Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Republicans blast NSA "Dragnet"

  1. #1

    Default Republicans blast NSA "Dragnet"

    The Republican National Committee Blasts The NSA’s “Dragnet” Surveillance | TechCrunch

    Thoughts and opinions? Do you feel we need all this NSA spying, whether it be average American citizens or world leaders abroad or does it need to be limited like Obama said he would do?

  2. #2

    Default

    It's hard to reasonably believe this is an ideological stance. Republicans were major supporters of warrantless wiretapping last time it was in the news. This is nothing more than an opportunity to drive a wedge between Obama and his base. That said, he bloody well deserves it. I'm squarely in wish-I-could-take-my-vote-back territory entirely over this matter.

  3. #3

    Default

    Absolutely not, its an invasion of privacy and an overstepping of authority for the NSA. This matter kinda makes me think the US government is out of control and is without proper oversight.

  4. #4

    Default

    Perhaps because I have family and friends that have worked and are working for many different agencies in the intelligence community, I've always found it hard to go along with the majority opinion that the Feds as being constantly 'out to get you'. The vast majority of people that work at agencies like CIA and NSA (both of which I have close family members working for) are patriotic, non-James Bond type, everyday Americans. Furthermore, they often understand FAR more than most the dangers of modern technologically driven surveillance, and are very hesitant to do anything that goes against the Constitution they are sworn to protect.

    Obama suggested that the bulk records of the dragnet 'meta data' be held by some non-government entity in the future, but frankly...that's scarier to me than it being under the hands of the IC folks in the government. I trust them far more than any sort of corporation, out of personal experience.

    That being said, I do think there needs to be a change with how oversight is handled in the IC. The FISA court is a complete joke, and seems to me to be nothing more than a rubber stamp, not the vetting element it was supposed to be.

    As for the Republican backlash? I laughed when I first heard of it. The entire move is just a political maneuver on their part. Real, serious efforts by individual Republican members of Congress that would endanger national security efforts would be political suicide, and they know it.

  5. #5

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by Dan09 View Post
    Real, serious efforts by individual Republican members of Congress that would endanger national security efforts would be political suicide, and they know it.
    If anyone actually thought the program was effective at preventing terrorist attacks, this would be an issue. However, pretty much every news outlet is reporting opinions to the contrary.

    NSA surveillance: Trading our privacy for a program that doesn't work: Editorial | NJ.com
    The NSA's Surveillance Programs Aren't Making Us Any Safer - Defense One
    NSA: Usefulness of Mass Surveillance is Vastly Overstated | TIME.com

  6. #6

    Default Republicans blast NSA "Dragnet"



    Quote Originally Posted by AEsahaettr View Post
    If anyone actually thought the program was effective at preventing terrorist attacks, this would be an issue. However, pretty much every news outlet is reporting opinions to the contrary.

    NSA surveillance: Trading our privacy for a program that doesn't work: Editorial | NJ.com
    The NSA's Surveillance Programs Aren't Making Us Any Safer - Defense One
    NSA: Usefulness of Mass Surveillance is Vastly Overstated | TIME.com
    Oh I'm sure that they understand the program itself isn't effective at all. It definitely has the potential for far more harm than good.

    However, in a post-9/11 world, reversing or even reducing programs that are seen as being defense or national security related is *usually* not a good move for most politicians, particularly Republicans. If someone had the guts to do so, it would be easy for an opponent in their next reelection to claim they were 'anti-troops' or some such nonsense.

    I'd be glad to see the entire NSA program vanish entirely in the near future, but I'm not so naive to think that it is the only program of its kind in existence in the Intelligence Community.

    The public outrage that has stemmed from Snowden's leaks (who, by the way I think is a traitor that should be left to rot in jail) is only the tip of the iceberg as far as surveillance goes. All kinds of programs such as this one were created in the wake of 9/11 - Patriot Act when irrational desperate fear was overriding common sense and careful thinking.

  7. #7

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by Dan09 View Post
    However, in a post-9/11 world, reversing or even reducing programs that are seen as being defense or national security related is *usually* not a good move for most politicians, particularly Republicans.
    Very much agreed, though I think that Republicans have more immunity than Democrats. The "R" conveys a basal level of trust on military/security issues with the public. Mark Kirk was elected Senator from Illinois despite the fact he centered his platform around his military record and was later exposed as having lied about pretty much everything. He made a lot of statements about being named Naval Intelligence Officer of the Year and claimed he "ran the war room in the Pentagon." Turned out neither of those things are real. The outcome? Five-point victory in a blue state.

  8. #8

    Default

    I personally don't see this as either a Republican or Democratic party issue (not left or right).
    These programs were started in the Bush administration, which of course was carried on with zeal in the Obama administration.
    I see it as a Libertarian vs Authoritarian issue.
    with some aspects of this government going insanely Authoritarian, namely the Federal Governments' surveillance programs that I feel go way over the line with personal privacy. this is an issue that both left and right can agree on.
    And no, I trust Big Corporation even less than Big Government, at least Big Government shouldn't have a profit attached.

    Other areas, it has gone the other way, Food and Factory safety; USDA inspection programs have been cut back over and over through the years, resulting in mass outbreaks of illness that have frequently resulted in death. Also resulting in a body of laws that favor the factory farms where these problems originate.
    Or, how about a chemical factory, whose storage tanks haven't been inspected since it opened more than 20 years ago? and that inspection was revealed to be done quite poorly.

    Meanwhile, the local board of health routinely goes after my mother for not having a septic system (quite legal with the specialized toilet she has) or running water, (something humans have been doing for thousands of years, she knows how to obtain it). Especially when she is the only human residing in 3 square miles, and the local wildlife probably poop much more than her.
    In my own business, the local building department has gone insane, requiring a permit, with CAD drawings, load calculations, Environmental Impact Study to hang a picture on the wall. Heaven forbid you might want re-paint your bedroom.

    'I think a government loses its legitimacy when it does more to you than for you'
    - Robert Heinlein

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 21-Jan-2014, 03:58
  2. Replies: 30
    Last Post: 04-Aug-2013, 20:23
  3. Are terms like "fetish" and "paraphilia" outdated/unhelpful?
    By cm90210 in forum Adult Babies & Littles
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 31-Dec-2012, 22:24
  4. Replies: 99
    Last Post: 23-Jul-2012, 18:43
  5. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 21-May-2011, 09:58

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
ADISC.org - the Adult Baby / Diaper Lover / Incontinence Support Community.
ADISC.org is designed to be viewed in Firefox, with a resolution of at least 1280 x 1024.