• 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!

Ron Paul Launches Clemency Petition For Edward Snowden

Think that through.


Jokes on you.

The NSA has done nothing, nada, zip, zero to improve your safety or security. It is a troubling and problematic institution that Mr. Church NAILED in 1976!
 
So basically Americans are saying two wrongs don't make a right. I'm cool with that BUT!!! Only because there was/is no avenue for reporting wrong doing on the government. And Obama, had on his 08 platform, improving protections for whistle blowers while in all actuality hasn't just failed to provide it, he has prosecuted more of them than any of his predecessors. And I want to point out that while Americans don't approve of committing a crime to expose a crime, your source points out that 58% still disapprove of the NSA's crime!! And the only reason that's not 100% is that we have ******s that are willing to trade their liberties for security, never mind that the NSA has secured NOTHING!!



Well Monte.....I am in agreement with what Ran Paul said over the issue.


I’m not against the NSA, I’m not against spying, I’m not against looking at phone records,” he said at a press conference outside the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia Wednesday morning. “I just want you to go to a judge, have a person’s name and individualize the warrant.”.....snip~


That's my take on it.....and witnesses in front of that Judge. ;)
 
The NSA has done nothing, nada, zip, zero to improve your safety or security. It is a troubling and problematic institution that Mr. Church NAILED in 1976!
lol WHAT? How would you even know this? loool
 
Well Monte.....I am in agreement with what Ran Paul said over the issue.


I’m not against the NSA, I’m not against spying, I’m not against looking at phone records,” he said at a press conference outside the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia Wednesday morning. “I just want you to go to a judge, have a person’s name and individualize the warrant.”.....snip~


That's my take on it.....and witnesses in front of that Judge. ;)

But we don't even have that. That view is also consistent with Snowden's.
 
lol then no wonder you said:



You just don't care! hahahahahahaha

No wonder you're so afraid of the NSA, you don't care about anything it does unless it's collect your phone's metadata.

How about this: don't say that you're "not satisfied he's harmed anything" when it's clear you just don't care about the things he has indeed harmed. Christ, talk about living in fear. You're so scared of the NSA.

I just place a higher value on my liberty than some. And! The NSA, by their own admission, have done nothing to secure my safety. And I accept senator Church's assessment of the NSA.
 
But we don't even have that. That view is also consistent with Snowden's.



book1.gif
.....;)


What is the FISA court?

It may be the most powerful court you have never heard of -- operating out of a bunker-like complex blocks from the Capitol and the White House -- sealed tightly to prevent eavesdropping.

Its a tribunal that is secret (or supposed to be). Its structure is largely one-sided and its members are unilaterally chosen by one unelected person.

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court -- or FISA Court for short -- is a panel that critics contend rubber-stamps nearly every National Security Agency request to snoop that it receives.

Court officials, naturally, object to that characterization. But concerns remain that without reforms, like President Barack Obama's call for an independent "privacy advocate" to monitor its actions, civil liberties might be at risk.

Who's on the court?

The court is housed in a room in a windowless and secure area of the U.S. District Court on Constitution Avenue. Government sources say it's a courtroom with a judge's bench, tables for lawyers, and support staff. Officials won't divulge its exact location in the building.

The court is made up of 11 judges who sit for seven-year terms. All are federal district judges who agree to take on the additional duties on a rotating basis. They are appointed by Chief Justice John Roberts, without any supplemental confirmation from the other two branches of government. Roberts has named every member of the current court, as well as a separate three-judge panel to hear appeals known as the Court of Review.

How does the surveillance court work?

The FISA Court's larger mission is to decide whether to grant certain types of government requests-- wiretapping, data analysis, and other monitoring for "foreign intelligence purposes" of suspected terrorists and spies operating in the United States.

There were 1,856 applications in 2012 to the FISA Court for electronic surveillance and physical searches for "foreign intelligence purposes," the Justice Department said.

None were denied, but 40 were modified to some extent. Only one such request was withdrawn by the FBI.....snip~

What is the FISA court? - CNN.com
 
My vote is for constitutional law.

Right. But there are people arguing on this thread in support for NSA that are or were employees of the NSA. Some of which consider the constitution an impediment to them being able to do their job.
 
I just place a higher value on my liberty than some. And! The NSA, by their own admission, have done nothing to secure my safety. And I accept senator Church's assessment of the NSA.

No, that's not by admission, I'm sorry. Are you ready to admit he did indeed harm things, whether you "care" about them or not?
 
book1.gif
.....;)


What is the FISA court?

It may be the most powerful court you have never heard of -- operating out of a bunker-like complex blocks from the Capitol and the White House -- sealed tightly to prevent eavesdropping.

Its a tribunal that is secret (or supposed to be). Its structure is largely one-sided and its members are unilaterally chosen by one unelected person.

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court -- or FISA Court for short -- is a panel that critics contend rubber-stamps nearly every National Security Agency request to snoop that it receives.

Court officials, naturally, object to that characterization. But concerns remain that without reforms, like President Barack Obama's call for an independent "privacy advocate" to monitor its actions, civil liberties might be at risk.

Who's on the court?

The court is housed in a room in a windowless and secure area of the U.S. District Court on Constitution Avenue. Government sources say it's a courtroom with a judge's bench, tables for lawyers, and support staff. Officials won't divulge its exact location in the building.

The court is made up of 11 judges who sit for seven-year terms. All are federal district judges who agree to take on the additional duties on a rotating basis. They are appointed by Chief Justice John Roberts, without any supplemental confirmation from the other two branches of government. Roberts has named every member of the current court, as well as a separate three-judge panel to hear appeals known as the Court of Review.

How does the surveillance court work?

The FISA Court's larger mission is to decide whether to grant certain types of government requests-- wiretapping, data analysis, and other monitoring for "foreign intelligence purposes" of suspected terrorists and spies operating in the United States.

There were 1,856 applications in 2012 to the FISA Court for electronic surveillance and physical searches for "foreign intelligence purposes," the Justice Department said.

None were denied, but 40 were modified to some extent. Only one such request was withdrawn by the FBI.....snip~

What is the FISA court? - CNN.com

Dude! I wasn't suggesting that FISA doesn't exist, or that laws to protect my liberty don't exist. Think about that. And, why would Rand Paul say what you quoted him as saying if he thought it was functioning. And why would Jimmy Carter declare that the US is no longer a functioning democracy, and why would Patriot Act jim Sensenbrenner draw up legislation that has BI-PARTISAN support to overhaul an agency that's functioning just fine, and why did senator Church provide congress with the VERY DIRE warning of potential abuse (that we have now seen) that the NSA would be capable of, and there's no end to the objections.
 
Right. But there are people arguing on this thread in support for NSA that are or were employees of the NSA. Some of which consider the constitution an impediment to them being able to do their job.

As it should.

I have a cousin who worked for NSA as IT person straight out of college. I'm not sure he lasted more than a year before he quit. I'm beginning to think he had doubts as to legality of his role. I didn't ask because I'm sure he won't tell me anyway.
 
No, that's not by admission, I'm sorry. Are you ready to admit he did indeed harm things, whether you "care" about them or not?

If I interrupt a criminal from his work, I suppose I've harmed his ambitions so yes I'lll admit that Snowden has indeed harmed things, and I'm most delighted that it has so many up in arms, but discouraged that it doesn't have everybody up in arms. Not that it's going to happen, I'm LMAO that there are legislators that want to turn off utilities to NSA facilities. I'm glad that we do have some that value their liberty over EVERYTHING else that life has to offer.
 
as it should.

I have a cousin who worked for nsa as it person straight out of college. I'm not sure he lasted more than a year before he quit. I'm beginning to think he had doubts as to legality of his role. I didn't ask because i'm sure he won't tell me anyway.

very cool!!
 
If I interrupt a criminal from his work, I suppose I've harmed his ambitions so yes I'lll admit that Snowden has indeed harmed things, and I'm most delighted that it has so many up in arms, but discouraged that it doesn't have everybody up in arms. Not that it's going to happen, I'm LMAO that there are legislators that want to turn off utilities to NSA facilities. I'm glad that we do have some that value their liberty over EVERYTHING else that life has to offer.

Ummm...what? He harmed intelligence collection operations against foreign countries. Can you admit that?
 
Dude! I wasn't suggesting that FISA doesn't exist, or that laws to protect my liberty don't exist. Think about that. And, why would Rand Paul say what you quoted him as saying if he thought it was functioning. And why would Jimmy Carter declare that the US is no longer a functioning democracy, and why would Patriot Act jim Sensenbrenner draw up legislation that has BI-PARTISAN support to overhaul an agency that's functioning just fine, and why did senator Church provide congress with the VERY DIRE warning of potential abuse (that we have now seen) that the NSA would be capable of, and there's no end to the objections.

Again no one said there wasn't a problem with Surveiling Americans......as far as the rest is concern. Pink Floyd sang it best. Us and Them! I think Washington had some words for us with those outside the US too.

Now as to Snowden.....he went above and beyond just reporting to the media about the NSA program. Which he wanted to find out what he could. That which he was restricted from. Hence his buddys password and all that.
 
My ability to care is lacking.

Hahaha okay, well you don't like intelligence agencies. Cool. Unfortunately they're necessary. And he hurt the US by sharing details of them.
 
Hahaha okay, well you don't like intelligence agencies. Cool. Unfortunately they're necessary. And he hurt the US by sharing details of them.

Spying on every americans phone calls and Internet activity is not necessary. Furthermore, spying on all the Internet activity of the world is not necessary. Take your "we have a reason to be scared" crap and shove it.
 
Again no one said there wasn't a problem with Surveiling Americans......as far as the rest is concern. Pink Floyd sang it best. Us and Them! I think Washington had some words for us with those outside the US too.

Now as to Snowden.....he went above and beyond just reporting to the media about the NSA program. Which he wanted to find out what he could. That which he was restricted from. Hence his buddys password and all that.

I can agree with you about the above and beyond, it just doesn't concern me. Literally, I'm not concerned. It's my civil liberty and the struggle to hold and keep them that the founding fathers told us repeatedly in so many ways would indeed be a struggle to keep and that we would loose them if we didn't, that is of concern to me. For me, trading liberty for security is not just a cliche, its a no-brainer!
 
Spying on every americans phone calls and Internet activity is not necessary. Furthermore, spying on all the Internet activity of the world is not necessary. Take your "we have a reason to be scared" crap and shove it.

...Aren't you the one scared of the NSA? What is your background in defense or intelligence?
 
Spying on every americans phone calls and Internet activity is not necessary. Furthermore, spying on all the Internet activity of the world is not necessary. Take your "we have a reason to be scared" crap and shove it.

Dude you're hilarious!
 
...Aren't you the one scared of the NSA? What is your background in defense or intelligence?

A lone American cannot defend him/herself from a secretive agency that operates in the dark. Senator Church's assessment of the NSA has vastly more relevance than anything you could say in ten thousand posts defending them.
 
...Aren't you the one scared of the NSA? What is your background in defense or intelligence?

I was unaware that standing for the rights of people meant I was scared of something. I will be sure to tell every freedom fighter throughout history they were scared.
 
A lone American cannot defend him/herself from a secretive agency that operates in the dark. Senator Church's assessment of the NSA has vastly more relevance than anything you could say in ten thousand posts defending them.

Remember that time you grossly exaggerated what that federal judge said about NSA?

I was unaware that standing for the rights of people meant I was scared of something. I will be sure to tell every freedom fighter throughout history they were scared.

Oh lol. Why did you think I was scared if you were going to react so negatively when I called you scared? You don't like it?
 
Back
Top Bottom