Obama: Privacy Invasions 'Modest Encroachments'

Originally posted by beezzer
For those that still don't get it,

Imagine the government breaking into your home and taking your diary. Now you haven't written anything bad, so you have nothing to worry about, right? And the government says, well, we did break into your home, and we did steal your diary, but we haven't read it.

That's not really a fair analogy. A better analogy would be, you put your diary in the mail and send it to somebody. Every mailman who handles your mail photographs the exterior of the package, so they will have a record of the sender's address, the destination address, and the postmark to help them route their mail. The government photographs the exterior of the package, too, and they put the photograph in a vault. If they're interested in you, they get a warrant and pull all photographs with your address out of the vault. Then they can locate and read your diary (if you made copies of your diary for Google, Facebook, etc.). If you send a lot of mail, the government will get a pretty good idea of when you go to the post office and whom you correspond with, too. But until they get that court order, all they have is a bunch of photographs of unopened mail in a vault.

Originally posted by FurvusRexCaeli

Originally posted by beezzer
For those that still don't get it,

Imagine the government breaking into your home and taking your diary. Now you haven't written anything bad, so you have nothing to worry about, right? And the government says, well, we did break into your home, and we did steal your diary, but we haven't read it.

That's not really a fair analogy. A better analogy would be, you put your diary in the mail and send it to somebody. Every mailman who handles your mail photographs the exterior of the package, so they will have a record of the sender's address, the destination address, and the postmark to help them route their mail. The government photographs the exterior of the package, too, and they put the photograph in a vault. If they're interested in you, they get a warrant and pull all photographs with your address out of the vault. Then they can locate and read your diary (if you made copies of your diary for Google, Facebook, etc.). If you send a lot of mail, the government will get a pretty good idea of when you go to the post office and whom you correspond with, too. But until they get that court order, all they have is a bunch of photographs of unopened mail in a vault.

Excellent analogy! Much better than my example.

Originally posted by kaylaluv

Originally posted by FurvusRexCaeli

Originally posted by beezzer
For those that still don't get it,

Imagine the government breaking into your home and taking your diary. Now you haven't written anything bad, so you have nothing to worry about, right? And the government says, well, we did break into your home, and we did steal your diary, but we haven't read it.

That's not really a fair analogy. A better analogy would be, you put your diary in the mail and send it to somebody. Every mailman who handles your mail photographs the exterior of the package, so they will have a record of the sender's address, the destination address, and the postmark to help them route their mail. The government photographs the exterior of the package, too, and they put the photograph in a vault. If they're interested in you, they get a warrant and pull all photographs with your address out of the vault. Then they can locate and read your diary (if you made copies of your diary for Google, Facebook, etc.). If you send a lot of mail, the government will get a pretty good idea of when you go to the post office and whom you correspond with, too. But until they get that court order, all they have is a bunch of photographs of unopened mail in a vault.

Excellent analogy! Much better than my example.

It would be nice if that was as far as it went.
The whistle lower has apparently told the Guardian that he could get any phone tapped from his desk, no warrant involved.

"Any analyst at any time can target anyone. Any selector. Anywhere. Where those communications will be picked up depends on the range of those sensor networks and the authority that that analyst is empowered with," Snowden said, in accompanying video on the Guardian's website. "Not all analysts have the power to target anything. But I, sitting at my desk, had the authority to wiretap anyone, from you or your accountant to a federal judge to even the president if I had a personal email."

npr.org

So it is more like the government breaks into your house and photographs your diary without a warrant and doesn't tell you about it.

reply to post by butcherguy


And you're assuming he's telling the truth about that. I'd like to see proof before I just believe it. I read somewhere that he's a tea party supporter, so he may have some ulterior motives.... just sayin'.

Originally posted by kaylaluv
reply to post by butcherguy

 

And you're assuming he's telling the truth about that. I'd like to see proof before I just believe it. I read somewhere that he's a tea party supporter, so he may have some ulterior motives.... just sayin'.

He did have the power point document. He has been thoroughly vetted by the Guardian.

So now you are going to blame the tea party?

Did you ever give them that much credit before? He was a CIA agent and then worked for the NSA.
Is it possible that he just thinks more of the Constitution than our own President does?
Snowden did what did at great personal risk... it is a no win situation for him.

He might be lying, but who should we trust at this point? Our government?

Originally posted by gamesmaster63
reply to post by resoe26

 

That quote is actually from Benjamin Franklin, not Jefferson.

That said, any reasonably intelligent and observant person should have seen this type of situation coming since Nixon was in office. I have never trusted the government to keep my best interests in mind. That is not what a bureaucracy does, the primary purpose of a bureaucracy is to protect itself.

Negative. You should have said it is BELIEVED to have originated from Franklin. There is much debate on whom it is that first stated that.
SOURCE

If Obama's an empty suit who is controlled and owned by these people, and he's a liar, and he's very likely compromised himself by info they have on HIM, how can you believe what he says?
I won't listen to a word that cowardly little dip# says.