[QUOTE=Richard Parker]
Ok. So your position is that the NSA spying program was kept a secret because they believed it was wrong?
[/QUOTE]
Yes, wrong and unpopular.
Also, they didn’t want to take the small chance that an ethical judge would rule against their “spy on the entire internet” program. Sure, most judges will toe the government line, but there is often a pesky court with morals to get in the way.
Hence, the bought and paid for secret rubber stamp court to point to when they’re inevitably found out.
Nothing. It’s an admirable goal, and one that I hope is successful.
What’s so great about treating everyone on earth like they’re terrorists?
So my guess is ~99% of Americans have been spied on by the NSA using this technology. And Americans are the only ones the NSA even pretends to care about! They are not ashamed of spying on every last foreigner, including foreign governments, in the least, and they’ve said as much.
And if the number of victims is less than 100% of the population, do you think that is due to NSA restraining their operations out of conscience, or incompetence?
How do you realistically define “spying on the entire internet” such that the NSA is not doing that?
They are paid by the government. The are all appointed by one man. They work for the NSA. They hear no opposing arguments (meaning the people who pay them and tell them what to do are the ones asking for their permission to spy on people). And they allow all the spying that is requested. They might as well not be there. What function does this court serve besides lending a veneer of formality to an evil, despicable organization?
Add in a competing despotic national leader, a story-hungry journalist, the Ecuadoran embassy, and a stripper ex-girlfriend and you’ve got yourself a hell of a game of Fiasco. This is almost as good of a show as John McAfee, and has also suitably diverted attention from the actual financial and political problems of the United States that the biggest possible conspiracy is that someone deliberately fanned the story into a bonfire.
And he is an idiot. Who the freaking hell scarpers and doesn’t run to a country withNO extradition? If you decide you are going to geek out, plan ahead. He has no planning skills, obviously. If I was going to become a traitor, I would have exit plans including actually knowing which countries have no extradition treaties with the US, and the fastest ways to get there. [Well, I also probably wouldn’t release the data until I was already headed to one of those countries.]
Have you never seena Coen Brothers movie? These are not smart people; these are people with “powerful ambition and poor impulse control.”
CIA Superior: What did we learn, Palmer?
CIA Officer: I don’t know, sir.
CIA Superior: I don’t fuckin’ know either. I guess we learned not to do it again.
CIA Officer: Yes, sir.
CIA Superior: I’m fucked if I know what we did.
CIA Officer: Yes, sir, it’s, uh, hard to say
CIA Superior: Jesus Fucking Christ.
That was a little cryptic, and I blame posting from my phone.
The article says that a judge ruled (correctly in my view) that portions of the program that involved purely domestic spying were found unconstitutional in 2011 and fixed to the court’s satisfaction.
The article also suggests that FISA is a toothless check, which I also agree with. But it does not establish that any part of the program revealed by Snowden was illegal, does it?
ETA: Sorry, I posted this before I saw your additional post. I think that the court’s finding that the NSA program was unconstitutional implies that it was illegal. They have made adjustments, but we don’t know, and are not allowed to know, if the court has made further findings.
The problem here is the lack of oversight, right? If you and I agree that FISA is toothless, then they are not effectively able to oversee the project. Only select members of congress are allowed to oversee it, and some of those, such as Ron Wyden, are still frustrated. He doesn’t have the ability to effectively oversee the program either, since he’s not allowed to say anything about it in a public forum.
So, I don’t know how we could ever know whether illegal things were going on – parts of the program were found unconstitutional in 2011 and no one paid a price for that. I suspect that, once the current round of FOIA request are addressed a few years from now, we’ll find that there were further issues in the NSA program, but I cannot answer your question about current illegal activities right now, since I don’t know about them. Even if I did, I couldn’t answer you.
If the position is that parts of the program we don’t know about might be illegal, but we wouldn’t know, then I have to agree. That’s true almost axiomatically.
If the position is that the parts of the program as it currently exists that we know about are illegal, I think that’s far from clear.
I agree that reform is needed, and that overbroad surveillance (even when legal) is just bad policy. I just think it’s hyperbolic and wrong to claim that the NSA kept the program secret because they thought it was wrong or illegal. I think they pretty obviously had other motivations, and also good reasons for thinking it to be legal.
You also note that no one “paid a price” when parts of the program were found unconstitutional. But without knowing more, there’s no reason to think they should have paid any price. For example, if a part of the program was found unconstitutional on an issue that had never before been adjudicated by controlling law (such as whether it is permissible to read the content of a US-originating SMS message sent to a foreign cell phone number that may or may not be inside the US), then there’s no reason anyone should have paid a price, the program just needed to change.
My opinion remains unchanged. The program is legal and Snowden is a traitor who betrayed his country because he wanted to be famous and live like a king in the Third World without having to work for it.
Er, see the link in the previous post. You get to have your own opinion, but not your own facts.
Anyhoo, as I noted on the other thread, technological advances may render the issue moot by making continued government abuses of this sort impossible.
Well, If you have a “system” that suppresses discussion and investigation. Conspiracies can be created by the Government. Have you ever brought up 9/11/01 on Straight Dope? Everytime I do the “discussion” is CLOSED. Now, what is going on. Someone afraid of the “facts” being examined?
Smells like a cover-up? Right here.
check this out. lets see if this reference is censored? http://www.truthweather.com/images/pentagon/