Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

NSA admits listening to U.S. phone calls without warrants - Angry yet?

page: 3
87
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 16 2013 @ 01:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Heliophant
 


Yeah, the US, Canada, UK, Australia and NZ share signals intelligence freely in an arrangement known as the "Five Eyes" group. Canada's CSEC agency has a very close relationship with their NSA and British GCHQ counterparts so I wouldn't be surprised if they're involved with Prism too, even though it's illegal for them to spy on Canadians.




posted on Jun, 16 2013 @ 01:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by winofiend

Originally posted by elouina
reply to post by Yngvarr
 


Ohhh... I think this one will certainly do it. I mentioned in another thread that the Obamanites were angry. Wait until they get a load of this!

IMPEACH NOW!!!! That is punishment most fitting of this crime.


What good will that do?

You see, it seems that while everyone was not looking, communist china came along and said "Home of the brave, land of the free!" and sat down in the big chair.

I still find it absolutely unfathomable that they can justify this. My brain is swimming...

How can you fix something that has tendrils of sinister intent intertwined into everything you now use?


I have to admit you're spot on. I gave a knee jerk, one size fits all solution to the problem
while knowing damn good and well it's a MUCH bigger problem than an impeachment
will clean up.

Look at your first sentence. Nailed it!



posted on Jun, 16 2013 @ 01:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by elouina
reply to post by Yngvarr
 


Ohhh... I think this one will certainly do it. I mentioned in another thread that the Obamanites were angry. Wait until they get a load of this!

IMPEACH NOW!!!! That is punishment most fitting of this crime.



looking back at yngvarr's post, I was hoping to discover how this argument got steered toward Obama rhetoric yet again. but, unsurprisingly, it was our fair elouina that derailed.

am I angry and shocked about the surveillance? absolutely.

but does Obama have to be the focus of every single thread? you don't think there are people involved with this that have no tie to the executive? surely there must be. will hanging this one man really be effective recourse? I doubt it. (it would be interesting to watch, tho)

you are really undermining the importance of this information by pursuing your hatred of the president over the hatred of these abominable federal activities.



posted on Jun, 16 2013 @ 02:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sankari

Originally posted by elouina
NSA admits listening to U.S. phone calls without warrants - Angry yet?


Nope. I live in Australia. They can't tap my phone.

Sucks to be you.




Oh man, I dunno how old you are but do you remember Richard Alston back in 99 and the internet censorship agenda we had to put up with at the time, full of idiotic rhetoric and ignorance of reality, and we were the laughing stock of the wider internet community for having such idiots pushing such things.

We're far far far from being safe down here, when it comes to political idiots and thinking they know better than us.

He failed, but we're still battling idiots... I fear it's only a matter of time before the weight of their attempts will simply subdue the overall importance of it all, and they seep their legislation in.

And with everything happening world wide in this regard, we're silly if we sit complacently thinking we're safe from it all.



posted on Jun, 16 2013 @ 02:02 AM
link   
reply to post by tgidkp
 

I know you get ruffled when people blame Obama... But he IS the President. The buck stops with him. He's in charge of all these agencies.

Yes, other people are also to blame. No, just blaming the Pres isn't enough. But he is certainly the one person we KNOW we can waive a finger at. Nothing personal or political to Obama, but he's the guy at the top of the Federal Org-Chart.
edit on 16-6-2013 by Heliophant because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2013 @ 02:03 AM
link   
reply to post by tgidkp
 


Look it is up to Obama to uphold our constitution. He stated that this PRISM crap is kewl with him. So he is just as guilty as the NSA, and failed the US citizens miserably. I say, fire every darn last one of them!

Oh and this isn't hatred over the president, it is hatred over his actions. I have never felt this way over a presidents actions ever before in my life. But then again, look at what we are seeing.
edit on 16-6-2013 by elouina because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2013 @ 02:10 AM
link   
B.bbbb.buh.bbb buh b but if we have nothing to hide surely this is OK no?
Let's see if they can stand up to the same scrutiny huh



posted on Jun, 16 2013 @ 02:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by tgidkp

Originally posted by elouina
reply to post by Yngvarr
 


Ohhh... I think this one will certainly do it. I mentioned in another thread that the Obamanites were angry. Wait until they get a load of this!

IMPEACH NOW!!!! That is punishment most fitting of this crime.



looking back at yngvarr's post, I was hoping to discover how this argument got steered toward Obama rhetoric yet again. but, unsurprisingly, it was our fair elouina that derailed.

am I angry and shocked about the surveillance? absolutely.

but does Obama have to be the focus of every single thread? you don't think there are people involved with this that have no tie to the executive? surely there must be. will hanging this one man really be effective recourse? I doubt it. (it would be interesting to watch, tho)

you are really undermining the importance of this information by pursuing your hatred of the president over the hatred of these abominable federal activities.


The Executive Branch has complete control over classified information and national security all such matters (in particular the designation of information as classified or not), the Judiciary is a rubber stamp on National Security, and Congress only has such oversight powers as the Executive is willing to grant them (because it can simply decline to share information if it doesn't want to, as for example has been the case with a many, but not all, of Obama's national security surveillance moves -- hence the coinage of the term "Imperial Presidency"). In addition, those oversight powers are restricted even further by the inability of Congressional overseers to discuss or debate these matters publicly, or to inform the American people about what is being done in their name.

Ultimately, whether you're okay with such an arrangement comes down to how much faith you repose in the Executive Branch (not the other two), because they hold all the cards. Me? I've never had much faith in strong, big centralized federal government, even during the Bush years (hence my opposition to the PATRIOT Act among other things). But the real problem is what the rest of America thinks.

So to sum my post up, Elouina is correct.



posted on Jun, 16 2013 @ 02:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Heliophant
 


you know I get ruffled? I suppose I must be an "obamanaut", huh?

or rather, perhaps I just prefer a nice clean debate.

....but I know how you love your mud-slinging. (making assumptions is fun!)

elouina says: "just fire them all".

that is certainly a more appropriate response, IMO.



posted on Jun, 16 2013 @ 02:19 AM
link   
reply to post by tgidkp
 

You do have a history of getting ruffled when Obama-blame comes up. I've seen it happen a few times. (And sometimes, you're right)
I don't believe I've earned the title of mud slinger, though.

Now, what about that clean debate you wanted?


edit on 16-6-2013 by Heliophant because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2013 @ 02:22 AM
link   
I'm guessing he/she is one of the millennials.

Hey millenials, Big Brother is your Cool New Buddy! Mind if he chills at your apartment and uses your computer for a little bit? Borrows your phone? Records your entire digital footprint? He promises not to go snooping around in there. Much.



posted on Jun, 16 2013 @ 02:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by tgidkp
reply to post by Heliophant
 


you know I get ruffled? I suppose I must be an "obamanaut", huh?

or rather, perhaps I just prefer a nice clean debate.

....but I know how you love your mud-slinging. (making assumptions is fun!)

elouina says: "just fire them all".

that is certainly a more appropriate response, IMO.


Oh I get it! Don't fire the criminals, just keep them! And maybe hire a few axe murderers and drug addicts also. Why? Because you love them! Makes total sense! Shaking my head here... This is the most insane argument I have ever heard. Obamanut? You said it I didn't.



posted on Jun, 16 2013 @ 02:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by AQuestion
reply to post by elouina
 


Dear elouina,

Cell phones and phones are different, cell phones broadcast over the air and anyone can listen to them. Nothing you put on the internet cannot be hacked. Do hackers need warrants? If they do not then expect the government to data mine everything that is in the air and on the net. If you do not like that then use regular mail and a land line.


Are you saying then, that anything written on the internet, anything posted on the internet is excluded from the protection afforded in the 4th Amendment?


Dear beezer,

What does it matter what I say? That is what the courts have said since the beginning of radio. What do you think has changed legally? I did not say it was right or wrong, I said what the law is.



posted on Jun, 16 2013 @ 02:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by elouina

Originally posted by AQuestion
reply to post by elouina
 


Dear elouina,

Cell phones and phones are different, cell phones broadcast over the air and anyone can listen to them. Nothing you put on the internet cannot be hacked. Do hackers need warrants? If they do not then expect the government to data mine everything that is in the air and on the net. If you do not like that then use regular mail and a land line.



Hello??? Obviously you didn't read the article. This matter is so serious, and your argument so weak, that I don't even have to counter anything here. Just go read the darn article, will you?


Dear elouina,

"Serious", I never said it was not, I said what it is and what it was. If you publish something on twitter so that the world can see, how do you exclude the government from reading it? You see once you cease believing in privacy and being careful with what you say publicly, you give up control over who reads or listens to your words. That is a personal choice.



posted on Jun, 16 2013 @ 02:41 AM
link   
Ok I am going to bed now, but I have a question that I would like to leave for everyone being negative here. Why do you support this? Honestly... Would you not care if this led to total tyranny? Do you like Obama so much that you would like him to be a dictator here forever and ever? Or maybe you don't live in the US and want to see it destroyed? What gives? Seriously...



posted on Jun, 16 2013 @ 02:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ex_CT2
reply to post by elouina
 


But ... but ... but ... didn't our wonderful heroic president just say the other day that no one is listening to our phone calls? And that we could trust our government? Oh my! I'm so dismayed and confused. Someone is lying to us. Who am I supposed to believe...?


Dont worry theyll tell you what to think very soon. You know it started out a joke but it really isnt funny is it?



posted on Jun, 16 2013 @ 02:47 AM
link   
reply to post by AQuestion
 


To quote you:


If you do not like that then use regular mail and a land line.


You mentioned that land lines were safe, well they are not. Just read the article like I mentioned. No matter whose side you are on, you need to be informed. This recent admission by the NSA is very bad news here. And how are we certain now that our regular mail is even safe? Who can we trust now?



posted on Jun, 16 2013 @ 02:51 AM
link   
reply to post by AQuestion
 


You don't publish your private emails, phone calls, and texts. You use the internet on a forum such as this with the expectation that your identity can remain private.

Do I seriously have to explain to you why what is being done in the name of national security is wrong, insidious and the most evil form of tyranny?



posted on Jun, 16 2013 @ 03:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Heliophant
reply to post by tgidkp
 

You do have a history of getting ruffled when Obama-blame comes up.
Blaming the president is appropriate since I think presidential executive orders were given to allow the NSA to ignore the constitution and do their spying. Of course the president isn't the only one to blame, but we can't really blame anyone else for their executive orders.

But if you blame Obama you also have to blame Bush, because warrantless spying goes back at least as far as pre-9/11 2001, with Bush.

The last president who appeared to be trying to follow the law and constitution was Clinton, who of course authorized spying with a warrant. I haven't seen anything yet showing Clinton authorized warrantless domestic spying.



posted on Jun, 16 2013 @ 03:27 AM
link   
wrong thread...

reply to Arbitrageur:
Still agree.
edit on 16-6-2013 by ColCurious because: sorry, mixed up threads






top topics



 
87
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join