Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Indi Guy

(3,992 posts)
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 03:51 PM Jan 2014

Poll: Most Americans now oppose the NSA program

Source: USA Today

WASHINGTON -- Most Americans now disapprove of the NSA's sweeping collection of phone metadata, a new USA TODAY/Pew Research Center Poll finds, and they're inclined to think there aren't adequate limits in place to what the government can collect.

President Obama's announcement Friday of changes in the surveillance programs has done little to allay those concerns: By 73%-21%, those who paid attention to the speech say his proposals won't make much difference in protecting people's privacy.

The poll of 1,504 adults, taken Wednesday through Sunday, shows a public that is more receptive than before to the arguments made by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden
. His leak of intelligence documents since last spring has fueled a global debate over the National Security Agency's surveillance of Americans and spying on foreign leaders.

Those surveyed now split, 45%-43%, on whether Snowden's disclosures have helped or harmed the public interest...

The snapshot of public opinion comes as the White House, the intelligence agencies and Congress weigh significant changes in the way the programs are run. In his address, Obama insisted no illegalities had been exposed but proposed steps to reassure Americans that proper safeguards were in place.

By nearly 3-1, 70%-26%, Americans say they shouldn't have to give up privacy and freedom in order to be safe from terrorism...



Read more: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2014/01/20/poll-nsa-surveillance/4638551/

52 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Poll: Most Americans now oppose the NSA program (Original Post) Indi Guy Jan 2014 OP
Lots of people are against this... Javaman Jan 2014 #1
You missed the good part Progressive dog Jan 2014 #2
Because it's "all" about Snowden MNBrewer Jan 2014 #30
You base your entire ct on Snowden then Progressive dog Jan 2014 #33
WTF are you saying? MNBrewer Jan 2014 #36
No it isn't, you can't separate the "whistleblower" from Progressive dog Jan 2014 #37
Well, *I* can even if you can't MNBrewer Jan 2014 #40
Why are you afraid of the whole poll? Progressive dog Jan 2014 #42
Yes, he's a part of it MNBrewer Jan 2014 #43
A Conspiracy Theory. nt riderinthestorm Jan 2014 #44
Wow. that's RICH! MNBrewer Jan 2014 #46
a ct is initials for conspiracy theory nt Progressive dog Jan 2014 #45
Ouch .. Lenomsky Jan 2014 #51
And then there's this little nugget leftynyc Jan 2014 #3
The consequences? davidthegnome Jan 2014 #6
Well, we agree on one thing leftynyc Jan 2014 #11
The US is keeping him there MNBrewer Jan 2014 #32
-1000000 Dopers_Greed Jan 2014 #7
Let him stay in Russia leftynyc Jan 2014 #13
Do I need to remind you what happened to Dr. King? BlueStreak Jan 2014 #9
Dr. King turned himself in leftynyc Jan 2014 #12
Dr. King ended up assassinated BlueStreak Jan 2014 #14
It's not like he simply jaywalked leftynyc Jan 2014 #15
But I'm talking about an EXTRA-jucial system BlueStreak Jan 2014 #16
Given his notoriety leftynyc Jan 2014 #18
I suppose Yassir Arafat and Paul Wellstone believed that also. BlueStreak Jan 2014 #19
I had no idea leftynyc Jan 2014 #20
Wellstone too. OilemFirchen Jan 2014 #31
So you believe our government doesn't involve itself in that kind of stuff? BlueStreak Jan 2014 #50
Is Anwar Al-Awlaki in prison? When was his trial? OnyxCollie Jan 2014 #48
Really. You have a link for that because I read Greenwald's twitter feed Luminous Animal Jan 2014 #52
Once again, here is the link to the press conference held by the other NSA whistleblowers JDPriestly Jan 2014 #4
Huh? OilemFirchen Jan 2014 #10
They changed the law. They did pursue the whistleblowers. JDPriestly Jan 2014 #17
Thank you. OilemFirchen Jan 2014 #22
Chelsea Manning is serving a life sentence. n/t NealK Jan 2014 #23
Nope. OilemFirchen Jan 2014 #27
Do you seriously think that she'll ever be granted parole? NealK Jan 2014 #35
Actually, Chelsea Manning was sentenced to many years. JDPriestly Jan 2014 #24
There's just this perception bucolic_frolic Jan 2014 #5
If the surveillance state continues to expand without control there will be NO freedom ... spin Jan 2014 #21
Stephanie Miller is in full meltdown mode on this BlueStreak Jan 2014 #8
I bet that she's a member here. n/t NealK Jan 2014 #39
Therre are certainly a few people who voice her views of the dandy security state we are building. BlueStreak Jan 2014 #47
Cool! I hadn't realized that the NSA was publishing the information they collect! eggplant Jan 2014 #25
By 73%-21%, those who paid attention to the speech say his proposals won't make much difference... NealK Jan 2014 #26
You know what they are? They're racists! Enthusiast Jan 2014 #29
D'oh! I forgot to mention it. NealK Jan 2014 #38
They just don't understand. Enthusiast Jan 2014 #28
Apparently nearly 70% of Americans hate America. JoeyT Jan 2014 #34
Or it might be the "year of the libertarian" in 2016. LOL. Pholus Jan 2014 #41
LOL. BlueStreak Jan 2014 #49

Javaman

(62,439 posts)
1. Lots of people are against this...
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 03:57 PM
Jan 2014

and a majority of Americans also wanted single payer.

they never listen to we the people.

Progressive dog

(6,861 posts)
2. You missed the good part
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 04:01 PM
Jan 2014
Even so, by 56%-32%, those surveyed say the government should pursue a criminal case against Snowden.

MNBrewer

(8,462 posts)
43. Yes, he's a part of it
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 07:17 PM
Jan 2014

A separate part of it from the abuses of power and/or crimes and/or unconstitutional activities that he exposed.

What is a ct?

Lenomsky

(340 posts)
51. Ouch ..
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 11:08 PM
Jan 2014

I missed that. Don't shoot the messenger.

Hope Snowden has a happy fruitful life .. maybe he'll pen a book but he didn't do it for fame in my opinion.

 

leftynyc

(26,060 posts)
3. And then there's this little nugget
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 04:01 PM
Jan 2014

Even so, by 56%-32%, those surveyed say the government should pursue a criminal case against Snowden.

Comparing Snowden to Dr. King (as Greenwald is doing on twitter) is a fucking insult. Dr. King never ran away to another country - he turned himself in and paid the consequences for breaking what he considered an unjust law. That's what a real hero does.

davidthegnome

(2,983 posts)
6. The consequences?
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 04:14 PM
Jan 2014

What do you think would happen to Snowden if he did turn himself in? Do you think he'd be given a fair trial? Do you think he'd be treated fairly in any way? I don't. Is it cowardice for him to hide from the authorities of a Nation recently known for torturing prisoners? I mean, I guess you could ask Bradley Manning...

Snowden leaked the information he did with the full knowledge that it could bring great risk to his own health and safety - and in all likelihood, his family's as well. I don't know about comparing Snowden and Dr. King, other than the fact that, the consequences, for Snowden, would almost certainly be torture and a lifetime of imprisonment. Who the hell knows where he would end up or what would be done to him.

I hope Snowden stays the hell away - and stays safe. No, I believe that turning himself in would be a very bad idea for Mr. Snowden - not because he would have to face a fair trial and suffer the consequences of a crime, but because the consequences for him would be far above and beyond what any just Nation should do to a prisoner.

 

leftynyc

(26,060 posts)
11. Well, we agree on one thing
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 04:52 PM
Jan 2014

I also hope Snowden stays the hell away. Russia (that bastion of freedom and free speech) is the perfect place for him.

Dopers_Greed

(2,640 posts)
7. -1000000
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 04:29 PM
Jan 2014

It's easy for you to say what Snowden should do, when you aren't faced with a lifetime of torture like he is.

 

leftynyc

(26,060 posts)
12. Dr. King turned himself in
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 04:53 PM
Jan 2014

and faced consequences. He will always be a hero. Anyone comparing that coward Snowden to him should be ashamed of themselves.

 

BlueStreak

(8,377 posts)
14. Dr. King ended up assassinated
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 04:55 PM
Jan 2014

Your prescription for Snowden is brilliant, until one includes that tiny little detail.

A person has to be insane to believe that the system would not use all of its considerable power to grind Snowden to a pulp.

 

leftynyc

(26,060 posts)
15. It's not like he simply jaywalked
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 04:59 PM
Jan 2014

so why shouldn't he be facing years in prison? Hey, you want to glorify him, knock yourself out. I have no desire to put a halo on a criminal who ran away. Every single minority person who is arrested can claim the same thing - an unfair judicial system.

 

BlueStreak

(8,377 posts)
16. But I'm talking about an EXTRA-jucial system
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 05:08 PM
Jan 2014

You know, the system that took care of trouble-makers like King and the two Kennedys. Snowden's "crime" was in disclosing the crimes of this EXTRA-judicial security machine. What are the odds he could survive long enough to make it to trial?

Equating this to the racism we have built into our judicial system is a non-sequitur. They are both problems.

 

leftynyc

(26,060 posts)
20. I had no idea
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 05:20 PM
Jan 2014

I was dealing with someone who thinks arafat was murdered so I'm going to back away from this before I say something very insulting.

 

BlueStreak

(8,377 posts)
50. So you believe our government doesn't involve itself in that kind of stuff?
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 10:01 PM
Jan 2014

Not everybody has such a utopian view. I don't blame Snowden for being realistic about that. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if he holds some documents that prove that the NSA/CIA have been doing exactly that in many cases. We know they have no problem doing that overseas with drones or any other convenient means. The only point of debate is how much of that they have done domestically.

 

OnyxCollie

(9,958 posts)
48. Is Anwar Al-Awlaki in prison? When was his trial?
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 09:54 PM
Jan 2014

You can bet Snowden's name is on a stickie for every Terror Tuesday kill list compilation.

Will Snowden get a fair trial, or will the Obama administration simply declare that it is not be possible to bring him to justice, and assassinate him with a Predator drone instead?

Some have argued that the President is required to get permission from a federal court before taking action against a United States citizen who is a senior operational leader of al Qaeda or associated forces. This is simply not accurate. “Due process” and “judicial process” are not one and the same, particularly when it comes to national security. The Constitution guarantees due process, not judicial process. -Eric Holder

Luminous Animal

(27,310 posts)
52. Really. You have a link for that because I read Greenwald's twitter feed
Tue Jan 21, 2014, 11:51 AM
Jan 2014

Every day and I've seen zero posts from him comparing Snowden to King

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
4. Once again, here is the link to the press conference held by the other NSA whistleblowers
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 04:07 PM
Jan 2014

following Obama's speech.

For those who are interested, it is long but well worth hearing. Snowden was not alone in his doubts about the extent of the NSA's activities. The other whistleblowers are, as I suspect Snowden is, quite concerned about doing what is needed and right to protect our country from terrorism. They object to the excesses as so I.


http://new.livestream.com/accuracy/nsa-rebuttal/videos/39824993

I recognize that those leading the NSA and our government with regard to this security issue have an extremely difficult and heavy responsibility. It cannot be easy to draw the line on the surveillance of the entire world when you have the capacity to watch it all. I sincerely think they are trying to do the right thing. But their zeal is obsessive, and they face a lot of temptations -- the desire to be really, really the best at what they do, perhaps even pressure from corporate interests or even personalities to find information out either for personal gain or simply nosiness. I'm not saying that they succumb to those temptations but in a program that provides so many opportunities for snooping unrelated to American security and that is so poorly overseen by completely independent third parties, it gets very easy to just once in a while cross the line between right and wrong.

The NSA program is extremely dangerous. It will be difficult and take a lot of time for us to control the technological capacity that we have. But we have to remember that laws are made for everyone to follow. They need to be universal. What applies to the US should apply to China and Russia and Germany and Brazil and every other country. No country should claim the right to place the citizens and businesses of another country under surveillance. On the other hand, we need to define terrorism more clearly and come to some sort of international agreement about how to define and control it together. That should be an international effort, and not just the responsibility of the US or the US and a few, random allies. Sometimes one person's terrorist is another person's patriot. Deciding who is a patriot and who is a revolutionary depends on a subjective point of view.

So anti-terrorism fights are always educated by a political viewpoint. And this troubles me very much about the NSA program. Do those managing it, those doing the actual surveillance or the government oversight boards have a political agenda? If so, what is it? That is a very important question that needs to be answered.

OilemFirchen

(7,143 posts)
10. Huh?
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 04:37 PM
Jan 2014

NSA whistleblowers are all serving life sentences.

I read so right here.

These are actors, I presume?

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
17. They changed the law. They did pursue the whistleblowers.
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 05:09 PM
Jan 2014

William Edward Binney[2] is a former highly placed intelligence official with the United States National Security Agency (NSA)[3] turned whistleblower who resigned on October 31, 2001, after more than 30 years with the agency. He was a high-profile critic of his former employers during the George W. Bush administration, and was the subject of FBI investigations, including a raid on his home in 2007.

Binney continues to speak out during Barack Obama's presidency about the NSA's data collection policies, and continues interviews in the media regarding his experiences and his views on communication intercepts by governmental agencies of American citizens. In a legal case, Binney has testified in a sworn affidavit that the NSA is in deliberate violation of the U.S. Constitution.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Binney_%28U.S._intelligence_official%29

Russell D. Tice (born 1961) is a former intelligence analyst for the U.S. Air Force, Office of Naval Intelligence, Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), and National Security Agency (NSA). During his nearly 20-year career with various United States government agencies, he conducted intelligence missions related to the Kosovo War, Afghanistan, the USS Cole bombing in Yemen, and Operation Iraqi Freedom.

In December, 2005, Tice helped spark a national controversy over claims that the NSA and the DIA were engaged in unlawful and unconstitutional wiretaps on American citizens. He later acknowledged that he was one of the sources that were used in the New York Times reporting on the wiretap activity in December 2005.[2][3] After speaking publicly about the need for legislation to protect whistleblowers, Tice received national attention as the first NSA-whistleblower in May 2005 before William Binney, Thomas Andrews Drake, Mark Klein, Thomas Tamm, and Edward Snowden came forward.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russ_Tice

homas Andrews Drake (born 1957) is a former senior executive of the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA), a decorated United States Air Force and United States Navy veteran, and a whistleblower. In 2010 the government alleged that Drake "mishandled" documents, one of the few such Espionage Act cases in U.S. history. Drake's defenders claim that he was instead being persecuted for challenging the Trailblazer Project.[4][5][6][7][8][9] He is the 2011 recipient of the Ridenhour Prize for Truth-Telling and co-recipient of the Sam Adams Associates for Integrity in Intelligence (SAAII) award.

On June 9, 2011, all 10 original charges against him were dropped. Drake rejected several deals because he refused to "plea bargain with the truth". He eventually pled to one misdemeanor count for exceeding authorized use of a computer;[10] Jesselyn Radack of the Government Accountability Project, who helped represent him, called it an act of "civil disobedience."[11]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Andrews_Drake

Obama signed a new law expanding whistleblower protections for some government employees in November, and on January 2, he signed the 2013 National Defense Authorization Act, which extends similar protections to defense contractors who expose waste and corruption. But the NDAA signing came with a caveat that blindsided the bill's backers and has some in the whistleblower community up in arms: In a signing statement, Obama wrote that the bill's whistleblowing protections "could be interpreted in a manner that would interfere with my authority to manage and direct executive branch officials," and he promised to ignore them if they conflicted with his power to "supervise, control, and correct employees' communications with the Congress in cases where such communications would be unlawful or would reveal information that is properly privileged or otherwise confidential."

"12 million contractors are going to be out in the cold because of this," warns Jesselyn Radack, the national security and human rights director for the Government Accountability Project and a former whistleblower. "Asking employees to go to their boss before going to Congress defeats the purpose of blowing the whistle." Radack adds that presidents "use signing statements to direct their subordinates on how to interpret and administer a law, and it can have substantial legal impact." She points to George W. Bush's signing statements on torture and the USA PATRIOT Act as examples, both of which allowed the former president to dodge parts of those laws.

"The language Obama used wasn't defined, it's completely ambiguous, and it's already led to confusion," says Angela Canterbury, director of public policy at the Project on Government Oversight. "I can imagine contractors claiming that disclosures made by whistleblowers are 'confidential,' and I think it could likely have a chilling effect."

Peter Van Buren, a former foreign service officer who wrote a book exposing contracting waste in Iraq (and was hassled by the State Department as a result) tells Mother Jones the signing statement "is merely another expression of [the Obama] administration's hostile policy toward all whistleblowers…It disappoints me, and devalues my own efforts to bring transparency to the government."

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/01/obama-whistleblower-protections-signing-statement

The Obama administration has been merciless in going after whistleblowers.

The man who blew the whistle on the torture interrogations of the Bush administration is an example of a whistleblower who went to jail for his courage and honesty.

Former CIA agent John Kiriakou, who blew the whistle on the US government’s use of torture under the Bush administration, is currently serving a 30 month sentence at the Federal Correctional Institution in Loretto, Pennsylvania.


His words:

Greetings from the Federal Correctional Institution at Loretto, Pennsylvania. I arrived here on February 28, 2013 to serve a 30 month sentence for violating the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982. At least that's what the government wants people to believe. In truth, this is my punishment for blowing the whistle on the CIA's illegal torture program and for telling the public that torture was official US government policy. But that's a different story. The purpose of this letter is to tell you about prison life.

At my formal sentencing hearing in January, the judge, the prosecutors, and my attorneys all agreed that I would serve my sentence in Loretto's Federal Work Camp. When I arrived, however, much to my surprise, the Corrections Officer (CO, or "hack&quot who processed me said that the Justice Department Bureau of Prisons had deemed me a "threat to the public safety" and so I would do serve the entire sentence in the actual prison, rather than the camp.

http://dissenter.firedoglake.com/2013/05/29/imprisoned-cia-torture-whistleblower-john-kiriakou-pens-letter-from-loretto/

Enjoy your freedom from information in America. Whistleblowers are silenced either through intimidation or prison, and we are the more ignorant for it.

OilemFirchen

(7,143 posts)
22. Thank you.
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 06:04 PM
Jan 2014

So, no. There are no whistleblowers serving life sentences in the U.S.

The best (worst) example you cited is John Kiriakou, who was charged with repeatedly disclosing classified information to journalists, including the name of a covert CIA officer and information revealing the role of another CIA employee, Deuce Martinez, in classified activities. He was tried, plead guilty, and was sentenced to 30 months. He is currently housed at the Federal Correctional Institution, Loretto - not exactly notorious for torture, BTW.

OilemFirchen

(7,143 posts)
27. Nope.
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 06:40 PM
Jan 2014

Chelsea Manning was sentenced to 35 years confinement with the possibility of parole in eight years for violations of the Espionage Act. She plead guilty to ten charges. She also, BTW, was a member of the military and, as such, was subject to the UCMJ.

Still not seeing Gulags here. But keep trying, if you must.

bucolic_frolic

(42,661 posts)
5. There's just this perception
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 04:08 PM
Jan 2014

from the libertarian right as well as the left

that the government is not to be trusted and
they have to much information

there were those cases a few months back where
details were being used to reconstruct cases against
people. That didn't build trust or confidence.

President Obama hinted at something yesterday about
selective enforcement

Citizens are not happy if most criminality goes unnoticed
but they get cited. Drunk driving at 65 miles an hour is
dangerous. Rolling through a stop sign or not wearing a
seat belt is illegal, but in a quiet suburb, does either
warrant the cost of enforcement?

Americans have a long history of preference for freedom
however they define it

spin

(17,493 posts)
21. If the surveillance state continues to expand without control there will be NO freedom ...
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 05:37 PM
Jan 2014

in this nation.

 

BlueStreak

(8,377 posts)
8. Stephanie Miller is in full meltdown mode on this
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 04:33 PM
Jan 2014

What is wrong with her? She has been defending the security state and hating on Snowden from the very first day. Today she was marveling at the fantastic leadership Obama showed with his courageous package of hard-hitting reforms.

She is out of her ever-loving mind.

 

BlueStreak

(8,377 posts)
47. Therre are certainly a few people who voice her views of the dandy security state we are building.
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 09:53 PM
Jan 2014

eggplant

(3,891 posts)
25. Cool! I hadn't realized that the NSA was publishing the information they collect!
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 06:32 PM
Jan 2014

Oh wait -- someone *else* collected these opinions?

Nevermind...

NealK

(1,788 posts)
26. By 73%-21%, those who paid attention to the speech say his proposals won't make much difference...
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 06:33 PM
Jan 2014

Why do so many people hate Obama?

"70%-26%, Americans say they shouldn't have to give up privacy and freedom in order to be safe from terrorism..."

Bunch of traitors and Paulbots!

Enthusiast

(50,983 posts)
28. They just don't understand.
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 06:41 PM
Jan 2014

We have to fight them here so we don't have to fight them over there. Or something.

JoeyT

(6,785 posts)
34. Apparently nearly 70% of Americans hate America.
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 06:47 PM
Jan 2014

Or do we only play the "LIBERALS BLAME AMERICA FIRST!!! LOVE IT OR LEAVE IT!!!" card when it isn't a majority yet? Right wing talking points are so hard to keep up with.

Pholus

(4,062 posts)
41. Or it might be the "year of the libertarian" in 2016. LOL.
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 07:12 PM
Jan 2014

Just extending the argument used this past summer of course to dismiss anyone with NSA concerns.

As to your last bit, I remember one argument this summer where the professed democrat and definite NSA apologist I was debating told me that the right wingers had a point when it came to the statement that "some far-left liberals hate America."

That was a hoot!

 

BlueStreak

(8,377 posts)
49. LOL.
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 09:56 PM
Jan 2014

What happens when the only people in favor of the security state are the NSA, Obama, Feinstein, al Qaeda, Rudy Guiliani, Gramps McGrumpy, and his gal Lyndsay?

Do we get a prize or something?

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Poll: Most Americans now ...