1
   

Three Cheers for Qwest!

 
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 May, 2006 04:39 pm
Setanta wrote:
What it explains is that the historical context you're attempting to foist onto this topic is meaningless. We cannot do anything about FDR's actions and policies. We can respond to current circumstances. Only a jackass would contend that any crimes alleged by FDR impinges upon the bahavior of the NSA today, and the telecom companies who truckled to that organization.


To claim historical context is meaningless is a very ignorant statement in my opinion.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 May, 2006 04:40 pm
Setanta wrote:
It will be interesting to learn down the road if this results in an increase in business for Qwest.


How about a decrease in business?
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 May, 2006 04:41 pm
When it comes to history, i'll test my knowledge against yours any time, and we'll see who appears ignorant. This thread is about Qwest refusing to provide the NSA information which other telecom providers did give them. FDR is not relevant to that issue.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 May, 2006 04:44 pm
okie wrote:
Setanta wrote:
It will be interesting to learn down the road if this results in an increase in business for Qwest.


How about a decrease in business?


That might happen, but i consider it unlikely. What does your profound wisdom concerning FDR suggest to you?
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 May, 2006 09:29 pm
Setanta wrote:
What does your profound wisdom concerning FDR suggest to you?


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,195205,00.html

Nothing is profound about it. Setanta, if you wish to carry on a sensible evaluation of what is going on, you surely must recognize that "data mining" pales in comparison to what has been employed by presidents in the past, including Democrat hero and icon, Franklin Roosevelt. Go ahead and claim it doesn't matter, but the simple fact is historical context does matter. If you simply wish to create mountains out of mole hills in an effort to demonize a Republican administration, then I'm not interested in debating. It ends up being a useless debate as many are on this forum.

Was it data mining involved in Able Danger that potentially identified some of the 911 plotters? I believe it was. If we had used the technology as intended, perhaps thousands of deaths and destruction could have been prevented, we don't know, but its at least a possibility.

I am personally in favor of data mining as long as the objectives and parameters are clearly defined and targeted toward serious national security threats, which I believe these programs do. And I believe the president has the authority to do that under his constitutional authority. Again, we are not talking about wire tapping here.

Are you in favor of doing anything along the lines of data mining the habits of potential terrorist threats? If so, how, and if not, why?
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 May, 2006 11:27 pm
Quote:
which I believe these programs do


Based on what, exactly, do you believe this?

Based on your trust of the NSA? Your trust of our government?

That's the American way?

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 May, 2006 07:43 am
Okie, i would think you'd be embarrassed. This thread is not a pissing match between Republicans and Democrats, for as much as you'd like to make it that. It is about telecom companies turning over data to the government, and in particular, about the refusal of Qwest to do so.

But you have your fun, i know that the partisan hatred means more to you than anything else.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 May, 2006 08:31 am
Setanta wrote:
Okie, i would think you'd be embarrassed. This thread is not a pissing match between Republicans and Democrats, for as much as you'd like to make it that. It is about telecom companies turning over data to the government, and in particular, about the refusal of Qwest to do so.

But you have your fun, i know that the partisan hatred means more to you than anything else.


Then prove it isn't partisan hatred on your part and offer a sensible opinion in response to my question: "Are you in favor of doing anything along the lines of data mining the habits of potential terrorist threats? If so, how, and if not, why?"

My opinion is not based on partisan hatred. It is based on the reality of today's world, and what I might do if I had to make the same decisions that Bush is.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 May, 2006 08:32 am
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Quote:
which I believe these programs do


Based on what, exactly, do you believe this?

Based on your trust of the NSA? Your trust of our government?

That's the American way?

Cycloptichorn


Based on common sense and what is so far reported.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 May, 2006 08:39 am
okie wrote:
Setanta wrote:
Okie, i would think you'd be embarrassed. This thread is not a pissing match between Republicans and Democrats, for as much as you'd like to make it that. It is about telecom companies turning over data to the government, and in particular, about the refusal of Qwest to do so.

But you have your fun, i know that the partisan hatred means more to you than anything else.


Then prove it isn't partisan hatred on your part and offer a sensible opinion in response to my question: "Are you in favor of doing anything along the lines of data mining the habits of potential terrorist threats? If so, how, and if not, why?"

My opinion is not based on partisan hatred. It is based on the reality of today's world, and what I might do if I had to make the same decisions that Bush is.


No, my response to this thread has consistently been that Qwest deserves people's business because they did not truckle to the NSA. That would not change if it were a Democratic administration who attempted to do this "data mining." Therefore, no imputation of partisan hatred is justified.

Furthermore, you make the assumption (in an incredibly awkward sentence) that this data would only be used to identify the "habits" of terrorist threats. (One assumes that is what you mean, as it is not completely clear from that badly-written sentence.) That assumption is unwarranted on your part, unless you assert that you are an employee of the NSA who is charged with reviewing the data from telecom companies records--and if you contend that, i will consider you to be a bald-faced liar. I am not obliged to prove that something is not so, but if you make a contention, then you have the burden of proving that it is so.

The cited article on this topic in another thread states that the records of about 200,000,000 Americans were turned over. Do you contend that there are 200,000,000 Americans who constitute a terrorist threat?

So, once again, this thread congratulates Qwest for not giving this information to the government. Read the opening post again. It suggests that people vote with their feet when choosing a telecom company on this basis. Therefore, partisan references, and references to what the President should do about putative terrorist threats are not relevant.

At all events, you have not established that this information will be used for that purpose. You have not established that this information can effectively be used for that purpose. You have, finally, not established that the purpose of this thread is partisan criticism.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 May, 2006 08:58 am
You still offer little opinion on what you would constructively do, outside of the fact you are against something. Typical.

And you are in the minority:

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/5/12/91831.shtml?s=tn

As for my "incredibly awkward sentence," you should be able to figure out what the NSA is probably doing. They are using computers to establish patterns of behavior in terms of calling habits, and identifying anomalies that may be indicative of possible terrorist communications. These anomalies can then be further investigated and correlated with other known information by more detailed methods employed by the NSA. In order to do this filtering process in the most efficient manner, you need to start with as large amount of data as possible. Bush did not invent this technology. It is a technology that has gained prominence among intelligence experts as a useful tool in their overall mission of national security.

If you were president, would you rule out using this very useful tool?
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 May, 2006 09:01 am
As i have pointed out, your partisan rant is not relevant to this thread. What you allege as "typical" is therefore not relevant either--this thread doesn't have a partisan basis. When i see someone ranting on the basis of partisan hatred, i am usually uninclined to play their nasty little games with them. That applies in this circumstance.
0 Replies
 
Synonymph
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 May, 2006 09:02 am
Good thing I use Qwest. The government doesn't really need to be listening in on my occasional phone sex escapades. Wouldn't want to offend those fundamentalist ears...
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 May, 2006 09:04 am
That's very considerate of you Synonymph, i'm impressed!
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 May, 2006 09:08 am
Synonymph wrote:
Good thing I use Qwest. The government doesn't really need to be listening in on my occasional phone sex escapades. Wouldn't want to offend those fundamentalist ears...



Yeah, whatever - what is that number....?
0 Replies
 
Synonymph
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 May, 2006 09:10 am
Be careful what you wish for, snood.
0 Replies
 
username
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 May, 2006 09:18 am
Now from the source that okie cites to prove his point, we get:

"Also, social network analysis would appear to be powerless against criminals and terrorists who rely on a multitude of cell phones, payphones, calling cards and Internet cafes.

Then there are more creative ways of getting off the grid. The Madrid train bombings case has revealed that the plotters communicated by sharing one e-mail account and saving messages to each other as drafts that, since they were never sent, didn't traverse the Internet as regular e-mail messages would."

So the NSA program won't find potential terrorists. Who does that leave for it to spy on? You and me. What was that Ben Franklin line about people who give up their civil liberties for seucrity get neither? Two hundred years ago he was wiser than all those righties who rush to give it all away to Big Brother.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 May, 2006 09:19 am
Wow - I got a shiver from that reply...
0 Replies
 
Synonymph
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 May, 2006 09:20 am
That email method is pretty cool.
0 Replies
 
Synonymph
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 May, 2006 09:21 am
snood wrote:
Wow - I got a shiver from that reply...


And that's just the tip of the iceberg.
0 Replies
 
 

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
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 01/21/2022 at 10:48:28