• 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!

The NSA's Reach Might Be Even Bigger Than We Thought

jmotivator said:
The odds are better than they have been in a long time for a constitutional convention.

Granted, you still need to have a government that respects the Constitution so....
Click to expand...

Yes. Wasn't there just a formal meeting in Virginia on that?
 
Arbo said:
Yes, there are many people that are inconsistent in their beliefs and outrage in that manner.

I grew up with and around people that worked there. And even with that, there was a time in my misguided teen years where I believe such nonsense. But the reality is that it's a place where normal people work, and just do a job. A buddy of mine was big time against them too and believed the worst, until his later years when as a programmer he was contracted to work there, he later admitted he was wrong about it for most of his life. Does government overstep it's bounds and abuse things? Hell yeah, from time to time, sometimes worse than others… are there people in government that abuse their positions? Hell yeah. So strict guides and oversight needs to be in place. And I know that warehousing loads of data could possibly lead to massive abuse, that's a simple reality. But the fear of some evil group of american citizens out to watch your every move is just fodder for the weak minded.
Click to expand...

Ok! That's all the concerned parties want addressed. First the rational behind warehousing citizens personal data in the first place, which may not be possible anyway, and IF it were, the very tightly regulated system that would ensure that there would not be "MASSIVE abuse" (emphasis added)
 
Ikari said:
The aggregated Big Brother Agencies have indeed become the bad guy. Government beyond its boundaries has never been a good thing.
Click to expand...

Well see, it's a done deal for you. So anything they do is bad. lol
 
OldWorldOrder said:
Well see, it's a done deal for you. So anything they do is bad. lol
Click to expand...

Anything they do without proper oversight and restraint will likely be bad, more likely to be something they shouldn't be doing than should. Government must be constrained and regulated.
 
Ikari said:
Anything they do without proper oversight and restraint will likely be bad, more likely to be something they shouldn't be doing than should. Government must be constrained and regulated.
Click to expand...

The oversight is there. You just don't think it's proper. That's the only issue. They'll keep on keeping on, luckily.
 
OldWorldOrder said:
The oversight is there. You just don't think it's proper. That's the only issue. They'll keep on keeping on, luckily.
Click to expand...

Secret courts, ignoring the constitution, and uncontrolled data mining is not something constrained to oversight and restriction. No matter what you think. They will keep on keeping on of course, government doesn't stop even when it does wrong. All government tends towards tyranny when left to their own devices. I'd rather just keep the Republic, you seem perhaps not so much on board with that.
 
Ikari said:
Secret courts, ignoring the constitution, and uncontrolled data mining is not something constrained to oversight and restriction. No matter what you think.
Click to expand...

Uhh...they are. No matter what you think.

They will keep on keeping on of course, government doesn't stop even when it does wrong. All government tends towards tyranny when left to their own devices. I'd rather just keep the Republic, you seem perhaps not so much on board with that.
Click to expand...

I like the republic. I don't like the form of democracy where everyone knows everything when it comes to intelligence, however. You don't need to be an expert to understand why that isn't good. So yes: republic. Where people are elected to perform that oversight on behalf of people. People who won't know the details and sometimes not even the big picture. Republics are good. Transparent democracy is bad. Boo to that.
 
OldWorldOrder said:
Uhh...they are. No matter what you think.



I like the republic. I don't like the form of democracy where everyone knows everything when it comes to intelligence, however. You don't need to be an expert to understand why that isn't good. So yes: republic. Where people are elected to perform that oversight on behalf of people. People who won't know the details and sometimes not even the big picture. Republics are good. Transparent democracy is bad. Boo to that.
Click to expand...

I think perhaps you don't understand what Republic means. You're looking for monarchy, oligarchy, or other class structured forms of government where power is thought to rest innately in the government itself and it must protect the citizens from themselves. That's not a free society, that's serfdom to the State.
 
Ikari said:
I think perhaps you don't understand what Republic means. You're looking for monarchy, oligarchy, or other class structured forms of government where power is thought to rest innately in the government itself and it must protect the citizens from themselves. That's not a free society, that's serfdom to the State.
Click to expand...

I'm fairly certain I know what a republic is. Oligarchy would, in fact, be better, but you take what you can get. In a republic, people vote for people to make decisions for them. That's what the US has. That's what was created. You're going to have to deal with it, I'm quite sorry.

Intelligence agencies have oversight. It's never going to be public. That's intel work. You have to accept it or just pout for the rest of your life.
 
OldWorldOrder said:
I'm fairly certain I know what a republic is. Oligarchy would, in fact, be better, but you take what you can get. In a republic, people vote for people to make decisions for them. That's what the US has. That's what was created. You're going to have to deal with it, I'm quite sorry.

Intelligence agencies have oversight. It's never going to be public. That's intel work. You have to accept it or just pout for the rest of your life.
Click to expand...

No, a Republic is a system founded on law and restricts government to the rights of the individual. You have thus demonstrated the inability to understand what Republic means.

Our intelligence agencies have grown beyond their boundaries and now negatively affect our rights, liberties, and property. While it is true that on some level what intelligence agencies do must remain on whole a secret, that doesn't mean they can do whatever they want and we need to shut up, as your arguments would suggest. It must be constrained to proper levels, not allowed to aggregate against the People, and must contain the proper amount of regulation and oversight. We are most assuredly missing the regulation and oversight currently.
 
Ikari said:
No, a Republic is a system founded on law and restricts government to the rights of the individual. You have thus demonstrated the inability to understand what Republic means.
Click to expand...

lol no

Republic - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Our intelligence agencies have grown beyond their boundaries and now negatively affect our rights, liberties, and property.
Click to expand...

That's your opinion.

While it is true that on some level what intelligence agencies do must remain on whole a secret, that doesn't mean they can do whatever they want and we need to shut up, as your arguments would suggest. It must be constrained to proper levels, not allowed to aggregate against the People, and must contain the proper amount of regulation and oversight. We are most assuredly missing the regulation and oversight currently.
Click to expand...

The constraints exist in the three branches of government, which the people elect directly, mostly directly, and through an elected official, respectively. It's your opinion we're missing the regulation and oversight. That's all.
 
OldWorldOrder said:
lol no

Republic - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

Exactly, the course and actions of government are public affair. It's a system of law, as your source supports.

OldWorldOrder said:
That's your opinion.
Click to expand...

And reality

OldWorldOrder said:
The constraints exist in the three branches of government, which the people elect directly, mostly directly, and through an elected official, respectively. It's your opinion we're missing the regulation and oversight. That's all.
Click to expand...

What constraints are those? The warrantless spying? The warrantless blanket data mining? The secret courts?
 
Ikari said:
Exactly, the course and actions of government are public affair. It's a system of law, as your source supports.
Click to expand...

Yes. As you in elect the people to execute laws and provide oversight. Did you just read the first sentence or something? Lemme guess....not a polisci major?

And reality
Click to expand...

Right. It's your opinion that it's reality. Your opinion.

What constraints are those? The warrantless spying? The warrantless blanket data mining? The secret courts?
Click to expand...

The constraints of the government the people elect. I'm sorry you don't agree with them: that's a republic. Vote for someone else.
 
Ikari said:
No, a Republic is a system founded on law and restricts government to the rights of the individual. You have thus demonstrated the inability to understand what Republic means.

Our intelligence agencies have grown beyond their boundaries and now negatively affect our rights, liberties, and property. While it is true that on some level what intelligence agencies do must remain on whole a secret, that doesn't mean they can do whatever they want and we need to shut up, as your arguments would suggest. It must be constrained to proper levels, not allowed to aggregate against the People, and must contain the proper amount of regulation and oversight. We are most assuredly missing the regulation and oversight currently.
Click to expand...

You're absolutely right on all counts, yet the problem isn't just the government and it's boundless march towards tyranny - it's also the abject ignorance and disinterest by the public. The end result will probably be ambivalence to all the spying.
 
OldWorldOrder said:
Yes. As you in elect the people to execute laws and provide oversight. Did you just read the first sentence or something? Lemme guess....not a polisci major?
Click to expand...

Not a major. I majored in Physics and Chemistry. I minored in Math, Political Science, and Botany before getting a MS and PhD in physics. The People elect representatives to perform government action as we have laid out in the contract between The People and The Government. But government itself is corruptible and part of oversight is duty of the People. We need proper information to form that servo.

OldWorldOrder said:
Right. It's your opinion that it's reality. Your opinion.
Click to expand...

My data is continually confiscated without my permission and without warrant and without cause. That is violation of rights.

OldWorldOrder said:
The constraints of the government the people elect. I'm sorry you don't agree with them: that's a republic. Vote for someone else.
Click to expand...

No, the Republic is founded on law and is property of the Public Domain. The government must abide by the laws we have set forth in the Contract that established the government in the first place. Government is limited. Your version is not. It's dangerous to have unregulated government.
 
Ockham said:
You're absolutely right on all counts, yet the problem isn't just the government and it's boundless march towards tyranny - it's also the abject ignorance and disinterest by the public. The end result will probably be ambivalence to all the spying.
Click to expand...

You are unfortunately correct, and it brings to mind one of my favorite quotes.

“I apprehend no danger to our country from a foreign foe . . . Our destruction, should it come at all, will be from another quarter. From the inattention of the people to the concerns of their government, from their carelessness and negligence, I must confess that I do apprehend some danger. I fear that they may place too implicit a confidence in their public servants, and fail properly to scrutinize their conduct; that in this way they may be made the dupes of designing men, and become the instruments of their own undoing. Make them intelligent, and they will be vigilant; give them the means of detecting the wrong, and they will apply the remedy.”
― Daniel Webster
 
Ikari said:
Not a major. I majored in Physics and Chemistry. I minored in Math, Political Science, and Botany before getting a MS and PhD in physics. The People elect representatives to perform government action as we have laid out in the contract between The People and The Government. But government itself is corruptible and part of oversight is duty of the People. We need proper information to form that servo.
Click to expand...

Then be aware: a republic is when the people elect the people to decide matters for them. It's not where they decide matters for them. That's why matters of intelligence- which need to be more secret than anything else, this isn't the damn secretary of interior- aren't divulged to the people.

My data is continually confiscated without my permission and without warrant and without cause. That is violation of rights.
Click to expand...

And that's your opinion. Many federal judges disagree.

No, the Republic is founded on law and is property of the Public Domain. The government must abide by the laws we have set forth in the Contract that established the government in the first place. Government is limited. Your version is not. It's dangerous to have unregulated government.
Click to expand...

Apparently they don't. Because what you have is...that's right...just your opinion.
 
OldWorldOrder said:
Then be aware: a republic is when the people elect the people to decide matters for them. It's not where they decide matters for them. That's why matters of intelligence- which need to be more secret than anything else, this isn't the damn secretary of interior- aren't divulged to the people.
Click to expand...

They decide within limits. They may not rule in any way they see fit, they are constrained.

OldWorldOrder said:
And that's your opinion. Many federal judges disagree.
Click to expand...

And the 4th clearly states. Data mining clearly violates the 4th. Nothing prevents the courts from corruption.

OldWorldOrder said:
Apparently they don't. Because what you have is...that's right...just your opinion.
Click to expand...

That is definition of Republic, you're inability to grasp it only demonstrates your inability to fully understand what a Republic is. You're thinking government act is private concern and once the officials are elected, the People can have no more say and that those officials may do anything they want. That's not a Republic, that's an Oligarchy system.
 
Ikari said:
They decide within limits. They may not rule in any way they see fit, they are constrained.
Click to expand...

No, it's pretty clear. You aren't getting anything divulged to you.

And the 4th clearly states. Data mining clearly violates the 4th. Nothing prevents the courts from corruption.
Click to expand...

The 4th says nothing about your data. That's your interpretation. Your opinion.

That is definition of Republic, you're inability to grasp it only demonstrates your inability to fully understand what a Republic is. You're thinking government act is private concern and once the officials are elected, the People can have no more say and that those officials may do anything they want. That's not a Republic, that's an Oligarchy system.
Click to expand...

lol no. No one else "gets it" other than you and mad people on the internet, huh?
 
OldWorldOrder said:
No, it's pretty clear. You aren't getting anything divulged to you.
Click to expand...

It is clear, government action has been limited

OldWorldOrder said:
The 4th says nothing about your data. That's your interpretation. Your opinion.
Click to expand...

It's papers and effects, anyone of any honest backing would have to agree.

OldWorldOrder said:
lol no. No one else "gets it" other than you and mad people on the internet, huh?
Click to expand...

No, there are many who understand that just because we elect an official doesn't mean that official can do whatever he wants whenever he wants.
 
Ikari said:
It is clear, government action has been limited
Click to expand...

If it's clear, then why are you complaining about having more transparency? If it's clear, what's the issue?

It's papers and effects, anyone of any honest backing would have to agree.
Click to expand...

Ahhh, so all those federal judges are dishonest. You sound very much like a zealot.

No, there are many who understand that just because we elect an official doesn't mean that official can do whatever he wants whenever he wants.
Click to expand...

Ummm...okay? No one is talking about that. You think you are. But you're a very confused young man, who's obviously unable to discern his opinion from fact.
 
OldWorldOrder said:
If it's clear, then why are you complaining about having more transparency? If it's clear, what's the issue?
Click to expand...

Government interference preventing the proper oversight by the People.

OldWorldOrder said:
Ahhh, so all those federal judges are dishonest. You sound very much like a zealot.
Click to expand...

All power corrupts, and once the system begins to corrupt, less you control it there's only downhill. Still, this is an issue of rights against government action and the unmitigated, uncontrolled, unrestricted, unconstrained data mining and aggregation of the government against the People is clearly a violation of rights and of restrained government.

OldWorldOrder said:
Ummm...okay? No one is talking about that. You think you are. But you're a very confused young man, who's obviously unable to discern his opinion from fact.
Click to expand...

That is, in fact, your argument. We elected them and they act. Your argument never placed restriction upon their action, only that the sole input The People have is the vote and after that nothing. Make a better argument if you don't like it.
 
Someone suggested banning private enterprise from snooping - which is what I opposed. I think companies should be free to do so - as long as they say they are doing it and I have the freedom to shop some where else.


Montecresto said:
Not sure whom that was addressed to if anyone, but I have no problem with what you described. It's quite different however than the National Spy Agency, FBI or any other alphabet agency doing the same to Americans who aren't guilty of crime. Sooner or latter Americans are going to deal with the infringement of their civil liberties. Or loose them for good.
Click to expand...
 
Ikari said:
Government interference preventing the proper oversight by the People.



All power corrupts, and once the system begins to corrupt, less you control it there's only downhill. Still, this is an issue of rights against government action and the unmitigated, uncontrolled, unrestricted, unconstrained data mining and aggregation of the government against the People is clearly a violation of rights and of restrained government.



That is, in fact, your argument. We elected them and they act. Your argument never placed restriction upon their action, only that the sole input The People have is the vote and after that nothing. Make a better argument if you don't like it.
Click to expand...
You're clearly unable to deal with the facts that:

#1- In a republic, the people vote for the people to make decisions.
#2- That anyone that disagrees with your interpretation isn't corrupt or evil or whatever.
#3- That your opinion is just that. It's not some Holy Writ from on high that makes you right.

You need to deal with that, or you're going to very angry. Because the world isn't going to change for you. Secrets will stay secret. Deal with it.
 
OldWorldOrder said:
You're clearly unable to deal with the facts that:

#1- In a republic, the people vote for the people to make decisions.
#2- That anyone that disagrees with your interpretation isn't corrupt or evil or whatever.
#3- That your opinion is just that. It's not some Holy Writ from on high that makes you right.

You need to deal with that, or you're going to very angry. Because the world isn't going to change for you. Secrets will stay secret. Deal with it.
Click to expand...

There's no anger, just a desire to keep the Republic and to ensure freedom to the People. People vote for people to make decisions, but that doesn't mean those decisions are unlimited. Your second is correct, but it also doesn't mean that everyone who disagrees is innocent either. Thus it's useless platitude. My opinion is my own, I am free (for now) to express it and move towards ways to support it. Just because you like unregulated secret organizations and uncontrolled data aggregation doesn't mean everyone has to accept such a despotic system.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom