14 ms·

Surveillance is there to consolidate power, safety is a smokescreen. We have ample evidence that mass surveillance not only has massive issues but also that it

Surveillance is there to consolidate power, safety is a smokescreen. We have ample evidence that mass surveillance not only has massive issues but also that it doesn't deliver on the parroted benefits, at all. http://newamerica.org/future-security/policy-papers/do-nsas-bulk-surveillance-programs-stop-terrorists/ http://newamerica.org/future-security/policy-papers/do-nsas-... Want a grim reality check on "what they say vs reality", then go read this https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/publications/CRPT-113srpt288.pdf https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/publ... . Particularity interesting is this section: "The Committee makes the following findings and conclusions:"

unclebucknasty 2y ago
>Surveillance is there to consolidate power, safety is a smokescreen. This is another vague allusion. Consolidate power for whom? How exactly does it do so? What, specifically, is this "power" and how is it used against American citizens? >it doesn't deliver on the parroted benefits The article referenced here is from 2014, so not exactly up-to-date. And, in multiple instances, the authors acknowledge that they don't even know whether the programs were used. In still other cases, they acknowledge the programs' use in prosecuting terrorists, but casually cast them aside as a low percentage. OK. But, who wants to sign up for "just a few terror incidents"? >Want a grim reality check Another report from 2014, and additionally has nothing to do with the subject. "Someone in the government did something wrong in this completely unrelated way 10 years ago" is not a valid argument.