{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
Edited by HurtfulTurkey:
6/10/2013 12:06:17 AM
25
[quote]"I have no intention of hiding who I am because I know I have done nothing wrong,"[/quote]
>Commits felonies by leaking classified material
>Hides in Hong Kong
>Claims he isn't hiding
First of all, this leak was nothing. The information the government got from Verizon was barely more than what is available publicly in your local White Pages. I'd be willing to bet a lot of people freaking out about the leak would actually agree with the program if they actually knew what it did.
English
-
I don't why the hell you're defending this. The whistleblower, you know the guy that knows more about this situation than you EVER will in your whole life is condemning it, but you're sitting here defending it. Go listen to the interview he found his job so sickening that he quit. If it wasn't that bad explain the controversy over it.
-
[quote]The whistleblower, you know the guy that knows more about this situation than you EVER will[/quote] Appeal to authority. You're assuming that because he knows more, that he's correct in his actions. [quote]but you're sitting here defending it[/quote] You've got a clear bias if you consider my posts, which have strictly been presenting the facts of the situation (such as the fact that the NSA's actions were completely legal) as defending such actions. It also shows ignorance, since I've already said in this thread I do not support the sweeping powers of the NSA. [quote]Go listen to the interview he found his job so sickening that he quit.[/quote] No, he didn't quit, he stole a ton of classified, legal material and then fled to China, America's #1 enemy in the intelligence field. [quote]If it wasn't that bad explain the controversy over it.[/quote] The media loves controversy because people love hearing about it. There is no controversy, because this was all legal. [url]http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2013/06/edward-snowden-nsa-leaker-is-no-hero.html?mobify=0[/url] [quote]These were legally authorized programs; in the case of Verizon Business’s phone records, Snowden certainly knew this, because he leaked the very court order that approved the continuation of the project. So he wasn’t blowing the whistle on anything illegal; he was exposing something that failed to meet his own standards of propriety. [/quote] [url]http://davidsimon.com/we-are-shocked-shocked/[/url] [quote]And to that, the Guardian and those who are wailing jeremiads about this pretend-discovery of U.S. big data collection are noticeably silent. We don’t know of any actual abuse. No known illegal wiretaps, no indications of FISA-court approved intercepts of innocent Americans that occurred because weak probable cause was acceptable.[/quote]
-
Leaking things is not a felony depending on how he got them, to which I'll admit I'm not sure. As long as it's within the public's interest.
-
The White Pages list every call you've made, who you made it to, and the location of the calls?
-
No, use your context clues, Mike.
-
The problem I have as a Verizon customer, is that I did not consent. I do not condone actions like this without my knowledge.
-
You're not in charge of the records Verizon collects, unfortunately. They did not need your consent.
-
From BBC: "The metadata include the numbers of both phones on a call, its duration, time, date and location (for mobiles, determined by which mobile signal towers relayed the call or text)." That's a lot of information. That's a lot of information that the government should not be able to take from Verizon.
-
Do you understand what was done with that data? They didn't crowd around it, twirling their evil mustaches and cackling. They dumped it into an algorithm that compared it to known terrorist phone numbers. If they matched a call between a terrorist number and a collected number, they would flag the call. Then the government would go to a judge for a warrant, and only then would they have access to the names involved in a call.
-
That's irrelevant. It's still unconstitutional and a violation of privacy.
-
You should like this
-
The PATRIOT Act has been deemed constitutional. I'm not defending the PATRIOT Act here, I'm explaining why what was done by the NSA is perfectly legal.
-
A true patriot opposes the PATRIOT Act, did you know it's actually a very horrible acronym? Also, are 30 million people now suspects?
-
That's a matter of opinion, which I'm not expressing here. I'm expressing the factual matters of the situation. I don't consider B.Net a mature enough venue to discuss Constitutional law, nor do I consider myself educated enough to do so. I tend to defer to Constitutional and legal experts, who have agreed that the act is valid.
-
Rights are not subjected to opinions. Individual liberty is supreme to any unjust law from oppressors, no matter if everyone except one person agreed.
-
Edited by SecondClass: 6/9/2013 11:58:40 PMI don't care what it's been "deemed". It's fucking unconstitutional. It directly violates the 4th and 9th amendments. But of all the things our government sucks at, they are exceptionally good at brainwashing their own people. What the NSA did derived from the Patriot Act. Of course it's legal, I'm saying that it shouldn't be legal.
-
I don't care. I understand that's your purpose of posting; as I said, I'm not trying to debate whether the PATRIOT Act is okay, I'm presenting relevant facts. If you wanted my opinion, I would tell you that it's a vile piece of legislation that skirts the limits of the Constitution. On the other hand, the very same measures in the NSA scandal prevented a terrorist attack. This is a complicated issue, but I'm disappointed the Obama Administration continued it and apparently abused it more than Bush ever did.
-
What terrorist attack was prevented? One the F.B.I. set up?
-
Terrorism isn't prevented when the government is the one terrorizing people.
-
-
class you now havrle my respect.
-
I have to agree with this. It's a sad thing when you see people being compliant with any amount of surveillance either just because it's deemed "legal" or on the premise its only to find enemies... Since most seem compliant or don't care in the first place, it's only a slow trend forward for more.
-
First, I was just counteracting your statement that what the government collected was only a little more than what you could find in white pages. Second, it doesn't matter what the government did with that information. It's a huge breach of privacy, and opens up a number of potential ways that the government could infringe on our privacy in the future.
-
[quote]I was just counteracting your statement that what the government collected was only a little more than what you could find in white pages[/quote] You failed, since call length is hardly a confidential piece of information. The bit about being able to locate a cell phone is incorrect. It can see which cell tower was used, but that's not at all accurate. [quote] It's a huge breach of privacy[/quote] Clearly it isn't, for reasons explained.
-
Just a note though; you're only talking about Verizon phone calls; what about data being collected by Microsoft, Facebook, Google, Apple, etc?
