Charge him with Treason

[Domer Dude]

As Okie will attest, I am not a right winger, but this kid needs to be tried for treason. Punk kids should not be able to get away with exposing US operations. This to me is treason and he should be held accountable.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/21/politics/nsa-leaks/index.html?hpt=hp_c2

[REMND]

I think one of the penalties for treason is the death penalty. Countries may not extradite him as a result. We need to get him back so that he stops selling secrets for sanctuary. I am guessing that's why they have charged him with espionage instead of treason. They want him back here.

 

He's a cornered varmint at this point. Cornered varmints will do anything to survive. He can't see much of a future whatever direction he looks. I'm guessing that he realizes too late that narcissism is a bad career choice.

 

What country would want the Snowdon headache? Iran? North Korea? Hopefully he does not have that much to sell. Who are the possible buyer's who would risk our ire?

 

P.S. I read that an espionage claim comes with a10 year sentence. That is a little light. Oh, and Iceland is a possible destination.

Edited June 22, 2013 by REMND

[ND3]

According the US Constitution, "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort."

 

The only way that this is treason is if the enemy is the people of the United States.

 

He did this because the United States government is far overreaching it's power. He did it because the American people are being held in the dark about the government having access to all of their communications, behind their back. He didn't do it for himself, he did it for the people.

 

For anyone who thinks he released this information to self-serve. take a look at what happened to Bradley Manning. Snowden is a smart guy and knows that, by releasing this surveillance information, he is in major danger. He had a very successful career and threw it away doing what he felt was right.

 

You can say that PRISM is there to keep our country safe (indeed, it is), but the problem is that when you give one person/agency/group unlimited power, they abuse it. Obama says that there is a system of checks and balances, but that has since been shown to be false.

 

It's time to end the PATRIOT Act. It's time to end PRISM. It's time to restore the 4th Amendment. It's time to actually read our Constitution. It's time our representatives in Washington uphold their oaths.

 

(The following is copy/pasted from another forum)

•I go to the airport, I either get naked scanned or physically felt up when trying to go to Disney World.

•I go online to do anything, my activities are tracked.

•I make a phone call and they track who, where, and how long I talked to them.

•Every government agency is demonstrating blatant revolving door bull**** like the head of the FCC Commissioner going to Comcast and supporting the company. Michael Chertoff as homeland security secretary uses his position to scare, promote, and sell shi**y naked body scanners that violate the privacy of all air traveling passengers for his own monetary gain. This is just the tip of the iceberg.

(End of copy/paste)

 

Is this freedom? Is this the America you want to live in?

 

Has anyone considered that we should stop hurting people to the point of thinking it's a legitimite option to attack us?

 

We've been bombing the Middle East since the Russo-Afghan War. These people have literally watched as their friends and family die from our bomb strikes. What would you do? Put yourself in their shoes. We have killed so many civilians that it's absurd. People who did nothing to us. We're ruining lives of fellow human beings. They don't hate us for our freedom. They hate us because our government thinks the oil is worth it. For every civilian that has been killed in terrorist attacks, we have killed 100+ civilians on their end.

 

History will look fondly upon Snowden, unfortunately the present isn't.

Edited June 24, 2013 by ND3
typos

[REMND]

According the US Constitution, "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort."

 

The only way that this is treason is if the enemy is the people of the United States.

 

He did this because the United States government is far overreaching it's power. He did it because the American people are being held in the dark about the government having access to all of their communications, behind their back. He didn't do it for himself, he did it for the people.

 

For anyone who thinks he released this information to self-serve. take a look at what happened to Bradley Manning. Snowden is a smart guy and knows that, by releasing this surveillance information, he is in major danger. He had a very successful career and threw it away doing what he felt was right.

 

You can say that PRISM is there to keep our country safe (indeed, it is), but the problem is that when you give one person/agency/group unlimited power, they abuse it. Obama says that there is a system of checks and balances, but that has since been shown to be false.

 

It's time to end the PATRIOT Act. It's time to end PRISM. It's time to restore the 4th Amendment. It's time to actually read our Constitution. It's time our representatives in Washington uphold their oaths.

 

(The following is copy/pasted from another forum)

•I go to the airport, I either get naked scanned or physically felt up when trying to go to Disney World.

•I go online to do anything, my activities are tracked.

•I make a phone call and they track who, where, and how long I talked to them.

•Every government agency is demonstrating blatant revolving door bull**** like the head of the FCC Commissioner going to Comcast and supporting the company. Michael Chertoff as homeland security secretary uses his position to scare, promote, and sell shi**y naked body scanners that violate the privacy of all air traveling passengers for his own monetary gain. This is just the tip of the iceberg.

(End of copy/paste)

 

Is this freedom? Is this the America you want to live in?

 

Has anyone considered that we should stop hurting people to the point of thinking it's a legitimite option to attack us?

 

We've been bombing the Middle East since the Russo-Afghan War. These people have literally watched as their friends and family die from our bomb strikes. What would you do? Put yourself in their shoes. We have killed so many civilians that it's absurd. People who did nothing to us. We're ruining lives of fellow human beings. They don't hate us for our freedom. They hate us because our government thinks the oil is worth it. For every civilian that has been killed in terrorist attacks, we have killed 100+ civilians on their end.

 

History will look fondly upon Snowden, unfortunately the present isn't.

 

I just have not been able to see how the scrutiny of metadata affects my personal freedom that much. I am more worried about cookies on my computer when a surf the net.

 

There is a balancing test along the spectrum of sacrificing freedom in the face of a national threat. There is enough of a threat out there that I am willing to give up some freedoms until that threat is resolved. In the meantime I need to know that there is a legitimate check and balance system in place. There was clearly not when Cheney/Bush were using it. They now have I believe a FISA court look at the data and I believe a congressional group. Is it sufficient? I say yes but that is up to the administration to demonstrate. How do they do that though without disclosing the whole program rendering it useless and leaving us unprotected?

 

Snowden has offered to disclose more and more secrets unless he gets whatever his way is. It does not sound to me that he is trying to protect our citizens privacy by dealing with china, russia and other nations. I think he is protecting himself.

Edited June 24, 2013 by REMND

[ND3]

On mobile right now so this won't be terribly in-depth. I should get my laptop back from the shop tomorrow to expand on it.

 

It's a step to a surveillance state. I have nothing to hide, but I shouldn't have to be concerned about censoring myself during personal communications. I shouldn't need to always be thinking, "is this word going to trigger PRISM to listen in?" I just want my privacy.

 

As far as the FISA court... secret government courts are the last thing I trust. And I believe (again, on mobile so no source for now) that it was leaked that they approved of every single warrant request thrown their way. Will look for proof tomorrow.

 

Apologies for my last post- I'll try to keep them less emotionally-charged here on out. G/f issues.

 

EDIT: Snowden had 12 "leaks" from the start to release gradually. If he did them all at once, it would become "old news" fast. Nothing leaked is a threat to national security nor will anything else that he leaks in the future.

Edited June 24, 2013 by ND3
cell phones are hard

[Rockets Revenge]

REMND - If you believe they are only looking at the "metadata" you are extremely naive.

 

ND3 - Speak the truth brother!! You forgot to mention that in many states your DNA is collected and stored in a database if you are arrested even if you are not charged or found innocent!! The police can falsely charge or arrest you just to collect DNA then release you but your DNA remains in a database. This was just upheld by the Supreme Court in a 5-4 vote on a ruling for a case brought against the Maryland law.

Edited June 26, 2013 by Rocket's Revenge

[echo88]

"I go to the airport, I either get naked scanned or physically felt up when trying to go to Disney World.

•I go online to do anything, my activities are tracked.

•I make a phone call and they track who, where, and how long I talked to them.

•Every government agency is demonstrating blatant revolving door bull**** like the head of the FCC Commissioner going to Comcast and supporting the company. Michael Chertoff as homeland security secretary uses his position to scare, promote, and sell shi**y naked body scanners that violate the privacy of all air traveling passengers for his own monetary gain. This is just the tip of the iceberg."

 

1) Youre right. We should just end airport screenings and allow whatever terrorists would like to bring aboard your next flight. TSA is a response to our enemies having commandeered airliners and use them as weapons. It is no different than armoring our Humvees in response to IEDs. It's a pain in the *** for soldiers entering and exiting the vehicles--especially in a firefight---but it is necessary and it saves lives. Im sorry you're so inconvenienced by this.

 

2) No, you are not being tracked. If you think you are, then you are stupid. Now, if your MAC address has been tied to established jihad sites or if you skype daily with someone in Somalia or Mali then maybe you are right. Until then, stop referencing this until you know how its done. I do.

 

3) Again, no they do not. They take a 16 digit number that is not your phone number and correlate it to known 16 digit numbers tied to terrorism or tied to countries like Iran and Pakistan. If your 16 digit number is linked to them, the data is bundled up and taken to the courts to release the authority to retrieve your records from the phone companies to see how long and to whom you are talking. The way this has been stirred up by the media is hilarious.

 

4) Its a crazy time we live in. Adversaries are using every technological means to communicate and plan while hiding taking advanatage of the freedoms you are crying about having "lost". I bet if they slip through the cracks and manage to kill someone you love, you might be a little more accommodating at the airport. For those who say "TSA hasnt caught a single terrorist". You're right. That's because they were forced to come up with new ways to attack us.

[ND3]

Hopefully these case studies will show that Snowden would have been stupid to do this for narcissistic reasons. He did what he thought was right and he knew the danger that he was putting himself in.

 

MI6 Codebreaker Found Dead in Bag Was Likely Killed, Coroner Says

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/05/mi6-coder-death-foul-play/

 

Dead Codebreaker Was Linked to NSA Intercept Case

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/08/codebreaker-death/

 

Two Strange Deaths in European Wiretapping Scandal

European investigators are tracking the mysterious deaths of two security experts who had uncovered extensive spyware in their telecommunications firms.

http://www.alternet.org/story/40485/two_strange_deaths_in_european_wiretapping_scandal

 

The Men Who Knew Too Much? NSA Wiretapping Whistleblowers Found Dead in Italy and Greece

Adamo Bove and Costas Tsalikidis: Both uncovered a secret bugging system and both met untimely ends.

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=3305

 

The Athens Affair How some extremely smart hackers pulled off the most audacious cell-network break-in ever

http://spectrum.ieee.org/telecom/security/the-athens-affair

 

The TSA is hilariously inefficient and they sexually assualt passengers. Yes, we should get rid of it. Just because it's a response to an attack means we shouldn't critically examine it's effectiveness? Sure, it may be well-intentioned, but that doesn't mean it should stay.

 

The issue is that we have been constantly at war since the 50s (outside of Carter). That's why people feel it's necessary to use force against us. They have watched as their friends and their families die unnecessarily at the hands of our troops. We are the bad guys in this situation. We don't need to police the world and we don't need the rest of the world to think like us. Countries having other ideologies is not dangerous and does not mean that we should intervene.

 

I know that I'm not being tracked. However, all of my data is stored in case they need it later. I don't want my taxpayer money going to keeping tabs on me and making sure that I'm staying in line. There are better uses.

 

Keeping all of this under wraps is entirely unconstitutional and it means that the government weilds totalitarian power. They are far overreaching their constitutional boundaries.

[echo88]

Hopefully these case studies will show that Snowden would have been stupid to do this for narcissistic reasons. He did what he thought was right and he knew the danger that he was putting himself in.

 

 

 

The TSA is hilariously inefficient and they sexually assualt passengers. Yes, we should get rid of it. Just because it's a response to an attack means we shouldn't critically examine it's effectiveness? Sure, it may be well-intentioned, but that doesn't mean it should stay.

 

The issue is that we have been constantly at war since the 50s (outside of Carter). That's why people feel it's necessary to use force against us. They have watched as their friends and their families die unnecessarily at the hands of our troops. We are the bad guys in this situation. We don't need to police the world and we don't need the rest of the world to think like us. Countries having other ideologies is not dangerous and does not mean that we should intervene.

 

I know that I'm not being tracked. However, all of my data is stored in case they need it later. I don't want my taxpayer money going to keeping tabs on me and making sure that I'm staying in line. There are better uses.

 

Keeping all of this under wraps is entirely unconstitutional and it means that the government weilds totalitarian power. They are far overreaching their constitutional boundaries.

 

Sexually assault passengers? Give me a break. Our society is so soft nowadays. The fact that we have had no successful hijackings since 9/11 should be all the proof you need. It's a deterrent---its not supposed to catch terrorists red handed. It simply forces them to find another way to inflict mass murder.

 

The people who cry about body scanners need a head scan. The folks looking at your scan are looking for one thing---something hidden on your person. So we get rid of it and guess what---terrorists take advantage of its absence just like they did on 9/11. You dont need to sneak bombs onto a plane. Just a box cutter. I know that TSA is full of inept personnel, but you know what....it deters and thats all we need it to do.

 

If you really think that the inception of radical Islam's war against the Jews/Christianity was the 50's, you should pick up a book. Try centuries.

 

As for your data, where are you getting this information? Your data is already stored by sites like Google and Microsoft and it takes court orders to retrieve it (when there is evidence that you are a person of interest). The government is not collecting anything stateside except for data linked to persons of interest. Do you know how long it takes to plan a mass scale terrorist attack? I'd estimate 6 months to years. So hypothetical situation: a dirty bomb is detonated in downtown DC. You're telling me that you dont want the government to be able to go back to see who the culprit was in contact with before the attack? Who they emailed? Who they called? Because thats what it is stored for.

 

If the NSA wants to be able to go back to be able to identify others involved, both for prosecution and to thwart potential additional attacks, why push back? It boggles my mind how a contingent of citizens tell the government they should have done more after an attack, yet hamstring their efforts in the present. No one is making sure you're "staying in line". If fact, no one gives a **** about who you are or what you're doing unless you're in frequent contact with "questionable metadata". In other words, MAC addresses and 16 digit cell identifiers that have already been associated with terrorism.

[ND3]

Sexually assault passengers? Give me a break. Our society is so soft nowadays. The fact that we have had no successful hijackings since 9/11 should be all the proof you need. It's a deterrent---its not supposed to catch terrorists red handed. It simply forces them to find another way to inflict mass murder.

 

I would just like to point out that the same guy who said that I'm not accomodating to his ideas because my loved ones haven't been affected just called sexual assault victims soft. Hypocrisy at it's finest.

 

How many successful hijackings did we have before 9/11? It's not like they did it regularly, then all of a sudden stopped when we created the TSA. It was a one-time deal.

 

The people who cry about body scanners need a head scan. The folks looking at your scan are looking for one thing---something hidden on your person. So we get rid of it and guess what---terrorists take advantage of its absence just like they did on 9/11. You dont need to sneak bombs onto a plane. Just a box cutter. I know that TSA is full of inept personnel, but you know what....it deters and thats all we need it to do.

 

That's the point of the TSA, yes. It works in theory, yes. In practice, people get fondled and creeps check out boobs.

 

If you really think that the inception of radical Islam's war against the Jews/Christianity was the 50's, you should pick up a book. Try centuries.

 

My quote:

 

The issue is that we have been constantly at war since the 50s (outside of Carter). That's why people feel it's necessary to use force against us. They have watched as their friends and their families die unnecessarily at the hands of our troops. We are the bad guys in this situation. We don't need to police the world and we don't need the rest of the world to think like us. Countries having other ideologies is not dangerous and does not mean that we should intervene.

 

The United States is not Christianity nor are we Judaism. We are a country, not a religion. We have been at war since the 50s. I stand by what I said.

 

And yes, people have been fighting over petty things for centuries.

 

As for your data, where are you getting this information? Your data is already stored by sites like Google and Microsoft and it takes court orders to retrieve it (when there is evidence that you are a person of interest). The government is not collecting anything stateside except for data linked to persons of interest. Do you know how long it takes to plan a mass scale terrorist attack? I'd estimate 6 months to years. So hypothetical situation: a dirty bomb is detonated in downtown DC. You're telling me that you dont want the government to be able to go back to see who the culprit was in contact with before the attack? Who they emailed? Who they called? Because thats what it is stored for.

 

According to Snowden, the NSA can track any digital footprints from anyone. In fact, he said that he could personally do it with just an email. If that kind of unchecked power doesn't scare you, welcome to 1984.

 

If the NSA wants to be able to go back to be able to identify others involved, both for prosecution and to thwart potential additional attacks, why push back? It boggles my mind how a contingent of citizens tell the government they should have done more after an attack, yet hamstring their efforts in the present. No one is making sure you're "staying in line". If fact, no one gives a **** about who you are or what you're doing unless you're in frequent contact with "questionable metadata". In other words, MAC addresses and 16 digit cell identifiers that have already been associated with terrorism.

 

I wish I could trust the government as much as you do. I wish I could just trust that, with unlimited and unchecked power, they would do the right thing. I, however, am jaded towards Washington and I believe that they do what keeps them in power, and, really, what increases their power.

 

EDIT: With regard to the FISA courts being a "check/balance"...

 

BLOCK: There is a lot about the FISA court that is secret. But they are aggregate numbers, right, that are released that show more than 20,000 requests to conduct domestic electronic surveillance that were made September 11th, 2001. And the overwhelming majority of those, correct, have been approved by the FISA court.

WEINER: Absolutely. It may be that they grant more than 99 percent of the requests but they look at them.

BLOCK: So the judges on this court might have the government modify their request, make it narrower in scope maybe or a shorter duration.

WEINER: We have the data to show that they kicked back roughly 70 or 80 requests in 2002 and 2003.

 

http://www.npr.org/2013/06/10/190453533/fisa-court-has-approved-majority-of-surveillance-warrants

 

This source (http://www.whocalledmyphone.net/wire-tapping/) says that 33,942 have been approved by the FISA courts. 11 have been rejected. It's an inforgraphic but they list sources at the end

Edited June 25, 2013 by ND3

[echo88]

They're not sexual assault victims. They're ACLU nuts who object to the scanner then complain that they were assaulted because they don't agree with TSA. Cops also get accused of the same BS when some idiot who objects to being pulled over says the same thing.

 

Actually planes were hijacked all the time before 9/11. It's just that it occurred to bin laden that it was time to take advantage of lax security at our airports.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_hijackings

 

The U.S. is not Judaism or Christianity??? Here's a little fact for you:

 

"Depending on religious definitions and varying population data, the United States is home to the largest or second largest (after Israel) Jewish community in the world. The population of American religious adherents of Judaism was estimated to be approximately 5,128,000 or 1.7% of the total population in 2007 (301,621,000)."

 

As for Christians? 73-76% of Americans identify themselves as Christian. Yeah, chew on that.

 

Snowden is a moron who has exaggerated our capabilities to make his case stronger. DIRNSA wasn't full of **** when he said that Snowden was lying. He lied about his salary. He lied about planning his "infiltration" ever since he was hired. He would've never made it through the polygraph portion. No one's emails or surfing habits are "tracked" until after they have been confirmed to be tied to terrorism and after the FISA court agrees with the case. That's first hand knowledge--not Fox News bull that you read about. Plain and simple.

 

The NSA does not have unchecked and unlimited power. If they did, every crime involving a cell phone or internet connection would be thwarted. The Boston bombers would've been stopped. They actually have a very cumbersome and lengthy legal process that they have to follow. FISA denies cases that are not strong enough and DIRNSA has to release more classified sources and methods to prove to crybaby citizens that their every move isnt being watched. Who benefits from this? Enemies who are trying to avoid detection.

 

I promise you that if you were made aware of how it's done and what lengths the government goes to to protect your freedoms, you wouldn't feel so strongly about this. The NSA employs tens of thousands of law abiding citizens and it doesn't strike you that there hasn't been a strong objection to what is going on from inside the fort? It's because they understand the necessity. They understand that their privacy remains in tact. They understand that it saves lives. The everyday american isnt told about it because preserving our sources and methods is what keeps us in the game.

 

A couple "whistleblowers" decide to make a name for themselves by releasing classified information that makes it easier for sleepers within our borders to conduct their jihad. Everyone who signs the papers understands that it is not your information to release--ever. If you object to what is being done, you give up your clearance and you stop being a part of it. You don't inflict massive damage to our efforts and flee the country to protect yourself, releasing nuggets of information as it benefits you (as he did with China and the U.K.) That's why Manning is going to prison and why Snowden will face the same.

Edited June 25, 2013 by echo88

[ND3]

They're not sexual assault victims. They're ACLU nuts who object to the scanner then complain that they were assaulted because they don't agree with TSA. Cops also get accused of the same BS when some idiot who objects to being pulled over says the same thing.

 

Actually planes were hijacked all the time before 9/11. It's just that it occurred to bin laden that it was time to take advantage of lax security at our airports.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_hijackings

 

The U.S. is not Judaism or Christianity??? Here's a little fact for you:

 

"Depending on religious definitions and varying population data, the United States is home to the largest or second largest (after Israel) Jewish community in the world. The population of American religious adherents of Judaism was estimated to be approximately 5,128,000 or 1.7% of the total population in 2007 (301,621,000)."

 

As for Christians? 73-76% of Americans identify themselves as Christian. Yeah, chew on that.

 

Snowden is a moron who has exaggerated our capabilities to make his case stronger. DIRNSA wasn't full of **** when he said that Snowden was lying. He lied about his salary. He lied about planning his "infiltration" ever since he was hired. He would've never made it through the polygraph portion. No one's emails or surfing habits are "tracked" until after they have been confirmed to be tied to terrorism and after the FISA court agrees with the case. That's first hand knowledge--not Fox News bull that you read about. Plain and simple.

 

The NSA does not have unchecked and unlimited power. If they did, every crime involving a cell phone or internet connection would be thwarted. The Boston bombers would've been stopped. They actually have a very cumbersome and lengthy legal process that they have to follow. FISA denies cases that are not strong enough and DIRNSA has to release more classified sources and methods to prove to crybaby citizens that their every move isnt being watched. Who benefits from this? Enemies who are trying to avoid detection.

 

I promise you that if you were made aware of how it's done and what lengths the government goes to to protect your freedoms, you wouldn't feel so strongly about this. The NSA employs tens of thousands of law abiding citizens and it doesn't strike you that there hasn't been a strong objection to what is going on from inside the fort? It's because they understand the necessity. They understand that their privacy remains in tact. They understand that it saves lives. The everyday american isnt told about it because preserving our sources and methods is what keeps us in the game.

 

A couple "whistleblowers" decide to make a name for themselves by releasing classified information that makes it easier for sleepers within our borders to conduct their jihad. Everyone who signs the papers understands that it is not your information to release--ever. If you object to what is being done, you give up your clearance and you stop being a part of it. You don't inflict massive damage to our efforts and flee the country to protect yourself, releasing nuggets of information as it benefits you (as he did with China and the U.K.) That's why Manning is going to prison and why Snowden will face the same.

 

Right, because you get to define what sexual assault is and who is faking it. People do get fondled by TSA agents and police officers. Just because it's somebody's job to serve the public doesn't mean that each one is an upstanding moral person. The terrorists that you speak of have scared us into thinking it's necessary. It's a waste of a huge amount of government resources on something that doesn't protect us and violates our rights.

 

Virtually all of those hijacked flights were not US flights, making it irrelevant to this discussion.

 

You are correct- there are both Jewish and Christian people in the US. However, we have freedom of religion, meaning that the country is not defined by it. America transcends religion. We are defined by the rest of the world by our unnecessary use of force against nations who don't deserve it for the last half century-plus.

 

I showed sources above that show that the FISA courts can decline cases, but they don't. I tend to trust the whistleblower more than the guy trying to cover his ***. The reason that this is the first source with proof to come forward is because of the extreme danger that he is putting himself in. See my stories posted above. You don't leak secrets about the US without being tortured or killed.

 

I don't understand all the hatred toward whistleblowers. They're doing the right thing. These actions are completely disregarding the 4th Amendment and Edward Snowmen recognized that and reported it. Nothing he has released has put anyone in any clear and present danger!

[TheRizz]

ND3, you do realize you are being tracked now, right?

 

The whole idea is to debunk and demean anyone that speaks out against the government. Read up on WWII and how they really came into power. Control the media, authoritative government, and most of all, take away religious freedom.

[ND3]

Oh, Boston bombings. They were working alone, that's why they didn't get caught. Tracking individuals is like drinking from a fire hose. You can't go through it all. There's just not enough manpower. But they still have the ability to search anyones digital information without cause, as they see fit. And "as they see fit" is a scary phrase when we're talking about an institution with limitless, unchecked power.

[REMND]

Oh, Boston bombings. They were working alone, that's why they didn't get caught. Tracking individuals is like drinking from a fire hose. You can't go through it all. There's just not enough manpower. But they still have the ability to search anyones digital information without cause, as they see fit. And "as they see fit" is a scary phrase when we're talking about an institution with limitless, unchecked power.

 

This is the tension that I am feeling on the claim that they can track anyone. They can't find guys like the Boston Bombers but they can me.

 

We should be able to fashion a check and balance system that avoids the type of abuse your are referring to. Is there a possibility there will be some abuse? Yes. Is there a possibility that this program will avoid threats to us? It is already doing that.

 

It is a balancing test and an absolute yea or nay on either side of the debate will not be a very compelling approach to addressing the issue. I do think that it is healthy to have the debate and we have been having it ever since we found out about the Bush Cheney decision that the Patriot act gave them the power to unilaterally spy without warrants or oversight.

 

I do not think Snowdon's actions were born from some selfless desire to protect our privacy.

Edited June 25, 2013 by REMND