Yes because if the government ever became an entity that served only the needs of itself and its rich friends, having the power to be aware of any political activist to lay serious challenge to them and put it to rest before any challenge ever happened is a good thing.Deshara said:
Why are you unable to understand, then? They just proved they will violate ANY amendment in the name of "security," so if they already proved they will violate it illegally, what is to stop them from violating any other amendment? My right to free speace? My right to a fair trial (news flash: They've already violate this right too)? My right to humane treatment? My right to vote?Lilani said:
I didn't start this thread to discuss the NSA. I started it because I, personally, don't want anything to do with the NSA. If you, or anyone, has got a problem with that, in the politest possible way-- go away.Lilani said:
It's not that I trust the government. It's that I realize there are 300 million people in this country, and if the government were to become an entity that only serves itself (well, more than usual) I recognize that in their grand scheme I am but a peon that they wouldn't have the manpower or give enough fucks to deal with on such an individual basis. The government isn't going to individually incarcerate everyone and have a look at everyone's personal "file" of political allegiances. Given the fact they at least know they're dealing with America they know pretty much nobody is going to be keen on the idea of becoming a dictatorial plutocracy. No need for a fancy database to figure that one out.flarty said:
Everybody seems pretty okay with Guantanamo bay still being open and operational, so I think it's rather disgusting that THIS is suddenly the straw that break's the camel's back, and that THIS is the one violation of human rights we simply cannot stand. Suspected terrorists being incarcerated indefinitely and tortured without due process? It's necessary for our security! Or, my favorite excuse: This is what happens during wartimes!Devil said:
Really? You're going to compare this to the occupy protests? The fed wasn't censoring or abusing protestors. Any abuse that happened was at a local level. It was officers overreacting to the situation at hand, not men in black suits whispering in their ears saying "Hit harder, beat them to a pulp!" Overreactions happen. The fact that it's caught on video doesn't suddenly make it a national conspiracy. And besides, if the government were going to censor the dissent, they would have gone after videos like that.flarty said:
That was not a comparison, that was an example of how us citizens rights have already been trampled upon. Also there?s no shouts of conspiracy in my post. If it was officers over reacting, it seemed to be on a horrendously large scale (especially in New York) and the video i posted even demonstrated what seems to be cold and calculated instances of brutality. But if you want to get in to the conspiracy side of stuff, there are leaked documents that insinuate that the fbi and banks we're working together to coordinate a crackdown on the occupy occuppy protests. Now before you jump down my throat again, note i used the word insinuate, as the documents are so poorly written and ill defined.Lilani said:
There's an incredible amount of people outraged by Guantanamo bay, just as they are outraged by in-discriminatory use of attack drones. Your apathy towards such matters is not a fair basis to judge everyone else's feelings and thoughts on the issue. As is your lack of concern for your privacy, if you are fine being monitored by your government on the whim you may do something wrong in the future.Lilani said:
You make it sound like there's some need to do individual examination of files to do bad things. You literally just filter down the vast bulk of it by looking for suspicious things, then do only slightly deeper research on them. No need to look at everyone individually, just look at people who've done a handful of things that might be suspicious in combination, but which the government shouldn't be able to examine without already having suspicion in the first place. Not just that, but using the data mining as evidence that one needs a warrant to search their person and property.Lilani said:
Who is OK with Guantanamo again? Certainly not I. Personally, they need to eradicate the whole "enemy combatant" that somehow isn't an enemy soldier bullshit entirely, and then sort out Guantanamo into "these are POWs" and "these are merely criminals" and apply the appropriate standards to them. I find it both ridiculous and kind of appalling whenever I hear someone claim that they can't treat Guantanamo prisons like normal criminals because then they'd get lawyers and trials and some of them might go free (you'd be shocked how often I've heard people make that argument).Lilani said:
A few emails and text messages? You *really* underestimate how much of a trail you leave online. Realistically (assuming that the largest ISPs are included in this), the government could very readily have every page you viewed, every search you've done, every email and text, your account names on every site you've visited, and roughly where you've been accessing the internet from (and thus a rough gauge on your movements from place to place if you frequently access the internet). If they've got the cell companies in on it then include your movements to GPS accuracy.Lilani said:
