|Caminante Nocturno |
Russia Today is somehow worse than Fox News.
Russia Today is an undisguised propaganda mill for the Soviet government.
There is no Soviet government anymore. There's Putin and his cronies who run just about every major corporate interest and extort bribes from all the others. So, I dunno. Mafia-based oligarchy?
Tell us your feelings about how salon is run by ex KGB.
PBS is an undisguised propoganda mill for the confederate government!
I really have to discount anyone who thinks Fox and CNN are somehow even remotely equivalent in their biases. Not to mention that most of all the other networks will actually have some sense of shame if one of their talking heads says something that goes over the top and has them apologize and/or resign. For Fox, spouting something that's not only false but inflammatory is how you get paid, and everyone just shrugs and says, "well, that's Fox News, what are you going to do?"
That said, CNN was at its best as a headline news channel. When cable news started doing shows based around personalities, the "news" took a nose-dive.
The NSA is collecting a ton of domestic information without warrants or a court order. That statement is probably totally obvious to most people by now. The Binney he mentions has given a great interview on Democracy Now, which I suggest people who care about this topic watch.
It's also pertinent to mention there was even a Nova episode about this; wherein towards the end a guy named Mark Klein speaks for a minute - the man who found that the NSA is splitting the San Francisco AT&T internet backbone into a secret room with Deep Packet Inspection tools and had the balls to talk about it. There's an unredacted version of his declaration on the EFF's (Electronic Frontier Foundation) website wherein he also states that the NSA is probably capturing information around the country. The EFF filed a lawsuit as well; Hepting vs. AT&T, which is worth looking at. Furthermore there's a lengthy Wired article about how there's a massive Cryptanalysis facility the "Utah Data Center" being finished off.
It's really important that we know we have no privacy on the internet now.
I look forward to the day the government tries to use my pornography collection against me.
I won't even say anything.
I'll just stand there and smile proudly.
The biggest defense we have, as a whole, against this kind of thing is just the sheer amount of crap humans generate via the internet. I pity even the computer system that has to sift through Facebook to find anything relevant or meaningful.
Coupling that with the error rate inherent in our information systems, and actually finding people will often be a challenge. Just misspellings of my name have generated three "identities" that I get junk mail for, and I still get official mail for the guy who lived in my house over a decade ago.
That said, it's still scary for any individual the NSA or whoever decides to target.
Glenn goes over your argument. Would you be ok with me having your password for your blog, a record of your credit card transactions, and a tap on your phone line? Or do I just have to be a police officer for you to be ok with it? After all you have nothing to be ashamed of or hide, right? How much privacy do you think people should have? Do you think we should have oversight of what the government does? Is national security more important than the privacy of the population? More importantly, who decides? I agree with Glenn when he basically says that want of privacy is a good value to have. We're talking philosophically here - if you don't care that's your problem.
But then again, you don't live in a place like Syria or China so you really don't get to see how this might affect someone who has to answer to an authority that doesn't like your political beliefs.
Remember when these people were targeting Martin Luther King Jr.? It's the same fucking people in power today and they're just as racist.
They've fought to be able to do this stuff without warrants. Getting a warrant is not a burden to a legitimate law enforcement operation. Not requiring a warrant is basically explicitly telling people they can use these powers to do whatever the fuck they want, which usually translates to kicking the shit out of minorities.
"But then again, you don't live in a place like Syria or China so you really don't get to see how this might affect someone who has to answer to an authority that doesn't like your political beliefs."
technically you already do.
remember how the bush whitehouse fired a bunch of staffers for their political beliefs? This system would just streamline that process so only the croniest of cronies would be hired in the first place.
dont have to worry about whistle blowers if everyone in your group thinks the same way...and even if you end up being too corrupt for them, you can just track them down and try them them for treason pretty easly.
I just have two questions:
1) What dupe thinks we have, have ever had, or will ever have privacy online?
2) What retirement home to they reside in, and/or what flavor of crack are they on?
|Robin Kestrel |
I think we can trust the Government not to abuse its unlimited & highly secretive domestic spying powers.
I have a "friend" in the NSA. I stole his never-gonna-be-his-girlfriend once when we were younger (I'll never forget crying throwing up in the toilet night and no I don't mean her) so now he tells all of our old mutual friends I'm a terrorist. It used to piss me off, but now I don't care.
The NSA is overrated.
10 years ago "Crying Throwing Up in the Toilet Night" used to come come a few times a week for me, but I don't get out much and I stopped drinking so nowadays it's more like an annual holiday. And it's usually because I ate something I should have thrown away and someone else probably already had, and not booze-, drug-, or some-jerk-broke-my-heart-related.
| Register or login To Post a Comment|