NSA Programs

[99-1100896887]

Guys: Please ignore criddic If you ignore hime, he will go away.

[OscarGuy]

Even the USA Today article said that calls were not being listened to. So, either they are all lying or you are wrong.

This may just be another case of hysteria brought on by the idea that a headline saying "Government Engaging in Domestic Spying" will boost newspaper sales.

The fact remains that several sources have now said that this program is not being used to spy on innocent people, but to try to track down terrorists.

That's NOT what it's saying. It's analyzing PATTERNS to try to track down terrorists. That means that if something fits a specific pattern, it would be monitored. That could be an Arabian/Indian/Pakistani citizen who makes regular calls to specific foreign countries that fall into "terrorist" labels. Those people would then raise flags and be monitored to ensure they aren't terrorists. THAT RIGHT THERE is reason enough to fear the program. Because they don't have to get a warrant anymore...at least not according to Bush...they can just tap and go and never obtain a warrant, so if they don't find what they want, they don't file the warrant and no one's the wiser...if they do find what they want, they have to seek the retroactive warrant to ensure they can use it in court...though those suspected will just be locked up and never charged despite due process.

You're deluding yourself if you think innocent Americans AREN'T being monitored. Look at all the furor over search engines and libraries complying with requests for records so that those who check out "questionable" books can be monitored to ensure they aren't terrorists...this is the Red Scare all over again...except the public ISN'T buying it anymore...It's a witch hunt without the witches.

[criddic3]

Even the USA Today article said that calls were not being listened to. So, either they are all lying or you are wrong.

This may just be another case of hysteria brought on by the idea that a headline saying "Government Engaging in Domestic Spying" will boost newspaper sales.

The fact remains that several sources have now said that this program is not being used to spy on innocent people, but to try to track down terrorists.

[Damien]

According to Keith Olbermann, the ABC/Post poll had a mis-statement of fact in its questioning, stating that only phone numbers were being collected, and that conversations were not being listened to. This was not accurate, as the numbers were used to decide who they wanted to listen to.

[99-1100896887]

I would like to make this announcement: I will not respond to cam. He is obviously more into bait-posts than any of you have ever been. I'm beginning to see that some of you may have been more fair in your debates than I initially thought. (criddic)

I have never seen anyone on this discussion board even concede an argument to you.
I have been on this site for several years and have always enjoyed the spirited discussions revolving around film, performers, etc. Most of the posts are by writers, artists, and cinephiles themselves are naturally( as most artists are) liberal and progressive.
As a Canadian, I follow American politics, for the simple reason that I don't want what is happening politically at this moment in American history to be repeated in my country, which, as you, criddic, may not know(being xenophobic) has a minority Conservative government, and hopefully will not go down the same road. The only thing that I could ever thank you for, is showing me yet again that there are some people in the world, like yourself, and those you champion,that we should be afraid of. Non-thinkers. Non-questioners. Ill-informed. We should all be wary of them.
I know most of the people on this board, and correspond with some, so I know my ideas are not out of step with theirs, in fact, I think yours are out of step with the rest of us. I find, interestingly, that YOU are the one who bait-posts, and I don't see anyone of your Republican friends supporting you. Could be that they are such a small group now. I think this is a game to you, and I am surprised that so many of the group actually take your bait to argue with you, a person who is not particularly knowledgeable about the facts, and who follows the Party Line blindly and unquestioningly. I see you most of your figures disputed by the facts that the more intelligent literate posters set down here. But your politics are your business. They just don't belong here. Please limit yourself to the discussion of films, where you CAN contribute, and leave the discussion of politics to those who are informed , thinking people. Yeah, yeah, free speech and all that. But your people would like it to be only one-sided speech and thus NOT free for everyone. ( see the discussion about the telephone tampering)

Ignore me if you will, but I fear a world full of criddics.

[Mister Tee]

I'd advise waiting a few days before taking any polling on this subject seriously, for several reasons: 1) Details are still emerging. 2) The lead-in questions in the ABC/Post poll were quite loaded -- along the lines of "is it more important to keep our citizens safe, or to protect civil lberties?" -- which makes this what the trade would call a push-poll: geared to yield a certain result. 3) One-night polls are notoriously unreliable; any reputable pollster uses a three-night sample. One has to wonder what was the urgency about getting a poll out on this particular subject, that such a basic tenet of the profession was tossed aside. The cynic would have to wonder if it was a desire to squelch the story.

It may be that succeeding polls will echo this result, in which case, fine. But if not, the more nuanced response will be undercut by this poll, which talking-points-parrotters like criddic will cite endlessly. It seems to me a nearly-bald attempt to guide the coverage.

[Damien]

By the way: An ABC/Washinton Post Poll says 63% of the people think this program is acceptable.

Wait until the public understands what this program actually entails. That records of what seems to be every phone call made by every American should shock people. Especially since this was done without warrants.

Sure, the booboisie says "I don't care. I didn't do anything illegal," meaning "I have no ties to a terrorist organization," but about when the married man realizes that all those calls to the woman he is having an affair with are in a government database. Or all those calls to sex chat rooms . . .

[criddic3]

Where was the outrage? This all happened while you were on your month-long hiatus. I'm wondering if you were in jail or something, that you missed the outrage. We talked about it on this thread.

I made posts in January, didn't I?. I must have avoided that thread because I knew the kind of conversation it woudld be. Or it could have been during the period when my computer was unprotected and I didn't go online. That was about a month of time I think.

By the way: An ABC/Washinton Post Poll says 63% of the people think this program is acceptable.

[criddic3]

I would like to make this announcement: I will not respond to cam. He is obviously more into bait-posts than any of you have ever been. I'm beginning to see that some of you may have been more fair in your debates than I initially thought.

[99-1100896887]

criddic; You cannot defend any of these actions by your Government. Go away!

[Sonic Youth]

I am also hearing that this story has been out there since December, as per an article in The New York Times. Where was the outrage back then?

Not exactly. The Times story didn't know the scope was this large, it didn't report on Hayden's role in the program, and it didn't name the telecom's that were involved.

Where was the outrage? This all happened while you were on your month-long hiatus. I'm wondering if you were in jail or something, that you missed the outrage. We talked about it on this thread. That a new thread was started and many people participated (even Magilla, who usually remains aloof on the political threads) proves we here were not oblivious at the time. As for the rest of the country, just look at that thread. It was all over the news "back then". Lots of articles were written, Arlen Spector suggested impeachment proceedings if the story panned out, other members of congress spoke out, the FISA judges spoke out against it and one resigned in protest, Al Gore (along with Bob Barr) denounced the program in a speech that was later mocked on Fox News, Barron's magazine called for impeachment hearings, polls were conducted over this development and the participants favored impeachment if the story panned out, etc. And afterwards, Bush and the rest of the administration campaigned heavily to defend their position on this program (an odd thing to do, since there was "no outrage").

So, never mind where the outrage was back then? The question is, where were YOU back then that you didn't notice the outrage?

(Don't worry about it, Criddic. I know it's not your fault. I've heard several Republican operatives say the exact same thing on TV last night. And since you excel at parroting what you hear without checking the accuracy of the claim, I don't blame you for saying there was no outrage back then. But is your memory really that bad?)

[OscarGuy]

I was just as outraged as when I found out they were requesting search records for the internet and proud of Google for telling them to "F*** Off". Pertinent is a subjective term. If you pertinent by using the numbers people called to form patterns, then that's using pertinent info. I hope that the NSA comes knocking on your door one day to ask you why you were calling so-and-so because they had been linked to "Communism"...I'm sorry, I mean "Terrorism"...Sadly, it won't ever happen, but until it does, I don't think you'll ever understand the gravity of things like this.

[criddic3]

From what I am hearing, no pertinent info about the people is being used whatsoever. I am also hearing that this story has been out there since December, as per an article in The New York Times. Where was the outrage back then?

[OscarGuy]

Does that matter, Criddic? My call records are private. Having worked for the telecom industry for 5 years, I know that the only legal way to obtain records on individuals is through subpoena and for a judge to order a subpoena, there generally has to be criminal activity. However, by subpoenaing ALL call records, they are actually accusing the American public of being criminal. It's one thing to demand the call records of terrorists or their conspirators but to demand the records for ALL people goes against MY right to privacy. Would you want someone subpoening your medical records? It's the same thing. The people I choose to speak with on the phone is MY private affair. If I wanted everyone to know, I'd post the call list to the internet.

[criddic3]

This program does not involve the NSA listening to or recording conversations.