Sen. Feinstein calls Snowden's NSA leaks an 'act of treason'

What I find interesting is that Snowden apparently was an IT guy; he basically seems to have come across this info while doing admin stuff. Not a super-spy, not an inside guy. And only 29.

He may end up regretting this.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2339268/Edward-Snowden-IT-geek-Americas-wanted.html

Some thoughts are that's why some of the initial info was not quite right - they may not be going directly to the servers of the companies listed in Prism, although they are accessing data from them; but since he just had the powerpoint, he didn't realize all the details.

One person's traitor is another person's whistleblower. Rather than arguing definitions, better to keep learning more about the program and leaning on representatives to change the laws if we don't like this. And I don't like it. I didn't like the Patriot Act either, but apparently that didn't keep it from being passed... sigh.

But yeah, I would expect officials in govt to consider this young man a traitor. But that's a side issue.
 
the patriot act was altered when the dems got control.

Its not the same act as under Bush.


I dont mind the type of info they collect but I do mind if they go after individuals without warrents like Bush did and Obama has not done
 
PostmodernProphet said:
I'm torn on this issue......I have no objection to the federal government having access to the same information that Google sells to insurance companies and people who sell automatic rice cookers......

I also have no objection to the fact that this guy told us the government was doing it secretly....

I can't find anyone to hate.....
Click to expand...
There's always me! :)
 
evince said:
the patriot act was altered when the dems got control.

Its not the same act as under Bush.


I dont mind the type of info they collect but I do mind if they go after individuals without warrents like Bush did and Obama has not done
Click to expand...

Electronic surveillance under Bush and Obama 2001 to 2013: from Patriot Act to PRISM program
excerpt

May 11, 2006 - USA Today reported the National Security Agency has been secretly collecting the phone call records of tens of millions of Americans, using data provided by AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth.

January 17, 2007 - The Justice Department transfers oversight of the surveillance program from the NSA to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA).

September 2007 - Prism begins. The FBI and the NSA get access to user data from Microsoft under a top-secret program known as Prism.

July 9, 2008 - The senate passes the FISA amendments act, extending the government’s expanded spying powers for another four years. Senator Barack votes for this bill. The act also gives immunity to telecom companies for their participation in warrantless wiretapping.

March 31, 2010 - Wiretaps ruled illegal by a federal judge.

February 2010 - Controversial Patriot Act provision extended. President Obama signs a temporary one-year extension of elements of the Patriot Act, which grants the government broad powers to seize records.

May 27, 2011 - President Obama signs a four-year extension of the Patriot Act. President Obama, who is in Europe directs the bill to be signed with an “autopen” machine in his stead. It’s the first time in history a U.S. president has done so.

May 2011 – Senator Ron Wyden says: "When the American people find out how their government has secretly interpreted the Patriot act, they will be stunned and they will be angry."

July 2012 - Court finds unconstitutional surveillance. According to a declassified statement by Wyden, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court held on at least one occasion that information collection carried out by the government was unconstitutional.

December 2012 - Congress extends the FISA Amendments Act another five years, and Obama signs it into law.

June 5, 2013 - The Guardian reports that the NSA collecting the telephone records of millions of American customers of Verizon under a court order on daily basis.

June 6, 2013 - The Washington Post and The Guardian report that under a program named PRISM, the NSA and FBI are accessing central servers of nine American Internet companies, extracting audio and video chats, photographs, e-mails, documents and connection logs.
http://english.ruvr.ru/news/2013_06...3-from-Patriot-Act-to-PRISM-program-6657-209/
 
To expand on those answers. Yes this is what liberation looks like. Liberation means that women who are assholes will rise to power just as male assholes always have.

However, a far more interesting question; are antiwar women considered soft? Absolutely. But not just women. Antiwar men are considered what? What were all of the men who were against the Iraq war for one, called on these very message boards we have all been posting on? Pussies. Gendered insults. They were feminized as "weaklings". In a patriarchy, strength is measured by the ability to kill without remorse. "Toughness" is measured by supporting a war, even if you are supporting it while sitting on your living room couch in your air conditioning eating grey poupon mustard! Even if an antiwar person gets up from their couch and risks arrest, beatings, even their reputation by attending anti-war demonstrations.

I argued back in 2008 during the primary, that Hillary's loss proved to me that a woman was going to have a very hard time becoming president on the Democratic ticket. The reason being is that a woman will have to prove herself to the general public by being "tough" (which as we know equates with a willingness to kill indiscriminately), and then would not have the room to move to the left during the primaries when a more anti-war populace chooses the nominee. Of course they chose Barack Obama. And I said that before Obama actually made war cool with the white guys who lectured ME, on Hillary's war record. Those same guys? That's right, now making excuses for why it's okay when Obama does it.

In fact, it is Obama, a man, most responsible for ending the Democratic reputation as being soft on foreign policy. For being the wimps. Which man is going to run BAC, run against Obama's warhawk policies which the democratic party have now adopted and defend? And so our war culture, which really is the patriarchy, keeps moving the standard for toughness more towards traditional "masculine" traits. And so any woman who wishes to be President, will do the same.

And while all this is going on, the real cowards, will sit at home and post support for wars, drone strikes, erosion of any civil liberty, because they must be kept safe. At any and all costs. And somehow, in our crazy culture, they will be considered the tough guys. Any one who dissents, whether man or woman, will be called a pussy. There is so much going on there, you would need a team of psychiatrists to unravel it all.
 
All I can say to any democrats or liberals who support this, let me know how it goes for you when President Jeb Bush, President Chris Christie, or President Mark Rubio is doing the same thing, and has access to all of the information you didn't mind Obama collecting on you.

I saw a poll today that showed that Democrats didn't support this under Bush, and more of them do under Obama, and that Republicans had no problem with it under Bush, but do not support it under Obama. So basically it comes down to, hey if it's my guy I trust him, it's cool.

But there is no your guy. This is just pure stupidity. And I am amazed.
 
Darla said:
All I can say to any democrats or liberals who support this, let me know how it goes for you when President Jeb Bush, President Chris Christie, or President Mark Rubio is doing the same thing, and has access to all of the information you didn't mind Obama collecting on you.

I saw a poll today that showed that Democrats didn't support this under Bush, and more of them do under Obama, and that Republicans had no problem with it under Bush, but do not support it under Obama. So basically it comes down to, hey if it's my guy I trust him, it's cool.

But there is no your guy. This is just pure stupidity. And I am amazed.
Click to expand...

APPLAUSE
 
Darla said:
All I can say to any democrats or liberals who support this, let me know how it goes for you when President Jeb Bush, President Chris Christie, or President Mark Rubio is doing the same thing, and has access to all of the information you didn't mind Obama collecting on you.

I saw a poll today that showed that Democrats didn't support this under Bush, and more of them do under Obama, and that Republicans had no problem with it under Bush, but do not support it under Obama. So basically it comes down to, hey if it's my guy I trust him, it's cool.

But there is no your guy. This is just pure stupidity. And I am amazed.
Click to expand...
I don't support it. I said as much when the Yellow Bellied Coward Act (AKA The USA PATRIOT ACT) was made into law. That it was cowardly, gutless and that once we opened pandoras box by giving government this power that we'd play hell trying to get rid of it.

Well this is what most people wanted back in 2001. I hope eveyone likes it.
 
Darla said:
All I can say to any democrats or liberals who support this, let me know how it goes for you when President Jeb Bush, President Chris Christie, or President Mark Rubio is doing the same thing, and has access to all of the information you didn't mind Obama collecting on you.

I saw a poll today that showed that Democrats didn't support this under Bush, and more of them do under Obama, and that Republicans had no problem with it under Bush, but do not support it under Obama. So basically it comes down to, hey if it's my guy I trust him, it's cool.

But there is no your guy. This is just pure stupidity. And I am amazed.
Click to expand...

This is what I've been astounded over. I was against the relatively less invasive warrantless wiretapping under Bush, I am against this astounding breach of the 4th under Obama. It doesn't matter what jersey "they" wear, what this is, is wrong.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
I don't support it. I said as much when the Yellow Bellied Coward Act (AKA The USA PATRIOT ACT) was made into law. That it was cowardly, gutless and that once we opened pandoras box by giving government this power that we'd play hell trying to get rid of it.

Well this is what most people wanted back in 2001. I hope eveyone likes it.
Click to expand...

I too was against the "Patriot" Act from the get go. You can actually find posts of mine denigrating it on this very board still...
 
Darla said:
All I can say to any democrats or liberals who support this, let me know how it goes for you when President Jeb Bush, President Chris Christie, or President Mark Rubio is doing the same thing, and has access to all of the information you didn't mind Obama collecting on you.

I saw a poll today that showed that Democrats didn't support this under Bush, and more of them do under Obama, and that Republicans had no problem with it under Bush, but do not support it under Obama. So basically it comes down to, hey if it's my guy I trust him, it's cool.

But there is no your guy. This is just pure stupidity. And I am amazed.
Click to expand...

I agree. But sadly, it's a sign of our partisan our country is ... This isn't a "government scandal" it's an "Obama scandal". And when one sees one's party members being trashed in the forums or in headlines, it's a natural response to leap to their defense.

Even on this board, there are people who are trying to make it about Pres Obama, not about abuse of govt power in general. And yet we know it doesn't matter which party is in power -if McCain or Romney had won, the same things would be happening.

In terms of supporting it - I'm very uneasy about it. Yes, it is our govt's function to collect information to find the bad guys. But who is watching the NSA to make sure they don't abuse this data? And how much information should be collected before there is a crime as opposed to collecting it after something happens?

I don't know what controls are around the data; hopefully this exposure of the programs leads to tightening of controls where needed.

But let's face it- the info is out there; everyone is collecting it. And when we were able to track down the Boston bombers quickly due to video footage, we liked it. But again - that was data checked after there was a crime, not before. But is there that much different in collecting data on phone records but not checking until there is a crime?

We won't ever get the balance right. But we have to keep discussing the balance, and working out the rules, to try to balance security vs privacy.
 
tekkychick said:
Even on this board, there are people who are trying to make it about Pres Obama, not about abuse of govt power in general. And yet we know it doesn't matter which party is in power -if McCain or Romney had won, the same things would be happening.
Click to expand...

there is something else that should happen, but I bet that it doesn't. If the intelligence committee in congress knew of this collection and approved of it, they should be arrested and convicted for treason.
 
Damocles said:
I too was against the "Patriot" Act from the get go. You can actually find posts of mine denigrating it on this very board still...
Click to expand...

I will vouch for Damo here. He and I discussed this back then as I was on one side (for much of the PA) and he was against it. I remember those discussions to this day. I am still torn but must admit that following those discussions I began to look at the PA differently. I was raised to trust until given reason to do otherwise ... and that includes not only people but extends to government. My wife thinks that is a fault that I have ... though I have become more cynical and questioning over the past 10 - 12 years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top