4 ms·

I'll believe it when I see it. Also, someone broke the law. We need to demand prosecution or the program will simply be renamed and moved on to a different budg

by pvnick 13y ago

I'll believe it when I see it. Also, someone broke the law. We need to demand prosecution or the program will simply be renamed and moved on to a different budget.

tarellel 13y ago
It'll still be there in one form or another, it'll just be less obvious from those actually looking for it.
unclebucknasty 13y ago
>I'll believe it when I see it. Right. And, that's just it. Will we see it? We will continue to have no idea what's going on, unless another Snowden steps up. And one thing we have seen before was push-back on the TIA (Total Information Awareness) program causing its proponents to "reconsider" and Congress to defund it. In other words, stop talking about it and just do it quietly under a million different programs with a million different names. Ironically, this NSA program itself that "Obama is considering ending" was one of the original TIA programs.
- rhizome 13y ago
  The only thing that was defunded was any program called "TIA." The behavior has continued apace under other names just fine. Thus it was always so, and this is just another "if you can't change the product, change the packaging" non-change from Obama. He's just trying to trick you, because they're going to keep on doing whatever they want to do until people start getting voted out of office in favor of people who won't fund the behavior.
  - unclebucknasty 13y ago
    >"until people start getting voted out of office in favor of people who won't fund the behavior" And add to that the fact that we don't have the information we need to make those choices as voters. Remember, the only reason we know about this instance is that someone (Snowden) was willing to take a risk, and he is now considered a criminal for that. Who knows what else is out there and who knows what else is coming (including this, again)? People need to be prosecuted. Beyond that, the entire architecture needs to be dismantled: the "War on Terror" ended and the egregiously overreaching, rights-curtailing government culture it created needs to be rolled back. The security-industrial-military-complex needs to be finally checked as well. We need to roll back the Patriot Act, examine the ethos of a Justice department that works overtime to loosely interpret our Constitution to expand its power, and put this run amok unitary executive theory back in its box.
zepolud 13y ago
There is no way to "see it." Those were secret programs justified by secret laws written by secret courts. The whole system has gone so far already that a negative proof is impossible in the current legal framework. There is simply no credible way anymore an official could present evidence of the absence of mass surveillance.
- chris_mahan 13y ago
  The only way to be sure is for Congress to cut the funding for the NSA to zero. Of course, others would spring up, but they would think twice, knowing that getting busted gets you the boot. Putting the director of the NSA behind bars for 25 years would also act as a deterrent for future would-be spy-on-americans-is-ok directors of whatever agencies.
  - D9u 13y ago
    I agree. The director of NSA who lied about the capabilities of the program needs to be prosecuted for perjury.
    - fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
      Except that he was hired, and the last one was fired, precisely because of his willingness to grow the NSA thusly.
      - D9u 13y ago
        Rather than lying about anything and claiming "state secrets," he should have said, "No comment," or "I can neither confirm, nor deny." To purposefully perjure oneself before the entire nation is inexcusable.
j_baker 13y ago
Prosecution would merely serve to force someone to choose a scapegoat. We need to ensure that Congress is meaningfully providing oversight of the executive branch.

by pvnick 13y ago

I'll believe it when I see it. Also, someone broke the law. We need to demand prosecution or the program will simply be renamed and moved on to a different budget.

tarellel 13y ago

It'll still be there in one form or another, it'll just be less obvious from those actually looking for it.

unclebucknasty 13y ago

>I'll believe it when I see it. Right. And, that's just it. Will we see it? We will continue to have no idea what's going on, unless another Snowden steps up. And one thing we have seen before was push-back on the TIA (Total Information Awareness) program causing its proponents to "reconsider" and Congress to defund it. In other words, stop talking about it and just do it quietly under a million different programs with a million different names. Ironically, this NSA program itself that "Obama is considering ending" was one of the original TIA programs.

rhizome 13y ago
The only thing that was defunded was any program called "TIA." The behavior has continued apace under other names just fine. Thus it was always so, and this is just another "if you can't change the product, change the packaging" non-change from Obama. He's just trying to trick you, because they're going to keep on doing whatever they want to do until people start getting voted out of office in favor of people who won't fund the behavior.
- unclebucknasty 13y ago
  >"until people start getting voted out of office in favor of people who won't fund the behavior" And add to that the fact that we don't have the information we need to make those choices as voters. Remember, the only reason we know about this instance is that someone (Snowden) was willing to take a risk, and he is now considered a criminal for that. Who knows what else is out there and who knows what else is coming (including this, again)? People need to be prosecuted. Beyond that, the entire architecture needs to be dismantled: the "War on Terror" ended and the egregiously overreaching, rights-curtailing government culture it created needs to be rolled back. The security-industrial-military-complex needs to be finally checked as well. We need to roll back the Patriot Act, examine the ethos of a Justice department that works overtime to loosely interpret our Constitution to expand its power, and put this run amok unitary executive theory back in its box.

zepolud 13y ago

There is no way to "see it." Those were secret programs justified by secret laws written by secret courts. The whole system has gone so far already that a negative proof is impossible in the current legal framework. There is simply no credible way anymore an official could present evidence of the absence of mass surveillance.

chris_mahan 13y ago
The only way to be sure is for Congress to cut the funding for the NSA to zero. Of course, others would spring up, but they would think twice, knowing that getting busted gets you the boot. Putting the director of the NSA behind bars for 25 years would also act as a deterrent for future would-be spy-on-americans-is-ok directors of whatever agencies.
- D9u 13y ago
  I agree. The director of NSA who lied about the capabilities of the program needs to be prosecuted for perjury.
  - fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
    Except that he was hired, and the last one was fired, precisely because of his willingness to grow the NSA thusly.
    - D9u 13y ago
      Rather than lying about anything and claiming "state secrets," he should have said, "No comment," or "I can neither confirm, nor deny." To purposefully perjure oneself before the entire nation is inexcusable.

j_baker 13y ago

Prosecution would merely serve to force someone to choose a scapegoat. We need to ensure that Congress is meaningfully providing oversight of the executive branch.