Say what you want about George W.

[AViking]

Only in today's political climate can Americans get upset about espionage and surveillance. This has been going on since the beginning of time.

The difference today is that people think they're a hero by telling everyone all our dirty little secrets.

Germany is a prime target for intelligence gathering since they are the hub of the European Union and their economy (EU) is the 2nd largest in the world. The Euro is also driving that economy into the ground. Why anyone would expect people to not spy on Germany I don't know.

Worse yet when our intelligence gathering capacity was crippled and unorganized we had an outcry from the public who were upset that something like 911 could happen. They ramp up their operations and because a 30 year old contractor gets his panties in a bunch the rest of you naive Americans have to follow suit?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Oops...looks like you guys have egg on your face once again!

From the liberal mag-wsj
http://m.us.wsj.com/article_email/S...0180138036-lMyQjAxMTAzMDIwNzEyNDcyWj?mobile=y

So at first you claim 0bama has no control although you were shown that the intelligence agencies are under his direction and control, then you say we have egg on our faces because he stopped that which he had no control over. How does that magic trick work?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Only in today's political climate can Americans get upset about espionage and surveillance. This has been going on since the beginning of time.

The difference today is that people think they're a hero by telling everyone all our dirty little secrets.

Germany is a prime target for intelligence gathering since they are the hub of the European Union and their economy (EU) is the 2nd largest in the world. The Euro is also driving that economy into the ground. Why anyone would expect people to not spy on Germany I don't know.

Worse yet when our intelligence gathering capacity was crippled and unorganized we had an outcry from the public who were upset that something like 911 could happen. They ramp up their operations and because a 30 year old contractor gets his panties in a bunch the rest of you naive Americans have to follow suit?

Well we naive Americans have a President who bullied the world over one man. We have a President who lied about how the NSA surveillance program hasn't hurt any Americans not involved in terrorism. We have a dept of justice under the cool off a President who is trying to use evidence obtained without a warrant for criminal prosecution. Yeah we should just trust. That's pretty native.

But we are Americans. You owe us and we must bow to abuse... Why? We tossed out the king here.

Now Merkel is a terrorist because?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I missed the other part you made up. Our intelligence community was hamstrung by politics, not because we weren't in everyone's junk. The Clinton administration correctly identified and passed onto the next who were the threats. Correct information was dumped and Saddam was substituted. That was NOT a failure of intelligence.

 

[boomerang]

It's time to quit blaming Obama and start assessing the blame where it belongs-with Valerie Jarrett. She's the decision maker for this president. He just goes along with her. He's the public face.

 

[fskimospy]

It is truly telling about our political climate when the right pretends to be outraged that the NSA is doing the job that it is required to do by law.

Of course we are spying on foreign leaders. Of course we have to deny it. That's how the game works. Why is this a surprise to anyone?

Snowdon is quickly moving into Bradley manning territory. He has gone from heroic whistleblower to piece of shit fairly fast.

 

[destey]

It is truly telling about our political climate when the right pretends to be outraged that the NSA is doing the job that it is required to do by law.

Of course we are spying on foreign leaders. Of course we have to deny it. That's how the game works. Why is this a surprise to anyone?

Snowdon is quickly moving into Bradley manning territory. He has gone from heroic whistleblower to piece of shit fairly fast.

Please provide citations that the NSA is fulfilling its legal duties by what it is doing.

 

[fskimospy]

Please provide citations that the NSA is fulfilling its legal duties by what it is doing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=National_Security_Agency

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=National_Security_Agency

I missed in that article that it says it must gather all data about all people.

 

[bignateyk]

The only countries we have a spying agreement with are the 5-eyes. Outside of that, it's fair game. Germany/France/Israel, and others spy on us all the time. They're just acting up in arms so their population doesn't get all pissy about it.

 

[fskimospy]

I missed in that article that it says it must gather all data about all people.

I have no idea what relevance that would have. The NSA has a clear mission, to gather signals intelligence. Gathering that on foreign leaders is obviously part of that.

 

[TerryMathews]

I have no idea what relevance that would have. The NSA has a clear mission, to gather signals intelligence. Gathering that on foreign leaders is obviously part of that.

Typically, in the past, these spy agencies had specific targets. Granted, the technology didn't exist for monitoring on the scale we are doing it now (Total Information Awareness?).

I will grant you that this development in technology may have created a monster that would've thrived under a Republican president as well, but I still lay the blame at Obama for not exercising his executive power to reign it in.

The president is not the man the senator was. I guess that was just good marketing.

 

[fskimospy]

Typically, in the past, these spy agencies had specific targets. Granted, the technology didn't exist for monitoring on the scale we are doing it now (Total Information Awareness?).

I will grant you that this development in technology may have created a monster that would've thrived under a Republican president as well, but I still lay the blame at Obama for not exercising his executive power to reign it in.

The president is not the man the senator was. I guess that was just good marketing.

I don't agree or like the scope of US spying on our citizens at all, but outrage over spying on foreign leaders? Give me a break. That is the whole point of the NSA and I hope they keep it up.

 

[TerryMathews]

I don't agree or like the scope of US spying on our citizens at all, but outrage over spying on foreign leaders? Give me a break. That is the whole point of the NSA and I hope they keep it up.

If you review my post, I wasn't talking about spying on foreign leaders. I agree with you that is a non-starter if they are targeted for monitoring.

 

[Zargon]

Please, snowden made the US look bad because he released sources and methods. That is traitorous.

Bolded is pretty much exactly where I still stand on the Snowden issue myself. He was right to an extent, but clearly didn't think it through as well as he should have.

He cost us an incredibly detailed view into Russian diplomatic and military communications. But I will admit I smiled when I saw news of our decryption abilities just stomp all over Putin's little tour of bluster and ego - right after he got done mocking the West for disparaging the level of Russian technical and design prowess (wrt to the S-300s he was sending to Syria).

Heh.

Enjoy using those typewriters Vlad.

whys that?

he got lots of blatant death threats from the US, he asked them to back off, and they grounded that plane, he released some intel like he said he would, and then the admin got all pissy

everytime the US Admin has provoked him, he leaks something, he laid the ground rules for the engagement VERY clearly.

PRISM is a giant pile of garbage, and we all pretty much owe the dude a beer atleast for opening this process up for scrutiny

The pres is so worried about it hes lobbying the SCOTUS directly asking them to not take the case.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I have no idea what relevance that would have. The NSA has a clear mission, to gather signals intelligence. Gathering that on foreign leaders is obviously part of that.

The NSA will gather whatever it is tasked to do. The restraint and selectivity comes from those in control, who apparently have selectivity and restraint only when it's politically expedient. Those are the same people who thwart efforts regarding wiretapping of US citizens so there's not much hope that they'll be judicious.

 

[fskimospy]

The NSA will gather whatever it is tasked to do. The restraint and selectivity comes from those in control, who apparently have selectivity and restraint only when it's politically expedient. Those are the same people who thwart efforts regarding wiretapping of US citizens so there's not much hope that they'll be judicious.

Right, and we should all be super happy that the NSA is attempting to gather intelligence on the leadership of foreign countries, even our allies. That's what we pay them to do.

I am sincerely baffled that people are upset that our spies are spying on foreign governments. What did you think they were there for? If you want to be mad about the other things the NSA does I'm right there with you. This though? Pssh, I hope they double down and spy even more.

 

[TerryMathews]

Right, and we should all be super happy that the NSA is attempting to gather intelligence on the leadership of foreign countries, even our allies. That's what we pay them to do.

I am sincerely baffled that people are upset that our spies are spying on foreign governments. What did you think they were there for? If you want to be mad about the other things the NSA does I'm right there with you. This though? Pssh, I hope they double down and spy even more.

I think the problem here is the indiscriminate nature of it. Spying for a specific purpose is one thing but this is almost Hoover-esque.

 

[fskimospy]

I think the problem here is the indiscriminate nature of it. Spying for a specific purpose is one thing but this is almost Hoover-esque.

What does that have to do with this thread? The article says that Obama specifically approved the wiretapping of Angela Merkel's phone conversations, and I approve of that. That's the opposite of indiscriminate.

 

[TerryMathews]

What does that have to do with this thread? The article says that Obama specifically approved the wiretapping of Angela Merkel's phone conversations, and I approve of that. That's the opposite of indiscriminate.

What were they monitoring for?

This is what Hoover was famous for, looking for anything he can use.

 

[ivwshane]

So at first you claim 0bama has no control although you were shown that the intelligence agencies are under his direction and control, then you say we have egg on our faces because he stopped that which he had no control over. How does that magic trick work?

Lol! More dishonest posting from you? Who would have thought?

Are you really this stupid?

Spying program starts in 2000, NSA goes to the president and says, we have reason to believe we should be spying on such and such, should we do it? The president says yes.

2010 comes around and the NSA says, hey mr prez we have this spying program going on for these reasons, should we continue it? The president says, well the reasons you gave sound good, go ahead and continue the program.

Later in the presidents term, the president or congress says, hey I think we need to look at our spying operations and make sure they align with our values. Some don't and are stopped or are asked to be shut down.

2013 comes around and details of the spying are leaked, hyabusa gets butthurt because he doesn't like how the sausage is being made and blames Obama for not knowing what he wasn't told. Apparently hyabusa believes one knows what they do not know. He also believes that even if the president isn't ware of something, if he doesn't stop it, the prez then therefor supports it. Brilliant logic once again!

 

[ivwshane]

What does that have to do with this thread? The article says that Obama specifically approved the wiretapping of Angela Merkel's phone conversations, and I approve of that. That's the opposite of indiscriminate.

Actually it doesn't say that, the article implied that he specifically approved her being wire tapped. What is true, is that he approved a broader spying program that included her. He later had that program stopped once he was made aware of that detail.

 

[ivwshane]

What were they monitoring for?

This is what Hoover was famous for, looking for anything he can use.

Why would Eski or anyone outside of the NSA/CIA know that answer unless it was leaked? Was that info leaked? No? Then why would you ask such a pointless question?

 

[TerryMathews]

Lol! More dishonest posting from you? Who would have thought?

Are you really this stupid?

Spying program starts in 2000, NSA goes to the president and says, we have reason to believe we should be spying on such and such, should we do it? The president says yes.

2010 comes around and the NSA says, hey mr prez we have this spying program going on for these reasons, should we continue it? The president says, well the reasons you gave sound good, go ahead and continue the program.

Later in the presidents term, the president or congress says, hey I think we need to look at our spying operations and make sure they align with our values. Some don't and are stopped or are asked to be shut down.

2013 comes around and details of the spying are leaked, hyabusa gets butthurt because he doesn't like how the sausage is being made and blames Obama for not knowing what he wasn't told. Apparently hyabusa believes one knows what they do not know. He also believes that even if the president isn't ware of something, if he doesn't stop it, the prez then therefor supports it. Brilliant logic once again!

We don't accept this answer from Wall Street. Why should we accept it from the White House?

 

[fskimospy]

What were they monitoring for?

This is what Hoover was famous for, looking for anything he can use.

Come on man, you can't be serious. How on Earth would any of us know what they were monitoring her phone? Having insight into the conversations of another head of government is simply an intrinsically valuable thing to have.

I'm not even sure what you're arguing for or against here. Do you not want our intelligence services to attempt to intercept the communications of foreign governments? You claimed this was indiscriminate, but from the information available it was the exact opposite of indiscriminate.

The problem with Hoover was that he frequently targeted innocent Americans for monitoring and investigation without a legitimate purpose. Monitoring what a foreign head of government does is a legitimate purpose in and of itself.