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."
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
But then who would be the first Cuban-American president!
Obviously Hillary is the last female on earth, that is why we are voting for her!
I'm sure Rubio spends all his time reading Slashdot forums waiting to see who will or will not vote for him. I bet you just made his day.
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 ...
Why? It's cool to insult him, but better to give reasons. Insults without reasons are a waste of a post.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
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.
In a few centuries all real religions will be dead. The last war will be between the followers of FSM and IPU.
Yes I know, it sounds like that South Park episode. But still a good scenario for a movie.
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.
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.
More accurately it's more like:
"Doesn't work, but it's good political theater to pretend it does. And I need more political theater to get elected."
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
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
We need an addon that replaces the following six words after a Trump mention with "Trump".
Ex: Person accuses Trump of pandering to racists, general intolerance, and fascism
Becomes: Person accuses Trump Trump Trump Trump Trump, Trump Trump, and fascism
if you were the last Cuban-American on Earth.
Uh, that's Cuban-Canadian... At least according to Trump and "people who are talking about this".
Or is that Cruz? I can't tell them apart :-)
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
The last war will be between the followers of FSM and IPU.
Maybe the last religious war, but certainly not the last war. If there is one thing that humans excel at above all other things, it's finding reasons to hate other humans and commit acts of violence against them. As long as there are two people left on the planet, they'll find a way to hate each other, so the only way there will ever be a last war is if humanity goes extinct.
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.
That's how government works. Oh FBI/NSA/CIA/EPA/FDA/NBA couldn't detect the baddies? Then they need more funding!
Which is also why false flags are so popular amongst governments.
That's the thing of it, we need to see that it's actually working before we even continue to use it, let alone add more.
There have been several domestic incidents where there might have been some kind of Internet-based evidence that it was in the works, most not even based on Islamic terrorism. There was a shooter at a historically-Black church. There was a movie theatre shooting. There was an elementary school shooting. There was a congresswoman and people that came to see her speak that were shot. Hell, those wackos from Nevada that are in armed-standoff in Oregon that previously were in armed-standoff in Nevada are operating, and none of those are even Islamic in nature.
Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but one would think that in at least some case of domestic surveillance, authorities would react to communications or online rambling to actually go find the preparation for an attack. If not, then what's the benefit? Prosecuting some schmuck after-the-fact because he supplied rifles to someone else when it's not clear that he knew what they were to be used for?
When John Allen Muhammed an Lee Malvo were caught, it was because of their missteps along with some evidence that Malvo had not realized he left behind in an armed robbery well prior to their shooting spree that they referenced in their communications with authorities. In short, good old-fashioned, labor-intensive detective work. When the government has infiltrated groups that have domestically tried to commit acts, it has been because people tipped them off to the plots, and that infiltration again required labor-intensive work. To me, that makes it look like the labor-intensive work, not the technology, is what ultimately rules the day.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
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.”
I want the govt to mostly leave me alone.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
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
I want the govt to mostly leave me alone.
In spite of what some claim, there isn't a party that wants this.
Don't believe me? Go back to when Reagan would have been a conservative Democrat in today's world.
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
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.
Socialism has been noted as taking over the attracting features of religion, that gained them followers in millenia past, like caring for poor, the sick, hospitals, and orphanages.
It is no coincidence that youths no longer care for religion when government does all that. This was noted at least 20 years ago.
Political parties are literally religions in all but the most technical sense. Andike religions, as giant memeplexes, they happily adopt a righteous feeling they can jam their behaviors onto everyone, not just True Believers.
Freedom means freedom...from others' memeplexes.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
But then who would be the first Cuban-American president!
Not for long. His first act would be to annex the USA to Cuba, thus making him the President of all the Cubas.
He obviously has the Cuban Government mindset.
We need an addon that replaces the following six words after a Trump mention with "Trump".
Ex: Person accuses Trump of pandering to racists, general intolerance, and fascism Becomes: Person accuses Trump Trump Trump Trump Trump, Trump Trump, and fascism
Well, how about eggs, sausage and Trump? That hasn't got too much Trump in it.
Similar to the upcoming US election results
He's the strongly-establoshment candidate. If you like how the government treats people, vote for him for more of it. If you'd like some reform, that basically any GOP candidate other than him and Bush. Cruz is straddling the border but he might try to make some changes, while Trump would randomize everything, and the others fall somewhere in between.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
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
if you were the last Cuban-American on Earth.
Uh, that's Cuban-Canadian... At least according to Trump and "people who are talking about this".
Or is that Cruz? I can't tell them apart :-)
Cruz.
The whole thing is hilarious because Cruz claims to be a constitutional 'originalist' and believes that interpretation of law etc should be based on the original meaning of the constitution as the framers understood it. And then goes on to say 'except that bit about natural born citizen'.
In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
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
Given the alternatives? Hell yes. It's not like anyone running was going to try to reduce the surveillance state, and the likely alternative was far, far worse on social policies.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
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.
hile Trump would randomize everything
Trump is Pandora's box, please leave it closed, please.
When you cant win, ad hominem.
I am pretty sure he is being insulted because of his desire to destroy privacy even more than it has been. It is implied from the article to the comments.
When you cant win, ad hominem.
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"...
Why? It's cool to insult him, but better to give reasons. Insults without reasons are a waste of a post.
Point taken.
Hey, Rubio! I am not, even the least little bit, so scared of "teh terrorists" that I am willing to let you and the rest of our government take away my right to privacy. No. Shut up and listen. I am not scared. If I am, the terrorists win. If you assume I am, the terrorists win. If you're just using the 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.
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...
Well, even as a liberal, the natural born citizen part was left up to congress, and not specifically defined in the Constitution. the current belief is that if you are eligible to be a US citizen at birth, to the criteria that defines someone as a US citizen, then you are a natural born citizen. Depending on Cruz's mothers resident status at the time, when was the last time she lived in the US prior to giving birth, he could be a natural born citizen based on that definition.
When you cant win, ad hominem.
That's an improvement.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
if you were the last Cuban-American on Earth.
Uh, that's Cuban-Canadian... At least according to Trump and "people who are talking about this".
Or is that Cruz? I can't tell them apart :-)
Cruz.
The whole thing is hilarious because Cruz claims to be a constitutional 'originalist' and believes that interpretation of law etc should be based on the original meaning of the constitution as the framers understood it. And then goes on to say 'except that bit about natural born citizen'.
Thanks.
Politicians (and partisan people) are great at using and rationalizing "except for the " arguments.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Yaaaaayyyyy small-government conservatism!!!
Well, even as a liberal, the natural born citizen part was left up to congress, and not specifically defined in the Constitution. the current belief is that if you are eligible to be a US citizen at birth, to the criteria that defines someone as a US citizen, then you are a natural born citizen. Depending on Cruz's mothers resident status at the time, when was the last time she lived in the US prior to giving birth, he could be a natural born citizen based on that definition.
Yes thats what I meant; Cruz claims to be a constitutional 'originalist' not a liberal. Except when being an originalist doesn't suit him.
In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
Except that the definition I provided would still be considered an originalist, because there is nothing in the original Constitution that contradicts it, as I mentioned. I consider myself a consitutionalist, but progressive. They are not against each other by itself.
Where I will complain about him would be more about his stance on guns and blocking inmates and the crazies from having them. That is not an originalist.
When you cant win, ad hominem.
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 isn't a party that wants this.
You haven't heard of the Libertarian Party?
Difference is that Obama was corrupted by office in this regard. I would rather have someone who is an open critic, running as a critic, that gets into office and then some how understands something differently, than someone who is openly bad from the beginning. With the first we have have a shot at fixing it, with the latter there is no shot.
When you cant win, ad hominem.
Except that the definition I provided would still be considered an originalist, because there is nothing in the original Constitution that contradicts it, as I mentioned. I consider myself a consitutionalist, but progressive. They are not against each other by itself.
Where I will complain about him would be more about his stance on guns and blocking inmates and the crazies from having them. That is not an originalist.
I think the argument is that the framers wouldn't have considered that his mother being a US citizen made him a 'natural born' US citizen when born outside of the USA.
In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
Pay me?
I'm not on the dole....I work for a living, and PAY THEM. I pay a bit too much IMHO, but I certainly don't get a lot of favors from the feds. But in general, I"d be happy with less regulation, less paperwork I have to fill out to simple run a business, but let me pay some reasonable taxes and then, stay the fuck out of my life.
That's supposed to be their job....
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
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
Didn't think the NSA was about collecting meta-data & wiretaps (illegally) on Americans until the Snowden revelations. All those programs were in place for decades, but I presumed they were only used on foreign nationals. Once I saw evidence the gov't was violating the law with impunity, I ceased to give Obama the benefit of the doubt.
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
> Well, how about eggs, sausage and Trump? Trump Trump Trump Trump Trump Trump Trump Trump. TRUMP BUFFER OVERFLOW#@^$#%
We need range checking I think...
I want the govt to mostly leave me alone.
Except for the times when you want them to be there for you. But that doesn't sound as cool...
You really think that? A lot of them were born outside of what would be US. Even still what they considered does not matter, what they stated in the constitution does for that argument.
When you cant win, ad hominem.
You really think that? A lot of them were born outside of what would be US. Even still what they considered does not matter, what they stated in the constitution does for that argument.
Yes and it also specifies "or US citizens at the time of independence"
They weren't stupid.
In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.