I'm Sorry, Mr President, What Were You Lying?

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

NSA captures Americans’ Internet content if it mentions overseas suspects
According to a new report by The New York Times, the National Security Agency (NSA) is collecting content—not just the previously acknowledged metadata—of Americans who simply “mention information about foreigners under surveillance, according to intelligence officials.”

The Times says that mention of this practice first appeared in Snowden documents published by The Guardian on June 20, but was “largely overlooked.”

The Times wrote:
***To conduct the surveillance, the NSA is temporarily copying and then sifting through the contents of what is apparently most e-mails and other text-based communications that cross the border. The senior intelligence official, who, like other former and current government officials, spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the topic, said the NSA makes a “clone of selected communication links” to gather the communications, but declined to specify details, like the volume of the data that passes through them.

Yeah, so we've gone from "we don't collect American's data" to "we don't collect domestic data" to "we only collect metadata" to "we only collect data on targets and their associates" to "we collect anything that even mentions anybody". But according to POTUS, this is not collecting American's data. This is not domostic spying. Seriously?

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

But according to POTUS, this is not collecting American's data. This is not domostic spying. Seriously?

It depends on your definition of "is".

[devildog 0]

zing!

You stop breathing for a few minutes and everyone jumps to conclusions.

[funjumper101 15]

It is laughable how the conservatards are NOW all pissed off about the domestic spying program conceived and implemented under ShrubCo. Not a word when the votes were taken by Congress, and signed into law by Shrub.

Now that a Democratic administration is running the program, the sky is falling and the POTUS is a liar.

This is a stellar example of just how easily led the 'tards are. The talking points are spread through the corporate owned media, and the sheeple 'tards repeat the talking points verbatim.

The USA is fucked. The media is owned by the corporate elite. The elite uses the power of the media to make people believe things that are not true.

[rushmc 18]

funjumper101

It is laughable how the conservatards are NOW all pissed off about the domestic spying program conceived and implemented under ShrubCo. Not a word when the votes were taken by Congress, and signed into law by Shrub.

Now that a Democratic administration is running the program, the sky is falling and the POTUS is a liar.

This is a stellar example of just how easily led the 'tards are. The talking points are spread through the corporate owned media, and the sheeple 'tards repeat the talking points verbatim.

The USA is fucked. The media is owned by the corporate elite. The elite uses the power of the media to make people believe things that are not true.

Rant #1 of the day

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[winsor 191]

funjumper101

It is laughable how the conservatards are NOW all pissed off about the domestic spying program conceived and implemented under ShrubCo. Not a word when the votes were taken by Congress, and signed into law by Shrub.

Now that a Democratic administration is running the program, the sky is falling and the POTUS is a liar.

This is a stellar example of just how easily led the 'tards are. The talking points are spread through the corporate owned media, and the sheeple 'tards repeat the talking points verbatim.

The USA is fucked. The media is owned by the corporate elite. The elite uses the power of the media to make people believe things that are not true.

Do you have any suggestions, or are you satisfied with your usual outpouring of unfocused poison?

[Bertt 0]

"unfocused poison" - You make it sound like that's a bad thing.
Seriously, what's being collected by the NSA is not "metadata", it's "data". This sort of thing has been going on since the late 1980's when relational database technology became available and allowed large amounts of data to be retrieved in a useful manner. Businesses do it for commercial purposes. The NSA does it for purposes of national security. Law enforcement does it because they have to spend their grant money on something.
My solution: don't be so damned concerned about privacy. Sure, you can fall victim to guilt by association, but you could do that by having a drink in the wrong bar on the wrong night.
My greater concern here is that Mr. "Unprecedented level of openness in government" is finding out that things aren't so simple and he's falling into the same traps and making the same mistakes that have plagued other leaders whose tolerance for embarrassment is lower than their tolerance for misleading the public. There is a need for government to keep some things close to the vest. I don't want to know the exact plans for the D-Day invasion. When these things come up, sometimes the best answer is "No Comment". Attempting to make the public think you're being straight with them when you're not being straight with them only reduces trust.

You don't have to outrun the bear.

[winsor 191]

Bertt

"unfocused poison" - You make it sound like that's a bad thing...

Yeah, pretty much.

I do not dispute the content in particular BAD THINGS> so much as the tone.

'The FUCKINGASSHOLESCUMSUCKINGDOUCHEBAGS now claim that the Earth does not revolve around the Sun!'

I find it hard to get past the vitriol to the content. If the point is that the poster REALLY disapproves of anyone who might be labeled as a 'conservative' or whatever, that was established long ago. Cleverly inserting commentary ('conservtards,' etc.? Give me a break.) into one's monologue suggests that the standpoint is anything but dispassionate - or even rational.

If you wish to discuss transgressions by various Gov't agencies, fine. If you do so by screaming your point, it is likely to be ignored.


BSBD,

Winsor

[turtlespeed 212]

winsor

I find it hard to get past the vitriol to the content.

I can't get past the username . . . no credibility . . .

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun