I'm looking for ten million Americans

hedonist · June 2013

mikepegg44 wrote:

tell me honestly, what about what the gov't has done and said in the past has led you to the point where you believe what they tell you now without what appears to be the slightest inkling of doubt?

I doubt that this was done with nefarious intentions, doesn't mean I think it should be done. Dragnet surveillance is not a good road to go down. We will find out when the ACLU gets this to the supreme court how this will shake out...I am sure they will side with more erosion of the 4th and 5th amendments, it has been happening slowly for decades, no reason to stop it now...

Great points, Mike. Reasonable ones at that.

I'm sure much more will be brought to light (it always is), but part of me had a problem with the outright lie that Clapper told when being questioned - (to paraphrase) "perhaps inadverdently gather the info, but not wittingly" (with total give-away body language).

I appreciate that he's in a very difficult position, one I certainly don't envy, but it goes back to your first comment up there.

Cosmo · June 2013

mikepegg44 wrote:

tell me honestly, what about what the gov't has done and said in the past has led you to the point where you believe what they tell you now without what appears to be the slightest inkling of doubt?

I doubt that this was done with nefarious intentions, doesn't mean I think it should be done. Dragnet surveillance is not a good road to go down. We will find out when the ACLU gets this to the supreme court how this will shake out...I am sure they will side with more erosion of the 4th and 5th amendments, it has been happening slowly for decades, no reason to stop it now...

...
I doubt it will get to the Supreme Court... again. This has already been ruled on and the government can play the National security card... just like they did during the Bush Administration. That having to reveal state secrets in open court will jepordise National Security... when was the last time the Supreme Court ruled against the government on that? That's right, never.
...
Again.. I have to ask the question. Where were all of those people who are pissed off today... in 2006, when the thing first surfaced and changed the law to make this type of activity legal/ Where were you FOX News? Where were you FOX News viewers? I'll tell you where you were... you were in FAVOR of these thing because you were afraid of scary Bin-Ladenman coming to build a mosque and kill you. I think it is ridiculous for the FOX News (and their audience) to act all concerned today, when they cheered on the erosion of our Fourth Amendment 7 years ago,

Byrnzie · June 2013

ofthegirl99 wrote:

AMT is no place for you and your facts, please move along so the paranoid masses here can continue to live in the pretend "spy" movie they believe is our country.....

It has nothing to do with paranoia. The NSA has allegedly been recording every phone conversation and e-mail of every American citizen. I know you don't give a shit, but this erosion of privacy and civil liberties is a flagrant breach of the constitution. It could also have dire consequences further down the road. You think the U.S is immune to fascism? Think again.

mikepegg44 · June 2013

Cosmo wrote:

mikepegg44 wrote:

tell me honestly, what about what the gov't has done and said in the past has led you to the point where you believe what they tell you now without what appears to be the slightest inkling of doubt?

I doubt that this was done with nefarious intentions, doesn't mean I think it should be done. Dragnet surveillance is not a good road to go down. We will find out when the ACLU gets this to the supreme court how this will shake out...I am sure they will side with more erosion of the 4th and 5th amendments, it has been happening slowly for decades, no reason to stop it now...

...
I doubt it will get to the Supreme Court... again. This has already been ruled on and the government can play the National security card... just like they did during the Bush Administration. That having to reveal state secrets in open court will jepordise National Security... when was the last time the Supreme Court ruled against the government on that? That's right, never.
...
Again.. I have to ask the question. Where were all of those people who are pissed off today... in 2006, when the thing first surfaced and changed the law to make this type of activity legal/ Where were you FOX News? Where were you FOX News viewers? I'll tell you where you were... you were in FAVOR of these thing because you were afraid of scary Bin-Ladenman coming to build a mosque and kill you. I think it is ridiculous for the FOX News (and their audience) to act all concerned today, when they cheered on the erosion of our Fourth Amendment 7 years ago,

I agree.

But the supreme court ruled on warrant-less wire taps with specific targets in mind. I don't believe they ruled on domestic only calls being dragnet surveilled and all logs being kept indefinitely. I could be wrong though. I don't think the ACLU would file suit if it was the same case already decided. But then again, they will file just about anything to keep watch dogging civil liberties.

But foreign intelligence was the focus of the patriot act discussions. People were mocked and ridiculed for saying that it would come to this, because their guy was in charge. Where were all the democrats now defending the practice in 2006 when the patriot act and these practices were under fire from just about all on the left?

I don't remember hearing a bunch of no big deals back then...ax...gored...that whole thing.

Cosmo · June 2013

mikepegg44 wrote:

I agree.

But the supreme court ruled on warrant-less wire taps with specific targets in mind. I don't believe they ruled on domestic only calls being dragnet surveilled and all logs being kept indefinitely. I could be wrong though. I don't think the ACLU would file suit if it was the same case already decided. But then again, they will file just about anything to keep watch dogging civil liberties.

But foreign intelligence was the focus of the patriot act discussions. People were mocked and ridiculed for saying that it would come to this, because their guy was in charge. Where were all the democrats now defending the practice in 2006 when the patriot act and these practices were under fire from just about all on the left?

I don't remember hearing a bunch of no big deals back then...ax...gored...that whole thing.

..
Those Democrats voted for the Patriot Act. To do otherwise was commiting political suicide.
i'm not defending then, I am calling them out as cowards who were more worried about their careers in politics rather than upholding the oath they had sworn to.

gimmesometruth27 · June 2013

yes, i think we have to keep in mind the frame of mind that the country was in at the time of the patriot act's implementation. i think we have lost sight of the patriotic ferver that everyone was in back then.

that was at the same time people were telling people like me to get the hell out of the country for not supporting a free-for-all war in the middle east and for questioning the purpose of the patriot act, and questioning the federal government in general. people like me would get shouted down for asking questions against that mob mentality..

it was treason to ask questions back then.

anybody remember that?

mikepegg44 · June 2013

Cosmo wrote:

mikepegg44 wrote:

I agree.

But the supreme court ruled on warrant-less wire taps with specific targets in mind. I don't believe they ruled on domestic only calls being dragnet surveilled and all logs being kept indefinitely. I could be wrong though. I don't think the ACLU would file suit if it was the same case already decided. But then again, they will file just about anything to keep watch dogging civil liberties.

But foreign intelligence was the focus of the patriot act discussions. People were mocked and ridiculed for saying that it would come to this, because their guy was in charge. Where were all the democrats now defending the practice in 2006 when the patriot act and these practices were under fire from just about all on the left?

I don't remember hearing a bunch of no big deals back then...ax...gored...that whole thing.

..
Those Democrats voted for the Patriot Act. To do otherwise was commiting political suicide.
i'm not defending then, I am calling them out as cowards who were more worried about their careers in politics rather than upholding the oath they had sworn to.

It would be so nice if politicians looked at it as a service rather than a career. It has caused a lot of good things that could have solved a lot of problems to be destroyed. I can't believe at the end of the day that those who made decisions like the one you are talking about can look at themselves in the mirror and say I did my best...

Cosmo · June 2013

mikepegg44 wrote:

It would be so nice if politicians looked at it as a service rather than a career. It has caused a lot of good things that could have solved a lot of problems to be destroyed. I can't believe at the end of the day that those who made decisions like the one you are talking about can look at themselves in the mirror and say I did my best...

..
I was angry about this in 2005 as I am now... I don't care which political party hold the White House, I care about my rights getting trampled because we cower like a bunch of pussies everytime we hear the word, 'Terrorist'. We have to come to the realization that terrorists are not eroding our freedoms... WE are eroding our freedoms. We are letting fear get the best of us and we need to finally man up and tell them that we are willing to take the risk of attacks over the stomping of the basic principles of our nation.

London Bridge · June 2013

Cosmo wrote:

mikepegg44 wrote:

It would be so nice if politicians looked at it as a service rather than a career. It has caused a lot of good things that could have solved a lot of problems to be destroyed. I can't believe at the end of the day that those who made decisions like the one you are talking about can look at themselves in the mirror and say I did my best...

..
I was angry about this in 2005 as I am now... I don't care which political party hold the White House, I care about my rights getting trampled because we cower like a bunch of pussies everytime we hear the word, 'Terrorist'. We have to come to the realization that terrorists are not eroding our freedoms... WE are eroding our freedoms. We are letting fear get the best of us and we need to finally man up and tell them that we are willing to take the risk of attacks over the stomping of the basic principles of our nation.

With your statement, you just made it easier for terrorists to carry out their plans. They would love for us to stop surveillance activity. Another victory for them.

Cosmo · June 2013

London Bridge wrote:

With your statement, you just made it easier for terrorists to carry out their plans. They would love for us to stop surveillance activity. Another victory for them.

...
The victory for them is to have us alter our way of living to suit them. if you choose to live your life in fear, that's fine. I just don't want your fear to empower my government to erode away the rights of my nation.

London Bridge · June 2013

Cosmo wrote:

London Bridge wrote:

With your statement, you just made it easier for terrorists to carry out their plans. They would love for us to stop surveillance activity. Another victory for them.

...
The victory for them is to have us alter our way of living to suit them. if you choose to live your life in fear, that's fine. I just don't want your fear to empower my government to erode away the rights of my nation.

I think most people in the world live in fear to some extent. It's not really a choice or option. I'm more fearful of a neighbor owning a gun and going crazy with one day, then I am of the government gathering some info on me that will never be used. I'm not hiding anything. I spent 4 years at NSA as part of my military enlistment and can tell you America would be in some deep shit if NSA didn't exist.

gimmesometruth27 · June 2013

how do we reconcile the statement from ben franklin stating that people willing to sacrifice freedom for security with the realities of this day and age?

back then people used quills and inkwells to conspire to have a battle on a battlefield. they did not use phones, internet, email, etc to conspire to crash planes into buildings or blow things up.

Hugh Freaking Dillon · June 2013

London Bridge wrote:

I think most people in the world live in fear to some extent. It's not really a choice or option.

not me. I smoke weed.

hedonist · June 2013

Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:

London Bridge wrote:

I think most people in the world live in fear to some extent. It's not really a choice or option.

not me. I smoke weed.

Thank our lucky stars it doesn't make us paranoid

An aside...there are some things I do fear (or maybe "contemplate" is a better word) in a passing but not constant sense - a huge earthquake, some dipshit blowing a red light and plowing into me, a nutjob going off on me, the death of someone I love - all possibilities, but they don't rule my life or my peace of mind.

I'd go nuts if they did.

Cosmo · June 2013

Question: Does anyone read/understand that contract/waiver on their phone contract?
You may have consented that the phone companies can parcel out portions of your phone records by clicking the 'I Accept' button.
...
Also, you can opt out of government scrutiny by not putting your life out on your phone.

josevolution · June 2013

I'm looking for ten million americans to stand together to stop gun violence , why don't you do something about that asshole why don't you have the balls to meet with the Newtown families and explain why your party has not done zero about this bigger problem dick .........

Hugh Freaking Dillon · June 2013

hedonist wrote:

Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:

London Bridge wrote:

I think most people in the world live in fear to some extent. It's not really a choice or option.

not me. I smoke weed.

Thank our lucky stars it doesn't make us paranoid

An aside...there are some things I do fear (or maybe "contemplate" is a better word) in a passing but not constant sense - a huge earthquake, some dipshit blowing a red light and plowing into me, a nutjob going off on me, the death of someone I love - all possibilities, but they don't rule my life or my peace of mind.

I'd go nuts if they did.

I fear more now that I'm a dad of two gorgeous girls, but I'm by no means a helicopter parent. Just normal shit: I hope they don't break an limb at the beginning of summer, I hope we can trust all the adults in her life, stuff like that. but like you said, it doesn't rule my/our life. we're careful and smart, but for the most part cross that bridge.

Hugh Freaking Dillon · June 2013

Cosmo wrote:

Question: Does anyone read/understand that contract/waiver on their phone contract?
You may have consented that the phone companies can parcel out portions of your phone records by clicking the 'I Accept' button.
...
Also, you can opt out of government scrutiny by not putting your life out on your phone.

last time I had a phone, back in the 90's when they didn't flip or have the internet, that thing was longer than any legal document. they KNOW no one is going to read it. the person is just thinking "yay! now I can phone my friends when they were already out and didn't invite me!".

I'm looking for ten million Americans

Comments

Categories