Comment by rglover

Comment by rglover 2 months ago

Unfortunately, there are far too many examples of those very people abusing these tools. They shot the "sense of honor and duty" argument point blank just for allowing these things to exist in the first place.

If what you say is true, there would have been more than one honorable person to step up and say "hey, wait a minute." In the case of XKEYSCORE, there was precisely one, and he's basically been marooned in Russia for over a decade (and funny enough, XKEYSCORE still exists and is likely still utilized in the exact same way [1]).

Never underestimate the effect the threat of character destruction—and by extension, loss of income—will have on even the most honorable person's psyche. In situations involving matters like these, it's always far more likely that the "pressure" will be ratcheted up until the compliance (read: keep your mouth shut) rate is 100%.

[1] https://documents.pclob.gov/prod/Documents/OversightReport/e...

ActorNightly 2 months ago

> far too many examples of those very people abusing these tools.

Name one. And not about some agency collecting data, or targeting a foreign national with suspected ties to terrorist, all which are within the bounds of the law. I want to hear an example where a US citizen, fully innocent, who was targeted for no reason what so ever for someone for personal gain.

You can't. Because it doesn't happen. Even in the report that you linked (which I know you didn't read btw), it literally states the multitude of guardrails in place for using XKEYSCORE.

>If what you say is true, there would have been more than one honorable person to step up and say "hey, wait a minute." In the case of XKEYSCORE, there was precisely one, and he's basically been marooned in Russia for over a decade

Here is a pro tip: anytime you hear or read about Bad Big Brother Government, ask yourself why should the person reporting it be given the benefit of the doubt and not the government. People took a lot of what Snowden said as gospel, despite him being technically wrong on a lot of stuff, all because its "cool" to be anti big brother, no matter what the actual truth is.

Reply View 2 replies

rglover 2 months ago

COINTELPRO [1] (and [2])
IRS Targeting [3] (misuse of technology to unfairly target political opponents)
Stellar Wind [4] (related to XKEYSCORE)
DCSNet [5]
ECHELON [6]
Project Shamrock [7] (an oldie but telling of the culture of intelligence agencies and collusion with private business)
Hepting v. AT&T [8] (hilarious because the outcome was that the government just changed the rules to give retroactive immunity to data providers)
> And not about some agency collecting data, or targeting a foreign national with suspected ties to terrorist, all which are within the bounds of the law.
When “bounds of the law” can be extended to be any U.S. citizen (and I can just fill in “suspected terrorist ties” in the “why” column [9]), then there aren’t really any bounds. The entire point is that these data collection programs and databases shouldn’t even exist.
> I want to hear an example where a US citizen, fully innocent, who was targeted for no reason what so ever for someone for personal gain.
I can’t (unless you’d count the admission of error in the surveillance of Carter Page [10]) because they created a shadow court (FISC or “FISA Court” in the 70s) to push through surveillance warrants on their own terms [see 9]. There’s zero requirement to publicly report any surveillance (or its outcome) authorized under a FISA-granted warrant.
This further highlights the problem: American citizens are supposed to just blindly trust entities that not only have unlimited access to our information if they want it, but also have a court with judges that will push through surveillance warrants (see stats on the number of approved warrants vs. those rejected or requiring amendment)?
And that document I linked? You’re right, I skimmed it. My point with sharing that was that a system that shouldn’t even exist still does and is still being used under the rule of the FISA court, not the greater U.S. Justice System.
The report itself is covered in redactions. It’s clearly a (arguably weak) case of plausible deniability (my own speculation—you can call me an idiot but I think that’s the more intelligent position, here). I’m all for patriotism and protecting the country, but not under the pretense that all Americans be made into de-facto criminals and unwillingly submit (without recourse) to limitless surveillance because they hypothetically, possibly, maybe could potentially have ties to “terrorists.”
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_Committee
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRS_targeting_controversy
[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stellar_Wind
[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Collection_System_Netw...
[6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECHELON
[7] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_SHAMROCK
[8] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hepting_v._AT%26T
[9] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Foreign_Intellig...
[10] https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/23/politics/fisa-carter-page-war...

Reply View | 1 reply
- ActorNightly 2 months ago
  
  >because they created a shadow court (FISC or “FISA Court” in the 70s) to push through surveillance warrants on their own terms [see 9]. There’s zero requirement to publicly report any surveillance (or its outcome) authorized under a FISA-granted warrant.
  When you start excusing the lack of evidence for conspiracy with more conspiracy, you are too far lost in the sauce.
  Note how you automatically assume that just because its a shadow court, it MUST be corrupt. Or that the US citizens being targeted have done nothing wrong, and are being targeted solely because some c-suit wants them to be.
  Consider that all of your ideas have this inherent bias of government being bad. If you are capable, eliminate this bias, and think through logically on why you may want to have a FISA court, and why you may want the power to target US citizens.
  >American citizens are supposed to just blindly trust entities that not only have unlimited access to our information if they want it, but also have a court with judges that will push through surveillance warrants (see stats on the number of approved warrants vs. those rejected or requiring amendment)?
  Yes. Governments are not perfect, but they are absolutely required for societies to function. When the government is created, citizens give it rights that surpass individual rights, so that it can rule in various ways, including through force or surveillance, to keep society in order. Your life today, thats arguably better in US than for people in other countries, is a direct result of this system in work.
  
  Reply View | 0 replies