FREE EDWARD SNOWDEN

I have no problem with law enforcement asking for my Id. I would voluntarily wait while the law enforcement works through evryone in a line. I have no problem with all the things added to airport rules since 9-11.

The population of Israel has lived with those rules for years. The United States needs to catch up with Israel in security procedures for the general population (like reporting unattended luggage or packages).

I am conservative and believe rules are the foundation of a society. Rules help it function.

Old Dingus Originally Posted by Old Dingus

Most conservatives don't, it's usually the libs that have a problem with any measure that would actually eradicate the terrorist problem on our soil. Of course we could stop killing them on their soil, that might help a little too.

News Headlines, July 19, 2019

Washington. US Dept of Treasury, Division of Tax Enforcement announced that it has reached its initial target of 1M audits, 119,000 prosecutions for tax fraud/avoidance and 19.7Bn of arrears collected as a result of the MOU between the NSA and the US Department of the Treasury in February, 2016.

In related news, the House of Representatives scheduled its final mark up session for implementing legislation for the Debtors Prison Fairness Act. Under the DPFA, after all seizure and forfeiture, foreclosure and garnishment has been exhausted and tax offenders may be incarcerated under the controversial Make Tax Fair Program announced by the Secretary of the Treasury last year at Fort Knox.

19Trees

COG, even though you won't care and probably won't think about it, here are my comments in response. Originally Posted by Old Dingus

Well, you are partially right, and partially wrong. I read and thought about your post. You were wrong. I don't care what you said. It's the same old statist drivel that is being used to chip away at our liberty, a little at a time. Not original, and, unfortunately, not surprising.

So, no. I don't care what you think. When the curtain falls, you will side with the enemies of freedom. I will be on the other side. I will not passively watch this country descend into the depths of statism. It will, for sure, because of people like you, and others on here, but I will dissent and resist in every non-violent way available to me.

Asshole ... There's only one traitor, right? The black guy! I thought you were hip and spoke jive growing up?

You, Mom, Dad and John Coltrane!

Just because the government calls some activity "secret" doesn't mean it should be kept from the public. Certainly there actions undertaken by government that need to be kept secret, but all Snowden (and Bradley Manning) did was reveal "secrets" about activities that the American people had every right to know about.

They are patriots in the truest sense of the word.

Imagecoast.com=snick

What about the half million non-vetted civilian contractors that have access to this same data? They also have your email history and your internet history and the capability of using this data to harm you, it's not just phone records and it's not all government employees. Is it that far fetched to believe that another one of these dropout contractors will not do something devious with this data?

My favorite is that the same people that think this is no problem whatsoever are the first to scream bloody murder when a police officer, boots on the ground, life in possible danger is standing face-to-face with a possible terrorist in this country illegally, and wants to ask for that person to prove he is an American. Oh no, how dare we even think of asking a foreign looking muslim to prove he is here legally. But go ahead spy on us Americans, nothing wrong with trampling on our rights as long as we are protecting the illegal muslims with no rights at all. On principle, I disagree with spying on us, but it might taste a little better if they actually did everything that was needed to stop muslim attacks as well. Originally Posted by nwarounder

You have a good point about who has access to the data. That is the problem I have with all of this. We have to trust the government to be ethical and not use the data inappropriately. They have not proven themselves to be that way as is being demonstrated by the IRS scandals. If Snowden had made public illegal use of that data by the government I would be cheering him on. Unfortunately, that is not the case. Also, keep in mind the thousands of people in private companies that have access to that data. The only real security anyone has is that no one cares about what they are doing. Public personalities probably deal with these issues on a regular basis.

As for the people here illegally I think the federal government is failing to do their job. The idea that local officials are not allowed to ask about citizenship is nuts. That being said, we must always be cognizant of the potential for police abuse of power.

You have a good point about who has access to the data. That is the problem I have with all of this. We have to trust the government to be ethical and not use the data inappropriately. They have not proven themselves to be that way as is being demonstrated by the IRS scandals. If Snowden had made public illegal use of that data by the government I would be cheering him on. Unfortunately, that is not the case. Also, keep in mind the thousands of people in private companies that have access to that data. The only real security anyone has is that no one cares about what they are doing. Public personalities probably deal with these issues on a regular basis.

As for the people here illegally I think the federal government is failing to do their job. The idea that local officials are not allowed to ask about citizenship is nuts. That being said, we must always be cognizant of the potential for police abuse of power. Originally Posted by Laz

What is truly sad is that this is a revelation to anybody and that Snowden somehow leaked this information. You only have had to read the Patriot Act to know that this was already happening, and "legal". So, how has Snowden broke any law reaffirming what the Congress passed in a public session? Maybe because of the details, I guess? I think he falls way short of being called a hero, but if he is a criminal for reaffirming what is happening under the Patriot Act, then the government is certainly criminal as well for practicing it.

Fourth Amendment – Protection from unreasonable search and seizure.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.



Seems to me that some of the things the government has been doing is in direct conflict with the 4th amendment.

A "secret court" and a "secret judge" who approves over 99% of all requests does not automatically make it all legal. That's like Nixon saying " if the President does something, it cannot be illegal.

What we did learn from Snowden is probably just the tip of the iceberg. What is "PRISM" exactly? Is it a quantum supercomputer capable of taking all that meta data, emails, and possibly even listening to phone calls and quantifying everything into a profile that strips us of all privacy?

Wonder how many of the bitchers have everything they do on Face book my space or twitter?

Ive known a few dipshits on ECCIE who were that fucking stupid, Iva.

I'll answer your question if you can tell me how the government's knowing what phone numbers i've dialed has tangibly changed my life from what it was like 20 years ago. Originally Posted by Doove

That doesnt matter...

would you say you can beat your wife if it doesnt leave a mark?

Theres a right way to do things and I'd hop on the Snowden Hero bandwagon if I knew enough about what he did and how. I do not know.

It is too soon to tell. Technically, Snowden is a traitor. But those he betrayed are some dirty, nasty motherfuckers that wouldnt piss on me if I were on fire. In fact, they would probably bring gas to see if I had any money. So I'm open to the idea he could be righteous.

The winner writes the history books.

That doesnt matter...

would you say you can beat your wife if it doesnt leave a mark? Originally Posted by JohnnyCap

Lousy analogy. Beating your wife leaves a tangible impact whether it leaves a mark or not. But if you wanna try analogies, how about asking me if i saw a major problem with beating your wife with a feather.

"The government" knows how much money i make. They know my SSNUM. They know how much i give to charity. The idea that they know what phone numbers i dialed, information that's also known by the phone company i use by the way....getting outraged by that seems somewhat ridiculous to me.

And since you brought me back into this, i'll point out that nwarounder still hasn't answered the question of how it's affected his life tangibly. Perhaps you could help him out.

Lousy analogy. Beating your wife leaves a tangible impact whether it leaves a mark or not. But if you wanna try analogies, how about asking me if i saw a major problem with beating your wife with a feather.

"The government" knows how much money i make. They know my SSNUM. They know how much i give to charity. The idea that they know what phone numbers i dialed, information that's also known by the phone company i use by the way....getting outraged by that seems somewhat ridiculous to me.

And since you brought me back into this, i'll point out that nwarounder still hasn't answered the question of how it's affected his life tangibly. Perhaps you could help him out. Originally Posted by Doove

I will not help answer the question because I think it off point. Damage doesn't need be done for a method to be wrong. The government is not supposed to look for evidence of a crime without reasonable suspicion. Just making phone calls is not reasonable suspicion.

Yes, the outrage seems ridiculous, but it is necessary to try to prevent small transgressions from becoming big ones. The NRA fights ridiculous battles, because conceding a little ground usually leads to bigger concessions, as it did for the tobacco industry. A little outrage is a good thing.

I will not help answer the question because I think it off point. Damage doesn't need be done for a method to be wrong. The government is not supposed to look for evidence of a crime without reasonable suspicion. Just making phone calls is not reasonable suspicion.

Yes, the outrage seems ridiculous, but it is necessary to try to prevent small transgressions from becoming big ones. The NRA fights ridiculous battles, because conceding a little ground usually leads to bigger concessions, as it did for the tobacco industry. A little outrage is a good thing. Originally Posted by JohnnyCap

IMO the government isn't looking through a vast amount of calls for evidence .. where do they find the $$ ,the time or employees ??? the database of records can be used to PROVIDE evidence AFTER reasonable suspicion has been proven ...