Slashdot Mirror
Marco Rubio: We Need To Add To US Surveillance Programs (dailydot.com)
Patrick O'Neill writes: The debate over surveillance hit the 2016 race for the White House again on Sunday when Republican presidential candidate Marco Rubio said he wants to add to American surveillance programs, many of which were created after 9/11. He invoked a recent shooting of a Philadelphia police officer by a man who allegedly pledged allegiance to the Islamic State. "This the kind of threat we now face in this country," Rubio said. "We need additional tools for intelligence." Rubio also addressed the NSA leaks that led to this debate: "Edward Snowden is a traitor. He took our intelligence information and gave it to the Chinese and gave it to the Russians. We cannot afford to have a commander-in-chief who thinks people like Edward Snowden are doing a good public service."
if you were the last Cuban-American on Earth.
If someone pledged allegiance to the flying spaghetti monster, would that cause a crackdown on religion?
It doesn't work, so we need more of it...
Give me a Chrome plugin that only shows Trump stories!
People like like Marco Rubio, who think that any and every threat of violence is an excuse to make nearly omniscient government through every and any possible means of government, be president. He talks a game about reducing government. If/When the government attains the power he is talking about, then what's to stop it from using the power for other "unintended" purposes. He's a politician, he should know all about power creep. And he calls himself a conservative. I am tired of these people who claim to be conservative, complaining about big government, and then turning out to be power-hungry hypocrites.
captcha:tactics
Coming out strong in favor of surveillance is a bad idea. It's true that recent polls have shown the majority of Americans favor surveillance of 'suspicious people,' but among the people I've talked to, most are indifferent, some are ok with it, and a sizeable minority vehemently oppose it (this is something that I've found on both the conservative and liberal side. Whether you think "Bush is Hitler" or "Obama is trampling the constitution," spying is something you can appreciate as bad). Of the people who absolutely favor surveillance, even those understand that abusing it can be bad.
So he's coming out with something that few people are strongly in favor of, but a sizeable minority strongly opposes. Something like that is a political loser.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Advocating the need for more tools while making yourself sound like a tool--it's an interesting strategy. Let's see how it works out for him ...
It was neat to read about all the assholes in history when I was a kid in school. Was always amazed how no one really noticed how fucked up they were until several million bodies stacked up somewhere. But in the end the asshole(s) got killed and their followers were dispersed to never really be seen again. Now I sit here and watch as 'The Greatest Country On Earth' turns into another one of those assholes I read about when I was a kid. The arrogance of humanity is fucking horrible.
What is it with US politics. Do these people actually go out there and actually talk to real people. Is the fear mongering that effective that people are actually wanting this?
All this talk of spending more in surveillance and military makes me sick. Education is where money needs to be spent. Local infrastructure, innovation...
The only surveillance I would approve of is the monitoring of our elected officials and how budgets are spent. THAT'S IT!
"Edward Snowden is a traitor. He took our intelligence information and gave it to the Chinese and gave it to the Russians. We cannot afford to have a commander-in-chief who thinks people like Edward Snowden are doing a good public service."
See I prefer a Commander In Chief who actually treats the civil rights of US citizens as something more than an inconvenience to be trampled over at their whim. We don't need more "intelligence tools" that demonstrably do not make us any safer but manage to oppress us in the process.
I look forward to the day when we have a republican candidate for president who doesn't ear big shoes, a colorful wig and have a red squeaky nose.
Remember how Hitler was able to suspend civil liberties in Germany? On February 27, 1933 Reichstag building was burned, which found to be an arson. This led Hitler to accuse communists of the terrorism, and he got Hinderburg to pass an emergency decree to suspend civil liberties. Of course, Germany was in shock and most of the smart educated Germans really thought that this action would protect them from the terrorist threat of communists and anarchists.
That's how Hitler was able to come to power. He came on the power of the fear of the masses, willing to suspend their civil liberties in return for security.
The correct answer to crime or terrorists is not more surveillance but more guns in the hands of citizens.
And this is why I am not a (R).
We have plenty of government intervention into our lives. We don't need more. Americans aren't a danger to America. We are America!
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Trump - blowhard asshole
Cruz - scary blowhard asshole
Rubio - no concept of privacy
Clinton - unindicted felon
Bush - aww hell no
Christie - not considered corrupt only by comparison to New Jersey
Fiorina - Enriches herself by firing people
Sanders is the only one out there who makes any sense, and he's an unabashed Socialist!
Nothing prevents me as a law-abiding citizen from owning guns and building up a small arsenal to slaughter people in the name of Santa Claus. All the intelligence agencies won't have the slightest clue if I keep to myself and don't broadcast my intentions to the world at large.
some would call it persistence, other would call it retarded. In the mean time Americans continues to buy guns since the existing government policies isn't exactly making them feel safer...
One of the reasons GOP gained so many seats in the last midterm election is that many were upset with Snowden's revelations about how much domestic and ally-country snooping the gov't was doing. Republican attack ads on Democrats made that a key issue (along with ACA).
But recent domestic attacks have caused the GOP to flip on snooping, in general. They are now pro-snooping.
I have to give them credit for taking advantage of both sides of the issues and leveraging voter forgetfulness. It's slimy, but it works politically.
Table-ized A.I.
Um, no we don't.
Select from tblFriends where interesting >= 4;
> And he calls himself a conservative. I am tired of these people who claim to be conservative, complaining about big government, and then turning out to be power-hungry hypocrites.
I've made that point calling conservative talk radio, and I called and said that to my House representative when he visited the local radio station. I hope you and others do the same.
We can't afford to have a president so ill-informed as to believe the Russians and Chinese got anything the rest of us didn't from Snowden.
I agree that Snowden was a traitor. (not for revealing the NSA collecting on citizens, that was whistleblowing. He crossed the traitor line when he dumped other documents such as the collection efforts on other nations. That was the treason.
That said Rubio is flat wrong, and is a dangerous candidate because he is for more invasion of privacy. We don't need more surveillance. We need more freedom.
I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
How can you call someone who risks his life to expose a huge conspiracy by a government agency to violate fundamental civil rights on a massive scale a traitor? Marco Rubio is either very dishonest or very stupid, but I strongly suspect he is both at the same time.
Let's start with a set of drones programmed to follow every single US Governor, Congressman, Senator, President or candidate for any of those jobs 24 hours a day, live streaming and recording it, viewable by any IP address located inside the USA.
We can put in an exclusion for when they actually meat on top secret/confidential meetings - as long as those meetings only consist of people directly employed by the US government.
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
How do they operate on one another in political campaigns? Smear tactics and blackmail. They take it to the next level in tracking and recording is all on the rest of all of us now. Why? Those in power are afraid to lose that power. They know they've done a terrible job and have been exposed in corruption as puppets of the true powers that be: Their campaign backers in a shadow government behind the scenes pulling the strings and writing the bills introduced into law by their bought and paid for puppets, politicians (and we have the best money can truly really BUY). Know thy enemy. The real enemy. The 1% wealthy and powerful in control who view us all as cattle. The only reason they allowed us to read was technological society requires minions that are at least literate to a degree. They're doing the only things they understand how to do to ensure "continuity of government" and their own power we pay for no less and are corrupt as hell doing a poor job of things in the USA and we all know it. They do and know their time is short so they are grasping at straws resorting to their favorite tools. Blackmail and arm twisting coercion.
Why are they all such sniveling cowards? They are supposedly all for the Constitution and the 2nd Amendment, but don't give a shit about the 4th?
A pox on all these jingos!
And the Democrats are no better, not ever a bit.
Prove anything by multiplying Huge Number times Tiny Number
What amuses me is that these chuckleheads don't seem to realize that the NSA is incapable of effectively searching through the torrents of ELINT that they already gather.
Yeah, let's dump more data on them, that will fix them not finding what's right in front of their nose!
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
I regularly readjust my irrigation system to minimize waste from overspray, aiming, and excessive runtimes.
The same scrutiny should be be applied to our various government surveillance efforts.
'Better tools' should include identifying legitimate and dangerous targets based on general surveillance, focusing on real threats, and enhanced oversight and permission. Courts should have meaningful and genuine control over requests for detailed information.
The current scheme seems to be 'collect everything', with the alleged intent to go in and search for details when a threat is identified. I'm sure this makes sense to the watchers, as they want to be able to go back and look at the history when a suspect is identified. Well, so far we have not seen much success from this method, and have surrendered our privacy for no tangible benefit.
If they, the watchers, cannot give us any assurance of being able to thwart terrorist threats without wholesale collection, and cannot do so without immediate access unfettered by oversight, we will have to have the discussion of whether this method is compatible with a free society that also demands a limited government and an inferential right to privacy, or at least ownership of individual information. This includes email, Internet use history, text and other messaging history, and phone usage.
It may be that other methods need to be developed. The examples of this current method's success are, sadly, lacking. And the abuses are both obvious and not entirely disclosed, even now.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
What is it with US politics. Do these people actually go out there and actually talk to real people.
Not really, no. And many of the ones they do talk to are fairly hysterical, racist, fearful and dumb. The republican base in the last few years seems to be particularly panicky and nuts. Used to be that the republicans were pragmatic economically and had a wing of the party where the kooks hung out that could be safely ignored. Now the tail is waging the dog and the religious nuts and the tea party loonies have gained enough power that they can't be ignored anymore. Combined with gerrymandered voting districts we've had both parties (but especially the republicans) getting more extreme for the last 10-15 years. If a politician isn't "pure" enough for their party they never make it out of the primary election.
Is the fear mongering that effective that people are actually wanting this?
Short answer? Sadly, yes.
Long answer? We've got a lot of dumb, fearful people who are religious bigots and racists. They'll vote for anything that gives them a way to act on these us vs them tribal fears and the mechanisms to keep the politicians from responding to these idiots are broken or badly damaged.
All this talk of spending more in surveillance and military makes me sick. Education is where money needs to be spent. Local infrastructure, innovation...
I couldn't not agree more. Education, infrastructure, research, clean energy, etc are badly needed. A larger military and surveillance state is not. We're borrowing to pay for a military that is way larger than we need and an inefficient and badly designed health care system.
They've said this about Rubio:
"So Rubio's foreign policy and national security strategy is to invade Middle Eastern countries, create power vacuums for terrorist organizations, allow their people to come to America unvetted, give them legal status and citizenship, then impose a massive surveillance state to monitor the problem,” ... “I'm trying to figure out if it is more incoherent than dangerous or vice versa.”
War is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength.
Ooh, moderator points! Five more idjits go to Minus One Hell!
Delendae sunt RIAA, MPAA et Windoze
People with those beliefs helped elect George Bush in 2000, because "Gore is just the same".
So thank you in advance for helping get US boots on the ground in Syria.
Best Slashdot Co
Finally, a halfwit who gets it...
Hillary the soon to be indicted felon? Mishandling classified information is no laughing matter. Ordering underlings to strip classification markings to send information via unsecure email is even more serious.
I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
He's lost my vote, along with Microsoft with the OS that now spies on you and hijacks itself.(Wonder if these two have chatted at some point...)
"Imagination is more important than knowledge" - Einstein
Unless you are spying on US Congressmen or Israelis, in which cause Rubio believes spying is out the question. Because all spy technologies have a magic button that turns off surveillance if you are a special person.
Yeah yeah yeah - where was your outrage with the Plame affair? That particular link has a whole set of assertions that if true, should have resulted in a large prison population of former government people.
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
Hillary the soon to be indicted felon?
Yes, yes. Just like how Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld were all frog-marched out of the White House in handcuffs. Face it. Those in power rarely, if ever, have to suffer for their misdeeds. When they do, the misdeed is only the publicly stated reason. The actual reasons for it has nothing to do with the misdeed.
Similar to the upcoming US election results
You know you've got a spending problem when you need to ****** **** in the White House to afford your lifestyle.
I've got to admire his willingness to "think big" though! Most people with this problem settle for "Backpage" or a Webcam.
Sounds like he might have read "Think Big and Kick Ass". Maybe he can get his copy signed by the next president of the United States?
The reason Iowa is chosen as the first primary is because it is supposed to represent "middle America," and give an idea of how a candidate will fare in a general election.
If you wanted a state that does represents the general election the best choice would probably be Ohio. It's demographics are eerily similar to the national demographics and if votes that way too. Generally as Ohio goes, so does the election and it's the very definition of a swing state. Iowa has a lot of farms but not that much industry. Ohio has both. It's more liberal in the north and conservative down south just like the national elections.
Progressives don't want HillaryClinton. They want Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren.
Pain is merely failure leaving the body
I see the boy is dehydrated again. Put that glass of water within his reach.
And before anyone talks about "throwing your vote away" consider this: Your vote is only wasted when you don't use it.
A vote not used is merely a vote abdicated to someone else and it still has an effect. You are giving more weight to the votes of others by not voting. Not voting is in practical terms, still a vote. It just is less direct.
This is the best idea ever.
Nothing will distribute the technical cloud industry faster than obtrusive government involvement.
In fact, you could argue that intrusive involvement from the US government would be a net win, similar to privacy legilation in the EU, forcing distribution of the infrastructure while simulatenously driving ubiquitous encryption and advanced technology like homomorphic computation.
Fun times!
Regardless Republicant or Democrate, which politician you can really call "trustworthy" for decades (or if ever)? Seriously, it is just an oxymoron for the words "trustworthy politician"...
Rubio is a leading opponent of municipal broadband deployment, which would offer 'unfair competition' to struggling cable providers like Comcast and AT & T.
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
Yaaaaayyyyy small-government conservatism!!!
Never forget the 2007 speech from our Democrat president
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAQlsS9diBs
http://www.mcall.com/news/nati...
"The man, 30-year-old Edward Archer, also pledged allegiance to the Islamic State group when he was questioned after his arrest in the shooting late Thursday, police said. Archer's mother, Valerie Holliday, told The Philadelphia Inquirer he had been hearing voices recently and had felt targeted by police and the family asked him to get help."
Way to NOT pay attention Mr Rubio.
It's worth noting that you said nothing when another kook dyed his hair orange and murdered two dozen kids near Denver. The only difference was, James Holmes claimed to be the Joker, not a member of ISIS.
Shouldn't we arrest Bob Kane too?
Oh please... She hardly stands out from the crowd... Any indictment will have to tread very lightly to avoid bringing down the entire house of cards. An indictment will be met with a pardon, and the democrats will have to run their standby astronaut, Joe Biden, who can also cruise to a pretty easy victory while the republican crazy act remains in play.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
There are scary people so we must do stuff.
Scary. Stuff. Do the stuff to make less scary. Also, children.
Why does he has to be Republican? Or Democrat? Have you not understood after all these elections that that does not matter?
They are all the same party, basically.
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4v7XXSt9XRM
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FlcngdW2Ju4
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treehouse_of_Horror_VII#.22Citizen_Kang.22
Who's going to protect America from your campaign contributors, Marco Rubio?
There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
I'm amazed that people didn't grasp the implications of the Jane Harman wiretap .
There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
He took our intelligence information and gave it to the Chinese and gave it to the Russians.
False.
Hey, all candidates! I refuse to be scared of "the terrorists", and I'm unwilling to let you and the rest of our government take away the constitution. No. Shut up and listen. If I am scared, the terrorists win. If you even assume I am scared, the terrorists win. If you're using terrorists as an excuse to grab power for your corporate masters, the corporations win. In no case is this good for me, so start acting like the elected official you claim that you want to be and represent the interests of the people or get the fuck off the stage.
that anybody would vote for a republican on that ticket. Hillary is the best and only republican I will vote for. The republican party should change its name to the Insane Clown Posse, fuck the trademark
The trademark was already cancelled. Apparently it was disparaging to clowns.
Who is going to indict her? Are you saying that once she's elected president, she's going to tell her own AG to indict her? It's hard to believe that's likely and yet everyone else is either a coward or an ally. So are you saying a coward will do it, or an ally will do it?