NSA spying is illegal? Then let's make it law, say Republicans Now that a US federal court has ruled that the NSA's mass wiretapping program exceeded its legal authority, leaders of the US Republican party are pushing to make it legal. Within hours of the ruling by the US Second Circuit Court of Appeal that the NSA's bulk domestic surveillance program under Section 215 of the Patriot Act …
This is the new strategy.
It takes years to contest an illegal law. When it is declared unlawful, no one is punished, they just vote in a new law to be fought in court.
Someone needs to go to jail before this will change and as the government runs the courts, guess just how likely that is.
Why does these idiots keep trotting out the line that they (the NSA) will prevent an attack. The NSA has proven time and again that they won't prevent an attack at all. Why? because to do so would let the bad guys know we are spying on them.
If they were honest to god going to actually ACT before something happened then I'd be more inclined. If they were TRANSPARENT about what they are collecting, etc, I'd be more inclined.
But that's not the situation we find ourselves in. Rather we have yet another government agency that consistently lies to the public, lies to congress - basically lies to pretty much everyone about what's going on. Further they don't prevent jack or shit. To sum up: they have zero credibility.
So, no, I don't want them to have their hands in everything because I simply DON"T TRUST THEM.
Stopping the next tourist attack is completely against the NSA's interests. A big bomb blast is something they can point at when they demand their next budget increase. Imagine how much dirt you could dig up on politicians with a $50billion budget. If there was any danger of the NSA's senior management being found guilty, politicians all over the country would leap up to change the law for them.
"If our intelligence community cannot connect the dots of the information, we cannot stop this determined enemy from launching attacks,"
Dear Mr. McConnell,
Our intelligence community cannot connect the dots because they're fucking drowning in them. You don't gather intelligence by piling irrelevant data on top of irrelevant data.
Also, if you have identified the "determined enemy" then the intelligence community doesn't need the mass surveillance; they can do targeted surveillance. And if "determined enemy" is used here to reference a hypothetical enemy, then you haven't met the level of evidence to justify mass surveillance.
In either case, your statements do nothing to justify mass surveillance.
PS. You do so look like a turtle.
Looking at that face, and trying to wrap my mind around WTH is going on in the American political system is making me ill.
They can't even catch terrorists that tweet their plans, we've got WW3 about to explode, and these morons are still re-arranging chairs on the Titanic arguing about metadata.. the issue has gone so far beyond surveillance now, we are talking about whether any part of the US government is even functioning anymore..
stick a fork in America, she's done..
"It's pretty clear that 9/11 could have been prevented if we had known about some of the communications that were linked to those who committed the terrible atrocity of 9/11,"
You mean intelligence from the French and Germans that pointed out that this was going to happen, but that intelligence was ignored because US spooks couldn't be bothered getting their heads out of the donut box to confirm?
But lets face it, you just wanted an excuse to rename the way you cook your potatos.
Exactly. They even had, at one point, Bin Laden targeted and didn't take the shot. They knew what was coming. The actions of at least one of the hijackers was reported by a flight school and was ignored.
It's a power grab pure and simple by the Congress for some warm fuzzies like the whole DHS thing. Pure theater for the masses and for the politicos... it's "see we did something.. vote for us".
would have prevented 9/11, sad and uninspiring though that may have been.
Besides, it is not as if the criminals were not known to the government, all of them had visas and were from the same embassy...
You guys should watch "The Unit", a masterpiece of military drama by David Mahmet. They have an episode that parodies it very well.
P.
"The NSA doesn't sell data, your grocery store does," he said. "But I don't hear anyone complaining about the grocery store's discount card, because you get a discount."
I chose to join the 'grocery store' scheme and gave them a 'junk' e-mail address so I can ignore any spam. I never choose (and didn't even know until recently) that the NSA(/GCHQ/etc) were making notes of who I called and when, where I was and when and which website I looked at and when.
I have reasonable confidence that the grocery store will never try to blackmail me or embarass me in any way by revealing my purchases of tobacco/condoms/pile-ointment or try to spy on me while I use any or either of my purchases. I know that the NSA(etc) have already used their powers to spy on people's private web-cam chats for their own personal amusement and to spy on their own spouses to sniff out infidelity etc. For this, the individual operators get a 'stern talking to'.
So, why should I trust them in any way and why should I pay attention to this idiot's analogies?
I don't want to live on this planet any more.
After last nights showing, I'm thinking of moving. The one party that tentatively suggested this that maybe all this slurping was unuseful were slapped and slapped hard (admittedly, they hardly stepped out from the shadows as the prop of the last government, but still.
What fresh madness does the future hold in store today, another round of 'let's ban encryption' etc. etc.
Simples... destroy all your personal means of electronic communication... phones, tablets, pc's, etc. Turn off the cable and satellite tv. Then... oh... wait... then they come looking for you in person thinking you're some kind of survivalist terrorist and have lots of things to hide. You're damned if you do, damned if you dont'.
Er, what about remembering last week when a comic convention was attacked.... they had been watching one guys since 2006... didn't seem to make any difference there... only local law enforcement dealt with some people shooting... only later was it "terrorsim".
Where in this very recent example did all the surveillance alter the outcome?
Ehm, not the nitty gritty on how they started tracking him, but: " while the FBI had been aware of Garland, Texas jihadist attacker Elton Simpson for nearly a decade, they did not follow his violent, pro-jihad tweets as closely as they could have because “there are so many like him” that the agency is overwhelmed."
And:
"Despite Simpson’s public calls for jihad on Twitter, one law enforcement official told the New York Times that this did not make him unique or demanding of special monitoring. "
So much for blanket monitoring of anybody and everybody then eh?
Source: http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/05/06/official-fbi-overlooked-texas-shooters-violent-tweets-because-there-are-so-many-like-him/
I don't know where to start with my criticisms of these idiots.
I suspect that McConnell, Burr, Rubio, McCain, et al must have some SERIOUS skeletons that the NSA (etc) have documented.
For $diety's sake - grow some, politicians! Live up to your oath to defend the Constitution!
<disgust>
I think in some of their minds, they really ARE defending the Constitution from an existential threat can come anyWHERE, anyTIME, from anyONE. They're trying to prevent the last two dreaded words, "Without Warning." In which case, no holds are barred because The Enemy certainly won't play by the rules.
The Patriot Act has never once connected any dots. Not once. When asked, not a single person in government or any of its intelligence or law enforcement agencies has been able to produce even one example of such utility.
McConnell is flat-out lying here when he claims otherwise. If he wants to prove me wrong, all he has to do is show the nation a solitary instance of such connections made because of this odious piece of legislation.
"The NSA doesn't sell data, your grocery store does," he said. "But I don't hear anyone complaining about the grocery store's discount card, because you get a discount."
1) I can shop somewhere else, or otherwise opt out of my grocery store's data collection.
2) My grocer can't put me in prison.
This post has been deleted by its author
NSA does not jail people, they collect information which may lead to jailing people if that information implicates them being part of a terrorist plot.
US bashing is on the high again here, at least it is transparent, something that European government culture lacks by default.
Also there are tens of millions at the south side of the Mediterranean, waving the Koran at us and cutting heads off. They are the same threat to us as the communists were, except they waved with "the red booklet of Mao", both live in failed societies and want to bring their failure to us.
Nobody should blame the US for doing something to defend itself.
NSA does not jail people, they collect information which may lead to jailing people if that information implicates them being part of a terrorist plot of being someone "we don't like".
<snip>
Also there are tens of millions at the south side of the Mediterranean, waving the Koran at us and cutting heads off. (me:Then why do they want to surveail people on the west side of the Atlantic that have never held a Qoran?)They are the same threat to us as the communists were, except they waved with "the red booklet of Mao", both live in failed societies and want to bring their failure to us.
Me: El Reg, can we PLEASE get the "You are completely insane" voting button?
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
