The dangers of our new normal...

[DC Tom]

 

It's not about the fact they're doing it, it's about the fact they've been lying about it -- even when everyone already knows they're doing it. Which makes it hard to trust anything they say about their domestic spying programs. It's a continued pattern of abuse and deceit of the American public. That's the point of posting the article (in a thread littered with similar examples of outright lies and perjury before a Congressional committee).

 

I don't recall them ever lying about spying on other countries.

 

All I recall is them not publicizing it.

[Deranged Rhino]

 

Are they lying about it or trying to keep it secret. AFAIK, FISA and cleared members of Foreign Policy committees in Congress knew.

 

They are lying about it to our allies (Germany and France specifically), like they've been lying to the American people about their capabilities and motives behind their domestic spying apparatus -- which is ongoing.

 

A spying program would be much less successful if you told everyone you were doing it.

 

Exactly the point of posting that article in reference to their denials, obsfucations and outright perjury regarding the illegal domestic surveillance of US citizens. Despite this logic (and GG's above), the regular Joe on the street is still more than willing to believe NSA when they say that their programs are designed to stop terrorists (they're not) and they're not being used on US citizens (they are and continue to be).

 

 

 

I don't recall them ever lying about spying on other countries.

 

All I recall is them not publicizing it.

 

They "lied" outright to Merkel and Hollande over the past two years (probably more).

 

Again, the issue isn't that NSA is spying on foreign nations (I know no one in America cares about that), or that they're spying on foreign economic interests (again, no one cares but our allies), it's the continued pattern of deceit when it comes to discussing their true agenda in relation to their domestic spying programs.

[....lybob]

 

They are lying about it to our allies (Germany and France specifically), like they've been lying to the American people about their capabilities and motives behind their domestic spying apparatus -- which is ongoing.

 

 

Exactly the point of posting that article in reference to their denials, obsfucations and outright perjury regarding the illegal domestic surveillance of US citizens. Despite this logic (and GG's above), the regular Joe on the street is still more than willing to believe NSA when they say that their programs are designed to stop terrorists (they're not) and they're not being used on US citizens (they are and continue to be).

 

 

 

They "lied" outright to Merkel and Hollande over the past two years (probably more).

 

Again, the issue isn't that NSA is spying on foreign nations (I know no one in America cares about that), or that they're spying on foreign economic interests (again, no one cares but our allies), it's the continued pattern of deceit when it comes to discussing their true agenda in relation to their domestic spying programs.

We live in an oligarchy and much of what our military, diplomatic institutions, and intelligence agencies do is for the economic benefit of a small number of powerful people.

[Adam]

 

Even when said communication and information is being tracked, stored, and swayed more than ever by big government and big corporate interests? Again, this isn't the point of this topic but it's still a point you're woefully ignorant about.

 

The issue is privacy and the government's complete invasion of it. So, I'll ask you again. You stated this kind of power has always been possible, explain that to me. How has it always been possible for government to infringe on the privacy of its people when the technology to do so has only recently (in terms of the totality of history) been developed?

 

I'll wait...

 

This is absolutely the catch-22 of the modern world. The younger generation (millennials and under) operate in the digital world knowingly surrendering their privacy in order to have a digital life. The older generation either doesn't understand the issue (like gatorman) or believes that it's a necessary evil to fight those no good terrorists.

 

We've been tricked into believing this is the cost of doing business in the modern world by the powers that be because it's given them an incredible opportunity to gain insight into every single voter/customer/citizens' life.

The two entities are really one and the same (govt and corporate interests. And here's the rub..... If they're tracking you and monitoring everything about you, they know how to market themselves to you. This means they can sell you on absolutely anything. If they can do that, they can convince you of anything, and at that point, you have little freedom.

[reddogblitz]

Exactly the point of posting that article in reference to their denials, obsfucations and outright perjury regarding the illegal domestic surveillance of US citizens. Despite this logic (and GG's above), the regular Joe on the street is still more than willing to believe NSA when they say that their programs are designed to stop terrorists (they're not) and they're not being used on US citizens (they are and continue to be).

 

Several posters on PPP sound a lot like "regular Joe".

[GG]

 

They are lying about it to our allies (Germany and France specifically), like they've been lying to the American people about their capabilities and motives behind their domestic spying apparatus -- which is ongoing.

 

 

Exactly the point of posting that article in reference to their denials, obsfucations and outright perjury regarding the illegal domestic surveillance of US citizens. Despite this logic (and GG's above), the regular Joe on the street is still more than willing to believe NSA when they say that their programs are designed to stop terrorists (they're not) and they're not being used on US citizens (they are and continue to be).

 

 

 

They "lied" outright to Merkel and Hollande over the past two years (probably more).

 

Again, the issue isn't that NSA is spying on foreign nations (I know no one in America cares about that), or that they're spying on foreign economic interests (again, no one cares but our allies), it's the continued pattern of deceit when it comes to discussing their true agenda in relation to their domestic spying programs.

 

Ask Germany if they're more upset about the spying or that Snowden went public with it? I'm betting on the latter.

 

I'm guessing you're still shocked that gambling occurred in Casablanca.

 

I don't worry too much about the NSA programs because I don't make a living making up fantasy stories, so I'm not looking for the big bad bogeyman in Ft Meade looking up my phone number or email. But if I suddenly started an online conversation with somebody in Syria, you bet that it's more likely that the communication would trip up some alarms (as it should).

 

I've said it before, you're blinded by the largeness of the data collected and instantly associate it with something sinister. I'm on the opposite side. The more data that's collected, the less possibility that individual data will be compromised, because it's impossible for the few hundred analysts to get to the minutiae of each person. You've also failed to admit that the data that's collected by other law enforcement is far more intrusive and can and has been abused. Chances are, everyone who's participated in this thread has had his face, license plate or some other identifying feature scanned and recorded by a government agency in the last 24 hours. It's far more likely that a bored official in a local police department is going through the videos and is laughing at Greggy's driving skills right now. Where's your outrage? Where's your local police department's Snowden? Yet it's highly, highly unlikely that the NSA or CIA spooks are doing the same on regular US citizens.

 

You also continue to misinterpret the programs. They were designed to intercept foreign communication and to prevent acts of terror. Yet, as OC has voluminously explained, large data gathering by design needs to collect far more data than what is truly useful. Probable terrorists don't put in a #terrorist tag on their communication to help out the sleuths. Even the NSA whistleblowers (not the traitors) did not argue with the programs' missions or data collection. Their beef was with how the data was indexed and stored to filter out data on US citizens. So it would be helpful if you can stick to that distinction too.

 

Lastly, for all the harangue about the government programs, the industry that funds your paycheck is way over the top in privacy invasion and intrusion into the lives and habits. New technology gives them far greater access to people's lives. You don't care, because it's a matter between two private parties, and that is correct. But the flipside to the NSA blowback is that the Internet companies have now been deputized by the Feds, and now can fall back on a regulatory mandate to keep all detailed information about you as possible. But you're ok with that, because you're on the payroll, as are the indignant reporters who are shocked that the NSA is keeping track of phone calls.

[Deranged Rhino]

 

Ask Germany if they're more upset about the spying or that Snowden went public with it? I'm betting on the latter.

 

I'm guessing you're still shocked that gambling occurred in Casablanca.

 

I don't worry too much about the NSA programs because I don't make a living making up fantasy stories, so I'm not looking for the big bad bogeyman in Ft Meade looking up my phone number or email. But if I suddenly started an online conversation with somebody in Syria, you bet that it's more likely that the communication would trip up some alarms (as it should).

 

I've said it before, you're blinded by the largeness of the data collected and instantly associate it with something sinister. I'm on the opposite side. The more data that's collected, the less possibility that individual data will be compromised, because it's impossible for the few hundred analysts to get to the minutiae of each person. You've also failed to admit that the data that's collected by other law enforcement is far more intrusive and can and has been abused. Chances are, everyone who's participated in this thread has had his face, license plate or some other identifying feature scanned and recorded by a government agency in the last 24 hours. It's far more likely that a bored official in a local police department is going through the videos and is laughing at Greggy's driving skills right now. Where's your outrage? Where's your local police department's Snowden? Yet it's highly, highly unlikely that the NSA or CIA spooks are doing the same on regular US citizens.

 

You also continue to misinterpret the programs. They were designed to intercept foreign communication and to prevent acts of terror. Yet, as OC has voluminously explained, large data gathering by design needs to collect far more data than what is truly useful. Probable terrorists don't put in a #terrorist tag on their communication to help out the sleuths. Even the NSA whistleblowers (not the traitors) did not argue with the programs' missions or data collection. Their beef was with how the data was indexed and stored to filter out data on US citizens. So it would be helpful if you can stick to that distinction too.

 

Lastly, for all the harangue about the government programs, the industry that funds your paycheck is way over the top in privacy invasion and intrusion into the lives and habits. New technology gives them far greater access to people's lives. You don't care, because it's a matter between two private parties, and that is correct. But the flipside to the NSA blowback is that the Internet companies have now been deputized by the Feds, and now can fall back on a regulatory mandate to keep all detailed information about you as possible. But you're ok with that, because you're on the payroll, as are the indignant reporters who are shocked that the NSA is keeping track of phone calls.

 

There's so many things to pick apart in this, I'm going to need way more time. Post to be continued when I get done working today...

[Tiberius]

The two entities are really one and the same (govt and corporate interests. And here's the rub..... If they're tracking you and monitoring everything about you, they know how to market themselves to you. This means they can sell you on absolutely anything. If they can do that, they can convince you of anything, and at that point, you have little freedom.

So since they can try and get you to buy Brill cream you have little freedom? You guys are funny

[Tiberius]

http://video.foxnews.com/v/4404624763001/chris-christie-rand-paul-spar-over-nsa/?#sp=show-clips

 

 

Paul got smoked here.

[reddogblitz]

http://video.foxnews.com/v/4404624763001/chris-christie-rand-paul-spar-over-nsa/?#sp=show-clips

 

 

Paul got smoked here.

 

Paul was right, but Christie is a bigger blow hard.

 

Seems mentioning September 11 will be a big talking point amongst some Republicans this year. Pataki brought it up several times as well. Hard to argue with that I guess.

[Tiberius]

 

Paul was right, but Christie is a bigger blow hard.

 

Seems mentioning September 11 will be a big talking point amongst some Republicans this year. Pataki brought it up several times as well. Hard to argue with that I guess.

Yes, and Paul had to talk about Christie hugging Obama to defend his point. Strong argument there

[birdog1960]

We live in an oligarchy and much of what our military, diplomatic institutions, and intelligence agencies do is for the economic benefit of a small number of powerful people.

absolutely. i can't decide if it's willful ignorance or just plain ignorance that leads so many to ignore this truth and accept the status quo.

[....lybob]

absolutely. i can't decide if it's willful ignorance or just plain ignorance that leads so many to ignore this truth and accept the status quo.

America has always been more or less an Oligarchy but right now we are in a more period and what makes this period worse in my opinion is that our elites are much less nationalist and much more globalists. What galls me is they want the benefits of the American military, diplomatic institutions and intelligence agencies but don't want to pay for them, it's clear to anyone who looks that America has been hollowed out for the last 40+ years and this has nothing to do with welfare or single mothers, it's a direct result of neo-liberal economics and the off-shoring of jobs- someday soon I expect the drum-beat for increased military spending to counter act a rising China, at that point I hope someone stands up and "says shouldn't the guys who moved the manufacturing jobs and technology that has created this rising China pay for it?."

[Deranged Rhino]

 

(1) Ask Germany if they're more upset about the spying or that Snowden went public with it? I'm betting on the latter.

 

I'm guessing you're still shocked that gambling occurred in Casablanca.

 

(2) I don't worry too much about the NSA programs because I don't make a living making up fantasy stories, so I'm not looking for the big bad bogeyman in Ft Meade looking up my phone number or email. But if I suddenly started an online conversation with somebody in Syria, you bet that it's more likely that the communication would trip up some alarms (as it should).

 

(3) I've said it before, you're blinded by the largeness of the data collected and instantly associate it with something sinister. I'm on the opposite side. The more data that's collected, the less possibility that individual data will be compromised, because it's impossible for the few hundred analysts to get to the minutiae of each person. (4) You've also failed to admit that the data that's collected by other law enforcement is far more intrusive and can and has been abused. Chances are, everyone who's participated in this thread has had his face, license plate or some other identifying feature scanned and recorded by a government agency in the last 24 hours. It's far more likely that a bored official in a local police department is going through the videos and is laughing at Greggy's driving skills right now. Where's your outrage? Where's your local police department's Snowden? Yet it's highly, highly unlikely that the NSA or CIA spooks are doing the same on regular US citizens.

 

(5) You also continue to misinterpret the programs. They were designed to intercept foreign communication and to prevent acts of terror. Yet, as OC has voluminously explained, large data gathering by design needs to collect far more data than what is truly useful. Probable terrorists don't put in a #terrorist tag on their communication to help out the sleuths. Even the NSA whistleblowers (not the traitors) did not argue with the programs' missions or data collection. Their beef was with how the data was indexed and stored to filter out data on US citizens. So it would be helpful if you can stick to that distinction too.

 

(6) Lastly, for all the harangue about the government programs, the industry that funds your paycheck is way over the top in privacy invasion and intrusion into the lives and habits. New technology gives them far greater access to people's lives. You don't care, because it's a matter between two private parties, and that is correct. But the flipside to the NSA blowback is that the Internet companies have now been deputized by the Feds, and now can fall back on a regulatory mandate to keep all detailed information about you as possible. But you're ok with that, because you're on the payroll, as are the indignant reporters who are shocked that the NSA is keeping track of phone calls.

 

Took longer than anticipated to get back to this, apologies. Busy time of year. That said, let's take this a point at a time. I didn't number your post to be pedantic, but to try to keep this discussion as organized as possible:

 

1) As I stated several times throughout this thread, I am under no delusions that we live in a dangerous world with real enemies who wish to do America harm. I'm also under no delusions that a strong and proactive intelligence apparatus is a necessity in the modern world. I also realize that Americans, by and large, don't give a **** about NSA or any of the other 17 intelligence agencies spying on foreign nations -- whether they be allies or not. You can paint me as a lot of things, but being blind to the realities of the work that goes on behind the scenes in the intel world is not one of them. I'm well versed and come from a military family where many people close to me have served, and continue to serve their country, some even in the very agencies I'm railing against.

 

2) This isn't about looking for a boogeyman. The boogeyman is standing out in plain sight boasting about what he's done to the American public. This is about whether or not we live in a free country as our founding father's intended. The simple fact is it is impossible to have a democratic society unless people have a place they can discuss, debate, and openly exchange ideas -- even controversial ones. The founders recognized this and codified it into law because they realized how important privacy actually is to a functioning democratic society. It's paramount. "Without the assurance of a zone of inviolate space, both physical and mental, that a citizen can inhabit without fear of observation by others, there is no guarantee of the essential sovereignty of the individual promised by the 1st and 4th amendment" (Scheer). Huxley and Orwell both wrote about this brilliantly (are they considered classics?), their essential premise: the totality of societal observation over the individual is the defining antithesis of freedom, even when that observation is gained through hidden and subtle persuasion. This has been proven accurate time and time again throughout history.

 

People on this very forum rail about the PC culture we're living in now. Where does this come from? It didn't come from the left. It came about as the inevitable result of living in a society where our communications are monitored 24/7 -- willingly and unwillingly. It comes from living in a "free" country where we are robbed of privacy. Self censorship is the norm in totalitarian societies (again, brilliantly illustrated by Orwell). You may not see this as connected, but one was born from the other. And we are only continuing to slide down this slippery slope of trading our privacy for what we presume is safety -- when there is very little factual data to back up the claim that we are actually safer because of these programs. We're not safer today than we were before 9/11 despite the continued constitutional violations perpetrated by the government int he name of safety. In fact, you could argue these violations have only made this country less stable, less free, and more open to attack from all sides.

 

Your last point (in this section) about Syria is the perfect example of how far astray we've wandered from a truly free country. The assumption you're making (and that the federal government running these programs is also making) is that every citizen is a possible enemy of the government, thus they are justified in spying. This is a complete reversal from the intent of our Constitution which presumes it's our LEADERS and our GOVERNMENT that should be watched, not the citizens. We're supposed to live in a country where everyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty.

 

But we've abandoned that concept and our core notions of freedom in exchange for protection. It's a racket, and every citizen was the victim of a shakedown. Bottom line, total surveillance and freedom are not capable of coexisting. To argue otherwise is to be ignorant of history and the true meaning of freedom.

 

3) Privacy and anonymity are not the same. You're conflating the two with this argument, same thing Gator did. And you're doing so while completely ignoring the whistleblower information that's come to light in the past 2+ years because you (perhaps rightfully) classify the sources as traitors. To me, their status is irrelevant once the information is out. We can't deny it any longer, it's happening. It continues to happen. And the sheer amount of data collected offers NO protection of individual privacy.

 

Unless you properly acknowledge the role privacy plays in a functioning democratic system, this is a point we'll never see eye to eye on.

 

4) As for not commenting on local law enforcement's collection of data I'd suggest you go back through and look at my posts in this thread. I've addressed those concerns, and I share them. We are actually very much on the same team in that regard. However, where we differ is I realize the NSA and the federal spying programs are siphoning up that same information (and abusing it more openly, the evidence for this is overwhelming despite your denials NSA doesn't do this). We're talking about the same thing... you're just focused on the local level. I'm saying they're all connected at the top. It's the federal government, through a bogus War on Terror, that's managed to flip the entire foundation our country and positioned itself as the one needing to be protected from its citizens.

 

That should outrage anyone with any understanding of what this country was supposed to stand for.

 

5) This is inaccurate for a number of reasons. First, the programs I'm railing against are the collection of domestic data. Not foreign. The links to the articles regarding spying on economic competitors was to show the continuing pattern of the government lying about the true purpose of its spying programs. So let's not conflate the two. You are still under the assumption that these programs are designed to fight terrorism. They are not. The man who designed the programs themselves admits as much.

 

The programs exist to protect the government from its people -- which runs counter to everything this country stands for. They get away with it because the first casualty in any war is truth. The government convinced people that the threat of global terrorism demanded a sacrifice of individual privacy. This is one of the biggest lies ever sold to the American public, and your refusal to see it as such is evidence of its effectiveness since you are a smart guy (and I mean that, no snark). Washington in his farewell address warned people of "pretend patriotism". We should have listened. Instead we over reacted to 9/11 and allowed the government to flip the script. In return, they've not made the world safer for Americans, they've made it more difficult for American citizens to protest against the government's agenda -- now and in the future.

 

6) Again, you should really go back through and read my posts on this matter. It's not a secret that private enterprises and the government have been working hand in hand to make this surveillance state possible. They continue to work hand in hand today, despite Google's, Facebook's and every other tech companies' denials. The web itself began as a DARPA project, for the purposes of retaining communication in light of a nuclear war. If you don't think the corporate interests have been invaded / funded / encouraged by the federal government then you have not done your homework on this topic. It's a vital piece of the puzzle, and there have been many excellent books detailing exactly how private enterprise and government dovetailed to create the digital world we're living in today.

 

As for being on the payroll, you again are mistaken. First of all, I'm a pretty lousy writer as evidenced by my credits. I'm very much on the outside looking in, and I'm not certain how writing movies violates your privacy or somehow makes me a hypocrite when it comes to this subject. I've worked for digital media companies and have gotten a pretty scary insight into the amount of data mining that does go on in the world of Amazon, Netflix, Hulu etc -- but I haven't worked for any of those companies or sold to any of those companies.

 

You continue to miss the point of this topic and where the outrage comes from. But that's okay, I understand you feel the government should have absolute power and control over us to keep us safe. I understand that you believe the government is the only thing standing between us and complete anarchy. The only thing I don't understand is how you can hold so many liberal progressive beliefs about the nature and purpose of government and yet not see them for what they actually are.

 

 

absolutely. i can't decide if it's willful ignorance or just plain ignorance that leads so many to ignore this truth and accept the status quo.

 

It's both. GG (and others who have disagreed with my position in this thread) are not dumb. They're smart people with excellent points (even when I disagree). The problem is this issue is so intertwined with the war on terror that fear overrides logic -- or sometimes political bent overrides logic. That's how totalitarian regimes always come about. Through playing on people's fears to get them to sacrifice individual liberty in exchange for "protection".

 

It's a farce.

[Tiberius]

 

2) This isn't about looking for a boogeyman. The boogeyman is standing out in plain sight boasting about what he's done to the American public. This is about whether or not we live in a free country as our founding father's intended. The simple fact is it is impossible to have a democratic society unless people have a place they can discuss, debate, and openly exchange ideas -- even controversial ones. The founders recognized this and codified it into law because they realized how important privacy actually is to a functioning democratic society. It's paramount. "Without the assurance of a zone of inviolate space, both physical and mental, that a citizen can inhabit without fear of observation by others, there is no guarantee of the essential sovereignty of the individual promised by the 1st and 4th amendment" (Scheer). Huxley and Orwell both wrote about this brilliantly (are they considered classics?), their essential premise: the totality of societal observation over the individual is the defining antithesis of freedom, even when that observation is gained through hidden and subtle persuasion. This has been proven accurate time and time again throughout history.

 

 

So there's a boogeyman out there stopping us from meeting in private? People exchange ideas constantly in the country. Hot air

[Deranged Rhino]

So there's a boogeyman out there stopping us from meeting in private? People exchange ideas constantly in the country. Hot air

 

Your ability to miss the point is incredible. I mean, staggeringly so.

[DC Tom]

So there's a boogeyman out there stopping us from meeting in private? People exchange ideas constantly in the country. Hot air

 

Of course not. How can a boogeymen stop us from doing something that can't be defined and plays an uncertain role in a democratic society. There's a lot of blurry lines and ambiguity there.

[Tiberius]

 

Your ability to miss the point is incredible. I mean, staggeringly so.

The point was stupid. And your use of history as a reference really pathetic. You don't know what you are talking about. The boogeyman thing was pretty funny though! Tell us what Mr. Boogey is saying out loud...

[Deranged Rhino]

 

Of course not. How can a boogeymen stop us from doing something that can't be defined and plays an uncertain role in a democratic society. There's a lot of blurry lines and ambiguity there.

 

The line is pretty clear from my vantage.

[Tiberius]

The line is pretty clear from my vantage.

 

Well, you also see A boogeyman, so, there ya go Edited August 8, 2015 by gatorman