4 ms·
The NSA would say that it "substantively affected the public by protecting them". In fact, that would be interesting case if the NSA claimed to agree with you.
by asperous 13y ago
The NSA would say that it "substantively affected the public by protecting them".
In fact, that would be interesting case if the NSA claimed to agree with you. Perhaps that is this case's intention. You see if the NSA claimed that it did not affect the public, then there would not be a tradeoff involved in violating privacy.
- mpyne 13y agoAnd then the NSA would claim that more people die from falling in bathtubs than due to terrorism, so that the beneficial effect of their efforts, while psychologically quite morale-boosting, is not actually a substantive effect. I guarantee they win your game of screwed-up logic. Just look at the contortions they're able to make to record phone calls without a warrant. ;)