HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » This is why ALL liberals ...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 10:21 AM

This is why ALL liberals *should* oppose dragnet surveillance

Last edited Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:06 AM - Edit history (2)

Nashville_Brook note:

This is for those of us who are horrified at the "so what" response to the PRISM/Boundless Informant revelations.

We know that when people say "I assume my email is read," or that "my every move is logged," they're admitting tolerance and complicity to a form of totalitarianism that has a long and predictable history.

We also know it's not going to be different because of who holds office at this point in time. Indeed, these intelligence programs might even be beyond the control of an executive who is beholden to the most rarified ranks of the elite. Obama admitted as much when he passed the buck back to Congress during his remarkable comments on the subject Friday.

As this article points out, there's a LOGIC to state spying, and it's not what they're telling you. It's not about terror. Not exclusively. It's about keeping all of us pliant.

The very existence of such state spying apparatus is enough for MOST people to forgo any serious involvement in organizing against it. People fear losing their jobs, of having their secrets revealed, and of having their lives upended. People in this state of insecurity are not going to mount a serious campaign for Congress or the president to do anything...let alone give up the crown jewel of power: total surveillance.




The Logic of the Surveillance State

Liberalism, in its classic form, is, among other things, the proposition that you get more out of people if you treat them well. Conservatism is the proposition that you get more out of people if you treat them badly.

http://www.ianwelsh.net/the-logic-of-the-surveillance-state/

(snip)

The problem with surveillance states, and with oppression in general, is the cost. This cost is both direct, in the resources that are required, and indirect in the lost productivity and creativity caused by constant surveillance. Surveillance states, oppressive states, are not creative places, they are not fecund economically. They can be efficient and productive, for as long as they last, which is until the system of control is subverted, as it was in the USSR. We forget, in light of the late USSR’s problems, that it did create an economic miracle in the early years, and tremendously boost production. Mancur Olson’s “Power and Prosperity” gives a good account of why it worked, and why it stopped working.

(snip)

If you want despotism, as elites, if you want to treat everyone badly, so you personally become more powerful and rich, then, you’ve got two problems: an internal one (revolt) and an external one: war and being outcompeted by other nations elites, who will come and take away your power, one way or the other (this isn’t always violently, though it can be.) The solution is a transnational elite, in broad agreement on the issues, who do not believe in nationalism, and who play by the same rules and ideology. If you’re all the same, if nations are just flags, if you feel more kinship for your fellow oligarchs, well then, you’re safe. There’s still competition, to be sure, but as a class, you’re secure.

That leaves the internal problem, of revolt. The worse you treat people, the more you’re scared of them. The more you clamp down. This is really, really expensive and it breaks down over generations, causing internal rot, till you can’t get the system to do anything, no matter how many levers you push.

What is being run right now is a vast experiment to see if modern technology has fixed these problems with surveillance and opporessive states. Is it cheap enough to go full Stasi, and with that level of surveillance can you keep control over the economy, keep the levers working, make people do what you want, and not all slack off and resist passively, by only going through the motions? The oligarchs are betting that the technology has made that change... with the creation of a transnational ruling class, and with the ability to scale surveillance, it may be possible to take and keep control indefinitely, and bypass the well understood problems of oligarchy and police and surveillance states.


162 replies, 15383 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 162 replies Author Time Post
Reply This is why ALL liberals *should* oppose dragnet surveillance (Original post)
nashville_brook Jun 2013 OP
Puzzledtraveller Jun 2013 #1
Laelth Jun 2013 #2
LWolf Jun 2013 #3
DirkGently Jun 2013 #4
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #5
DirkGently Jun 2013 #8
woo me with science Jun 2013 #10
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #22
DirkGently Jun 2013 #28
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #42
rhett o rick Jun 2013 #58
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #62
rhett o rick Jun 2013 #63
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #65
DirkGently Jun 2013 #81
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #84
villager Jun 2013 #51
suffragette Jun 2013 #80
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #87
suffragette Jun 2013 #92
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #93
suffragette Jun 2013 #95
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #127
suffragette Jun 2013 #141
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #144
suffragette Jun 2013 #146
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #148
JDPriestly Jun 2013 #150
Generic Other Jun 2013 #104
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #107
snappyturtle Jun 2013 #162
RC Jun 2013 #137
DirkGently Jun 2013 #138
marmar Jun 2013 #6
forestpath Jun 2013 #7
Recursion Jun 2013 #9
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #11
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #24
JoePhilly Jun 2013 #53
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #61
uponit7771 Jun 2013 #97
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #99
DisgustipatedinCA Jun 2013 #101
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #105
uponit7771 Jun 2013 #119
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #121
JDPriestly Jun 2013 #151
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #154
DirkGently Jun 2013 #117
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #122
DirkGently Jun 2013 #123
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #130
DirkGently Jun 2013 #131
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #134
DirkGently Jun 2013 #132
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #140
DirkGently Jun 2013 #142
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #143
DirkGently Jun 2013 #155
Blecht Jun 2013 #12
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #14
dkf Jun 2013 #34
timdog44 Jun 2013 #13
DirkGently Jun 2013 #17
timdog44 Jun 2013 #25
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #76
timdog44 Jun 2013 #82
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #91
kenny blankenship Jun 2013 #38
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #48
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #18
timdog44 Jun 2013 #26
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #100
timdog44 Jun 2013 #103
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #125
timdog44 Jun 2013 #126
sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #39
timdog44 Jun 2013 #49
sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #55
DirkGently Jun 2013 #98
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #108
DirkGently Jun 2013 #109
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #115
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #50
siligut Jun 2013 #15
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #16
siligut Jun 2013 #23
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #27
DirkGently Jun 2013 #31
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #47
siligut Jun 2013 #43
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #46
ReasonableToo Jun 2013 #83
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #86
KG Jun 2013 #19
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #35
DLevine Jun 2013 #20
L0oniX Jun 2013 #21
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #29
BlueStreak Jun 2013 #36
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #45
BlueStreak Jun 2013 #56
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #70
BlueStreak Jun 2013 #71
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #73
DirkGently Jun 2013 #79
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #114
niyad Jun 2013 #30
moonbeam23 Jun 2013 #32
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #37
morningfog Jun 2013 #147
BlueStreak Jun 2013 #33
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #40
BlueStreak Jun 2013 #54
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #64
RobertEarl Jun 2013 #77
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #85
xtraxritical Jun 2013 #41
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #44
cantbeserious Jun 2013 #52
nebenaube Jun 2013 #66
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #74
markiv Jun 2013 #57
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #60
99Forever Jun 2013 #59
kentuck Jun 2013 #67
MotherPetrie Jun 2013 #68
snappyturtle Jun 2013 #69
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #72
snappyturtle Jun 2013 #75
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #78
DirkGently Jun 2013 #94
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #96
DirkGently Jun 2013 #129
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #139
snappyturtle Jun 2013 #159
DirkGently Jun 2013 #160
snappyturtle Jun 2013 #161
DirkGently Jun 2013 #157
AzDar Jun 2013 #88
WillyT Jun 2013 #89
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #90
leftstreet Jun 2013 #102
Warren DeMontague Jun 2013 #106
AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2013 #110
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #111
AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2013 #112
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #113
joshcryer Jun 2013 #116
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #120
joshcryer Jun 2013 #124
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #136
MNBrewer Jun 2013 #118
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #128
840high Jun 2013 #133
PopeOxycontinI Jun 2013 #135
nashville_brook Jun 2013 #145
tavalon Jun 2013 #149
Scuba Jun 2013 #152
DirkGently Jun 2013 #156
mia Jun 2013 #153
Solly Mack Jun 2013 #158


Response to nashville_brook (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 10:34 AM

2. k&r for exposure. n/t

-Laelth

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 10:37 AM

3. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 10:51 AM

4. Democracy & government in secret are opposites.


From all the dimwitted partisan yipping, you'd think that wasn't the case, but it is.

If progressives and Democrats don't stand against government claiming the right to decide who among us it will watch, judge, or kill, without our oversight and without accountability, they stand for nothing.

Secret courts making secret rulings interpreted by secret men in secret ways is exactly THE THING that our Constitution and every worthy principle we have stand against.

Making excuses, covering for them, poo pooing and cheerleading are exactly how we can become nothing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DirkGently (Reply #4)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 10:59 AM

5. Obama adopts Bush's doctrine...and it's all *yawn*...yargle bargle...poutrage...firebagger

I think these people should be stripped of their liberal standing. They're not liberal.

They're partisans without principles.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Reply #5)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:12 AM

8. If this issue goes unchecked, there is nothing left.


Because no one will be willing to speak up on anything any more. Anyone will be vulnerable to destruction or humiliation should they speak an inconvenient truth.

Let's be clear: The NSA has already been caught breaking the law to spy on Americans, which was only revealed when that information was leaked. Until that moment, by "following the law," the NSA meant "whatever the Executive says the law is, in secret."

Now this administration's approach is simply to stop all leaks.

What idiot child could not put together the danger that represents?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DirkGently (Reply #8)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:15 AM

10. Thank you. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DirkGently (Reply #8)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:39 AM

22. 2008 -- NSA listened in on soldiers' phone sex with their wives

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=5987804&page=1#.UbNXP0Cq-2U

As Digby says..."This problem is not a function of bureaucratic rules or proper protocol. It's a function of human nature. And I don't think anyone's "good intentions" are going to change that."

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2013/06/remember-when-nsa-professionals.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Reply #22)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:52 AM

28. The Constitution recognizes that.


It's why assurances of secret "safeguards" are meaningless. If power can be abused, it will be, immediately and completely.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DirkGently (Reply #28)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 12:09 PM

42. PROOF: we THOUGHT that a democratic executive branch would fix this

and we had every reason to believe this since it was one of Obama's biggest applause lines in his 2008 campaign stump speeches.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Reply #42)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 12:31 PM

58. Did you intend to us a small "d" in your title? The terms are not synonymous. nm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #58)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 12:58 PM

62. touche.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Reply #62)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 01:01 PM

63. Hey, using French is uncalled for. I think.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #63)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 01:07 PM

65. le ha ha!



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Reply #42)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 01:40 PM

81. Put it this way ...


... how great would everyone feel with "President Rubio" making these assurances of scrupulous legal interpretations and "safeguards?"

Because no amount of love and trust in your current executive protects you from the next executive.

But by then it may be too late to complain.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DirkGently (Reply #81)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 02:51 PM

84. "President Rubio" having these powers is almost as

Terrifying as Bush having them.

There's no scenario where this is okay.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Reply #22)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 12:22 PM

51. Exactly. The degree/depth of rolling over and apologetics, on this "Underground" site is astonishing

n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Reply #22)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 01:38 PM

80. This helps explain Clapper's distinction in backtracking an earlier statement

http://www.emptywheel.net/2013/06/07/james-clappers-tip-for-avoiding-lies-dont-do-talking-points/

Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said Thursday that he stood by what he told Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., in March when he said that the National Security Agency does not “wittingly” collect data on millions of Americans.
“What I said was, the NSA does not voyeuristically pore through U.S. citizens’ e-mails. I stand by that,” Clapper told National Journal in a telephone interview.
On March 12, at a hearing of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Wyden asked Clapper: “Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?” Clapper responded: “No, sir.” When Wyden followed up by asking, “It does not?” Clapper said: “Not wittingly. There are cases where they could, inadvertently perhaps, collect—but not wittingly.” Clapper did not specify at the time that he was referring to e-mail.
Clapper’s lie — that he took Wyden’s “collected any type of data at all” to mean “voyeuristically pore through emails” — is all the worse for how bad a non-sequitur it is. Caught in a lie, the head of our Intelligence Community responded with word salad.


Maybe he was thinking of that incident when he added the "voyeuristically" which was not part of his original testimony.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to suffragette (Reply #80)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 04:29 PM

87. marcy wheeler has been WAY on top of this story.

this bit about the meaning of the term "collected," i think goes to the heart of the problem with secret courts deciding in secret to create special definitions of terms that's used to describe these misadventures.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Reply #87)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 05:16 PM

92. Yes, this does go to the heart of the problem

I wonder if Clapper forgot for a moment that this testimony was not done in secret and that people could actually listen to his response at the hearing, which was very different than what he is trying to now say he said.
Revealing that a process for public transparency and accountability (recording and availability of a hearing) makes it harder to obfuscate the proceedings that have been done in secret.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to suffragette (Reply #92)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 05:32 PM

93. daaaang. i bet there's going to be a lot of this kind of "oopsie" as commentary is sought

on Snowden et al.

it's hard enough to keep up with what's secret and what's not. now they have multiple definitions of words to deal with.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Reply #93)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 05:58 PM

95. Yep, lots of clap on, clap off by the Clapper

and many repeats of "what I meant was.."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to suffragette (Reply #95)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 08:10 PM

127. here's a video of what it likely Clapper lying to Congress -->

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Reply #127)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:53 PM

141. I think that's the same one at Wheeler's site

From the March hearing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to suffragette (Reply #141)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 12:01 AM

144. yup. will be interesting to see how the Clapper arc proceeds!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Reply #144)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 12:07 AM

146. More developments here

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to suffragette (Reply #146)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 12:14 AM

148. with names like that on the org-chart, you have to wonder how much they're bilking us for

those are glamour appointments. the kind you want in order to get blank checks from government.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to nashville_brook (Reply #22)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 06:30 PM

104. Just like when Hoover sent LBJ classified records for his own titillation

These fuckers are given the legal right to be perverts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Generic Other (Reply #104)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 06:36 PM

107. Stasi-riffic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DirkGently (Reply #8)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 12:08 PM

162. I hear you! The association is crystal clear....and don't the idiot children

realize that stopping all leaks is in violation of the whistleblower's First Amendment rights?
This practice, stopping leaks, is a very scary road to pursue. imho

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DirkGently (Reply #4)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:22 PM

137. We need to call it what it is.

 

Secret courts making secret rulings interpreted by secret men in secret...


A Star Chamber


For that is exactly what it is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RC (Reply #137)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:23 PM

138. Bingo. No one gets to police their own wrongdoing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:11 AM

6. k/r

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:12 AM

7. K&R

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:12 AM

9. So repeal FISA

Electing a President doesn't magically change the laws.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #9)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:18 AM

11. he sure sold himself as "determined" to "CHANGE" trading privacy for security

I remember that being a big applause line in his stump speeches.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #9)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:42 AM

24. said Obama: don't accept "false choice, between liberties we cherish and security we provide.

Senator Obama, 2007...oh how the worm turns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Reply #24)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 12:26 PM

53. Do you know which Senator proposed FISA and which President signed its creation into law?

I'm betting not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePhilly (Reply #53)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 12:57 PM

61. i betting you cheer Obama's use of surveillance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Reply #61)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 06:04 PM

97. More ad hominem, fudrs are having a hard time with the facts

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #97)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 06:23 PM

99. really? ad hominem? if you support surveillance, how is that ad hominem.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Reply #99)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 06:26 PM

101. He supports surveillance. He said so very distinctly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DisgustipatedinCA (Reply #101)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 06:34 PM

105. :) thought so -- precisely why it's not ad hominem.

or, if s/he thinks it's ad hominem, maybe they should review their values.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DisgustipatedinCA (Reply #101)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 07:46 PM

119. I sure do, I support Obama survelliance on large crowds hes in and terrorist organizations

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #119)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 07:51 PM

121. how about in your living room? in your children's bedroom? your phone?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #119)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 01:04 AM

151. Carefully targeted information.

But not the broad collection of banks of telephone numbers. This is a waste of time, money and gives the executive far, far, far too much power.

This program has to end. It is completely incompatible with the concept of democracy. It violates our Constitution.

Meanwhile, crazy people bomb and shoot and kill unpredictably and this sort of ultimate information data bank has nothing to do with the real dangers we face.

Is suspect that the Chinese do this same thing to their people. The young whistleblower who has sought refuge in China is in for a big surprise.

But that does not make what our government doing any less wrong.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #151)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 09:14 AM

154. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #97)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 07:44 PM

117. Uh huh. The "fudrs" are using ad hominem? Self parody much?


By the way, what IS this wonderful new label that's been trotted out for this? I remember PUMAS and FIREBAGGERS.

What have the wonderful, non ad hominem thinkers decided upon to label Dems-they-disagree-with this time?

I hope it's an acronym. Acronyms are so CLEVER!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DirkGently (Reply #117)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 07:52 PM

122. "Acronyms are so CLEVER!"

oh...please let it be an acronym!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Reply #122)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 07:56 PM

123. "Friends of the Upper Delaware River?

http://www.fudr.org

I searched, and I all can find is this poster calling everyone he disagrees with a FUDr / Freeper for the last year and a half, at least.

I guess it's as secret as the administration's legal standard for spying on Americans' e-mail and phone records.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DirkGently (Reply #123)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 08:53 PM

130. frankly unrepentant democratic rabblerousers

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Reply #130)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 08:55 PM

131. Fierce Uber Dems rallying!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DirkGently (Reply #131)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 09:29 PM

134. fearless under dogs reporting

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #97)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 08:59 PM

132. Fun Underground Dems resplendent?



















(nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DirkGently (Reply #132)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:49 PM

140. furry underwear doesn't ride-up

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Reply #140)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:55 PM

142. Famous Uncles Diligently rotating?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DirkGently (Reply #142)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 12:00 AM

143. fancy umbrella drains revealingly

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Reply #143)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 09:23 AM

155. Farriers Unilaterally Dowsing Resevoirs?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:20 AM

12. What a brilliant piece

Thanks for sharing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blecht (Reply #12)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:22 AM

14. thanks...and thank Twitter

I'd have never found this without my Twitter feed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Reply #14)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:57 AM

34. Yes it's the best source for news.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:21 AM

13. Not sure if I am addressing

what you are saying. But I see the problem with surveillance is it so sporadic and jealously guarded by who ever the surveillance is being done by. There is no coordination of efforts. It happened to Bush on his watch. The airplane things was known but those in the know did not want to let anyone else take the credit. We knew, with 20-20 hind vision, that Osama Bin Laden was planning an attack by airplane on buildings here in the USA. The tragedy in Boston was known about, but due bumbling, it was never followed up correctly. I believe that surveillance is a necessary evil, but there are so many spy agencies that don't want to share their information it is absolutely ridiculous. We, they, need to get their positions together and climb into the 21st century. There are some real computer geeks out there that can get a lot of this done. These guys need to take off their black suits and sunglasses and climb into a pair on jean and a regular shirt and sit down and get to work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to timdog44 (Reply #13)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:30 AM

17. No. We don't need them to get better at this.

What are you asking for here? The NSA is not lacking in computer geeks, but even if it were, the ideal secret worldwide information gathering network is the exact antithesis of an open democratic society.

We don't need them to get better at this. We need them to tell is what they are doing so that we can tell them what boundaries and limits are needed to preserve a government by, for and of the people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DirkGently (Reply #17)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:43 AM

25. I think the problem with surveillance

is that it is private. And if they are going to do it, I want them to do it better. And if they tell us what they are doing, there is no sense in them doing it. And I guess that supports you and I, in this matter. But I think things do need to be private. The problem is that the better one side gets, the better the other side gets. I would suggest that the computer/internet age has sped past the regulatory stage of same. I truly do not know what the answer is, but I support surveillance. Problem is who are you going to trust to do it? And how do you decide on that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to timdog44 (Reply #25)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 01:29 PM

76. the surveillance is secret. the court proceeding of the secrets are secret. the legislative

actions are secret. the examination of the secrecy is even secret.

this is not America.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Reply #76)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 02:30 PM

82. And who do you suggest they ask?

Surveillance is a necessary evil. Should they come and ask me? Come and ask you?

That is the whole thing I have been talking about. We need this. All I hear is complaints, but no solutions. And no, stopping surveillance is not a solution.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to timdog44 (Reply #82)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 05:09 PM

91. nosiree. stopping the dragnet surveillance is the only solution if we want a democracy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DirkGently (Reply #17)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 12:04 PM

38. Note the use of the camouflage avatar

A real peacenik, I'm sure!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenny blankenship (Reply #38)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 12:16 PM

48. camo-tar...i hadn't thought of it that way...

but i do remember when folks would troll with camouflage screen names like "Liberal Activist" or whatnot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to timdog44 (Reply #13)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:33 AM

18. Obama has shown he's more concerned about whistleblowers than intel accuracy

I think that speaks for itself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Reply #18)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:47 AM

26. I think you are right about the whistleblower thing.

Whistleblowers should be awarded a medal for what they do and not be prosecuted. E.G. the Steubenville rape case. The guy that blew the whistle could face more time in jail than the ignorant bug shit rapists, and the guys who knew what happened and turned states evidence for a no prosecution pledge. But that is another can of worms.

And Julian Assange is being terrorized for what he knows. And so is Anonymous. Both are heroes to me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to timdog44 (Reply #26)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 06:24 PM

100. and yet you seem in favor of state surveillance of citizens.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Reply #100)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 06:30 PM

103. It seems that

the only solution you offer is to not do any surveillance at all. If that is so, say so. Other wise, yes, there is reason to do surveillance of American citizens. I think the wholesale surveillance everyone is crying about is not what is actually going on.

Apparently someone on this site has been doing surveillance on me, to be calling me a liar as to my postings. Do I find that unfair. No. Just misguided and disrespectful of a fellow DUer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to timdog44 (Reply #103)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 08:01 PM

125. i don't think you understand what this surveillance is about, or what acceptable limits are

NSA is one of many agencies contracting with numerous private companies to vacuum up as much data as possible. They collect more data from the US than from Russia -- so, citizens are being sucked up in this.

also, it doesn't deter terror, as we've seen in the Boston bombing. and, it costs trillions of dollars at a time when our country is crumbling.

no one is saying the government can't have intelligence. what they're doing isn't intelligence. it's a vast dragnet that they have no idea what to do with.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Reply #125)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 08:09 PM

126. I suppose you may very well be right.

I think much of what has been detected is not released to the public for obvious reasons.

I also think that the ball was dropped on the Boston bombing tragedy. Too many agencies not sharing their information and being jealous of each other. The ball was dropped on 9/11 for the same reason.

The vast mining of information is really a waste of money. If our "spies" are as intelligent as they are suppose to be, you would think them to be a little more discriminate in the information gathering. I actually hate this espionage crap, but in this day and age I think it a necessary evil.

So much of the money spent on espionage by so many agencies (hate to guess how many) very well could be spent on much better things. The same with most military budgets, into which I throw all these things.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to timdog44 (Reply #13)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 12:05 PM

39. You're assuming that they wanted to know but just made some mistakes.

It's hard to believe if a government is taking security seriously how after 52 warnings, they were 'shocked' when what they were warned about happened. Anyone in any job who failed so tragically would have been not only been fired, but prosecuted.

Or, we can accept the 'incompetence' argument which means that all this surveillance does NOT, as they claim, keep us safe.

Surveillance of suspects, who become suspects because there are reasons, is not what people are objecting to. Surveillance of an entire population is dangerous and a threat to democracy, the very thing they claim to be protecting.

We do not need them to get better at spying on the entire population, we need to get better at spying on people who are known to be likely to commit crimes, or who have done so or who are associating with those who have done so. The waste of time and money surveilling people ordering pizzas is a threat to our security, on every level.

I'm still waiting for someone to tell me how this 'program' has or can protect us.

'They hate us for our freedoms'. Maybe if we give them all up voluntarily they won't hate us anymore!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #39)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 12:18 PM

49. But what I am seeing,

and I am not trying to be argumentative, is people want to know who is being surveilled and that defeats the purpose of surveillance.
Not sure who is telling us that we are all being held under the surveillance umbrella. It just sounds like another one of those diversionary things.

And for them to get better with surveillance on people likely to commit crimes requires surveillance in the first place. It sounds like a mad circle that can not be entered or broken. There certainly are people in that business who need to be fired. Incompetence is in all professions. I could tell you horror stories in the health care field.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to timdog44 (Reply #49)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 12:26 PM

55. Well, we are Verizon customers who, as far as I know, are not under suspicion for any crime, let

alone anything that would threaten the security of this country. We know now that any phone calls we made since March of this year, have been tracked. That gives me a creepy feeling as someone living in a democracy. We knew Bush was using the Telecoms to spy on the American people and we knew they altered the law he broke to save him, but we did not expect that a Democratic administration which had spoken out against the draconian destruction of our rights, to USE that bill which was so controversial to begin with. We expect to start seeing steps taken to reverse Bush policies since we all agreed, on the left anyhow, how bad they were for this country.

I agree with your last sentence about incompetence, there is also to be considered, what Nixon did to his political enemies. To allow any government to have this much information about all of its citizens is just plain dangerous. Something the country, including back then even Republicans, agreed on. That is how we got the FISA Bill in the first place, to ensure that the Intel Community had to get a warrant BEFORE spying on anyone's telephone activity.

It makes zero sense to be told we 'can just trust them'. No, we cannot, even Jefferson warned that people should not even trust THEM, the Founding Fathers with any extraordinary powers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to timdog44 (Reply #49)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 06:12 PM

98. We need to know how they're justifying the spying.


This is the big hold Obama is tapdancing around. The Fourth Amendment does not go away, ever. Searches of private information are supposed to require "probable cause" in every case.

The secrecy here that presents a problem is that, like Bush, secret interpretations of the law are being employed. We don't know that ANY of this action would stand up to Constitutional scrutiny, because we don't know what arguments are being made, and every effort is being put forth to make sure we never find out.

In essence, just as we were recently reassured that American citizens will only be killed when they pose "an imminent threat," we are now being told Americans will not be spied on without meeting some unspecified standard that will never be reviewed by the public. We're being told it's "lawful," but not what "lawful" means.

Bush thought "lawful" meant "anything the President wants to do in the name of national security." That is specious, dishonest logic, but it is EXTREMELY convenient when the executive branch wants to do something.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DirkGently (Reply #98)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 06:47 PM

108. apparently there's plenty of DU-folk who agree that "lawful" means anything POTUS

says it means.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Reply #108)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 06:52 PM

109. That is -- literally -- a Nixonian concept.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DirkGently (Reply #109)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 07:36 PM

115. Cheney codified it for Bush and Obama did NOTHING to change it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #39)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 12:18 PM

50. +1000000 -- if we give up all our freedom they won't hate us anymore.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:24 AM

15. Even the wealthy and powerful should care

There is always someone more wealthy and powerful, even if they are transnational. The only people who might be secure are the watchers, the ones who have the technology and position to watch.

In the future, access to a data center will be like dinner with the POTUS is now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to siligut (Reply #15)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:30 AM

16. what this means is that power will be defined by how much access is granted to OUR info

I mean...it already is. That's the only thing that explains Zuckerberg's power. Facebook doesn't generate revenue...it generates information. Ergo, he's got the power.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Reply #16)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:42 AM

23. And what about Skinner, Elad and EarlG?

But yes, and Zuckerberg looks like such a nice kid. I clocked the price of FB at around $23 Friday, lets see if there is any change in these coming weeks due to the news.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to siligut (Reply #23)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:47 AM

27. hardly anyone posts anything personal info here...few use their real names

even fewer fill in their profiles.

we used to. back in 2001, many DU'ers actually used real headshots for their avatar. now people don't even bother associating their screen name with an image...ostensibly that would reveal too much.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Reply #27)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:55 AM

31. Apparently NSA spooks are more trustworthy than DU


posters, in the estimation of some. Ironic seeing "Sumguy66" calling privacy concerns "hysteria."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DirkGently (Reply #31)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 12:14 PM

47. eggsactly!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Reply #27)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 12:10 PM

43. Tongue-in-cheek

But don't they have our IP addresses?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to siligut (Reply #43)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 12:13 PM

46. :) and ALL the sockpuppet's IPs as well...I'm suuuuuurrrrre.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Reply #27)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 02:46 PM

83. I do see an occasional phishing post here...

I've seen OPs that ask things like what was your first car? Or where did you go to school? I always wonder if DUers are being chatty or the survellience state is collecting data points to zero in on the identity of DUers.

Yes, I know, it's a"foil hat" thing to point out. . .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ReasonableToo (Reply #83)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 04:14 PM

86. you can't help but think that...i've thought it too.

just don't tell anyone your mother's maiden name, or your first pet's name.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:34 AM

19. all citizens should oppose a security state.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KG (Reply #19)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:58 AM

35. you'd think this would be non-controversial...and non-partisan...

and by partisan, clearly I mean within our own party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:36 AM

20. K&R. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:39 AM

21. The rich are conserned about anything that could be used to undo them. The NSA will help out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to L0oniX (Reply #21)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:53 AM

29. hell, with privatization, the "rich" likely own these networks in the first place.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Reply #29)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:58 AM

36. Some of it is undoubtedly farmed out to the likes of Raytheon and CSC

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #36)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 12:12 PM

45. imagine all the "foreign" companies that are likely contracting services.

imagine the temptation to use sensitive information for blackmail.

there's nothing "secure" about this. this is all about insecurity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Reply #45)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 12:29 PM

56. And remember, our database has a lot of information about citizens of other countries

Last edited Sun Jun 9, 2013, 01:16 PM - Edit history (1)

For example, if you make or receive calls from Germany, your German colleague is now in our database. I cannot imagine the Euro countries are well pleased with this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #56)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 01:14 PM

70. have you seen the Boundless Informant map?

Warm colors are more data collected -- cool colors (such as green) is less. They collect more data on the US than Russia.



Boundless Informant: the NSA's secret tool to track global surveillance data
Revealed: The NSA's powerful tool for cataloguing global surveillance data – including figures on US collection

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/08/nsa-boundless-informant-global-datamining


(snip)


The Guardian has acquired top-secret documents about the NSA datamining tool, called Boundless Informant, that details and even maps by country the voluminous amount of information it collects from computer and telephone networks.

The focus of the internal NSA tool is on counting and categorizing the records of communications, known as metadata, rather than the content of an email or instant message.

(snip)

The heatmap gives each nation a color code based on how extensively it is subjected to NSA surveillance. The color scheme ranges from green (least subjected to surveillance) through yellow and orange to red (most surveillance).

The disclosure of the internal Boundless Informant system comes amid a struggle between the NSA and its overseers in the Senate over whether it can track the intelligence it collects on American communications. The NSA's position is that it is not technologically feasible to do so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Reply #70)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 01:18 PM

71. I am not surprised. This has not been the "land of the free" for a long time

The Tea Party people actually have some valid concerns. It is just that they are so small-minded, they think of it in terms of having a gun in their hand -- as if that would stop any of this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #71)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 01:22 PM

73. and, woe be to us if the Tea Party actually opposes the data suck too...


b/c then the Very Serious Posters will scream bloody murder about "you never really liked him," something something, "firebagger" something something...rinse repeat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #36)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 01:34 PM

79. Yes. Remember Jane Mayer's piece

...on the bloated "surveillance state?" She won the Polk Award for it.

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/05/23/110523fa_fact_mayer

Jack Balkin, a liberal law professor at Yale, agrees that the increase in leak prosecutions is part of a larger transformation. “We are witnessing the bipartisan normalization and legitimization of a national-surveillance state,” he says. In his view, zealous leak prosecutions are consonant with other political shifts since 9/11: the emergence of a vast new security bureaucracy, in which at least two and a half million people hold confidential, secret, or top-secret clearances; huge expenditures on electronic monitoring, along with a reinterpretation of the law in order to sanction it; and corporate partnerships with the government that have transformed the counterterrorism industry into a powerful lobbying force. Obama, Balkin says, has “systematically adopted policies consistent with the second term of the Bush Administration.”


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DirkGently (Reply #79)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 07:33 PM

114. What's the Problem with Metadata...her latest...




http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2013/06/verizon-nsa-metadata-surveillance-problem.html?mbid=gnep



“The public doesn’t understand,” she told me, speaking about so-called metadata. “It’s much more intrusive than content.” She explained that the government can learn immense amounts of proprietary information by studying “who you call, and who they call. If you can track that, you know exactly what is happening—you don’t need the content.”

For example, she said, in the world of business, a pattern of phone calls from key executives can reveal impending corporate takeovers. Personal phone calls can also reveal sensitive medical information: “You can see a call to a gynecologist, and then a call to an oncologist, and then a call to close family members.” And information from cell-phone towers can reveal the caller’s location. Metadata, she pointed out, can be so revelatory about whom reporters talk to in order to get sensitive stories that it can make more traditional tools in leak investigations, like search warrants and subpoenas, look quaint. “You can see the sources,” she said. When the F.B.I. obtains such records from news agencies, the Attorney General is required to sign off on each invasion of privacy. When the N.S.A. sweeps up millions of records a minute, it’s unclear if any such brakes are applied.

Metadata, Landau noted, can also reveal sensitive political information, showing, for instance, if opposition leaders are meeting, who is involved, where they gather, and for how long. Such data can reveal, too, who is romantically involved with whom, by tracking the locations of cell phones at night.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:53 AM

30. k and r

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:56 AM

32. Horrified by how many "liberals" are defending this shit

Great post...this is what i was trying to say the other day...only this person said it more elegantly...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022967195

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moonbeam23 (Reply #32)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 12:04 PM

37. back in the 80s, one of the biggest reasons people wouldn't sign petitions,

was because they didn't want to "wind up on someone's 'list.'" i was told they were afraid their boss would find out and they'd lose their job. this is for seemingly pedestrian stuff like protecting wetlands and supporting veterans benefits.

i always got the feeling it was a blanket statement. "i don't sign stuff," because "i value my privacy." period. full stop.

i wonder how these folks operate now. do they use cell phones? do they have a gmail account? do they post photos to Flickr or Instagram?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moonbeam23 (Reply #32)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 12:13 AM

147. They only defend it because they are party liners.

Talking points parrots. They hold no opinions until something makes the party look bad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:57 AM

33. The scope of Big Data is far beyond what anybody is talking about

Heck, people are still talking about the Verizon thing as if that was the only phone monitoring going on. If they served Verizon, then they also served all the other phone companies. Any idiot should be able to figure out that much.

But there are other technologies that will be added to the data base. Face recognition technology is progressing and already in widespread use. You don't need ID chips if you can (semi-)reliably scan faces and tie them to all the other data in the "freedom from terrorists data base". And they can collect this information without any warrants. They are just taking pictures in public places, you know.

This recent business of DNA swabbing is just one more segment of the data base.

A skeptic might say, "Oh, but it s really hard to get those correlations accurate. There would be all sorts of mistakes. If they did that, that could lead to locking up innocent people."

Yeah?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #33)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 12:07 PM

40. FL school uses retina scan for students riding bus -- without parents consent

http://news.msn.com/us/school-iris-scanning-program-has-parents-seeing-red

just one example of "beyond what anybody is talking about."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Reply #40)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 12:26 PM

54. That is probably not in the Data Base --- yet

The thing about these data base projects is that they seem to be unstoppable. people can't stand to see big piles of loose data that could be pulled into the giant database.

None of this is purpose-driven. If it were, maybe there wouldn't be such objections. A purpose-driven process would go like "OK, we know there are some terrorists out there. We have observed they tend to do X Y and Z. SO we will collect data on X Y and Z for the purposes of identifying people who a re likely to be real terror threats to Americans".

That isn't what is happening. What is happening is that technology allows for really cheap storage of data of all kinds, so they are just gathering up everything in sight with no particular reason why it is necessary and no particular plan how to use it. The people building the database aren't even involved in national security in all likelihood. They are just technical geek, not much different from those at Microsoft, Oracle, Google, or any other large database user.

It grows and it grows and it grows. Then one day somebody operating behind the shroud of secrecy gets into the database and does some really horrible things with it.

Once the database is in place, you don't need any warrants to USE the data. The warrants are all about COLLECTING the data.

Another technology not mentioned is all the toll readers that are in place nationwide. They can and do read license plates as you pass through each toll station. That is, after all, how they assess fines for those who drive through without a transponder. That is all data that could co into the database. Putting that together with the phone data, they could say exactly when your car was at the O'Hare toll station and whose cell phones were in the car at that moment. Let's say there was an Occupy rally near that stop, if the database indicated one of those cell phones belonged to an active opinion leader in the Occupy movement, the database could alert law enforcement to be on the lookout for your vehicle. Perhaps they would pull you over for a "routine" traffic stop, whereupon they could use their newly granted right to collect your DNA and put that into the database.

All of this is designed to have a chilling effect on those who might be "enemies of the state."

Joseph McCarthy would be pleased.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #54)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 01:06 PM

64. f'n good points on warrants and toll roads...also, the info is a marketable product

Florida is a great example of this -- the state legislature and governor Skeletor have been forging partnerships with data companies now for quite some time. The data companies get access to our children's retinal scans, our voting records, our movements on toll roads...and the companies THEN go out and sell the data. The state gets to say they "got some services for FREE!" such as retinal scans of our kids...and the companies get to make green on selling the data. it's money from nothing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Reply #64)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 01:32 PM

77. That is why it is not constitutional

Because the writers of the constitution saw that personal info could be used in ways that did not support freedom from the government.

Imagine if king George had the web? The founders would have been the EFF.

The only way we win is to just say No.

Anyone not saying no is one who wants to spy on you. imo

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #77)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 03:38 PM

85. Agree completely

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 12:08 PM

41. I think 99% of the people oppose a security state but what are you going to do about it?

 

About all you can do is get off the grid.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xtraxritical (Reply #41)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 12:10 PM

44. for those who are already "on the grid" -- let's USE the GRID to fight this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 12:23 PM

52. The Money Statement - Surveillance Leads To Fear Which Leads To Apathy Which Leads To Control

"The very existence of such state spying apparatus is enough for MOST people to forgo any serious involvement in organizing against it. People fear losing their jobs, of having their secrets revealed, and of having their lives upended. People in this state of insecurity are not going to mount a serious campaign for Congress or the president to do anything...let alone give up the crown jewel of power: total surveillance."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cantbeserious (Reply #52)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 01:07 PM

66. Same

 

Same principle applies to cannabis prohibition... it's has only lasted so long because it has always been dangerous to oppose the drug war.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nebenaube (Reply #66)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 01:23 PM

74. it's always been about criminalizing populations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 12:30 PM

57. better idea, all CITIZENS should oppose dragnet surveillance

 

and dont let the 'strange bedfellows' of liberatarians, paleoconservatives and uncatagorizable independents stop you from seeking new allys with like thinking on a specific issue

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to markiv (Reply #57)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 12:56 PM

60. yup -- totally agree. just addressing this problems w/in our own house

and also addressing the author's key statement: Liberalism, in its classic form, is, among other things, the proposition that you get more out of people if you treat them well. Conservatism is the proposition that you get more out of people if you treat them badly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 12:35 PM

59. Huge K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 01:09 PM

67. very interesting

Well said

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 01:12 PM

68. K&R

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 01:13 PM

69. Thank you for posting this. Last night when I dropped into DU and read all

the, "a-ha moments", "I told you so", etc. when the Washington Post article
was somewhat re-buffed, I was so agitated! I don't give a dilly if 'they' pulled
back! They veiled a dangerous program at best imho.

Nobody seems to be asking the very simple question: WHY is the gov't doing
this cyber surveilling in the first place? Why millions of people? They have the
powers and techniques to go after criminals and terrorists....why are we being
lumped into that mess? I think the OP is correct; it's to keep us under control.
PERIOD.

If it's such an innocuous process then I want to see the phone call records of
Lindsay Graham! I have unlimited calling. I want to know who he talks to...
Oh, while we're at it....I want all the congresscritters' phone call lists. If they
have nothing to hide....yada, yada...you know the meme.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to snappyturtle (Reply #69)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 01:19 PM

72. it's abhorrent to see DU defending this vast data collection

It's the worst kind of partisan bullying: if you don't approve of massive surveillance under Obama, you're not a "good Dem."

we were steadfastly against it under Bush, and if anything, I'm even MORE against it under Obama b/c he promised to stop it. Instead he legalizes it? Really? That's what I voted for?

It's all so dishonest. I'm ashamed of what I've seem here lately.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Reply #72)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 01:28 PM

75. I'm not so much 'ashamed' as I am frightened. Can't folks understand that

we're being cyber "kettled"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to snappyturtle (Reply #75)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 01:33 PM

78. "cyber-kettled"! THAT is perfect.

i think i'll be too angry to be very frightened for quite a while. but that's just how i manifest fear.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Reply #72)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 05:49 PM

94. Personality over principle. Just as a joke,


I'd like to see a balloon floated that Obama IS waterboarding people (I do not believe this to be true).

The logic knots that would be tied around here trying to justify it would be hilarious.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DirkGently (Reply #94)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 06:03 PM

96. without waterboarding we'd be no better than the terrorists

...just thought i'd take it to the most logical conclusion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to snappyturtle (Reply #69)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 08:53 PM

129. If they have nothing to hide, they have nothing to fear.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DirkGently (Reply #129)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:45 PM

139. everybody's got something to hide...

'cept for me and my monkey.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DirkGently (Reply #129)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 11:29 AM

159. Obviously you forgot the sarcasm tag, or not? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to snappyturtle (Reply #159)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 11:34 AM

160. Not sure it's facetious when directed at government.



If we're a democratic society, the people should have a greater right to observe government than the other way around. Thus all the "transparency" talk in the various Obama campaigns.

But the sentiment, the way it's normally used to support secret surveillance, is of course specious.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DirkGently (Reply #160)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 11:45 AM

161. Point taken. Also,the transparency talk is just that. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to snappyturtle (Reply #69)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 11:23 AM

157. It's hard for people with their knees jerking so violently.



... circling the wagons to protect partisan interests, with so little apparent concern what's actually happening.

I agree that if the one-way mirror were transparent glass, all of this would stop overnight.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 04:36 PM

88. K & R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 04:40 PM

89. HUGE K & R !!! - Thank You !!!


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WillyT (Reply #89)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 05:08 PM

90. you're welcome WillyT!



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 06:28 PM

102. DURec

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 06:34 PM

106. I *KNOW* it's being done to keep us safe!!! But I want to know how many pot smoking grannies it has

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 07:02 PM

110. Maybe all liberals do. Doubt it? Point to a single liberal who does not.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AnotherMcIntosh (Reply #110)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 07:16 PM

111. i can point to plenty of DUers...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Reply #111)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 07:19 PM

112. Are all of them or any of them liberals?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AnotherMcIntosh (Reply #112)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 07:24 PM

113. :) thought that's where this was going...good point.


i guess to love Obama means joining forces with paleo/statist conservatives to trash the 4th amendment of the constitution.

but hey, long live the 2nd amendment.

hopefully we won't need it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 07:41 PM

116. Everywhere.

Not just in the US. But everywhere. Not just against government spying but also political spying and corporate data mining.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #116)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 07:48 PM

120. this is a finer detail...we have no idea how our data is being used, b/c

the companies that sell it are coming up with new uses for it all the time.

once collected there's no warrant needed, you just ring up the defense contractor with the data you need.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Reply #120)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 07:57 PM

124. It wouldn't surprise me if the NSA paid for this shit.

Got a Nevada ID and had been ducking some spam company that keeps trying to contact me for a debt that is super old (I didn't make the debt and can't get it off my record). My address was completely unknown. 3 days after I got my license I get a damn letter from them in the mail. I just know the DMV had to have sold my data or posted it online somewhere.

It's atrocious.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #124)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 10:06 PM

136. not just "getting paid" - ripping us off e.g. Trailblazer vs Thin Thread

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 07:45 PM

118. All liberals DO!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MNBrewer (Reply #118)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 08:18 PM

128. definitely the litmus test of the moment!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 09:27 PM

133. k/r

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 09:40 PM

135. All coming together


The USA is becoming more authoritarian like China, while China becomes more
capitalistic like the US. There is no competition between forms of government anymore,
thanks to globalization. Can anyone posit a plausible successful revolt scenario at
this point? I now wonder if the elite have learned from mistakes in the past
and fused that with technology to make any peaceful but successful revolt implausible.

Oh, and by the way, FUCK THE NSA!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PopeOxycontinI (Reply #135)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 12:01 AM

145. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Original post)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 12:31 AM

149. kicked for the night folk

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Original post)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 05:51 AM

152. Kick for "The very existence of such state spying apparatus is enough ...

The very existence of such state spying apparatus is enough for MOST people to forgo any serious involvement in organizing against it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Reply #152)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 10:52 AM

156. The chilling effect ...


... is instantaneous.

The cries for the leaker's blood are chilling as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Original post)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 07:08 AM

153. K & R!



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nashville_brook (Original post)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 11:24 AM

158. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread