In addition, the heads of the House and Senate intelligence committees have said the program does not infringe on privacy
WHO CARES WHAT THEY THINK!
If they didn't think it infringed on privacy, then why not make the public aware of it? Why is it considered treasonous by the Chair of the Senate Select Committe on Intelligence if the program does not infringe on privacy? Then Snowden was just informing the people of a legal program that is in not way a threat to their privacy.
In a fact sheet released over the weekend, Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper described Prism as “an internal government computer system used to facilitate the government’s statutorily authorized collection of foreign intelligence information from electronic communication service providers under court supervision.” Congress added the authority in Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) in 2008 and it “has been widely known and publicly discussed since,” Mr. Clapper said.
“They are following FISA. They are satisfying the [FISA court] judge, then they are getting the data from the [telecommunications] providers,” Mr. Baker said of the National Security Agency, whose classified slide show about Prism was leaked last week. In addition, the heads of the House and Senate intelligence committees have said the program does not infringe on privacy and has prevented terrorist attacks
I work for 'healthcare' and there are things not spoken because if no one talks about it, it must be OK.....legal/illegal right/wrong they are NOT interchangeable
it's all about the status quo.....
the problem is the government thinks the sheople are the enemy and fellow sheople are just hoping the pasture doesn't turn to a desert.....
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
If they didn't think it infringed on privacy, then why not make the public aware of it? Why is it considered treasonous by the Chair of the Senate Select Committe on Intelligence if the program does not infringe on privacy? Then Snowden was just informing the people of a legal program that is in not way a threat to their privacy.
You'd have to ask Feinstein, but I would assume that a program can be both secret and legal, don't you? Divulging details of that program, which could put the national security at risk, could be considered treasonous.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
You'd have to ask Feinstein, but I would assume that a program can be both secret and legal, don't you? Divulging details of that program, which could put the national security at risk, could be considered treasonous.
Treasonous in my interpretation would mean divulging a secret program aimed at a foreign enemy, protecting the citizens from a foreign threat, say...Afghanistan. This is a secret program aimed at all US citizens without citizens having complete transparency on how it is being administered, and no legal recourse if it is being abused. The FISA court is secret, a citizen cannot stand before the court and challenge any abuses that can and most likely will occur.
Treasonous in my interpretation would mean divulging a secret program aimed at a foreign enemy, protecting the citizens from a foreign threat, say...Afghanistan.
What do you think is the purpose of these programs? Isn't their entire reason for being (the patriot act) in response to a foreign enemy threat of Sept 11?
If so, then divulging the workings of a program to protect the US from terrorist threats would be an act against America and aiding the enemy.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
What do you think is the purpose of these programs? Isn't their entire reason for being (the patriot act) in response to a foreign enemy threat of Sept 11?
If so, then divulging the workings of a program to protect the US from terrorist threats would be an act against America and aiding the enemy.
Knew a woman who married an Iraqi had a couple of kids...he went to 'visit' relatives with son and didn't return...
reason? really?
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
What do you think is the purpose of these programs? Isn't their entire reason for being (the patriot act) in response to a foreign enemy threat of Sept 11?
If so, then divulging the workings of a program to protect the US from terrorist threats would be an act against America and aiding the enemy.
that's an awful big net you allow....are you a dolphin or a tuna?
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
What do you think is the purpose of these programs? Isn't their entire reason for being (the patriot act) in response to a foreign enemy threat of Sept 11?
If so, then divulging the workings of a program to protect the US from terrorist threats would be an act against America and aiding the enemy.
The information divulged is to the workings as it pertains to U.S. Citizens. After the patriot act was passed, "terrorists" were publically made aware that foreign communications coming into the United States would be surveyed. At no time that I can recall, did the patriot act imply that ALL electronic communications foreign and domestic would be stored on an NSA data bank for indefinite amount of time and profiled to be used at a future time.
After all, if Americans were supposedly aware this was going on because of the fine print on their phone contract, then certainly "terrorist" were aware of it too.
Knew a woman who married an Iraqi had a couple of kids...he went to 'visit' relatives with son and didn't return... reason? really?
Who knows why... Maybe because she was an ugly mean b1tch and he found a better wife there. Or He died in a traffic accident... Or He was kidnapped by Christian militants and mistakenly executed... or he was really running drugs and was caught and killed by his competitors... or a billion other reasons.
Why do you suppose he never returned?
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
The information divulged is to the workings as it pertains to U.S. Citizens.
Yup. If you call Home Depot to buy a new lawn mower, in order for the NSA to tap your phone and find out what you paid for that mower, they'd need a FISA court order signed by a judge. If you called Lowes to get a competitive price... no one at NSA can listen in to see if you got a better price. If you call Yemen for a price at Yemeni Depot for a lawn mower... THEY STILL CAN'T LISTEN IN UNLESS THEY HAVE A COURT ORDER.
But... If you call Yemen and the number called is that of a known terrorist agent, then they will have grounds to get a legal court order to actually listen in on your conversation.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Who knows why... Maybe because she was an ugly mean b1tch and he found a better wife there. Or He died in a traffic accident... Or He was kidnapped by Christian militants and mistakenly executed... or he was really running drugs and was caught and killed by his competitors... or a billion other reasons.
Why do you suppose he never returned?
she knows why and she didn't have to tap a phone, I didn't think she was a b**ch but then again I wasn't married to her.
not all are like this man, just saying, 1 fish in a billion that are just gold fish. so reason? is it worth it? for 1 in a billion?
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
Yup. If you call Home Depot to buy a new lawn mower, in order for the NSA to tap your phone and find out what you paid for that mower, they'd need a FISA court order signed by a judge. If you called Lowes to get a competitive price... no one at NSA can listen in to see if you got a better price. If you call Yemen for a price at Yemeni Depot for a lawn mower... THEY STILL CAN'T LISTEN IN UNLESS THEY HAVE A COURT ORDER.
But... If you call Yemen and the number called is that of a known terrorist agent, then they will have grounds to get a legal court order to actually listen in on your conversation.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA....THAT'S WHAT THE FU(KING DATA BASES ARE FOR ALONG WITH DNA DATA
AND WE ALLOW IT....HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.......
you love your masters
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
she knows why and she didn't have to tap a phone, I didn't think she was a b**ch but then again I wasn't married to her. not all are like this man, just saying, 1 fish in a billion that are just gold fish. so reason? is it worth it? for 1 in a billion?
As usual, this makes no sense at all to me... and is the reason that I usually ignore senders posts.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Yup. If you call Home Depot to buy a new lawn mower, in order for the NSA to tap your phone and find out what you paid for that mower, they'd need a FISA court order signed by a judge. If you called Lowes to get a competitive price... no one at NSA can listen in to see if you got a better price. If you call Yemen for a price at Yemeni Depot for a lawn mower... THEY STILL CAN'T LISTEN IN UNLESS THEY HAVE A COURT ORDER.
But... If you call Yemen and the number called is that of a known terrorist agent, then they will have grounds to get a legal court order to actually listen in on your conversation.
But if they person you talked to at Lowes and Home Depot are "suspected terrorists" 5 years from now, you are now on the radar of an investigation and your conversation can be listened to.
If you talk to a co-worker and become friends and talk and email for a few years, and 10 years from now that person is a suspected terrorist, you are now on the radar again and all your communications will be looked at and possibly opening up your friends and family to have their communications from 10 years ago now eavesdropped on.
Any innocent communication you have from now on is stored, and the actions of those people 10 years from now can give the government the authorization to comb through 10 years of your communications. And a secret FISA Court can approve it, and you can do nothing to challenge the governments actions in a court of law.
Logged
