• 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

How is that the private citizens fault or responsibility? Oh wait....its not.

And yes, it IS a violation of privacy as the government has no need of that information whether its as minimal amount as you think that it is or more. The government has no business knowing my or any one elses connnections unless they are tracking an individual who is a terrorist. My connections are just that...mine. Not the governments. Not yours. Not Joe Blows down the street. Mine. No one has the need to know them except me and the person I am connected with.

And, I guess, the companies that provide you that connection, right? Now is the way that they allow you and your connections to interact owned by them or by you? What if their programs use another company's infrastructure? A third company's software? Do any of you own that method of connection at all? I'm curious.
 
So you're just arguing against something that may or may not be happening? Like I said, I can't refute your imagination, dude.

What he is saying is that no one can possibly know everything that any agency that they are in is doing. Even CEO's of companies have underlings which have the power to implement stuff without having to bother the CEO with every single little detail. An over bloated government agency has the same structure. Indeed the President has the highest clearance access possible in this country and yet even he doesn't know everything that there is to know with all of the agencies under his purview.

The fact that you claim to have once worked for the NSA as more than just an "IT guy" and no longer do and therefore you know what their current policies and actions are is at best exaggerated dishonesty. At worst a straight out lie because NO ONE can know everything that happens in a large agency/company. It is a statistical impossibility. Even more so when that person no longer works for <insert agency here>.
 
What he is saying is that no one can possibly know everything that any agency that they are in is doing.

And no one can argue with someone else's imagination, so it becomes a nonissue. Either use some verifiable facts or don't bother. Because if someone with zero knowledge of intelligence is going to claim that I'm ignorant...well, they're always gonna lose, because all their argument is doing is pointing out that they're extremely LESS knowledgeable.
 
Which begs the question of what's essential and what's temporary. I didn't know it was essential that the US not store the metadata that phone companies have. That's an interesting take.
 
And no one can argue with someone else's imagination, so it becomes a nonissue. Either use some verifiable facts or don't bother. Because if someone with zero knowledge of intelligence is going to claim that I'm ignorant...well, they're always gonna lose, because all their argument is doing is pointing out that they're extremely LESS knowledgeable.

You have no personal knowledge of their current actions. Well...none beyond what Snowden has released. Do you deny this?
 
You have no personal knowledge of their current actions. Well...none beyond what Snowden has released. Do you deny this?

lol yes, I do. I highly doubt programs that have been underway for decades just closed up shop after I left. Especially considering I still have friends that work in those places. Hmm...I wonder what they do.

So if you're calling me ignorant, all you're doing is calling yourself even more ignorant. And arguing about what you can imagine they may be doing in your worst nightmares. I'm uninterested in arguing about whether or not it's okay that they do that which you're horrified that they might be doing. That's nonsensical.
 
Which begs the question of what's essential and what's temporary. I didn't know it was essential that the US not store the metadata that phone companies have. That's an interesting take.

Its called privacy. Its called needing a valid warrant to gather that information. It is not so essential that the government has an abritrary right to even gather that private data in the first place without just cause of all those people who they gathered data on being terrorists.

Both you and I know that our rights are based on individuality. That no individual's rights can be compromised without just cause. You and I also know that millions of people who they gathered that data on are NOT terrorists. As such they did not have legal just cause to gather that data. It would be one thing if they compiled a metadata base on criminals/terrorists. But they didn't. That is a fact.
 
lol yes, I do. I highly doubt programs that have been underway for decades just closed up shop after I left. Especially considering I still have friends that work in those places. Hmm...I wonder what they do.

A lot has changed just in the past 4 years in regards to how our government is acting....or at the very least its being brought more into the light thanks to people like Snowden... And if your friends are telling you everything then they are violating their own oaths. Are you making that claim?

So if you're calling me ignorant, all you're doing is calling yourself even more ignorant. And arguing about what you can imagine they may be doing in your worst nightmares. I'm uninterested in arguing about whether or not it's okay that they do that which you're horrified that they might be doing. That's nonsensical.

Yes, I am calling you ignorant of what the NSA is doing. And biased to boot. Unless your friends are violating their oaths like Snowden did then you are indeed just as ignorant as me on their current actions.
 
Its called privacy. Its called needing a valid warrant to gather that information. It is not so essential that the government has an abritrary right to even gather that private data in the first place without just cause of all those people who they gathered data on being terrorists.

So now privacy is an essential liberty? Funny how they didn't use that word in even the constitution. Why is that data private? The way your UE uses an IMEI and IMSI to connect through a BTS to MSC, using abis/mobis links and whatnot back down to another IMEI and IMSI, across many different company's infrastructures, using various other company's software and hardware is your private data? No, the courts disagree. They agree with you that your conversation is yours (and the person you're conversing with), and that's that private. But they agree with me in that all of that that I listed previous to the conversation is not your private data. And whether it's an essential liberty or not is highly dubious.

Both you and I know that our rights are based on individuality. That no individual's rights can be compromised without just cause. You and I also know that millions of people who they gathered that data on are NOT terrorists. As such they did not have legal just cause to gather that data. It would be one thing if they compiled a metadata base on criminals/terrorists. But they didn't. That is a fact.

I don't think you have a right to cellular metadata, I'm sorry. That's not yours.
 
A lot has changed just in the past 4 years in regards to how our government is acting....or at the very least its being brought more into the light thanks to people like Snowden... And if your friends are telling you everything then they are violating their own oaths. Are you making that claim?

Yes, I am calling you ignorant of what the NSA is doing. And biased to boot. Unless your friends are violating their oaths like Snowden did then you are indeed just as ignorant as me on their current actions.

Four years? lol I'm safely within the window. I'm making the claim that when someone says "Dude, remember that thing we used to have to do quarterly? Tom screwed that up so badly, it was hilarious. He was all flustered and ****, you should've seen it" I can imagine that they're not doing a completely different mission.

So yes, you're going to have to deal with the fact that I know mountains more than you about this. If I'm ignorant? You're totally lost and have even less of a clue of what you're talking about. So I'm still doing much better in this conversation about what does and doesn't happen. You seem to have a horrible aversion to the truth. You simply don't want to hear it. I'm sure you're one of those people that doesn't believe anything that's disclosed that doesn't totally adhere to your view of intelligence agencies, aren't you? If it came out that the NSA used radio waves to give Fidel Castro a stroke, you'd be all "hmmm...plausible". It comes out that PRISM prevented a terrorist attack? "Nah, that's just what they want you to believe. STOP ATTACKING MY CIVIL LIBERTIES!"

If you're just going to ignore anyone with any experience or knowledge, while depending on what you can imagine it happening, of course you can never be persuaded to think rationally. I mean...QED.
 
lol whatever fires you up. Continue to whine about something you have no proof of happening.

lol, better than listening to someone with delusions of grandeur thinking he knows all the secrets of the NSA.

Sorry that investigating claims and looking to keep government properly restrained sounds so radical to you, but seeing as I doubt your absolute knowledge of all NSA secrets, I'm going to go ahead and say we need to investigate and really look into what the NSA has been doing and is doing.
 
So now privacy is an essential liberty? Funny how they didn't use that word in even the constitution. Why is that data private?

It constitutes my papers and effects. Clearly been protected.
 
lol whatever fires you up. Continue to whine about something you have no proof of happening.

lol, better than listening to someone with delusions of grandeur thinking he knows all the secrets of the NSA.

lol

#1- I enjoy you admitting that you're making things up.
#2- You think someone working for an intelligence agency is something "grand". Jesus, there's tens of thousands of people that do. It's not like I was an NFL player or something.

Sorry that investigating claims and looking to keep government properly restrained sounds so radical to you, but seeing as I doubt your absolute knowledge of all NSA secrets, I'm going to go ahead and say we need to investigate and really look into what the NSA has been doing and is doing.

You're investigating? lol you're accusing. There's a difference. Congress has oversight. Write your representatives.
 
lol

#1- I enjoy you admitting that you're making things up.
#2- You think someone working for an intelligence agency is something "grand". Jesus, there's tens of thousands of people that do. It's not like I was an NFL player or something.



You're investigating? lol you're accusing. There's a difference. Congress has oversight. Write your representatives.

I've never made anything up. These accusations are of serious enough concern to warrant investigation. That's it.

Makes people wonder why you, someone in the "know" would fight investigations so much.
 
I've never made anything up. These accusations are of serious enough concern to warrant investigation. That's it.

You thought they were spying on you. You said it. I mean..come on. Anyway, write your representatives.

Makes people wonder why you, someone in the "know" would fight investigations so much.

lol YOU'RE ON TO ME!

It's because ignorant people say ignorant things (clearly). And this is a political debate forum, no?
 
My data is mine, if the government needs to search it they can get a warrant.

No, it's not. The conversation is yours. The metadata is not. That's been pretty clearly decided upon. I'm sorry you disagree.
 
You thought they were spying on you. You said it. I mean..come on. Anyway, write your representatives.



lol YOU'RE ON TO ME!

It's because ignorant people say ignorant things (clearly). And this is a political debate forum, no?

I never said they were spying on me personally, they are aggregating batch data for later parsing of information. It's a mega data mining operation, which should be illegal for government. As such, it's necessary to investigate and stop any improper use of government force or activity.

You don't have all the information, nor do you possess all the knowledge of NSA spying. You sitting here dismissing these accusations carte blanche is engaging in nothing more than you're accusing others of.
 
No, it's not. The conversation is yours. The metadata is not. That's been pretty clearly decided upon. I'm sorry you disagree.

I assuredly disagree, "megadata" did not exist back when the Constitution was made, but all my actions and purchasing falls under my papers and effects. It's mine and we must make sure the government understands its off hands without warrant or reasonable suspicion.
 
I never said they were spying on me personally, they are aggregating batch data for later parsing of information. It's a mega data mining operation, which should be illegal for government. As such, it's necessary to investigate and stop any improper use of government force or activity.

You don't have all the information, nor do you possess all the knowledge of NSA spying. You sitting here dismissing these accusations carte blanche is engaging in nothing more than you're accusing others of.

Ah, right. We're both equally ignorant. I'm sure that's what you want to believe. You have to- if you admitted that I had more experience in this, you'd have to admit that your position was a lot weaker than mine. But you can't bear to admit that so...

I assuredly disagree, "megadata" did not exist back when the Constitution was made, but all my actions and purchasing falls under my papers and effects. It's mine and we must make sure the government understands its off hands without warrant or reasonable suspicion.

Well, too bad federal judges disagree. Write your representatives. Get a privacy amendment drafted that includes metadata that isn't even yours to own (it would be the phone company's if anything). Until then, deal with it.
 
Ah, right. We're both equally ignorant. I'm sure that's what you want to believe. You have to- if you admitted that I had more experience in this, you'd have to admit that your position was a lot weaker than mine. But you can't bear to admit that so...



Well, too bad federal judges disagree. Write your representatives. Get a privacy amendment drafted that includes metadata that isn't even yours to own (it would be the phone company's if anything). Until then, deal with it.

It doesn't matter what "experience" you claim to have. You no longer work there, there isn't a newsletter that goes out to inform you of all the new secrets, you have not total knowledge of all the secrets. You are equally ignorant to those you condemn. You just try to carte blanche excuse any amount of activity. It's just dismissive "there are secrets that need to be secret" as if that excuses ALL secrets and ALL activity (pssst, it doesn't).

You offer no information and no true defense other than deflection, and that's supposed to count for something? Please. Try an actual argument and logic if you want to go far but the "I know cause I was there, and there wasn't anything bad happening, and shut up and go about your business" argument isn't going to cut it. Till you can offer more, you're just pissing into the wind like everyone else.

Investigation and proper limitation of government force is necessary. Why are you afraid of a little investigation?
 
It doesn't matter what "experience" you claim to have.

Right. You don't care about facts or experience or anything. You care about what your imagination can muster up.

I have no problems with investigations. But all that should still be classified, we don't need random civilians knowing things. That's bad; they're dumb.
 
Right. You don't care about facts or experience or anything. You care about what your imagination can muster up.

I have no problems with investigations. But all that should still be classified, we don't need random civilians knowing things. That's bad; they're dumb.

Oh, I care about facts, you've just haven't brought any. The "Citizens need to be ignorant" as a blanket statement for everything isn't going to cut it.
 
Back
Top Bottom