Skip to main content

View Diary: Secret FISA Court ruling: NSA illegally collected tens of thousands of domestic communications (385 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I'm outraged that it even exists. (9+ / 0-)

    And no, I don't care what function it performs in "protecting us."

    As for Dallasdoc's response: The government has never intentionally leaked information before, have they?

    Given the rate at which former conspiracy theories are becoming substantiated fact these days, I feel it's only prudent to keep an open mind.

    As an aside, I can't help but get this feeling there'll come a day when you and the others who've been so valiantly trying to explain away all these developments will become noticeably less talkative about the subject. That it STILL hasn't happened yet speaks volumes about something -- what that is, I'm not quite sure.

    Perhaps I'm wrong. Maybe we'll always have people trying to apologize for this stuff.




    Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ J. Garcia

    by DeadHead on Thu Aug 22, 2013 at 02:14:04 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Apologies are not needed ... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Reggid, eps62

      ... for an ingenius system that has been designed to seek out terror information while still protecting the privacy rights of Americans. If I saw you balancing the competing interests in any type of reasonable manner, we would not be having this debate. There's only one supposed interest for you--I guess it is your special interest--and that's why we need debate, and that's especially why we need a President like Barack Obama, a court system and a legislature dealing with the issue.

      I don't trust Edward Snowden, Bradley Manning, Glenn Greenwald or any other "one issue" individual to decide policy matters. The world's much too complex for that.    

      Rand Paul is to civil liberties as the Disney Channel is to subtle and nuanced acting.

      by Tortmaster on Thu Aug 22, 2013 at 02:37:52 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  By the way, I just read ... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Reggid, eps62

        ... the FISC opinion, and these are freaking "advisory opinions" or "advisory rulings." The Government has to prove what they're doing is Constitutional before they can implement a program! Even more safeguards than I expected, (and I expected a whole hell of a lot).

        So, we have privacy protected. What about foreign intelligence? Should we completely ignore the rest of the world? Is it now safe for us to put off trying to prevent terrorism events? Let's get some balance into this debate.

        Rand Paul is to civil liberties as the Disney Channel is to subtle and nuanced acting.

        by Tortmaster on Thu Aug 22, 2013 at 03:57:51 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  So you trust the ones that have been shown to be (5+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        DeadHead, Dallasdoc, JVolvo, CenPhx, eps62

        lying and discount the ones pulling back the curtain.
           You should reconsider your blind loyalties.

        •  kharma! I swear that ... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          kharma, Reggid

          ... I was already going to do a diary entitled, "What happens when you pull back the curtain and find a real wizard?"

          On to your statement, Clapper was placed in a Catch-22 situation where he had to either admit to the existence of the Top Secret NSA program or basically lie. There are negative enforcers for each scenario, but, in the end, it was the perfect spy version of the old, "So, have you stopped beating your wife" question. For most people, they realize that keeping national secrets secret is a good thing, so they cut him some slack.

          People like Greenwald, on the other hand, are just around to create a circus. There's no debating an idealogue like him because the ends always justify the means. That has been evidenced from day one of the Snowden Affair.

          I have suggested ways to improve the system, and I will continue to do so in the future, but I realize that the world is many shades of grey, and that privacy and foreign intelligence are important.  

          (I swear I was going to write that diary, though, on everything holy, and I'm still going to write it, but that really was, like, instant karma!)

          Rand Paul is to civil liberties as the Disney Channel is to subtle and nuanced acting.

          by Tortmaster on Thu Aug 22, 2013 at 04:25:36 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Well I will read it and try to at least (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Tortmaster, JVolvo, eps62

            see your point of view, and even rec it if it's not some divisive diary like I've been seeing lately.  I don't think obnoxious diggeR diaries help the discussion, even though they do make entertaining snarkathons with all the red-faced foot stomping and such.

          •  A question (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Dallasdoc, JVolvo, Tortmaster, eps62

            In your opinion, why is this surveillance thing buried so deeply in top secret that it requires it's director to lie to congress? That seems a little odd given that any serious enemy and most foreign friends pretty much have to assume their electronic communications are vulnerable and probably being peeked at. So who are these programs hiding from?

            Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell. --Edward Abbey

            by ricklewsive on Thu Aug 22, 2013 at 06:02:11 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  While I was reading the ... (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              ricklewsive, Reggid, eps62

              ... opinion, ricklewsive, I came up with a possible reason. Remember how the old mafia used to have telephone communications between their spouses for five or ten minutes before the "bosses" got on the phone? That was dramatized in the movie Casino, in a phone call between Pesci and DeNiro. They exploited a law that they knew was on the books. The Feds could only wiretap for X number of minutes, and if it was a personal communication, they had to stop the wiretap. Well, what if the terrorists decided to put U.S. Person Information at the beginning and end of each of their emails? For example:

              Did you hear about the big ballgame? I was so mad! The coach should have put in this player and not that one ....

              Proceed with plan to blow up target.

              Say hello to the Misses from me. Alice says Hi! And keep on trucking!

              In other words, if all the parameters are known, they can be easily exploited.

              Rand Paul is to civil liberties as the Disney Channel is to subtle and nuanced acting.

              by Tortmaster on Thu Aug 22, 2013 at 07:17:55 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Thanks for the response (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                eps62, Tortmaster

                I would agree that getting too deep into the techniques in a public way could produce some issues with regards to effectiveness, but I don't think Senator Wyden was asking the DNI to blow the project.

                During a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing Wyden asked Clapper whether the National Security Agency collects “any type of data at all on millions of Americans.” Clapper responded, “No, sir” — a response that seems to run contrary to the revelations of the past week concerning the NSA’s broad phone record collection efforts.
                The Washington Post

                It would seem the programs could operate with an acceptable level of secrecy something short of "I could tell you but then I'd have to kill you." My concern is that this level of secrecy might be less intended to protect the effectiveness of the programs than to protect the programs themselves*.

                *Granting that the people running the programs felt they might need some protection from the politics of the Congress. Who doesn't?

                Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell. --Edward Abbey

                by ricklewsive on Thu Aug 22, 2013 at 08:11:08 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

      •  You appear to be using a different definition (6+ / 0-)

        of "apologizing" than the one I intended.

        Or you maybe you ARE using it in the same sense that I was, and truly believe no explanations need be given regarding this "ingenious system," in which case, I wish you happiness as you occupy your place on the wrong side of history.

        But you are correct, tortmaster, I am not "balancing competing interests."

        There's absolutely no justification whatsoever for the scale and scope of these operations. THEY are at an imbalance, not me.

        There's really nothing left to debate, as far as I'm concerned. I've felt that from day one.

        With each passing day, we learn more and more. What was once CT has now become "Yeah, okay, you busted us, but it we didn't fuck up THAT much. See, only this small number of..."

        Soon, it will be "Yeah, you busted us. We fucked up bad. We have no excuse."

        And then, hopefully, the wrecking ball will arrive.




        Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ J. Garcia

        by DeadHead on Thu Aug 22, 2013 at 05:34:51 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  There is no interest that competes with (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        greenbastard, CenPhx, maryabein, eps62

        democratic government.   My Dad didn't fight WWII so corrupt centrist cowards could sell it to the SMIC.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site