Obama: Spying programs only ‘modest’ invasion of privacy
This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by NancyBlueINOklahoma (a host of the Latest Breaking News forum).
Source: Yahoo News
By Olivier Knox, Yahoo! News | The Ticket 57 mins ago
President Barack Obama on Friday defiantly defended the government's newly revealed telephone and Internet spying programs on grounds that Americans must tolerate what he dismissed as "modest encroachments on privacy" in the name of security.
With evident impatience, Obama suggested at one point that he set limits on what the National Security Agency (NSA) can grab without a judge's OK because he himself might one day be the target of such snooping.
"I came in with a healthy skepticism about these programs," Obama said at an event in San Jose, CA, initially designed to trumpet Obamacare but subverted by the dramatic disclosures. "My team evaluated them. We scrubbed them thoroughly. We actually expanded some of the oversight, increased some of the safeguards."
But, the president said, "My assessment, and my teams assessment, was that they help us prevent terrorist attacks. And the modest encorachments on privacy that are involved in getting phone numbers, or duration [of calls] without a name attached, and without looking at content, that on net it was worth us doing."
SNIP
Obama said Congress had been fully briefed on the various secret programs, and suggested that lawmakers who objected to those initiatives or to "abuses" could have done so. But lawmakers critical of such programs have repeatedly made clear that they are hamstrung by the Administration's decision to classify information -- making a full, public debate involving the American public impossible.
The president dismissed the "hype" that portrays such programs as s stepping stone towards a tyrannical "Big Brother"-like government. He also denounced the leaks that fed the news reports, saying the nation's secrets cannot be "dumped out willy-nilly" without damaging national security.
SNIP.
"With respect to my concerns about privacy issues: I will leave this office at some point -- sometime in the next three and a half years -- and after that I'll be a private citizen," he said. "And I suspect that on a list of people who might be targeted so that somebody could read their emails or listen to their phone calls, Id probably be pretty high on that list. So it's not as though I don't have a a personal interest in making sure my privacy is protected."
Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/obama-spying-programs-only-modest-invasion-privacy-170140961.html
"modest"
AndyA
(16,993 posts)Bullsh!t.
villager
(26,001 posts)n/t
indepat
(20,899 posts)villager
(26,001 posts)lupulin
(58 posts)Or is this a new one?
Autumn
(45,120 posts)evilhime
(326 posts)So what he is basically saying is our privacy isn't his primary concern but rather he is concerned that when he's a private citizen HE may have to worry about his privacy? Can anyone tell me what happened to the Senator we thought we elected President? Granted I don't know all that he knows but this very wide net seems like a rather large fishing expedition to me . What would we say if it was Georgie doing it?
catnhatnh
(8,976 posts)...show me that clause in the 4th amendment about "except modestly"!
Scholar my ass.
bowens43
(16,064 posts)what a pathetic response to a reprehensible action on the part of the administration.
Duer 157099
(17,742 posts)as in: eh, this is nothing. If you knew about the OTHER stuff we're doing, whoo boy, then you'd have a right to worry!
caseymoz
(5,763 posts)And you know they're doing much worse.
MotherPetrie
(3,145 posts)caseymoz
(5,763 posts)For a moment there, I thought the government could see the wrong things. As it is, government allows me a fig leaf and six-shooter.
Holster not included.
Chisox08
(1,898 posts)that says the government can invade our privacy only if it's a modest invasion.
With that being said, Hi Agent Smith hows the family, you already know about mine.
tavalon
(27,985 posts)Solly Mack
(90,797 posts)I'm sure they could have leaked more.
Deep13
(39,154 posts)Professor Obama, did you not read this in law school?
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
OKNancy
(41,832 posts)Previous post on the same news conference here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014502921
you can add this blog post to the previous news article