3 ms·

I laugh at comments like this. Every major social media network in the US feeds all data directly to the NSA without any kind of warrant. Did everyone forget a

I laugh at comments like this. Every major social media network in the US feeds all data directly to the NSA without any kind of warrant. Did everyone forget about the Snowden leaks? Or did everyone just decide to trust the same people who lied to us about committing the crime in the first place when they said they stopped?

shapefrog 4y ago
> Every major social media network in the US feeds all data directly to the NSA without any kind of warrant. > Did everyone forget about the Snowden leaks It appears you are misremembering or misunderstanding the Snowden leaks.
- ChuckNorris89 4y ago
  Sure, there was a need for warrant, but those were issued by the FISA courts which were secret and were basically a rubber stamp with the judges saying yes to every request. Might as well not be a warrant as you have no legal defense against it or even a way to know about it. Or which part of Snowden leaks he misunderstood?
  - shapefrog 4y ago
    > feeds all data directly to the NSA > without any kind of warrant. there was a need for warrant Nevertheless, you confirmed one part of a two part statement as being demonstrably false. So in conclusion, companies responded to court orders from courts in the jurisduction they were in. > Might as well not be a warrant as you have no legal defense against it You might need to take a refresher on what a warrant is. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probable_cause https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probable_cause is as good a starter as any, the bar is low, very low. Then check in in the Patriot Act, where the bar was lowered even further.
- anonym29 4y ago
  The data was fed to the NSA without any kind of warrant. The FISA court needed to grant a warrant to the NSA to access the data they already possessed. As others have pointed out, this court was also effectively a rubber stamp machine. Between 1979 and 2015, 38,365 warrants were approved and a grand total of 12 were rejected. That's an approval rate of >99.9%.
  - shapefrog 4y ago
    > The data was fed to the NSA without any kind of warrant. Go back and review the work of snowden, that is not how it worked.

shapefrog 4y ago

> Every major social media network in the US feeds all data directly to the NSA without any kind of warrant. > Did everyone forget about the Snowden leaks It appears you are misremembering or misunderstanding the Snowden leaks.

ChuckNorris89 4y ago
Sure, there was a need for warrant, but those were issued by the FISA courts which were secret and were basically a rubber stamp with the judges saying yes to every request. Might as well not be a warrant as you have no legal defense against it or even a way to know about it. Or which part of Snowden leaks he misunderstood?
- shapefrog 4y ago
  > feeds all data directly to the NSA > without any kind of warrant. there was a need for warrant Nevertheless, you confirmed one part of a two part statement as being demonstrably false. So in conclusion, companies responded to court orders from courts in the jurisduction they were in. > Might as well not be a warrant as you have no legal defense against it You might need to take a refresher on what a warrant is. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probable_cause https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probable_cause is as good a starter as any, the bar is low, very low. Then check in in the Patriot Act, where the bar was lowered even further.
anonym29 4y ago
The data was fed to the NSA without any kind of warrant. The FISA court needed to grant a warrant to the NSA to access the data they already possessed. As others have pointed out, this court was also effectively a rubber stamp machine. Between 1979 and 2015, 38,365 warrants were approved and a grand total of 12 were rejected. That's an approval rate of >99.9%.
- shapefrog 4y ago
  > The data was fed to the NSA without any kind of warrant. Go back and review the work of snowden, that is not how it worked.