5 ms·

I guess you're getting down voted because it's an emotional issue. But you're right, so far, the number of people targeted by the NSA/CIA with extreme methods (

I guess you're getting down voted because it's an emotional issue. But you're right, so far, the number of people targeted by the NSA/CIA with extreme methods (i.e. drone strikes, imprisonment without trial, rendition, warrantless spying, blackmail) seems relatively small, and it seems to be mostly restricted to non-Americans or people that the American public don't really care about. That doesn't mean it's okay. Think about what's going on here. The USA has basically created for itself a secret police with powers that, in practise, are very close to those of an agency like the KGB or the Stasi. Sure, as you point out, these new powers are not being used to cart people away wholesale. But you should still be very nervous. Even now, we might be past the point of no return. That's not just hyperbole on my part. The way I see it, it's very easy to get into in a kind of ratchet situation where powers and abuses can only increase over time. We may already be there. It's politically very difficult to reduce powers for any agency, let one that pushes both military and law enforcement buttons. Even if calls for reform get taken seriously, they may be dealt with by sacrificing a scapegoat and making superficial changes. Even if there was a strong serious concerted political effort to reform the NSA and CIA do you really trust them not to interfere with it? Do you strongly believe, without any doubt, that the NSA and CIA are above blackmailing their own politicians?

bmelton 13y ago
> seems relatively small, and it seems to be mostly restricted to non-Americans or people that the American public don't really care about. For what it's worth - that's the very point of the poem, that it always starts with the undesirables, minorities, or peoples to whom the population wouldn't object to. The tacit implication there is that those people were all portrayed as evil first, allowing public acceptance of their abuse. For the most part, even after Hitler started murdering Jews, he was still enjoyed pretty strong popularity.
- diminoten 13y ago
  The poem is one massive slippery-slope fallacy, and it's also a poem, not reality. It's fiction. Just like 1984, Brave New World, or any other literary piece that gets bandied about these days. Absolutely zero anchor in reality. And "Jews" isn't the same as "terrorists". The US isn't going after people based on what they look like or who their parents are, they're going after people based on what they do and say. I know, it's shocking, that when you try to enter into violent combat with a nation-state, that nation-state is going to kill you. Those assholes.
  - bmelton 13y ago
    > And "Jews" isn't the same as "terrorists". According to who, exactly? Who's to say that it isn't simply a placeholder for 'arab', or 'sheikh'? It's worth noting that I don't think it actually is, and I don't know of any specific abuses of the powers enumerated by the aforementioned acts -- but the point isn't what they're doing is wrong (though it is), it's that we've allowed the government to grant itself the authority powerful enough that, if they wanted to start killing Jews, or Arabs, or Sheikhs, or whomever, they could. The NDAA and Patriot Act give them the authority to do so. That is a very, very scary proposition to me. That we have abused such power in the past only lends further credence that we will again in the future, and while I don't mean to offend anyone's sensibilities in suggesting that our current administration is evil, there is literally nothing in place now to prevent us from electing a Hitleresque tyrant and him getting away with committing the slaughter of millions. "Slippery slope fallacy" is an odd accusation as well, considering that somewhat accurately synopsizes many distinct periods in our world's history leading up to genocide, politicide and democide. I'm sorry that you're so cavalier about the subject, but there's a very real argument that this is exactly the kind of authority the Constitution was designed to limit any single branch of the government from having with its separation of powers. If the executive branch has the power to detain or kill anyone it wishes with no Legislative or Judicial oversight, and the executive branch controls the US military, then there is literally no power that we can pretend it doesn't have.
    - diminoten 13y ago
      You're basically scared because someone other than you has power. It's sad you can't see past that fear.
      - bmelton 13y ago
        That's an entirely meritless accusation. I wouldn't want the power if it were handed to me, and frankly, if I were "in charge" of everything, the very first thing I would do is repeal any and every law that places anyone above, outside of, or beyond the purview of the law. Our nation was founded on the concept that nobody is exempt from the law, and the NDAA, Patriot Act and laws of their ilk are antithetical to that core tenet. They destroy the fifth amendment entirely, and do severe harm to other rights. That said, on the quality of your reply, I'll end this conversation here. Regards.

bmelton 13y ago

> seems relatively small, and it seems to be mostly restricted to non-Americans or people that the American public don't really care about. For what it's worth - that's the very point of the poem, that it always starts with the undesirables, minorities, or peoples to whom the population wouldn't object to. The tacit implication there is that those people were all portrayed as evil first, allowing public acceptance of their abuse. For the most part, even after Hitler started murdering Jews, he was still enjoyed pretty strong popularity.

diminoten 13y ago
The poem is one massive slippery-slope fallacy, and it's also a poem, not reality. It's fiction. Just like 1984, Brave New World, or any other literary piece that gets bandied about these days. Absolutely zero anchor in reality. And "Jews" isn't the same as "terrorists". The US isn't going after people based on what they look like or who their parents are, they're going after people based on what they do and say. I know, it's shocking, that when you try to enter into violent combat with a nation-state, that nation-state is going to kill you. Those assholes.
- bmelton 13y ago
  > And "Jews" isn't the same as "terrorists". According to who, exactly? Who's to say that it isn't simply a placeholder for 'arab', or 'sheikh'? It's worth noting that I don't think it actually is, and I don't know of any specific abuses of the powers enumerated by the aforementioned acts -- but the point isn't what they're doing is wrong (though it is), it's that we've allowed the government to grant itself the authority powerful enough that, if they wanted to start killing Jews, or Arabs, or Sheikhs, or whomever, they could. The NDAA and Patriot Act give them the authority to do so. That is a very, very scary proposition to me. That we have abused such power in the past only lends further credence that we will again in the future, and while I don't mean to offend anyone's sensibilities in suggesting that our current administration is evil, there is literally nothing in place now to prevent us from electing a Hitleresque tyrant and him getting away with committing the slaughter of millions. "Slippery slope fallacy" is an odd accusation as well, considering that somewhat accurately synopsizes many distinct periods in our world's history leading up to genocide, politicide and democide. I'm sorry that you're so cavalier about the subject, but there's a very real argument that this is exactly the kind of authority the Constitution was designed to limit any single branch of the government from having with its separation of powers. If the executive branch has the power to detain or kill anyone it wishes with no Legislative or Judicial oversight, and the executive branch controls the US military, then there is literally no power that we can pretend it doesn't have.
  - diminoten 13y ago
    You're basically scared because someone other than you has power. It's sad you can't see past that fear.
    - bmelton 13y ago
      That's an entirely meritless accusation. I wouldn't want the power if it were handed to me, and frankly, if I were "in charge" of everything, the very first thing I would do is repeal any and every law that places anyone above, outside of, or beyond the purview of the law. Our nation was founded on the concept that nobody is exempt from the law, and the NDAA, Patriot Act and laws of their ilk are antithetical to that core tenet. They destroy the fifth amendment entirely, and do severe harm to other rights. That said, on the quality of your reply, I'll end this conversation here. Regards.