Snowden, liberty, freedom, survalience and propaganda
where will you draw the line on being spied on?
What is your guys opinion on this?
Do you think marines are heros because they fight for liberty? how do you feel about being spied on?
I would like to show you a quote from a us senator:
I found that in this article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/25/frank-church-liberal-icon
What gets me is the things people are saying to demonize him, the way the bbc or yahoo is or isn't covering the story and the fact that no one is that upset about it.
I feel like big brother is closing in, has anyone read 1984? the way that book covers the way selfishness and hate acan be encouraged and used by a political system seems to me to be in use allready, the way the past can always be manipulated.
and what the PR companies put in the uk tabloids is a fine example of that.
why do we make a lot of fuss about terrorists when potentially bigger killers and more dangerous things are overlooked?
Also do you think the governments number one priority really is the majority?
What is your guys opinion on this?
Do you think marines are heros because they fight for liberty? how do you feel about being spied on?
I would like to show you a quote from a us senator:
| "'That capability at any time could be turned around on the American people, and no American would have any privacy left, such is the capability to monitor everything: telephone conversations, telegrams, it doesn't matter. There would be no place to hide.' "He added that if a dictator ever took over, the NSA 'could enable it to impose total tyranny, and there would be no way to fight back.'" |
I found that in this article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/25/frank-church-liberal-icon
What gets me is the things people are saying to demonize him, the way the bbc or yahoo is or isn't covering the story and the fact that no one is that upset about it.
I feel like big brother is closing in, has anyone read 1984? the way that book covers the way selfishness and hate acan be encouraged and used by a political system seems to me to be in use allready, the way the past can always be manipulated.
and what the PR companies put in the uk tabloids is a fine example of that.
why do we make a lot of fuss about terrorists when potentially bigger killers and more dangerous things are overlooked?
Also do you think the governments number one priority really is the majority?
Last edited on
| devonrevenge wrote: |
|---|
| what makes the NSA and CIA different to the KGB? |
They're the "good guys" because they aren't communists.
| Also do you think the governments number one priority really is the majority? |
I think you would do well to remember that there isn't a the government. Government is a collection of people with different priorities and beliefs, not a single organism.
Also, while I do think it is justified to be bothered and disgusted by this surveillance, I think it's a bit narcissistic to presume that anyone would be interested in surveying you in particular.
Last edited on
Wait, you mean the government could be spying on me right now? I better hurry up and flood the internet with pictures of my ass.
I hold very little respect for any area of the US government right now.
The executive branch has been screwed for decades. From Clinton's deregulation of banks, leading to the obviously inevitable economic crash and widening of the income barrier... to W Bush's stripping of individual liberties and war mongering.... to Obama's facade of repealing everything bad about Bush's presidency while in reality reinforcing everything he did.
Congress has been in lobbyists pockets for just as long. Though now they're all but completely defunct and unable to get anything done.
And the Supreme Court barely shot down the obviously bigotted and oppressive DOMA (5 to 4), which I find utterly appauling that it wasn't unanimous... and sickening that it was so close. Also the poor decision they made previously saying that you don't actually have the right to remain silent until you're told you have that right, or unless you actually say "I'm invoking my right to remain silent" (didn't hear about that? http://seattletimes.com/html/politics/2021208775_apussupremecourtsilence.html )
So yeah... all 3 branches of government are in bad shape. Governmental agencies like the NSA, etc are no better.
If that's actually what they were doing, then yes I would. However that doesn't really jive with the reality of it. I think many of them sign up because they think that's what they'll be doing. But I think you have to be a little... well... let's just say I wouldn't sign up.
I knew several people who have served in the armed forces. I don't think less of them for doing so... but I can't say I'm grateful to them for doing so. At this point, I think our armed forces are doing more harm to our national security than good. And we really need less people to enlist.
I haven't actually read the book, but I obviously know the jist of it.
What's funny is that in 1984 people were required to report where they were and what they were doing. And people are doing that willingly now through Facebook/Twitter. They think it's fun.
All of that said... I'm really hoping this is a generational thing that will pass. The baby boomers are really the ones messing everything up. The people from my generation (like Snowden) appear to be standing up for civil liberties. I mean seriously... what that guy did is amazing. The sacrifice he gave for the country is unbelievable. If you want to talk about heros you should be talking about people like him.
(Also note that he's still on the run... supposedly. One of my big fears is that he gets caught -- or has already gotten caught -- and we just never hear about it).
But yeah I'm really hoping that once the Baby Boomers finally fall out of power and my generation gets in... we'll hopefully be able to fix a lot of what's wrong now. Though I worry the system might be too broken to ever be fixed.
The executive branch has been screwed for decades. From Clinton's deregulation of banks, leading to the obviously inevitable economic crash and widening of the income barrier... to W Bush's stripping of individual liberties and war mongering.... to Obama's facade of repealing everything bad about Bush's presidency while in reality reinforcing everything he did.
Congress has been in lobbyists pockets for just as long. Though now they're all but completely defunct and unable to get anything done.
And the Supreme Court barely shot down the obviously bigotted and oppressive DOMA (5 to 4), which I find utterly appauling that it wasn't unanimous... and sickening that it was so close. Also the poor decision they made previously saying that you don't actually have the right to remain silent until you're told you have that right, or unless you actually say "I'm invoking my right to remain silent" (didn't hear about that? http://seattletimes.com/html/politics/2021208775_apussupremecourtsilence.html )
So yeah... all 3 branches of government are in bad shape. Governmental agencies like the NSA, etc are no better.
| Do you think marines are heros because they fight for liberty? |
If that's actually what they were doing, then yes I would. However that doesn't really jive with the reality of it. I think many of them sign up because they think that's what they'll be doing. But I think you have to be a little... well... let's just say I wouldn't sign up.
I knew several people who have served in the armed forces. I don't think less of them for doing so... but I can't say I'm grateful to them for doing so. At this point, I think our armed forces are doing more harm to our national security than good. And we really need less people to enlist.
| I feel like big brother is closing in, has anyone read 1984? |
I haven't actually read the book, but I obviously know the jist of it.
What's funny is that in 1984 people were required to report where they were and what they were doing. And people are doing that willingly now through Facebook/Twitter. They think it's fun.
All of that said... I'm really hoping this is a generational thing that will pass. The baby boomers are really the ones messing everything up. The people from my generation (like Snowden) appear to be standing up for civil liberties. I mean seriously... what that guy did is amazing. The sacrifice he gave for the country is unbelievable. If you want to talk about heros you should be talking about people like him.
(Also note that he's still on the run... supposedly. One of my big fears is that he gets caught -- or has already gotten caught -- and we just never hear about it).
But yeah I'm really hoping that once the Baby Boomers finally fall out of power and my generation gets in... we'll hopefully be able to fix a lot of what's wrong now. Though I worry the system might be too broken to ever be fixed.
I think Snowden did a lot of good, but also did a lot of bad. It really is hard to say what effect his leaking will have in the big picture, but him revealing domestic surveillance programs is definitely a good thing. I do think he should have been more selective with what he leaked though. I heard something about him having 4 laptops filled with sensitive data, which makes it hard to believe that there won't be any effects are national security. All it will take is one big terrorist attack to slip through because of changes in communication methods for everyone to turn on him.
As for the KGB comparison, the CIA and NSA aren't currently making political rivals and activists disappear to scare everyone into silent submission. And I honestly don't see them becoming that way because of the occasional interception of phone calls and texts.
I always did find it humorous how worked up people get about the thought of the government intercepting their communications though. Out of all the hundreds of millions of people to spy on, what are the actual chances of your stuff actually being read? And what are they going to see that requires extreme privacy? Sappy love letters? It's not like you'll ever meet the spying person anyways. Also, they don't have the personnel to monitor everyone, so the only people being monitored would be suspected threats. If you appear to be a threat, then I think you deserve to have your communications monitored.
Don't take my defense of spying as a defense for the government though. The U.S. government is quite a joke right now. That's why I'm going to start a revolution to create a utopian society ruled by Google. Just imagine the possibilities!
As for the KGB comparison, the CIA and NSA aren't currently making political rivals and activists disappear to scare everyone into silent submission. And I honestly don't see them becoming that way because of the occasional interception of phone calls and texts.
I always did find it humorous how worked up people get about the thought of the government intercepting their communications though. Out of all the hundreds of millions of people to spy on, what are the actual chances of your stuff actually being read? And what are they going to see that requires extreme privacy? Sappy love letters? It's not like you'll ever meet the spying person anyways. Also, they don't have the personnel to monitor everyone, so the only people being monitored would be suspected threats. If you appear to be a threat, then I think you deserve to have your communications monitored.
Don't take my defense of spying as a defense for the government though. The U.S. government is quite a joke right now. That's why I'm going to start a revolution to create a utopian society ruled by Google. Just imagine the possibilities!
| Disch wrote: |
|---|
| And the Supreme Court barely shot down the obviously bigotted and oppressive DOMA (5 to 4), which I find utterly appauling that it wasn't unanimous... and sickening that it was so close. Also the poor decision they made previously saying that you don't actually have the right to remain silent until you're told you have that right, or unless you actually say "I'm invoking my right to remain silent" (didn't hear about that? http://seattletimes.com/html/politics/2021208775_apussupremecourtsilence.html ) |
I will also add I am completely disgusted with the damage done to the voting rights act.
Edit:
I also have to disagree about Snowden. He wasn't being altruistic saving the country, he's a traitor plain and simple. He had high level security clearance and and access to classified information. And ultimately exposed classified information and should be punished for it. I'll admit I'm not in love with the data that is collected although it has been exaggerated as to what they are collecting (no calls are recorded). The NSA and CIA cannot operate (field work) on US soil, I'd be more worried about the FBI.
Last edited on
| It really is hard to say what effect his leaking will have in the big picture, but him revealing domestic surveillance programs is definitely a good thing. |
To my knowledge, that's the only thing he leaked. Was there more?
| All it will take is one big terrorist attack to slip through because of changes in communication methods for everyone to turn on him. |
You're probably right because that's how the media would spin it... but in reality the NSA should be able to do their job without invading citizen privacy. If they are unable to do so, then the blame lies with them, not with Snowden.
| the CIA and NSA aren't currently making political rivals and activists disappear to scare everyone into silent submission. |
Errr.. Snowden had to flee to Moscow, and has since disappeared entirely.
| Out of all the hundreds of millions of people to spy on, what are the actual chances of your stuff actually being read? |
That's not the point.
And in fact... you could say that exact same sentence to illustrate just how ineffective this approach is toward actually capturing terrorists.
So the CIA never attempted to assassinate castro??
Imagine though that experts who sifted through data found that a lot of people felt an undesirable way about the government/one of their interests? they might think "what could they do to change that?" and then have a little meeting.
New laws might permit nudging the populations opinion with government PR agencies to avoid riots or demonstrations against things they invested in. (google "david cameron's nudge unit")
First we have a little bit of propaganda in the US and UK then we add a bit of surveillance and before you know it they are subtly controlling the population.
give a few more generations of manipulation and they can manipulate public opinion enough to be allowed more power, soon they are erasing records of the past and changing them, people will justify more and more crazy things the governments allowed to do to them.
I think this is a natural stage of human development, unavoidable sociology and its actually inevitable that the whole world ends up like north Korea, powerful people want more power and so bit by bit they do and will.
they will say its the only way we can avoid nuclear war.
EDIT
^the whole anti terrorism laws thing are completley and uterley out of proportion to the threat
Imagine though that experts who sifted through data found that a lot of people felt an undesirable way about the government/one of their interests? they might think "what could they do to change that?" and then have a little meeting.
New laws might permit nudging the populations opinion with government PR agencies to avoid riots or demonstrations against things they invested in. (google "david cameron's nudge unit")
First we have a little bit of propaganda in the US and UK then we add a bit of surveillance and before you know it they are subtly controlling the population.
give a few more generations of manipulation and they can manipulate public opinion enough to be allowed more power, soon they are erasing records of the past and changing them, people will justify more and more crazy things the governments allowed to do to them.
I think this is a natural stage of human development, unavoidable sociology and its actually inevitable that the whole world ends up like north Korea, powerful people want more power and so bit by bit they do and will.
they will say its the only way we can avoid nuclear war.
EDIT
|
|
^the whole anti terrorism laws thing are completley and uterley out of proportion to the threat
Last edited on
| devonrevenge wrote: |
|---|
| So the CIA never attempted to assassinate castro?? |
They don't count failure as an attempt :p
| chrisname wrote: |
|---|
| Also, while I do think it is justified to be bothered and disgusted by this surveillance, I think it's a bit narcissistic to presume that anyone would be interested in surveying you in particular. |
| devonrevenge wrote: |
|---|
| I feel like big brother is closing in |
| ModShop wrote: |
|---|
| Out of all the hundreds of millions of people to spy on, what are the actual chances of your stuff actually being read? And what are they going to see that requires extreme privacy? |
It's really a grey zone. If I were to be told that monitoring phone calls and texts nation wide would prevent serious terrorist attack, as a person I would be morally obligated to help out. But at the same time, these laws have to be more important than a few lives. Right?
Also, I have a hard time taking talk about terrorism seriously because about as many people die from falling coconuts every year as they do from incidents of terrorism.
| devonrevenge wrote: |
|---|
So the CIA never attempted to assassinate castro?? |
| Disch wrote: |
|---|
Errr.. Snowden had to flee to Moscow, and has since disappeared entirely. |
Oppressive foreign dictator != U.S. Citizen.
High profile leaker on the run != 99.99...% of U.S. Citizens.
If we were all citizens of the Soviet Union we would probably get arrested for simply having this conversation. Comparing the CIA or NSA to the KGB is (at the moment) ridiculous.
| Thumper wrote: |
|---|
We have been given certain rights... |
Privacy was never promised under the constitution and is not considered a protected right. This wouldn't be the first time privacy/human rights were limited in circumstances deemed "extreme". The biggest thing that comes to mind would be the interment of Japanese Americans during World War 2. The Supreme Court actually ruled it to be constitutional. The same thing happened in World War 1; freedom of speech (in the forms of newspaper and flyers) was severely repressed in order to keep as many people behind the war effort as possible. Again, the Supreme Court ruled it as constitutional.
| Disch wrote: |
|---|
And in fact... you could say that exact same sentence to illustrate just how ineffective this approach is toward actually capturing terrorists. |
Not necessarily, you can narrow down suspicious communication quite easily with racial profiling and other side channel techniques, such as the frequency, source and destination, etc. While it would be naive to think that spying would catch everything, it certainly could help.
| Thumper wrote: |
|---|
Also, I have a hard time taking talk about terrorism seriously because about as many people die from falling coconuts every year as they do from incidents of terrorism. |
Terrorism isn't about destroying populations or otherwise inflicting mass casualties, it's about instilling terror in people to send a message or accomplish some sort of political goal. With the help of our own media it isn't hard to do. Only 3 people dead in Boston and the entire city shut down for days. It wouldn't do us much good if stuff like that happened more often now would it? It doesn't matter what the actual casualty count is, everything would come to a screeching halt.
| Disch wrote: |
|---|
To my knowledge, that's the only thing he leaked. Was there more? |
Don't quote me on this, but I think he was a source for Wiki Leaks and currently has 4 hard drives filled with classified files. I find it hard to believe that he has however many hundreds of gigabytes of data just on NSA surveillance programs. If all he leaked was basic information on said surveillance programs then I would probably think a little differently of him. Of course you also have to take the principle of the situation into account too. If he were to get away with leaking all of that information, then why wouldn't other people leak? Someone with that kind of security clearance should be at least trustworthy.
Last edited on
| High profile leaker on the run != 99.99...% of U.S. Citizens. |
I would classify Snowden as an activist. Though I agree that comparisons to the KGB are absurd.
| Privacy was never promised under the constitution and is not considered a protected right. |
You're right that it isn't in the Constitution (at least not that I'm aware of), though the founding fathers generally spoke out against the SOP of modern governmental institutions like the NSA.
Ben Franklin in particular had a famous quote: 'Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither.'
And of course Patrick Henry: 'Give me liberty or give me death' -- which is not to be confused with the modern practice of "give me the closest thing to liberty as long as I don't have to worry about dying at the hands of terrorists".
People should be a lot more outraged by this than they are. You should not be rationalizing what the NSA is doing and trying to convince yourself it really is in our own best interest.
| This wouldn't be the first time privacy/human rights were limited in circumstances deemed "extreme". The biggest thing that comes to mind would be the interment of Japanese Americans during World War 2. |
And history has shown us that was a horrible mistake.
Are we going to repeat that mistake now, only to realize it 30 years from now?
But you're right... scare tactics have routinely been used by the government to restrict personal freedom throughout history. That's the point. They should never be doing that. It's wrong. That's why we should be outraged.
The WW1 thing is an equally detestable example.
| Not necessarily, you can narrow down suspicious communication quite easily with racial profiling and other side channel techniques |
Did you really just use racial profiling as a viable anti-terrorism measure?
You must be white. It's really easy to defend racial profiling when you've never been a victim of it.
Also note that most of the acts of terrorism over recent history have been perpetrated by white people (Boston bombing, <insert school shooting here>). 9/11 was like the exception... yet everyone is still shaking in their boots about it.
| Don't quote me on this, but I think he was a source for Wiki Leaks |
Pretty cruel of you to condemn a man for something you're not sure he did.
If you have a source for that, I'd love to see it. (no sarcasm, I'm always interested in learning more facts about the situation). If not, I'd urge you to re-evaluate where you're getting your information from.
Word-of-mouth and Fox News are not credible sources.
| You must be white. It's really easy to defend racial profiling when you've never been a victim of it. |
I find this statement ironic. ;)
Last edited on
| Disch wrote: |
|---|
| Word-of-mouth and Fox News are not credible sources. |
Correction; Any TV/radio/(controlled news media publisher or developer) are not credible sources. Anything affected by the mighty $ cant be trusted as the lines can easily be twisted for an extra buck.
| Disch wrote: |
|---|
I would classify Snowden as an activist. |
Perhaps, although I would also classify him as a traitor as well. In his situation I suppose it would have been impossible to be active without becoming an enemy though.
"You either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become a villain"
</epic-but-semi-related-quote>
And history has shown us that was a horrible mistake. Are we going to repeat that mistake now, only to realize it 30 years from now? But you're right... scare tactics have routinely been used by the government to restrict personal freedom throughout history. That's the point. They should never be doing that. It's wrong. That's why we should be outraged. The WW1 thing is an equally detestable example. |
I agree with you. This will blow over though, just like everything else did. Are the Japanese still being held in interment camps? No. Is political activism repressed by arresting (peaceful) activists? No. Will this spying last forever? Probably not. If it's still happening 30 years from now I'll join you in whatever revolution you begin. I imagine the public whiplash from Snowden's leaks will be enough for the programs to be scaled back dramatically anyways.
Did you really just use racial profiling as a viable anti-terrorism measure? |
It happens, whether you like it or not. The Boston bombers WERE Muslim (not a race, I am aware, but still a group). If you worked at a convenience store and a group of white men walked in, you probably wouldn't think much of it. But if a group of black men walked in you would probably start to get nervous. Not because you're racist, but because your brain subconsciously makes the connection. Just because it isn't right doesn't mean that it doesn't happen, or that it never works. I'm not necessarily defending racial profiling, but merely using it as an example to show how the population could be reduced to a more manageable number of "interesting" people to monitor. I'll change my wording to just "profiling" though, it's more applicable.
Pretty cruel of you to condemn a man for something you're not sure he did. |
I stand corrected. I can't seem to find an actual list of information he disclosed. I still consider him a traitor in principle though. He had security clearance and access to systems filled with sensitive data, and he just took it and gave it to all of our enemies. Even if nothing terribly damaging was released, if he gets away scotch free than more will follow. Who's to say that the next leaker won't release information that would cost people their lives?
closed account (3qX21hU5)
@ Disch You do know that you yourself just used racial profiling right? But it's no big deal because it is against whites?
As for the snowden thing I am torn. On one hand I believe him a hero for exposing how big the government surveillance program actually is. And giving us proof to what we all suspected.
But then on the other hand he stole classified data from our government and fled to foreign countries with it... Don't get me wrong what the government is doing is completely wrong but the way snowden handled it also was completely wrong. I mean lets use common sense here you don't believe that the Chinese government would just let this guy stay in their country for a bit without asking for something in return? Yes there is no proof of this but it is just my opinion. They then cover for him when the US tried to stop his departure from China to Russia (The US cancelled snowdens passport 3 days before he left China but the Chinese still let him leave because "Of a Technicality". They said the US didn't fill out the forms right...).
Now he is in Russia (At least that is the last we have heard of him) which is another super power in the world that would love to get their hands on that data.
So I am torn between calling him a hero or a traitor. So I think I will just wait it out and wait for more facts to get on the table before I make my judgement because most everything we have right now is opinions not facts.
| Did you really just use racial profiling as a viable anti-terrorism measure? You must be white. It's really easy to defend racial profiling when you've never been a victim of it. Also note that most of the acts of terrorism over recent history have been perpetrated by white people (Boston bombing, <insert school shooting here>). |
As for the snowden thing I am torn. On one hand I believe him a hero for exposing how big the government surveillance program actually is. And giving us proof to what we all suspected.
But then on the other hand he stole classified data from our government and fled to foreign countries with it... Don't get me wrong what the government is doing is completely wrong but the way snowden handled it also was completely wrong. I mean lets use common sense here you don't believe that the Chinese government would just let this guy stay in their country for a bit without asking for something in return? Yes there is no proof of this but it is just my opinion. They then cover for him when the US tried to stop his departure from China to Russia (The US cancelled snowdens passport 3 days before he left China but the Chinese still let him leave because "Of a Technicality". They said the US didn't fill out the forms right...).
Now he is in Russia (At least that is the last we have heard of him) which is another super power in the world that would love to get their hands on that data.
So I am torn between calling him a hero or a traitor. So I think I will just wait it out and wait for more facts to get on the table before I make my judgement because most everything we have right now is opinions not facts.
| @ Disch You do know that you yourself just used racial profiling right? But it's no big deal because it is against whites? |
Racial profiling is when you know someone's race and make an assumption based on it. I did the opposite and inferred someone's race from their behavior. So not quote the same thing.
But anyway yeah it's no big deal because it's against whites. Being white myself I can do that. It's the rule. ;P