Burn-E Posted June 10, 2013 Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 why, what behavior do i do that aligns with terrorist behavior? domestic or foreign. i do not go on any jihadst websites etc. i do not talk about the infidels while on the phone or yellow cake. i can trace my day to day actions digitally and on paper. i have nothing to fear and i believe all the belly achers are the same people worried about the guys in black jackets collecting guns. Mike, how about this as a starter. Your sovereignty is being violated in supposed name of security. Your claim is that unless I'm doing something wrong I should have no concerns about the government tracking my phone calls or searching my emails and online activities. And yet I imagine you would have an issue with them walking in your door and walking around your house opening cupboards and looking under your beds, right? You would have no issue with them following you and photographing you everywhere you go, right? The problem with saying I have nothing to hide and if I did have something to hide then the government should be shining a bright light on that illegal activity is that it fails to consider the true value of what is lost. It fails to recognize the shift that has already happened when you're willing to ask the question: "If I have nothing to hide then what is there to fear?" What you're really saying is I don't care what happens under this policy so long as it doesn't happen to me. We live in a society where a younger generation has essentially decided that information should be free and they're more than willing to post their lives online for all their friends and all the marketers who support those services to see and analyze. So why not let the government in on the analysis for the benefit of security? The difference is you make a conscious decision what to share online through services like Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, etc. You may decide to share your email with some people and recognize that anything you send through your corporate accounts can and will be monitored (per your employment contract / corporate computer use policy). But would you want all of your private emails and phone conversations monitored? How is that any different from having someone sitting there next to you at your kitchen table or in the passenger seat of your car or even in the shower with you and listening in on everything you say and do? We speak in sinister tones about the East German Stasi and their extensive network for spying on their people. But what the NSA is doing here comes right out of the Stasi playbook. Let's consider though, that the real impact is how this changes your relationship with the government and services you receive over which it has some form of oversight. And I'm not talking welfare here. Instead I'm talking about air travel, loans, etc. If you have a certain name or engage in travel activity that might cause you to be flagged - even if it's entirely innocent, you're not the person they're looking for and you have genuine reasons for traveling to Lebanon or the Caucasus region then it's possible that for no justifiable reason you will go through an enormous hassle of trying to get on an airplane - just as an example. Or, if you're an actual terrorist it's possible you won't be as we learned with the Boston Bombers. But add to this problem the fact that by giving the government the right to sift through any data we provide to third parties, we essentially are empowering them to track our actions. And this has a chilling effect on Free Speech, the Right to Assemble, the Freedom of the Press and the Right to Petition. Consider whether a whistle blower would be willing to contact a journalist to an important story out concerning government actions if they knew that it was possible their calls and emails would be sifted by the intelligence arm of that same government? We've already seen the IRS leveraged to go after political action committees and deny them free speech. Why should we trust that the NSA is only focusing on terrorists? What gives you that belief? You have no idea how they are leveraging the data collected because there is no transparency from their end. Are we supposed to trust their word when they have already lied directly to Congress? The legislative voice of the people who is supposed to have legislative and budgetary oversight of their activities? Speaking of whistle blowers, I think the fears expressed by Edward Snowden, someone who lived and worked in the belly of the beast justifies a skeptical response to any claims made by the Obama administration on this question. For a through discussion of the inherent problems with the "I've got nothing to hide argument" see this analysis. (PDF) As one who works with data analysis on a daily basis, you would be surprised at how much I can tell you about yourself and your family just by tracking specific behaviors. I've linked it before but I think it's one of the best examples of how powerful deep data analysis can be - big data is the future of marketing for a very good reason. Don't believe me? By tracking the purchase pattern of 25 items in its stores Target knew that a father's high school daughter was pregnant before he did. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Che'_Moderator Posted June 10, 2013 Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 Speaking of whistle blowers, I think the fears expressed by Edward Snowden, someone who lived and worked in the belly of the beast justifies a skeptical response to any claims made by the Obama administration on this question. If he's so righteous, why is he holed up in a Asian hotel like a rat? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7 VII 7 Posted June 10, 2013 Author Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 If he's so righteous, why is he holed up in a Asian hotel like a rat? I agree. If you watch the video, you just want to punch this guy in the face. He is so smug like he knows everything and he is speaking for everyone. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin. Posted June 10, 2013 Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 If you called out the US government with illegal activities and had legit proof if it would YOU stay in the country? I would run away Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Che'_Moderator Posted June 10, 2013 Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 If you called out the US government with illegal activities and had legit proof if it would YOU stay in the country? I would run away And have an "accident" in Hong Kong? I think not. Again, if you were really proud of what you did, you would own it. Well anyone with a backbone, you Kevin... You would probably end up like David Caradine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burn-E Posted June 10, 2013 Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 I agree. If you watch the video, you just want to punch this guy in the face. He is so smug like he knows everything and he is speaking for everyone. This is not about Snowden. Self aggrandizement is a typical motivator for those who take on a larger target. His motivation is no different from that of the terrorists who pointed the planes at the twin towers. He's a minor actor here in the larger story but the government and the press are going to focus on him to the detriment of the true outrage that should exist to what he revealed. Probably because he's scared of the potential responses to his actions. I think his choice of country of destination to deploy was stupid for many reasons, not the least of which because Beijing won't let him stay. But here's the thing. By going there he at least has the time to get the message out and put a face to legitimize what he provided before the government quashes him - which inevitably will happen. China will deport him, they'll make inroads with the US government by doing so, and eventually he'll wind up in a cell next to Bradley Manning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ErikS Posted June 10, 2013 Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 It makes our democracy a hypocrisy on the world stage. If we are a beacon for freedom, and dictate international policy under the rights of said freedoms, how are we any different than countries we condem and invade when we use the same practices on ourselves and our citizens? 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Che'_Moderator Posted June 10, 2013 Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 It makes our democracy a hypocrisy on the world stage. If we are a beacon for freedom, and dictate international policy under the rights of said freedoms, how are we any different than countries we condem and invade when we use the same practices on ourselves and our citizens? We are a representative democracy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burn-E Posted June 10, 2013 Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 Erik's going to say I'm being pedantic but I'm sure that's what he meant since in popular use Americans shorten representative democracy or democratic republic for democracy. We all know what we're talking about here (you, me, Erik) but your point is appropriate Chuck since plenty of the ill informed masses wouldn't understand the difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Che'_Moderator Posted June 10, 2013 Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 Im all for direct democracy only because it would be funny. I would be madmaxing it up within 18 months if you FB define all policy. They need to round this fucker up and shoot him in the head. Same goes for every congressman who leaked info and that dipshit pvt that was involved with wikileak. Security leaks put personnel in danger period! Intelligence channels should be protected whenever possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burn-E Posted June 10, 2013 Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 Why is it that people always die in the course of your resolution of a problem Chuck? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Che'_Moderator Posted June 10, 2013 Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 Why is it that people always die in the course of your resolution of a problem Chuck? He needs to made an example out of. You know another way that has 0% recidivism? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ErikS Posted June 10, 2013 Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 We are a representative democracy No, its an important point - I should have put that in front. I have a soul woman and a lesbian representing my day-to-day livelihood, things are well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burn-E Posted June 10, 2013 Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 I would argue his misguided approach actually benefits the Repulic rather than diminishing it. In an era where the government is taking on liberties contrary to the Constitution I want more people willing to speak up rather then fewer. Too many secrets. And to lighten the mood, Obama is checking your email: 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Che'_Moderator Posted June 10, 2013 Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 In an era where the government is taking on liberties contrary to the Constitution I want more people willing to speak up rather then fewer. Too many secrets. Nothing new is going on. This has gone on for years. Did anyone here really think your on-line data was private? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts