Rollback..an "executive coup" against the US constitution.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/10/edward-snowden-united-stasi-america

Snowden did what he did because he recognised the NSA's surveillance
programs for what they are: dangerous, unconstitutional activity. This
wholesale invasion of Americans' and foreign citizens' privacy does not
contribute to our security; it puts in danger the very liberties we're
trying to protect.

TEOTWAWKI wrote:http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/10/edward-snowden-united-stasi-america

Snowden did what he did because he recognised the NSA's surveillance
programs for what they are: dangerous, unconstitutional activity. This
wholesale invasion of Americans' and foreign citizens' privacy does not
contribute to our security; it puts in danger the very liberties we're
trying to protect.

You're just noticing this?

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

The USA PATRIOT Act of 2001 is an Act of the U.S. Congress that was signed into law by President George W. Bush on October 26, 2001.

I'm glad you brought that up, because we know that Teo loves Bush.

Nekochan wrote:I'm glad you brought that up, because we know that Teo loves Bush.

Yes, the patriot act has gone too far, I was against Bush signing it and also against Obama extending it. But the fact of the matter is Snowden gave out classified information and it's just the same as handing classified information over to the enemy. He violated his security clearance and should be punished.

doubtingthomas wrote:

Nekochan wrote:I'm glad you brought that up, because we know that Teo loves Bush.

Yes, the patriot act has gone too far, I was against Bush signing it and also against Obama extending it. But the fact of the matter is Snowden gave out classified information and it's just the same as handing classified information over to the enemy. He violated his security clearance and should be punished.

I agree that he should be punished. And as I said on another thread, I think there is something strange about this Snowden guy.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9845595-7.html

HANOVER, N.H.--Barack Obama may be leading the Democratic presidential pack in every major poll here, but that didn't dissuade the Illinois senator from a final early-morning rally with the Facebook generation.
Clearly not content to leave their votes to the whims of online politicking, the Illinois senator stepped onto a stage fashioned in a Dartmouth College gymnasium, pulled an index card from his inside jacket pocket, and launched into a familiar set of talking points centered on what has become a familiar theme for his campaign: change and hope.
"My job this morning is to be so persuasive...that a light will shine through that window, a beam of light will come down upon you, you will experience an epiphany, and you will suddenly realize that you must go to the polls and vote for Barack," he told a crowd of about 300 Ivy Leaguers--and, by the looks of it, a handful of locals who managed to gain access to what was supposed to be a students-only event.
For one thing, under an Obama presidency, Americans will be able to leave behind the era of George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and "wiretaps without warrants," he said. (He was referring to the lingering legal fallout over reports that the National Security Agency scooped up Americans' phone and Internet activities without court orders, ostensibly to monitor terrorist plots, in the years after the September 11 attacks.)

My impression of the current debate in the media on this subject.....is a bunch of folks on a very small bus going to school.....one group is looking out the bus window and sees a billboard with some information on it, and says I cannot believe the government is throwing away our constitution and getting access to the information on the billboard.......the other side says in order to be secure we need you to bend over for a rectal exam.......

The problem is that the technology is not understood by either side. The expectation of privacy and being secure in one's papers and home was embodied by our forefathers in the 4th amendment, but what fool has an expectation of privacy in the internet.....because some people think that their actions are private and secret on the internet is like putting a billboard in your front yard and having an expectation that the information on the billboard should have an expectation of privacy.

It is time to quit listening to folks on the little bus and have a knowledgeable discussion on what expectations of privacy can be expected in the use of the internet pipe..........we need to start with Congress defining that expectation of privacy in our modern world where the closure of the home and tangible papers have not easily transcended the fast pace of technological change........I think most Americans are really far closer on these issues once they get off the little bus and understand the real discussion.....not the dogma and distraction.

2seaoat wrote:My impression of the current debate in the media on this subject.....is a bunch of folks on a very small bus going to school.....one group is looking out the bus window and sees a billboard with some information on it, and says I cannot believe the government is throwing away our constitution and getting access to the information on the billboard.......the other side says in order to be secure we need you to bend over for a rectal exam.......

The problem is that the technology is not understood by either side. The expectation of privacy and being secure in one's papers and home was embodied by our forefathers in the 4th amendment, but what fool has an expectation of privacy in the internet.....because some people think that their actions are private and secret on the internet is like putting a billboard in your front yard and having an expectation that the information on the billboard should have an expectation of privacy.

It is time to quit listening to folks on the little bus and have a knowledgeable discussion on what expectations of privacy can be expected in the use of the internet pipe..........we need to start with Congress defining that expectation of privacy in our modern world where the closure of the home and tangible papers have not easily transcended the fast pace of technological change........I think most Americans are really far closer on these issues once they get off the little bus and understand the real discussion.....not the dogma and distraction.

You have defined the problem, Seaoat, in your roundabout way. It's supposed to be "We" the people. I think it was Lincoln who said, "A house divided against itself cannot stand."

It seems that everything is so politicized and slanted that we never get to the heart of the matter...whatever the particular item on the agenda...I am tired of it...but then I try to understand how anybody could have voted for Bush, and I'm completely lost on that score...and I don't care how anyone tries to rewrite that history...he was by far the worst of the worst.