Should the NSA Monitor Americans Based On Their Political Views?

[Ethereal]

Another poster said that the NSA should be "monitoring" me.

My crime? Having a different political opinion than this poster.

Put aside any feelings you may have about me personally and look at it based on the principle being expressed. Do you agree? Do you think the NSA should be monitoring Americans based on nothing more than their political speech?

Personally, I believe such ideas may have had their place in Soviet Russia, but not in America.

Apparently, this poster, who fancies himself a patriot, forgot that we have first amendment in the USA that prohibits the US government from abridging our freedom of speech. This poster also forgot that the supreme court has ruled that political speech is afforded the most protection of any kind of speech.

But if Americans believe the government will track them and monitor them based on nothing more than their political views, then this will have what many legal experts describe as a "chilling effect" on free speech. Perhaps that is exactly what this poster and others like him want? To silence and intimidate any who would disagree with them? Why doesn't this poster just move to North Korea or China if they want the government track and monitor people based on their political views?

Thoughts?

[MisterVeritis]

The national security agency should not be monitoring any Americans.

[Peter1469]

The NSA should not monitor any American not tied to transnational terrorism or spying for a foreign power.

[MisterVeritis]

The NSA should not monitor any American not tied to transnational terrorism or spying for a foreign power.
I suppose we should say without legitimate due process. The FISC is broken. Corrupt. It needs to be abolished. If you want to spy on me get a real warrant based on real probable cause.

[Green Arrow]

Absolutely not.

[Ethereal]

The NSA should not monitor any American not tied to transnational terrorism or spying for a foreign power.
Right.

There is a process for doing such things.

First, you must establish probable cause that a specific crime or crimes have been committed by a particular individual or individuals.

The idea that the NSA would spy on an American merely because their political opinion is deemed offensive or unconventional is an affront to basic American values.

[Ethereal]

Absolutely not.
When and how did you come into the employ of Vladimir Putin?

[Green Arrow]

When and how did you come into the employ of Vladimir Putin?

Last week, he offered me double what I make now with benefits and a lovely snowfront villa in Siberia.

[Ethereal]

Last week, he offered me double what I make now with benefits and a lovely snowfront villa in Siberia.
You lucky dog... he only offered me time-and-a-half and a sturdy yurt in the hinterlands of Chechnya.

[Max Rockatansky]

The NSA should not monitor any American not tied to transnational terrorism or spying for a foreign power.
Agreed. However, if they are tied to terrorism or as a traitor working with a foreign power, I fully support monitoring them to track down their contacts.

[Helena]

Last week, he offered me double what I make now with benefits and a lovely snowfront villa in Siberia.
What? No redhead?

[Peter1469]

I suppose we should say without legitimate due process. The FISC is broken. Corrupt. It needs to be abolished. If you want to spy on me get a real warrant based on real probable cause.
FISA is suppose to work. If the FBI lies, then there is a problem. And the FBI could lie to any other court as well.

[Ethereal]

Agreed.

Uh, no. You don't agree. You want people monitored by the NSA simply because you don't like their political opinions.


However, if they are tied to terrorism or as a traitor working with a foreign power, I fully support monitoring them to track down their contacts.

In your mind, anyone who doesn't share your maniacal hatred for Russia is a traitor working with a foreign power.

Clearly, your subjective and loose standards should never be used as a basis for tracking and monitoring of Americans by the government.

[Ethereal]

FISA is suppose to work. If the FBI lies, then there is a problem. And the FBI could lie to any other court as well.
And it would appear that they did lie when seeking a warrant to spy on Carter Page and other individuals connected to the Trump campaign.

[Max Rockatansky]

Uh, no. You don't agree. You want people monitored by the NSA simply because you don't like their political opinions. ...That's a lie. Feel free to post a quote of me ever claiming what you say. If you can't, are you man enough to admit your a liar?

[Ethereal]

That's a lie. Feel free to post a quote of me ever claiming what you say. If you can't, are you man enough to admit your a liar?

You're the person who said the NSA should monitor me. Do you deny it?

So, yes, you want Americans monitored for no other reason than their political opinions.

[Tahuyaman]

Should the NSA Monitor Americans Based On Their Political Views?
only if they are conservatives.

[Tahuyaman]

That's a lie. Feel free to post a quote of me ever claiming what you say. If you can't, are you man enough to admit your a liar?
Punk.

[Common]

Punk.
Stop the personal attacks

[FindersKeepers]

Another poster said that the NSA should be "monitoring" me.

My crime? Having a different political opinion than this poster.

Put aside any feelings you may have about me personally and look at it based on the principle being expressed. Do you agree? Do you think the NSA should be monitoring Americans based on nothing more than their political speech?

Personally, I believe such ideas may have had their place in Soviet Russia, but not in America.

Apparently, this poster, who fancies himself a patriot, forgot that we have first amendment in the USA that prohibits the US government from abridging our freedom of speech. This poster also forgot that the supreme court has ruled that political speech is afforded the most protection of any kind of speech.

But if Americans believe the government will track them and monitor them based on nothing more than their political views, then this will have what many legal experts describe as a "chilling effect" on free speech. Perhaps that is exactly what this poster and others like him want? To silence and intimidate any who would disagree with them? Why doesn't this poster just move to North Korea or China if they want the government track and monitor people based on their political views?

Thoughts?


That's a very good question, and I don't have a simply yes or no answer. Criminal profilers use religion because extremists in any religion send up a red flag.

While many will say don't profile based on a person being Islamic, we have studies that show a large percentage of Muslims are sympathetic to certain terrorist acts. That doesn't make them guilty, of course, but it's a useful statistic for profiling.

At the same time, I think we have to be careful not to punish anyone based on their religious beliefs.

It's a fine line.

[Peter1469]

And it would appear that they did lie when seeking a warrant to spy on Carter Page and other individuals connected to the Trump campaign.

Yes they did. They would have done the same to a non-FISA court as well.

[DGUtley]

Another poster said that the NSA should be "monitoring" me. My crime? Having a different political opinion than this poster. Put aside any feelings you may have about me personally and look at it based on the principle being expressed. Do you agree? Do you think the NSA should be monitoring Americans based on nothing more than their political speech? Personally, I believe such ideas may have had their place in Soviet Russia, but not in America. Apparently, this poster, who fancies himself a patriot, forgot that we have first amendment in the USA that prohibits the US government from abridging our freedom of speech. This poster also forgot that the supreme court has ruled that political speech is afforded the most protection of any kind of speech. But if Americans believe the government will track them and monitor them based on nothing more than their political views, then this will have what many legal experts describe as a "chilling effect" on free speech. Perhaps that is exactly what this poster and others like him want? To silence and intimidate any who would disagree with them? Why doesn't this poster just move to North Korea or China if they want the government track and monitor people based on their political views? Thoughts?

No, the NSA should not be monitoring Americans based on political views or speech. It is unconstitutional. There are those that definitely want to silence the opposition. I do not. I want the opposition to speak up, loud and clear. The stifling of opposition speech is NK or China or Nazi-Germany or Soviet Russia stuff. I hope Ethereal that I have been clear.

[donttread]

Another poster said that the NSA should be "monitoring" me.

My crime? Having a different political opinion than this poster.

Put aside any feelings you may have about me personally and look at it based on the principle being expressed. Do you agree? Do you think the NSA should be monitoring Americans based on nothing more than their political speech?

Personally, I believe such ideas may have had their place in Soviet Russia, but not in America.

Apparently, this poster, who fancies himself a patriot, forgot that we have first amendment in the USA that prohibits the US government from abridging our freedom of speech. This poster also forgot that the supreme court has ruled that political speech is afforded the most protection of any kind of speech.

But if Americans believe the government will track them and monitor them based on nothing more than their political views, then this will have what many legal experts describe as a "chilling effect" on free speech. Perhaps that is exactly what this poster and others like him want? To silence and intimidate any who would disagree with them? Why doesn't this poster just move to North Korea or China if they want the government track and monitor people based on their political views?

Thoughts?

Of course they should not monitor people for their political views. But when we the people found out they were spying on Americans without due process, hell without any process and did NOTHING: We effectively agreed to an Orwellian society.

[DGUtley]

Of course they should not monitor people for their political views. But when we the people found out they were spying on Americans without due process, hell without any process and did NOTHING: We effectively agreed to an Orwellian society.

Well.... that's because it was the Obama administration and the Press ran cover for them. Nothing to see here citizen, move along.....

[Green Arrow]

Well.... that's because it was the Obama administration and the Press ran cover for them. Nothing to see here citizen, move along.....

Are you sure? Because I remember the press coverage being relentless.

[DGUtley]

Are you sure? Because I remember the press coverage being relentless.

I don't. I remember it being a big nothing burger that Brennan lied about it, that the conservative press tried to push it and were told that there was nothing there. I could be wrong. . . . I mean, they ignored so many of his scandals.

[mak2]

What scandals? If I recall correctly not a single person from the Obama plead guilty. The Repubs just made up stuff.
I don't. I remember it being a big nothing burger that Brennan lied about it, that the conservative press tried to push it and were told that there was nothing there. I could be wrong. . . . I mean, they ignored so many of his scandals.

[Peter1469]

What scandals? If I recall correctly not a single person from the Obama plead guilty. The Repubs just made up stuff.

What scandals? For one, using the FBI at attack political opponents.

[mak2]

And Benghazi, and the IRS and the dozens of others. How many convictions and guilty pleas?
What scandals? For one, using the FBI at attack political opponents.

[Peter1469]

And Benghazi, and the IRS and the dozens of others. How many convictions and guilty pleas?

That is a poor measure when crimes are covered up and not prosecuted.

[mak2]

If they were really crimes why weren't any of them prosecuted the last two years when the Repubs were in charge of everything?
That is a poor measure when crimes are covered up and not prosecuted.

[Max Rockatansky]

If they were really crimes why weren't any of them prosecuted the last two years when the Repubs were in charge of everything?
I'd like to know the answer to that one too. One might be that the Clintons are smart lawyers, with Hillary being the smarter one. She knows where the lines are drawn. Heck, she helped write the laws on obstruction and destruction of evidence after the Nixon fiasco. The Clintons are as unethical as it gets without actually crossing the line. I think she did cross the line by destroying 30,000 emails, some of which contained evidence of passing classified material via unsecure means, but the DOJ deemed there was insufficient evidence to charge her. I disagree since others have been charged for less. Regardless, I fail to see why Sessions didn't go back for a second look.

[mak2]

I refused to vote this time because I have an irrational (I know) hate of Hillary and the Clintons and this is exactly what I expected from Trump. But I do think if there was any truth or evidence to the Obama/Hillary scandals the Repubs could have prosecuted at least one.
I'd like to know the answer to that one too. One might be that the Clintons are smart lawyers, with Hillary being the smarter one. She knows where the lines are drawn. Heck, she helped write the laws on obstruction and destruction of evidence after the Nixon fiasco. The Clintons are as unethical as it gets without actually crossing the line. I think she did cross the line by destroying 30,000 emails, some of which contained evidence of passing classified material via unsecure means, but the DOJ deemed there was insufficient evidence to charge her. I disagree since others have been charged for less. Regardless, I fail to see why Sessions didn't go back for a second look.

[Max Rockatansky]

I refused to vote this time because I have an irrational (I know) hate of Hillary and the Clintons and this is exactly what I expected from Trump. But I do think if there was any truth or evidence to the Obama/Hillary scandals the Repubs could have prosecuted at least one.
While I agree both were deplorables, Trump was the lesser evil. That said, I couldn't hold my nose long enough to vote for him nor vote, once again, for the "lesser of two evils". I do believe it is a civic duty to vote so I vote a straight libertarian ticket. It's voters like me which is why neither candidate received over 50% of the vote.

Please consider voting in every election, but if the candidates disturb you, vote for the challenger, never the incumbent, regardless of party. Keep them on their heels by always voting for the opposition until they put someone in office who is worth voting for.

[MisterVeritis]

FISA is suppose to work. If the FBI lies, then there is a problem. And the FBI could lie to any other court as well.
It is a secret court. It cannot possibly work. No one advocates for the accused.

[MisterVeritis]

That's a very good question, and I don't have a simply yes or no answer. Criminal profilers use religion because extremists in any religion send up a red flag.

While many will say don't profile based on a person being Islamic, we have studies that show a large percentage of Muslims are sympathetic to certain terrorist acts. That doesn't make them guilty, of course, but it's a useful statistic for profiling.

At the same time, I think we have to be careful not to punish anyone based on their religious beliefs.

It's a fine line.
No. It is not a fine line. Don't ever let the government convince you that it is. If the government wants to spy on you, to eliminate your 4th Amendment right, don't ever make it easy on them.

[MisterVeritis]

What scandals? If I recall correctly not a single person from the Obama plead guilty. The Repubs just made up stuff.
I suppose weaponizing federal agencies to go after political opponents is no big deal. After all, it did help Obama win a second term.

[Ethereal]

Of course they should not monitor people for their political views. But when we the people found out they were spying on Americans without due process, hell without any process and did NOTHING: We effectively agreed to an Orwellian society.
Well, SOME Americans may have agreed to that by their inaction and indifference, but others have been speaking out against it tirelessly since the moment it was revealed. Anyway, at this point, the best thing you can do as an individual is to use technology to your advantage. There are lots of ways to keep maintain your privacy and anonymity against the NSA's panoptican surveillance system. It just requires some knowledge and commitment to privacy.

[DGUtley]

I suppose weaponizing federal agencies to go after political opponents is no big deal. After all, it did help Obama win a second term.

Yes it did. Not a smidgen of corruption....

[mak2]

Again, if they did something illegal, why didn't the RWers go after it the last two years, when they were in charge of everything?
Yes it did. Not a smidgen of corruption....

[Ethereal]

I'd like to know the answer to that one too. One might be that the Clintons are smart lawyers, with Hillary being the smarter one. She knows where the lines are drawn. Heck, she helped write the laws on obstruction and destruction of evidence after the Nixon fiasco. The Clintons are as unethical as it gets without actually crossing the line. I think she did cross the line by destroying 30,000 emails, some of which contained evidence of passing classified material via unsecure means, but the DOJ deemed there was insufficient evidence to charge her. I disagree since others have been charged for less. Regardless, I fail to see why Sessions didn't go back for a second look.

This thread isn't about that, but about your desire to see Americans tracked and monitored by the NSA based on their political beliefs.

[Max Rockatansky]

This thread isn't about that, but about your desire to see Americans tracked and monitored by the NSA based on their political beliefs.First, thanks for confessing this is a call-out thread.

Second, thanks also for proving, once again, you're a liar. I never said I desired "see Americans tracked and monitored by the NSA based on their political beliefs" and you can't post a quote of me ever saying it. Ergo, you're a liar and admitted anti-American.

Now run off and start a thread on how great Russia is these days because of Putin.

[Ethereal]

First, thanks for confessing this is a call-out thread.

Responding to statements you made on a public forum is not a "call-out" thread.


Second, thanks also for proving, once again, you're a liar. I never said I desired "see Americans tracked and monitored by the NSA based on their political beliefs" and you can't post a quote of me ever saying it. Ergo, you're a liar and admitted anti-American.

You said you wanted the NSA to monitor me. I'm an American. Therefore, the only logical conclusion one can make is that you desire to see Americans monitored by the NSA based on nothing more than their political beliefs.

[Max Rockatansky]

Responding to statements you made on a public forum is not a "call-out" thread.

You said you wanted the NSA to monitor me. I'm an American. Therefore, the only logical conclusion one can make is that you desire to see Americans monitored by the NSA based on nothing more than their political beliefs.
Actually, it is. You just confessed it was. Why deny what you just admitted?

Quote please, not just your lying, twisted opinion. I've asked you this about a half dozen times but you never provide the quote. Hopefully people will start to understand why you won't do it.

[Ethereal]

Actually, it is. You just confessed it was. Why deny what you just admitted?

Responding to what other posters say is not a "call-out".


Quote please, not just your lying, twisted opinion. I've asked you this about a half dozen times but you never provide the quote. Hopefully people will start to understand why you won't do it.

Okay, here is the quote:


If you are in the US, I hope the NSA is monitoring your activities.

The reason I didn't quote it was because I didn't think you would have the unmitigated chutzpah to deny it. But I guess I was wrong.

[DGUtley]

Again, if they did something illegal, why didn't the RWers go after it the last two years, when they were in charge of everything?

I can't explain that -- maybe b/c they didn't have the stone. Maybe b/c they know all about goose / gander. I don't know. We know that they did illegal things. We have been over this ad nauseum.

[mak2]

The RWers have been talking about scandals and illegal activities for years, and yet...nothing. At some point they have to quit talking about it.
I can't explain that -- maybe b/c they didn't have the stone. Maybe b/c they know all about goose / gander. I don't know. We know that they did illegal things. We have been over this ad nauseum.

[Peter1469]

If they were really crimes why weren't any of them prosecuted the last two years when the Repubs were in charge of everything?

Ask them. But based on what has been reported, the FBI was used to go after Obama's and Hillary's political opponents. That is chilling. And criminal.

[DGUtley]

The RWers have been talking about scandals and illegal activities for years, and yet...nothing. At some point they have to quit talking about it.

This is a bit afield but the scandals have been exposed. You can play "Nothing to see here" all you want but everybody knows about the scandals. Let's be honest -- if the R's had weaponized the IRS to silence liberal PAC's in the run-up to an election there'd have been blood in the streets. The D's do it and it's crickets. Crickets.

[Peter1469]

While I agree both were deplorables, Trump was the lesser evil. That said, I couldn't hold my nose long enough to vote for him nor vote, once again, for the "lesser of two evils". I do believe it is a civic duty to vote so I vote a straight libertarian ticket. It's voters like me which is why neither candidate received over 50% of the vote.

Please consider voting in every election, but if the candidates disturb you, vote for the challenger, never the incumbent, regardless of party. Keep them on their heels by always voting for the opposition until they put someone in office who is worth voting for.

I just vote 3rd party. Never, since 2006, will I vote (D) or (R) under any circumstance.

[mak2]

Again, why no prosecutions the last two years? I posit it is because it is just made up right wing fantasy scandals with no evidence of illegal activity. Thankfully we still require that.
Ask them. But based on what has been reported, the FBI was used to go after Obama's and Hillary's political opponents. That is chilling. And criminal.

[Peter1469]

Again, why no prosecutions the last two years? I posit it is because it is just made up right wing fantasy scandals with no evidence of illegal activity. Thankfully we still require that.
What part of ask the republicans fails to click in your mind?

[Max Rockatansky]

....The reason I didn't quote it was because I didn't think you would have the unmitigated chutzpah to deny it. But I guess I was wrong.Is there a reason why you snipped the post and took it out of context? Didn't I call you a Russian first? Perhaps more people should click on that link and read the entire thread in context for a better understanding of each of our positions.

[mak2]

Oh, you are making a distinction between the Republicans and the Trumpsters?
What part of ask the republicans fails to click in your mind?

[Ethereal]

Is there a reason why you snipped the post and took it out of context? Didn't I call you a Russian first? Perhaps more people should click on that link and read the entire thread in context for a better understanding of each of our positions.

The context does not change the fact that you want the NSA to monitor me, an American, based on nothing more than my political beliefs.

[Max Rockatansky]

Oh, you are making a distinction between the Republicans and the Trumpsters?
If he won't, I will. As most people know, unlike the DNC which chose their candidate for the membership, the RNC let the membership choose their own nominee. Texas picked Cruz, the RNC favored Jeb!, but the majority chose Trump. After he was elected the RNC didn't know what to do or how to work with Trump. Eventually they figured just dropping to their knees and blowing him was all they could do. It was like watching an episode of "Oz" on HBO. Even Cruz eventually took a knee and balls to his chin. This doesn't mean they liked it, only that they knew the only way to get along with a nutjob was to, literally, massage his manhood.

[Max Rockatansky]

The context does not change the fact that you want the NSA to monitor me, an American, based on nothing more than my political beliefs.
Nyet, comrade. Anti-Americans who work in concert with enemies of our nation are traitors and should be monitored regardless of citizenship.

Treason is defined in the 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.

[MisterVeritis]

If he won't, I will. As most people know, unlike the DNC which chose their candidate for the membership, the RNC let the membership choose their own nominee. Texas picked Cruz, the RNC favored Jeb!, but the majority chose Trump. After he was elected the RNC didn't know what to do or how to work with Trump. Eventually they figured just dropping to their knees and blowing him was all they could do. It was like watching an episode of "Oz" on HBO. Even Cruz eventually took a knee and balls to his chin. This doesn't mean they liked it, only that they knew the only way to get along with a nutjob was to, literally, massage his manhood.
There is that latent homosexuality again.

[Max Rockatansky]

There is that latent homosexuality again.
Says the guy obsessed with latent homosexuality and continually gargles Trump's man juice.

[MisterVeritis]

There is that latent homosexuality again.

Says the guy obsessed with latent homosexuality and continually gargles Trump's man juice.
There is that latent homosexuality again.

[Max Rockatansky]

There is that latent homosexuality again.

There is that latent homosexuality again.Your obsession is noted. Why don't you just come out to your parents and be done with it?

[Ethereal]

Nyet, comrade. Anti-Americans who work in concert with enemies of our nation are traitors and should be monitored regardless of citizenship.

Treason is defined in the 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 US isn't a nation, it's a federation.

Your personal opinion on who qualifies as an "enemy" of the federation isn't even remotely authoritative, legal, or definitive.

And disagreeing with you on a political forum isn't treasonous.

[MisterVeritis]

Your obsession is noted. Why don't you just come out to your parents and be done with it?
I am not the one who makes constant references to homosexual acts. You are.

[mak2]

You guys need to get a room.

[MisterVeritis]

You guys need to get a room.
I thought he was your boy. Hmmm. You two are peas in a pod.

[Max Rockatansky]

I am not the one who makes constant references to homosexual acts. You are.
LOL. Says Mister "Latent Homosexuality".


I thought he was your boy. Hmmm. You two are peas in a pod.
QED on the latent homosexuality. Now you're thinking about boys? Wow.

[mak2]

Dont start on me, I am hetro.
I thought he was your boy. Hmmm. You two are peas in a pod.

[MisterVeritis]

Dont start on me, I am hetro.
Cool. Bobbing Max has issues.

[Max Rockatansky]

Dont start on me, I am hetro.
Me too but Mister Latent Homosexuality, like many latent homosexuals, has a love/hate relationship with anything he deems to be gay.

[Admiral Ackbar]

Short answer No. Longer answer should the NSA even exist. I say no to that as well

[MisterVeritis]

Me too but Mister Latent Homosexuality, like many latent homosexuals, has a love/hate relationship with anything he deems to be gay.
If you were not latently homosexual you would not make constant references to homosexual acts in your posts. Would you? I think you are the only one here who does.

[MisterVeritis]

Short answer No. Longer answer should the NSA even exist. I say no to that as well
No. The NSA should absolutely exist. But it should not spy on Americans without affording the American citizens due process.

[Peter1469]

Oh, you are making a distinction between the Republicans and the Trumpsters?

You keep asking me why republicans don't do something. I said ask them.

Does this answer help?

[Ethereal]

Short answer No. Longer answer should the NSA even exist. I say no to that as well
I think all civilian intelligence agencies should be merged into the military, and that their operations should be limited strictly to military operations in the context of declared wars. Otherwise, they will get up to no good, like indiscriminately spying on the entire civilian population or overthrowing governments in secret without the knowledge or consent of the American people.

[MisterVeritis]

I think all civilian intelligence agencies should be merged into the military, and that their operations should be limited strictly to military operations in the context of declared wars. Otherwise, they will get up to no good, like indiscriminately spying on the entire civilian population or overthrowing governments in secret without the knowledge or consent of the American people.
When I was on active duty the vast majority of the people who "worked for" the NSA wore military uniforms.

We do need real, civilian, adversarial oversight of all of our intelligence agencies. I don't know how to do that.

[ripmeister]

Another poster said that the NSA should be "monitoring" me.

My crime? Having a different political opinion than this poster.

Put aside any feelings you may have about me personally and look at it based on the principle being expressed. Do you agree? Do you think the NSA should be monitoring Americans based on nothing more than their political speech?

Personally, I believe such ideas may have had their place in Soviet Russia, but not in America.

Apparently, this poster, who fancies himself a patriot, forgot that we have first amendment in the USA that prohibits the US government from abridging our freedom of speech. This poster also forgot that the supreme court has ruled that political speech is afforded the most protection of any kind of speech.

But if Americans believe the government will track them and monitor them based on nothing more than their political views, then this will have what many legal experts describe as a "chilling effect" on free speech. Perhaps that is exactly what this poster and others like him want? To silence and intimidate any who would disagree with them? Why doesn't this poster just move to North Korea or China if they want the government track and monitor people based on their political views?

Thoughts?

Simply based on political beliefs? Absolutely not!

[Ethereal]

When I was on active duty the vast majority of the people who "worked for" the NSA wore military uniforms.

We do need real, civilian, adversarial oversight of all of our intelligence agencies. I don't know how to do that.
America existed without an FBI, a CIA, or an NSA for most of its history. Somehow, we still managed to defend ourselves and to collect intelligence when necessary.

[Peter1469]

America existed without an FBI, a CIA, or an NSA for most of its history. Somehow, we still managed to defend ourselves and to collect intelligence when necessary.
Washington had an informal counter intelligence apparatus. They didn't bother with protecting the rights of their targets either.

[ripmeister]

That is a poor measure when crimes are covered up and not prosecuted.

Yea. Its all that Deep State thing.

[ripmeister]

America existed without an FBI, a CIA, or an NSA for most of its history. Somehow, we still managed to defend ourselves and to collect intelligence when necessary.
Times change

[MisterVeritis]

America existed without an FBI, a CIA, or an NSA for most of its history. Somehow, we still managed to defend ourselves and to collect intelligence when necessary.
Without substantial help in signals intelligence from other countries, we might not have won world war two.

[MisterVeritis]

Washington had an informal counter intelligence apparatus. They didn't bother with protecting the rights of their targets either.
Uh, Peter, he was fighting a war.

[DGUtley]

That's a lie. Feel free to post a quote of me ever claiming what you say. If you can't, are you man enough to admit your a liar?


First, thanks for confessing this is a call-out thread. Second, thanks also for proving, once again, you're a liar. I never said I desired "see Americans tracked and monitored by the NSA based on their political beliefs" and you can't post a quote of me ever saying it. Ergo, you're a liar and admitted anti-American. Now run off and start a thread on how great Russia is these days because of Putin.

WARNING - @Max Rockatansky (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=575) - refrain from name-calling and insults. There's been a number of times that you've called people "liars" that disagree with you. It's bad faith posting as well. Please refrain or TB's and escalated moderation will follow.

[Ethereal]

Times change
I'm aware. That time changes doesn't remotely justify the creation of such agencies though.

[donttread]

I'm aware. That time changes doesn't remotely justify the creation of such agencies though.

Nor the need for so many of them. And so much brass.

[Ethereal]

By the way, my question is somewhat moot, since the NSA is already monitoring the entire civilian population of the USA.

[MisterVeritis]

By the way, my question is somewhat moot, since the NSA is already monitoring the entire civilian population of the USA.
Collecting, certainly.

I believe the intelligence community and the politicians they serve are the greatest threat to our liberties we have ever faced. I don't know how to fix it.

[Ethereal]

Collecting, certainly.

Once the data is collected, it is processed. Most of it is processed by systems that are automated. I still consider that a form of monitoring.

[MisterVeritis]

Once the data is collected, it is processed. Most of it is processed by systems that are automated. I still consider that a form of monitoring.
It is certainly searched and indexed.

I don't know how to fix the enormous liberty problems. How do we ensure that only men and women with extraordinary integrity have access to this system, supervise it, and operate it for our benefit instead of to our detriment?

[Cletus]

Again, if they did something illegal, why didn't the RWers go after it the last two years, when they were in charge of everything?

Political expedience, national unity... Sometimes, the effect of the processes involved in bringing a criminal to justice can have an even greater negative impact than the crimes themselves. That may not be right, but it is reality.

[Ethereal]

It is certainly searched and indexed.

I don't know how to fix the enormous liberty problems. How do we ensure that only men and women with extraordinary integrity have access to this system, supervise it, and operate it for our benefit instead of to our detriment?
Such systems should not exist in the first place. Nobody can be trusted to access them. They will be abused and misused, invariably. Such is the nature of power.

[MisterVeritis]

Such systems should not exist in the first place. Nobody can be trusted to access them. They will be abused and misused, invariably. Such is the nature of power.
I have a different view on the systems' purposes.