42
   

Snowdon is a dummy

 
 
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Sun 9 Nov, 2014 08:24 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

This has nothing at all to do with patting on the back, being respectful to a country or similar: it's just that I think, our constitution and laws should be respected and followed.

I know (personally) that intelligence agencies don't (and can't) do this always, but I really don't want to live in a country like during the Nazi or Stasi periods.


I doubt anyone wants to live in a country like the Nazi or Stasi periods, Walter. I certainly do not.

But I do not want the people who govern my country to treat the laws of our land like some sort of suicide pact.

Luckily, most of the laws allow for reasonable deviation to occur...and a for a procedure to determine what is a "reasonable deviation."

That is what we have here...and I strongly suspect that is what you people have also.

Most of the drama being displayed here in A2K on this subject...is nonsense.
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Sun 9 Nov, 2014 08:33 am
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:
That is what we have here...and I strongly suspect that is what you people have also.

Most of the drama being displayed here in A2K on this subject...is nonsense.
Here, laws and the constitution is nothing to "suspect". It's written down. And can be read nowadays even online.

(That's why the UK's government wants us to change our privacy laws.)
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Sun 9 Nov, 2014 08:56 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
That is what we have here...and I strongly suspect that is what you people have also.

Most of the drama being displayed here in A2K on this subject...is nonsense.
Here, laws and the constitution is nothing to "suspect". It's written down. And can be read nowadays even online.

(That's why the UK's government wants us to change our privacy laws.)


So is ours, Walter.

I have no idea of why the UK would want you to change your laws. If the UK does not like them...they could disregard them.


Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Sun 9 Nov, 2014 09:21 am
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:
I have no idea of why the UK would want you to change your laws. If the UK does not like them...they could disregard them.
My remark was related to a post a few days ago: the UK wants passenger's personal data plus more transmitted from the airlines before the flight to the UK.
Since they airlines can't legally do it, they wouldn't get clearance to land anymore.

I'm sure: before this happens, the laws will be changed for economic reasons. It won't be easy, so.
BillRM
 
  3  
Sun 9 Nov, 2014 11:08 am
@Walter Hinteler,
It would depend on who have the biggest balls as somehow I can not see British cutting off all direct air travel between itself and Germany assuming that Germany stand firm.

Of course in the name of national security the US is harming a large and important sector of it own economic so who can be sure how far this insanity will go.
0 Replies
 
revelette2
 
  1  
Sun 9 Nov, 2014 12:57 pm
@Olivier5,
Quote:
Spying on untrustworthy allies is a must nowadays. You never know what mischief the Americans will come up with next.


How hypercritical of them and you.
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Sun 9 Nov, 2014 02:06 pm
@revelette2,
Quote:
@Olivier5,
Quote: Spying on untrustworthy allies is a must nowadays. You never know what mischief the Americans will come up with next.

How hypercritical of them and you.


Why?
revelette2
 
  2  
Sun 9 Nov, 2014 02:49 pm
@cicerone imposter,
What do you mean why? It should be blaringly obvious. Either they really believed all their sanctimonious preaching, or they didn't. It is like a preacher standing on the pulpit going on and on about sin all the while carrying on an affair with a woman in the front pew.
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Sun 9 Nov, 2014 03:05 pm
@revelette2,
You're confusing intelligence against our enemies and illegal searches against American citizens.
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Sun 9 Nov, 2014 03:15 pm
@revelette2,
revelette2 wrote:
It is like a preacher standing on the pulpit going on and on about sin all the while carrying on an affair with a woman in the front pew.
But even this doesn't make a sin a holy act.
revelette2
 
  1  
Sun 9 Nov, 2014 03:26 pm
@cicerone imposter,
I am speaking of Merkel saying allies do not spy on allies, referring of course of us spying on her, later we find out Germany's BND "accidently" spied on Kerry and Clinton while spying on Turkey, also an ally.
revelette2
 
  1  
Sun 9 Nov, 2014 03:30 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
No, it doesn't, it makes the preacher a sinner and a hypocrite.
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Sun 9 Nov, 2014 03:31 pm
@revelette2,
revelette2 wrote:
I am speaking of Merkel saying allies do not spy on allies, referring of course of us spying on her, later we find out Germany's BND "accidently" spied on Kerry and Clinton while spying on Turkey, also an ally.
And she was correct. What those civil servants in the BND did, wasn't. (And if you read what was published, you would have noticed that those calls were collected while scanning others.)

That she now gave allowance to spy on the USA annd UK, well, that might certainly be called a sandbox or playground reaction.
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Sun 9 Nov, 2014 03:32 pm
@revelette2,
revelette2 wrote:

No, it doesn't, it makes the preacher a sinner and a hypocrite.
A sinner, certainly.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Sun 9 Nov, 2014 03:34 pm
@revelette2,
"Accidents" happen in real life; that's why they're called accidents. It was not intentional. Is that a difficult concept for you? Just wondering.
BillRM
 
  3  
Sun 9 Nov, 2014 04:20 pm
@cicerone imposter,
To say nothing of the fact that government on government spying be it on allies or enemies is not the same as massive spying on citizens of those countries with very special notice of when governments are spying on their own citizens.

Just because technology now allow this massive spying to be done effectively for the first time in history does not mean that it should be done or that legal and technology means should not be employ to stop it.

No matter how governments and people like Frank claimed that this massive spying made us safer there is zero evident for that being the case and in my opinion it is a cancer on our freedoms and our liberties.
0 Replies
 
revelette2
 
  1  
Sun 9 Nov, 2014 04:52 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Quote:
And she was correct. What those civil servants in the BND did, wasn't. (And if you read what was published, you would have noticed that those calls were collected while scanning others.)


I recall, just do not readily believe it, even if true, the other was an ally as well.

Quote:
That she now gave allowance to spy on the USA annd UK, well, that might certainly be called a sandbox or playground reaction.


Seems petty to me and makes a lie of her earlier statements.
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Wed 12 Nov, 2014 03:02 pm
One way to understand today and the future is to understand the past when the intelligence community under Hoover had gone very bad.

Take note even those we all know the dark side of Hoover the government still is honoring this man memory by having the FBI headquarter name after him.

If not monitor and control firmly our own intelligence community can be and in fact by history will be far far more of a threat to the well being of our nation and our freedoms and liberties then all of the terrorists in the world.


Quote:


https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/11/fbis-suicide-letter-dr-martin-luther-king-jr-and-dangers-unchecked-surveillance

The New York Times has published an unredacted version of the famous “suicide letter” from the FBI to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. The letter, recently discovered by historian and professor Beverly Gage, is a disturbing document. But it’s also something that everyone in the United States should read, because it demonstrates exactly what lengths the intelligence community is willing to go to—and what happens when they take the fruits of the surveillance they’ve done and unleash it on a target.

The anonymous letter was the result of the FBI’s comprehensive surveillance and harassment strategy against Dr. King, which included bugging his hotel rooms, photographic surveillance, and physical observation of King’s movements by FBI agents. The agency also attempted to break up his marriage by sending selectively edited “personal moments he shared with friends and women” to his wife.

Portions of the letter had been previously redacted. One of these portions contains a claim that the letter was written by another African-American: “King, look into your heart. You know you are a complete fraud and a great liability to all us Negroes.” It goes on to say “We will now have to depend on our older leaders like Wilkins, a man of character and thank God we have others like him. But you are done.” This line is key, because part of the FBI’s strategy was to try to fracture movements and pit leaders against one another.

The entire letter could have been taken from a page of GCHQ’s Joint Threat Research and Intelligence Group (JTRIG)—though perhaps as an email or series of tweets. The British spying agency GCHQ is one of the NSA’s closest partners. The mission of JTRIG, a unit within GCHQ, is to “destroy, deny, degrade [and] disrupt enemies by discrediting them.” And there’s little reason to believe the NSA and FBI aren’t using such tactics.

The implications of these types of strategies in the digital age are chilling. Imagine Facebook chats, porn viewing history, emails, and more made public to discredit a leader who threatens the status quo, or used to blackmail a reluctant target into becoming an FBI informant. These are not far-fetched ideas. They are the reality of what happens when the surveillance state is allowed to grow out of control, and the full King letter, as well as current intelligence community practices illustrate that reality richly.

The newly unredacted portions shed light on the government’s sordid scheme to harass and discredit Dr. King. One paragraph states:

No person can overcome the facts, no even a fraud like yourself. Lend your sexually psychotic ear to the enclosure. You will find yourself and in all your dirt, filth, evil and moronic talk exposed on the record for all time. . . . Listen to yourself, you filthy, abnormal animal. You are on the record.

And of course, the letter ends with an ominous threat:

King, there is only one thing left for you to do. You know what it is. You have just 34 days in which to do it (this exact number has been selected for a specific reason, it has definite practical significance). You are done. There is but one way out for you. You better take it before your filthy, abnormal fraudulent self is bared to the nation.

There's a lesson to learn here: history must play a central role in the debate around spying today. As Professor Gage states:

Should intelligence agencies be able to sweep our email, read our texts, track our phone calls, locate us by GPS? Much of the conversation swirls around the possibility that agencies like the N.S.A. or the F.B.I. will use such information not to serve national security but to carry out personal and political vendettas. King’s experience reminds us that these are far from idle fears, conjured in the fevered minds of civil libertarians. They are based in the hard facts of history.

NSA Spying
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Wed 12 Nov, 2014 03:17 pm
@BillRM,
hear - hear; History repeats itself.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -1  
Wed 12 Nov, 2014 10:33 pm
@ehBeth,
ehBeth wrote:
I think countries like China, Romania and Germany have done a pretty good job on decreasing the spying on their citizens over the past few decades. I don't think spying there has stopped completely but it's not as widespread and definitely not as accepted by their citizens.

China?!?

Did you accidentally type the name of the wrong country? China spies on ordinary citizens more than any other government in the world.


ehBeth wrote:
Odd to see US posters who think it's an unavoidable, or even desirable, direction for their governments to go. All through the 1950's, 60's and 70's those other countries' practices were denounced as bad/evil/communist etc etc.

Those past denunciations were about unconstitutional and/or illegal spying.

The spying that the US government presently carries out is neither unconstitutional nor illegal (regarding US law at least).
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Snowdon is a dummy
  3. » Page 583
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 10/05/2024 at 11:52:31