6 ms·
I'll suggest it's right. I elected the government in large part to protect...us. I want them to spy on our enemies. And I want them to roast for spying on us.
by qup 3y ago
I'll suggest it's right. I elected the government in large part to protect...us.
I want them to spy on our enemies. And I want them to roast for spying on us.
- cmilton 3y ago>I elected the government in large part to protect...us. Protect you from who? >I want them to spy on our enemies. Who are these enemies, and how did we identify them as such? Do we just spy until we found one?
- argiopetech 3y agoAll enemies, foreign and domestic, specifically those operating within the federal borders of the United States, it's territories, and any foreign holdings (e.g., embassy grounds). Investigation should begin with crimes that have occurred, suss out those circumstances where there is a bigger picture, and attain warrants for further investigation. Lack of probable cause means no search, a right extended by Amendment IV to all people (at least within US holdings as described above, which is where I think the FBI should be operating). The fault here lies with Congress. FISA is their doing, and it expressly violates all clauses of Amendment IV. The FBI is at fault for swinging this particular bat in a room full of citizens, but they shouldn't have been given the bat to begin with. Why FISA hasn't had a Supreme Court challenge on constitutional grounds is beyond me, but IANAL.
- cmilton 3y ago>The fault here lies with Congress. The fault lies with the idea that there always needs to be an enemy.
- tekknik 3y agoWhat experience, metrics, literally any data are you basing this on? Do you believe Russia is a current enemy of the US? How about North Korea and China?
- cmilton 3y agoThe life I've lived would be my experience. I have had zero direct interactions with any of these enemies. Enemies to the US aren't necessarily enemies to me. Should I be forced to inherit these enemies? I agree with self defense. However, I'm not sure this is always the case.
- rootusrootus 3y ago> The life I've lived would be my experience. I have had zero direct interactions with any of these enemies. Is that perhaps a direct result of the USG protecting you from them?
- chmod775 3y agoI've been to Russia and China and didn't get lynched. Didn't notice my country providing bodyguards.
- tekknik 3y agoAnd I’ve been in an actual warzone in an enemy country, that doesn’t change that they’re enemies
- cmilton 3y agoPossibly. How do you propose we prove otherwise?
- tekknik 3y agoPotentially listen to the threats coming from all 3 countries?
- tekknik 3y agoDo you believe nuclear or conventional weapons choose only military targets when they explode? Do you believe standing in any major city that you are safe from any kind of bomb? Or are we going to play the game of “it hasn’t happened yet”? Perhaps the US military should just lay down their weapons cause there’s clearly no threat?
- argiopetech 3y agoThere doesn't need to be an enemy, but there is never not an enemy. I mean this on the petty, day to day, citizen level, not the global political scale. Organized crime exists and must be investigated and prosecuted to avoid endangering the everyday life of the citizenry. When this crime crosses state borders, a federal investigatory body can be an asset. I think the FBI has succumbed to scope creep and overstepped what I perceive as their remit; however, that doesn't mean they're an unnecessary body.
- Kim_Bruning 3y ago> Why FISA hasn't had a Supreme Court challenge on constitutional grounds is beyond me, but IANAL. Not for lack of trying. Apparently it's very hard to show standing[1]. This is going to need a legislative solution, or none at all. [1] https://www.npr.org/2013/02/26/172998760/supreme-court-makes-it-harder-to-challenge-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-act https://www.npr.org/2013/02/26/172998760/supreme-court-makes...
- chmod775 3y ago>I want them to spy on our enemies. Do you have friends too? Does being spied on by the states mean you're their enemy?
- aa-jv 3y agoAmericans do spy on their friends. And, even worse: they use their friends to spy on their other friends. Basically, anyone "not a Fed" in the USA, is an enemy. And even then ..
- koonsolo 3y agoWhat about EU? Are we enemies?
- lynx23 3y agoOf course we are. Asking nicely will only get you a lie as an answer.
- ethbr0 3y agoIn geopolitical terms, every country is an enemy (in the sense that I believe parent used it) precisely because every country is autonomous. "It" may decide on courses of action that are in its best interests but detrimental to others, even if it has no history of that behavior. Same reason the US had war plans targeting essentially the entire world in the interwar years -- you never know. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_color-coded_war_plans#List_of_color_plans https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_color-coded_wa...
- koonsolo 3y agoWar Plan White means your own citizens are also considered enemies, which means you also need to spy on them.
- ethbr0 3y agoIndeed! But that's where Constitutional protections come in, and why the Bill of Rights was added.
- tastyfreeze 3y agoThe Bill of Rights only codified natural rights that exist for all. It is not a grant of rights given by the government. The Bill of Rights is a statement from the people to the government. "These are some of our rights and you will respect them."
- laratied 3y agoThis is completely disregarding the reality that it is not obvious who is the enemy. When you can't tell who the enemy is then everyone is suspect and the later naturally arises.
- raxxorraxor 3y agoClassic self-fulfilling prophecy. I don't think the spying made any friends, on the contrary. And in effect it didn't increase security either because people are way more distrustful. It is an overall net negative strategy.
- pjc50 3y agoThis logic doesn't work because in many cases the spying is on things like communications. And you can't tell whose communications they are until after you've spied on them. Bytes don't have little US flag stickers on them. EU human rights law doesn't make this distinction between citizen and non-citizen.
- capitol_ 3y agoThis demonstrates why the Schrems II judgement was so important.
- raxxorraxor 3y agoIt think this ignores the simple economics of surveillance and information gathering. Mass surveillance of this type is always directed at a countries own sphere of influence, domestic and at close allies. There is little camaraderie between people in power and the average citizen. On the contrary, to keep the power, you must collect info on everyone that could become a danger to you. In racing teams your largest opponent is often your racing partner. Surveillance of foreign adversaries is best done by getting info on key players. Why would info on the average foreign citizen matter at all? It just isn't interesting information.
- shadowgovt 3y agoI strongly suspect that post-January 6, the ease with which Americans can draw that border has decreased. You poll 10 random Americans on whether they think the government should have all powers necessary to defend against another January 6th riot and I don't know what they'll say.
- kernal 3y ago1 person was murdered on January 6 and she was a Trump supporter killed by a careless trigger happy cop that was known for leaving his gun in the bathroom >A spokeswoman for the department told Roll Call that Lt. Mike Byrd will be investigated after his Glock-22, which has no manual safety to prevent unintended firing, was found “during a routine security sweep” by another officer in a bathroom on Monday. https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/431924-capitol-police-officer-left-weapon-unattended-in-capitol/ https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/431924-cap... 30+ people were killed during the riots of 2020.
- tremon 3y agoYou are aware that you are conversing with many such "enemies" every day, through venues like this site? What about US citizens that regularly converse with your enemies? Can they be spied on too?