Yep, it's a difficult thing to accept, for sure. My main worry about this "spying" is political attacks. Petraeus was outed via emails, for example. It's highly likely that both republicans and Democrats have managed to "mine" certain types of information, like affairs, or illegal business dealings, and are waiting for the right moment to release the info. That's the double-edged sword the government has to accept. They want the tool for preventing mass murders, but they are going to be politically attacked using that tool. It's inevitable, as I see it, that abuses are going to happen or have already happened. So, we the people (ordinary citizens, not involved in politics), are not the only ones who are getting burned here, so are the politicians who have implemented this program. IMO.
I find it atypical that people like Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and any number of other Righties, AND people like Thom Hartman, Bill Press and any number of other people on the Left agree that this whistle blower is a hero. Just like there are people that trusted Bush (foolishly) there are people that trust Obama with this type of power to spy on us. The majority of voices from both sides are appalled that our government is spying on us but let the partisan nonsense begin just the same.
Come and live in the UK we have more CCTV per sq inch that any other place in the known universe. As well as a raft of other CI measures in place
Even with all that, bombings still occur. They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. - Franklin
I saw a blurp on NYC's surveillance. They put anything in England to shame - and they are all coordinated in real time. That is the only place in the world where they coordinated like that.
The foolish meme out there is that the big bad government is listening to all of your phone calls. That is actually BS! They collect and store Metadata which is simply data about data. But those who mistrust everything "gubermint" already think that their underwear size is stored someplace on Obama's desk for quick access just in case that kind of information needs to be ascertained in a hurry. Idiots!
Yeah, just to clarify: There is no way in hell that the government could possibly listen to everyone's phone calls, twits, faceslappin', emailin', etc... or even read transcripts of it all, the data is just too immense. One week of us yapping would take the government something like a hundred years to process lol It's data-mining. They use programs like the ones on this site, to search for certain words and phrases. This site uses them to generate ads, for example.
Why is Pete spying on us? Why Pete? Why? Oh yeah: Money. Pete needs advertiser to help pay for the site. The advertisers need "spy" programs to see what we are writing about and produce ads that we may be interested in. Should I say it, Pete? Should I say "Don't spy on me!"? I believe a "touche" is in order. Ohhhhh, I am sooooo on his chit-list lol
Patriot Act architect cries foul on NSA program, but skipped briefings Adam Serwer 6-14-13 The self-identified "author of the Patriot Act" has had a swift change of heart on surveillance. In a letter to Attorney-General Eric Holder last week, republican Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin asked: "How could the phone records of so many innocent Americans be relevant to an authorized investigation as required by the Act" In a separate newspaper column, Sensenbrenner went further, claiming the administration was abusing the law. Maybe Sensenbrenner wouldn't have been as surprized, had he attended classified briefings on the National Security Agency's program over the last three years. Read more: http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/06/14/sens...riefed-on-nsa-programs-skipped-the-briefings/ What a dolt. First he grants powers to the executive, then he wonders what happens afterwards. More so, he fails to attend meetings that may have provided him with the answers he seeks, had he been interested in attending, of course. Solution: He can usurp those powers for himself and his party, abuse the hell out of them, then cry foul when Democrats follow their lead. Like any other day in Congress.
Of course they do Coin can you tell me a foolproof way to stop a bomber or a gunman? because no government in the entire world has yet managed to figure that one out. All you can do is try to minimize the risk and we have not had a bombing over here since the London Underground/Bus one some years back (2005) and I hope that it stays that way. We have had a few incidents in Ulster but even they are a lot less than they once were.
Let's see. The UK has more CCTV cameras per square inch than anywhere in the known universe (in addition to a raft of other CI measures). Yet, those cameras didn't stop the 7/7 bombings. The cameras in Boston didn't stop that bombing. Cameras don't really do anything to "stop" crime. Of course they help investigators find perpetrators after a crime has been committed and that is a definite advantage to law enforcement. Cameras aren't going to "stop" crime, but they do give the authorities the ability to monitor our movements. As long as that isn't abused, I have little problem with cameras.
I never understand why the 100% success rate is always used as the justification for doing anything or nothing. Aren't incremental measures the only possible way approach these situations?
Sure. I see specific ads in specific threads. This thread, for example, may generate an ad asking for your opinion on whether or not the NSA is right on this issue. A thread on the Martin/Zimmerman case may generate an ad about civil rights or guns. It's based on whatever is written here, so when I say "guns" I may get an ad about the NRA or something. If I say sex sex sex sex sex, I hope to see a woman in a bikini advertising whatever, and occasionally it works lol Bikini, bikini, bikini, bikini....waaaait for it... It's not nefarious, btw. It's designed to give us ads that we may be interested in. Like bikinis, or guns, or cars. I'll try that one: cars cars cars cars cars. With luck, there's a car ad featuring a woman in a bikini on Pete's server lol...It all depends on what ads are available and what we write. Easy to verify by paying attention to what's been said in the thread (or previous thread you were reading/writing in) and seeing if a corresponding ad pops up. I see it all the time, but I don't mind, Pete needs to collect money to operate this site, and I'm certainly not providing it lol
Cameras do indeed stop crime, by being a deterrent. Most people prone to committing crimes are deterred by a camera's presence. That incremental effort does indeed help lower the crime rate.
Cameras will deter criminals that do not want to be caught but terrorists don't really care and more often prefer to perish in the act of their crimes. Nobody wants to live with big brother looking over their shoulder 24/7 but maybe we just have to accept that we no longer live in the 1800's and deal with the time we do live in not the time we'd like to live in. Maybe cameras are here to stay.
