Slashdot Mirror
Americans Don't Care About Domestic Spying ?
S1mmo+61 writes "Salon is analyzing a Time Magazine article today, a piece that essentially claims Americans do not care about the domestic spying. The analysis of the Time magazine piece (which is longer than the article itself) is interesting, if only as a quick history of domestic spying in the last eight years. 'Time claims that "nobody cares" about the Government's increased spying powers and that "polling consistently supports that conclusion." They don't cite a single poll because that assertion is blatantly false. Just this weekend, a new poll released by Scripps Howard News Service and Ohio University proves that exactly the opposite is true. That poll shows that the percentage of Americans who believe the Federal Government is "very secretive" has doubled in the last two years alone (to 44%)'"
I'd write an insightful and scathing retort, in which the abundance of witticisms and the razor-sharp logic would decisively destroy the opposing position... but I don't know who might be reading this.
Talk to most people about domestic spying or the abuses of the Patriot Act, and they say something like, "Well, if you're not doing something bad, who cares if the government is watching?"
I think that's a completely shortsighted and borderline insane viewpoint, but it's the one I most frequently encounter with most Americans.
I'm not sure how I like how the summary contrasts "Do you like domestic spying?" with "Do you think federal government is very secretive?". You can clearly think the government is very secretive and still not care about the spying. That isn't to say that people do or do not care, I just don't like the summary's cheap attempt at swaying people.
"Those who fail to learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat it." -- (Don't remember who said it).
It's called propaganda, folks. "Tell a lie long and enough and loud enough and sooner or later people will believe you." -- P.T. Barnum, I think.
My blog
... or is the assertion "Americans don't care about domestic spying" only very loosely tied to "Americans think the Government is very secretive?"
Don't get me wrong, I think the federal government is *very* secretive, and I greatly dislike domestic spying... but the two are not mutually inclusive. It's far from "Poll B proves Assertion A is a blatantly false."
Proudly supporting the Libertarian Party.
The cited poll just proves that people admit that domestic spying takes place, not that they care about it.
If you want a certain answer on a poll, if you ask the question in the correct way, you can usually get the answer that you want. Like: Does it bother you that the US govt increased domestic spying to keep you safe from the terrorists? Rather than: Does it bother you that the US govt increased domestic spying is keeping track of everything that you do? The first one will get a more positive answer against domestic spying than the second one, and I would bet the polls questions being used are heavily loaded to get the answer the poll taker wants.
Unfortunately.... The more people can learn about previously hush hush information like the capabilities of spy satellites and wiretapping -> the more worried a government will become that it is losing its ability to conduct intelligence gathering -> the more the government wants to clamp down on knowledge of what it does to protect itself / its citizens (yes I do think most people in the government work for the good of their fellow countrywomen and men). Is it good, no, but it makes sense.
As a coworker of mine says whenever the subject comes up, "That's what I pay my taxes for. I want them to be doing this." I feel like slapping him silly when he says that. What's worse is that he truly believes it.
This guy's the limit!
they might of got a different answer if they had surveyed /. readers.
thanks heavens I live in the UK where government spying on the populace is strictly for... oh wait.
its that we don't know by whom or why.
The lack of transparency is at the heart of any problem we have with surveilance.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
I've posted this before, but here's a survey that shows Americans are against Warrantless Wiretaps, Blanket Warrants, And Immunity For
Telecom Companies.
http://www.aclu.org/pdfs/safefree/mellmansurvey_jan2008.pdf [aclu.org]
Why the hell are our news sources giving us anything other than news? Uneducated man on the street opinions (I already know my opinion thanks, and don't trust your statistics on everyone else's), corporate advertising for new products billed as a science and technology item, known political chicanery and fraudulent press statements passed on without any actual scrutiny or independant research, and then a fluff piece to take our minds off it all. Oh how nice, you left some money for me on the bed, and now for sports, traffic and weather.
The Wolfpack Project: BitCoin + Crowdfunding = Political Accountability
"Those who fail to learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat it." -- (Don't remember who said it).
That was George Santayana.
It's called propaganda, folks. "Tell a lie long and enough and loud enough and sooner or later people will believe you." -- P.T. Barnum, I think.
Actually, that was Joseph Goebbels.
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
The problem with polls is that it is all about the way the questions are phrased: e.g. a survey on Captial Punishment may ask:
"Do you agree that it is OK to mistakenly execute an innocent person?"
alternatively they could ask:
"Should serial killers remain a burden on the tax payer for the entirity of their natural lives?"
People also habitually exagerate and lie when responding to surveys, and I know professional pollsters should be able to weed this out but they have often failed. A survey on food habits asked people to keep a record of all ingredients used over a period of many weeks. To make the lives of the participants easier, if a ready prepared meal was eaten then they could just keep the packaging. The survey found that the consumption of ready meals was much higher than any one ever thought...
Art is the mathematics of emotion
an "us" versus "them"
where "us" is your average american, the beneficiary of the spying, and "them" is your average islamofascist, the target of the spying
as long as that perception holds, your average american will support domestic spying
but of course, there is something called mission creep. much as we still pay tolls for bridges that were already paid for 10x over 50 years ago, once somethign is in place that benefits the goverment, it's not moving unless a really big push comes to shove
so unless stories come out about abuses of spying laws (and no, your average american does not view abuse as something that hurts someone seen as sympathetic to radical islam), where "us" versus "them" shifts in meaning to "us"=the agenda of someone in the government, and "them"=any average joe blow, these spying laws will be in place for a long time
that may take decades
as long as the government uses these powers shrewdly, and uses them only against those who most obviously have no interest in a tolerant society and the rights that should be used to protect them in the first place, your average american simply won't care. but what will happen is the government will not use these powers shrewdly, a scandal will happen where these powers are flagrantly abused, and the domestic spying laws will be reversed
so start looking for that scandal. it may take awhile
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
The "unidentified surveys" are supposedely about spying, and the noted one is about how secretive our government is. They don't equal the same thing. Quit sharing opinions, and why the crap is /. posting this bull?
For some reason I'm envisioning some obnoxious overweight woman in a mall, holding 20-page surveys asking, "would'cha like ta take uh survey aboot dumbestic spyin'?" to everyone who walks by her. Everyone refuses, so her results are nobody cares...
It doesn't matter whether or not "most" people care or don't care.
The issue is that there isn't an overwhelming backlash from this expansion of surveillance power.
The sad part is that America is losing it's democracy without realizing it.
When FDR tried to pack the supreme court the United States Congress saw it for what it really was; the undermining of the checks and balances instituted to prevent abuse of power.
Today, I think, with great sadness if the same thing happened it would hardly be so adamantly opposed. Whichever party the President belongs to would simply support it to further their agenda.
They don't care right now, but they WILL care, rest assured.
in 3... 2...
Caring about spying and believing the federal government is secretive: these are not mutually exclusive beliefs. I can believe the federal government is secretive and not care. Or I can believe the government is open and care a lot.
There hasn't been any indications that information gained by illegal surveillance has been used in an attempt to prosecute someone. Without that, any claim of illegal surveillance fails to incite anyone. As a matter of fact, using illegally obtained evidence is specifically prohibited from being used, so our rights are preserved.
Just because a tree COULD fall in the woods doesn't mean folks should go around holding their hands over their ears to prevent themselves from hearing it.
Can you hear me now?
- real hackers don't have sigs -
When the first vote came up to congress on 13-Feb-2008, the only thing covered on every news channel was the baseball steroids scandal. There was no mention of the congressional debate or vote.
http://www.hackerfactor.com/blog/index.php?/archives/151-Wag-The-Dog.html
When the revised bill came up to congress on 14-March-2008, it was not covered by the mass media. Instead, they repeatedly covered a "captured Al Qaeda leader"... who isn't a leader, wasn't captured recently, and isn't even missed by Al Qaeda.
http://www.hackerfactor.com/blog/index.php?/archives/164-No-Respect.html
If more people knew about the domestic spying bill, more people would be mad. And if more people knew about the government's manipulation of the mass media, more people would be furious.
I find Massimo Calabresi's article to be odious in the extreme. Suppose that his assertion was true, that nobody cared, would it then be okay for illegal domestic spying to occur? That seems to be his unwritten position, and I find that to be disgusting logic. There are numerous examples throughout history of the dangers posed by unregulated spying, some of them (like those uncovered by the Church Commission) right here at home.
I mostly liked Greenwald's response, but he does seem to tilt slightly by Calabresi's points. I think that will make it difficult for his article to be persuasive to those not already persuaded. However, he does link this excellent piece in the LA Times:
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-op-sanchez16mar16,0,4039194.story
That might be more approachable to most.
I'd also like to add a bit of insight from Molly Ivins, paraphrased. She said that moderates sometimes fret that when they give the government increased spying powers that they'll end up spying on the girl scouts. But this is wrong: they don't end up spying on the girl scouts, they don't end up making a mistake, they ALREADY ARE. Gotta keep tabs on those nonviolent Quakers, etc. It's not "what if" the government abuses its authority, it's by how much.
Use the Firehose to mod down Second Life stories!
He basically says that Time lied . Yep. So, in other words most Americans care about the Bush administration's illegal wiretaps and Time is making up data to support an opposite conclusion.
I prefer Flambe as apposed flamebait.
I think the poll should have asked if people were getting sick of responding to polls. It's probably the only poll you could give someone and expect a reliable answer.
I wonder how many Americans actually know that the CIA has absolutely no legal jurisdiction to spy on the American people. In order for it to spy on the American people, it has to break a whole host of laws.
The FBI, one of the most thuggish law enforcement agencies in the United States, however, has quite a lot of ability to spy on you.
The truth is, the people likely to be spying on you, are the people who should scare you because they are law enforcement, not spooks.
I love the shock on others' faces when they say "I have nothing to hide," and I respond, there is no innocence in the sight of an evil man with power. This is especially amusing when I point it out to other Christians, generally who support Bush and "strong-on-this-or-that" policies. There is nothing worse than an evil man with unchecked power because when his attention turns to you, he will, by nature, try to turn every good you have done into an evil thing in order to enjoy his power.
As for the poll that was mentioned in the Slashdot summary that claims the direct opposite: [..]shows that the percentage of Americans who believe the Federal Government is "very secretive" has doubled in the last two years alone (to 44%) How is this direct proof of the opposite? And how can we know that the poll was conducted in an unbiased manner?
There is little evidence that [the average] American cares about these issues. We rarely see any protests and almost no media coverage. The TIME editor may be wrong (or not), but at least he ignited a much needed debate that could eventually prove that if a blowjob can lead to impeachment, so should Bush's deeds.
Full Tilt
If you aren't doing anything wrong, what have you to hide?
What about the course of U.S. government since its inception?
The whole point of blackmail is that it exists in the shadows. The stage production of justice is a silly thing to point at when trying to downplay the impact of domestic spying, because the whole point of that kind of leverage is that both the abuser and the victim fight in their own ways to keep it out of the justice system.
McCarthy had dirt on almost everybody of any influence, and he certainly knew the value of it. Nothing has changed, except the expansion of the existing system. Despite the spin being layered on this issue, the true battle has little to do with the specter of abusive public arrests by cops using illegal wiretaps.
-FL
"He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither." - Benjamin Franklin
they do the president. The media, which at one point was probably controlled by liberals has now shifted into some sort of... monster. Republicans don't control it - Murdoch does... that guy is probably one of the many possible anti-christs but I digress :P
For the most part, the millenials (those born after 1980) don't care much about politics, and those who do mainly have skewed, false information.
Did anyone see the california train derailment that happened in cali? I would have never known about it if my brother, who ordered something from newegg tracked his shipping details and it said "train derailment" and called and told me.
The millenials don't care about things unless it jumps up and smacks them in the face. Its sad, really.
Can't we be left to make up our own minds on the validity of their assertion. This isn't Fox News is it?
I guess that got to be too inconvenient, hence the recent controversies.
Foreign governments are going to spy regardless of any possible law or supreme court decision.
If I need to send something secret internationally I send an encrypted email.
I can not get excited by one more government tapping international phone calls.
Please continue with the petty bickering, I find it fascinating.
I think if he were to come up with something today, it would be more along the lines of
"Because people inevitable fail to learn the lessons of history, we are doomed to repeat it endlessly."
First, RTFA. The summary picks the least useful poll in the entire article as its example of the otherwise very strong support the article gives for the author's position.
Reading the popular media, you might get the impression that the people don't care that our government is at war with our country. But then, that may just be the media pushing its preference for a stable tapestry on which to paint transient images of sex scandals. Those people who supposedly don't care have also been giving tens of millions of dollars a month, in individual amounts betraying the fact that they are not members of the ruling class and in numbers demonstrating an extraordinarily broad base, to one presidential candidate who does not represent business as usual.
If you look to establishment journalism for serious critique of the establishment, should you really be surprised if what you find is not truth, but spurious defense?
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
Those that give up Liberty to have temporary
Security deserve Neither - Benjamin Franklin.
Americans aren't any different to the rest of the world.. if you want the US to continue being different you need to work against the normalising forces that move you closer towards a world of 1984 where everyone is guzzling *bucks, munching McD and watching screens telling you want you want and what to do.
The pressures the drive the brown shirts to look for more powers will always exist. The people need to resist their government, else their prisonkeepers will take advantage and abuse the citizens.
But quick poll:
Besides this one, have you ever actually been polled in the real world? Like a hardcore poll that ends up on CNN and stuff.
I can safely say that I don't know a single person who has been, and thus take every poll I see with a large grain of salt.
but I may as well point this out. I think the reasons Most Americans don't care is because they understand the program beyond what it is being called.
1) The media likes to call it "Domestic Spying" but the truth is that the authority only covers calls where one party is outside the US. In that case, calling it a "Domestic Spy Program" is deceptive.
2) Americans understand (even if the eggheads in the media do not) that the US is at war. And during war time the US policy needs to be nimble enough to combat a faceless enemy. In a world where terrorist cells operate almost completely autonomous, you can't say "Well we can't listen to this conversation because we don't have a warrant. We'll get a warrant for the next one." There may not be a next one. Buildings could just start dropping from the sky.
3) As far as abuses of the patriot act go, you really need to look at this in a historical context. In WW2, Roosevelt interned 120K Japanese-Americans out of fear that they might try to sabotage US efforts against Japan. In June 1942, 8 German saboteurs were caught trying to enter the US to sabotage the US efforts against Germany. By July 8th, All eight were sentenced to death by a military tribunal. By August they all smelled a little too much like burnt toast. Lincoln is famous for his rape of the constitution. After the civil war, 2nd amendment rights in the south were abbreviated, Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus, etc.
So you see, this is the nature of war. I will be more concerned about these programs if they exist long after American boots have left the middle east. In the meantime, I want my uncle and brother to be as safe as possible over there.
First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.
Pastor Martin Niemöller
I don't like Linux. This doesn't make me a troll.
Whenever some pundit starts a statement with "Most Americans believe that ... ", you can translate it to mean "I believe, and I'm about to try to convince you and anyone listening, that ..."
See also, sig.
Research shows that 67% of those who use the term "research shows", are just making shit up.
You've all heard that one. --A very pure example of one of the most insidious and powerful advertising techniques in the biz. It's not about this feature over that feature. It's not even about the perception that one is cool and the other not. Nope.
The true intent of such advertising is never stated or obvious. What is the true intent?
To program people with regard to how they identify themselves to themselves. It's not, "Hi! I USE a Mac." --Which is powerful enough, especially when the human brain is lulled into low revs on the EEG meter as a direct result of gazing at a flickering CRT, Television viewing instantly puts every person into a clinically measurable hypnotic state where suggestion becomes defacto reality to the personality. Even when you know intellectually that owning a PC is no different than owning a can opener, that part of your brain is short circuited and a deeper part of your personality is affected, no matter how strong your personal resolve, by the emotional knowledge that you are not young and hip in whatever way is being provided as the benchmark. (In this case, by a Mac user who uses faux love and respect to deliver demoralizing comments and knife jabs. The latest in a long stream of sick tactics in the game of social power.)
What has this got to do with Time Magazine?
The article in question doesn't report so much as it instructs.
It tells us the abuse and it tells us that we do not care. Humans are social creatures; on an instinctive level we need to belong to the group, and so we will generally adopt whatever behavior is prevailing just to remain in the tribe, to stay part or the pack. Time Magazine is perhaps the top selling magazine in the U.S. Everybody knows this on some level; if Time speaks, it does so as an important voice of our tribe. So when it tells us what we think, on a deep level, we listen and for those who don't actively learn how this kind of programming works, we very often obey.
Abuser to the victim: "I'm going to rape you until you rupture, and you're not going to complain. You're even going to defend me against potential rescuers."
Stockholm Syndrom; When separated from the rest of the world for even a short time, fear and the instinctive desire to survive, causes people to automatically try to learn the rules of the tribe, (in this case the culture of hostages and power keepers), and fit in so that they are not rejected by the tribe leaders. (i.e., shot in the head.) So when the rescuers did arrive, they were actively fought by the hostages themselves. Stupid, but that's the human machine, and advertisers and media conglomerates know this fact well.
If Time Magazine wanted to serve humanity, it would not tell us what we think with endless polls and such. It would tell us what is happening in the world and would remain unbiased at all times. You know. Responsible journalism. Instead we get the popular kid telling us what all the cool people think.
-FL
I'm not sure why, of all the tidbits it could have quoted, the poster quoted the bit about people thinking the government is more secretive. Maybe doing this generates discussion.
But for those too lazy to RTFA, this quote from the Salon article has greater thrust towards the conclusion:
And:So he Times article cites no polls whatsoever, it's just someone talking out of their ass. The Salon article quotes a poll that shows the opposite conclusions.
And to those who say polls/surveys are inaccurate, I say it's better than talking out of your ass.
The issue here is that both the article and it's criticism start with an incorrect premise. That is that the TSA is actually "Domestic Spying".
For the original article, the reason people don't mind "Domestic surveillance" is because they see right through the slanted polls.
If I may geek-out for a moment, it's rather like the episode of Star Trek TNG where Data thought a small repair robot had developed sentience. Nobody believed him and they tested the robot by setting up a situation where if the robot didn't flee the area, it would be destroyed. Of course, the test was a fake-out. When the robot didn't flee when it ostensibly should have to save it's own life, everybody concluded that it wasn't sentient. What Data discovered was that the robot SAW RIGHT THROUGH the test, realized it was a fake-out, and kept working.
When you ask most people about the "Domestic Spying Program" most people know you are talking about the Terrorist Surveillance Act. Since they disagree with the premise that it is "domestic spying", they answer that they have no problems with it. Thus you get an article like the Time's article.
However, if you ask a more nebulous question such as "Should the Government be spying on it's own citizens?" You will inevitably get an opposite result. OF COURSE people don't want to be spied upon by their government. However, they DO NOT agree with the false premise that the TSA is "Domestic spying".
I'm not going to get into the reasons why the premise is wrong, I've no patience for the Bush Derangement Syndrome of the tinfoil hat wearers that comprise part of the Slashdot community. I just thought I'd take a moment to clarify the apparent dichotomy of the results here.
Official Heretic from the "Church of Global Warming". Proven right thanks to whistle blowers. AGW = Flat Earth Theory
Uhm, exactly the opposite would be: "Americans do care about domestic spying". Is that what the supposed counter-argument asserts? No, it is not:
Believing, that the government is secretive, does not equate to being bothered by it — plenty of people think, the government should be more secretive in its fight against our enemies (whether they are right is besides the point).
And 44% — 22% a year ago? — is still less than a half...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Don't worry, even the most fervent supporter of domestic spying is only one prostitution scandal away from having a more balanced viewpoint.
Support Right To Repair Legislation.
People who answer surveys don't care if other people know stuff about them.
---
"I can't complain, but sometimes still do..." Joe Walsh
That poll shows that the percentage of Americans who believe the Federal Government is "very secretive" has doubled in the last two years alone (to 44%)'"
That doesn't necessarily contradict the statement "Americans don't care about domestic spying."
No, the famous Barnum quote is "There's a sucker born every minute." It still applies, though.
(IANAL)
That was a professional group that has been listening in via computers for over a decade. Their listening was for issues from outside of the USA, even though they have been listening in on local calls.
The problem is that W. has perverted it to allow the DOJ and himself to have access to this data. The issue with this, is that DOJ and president are political AND have the power to arrest with minimal oversight (NSA actually is loaded with oversight).
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
It's really no big mistery. I can't make this claim about the rest of the world because I really don't know, but in my opinion, Americans only care about things that directly effect them. Why don't they care about domestic spying? They believe it doesn't effect them directly, and they may be right. We honestly care more about gas prices then our freedom.
What is this Time Magazine article, a propaganda piece? Seriously, I've never heard anyone claim that. It's an opinion, so I can post mine.
Its insane because the generation from the 60s, those who lamented about the government being bad, are now that very same government!
Go figure. Look at the leadership in Congress, then look back at some of these people in the 60s and 70s. Notice that they are doing the very same thing they decried back then?
Where is the new generation? I guess after all these years they managed to turn the school system into celebrating government instead of America. Kids are so distracted as to not care about the government and its they who need to be interested now so as to do something later.
About the spying, tapping calls going out of or into from this country to know terrorist locations is not the same as spying on Tom calling Jerry across the street. I think it comes down to how the poll presents the spying being done. Does it present it truthfully or in tinfoil hat methods?
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
You ask where Americans learn such a distorted premise of privacy?
Let me make it easy for you: "24". Certainly, it's not the only place, but it's a good example. There, we learn that regardless of what we're told, everything is being watched and monitored, whether for our safety, or our oppression. But the cause does not matter. What matters is that we're repeatedly hammered with the concept that for better or worse, there is nothing we can do to prevent our government from abusing its power. In the media, we are repeatedly treated to scenes of torture and humiliation of "innocent till proven guilty" people, at the hands of law enforcement. As a whole, these images promote habituation to ongoing abuses of our civil rights... not through fear or ignorance... but rather apathy.
Of course, media does not bear the sole blame, nor actually does it bear the bulk of it. You know who bears the blame? US!
We are the ones who are the chief architects of our own oppression and the nearly inevitable even greater oppression of our children. Why you ask? Because we are too busy, or don't care enough, to educate our children, both in terms of general education to develop their innate intelligence, and specifically historical knowledge that is absolutely required for them to even realize when their rights are being violated. Our current generation has grown complacent, arrogant, and stupid... and their parents largely don't seem to care. Sadly, the small, isolated, pockets of parents that actually do their job, to push their offspring to develop, matter little, as they drown in the sea of materialistic arrogance.
This is where the Constitution (through the judiciary) should step in and protect us (as a nation nation) from the masses. It's why we're not supposed to be a pure democracy.
However, the constant posting of poll results and inadequate education leads people to forget that, too, and insist on ignoring the Constitution.
One thing I rarely read in these kinds of discussion is the importance of the principle of balance of power. In my mind, the checks and balances placed on the power of government is the true genius of democracy, American-style. That we have three very independent branches of government makes it possible for self-regulation. It is the lack of balance that makes warrantless wiretapping improper.
I'm not convinced that it ought to be the judicial branch that balances the executive power in this particular case, however. If people in the Executive branch are spying against Americans, I would think that Congress would be a better choice, given the essentially political nature of the activity (what legal issues would be at stake in deciding whether person 'A' ought to be spied upon? It's a political question, not a legal one.)
Nevertheless, SOME balance is an absolute necessity.
"We receive as friendly that which agrees with, we resist with dislike that which opposes us" - Faraday
Not only arent Americans shy, but they seem to desire media exposure all the time.
It's not that we don't care. It's more that we have been aware that we the US has been enabling other partners in the WEST to spy on the US for us. Project Echelon would be a great example and the listening post in Canada that was funded by NSA funds. This has been a widely known fact for several years now. I do think it's sad that we have been such a free nation growing up. And now have had to become much more JADED since 9/11. Whether it's a NSA funded program using a Neighbor to spy on us, or an Agency that is INTERNAL to the United States. Domestic spying is here and if we didn't like it. Probably should have told J. Edgar Hover to STOP back then.
I do contract work for many different areas of government, city, county, state, federal, police, armed forces, nuclear regulatory bodies, court systems, etc etc etc.
It is truly astounding how incompetent they are at all levels. They cannot get all the things done they are trying to do right now. Not even close. While I don't directly work for whomever is responsible for 'domestic spying', I doubt its any different over there.
I'm really not worried about being 'spied' on by a bunch of people who cannot find their heads from their asses.
Posted anonymously because they're probably reading slashdot instead of doing whatever the hell we're paying them for.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiocracy
:(
With the House recently refusing to rubber-stamp legislation to let Bush continue his warrantless wiretap program and *gasp* insist that he go through legal channels (the FISA courts which pretty much approve every request and can approve requests up to 72 hours after the wiretap begins), a commercial started running over and over on our local stations. It used extremely slanted language to insinuate that *all* terrorism surveillance had stopped since the House refused to approve Bush's plan. It further insisted that we were now vulnerable to a terrorism attack and that the only way to restore our safety was to call our local Representatives and tell them to approve the plan.
It drove me crazy how much that commercial spun the facts around so much. (Even the word "spin" seems too benign. Contort maybe?) My wife wound up getting annoyed at me ranting every time the commercial aired.
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
Oh, it's already begun.
This kind of editorializing is terrible. But it is even worse to know that the claims are actually refuted by something posted to this very site!
TimeWarner owns _Time_ magazine and one of the biggest broadband networks, that carries millions of Americans' Internet, TV and also telephone. Of course its political propaganda magazine is going to lie about those Americans not caring that TimeWarner is spying on them without legal entitlement.
All this handwaving by Bush, his Republican Congressional minority (that was the majority that successfully hid these crimes for years of their joint reign), and the media corporations that all colluded to criminally spy on us are just more proof that they're guilty of those massive crimes. They're not covered by the existing laws that would have given them immunity from liability, if only they had even the slightest respect for the law. Instead they just did whatever they wanted, for the money and power it brings. And they plan to invade privacy as a top priority , which they've planned for quite a while.
Of course the corporations spying on you will lie to you about whether you care that they're spying on you. It's up to you: if you don't care that they're also lying to you about it to protect their own ass (and their ongoing, expanding criminal enterprise), then it's your fault, too.
--
make install -not war
The subject of the story is misplaced! The item Americans don't care about anymore is Time Magazine.
Were fully comfortable with the likelihood that our government is doing things that are illegal and unethical. Were even kind of proud when they can do these things in a secretive manner and produce the desired results.
We however would at least like to pretend that they cater to some code of ethics in the public face the put towards us.
Just keep lying to us. You've been doing it for so long that were comfortable with it. Don't try and legitimize it; it just makes you look lazy.
I absolutely agree that domestic spying is a concern. However, I also find an insult to my intelligence to see people claiming that they're being oppressed by the government, that someone is watching everything they say. I don't see how any rational person could actually believe that. Given all the open discourse, all the content out there vehemently opposing the president, ranging from blogs, to movies, to news media how can anyone say with a straight face that this administration has it in for anyone opposed to him. It's like people think it's more exciting if they see themselves as revolutionaries.
The patriot act is irrelevant anyway. Like the government is somehow not going to spy on us with our without some bit of legislation saying they can. The obvious difference is that if it's illegal it wont be disclosed to the public.
The problem with Americans today isn't that they don't care about domestic spying. It's that they're overly obsessed with security, specifically, they want the government to protect them from everything. See something offensive on television? Bring in government regulation. Someone says something disagreeable, make that speech illegal. Make poor financial decisions? Have the government come in with a bail out.
Americans want to be insulated from all the ills of the world. They don't want any responsibilities. This is something that apparently has afflicted Americans of all income levels. And what's worse, they have unrealistic expectations. They'll embrace domestic spying under the pretense that it will prevent a terrorist attack. It will certainly help, but it isn't foolproof. What if we face another serious attack. What then? Are we going have the military patrolling our streets.
And needless to say, the media feeds into this hysteria. To them it's all a money-making business, but it's having quite the detrimental impact on society. Priorities are all screwed up. Many people are fixated on terrorism which is a vague, relatively minor threat. I believe it's a real concern, but nowhere near the level that requires an obnoxious alert system, or required the Department of Homeland Security. For example, there's a more immediate and serious threat of crime which people seem to be oblivious through.
Anyway, my concern with things like domestic spying is their long-term application. I'm not concern with what this administration has done because he's on his way out and by and large it's been actually used against terrorism. My fear is what future administrations do with these powers. My fear is that the government engages what is essentially thought control, people are investigates for saying something perceived as offensive about some group. That's my concern with things like the Fairness Doctrine coupled with the Patriot Act.
We're already heading in a direction where anything deviating from group think is discouraged. And the internet is helping to feed particular mindsets where blogs perpetuate certain ideas. The idea basically is: you're free to say whatever you want as long as you agree with us. And because of this an alarming number of people seem to be embracing this notion that we should silence certain voices for whatever reason suits their agenda. And with the wrong people in power they can make this a reality.
The power technology affords provides the government with the resources to control us in ways that make what China is doing in Tibet seem like an amusement park ride.
Well, Barnum DID say "There's a sucker born every minute." I think he was being charitable.
A lot of people think "well, these rules are just for the funny guys with turbans and long beards. Nobody would ever think of applying them to me."
There is a famous answer to this argument.
When trying to have an objective, reasoned debate about policy, it's always unhelpful to use politically-charged, inflammatory language like "domestic spying." The name makes it seem like the government is flying around in black helicopters in the dead of night, spying in you windows and reading your mail. The reality is nothing of the sort and is being taken completely out of context.
Are conversations between two U.S.-based citizens being monitored? Absolutely not. Are conversations initiated in the U.S. to overseas destinations being monitored? Absolutely not. Are general conversations originating outside the U.S. to U.S.-based destinations being monitored? Absolutely not. Are conversations originating from known or suspected terrorist organizations to U.S.-based destinations being monitored? Yes, they are. This is not "domestic spying," this is anti-terrorist intelligence gathering.
I strongly believe the authorities in the U.S. should obtain warrants for this type of activity (if for no other reason than conformity to procedure) but I am not against the activity itself one little bit. If someone overseas is plotting and/or coordinating with assets already in place in this country, I want my government to know about it and take an active stance to thwart it. This debate would be much better served if people would place their ideological biases aside and examine this issue without Bush Derangement Syndrome (from the left) or Liberal Condemnation Disorder (from the right) ruining their judgement.
In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us. - Fyodor Dostoyevsky
Honestly, I don't care as much as the ACLU that's for certain. I think most Americans support tapping suspect calls on the fly out of Iran but happen to route through a US switch to another end receiver in Iran. To the ACLU that's a domestic wire tap, probably is to some courts as well I'm sure. I also have no problem with them filtering email that might originate from overseas or travel overseas. To the ACLU, an email between suspect foreign entities becomes a US "wiretap" when they carbon copy a citizen in the US (even if they don't know said person and use a cc as a spam mechanism to muddy the legal waters).
I think the US shouldn't intentionally target phone calls between my wife and I. I know it's a complete waste of their time and I don't think that's what they are doing. I think some special interest groups like the ACLU and political partisans are making mountains out of mole-hills on this. If the intentions of the US are to root out the bad guys then my call to the Pizza Hut is collateral damage as far as I'm concerned. Am I naive, ignorant and possibly even a danger to the whole US foundation of freedom because of my beliefs? No, I'm blissfully naive and ignorant about these possible dangers. I think like most Americans, I don't worry too much about it and I sleep well at night.
For all intents and purposes, Time is right. I wouldn't go so far as to say nobody cares, but I will say this: nobody cares enough. Considering what's been done, there should be, at a minimum, mass protests in the streets of every city, every town, and every villiage. Yet by and large there has been little or no public outcry over what's been done. Maybe 44% of the people think the government is very secrative, but what percentage think the government has become secretive in a way that violates the law and the Constitution? And of those, what percentage care enough to do something about it? So far, I'd have to say, saddly, pretty much zero.
Understanding is a three edged sword. - Ambassador Kosh Naranek, Babylon 5
Many Americans don't care about their government's interventionist policies, until the resentment turns into violence, and then their only response is more violence. Many Americans don't care that their public primary educational system is a joke among modern industrialized nations, until the ignorance gives rise to crime and violence, and then their only response is more violence. (More police, harsher sentences.)
It would be easier if all of us were like that. But many of us do care. And many of us know that violence is not a good answer. Violence is only an answer like a tourniquet is a treatment -- it is a desperate measure and the situation is probably already a tragedy if you have to use it.
- Cheeseburgers
- Dancing with the stars
- The Gays marrying
If it's not on that list, we don't care about it.sic transit gloria mundi
I live in NYC, perhaps the most anti-gun city in America. But in the last month many of my friends and associates, who are also quite anti-gun and quite peaceable, have started taking shooting lessons and going about the arduous licensing required here to become gun owners. They even started a club, ShootingLiberally (shootingliberally.org).
Yes, it's anecdotal. But it's striking because of the turnaround it represents. If these kinds of people start learning the arts of war, then there must be a deep aversion out there to what's happening to freedom in the United States.
Perhaps not every American cares that much about it, but neither did they at the time of the American Revolution. In fact, less than 5% of the colonists took up arms against the British. But those were the important 5%, and they changed the course of history.
Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.
Go talk to people and form your own opinion. Most of the people I talk to in my office like having the telco companies providing information to the FBI to help them bust terrorists. If a few people like drug dealers and sexual predators get busted while they're at it, most people think that's an added bonus (even though they're technically not supposed to use the information for that). People may not feel this way in many cities and/or states, but that's the way they seem to feel about it where I live.
The main problem I see with it is that politics ALWAYS gets involved, and powers like this ALWAYS get abused. I'm sure the Bush administration could easily have the FBI snoop on anyone who's not in his camp to dig up some dirt for a little old-fashioned blackmail. If you think the FBI has time to listen to all of our calls, you're deluded. But if you think they're not listening to the calls of certain high-profile people the Bush administration is watching out for, you're just as deluded.
"Those who fail to learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat it." -- (Don't remember who said it).
The irony...embrace it.
I was gonna skip over this article, but then the irony was too great.
Google: "All your data are belong to us."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Intelligence_Surveillance_Act Just from "skimming" that entry, domestic wiretapping seems to be a misused term. I think that calling your moms in Tulsa is a horrible example because this bill is mainly used for international wiretapping with one point being in the US. It seems that the main point of contention is that the materials and equipment from that point in the US could be seized. Like I said before I think a lot of privacy advocates running around saying domestic wiretapping makes it seems like you are being spied on your calls to pappajohns. I still don't know what kind of conclusion to come to myself in the end but I think a lot of people don't really know what the bill is in the first place.
"If you like Battlestar Galactica, you're probably a huge nerd." -Stephen Colbert
History repeats itself, first as a tragedy, second as a farce, third as inevitable...
Becuase no one has ever lost a job or got denied their college degree because of social networking sites?
Your ad here. Ask me how!
The submitter idiot then grabs a poll to his liking, which has little if anything to do with the subject of the Time magazine article.
People think the government is very secretive. What does that have to do with eavesdropping on international phone traffic? Are all secretive things exactly identical?
Damn, the submitter is an idiot.
Here's something all the paranoid little shits need to understand: after the next terrorist attack on the United States, your blood will be flowing in the streets. It was exactly this kind of legalistic barratry which allowed 9/11 to happen. Now that the Dummycrat party is back in power, all they have done is make America less safe.
The Dummycrats caused 9/11, and they are working on the next 9/11. Americans will be forced to defend ourselves from Dummycrats. We will call it pre-emptive self-defense, and it will be a lot of fun.
When is the last time that TIME published an article that was anything more than an executive summary?
Who reads TIME anyway? I don't.
They're using their grammar skills there.
Complacency of the average people with the nazism, or with the communism for that matter is something that people in the USA should bear in mind. If great nations like Germans or Russians, who gave to the world numerous philosophers, artists and scientists could fell for the Hitler and Lenin/Stalin, is it that difficult to understand that dictatorial behaviour can happend in almost every society? If these polls give true verdict on the status of "average Joe/Jane", that he/she indeed doesn't care if the government roams around with impunity, then we can almost say Liberty in the USA is all but dead.
It's an interesting premise to consider that going back to the past (the days of "freedom") might end up with another 911 terrorist attack.
One might argue that since the terrorists (presumably under the "freedom" days) are already among us, that there's no good way of identifying them in order to stop their activities.
We live in a world where many people do not know their neighbors, nor do they even have the desire to know their neighbors. We have taught our children now from youth that all strangers are DANGER. Is it any wonder that terrorist groups can operate effectively without fear of discovery? In addition to "stranger danger", we've also adopted things like "don't ask, don't tell" and "mind your own business" to the point of where neighborhoods are no longer controlled by the populace (we no longer even desire to "tar and feather" and "have em' ride the rail" out of town.. not that I'm advocating mass witch hunting either). Now we fully expect our own gov't or police to be the sole entity in determining who is "ok" and who is "not". And when those gov't/policing entities fail us, we sue them.
And we WONDER why we don't have the freedoms we used to? We don't have those freedoms because we have acted irresponsibly with regards to our duties as citizens to train our children to do what is right and honorable. Instead we set up examples of lewd living, cheating, piracy and CLAIM that we want "privacy" mainly to protect the deeds we have done that aren't "right" or "honorable". Sigh...
To make matters worse, to combine irresponsible living with no policing just continues moral degradation and chaos.
Want to go back to a "freer" time? Time to teach again what is right and wrong and THEN live it out! Not with justice... for no one would survive but with grace and mercy so that everyone can understand that the desire is for everyone to work together to do what is right. For those that are unteachable and have caused much harm to society.... time for them to "hit the rails!"
Anyone who believes that the "fix" is to stop the current policies needs to understand that building back responsible human behavior is NOT an easy or quick task. Policing must continue until the populace takes back ownership and their own responsibility for policing themselves.
Why do you have locks on your doors?
Why does your company have passwords on the computers?
Why don't we just have a national "party line" telephone system?
Why do we wear clothes?
Why is there such a thing as "intellectual property"?
Why do we have copyright?
Why do we have PINS on our checking account?
I'm not tense. I'm just terribly, terribly, alert.
Depending on how they couched the question you can get a myriad of answers. The majority of the different polls that *I* have seen personally pretty much hold out that "domestic spying" is okay but only when they relate it to "monitoring outside -> in calls from suspected terrorists".
One question that people dont ask often is how effective is this mass wiretapping?
Assuming the govt agency spy on a very big part of the population, doesnt it make a lot of information to filter?
Arent terrorists able to use encryption?
Wouldnt the efforts be better spent investigating people that actually pose a risk rather than go thru the huge bulk of information they get from mass spying?
Time, in net, has usually been an apologist for big government. As for this administration, Constitutional has either meant an evening stroll, or a brand of toilet paper.
I think the Time article was badly written because its assertion was not back up with any hard evidence. It mentions polls but what are these "polls" anyway? Even if specific polls would mentioned, I don't think they would have that much significance. Americans have other problems that may take greater precedence than domestic spying. All americans are affected by the declining economy through higher prices, less jobs, foreclosures, etc. Americans are witnessing the effects of the Iraq War on the soldiers and their families. Americans are certainly affected by are poor health care system. No one should be surprised if Americans are worried that someone may or may not have listened in on a recent phone call. Americans certainly have a problem with it overall but that issue has to go to the back of the line.
You don't have to be smart to use a Mac, you just have to be smart enough to buy one
I never get polled, so I'd like to take a minute to publicly air my sentiments.
Sure, push me around a bit, Uncle Sam. I know that you occasionally have to bend the rules to keep the game playable.
But I won't take much more pushing and shoving.
And to Mr. Bush - enjoy your last few months in the great white palace. Bang as much intern as you can, because after you pack your bags, your days as a Former US President begin. You and your ilk will be reviled for your administration.
Nothing like being remembered for all history as one of the most deranged and impotent administrations ever, hunh?
Message contains 1 attachment: spam.gif
"In 1972 a crack commando unit was sent to prison by a military court for a crime they didn't commit. These men promptly escaped from a maximum security stockade to the Los Angeles underground. Today, still wanted by the government, they survive as soldiers of fortune. If you have a problem, if no one else can help, and if you can find them, maybe you can hire the A-Team."
Where's B.A. Baracus when you need him...
"Figures lie and liars figure." I find more and more that this applies to most anything that goes through the mainsteam media, and in most other aspects of society these days.
In any case, the biggest threat to the people of the United States is our own ignorance. People are more concerned with Britney Spears and Paris Hilton these days, than the daily erosion of their every right by a corrupt, ethically/morally bankrupt government. And by and large, I think some of this has been by design.
Children aren't really taught much about the Constitution, the Founding Fathers, and the true foundations of this country. Where did these things go? Why aren't they included in the curriculum any longer? If they are lucky, they get the pop-trivia version of American history (ex: What year was the Declaration of Independence signed?) rather than (Who were the signers of the Constitution, and what was their reasoning or contribution to it?)
The future George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin, etc of this country are threatened by several things (and certainly not an exhaustive list):
1) The "dumbing down" of the American populace, perhaps by design.
2) As a result of the above, a sickening level of complacency and apathy among the People.
3) An increasing trend (by the media, government, and the ignorant public) to label those who don't buy into the sheep mentality as "extremists", "whackjobs", etc.
4) A government who feels the need for increasingly "expanded powers", which are then abused and turned on the People who grant those powers. Persons who don't subscribe to the idea that the government "is always right", who speak out too vocally in opposition, tend to end up on "watch lists", and after that who knows what (perhaps "Extraordinary Rendition"?)
America is being robbed of its birthright, and I fear that in the not-too-distant future, this country might well turn out like a living "Idiocracy" (It's a funny movie, but scary too. The film makers seem to have us pegged.).
Btw, check out my sig for a quote from James Madison. 200 years ago, he predicted very well the era in which we now find ourselves. I fear if the Founding Fathers could see what has become of this nation, they would be brought to tears.
If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. --James Madison
America cares and is concerned over the illegal spying on Americans. But what good does it do when the goverment just squashes everyone. Buy a gun and get ready for the 2nd American revolt. Someday it will be here. Be prepared and hope it never happens, but be prepared anyway.
I've got nothing to hide, nor am I doing anything that would be remotely interesting to the Feds, so, in my case, the study is accurate. I couldn't care less about wiretapping. I hope it leads to plenty of busts and convictions of assholes who would do much worse than the govt. keeping tabs on me. It's a non-issue and the only ones squealing about it are the ACLU types who would prefer that the feds didn't listen in on their phone calls to their pot connection. I'm pretty sure that they in turn couldn't care less who those ACLU types are getting their pot from. Now if that pot dealer happens to be funneling that money into fundamentalist Islamic organizations then I say snoop away.
Now I don't claim to know you're right about the scope of the problem but for whatever it's worth, what you said "sounded" like the truth to me. Kinda like "the wire" felt true when I watched it (as should you if you haven't already. It's incredibly good.)
Thank you for making slashdot worth reading today!
Either I'm mis-reading this stuff, or they're pumping clones out from a machine somewhere. . .
-FL
You know, if you're going to post under multiple accounts, you really need to get a new style sheet. I can't tell which is more pathetic/funny; that you might be all one guy or that so many unimaginative people can all be so hopelessly clueless in exactly the same way.
-FL
From the poll:
Misleading. While the poll results of 37 of 50 states may breakout as Greenwald states, less than half the population believe Bush broke the law, and the "Not sure" segment is over 2 times the difference between obeyed and broke.
I am guessing Greenwald went to the Michael Moore school of journalism
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
What the heck. . ? Do you have a quota or something? If you don't lay down enough astroturf, does the dark lord gouge out your eyes? What's the deal?
Basic lie I'm seeing repeated often enough under several Slashdot accounts. . . "The Democrats are bad, and Bush policy has actually helped to reduce terrorism." --All packaged under vaguely different recipes of socio-political flavor, but that same rotten meat stench just keeps coming through.
And I haven't even read a third of the posts on this story yet. Sigh. Onward.
-FL
Why is this important? Surely freedom is the more important part of the argument. No. Freedom is itself subjective. There is no objective definition of freedom, because that is dependent on what a given culture values. The freedom of a group is inherently in conflict with the freedom of an individual, so the more you value one, the less you value the other. If your society valued the freedom of the group, then to you, freedom means group freedom. Individuality reduces that group fredom and thus (to such a society) results in less freedom, not more. Now, it is also possible to have societies that value neither group freedom nor individual freedom. Some might value leadership freedom.
In all of these cases, the technological argument is untouched and unaltered. It is not subjective, it doesn't vary by how you define freedom, how you define an obscene image, or indeed how you define an image. It simply is. It doesn't depend on technological sophistication, money available, attitudes, social niceties, etc. It is consistant, universal, unalterable, inescapable.
THAT is why arguments over freedom make no sense - whose definition? Yours or your opponents? - and why technological arguments should always be used instead where it's not just a matter of time, but a matter of what technology can accomplish. Never, ever give credence to the impossible by implying fluffy non-real things are a stronger argument.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
The problem isn't with government monitoring citizens, it's with citizens not being able to monitor government. Dick Cheney's phone conversations would be a whole lot more incriminating than mine. If we knew exactly what our government was doing, it wouldn't matter what they knew about us because we could once again be able to control our government to serve us.
"Those who study history are doomed to know it's repeating."
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
She also grew up watching these PR programs for the CIA and FBI.
It's amazing to me that we find it entertaining to watch agents of US government work to overthrow foreign governments by any criminal means handy. If another nation did that to us, we'd immediately label they as renegade nation and now-a-days, terrorists ( the all-purpose bogeyman ).
These agents never had moral qualms. Afterall, they were the good guys, so any means is well justified. But I wonder how Eliot Ness would feel visting the liquor stores of today, would he thought his effort was worth while?
The only TV program of that era to challenge the validity of the spying appartus was: The Prisoner - still a landmark today.
Collusion is the word for the day.
collusion |klo zh n|
noun
secret or illegal cooperation or conspiracy, esp. in order to cheat or deceive others : the armed forces were working in collusion with drug traffickers | collusion between media owners and political leaders.
Law such cooperation or conspiracy, esp. between ostensible opponents in a lawsuit.
Bet you didn't see this either:
President Weakens Espionage Oversight:
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2008/03/14/president_weakens_espionage_oversight/
~hylas
"We're grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government." -- David Rockefeller, Council on Foreign Relations, Baden-Baden, Germany 1991
The summary sites a poll released just this weekend, which says that the number of people who care has doubled to a whopping 44%. That means that, if Time magazine is looking at the numbers from last year (which may have been the only ones available when the article was written), then it said 22%, which would justify their assertion.
Number of Americans I have emailed today, who have an OpenPGP key: 1.
Number of Americans I have emailed today, who don't have an OpenPGP key: 7.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
You have to read this article and consider demographics at the same time. Slashdot users are not typical or a majority. Babyboomers don't care and those who do not use the internet daily don't care. Republicans don't care (thats at least 50% of the nation.)
You guys get all riled up mostly because many of you are stealing media and dont want to get caught or limited.
This is not about surveillance. It's about WARRANTS.
//seventies//, when it was enacted.
//if they do it//. I'm sure that if there's a decent reason - and an upswing in terrorist activities created by Bush himself certainly qualifies, in my treasonous, liberal, progressive mind - that such surveillance is necessary in ways it wasn't before 9/11^H^H^H^H the Bush "administration". We need surveillance. Surveillance is good.
The FISA Act, and the secret court it created, allow for domestic surveillance. All you have to do is go to the court, and get the judge to sign off on it. FISA even allows for emergency surveillance, so you can take up to three days to get the warrant in fast-moving circumstances. This was how the law was, since the
The problem with the Bush "administration's" wiretapping is not that it is unnecessary, or even that Americans "don't care"
Just get a warrant. THAT, not the surveillance itself, is what Americans care about. And THAT is what Bush is refusing to do. THAT is why his surveillance programs are warrantless^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H unwarranted, and thus, unconstitutional.
Even the people cannot overrule the Constitution, without an appropriate amendment.
And I care ...
Stop LOOKING at me!!!
I used to subcribe to Time Magazine for 5 years and my father subcribed to Reader's Digest for almost 15 years. However, we finally stopped subcribing when both publications have a distinctly biased right-wing slant. I stopped reading Time Magazine after their blatantly false coverage of the lead-up to the second Iraq war and the Reader's Digest after they had the nerve to compare Bush and his lackeys to Churchill and Eisenhower. So, I am not suprised to see this article being written there.
So obsessed with your paranoia about Clinton, that you can't see Bush's utter violation of the Fourteenth Amendment?
http://www.wired.com/politics/law/news/2007/06/spy_room
"I once preached peaceful coexistence with Windows. You may laugh at my expense - I deserve it." Be's Jean-Louis Gass
Good God.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=464736&cid=22538048
~hylas
We tend to ignore static objects, like black featureless things mounted on light-standards.
Children raised in pathological conditions will react with pathological behavior.
But children raised in situations where the architecture is merely interesting but non-reactive just grow up.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
Corporate Propaganda says Americans don't care but... "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State." Joseph Goebbels http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Lie
"Flags are bits of colored cloth that governments use first to shrink-wrap people's brains..."
You need to read a book on this very subject:
"The Age of Abundance: How Prosperity Transformed America's Politics and Culture" by Brink Lindsey.
http://www.amazon.com/Age-Abundance-Prosperity-Transformed-Americas/dp/0060747668/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1205891737&sr=8-1
Libertas in infinitum
We all know that most people don't care about the government "spying". The left uses it to drum up support just like the right uses terrorism. There is no right to privacy in the this world. Personally, I have no problem with it. I can spy on anyone I want or hire someone to do so, so why can't the government? Police spy on people in order to catch the bad guys. I would be more concerned if the federal government wasn't "spying" on the goings-on within our borders. I WANT the federal government protecting me and I have no problem with "spying". I'm not giving up anything, because I never had a right to privacy. When you choose to be part of a working society, there are things you inherently do not have. Privacy is one of them. If you want privacy, go buy a piece of land unclaimed by any government. Good luck finding any existing government that doesn't spy on its citizens.
You may not like it, but that doesn't mean there is anything wrong with it. Some things just "are".
You need to read a book on this very subject:
"The Age of Abundance: How Prosperity Transformed America's Politics and Culture" by Brink Lindsey.
http://www.amazon.com/Age-Abundance-Prosperity-Transformed-Americas/dp/0060747668/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1205891737&sr=8-1
Libertas in infinitum
Close enough to G.W.F. Hegel's "History teaches that people don't learn anything from history."
Qu'on me donne six lignes écrites de la main du plus honnête homme, j'y trouverai de quoi le faire pendre.
I believe in mechanistic law & order. Cameras, robotics, reuse of commercial-purposed online user metrics for criminal tracking. I do not want average citizens intervening in community affairs for the sake of apprehending criminals. I do not want citizens performing the fighting functions in war. Heavy reliance on humans for maintaining law and order enables corruption and injustice.
I care about domestic spying. As a matter of fact, this is nothing new. Our government and and especially American corporations are criminal. The fact the Islamacists are upset with us tells us something. The Jihadists have reason to be upset with us. Besides the superior race propaganda there is some logic to them in their stupidity. They don't understand why our government permits corporations to commit felony after misdemeanor and just pay a fine or some other simple penalty as just an every day cost of doing business. All three need deprogramming and some very serious penalties instituted against the leadership of all. It may be hundreds of thousands dead for the cost doing business, but whatever it is, it's still a war crime because we went to Iraq on a mistaken pretense. GWB wanted to be a war president like his daddy. A lot of you turd bosom buddies are going read this and say he's another damn liberal retard. To which I say partisanship has nothing to do with this.
Any infraction, real or perceived, will be used against him. Ask Don Siegelman, who was railroaded to prison on trumped-up charges and is being denied an appeal because his case hasn't been transcribed (for a year).
You think they replaced all those US Attorneys for nothing?
Becuase those who don't commit crime have nothing to hide. If you have nothing to hide you don't care if they look because they have nothing to find. I would rather be looked over than have a criminal get overlooked.
If Americans don't care about domestic spying (which I doubt is true), it is probably because they know their government is too stupid to make it a real threat. Brains do not ride with the government. It is every man for himself, since our government has dismissed our nation's social contract.
Absolutely nothing, from Obama, Clinton, or McCain. The presumption has to be that they would keep things as they are. So much for the Constitution and privacy rights. I guess the Time article is right about the American public not caring. Wasn't it P.T. Barnum who said " no-one has ever lost money underestimating the intelligence of the American public".
People in the west are generally apathetic. Either they are fine and don't care or they aren't fine and don't care about anyone else.The atomization of society into independently propagandizable units by Television since the 1950s has created a world where large numbers of us are not as much a part of any functioning community as we used to be. The fall in volunteers and people active in their communities as time passes are strong evidence of this. Plus we now have labor laws in most western countries that see us all working longer hours and for lower pay or pay that remains static over time. We have less time, energy and opportunity to co-operate with neighbours for the common good. Politically, the dysfunction in the electoral systems actively discourage large numbers of people from voting. The two-party lockdown means they have very little real choice anyway in most parts of the country. They feel - and are - small, impotent and irrelevant. Power is reserved actively for entrenched elites and vested interests. We see this most clearly in the US House of representatives, where, each two years, more than 98% of incumbents are rubber-stamped back into office. That isn't a functioning democracy. Apathy is the safer, easy path. The alternative is activism.....and all the pain and sacrifice that entails in a country where activists are seared at and denigrated by the peope who hold power.
Only boring people are ever bored.