HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Nothing worse for the Dem...

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 09:23 AM

 

Nothing worse for the Democratic Party or the United States than the spying apologists who

Last edited Mon Apr 21, 2014, 09:58 AM - Edit history (1)

believe Americans cannot be trusted to use the internet and live our lives without an NSA chaperone.

They aren't keeping us safe, they are consolidating power and protecting against dissent.

Any employee knows the same thing at their work place - spyware running on computers, hundreds of pages of restrictions about what you can and cannot do as an employee

These corporate purists don't want a constitution - they want to give us an employee handbook.

Fight back!







40 replies, 3452 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 40 replies Author Time Post
Reply Nothing worse for the Democratic Party or the United States than the spying apologists who (Original post)
pragmatic_dem Apr 2014 OP
Swede Atlanta Apr 2014 #1
clarice Apr 2014 #22
randome Apr 2014 #25
jeff47 Apr 2014 #2
frylock Apr 2014 #3
jeff47 Apr 2014 #5
frylock Apr 2014 #8
jeff47 Apr 2014 #14
frylock Apr 2014 #15
jeff47 Apr 2014 #16
frylock Apr 2014 #17
jeff47 Apr 2014 #18
frylock Apr 2014 #19
jeff47 Apr 2014 #20
RobertEarl Apr 2014 #24
jeff47 Apr 2014 #26
RobertEarl Apr 2014 #29
zappaman Apr 2014 #36
NCTraveler Apr 2014 #33
MohRokTah Apr 2014 #6
frylock Apr 2014 #9
MohRokTah Apr 2014 #11
frylock Apr 2014 #12
MohRokTah Apr 2014 #13
joshcryer Apr 2014 #30
joshcryer Apr 2014 #28
sabrina 1 Apr 2014 #27
Tierra_y_Libertad Apr 2014 #4
G_j Apr 2014 #7
bvar22 Apr 2014 #10
SidDithers Apr 2014 #21
randome Apr 2014 #23
pragmatic_dem Apr 2014 #34
jazzimov Apr 2014 #35
pragmatic_dem Apr 2014 #38
randome Apr 2014 #40
LanternWaste Apr 2014 #31
NCTraveler Apr 2014 #32
pragmatic_dem Apr 2014 #37
NCTraveler Apr 2014 #39

Response to pragmatic_dem (Original post)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 10:04 AM

1. While I agree with you that the NSA and the other progeny of the Patriot Act

 

are acts of cowardice and shame for our nation, when it comes to employment I have a different take.

Let's be totally honest. When you work for someone else you are a prostitute. You prostitute your time and talent for the enjoyment of others, namely the owners of the business.

I accept when I am at work that my activities may be scrutinized and regulated by my employer. The employer is paying me $$ for my time and talent. As such they have wide discretion on what I can and cannot do.

If I were an employer I would give my employees the liberty to make reasonable use of company assets to keep in touch with their family, etc. but those uses come with risks for the employer.

An unfettered use of e-mail, etc. can end up landing the company in legal trouble. An employee who uses company resources and who knowingly, maliciously or negligently distributes malware, viruses, etc. or engages in threatening, harmful or slanderous communication implicates the company.

So I have to give great deference to company policies on the use of their resources and what you may and may not do on their time. A workplace should not be a prison or feel like enslavement but employees are just that, employees. They have agreed to do certain things in exchange for a salary and benefits.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Swede Atlanta (Reply #1)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 02:26 PM

22. What a weird thing to say....

 

"Let's be totally honest. When you work for someone else you are a prostitute. You prostitute your time and talent for the enjoyment of others, namely the owners of the business. "

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Swede Atlanta (Reply #1)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 02:49 PM

25. I think you're on the money there.

 

I work for a big corporation. Should I parse every decision they make to ensure it meets with my approval? Of course not. I simply do my job. It's the very definition of prostitution.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]If you don't give yourself the same benefit of a doubt you'd give anyone else, you're cheating someone.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pragmatic_dem (Original post)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 12:27 PM

2. Nah, there is something worse

That's all the Democrats who attack other Democrats for doing something they did not do.

Such as this lie:
the spying apologists who believe Americans cannot be trusted to use the internet and live our lives without an NSA chaperone.

I realize this is a very appealing lie. You can rage against it instead of dealing with the pesky reality of SCOTUS decisions, and the details of what was actually leaked.

But that doesn't make it true. And bashing people for a lie you like does not help. Either with fixing the problem, or electing more Democrats so we can fix the problem. Because you can not fix a problem when you lie about it.

Snowden, Manning, et al have so far leaked one program that spied on US persons. One. The phone metadata program. Every other leaked program targeted a non-US person. Non-US Persons do not have any constitutional rights. Even when they are Chancellor of Germany. If the NSA was really doing massive spying on US persons, how come they didn't leak a second program? Possibly even a third?

The phone metadata program fits nicely under an overly-broad 1979 SCOTUS ruling that made your phone metadata no more private than what you ordered the last time you went to a resturaunt. Or bought at the grocery store. Or any other routine business record.

To fix it, we need a new law from Congress. Sure, the President could tell the NSA to stop, but that won't stop future presidents. More importantly, it won't stop private spying - your phone metadata is available to anyone willing to buy it.

Appealing lies will not get us that fix.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #2)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 12:34 PM

3. how many attacks have been prevented by monitoring Chancellor Merkel's private phone conversations?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #3)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 12:37 PM

5. Don't know. But that doesn't make it unconstitutional.

Because as long as she was not in US territory or in US custody during the monitoring, nothing in the Constitution blocks it.

Again, we need a fix from Congress. Raging against Obama and the NSA does not get us that fix. It lets the people who can really fix it off the hook.

"Hey Senator Feinstein....we've got something for you to do...."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #5)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 12:57 PM

8. i never claimed it to be unconstitutional..

my claim is that it is unnecessary and overreaching. can you imagine the outrage here if it were disclosed that Germany's intel agencies were monitoring Obama's personal phone conversations?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #8)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 01:37 PM

14. So the goal was to change the subject.

Ooookay.

We were monitoring Merkel's phone because it gave us tons of intel on what Germany would be doing. As a result, it's not overreaching at all. Whether or not it's unnecessary is another debate.

can you imagine the outrage here if it were disclosed that Germany's intel agencies were monitoring Obama's personal phone conversations?

There's a reason the NSA took away Obama's cell phone and replaced it with their own hardware.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #14)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 01:43 PM

15. funny, you're the one who brought the chancellor

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #15)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 01:49 PM

16. And you're the one who measured against terrorist attacks.

One would have to be suffering from significant cranial-rectal inversion to think we only spy on people due to terrorism.

Also noticed you dropped the talking point about "OMG!!! WHAT IF THEY SPIED ON OBAMA!!" when reminded that it came up in 2009.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #16)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 01:56 PM

17. okay, so NSA surveillance ISN'T about preventing terrorist activity..

now we're getting somewhere.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #17)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 01:58 PM

18. No, SOME NSA surveillance is. SOME NSA surveillance is not.

FFS, stop pretending to be a moron. It's very unbecoming.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #18)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 02:01 PM

19. so what was to be gained by monitoring Chancellor Merkel's personal phone calls?

was it just because it could be done?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #19)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 02:04 PM

20. We find out what Germany is going to be doing

on a variety of issues. Trade deals, military plans, and so on.

It's not like heads of state leave the job at the office when they go home for the day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #16)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 02:44 PM

24. This shows something

 

"...we..." (don't)".... only spy on people due to terrorism. "

So you are admitting we spy on people for reasons other than terrorism.

Can you tell us about the other reasons we spy on people?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #24)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 02:49 PM

26. Hi Robert! We all dead yet?

No? How odd. I'm sure Fukushima will kill us soon.

So it looks like you're trying to do another "Gotcha". And once again failing. Here's the problem:
So you are admitting we spy on people for reasons other than terrorism.

I never said we only spied on people due to terrorism. That would be your talking point.

Can you tell us about the other reasons we spy on people?

Hey Robert, pretending to be an utter and complete moron is really not an appealing persona. You might want to try another way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #26)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 03:13 PM

29. Whoa, dude

 

Step away from the keyboard dude.

You can't even answer a simple question?

Yeah, I know the answer. The NSA spies on whoever they want, for whatever reason they want.

Just thought it would be cool to see you admit that simple truth. Instead, well, we see you name calling and acting childish. Step back dude.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #26)

Tue Apr 22, 2014, 12:26 AM

36. You should back off a little.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #8)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 03:23 PM

33. I think they would be foolish if they could, and they didn't. nt.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #3)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 12:39 PM

6. Who cares?

 

It was international intelligence gathering. That's the NSA's job. Status of relations with any nation doesn't enter into the picture, it is still the job of the NSA.

The NSA's job is not domestic intelligence gathering. That is the FBI's job and falls within the strict bounds of the constitution, but there is no constitutional protection for foreign leaders while on foreign territory.

Separate the two. An agent or employee of the NSA who reveals the former is a criminal engaged in espionage. An agent or employee of the NSA who reveals the latter is a whistleblower. Revealing both still makes one a criminal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #6)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 12:58 PM

9. i care. you don't..

but it if it were Obama's personal phone conversations being monitored, I'm sure you'd be just as glib.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #9)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 01:05 PM

11. I'm pretty damned sure the NSA protects the president's communications.

 

In fact, I'm positive there is no foreign agency capable of monitoring them. That's because the entire network the president's communications run on is completely private and is run by the Defense Information Services Agency headquartered in Ft. Meade, Maryland about a quarter mile from the headquarters of the NSA on the same base.

This level of security is simply not available to the German government.

The nation with the best technology wins the intelligence game.

Simple fact of life in a world with multiple nations. The only way to avoid it is to become a single nation encompassing the entire world.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #11)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 01:25 PM

12. and being that you're pretty damned sure, you'd be pretty damned pissed..

if that security were breached.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #12)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 01:29 PM

13. If another nation were to break that security,...

 

That's the intelligence game. You can be pissed, but it doesn't alter how the game is played.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #9)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 03:16 PM

30. I'd be amused.

And fascinated as to how it was done. We know Merkel was monitored because she ... used an unencrypted regular phone for everyday business.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #3)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 03:11 PM

28. There are no laws or treaties against foreign spying.

Nor will there ever be.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #2)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 02:51 PM

27. Ever read the privacy agreement you got from your telephone company?

I have, in fact I read it TO them when I discovered they were spying on me without my knowledge. They didn't say they had the 'right to do so', they DENIED IT. I guess if they felt they were covered by some law, they would have said so.

Thankfully now even the President has backed away from trying to defend these Bush policies and is proposing an end to them.

Thanks Snowden, Greenwald, Drake, Binney and all the other journalists and Whistle Blowers who despite the current atmosphere in this country towards those who expose crimes against the people, continue to do so and will until the rule of law is restored in this country.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pragmatic_dem (Original post)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 12:35 PM

4. But..but...they're doing it to protect freedom and democracy....oh, wait.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pragmatic_dem (Original post)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 12:41 PM

7. I doubt any have ever participated with Greenpeace, Veterans For Peace, OWS, the Quakers etc.

so they may feel they have nothing to worry about

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pragmatic_dem (Original post)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 01:00 PM

10. The defenders of Clapper and the NSA here are nauseating.





*Rampant Government Secrecy and Democracy can not co-exist.

*Persecution of Whistle Blowers and Democracy can not co-exist.

*Government surveillance of the citizenry and Democracy can not co-exist.

*Secret Laws and Democracy can not co-exist.

*Secret Courts and Democracy can not-co-exist.

*Our Democracy depends on an informed electorate.

You either believe in Democracy, and Government Accountable to The People,
or you don't.
It IS that simple.




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pragmatic_dem (Original post)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 02:08 PM

21. ...



Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pragmatic_dem (Original post)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 02:35 PM

23. There is nothing worse for the Democratic Party than needless hyperbole.

 

You say 'NSA chaperone' without any context whatsoever. The NSA is forbidden by law from targeting American citizens. Now if you or Snowden or anyone else can show evidence that law is being violated, that would be a big deal.

But there is -so far- no evidence of that.

There is evidence that the NSA stores metadata phone records with a warrant. Let me emphasize that one part: a warrant. Does that truly sound like an 'out of control' Frankenstein organization?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]If you don't give yourself the same benefit of a doubt you'd give anyone else, you're cheating someone.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #23)

Tue Apr 22, 2014, 12:07 AM

34. 100% false, just like a global warming denier claiming Earth is actually cooling, NSA spying

 

is an inconvenient truth isn't it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pragmatic_dem (Reply #34)

Tue Apr 22, 2014, 12:22 AM

35. Where is your proof?

Climatologists have lots of evidence backing them up. You have nothing except a meme.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jazzimov (Reply #35)

Tue Apr 22, 2014, 12:47 AM

38. It took .23 seconds for 24,000 results, warrantless spying on Americans,

 

Einstein is ashamed of you. We all are ashamed of you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pragmatic_dem (Reply #38)

Tue Apr 22, 2014, 08:58 AM

40. jazzimov asked for 'proof', not number of Google hits.

 

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pragmatic_dem (Original post)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 03:18 PM

31. In May of 2002, DU was pretty unified in its opposition to the NSA's revelation that all incoming an

 

In May of 2002, DU was pretty unified in its opposition to the NSA's revelation that all incoming and outgoing calls to Afghanistan were being monitored, stored and shared with other agencies, and a few months later when the NSA approached private telecomm companies for access to their records.

But then again, in 2002 the GOP was sitting in the White-house.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pragmatic_dem (Original post)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 03:20 PM

32. While I do think there are worse things for the party...

 

your point overall is good. Thankfully, we at du, have very few people who do not speak out against the NSA and data collection that became known a decade ago. We are almost 100% opposed.

Don't have as big of a concern about the workplace.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NCTraveler (Reply #32)

Tue Apr 22, 2014, 12:33 AM

37. Really? Democractic Party leadership endorsement for spending 100s of billions on citizen

 

surveillance programs isn't the worst thing?

I don't see any evidence that Democratic Party is opposed to spying, or drones. Not in any majority way.

How do you explain Nancy Pelosi running around Congress ordering people to not vote against citizen surveillance programs?

After all, not prosecuting torturers wasn't a big deal. You know, old news. Forgive and forget.

And not prosecuting Wall Street fraud subsidized by trillions from citizens and costing millions of jobs, disrupting millions of families and causing worldwide economic ruin wasn't a big deal. ZERO prosecutions. Moving forward, I guess.

And, of course, we need to move on past the lies of the Iraq war. No biggie.

And beefing up the Patriot Act was no big deal for Democratic Leadership, barely a peep from Republican or Democrat.

Certainly, in this light, who would be surprised that Dem leadership is throwing their weight behind spying?

Just how bad must a government or political organization behave before it becomes a "big deal"?

God help us all when that day comes.









Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pragmatic_dem (Reply #37)

Tue Apr 22, 2014, 08:28 AM

39. Please read my post again. Seems you didn't before you replied.

 

Seems you didn't read the op either. Not sure how you came to this response. Reading nuance can be difficult.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread