• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Edward Snowden: the whistleblower behind revelations of NSA surveillance

Im not using it as an anarchy claim im simply saying why would you not want to know what the government has been up to especially on infringement on civil liberties.

1. I am unconvinced that the program itself is an infringement of civil liberties.
2. Collection programs and methodologies are and must be classified for the simple enough reason that otherwise they become useless.
 
I will say this, this has much more potential for puzzling questions than the Manning case.
 
1. I am unconvinced that the program itself is an infringement of civil liberties.
2. Collection programs and methodologies are and must be classified for the simple enough reason that otherwise they become useless.

The 4th Amendment is clear that no searches of your personal property can be conducted without a warrant and probable cause to believe you have engaged in a criminal act.

I have called Holland several times over the last few years along with sending many text messages. It now appears that the NSA has records of all of my texts and calls.

What probable cause of criminal or terrorist activity did they have in order to request my cellphone records?

None. My rights have been violated.
 
Is it possible this program has saved lives? Absolutely.

Those who have been read in would delete the "possible". They have released statements that it has stopped attacks inside CONUS.

And once our technology advances to the point that the NSA actually CAN record and screen the contents of every phone call and email made I am sure even more lives could be saved. But it would still be wrong. Piece by piece by f-ing piece we are ceding our civil liberties in the name of security. Where does it stop? Where do we draw the line? It seems to me that the only thing keeping our government from absolute intrusion is the technology itself. As the technology improves the government WILL encroach more and more. History is proof positive of that.

:) and here I thought you were a progressive. Why shouldn't government be there to help guide us into making all those decisions that we are so poorly suited to make for ourselves? ;)
 
The 4th Amendment is clear that no searches of your personal property can be conducted without a warrant and probable cause to believe you have engaged in a criminal act.

1. There was a warrant
2. There were also no searches of anyones' personal property
so
3. This is anything but a blatant violation of the 4th Amendment.
 
1. I am unconvinced that the program itself is an infringement of civil liberties.
2. Collection programs and methodologies are and must be classified for the simple enough reason that otherwise they become useless.

Just who was in the dark about the ability to trace all forms of cyber-communication ? The bad guys ? Hardly !!

Only the naïve. And the innocent. What faith do you have that this would not be misused ? How about Hillary with the FBI files ? While she was friggin First Lady !!

And Obama and the IRS and who knows what else !!!!!

That cyber collection is now somehow rendered "useless" is absurd. Let the jihadists go back to smoke signals then.
 
Sorry man,but snooping on every single American kinda goes against the whole idea of freedom.

Gah. Guess we'd better pull all those police off the streets, then. Did you know that they observe massive numbers of Americans on a regular, daily basis? :eek:
 
1. There was a warrant
2. There were also no searches of anyones' personal property
so
3. This is anything but a blatant violation of the 4th Amendment.

The NSA requested and received a warrant for all records of international cellphone calls between the USA and other nations?

Since when does having a warrant mean the search cannot be unConstitutional?

What probable cause did the NSA use to justify retrieval of my cellphone records?
 
Just who was in the dark about the ability to trace all forms of cyber-communication ? The bad guys ? Hardly !!

Only the naïve. And the innocent. What faith do you have that this would not be misused ? How about Hillary with the FBI files ? While she was friggin First Lady !!

And Obama and the IRS and who knows what else !!!!!

That cyber collection is now somehow rendered "useless" is absurd. Let the jihadists go back to smoke signals then.

I have very little faith that this ability would not be misused. But, then, I have very little faith that any government power would not be misused. The possibility for abuse is not in and of itself a good argument against a government program for the simple reason that that (as applied) is an argument against all government.

And yes. By outing this platform, Snowden has rendered it useless, cutting future counter-terror efforts off from the information they would otherwise have gathered, making them less likely to stop attacks inside the US. Any honest discussion of this needs to account for that.
 
Gah. Guess we'd better pull all those police off the streets, then. Did you know that they observe massive numbers of Americans on a regular, daily basis? :eek:

Police don't engage in searches of everyone they see on the street.
 
Those who have been read in would delete the "possible". They have released statements that it has stopped attacks inside CONUS.

And just what did you expect them to say ? What, another bunch of Miami rastafarians who thought they could topple the Sears Tower in Chicago have been thwarted ?

:) and here I thought you were a progressive. Why shouldn't government be there to help guide us into making all those decisions that we are so poorly suited to make for ourselves? ;)

After the hypocritical crap from no less than Obama, first in criticizing Bush over the harvesting of meta-data from overseas calls, and then committing that he would never do it, its quite a betrayal of trust from the transparent liar in chief. This was never a secret from the bad guys. Just from the average Joe.
 
I have very little faith that this ability would not be misused. But, then, I have very little faith that any government power would not be misused. The possibility for abuse is not in and of itself a good argument against a government program for the simple reason that that (as applied) is an argument against all government.

And yes. By outing this platform, Snowden has rendered it useless, cutting future counter-terror efforts off from the information they would otherwise have gathered, making them less likely to stop attacks inside the US. Any honest discussion of this needs to account for that.

Yes, terrorists are now forced to no longer use cellphones to communicate their terrorist plans.

They will have to rely on carrier pigeons and skywriting to get their plans across.
 
Yes, terrorists are now forced to no longer use cellphones to communicate their terrorist plans.

They will have to rely on carrier pigeons and skywriting to get their plans across.

Or the Internet.
 
1. I am unconvinced that the program itself is an infringement of civil liberties.


2. Collection programs and methodologies are and must be classified for the simple enough reason that otherwise they become useless.

Tapping phones? Collecting internet searches? Collecting private information? Collecting phone records and documents? Just anyones any American citizens?
How is that not against the 4th amendment?
 
It seems like many people think there is some distinction between the NSA reading/hearing the contents of our communications and simply knowing who, how often, and for how long we make contact with specific people. It turns out that the distinction isn't as great as we might suppose. They don't need the content for someone to know what is going on in your personal life. As such, prying into this kind of information is certainly a violation of your private, personal space.

Here is the article that explains why:
Verizon and the N.S.A.: The Problem with Metadata : The New Yorker

If we really don't think that the government knowing your personal business is any big deal, then why not take it to its fullest. Why not just let them put cameras and microphones in your home, work and car. After all, I am certain this would save lives, which seems to be the only justification the government needs any more for people to just knuckle under. I am so disappointed in my fellow Americans right now, especially Obama.
 
Gah. Guess we'd better pull all those police off the streets, then. Did you know that they observe massive numbers of Americans on a regular, daily basis? :eek:

This is way overboard and you know it...It's one thing for the police to pull you over for a traffic violation or respond to a call....It's a completely different beast when they monitor all of your private activities without any reason whatsoever.
 
And yes. By outing this platform, Snowden has rendered it useless, cutting future counter-terror efforts off from the information they would otherwise have gathered, making them less likely to stop attacks inside the US. Any honest discussion of this needs to account for that.

That is nonsense. Are you shocked to find out that the government can trace anything it wants to ? We've been doing it for years !! You had to know this as current military. I am ex-military, and I knew it ! The enemy knows it !! The only thing that is new is the Big Brother has been harvesting it on all of us all of the time for the last few years.
 
The NSA requested and received a warrant for all records of international cellphone calls between the USA and other nations?

Absent treaty obligations, we're free to collect on that outside the borders so long as it is in line with the national intelligence program and the collection priorities and taskings set for us.

Since when does having a warrant mean the search cannot be unConstitutional?

:shrug: Warrants have to be issued to justify a search, which can be conducted without warrants only in extraordinary and defined circumstances. You don't have to like that, but it is the law.

What probable cause did the NSA use to justify retrieval of my cellphone records?

The NSA did not collect and analyze the content of your cellphone interchanges - and anyone who did so without a warrant is a criminal and liable to prosecution both inside and outside of the IC. What they did was (as we understand it thus far) collect your point-to-point transactions in order to cue further collection if it turned out you were making lots of calls to terror-cell membership.

So, an example of the data might look like:

NSA's records of Kanstantine said:
201305061230: 205-555-5555 -> 205-777-7777
201305061235: 205-555-5555 -> 970-888-8888
201305061657: 205-555-5555 -> 205-777-7777

:shrug:
 
Last edited:
:shrug: Warrants have to be issued to justify a search, which can be conducted without warrants only in extraordinary and defined circumstances. You don't have to like that, but it is the law.



The NSA did not collect and analyze the content of your cellphone interchanges - and anyone who did so without a warrant is a criminal and liable to prosecution both inside and outside of the IC. What they did was (as we understand it thus far) collect your point-to-point transactions in order to cue further collection if it turned out you were making lots of calls to terror-cell membership.

So, an example of the data might look like:



:shrug:

Which violates the 4th Amendment.

What probable cause did they have to demand my phone records?
 
and here I thought you were a progressive. Why shouldn't government be there to help guide us into making all those decisions that we are so poorly suited to make for ourselves? ;)

Touché :)

As a progressive I do believe in using the government to improve the lives of the citizenry. Such as using progressive taxation to ensure everyone has access to health care and a college education or heavily regulating industry to ensure the well being of the people and the planet isn’t compromised in the name of the profit motive.

The government can be a very useful tool, but it depends on how we wield it. The government as it currently stands, heavily in the pockets of corporations and stacked with career politicians only interested in accumulating more influence and power, is NOT a tool of the people. It would take term limits and serious campaign finance reform to start getting the government on track to being the kind of government this progressive would want.

In the meantime, there are definitely things I think the government should NOT be doing. Collecting taxes to make services available to all Americans is a great thing, in my opinion. Monitoring the communications of citizens without probable cause is not. So this program saves lives. I am still against it. DUI checkpoints save lives. I am against those. Stop and frisk probably saved lives. Yep, I’m against it. As my conservative friends often point out in the gun control threads, freedom is inherently dangerous.

In the liberty vs security equation, the increase in security has to be MUCH greater than the liberty that is given up to satisfy me. And since the risk of an American being the victim of a terrorist attack is miniscule, all these programs in the name of the War on Terror are crap.
 
What bothers me more than anything at this point is that it is quite obvious that a number of people haven't read much about the issue. That hasn't stopped them from being adamant about their positions. That is scary as all hell.
 
Three clear cut examples of why this country is heading for nothing but darker days. Shame on the three of you, and any one else that condones and agrees with them. ****ing ridiculous is what it is.

Wag your finger elsewhere. If you haven't noticed, we're at war. Releasing classified information is a capitol offense, but lordy lord we're facing dark days when laws are still enforced, trials are still given, due process is doled out, and something that used to mean death by hanging will likely result in nothing but some time in prison, even though some, like Manning, should most definitely receive the fullest punishment afforded by law.
 
Absent treaty obligations, we're free to collect on that outside the borders so long as it is in line with the national intelligence program and the collection priorities and taskings set for us.



:shrug: Warrants have to be issued to justify a search, which can be conducted without warrants only in extraordinary and defined circumstances. You don't have to like that, but it is the law.



The NSA did not collect and analyze the content of your cellphone interchanges - and anyone who did so without a warrant is a criminal and liable to prosecution both inside and outside of the IC. What they did was (as we understand it thus far) collect your point-to-point transactions in order to cue further collection if it turned out you were making lots of calls to terror-cell membership.

So, an example of the data might look like:

Originally Posted by NSA's records of Kanstantine:
201305061230: 205-555-5555 -> 205-777-7777
201305061235: 205-555-5555 -> 970-888-8888
201305061657: 205-555-5555 -> 205-777-7777

:shrug:


Yet, if you allow what you see above, how are you going to object when they add identifying information to it, and publicly available information to that? The phone records are the keystone to privacy, in this case. Without it, privacy cannot hold.
 
Touché :)

As a progressive I do believe in using the government to improve the lives of the citizenry. Such as using progressive taxation to ensure everyone has access to health care and a college education or heavily regulating industry to ensure the well being of the people and the planet isn’t compromised in the name of the profit motive.

The government can be a very useful tool, but it depends on how we wield it. The government as it currently stands, heavily in the pockets of corporations and stacked with career politicians only interested in accumulating more influence and power, is NOT a tool of the people. It would take term limits and serious campaign finance reform to start getting the government on track to being the kind of government this progressive would want.

In the meantime, there are definitely things I think the government should NOT be doing. Collecting taxes to make services available to all Americans is a great thing, in my opinion. Monitoring the communications of citizens without probable cause is not. So this program saves lives. I am still against it. DUI checkpoints save lives. I am against those. Stop and frisk probably saved lives. Yep, I’m against it. As my conservative friends often point out in the gun control threads, freedom is inherently dangerous.

In the liberty vs security equation, the increase in security has to be MUCH greater than the liberty that is given up to satisfy me. And since the risk of an American being the victim of a terrorist attack is miniscule, all these programs in the name of the War on Terror are crap.

Agreed.

There are many things the government could do that would save many lives, such as confiscating all firearms, injecting all citizens with a RFID-GPS chip, requiring presentation of photo ID at all public transit stations, limiting newspapers to only pro-government op-eds, instituting the death penalty for all felonies.

That doesn't mean we should allow our government to engage in such things.
 
Wag your finger elsewhere. If you haven't noticed, we're at war. Releasing classified information is a capitol offense, but lordy lord we're facing dark days when laws are still enforced, trials are still given, due process is doled out, and something that used to mean death by hanging will likely result in nothing but some time in prison, even though some, like Manning, should most definitely receive the fullest punishment afforded by law.

We're not at war with all residents of the United States.

Right?
 
Back
Top Bottom