NSA - Surveillance Stopped 50 Terror Plots

[Mertex]

When terrorist attacks are "stopped" generally it saves lives. And drying up the money is basically a good way to stop them.

That posted, even if what the NSA is true, the price paid, is still too high.

We should not be giving up our right to privacy.

And there are other ways to stop attacks.

People are more worried about a future "evil" President or Congress that would use the data for dishonest means, but if we ever get an "evil" President, (like one we had before who was not President but ran the President) don't you think they could start a database then and use it however they wanted. What's to stop them? Right now Congress and the courts have to be in on it to go further than just having the numbers. I'm okay with that.

Congress is "in on it"?? Most claim ignorance or are lying to you..

Yes, many members of Congress have known for years that his has been going on.

Q: Why don't others in Congress seem that upset about all this?

A: Many members of Congress have known this was going on for years. While Americans might be surprised to see, in writing, an authorization to sweep up their phone records, that's old news to many in Congress.

"Everyone should just calm down and understand that this isn't anything that's brand new," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said Thursday. "It's been going on for some seven years."

Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and Vice Chairman Saxby Chambliss issued a similar statement:
What you should know about NSA phone data program

"THE COURTS"??? You have any clue as to WHO is a FISA JUDGE??? Is their work reviewable in any way?? How do you know they aren't a 2 star General with a lifetime career in the spy biz? NOTHING the FISA court does in appealable in the Judiciary branch. Essentially, they are completely DIVORCED from the legal system.

True, the FISA court was set up when Bush was President, and is different from a typical court.

From same link above:
A: No. The seizure was authorized by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which operates under very different rules from a typical court. Probable cause is not required.

The court was created by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 and is known in intelligence circles as the FISA court. Judges appointed by the president hear secret evidence and authorize wiretapping, search warrants and other clandestine efforts to monitor suspected or known spies and terrorists.

In this instance, Judge Roger Vinson authorized the NSA to seize the phone records under a provision in the USA Patriot Act, which passed shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and vastly expanded the government's ability to collect information on Americans.

The Justice Department has staunchly defended Section 215, saying it was narrowly written and has safeguarded liberties.

You do know that even ACKNOWLEDGING that you have recieved a FISA National Security Letter is illegal? You OK with NSA listening to content and having THREE DAYS to obtain a warrant for that action? Are you even OK with allowing NSA access to domestic data when for DECADES they were barred from taking part in any domestic affairs (for dam good reasons).

Do you have a link for that? If they are after someone under suspicion of terrorism, I don't have a problem with it.

Don't really care about your political biases.

And why is that? It was okay when Bush was doing it, but now it isn't under Obama? Or did you complain when we found out Bush was doing it?

I want to know WHAT and WHO is really the oversight or the rules here ---- RIGHT NOW.. I'll talk to you later when the anti-Christ arrives.

I don't understand this comment.

NEITHER of your sorry ass parties ought to be trusted with that HUGE NEW NSA complex in Utah.. And sometimes I don't think we're smart enough to have the keys to a nuclear arsenal..

The one good thing about it is that both parties have done the same thing, and there are those who support it and those who oppose it from both parties, so, in my opinion, if something irregular goes on, the other party will surely jump on it and expose it, and there will be some explaining to be done, for sure.

 

[flacaltenn]

People are more worried about a future "evil" President or Congress that would use the data for dishonest means, but if we ever get an "evil" President, (like one we had before who was not President but ran the President) don't you think they could start a database then and use it however they wanted. What's to stop them? Right now Congress and the courts have to be in on it to go further than just having the numbers. I'm okay with that.

Congress is "in on it"?? Most claim ignorance or are lying to you..

Yes, many members of Congress have known for years that his has been going on.

Q: Why don't others in Congress seem that upset about all this?

A: Many members of Congress have known this was going on for years. While Americans might be surprised to see, in writing, an authorization to sweep up their phone records, that's old news to many in Congress.

"Everyone should just calm down and understand that this isn't anything that's brand new," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said Thursday. "It's been going on for some seven years."

Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and Vice Chairman Saxby Chambliss issued a similar statement:
What you should know about NSA phone data program


True, the FISA court was set up when Bush was President, and is different from a typical court.

From same link above:
A: No. The seizure was authorized by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which operates under very different rules from a typical court. Probable cause is not required.

The court was created by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 and is known in intelligence circles as the FISA court. Judges appointed by the president hear secret evidence and authorize wiretapping, search warrants and other clandestine efforts to monitor suspected or known spies and terrorists.

In this instance, Judge Roger Vinson authorized the NSA to seize the phone records under a provision in the USA Patriot Act, which passed shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and vastly expanded the government's ability to collect information on Americans.

The Justice Department has staunchly defended Section 215, saying it was narrowly written and has safeguarded liberties.


Do you have a link for that? If they are after someone under suspicion of terrorism, I don't have a problem with it.

And why is that? It was okay when Bush was doing it, but now it isn't under Obama? Or did you complain when we found out Bush was doing it?

I want to know WHAT and WHO is really the oversight or the rules here ---- RIGHT NOW.. I'll talk to you later when the anti-Christ arrives.

I don't understand this comment.

NEITHER of your sorry ass parties ought to be trusted with that HUGE NEW NSA complex in Utah.. And sometimes I don't think we're smart enough to have the keys to a nuclear arsenal..

The one good thing about it is that both parties have done the same thing, and there are those who support it and those who oppose it from both parties, so, in my opinion, if something irregular goes on, the other party will surely jump on it and expose it, and there will be some explaining to be done, for sure.

You missed MOST of the facts and points that I made. Relying SOLELY on the defensive propaganda that the Intel Committee and the NSA FBI have been spewing this week.

You have been lied to.. You are CONTINUING to be lied to.. The FISA court is UNTOUCHABLE. NOT reviewable. Even it's documents and methods are state secrets.

SO --- let's just go with this. You're obviously a fan of Dianne Feinstein -- Chair of the Senate Intelligience Committee. SHE LOVES the Patriot Act.. Do YOU love the Patriot Act?
Think Congress should MISREPRESENT what NSA is doing to the public to protect the program??? She does...

Do you love the P.Act even tho it CONTINUES to be violated and abused?
If so -- why are you different from Dick Cheney on this matter?

Do you any sense of self-preservation from an over-reaching govt?

If yes to any of those... How scared are you really to give up all that and agree with those War on Terror Repubs?

 

[Mertex]

Congress is "in on it"?? Most claim ignorance or are lying to you..

Yes, many members of Congress have known for years that his has been going on.

Q: Why don't others in Congress seem that upset about all this?

A: Many members of Congress have known this was going on for years. While Americans might be surprised to see, in writing, an authorization to sweep up their phone records, that's old news to many in Congress.

"Everyone should just calm down and understand that this isn't anything that's brand new," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said Thursday. "It's been going on for some seven years."

Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and Vice Chairman Saxby Chambliss issued a similar statement:
What you should know about NSA phone data program


True, the FISA court was set up when Bush was President, and is different from a typical court.

From same link above:
A: No. The seizure was authorized by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which operates under very different rules from a typical court. Probable cause is not required.

The court was created by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 and is known in intelligence circles as the FISA court. Judges appointed by the president hear secret evidence and authorize wiretapping, search warrants and other clandestine efforts to monitor suspected or known spies and terrorists.

In this instance, Judge Roger Vinson authorized the NSA to seize the phone records under a provision in the USA Patriot Act, which passed shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and vastly expanded the government's ability to collect information on Americans.

The Justice Department has staunchly defended Section 215, saying it was narrowly written and has safeguarded liberties.


Do you have a link for that? If they are after someone under suspicion of terrorism, I don't have a problem with it.

And why is that? It was okay when Bush was doing it, but now it isn't under Obama? Or did you complain when we found out Bush was doing it?

I don't understand this comment.

NEITHER of your sorry ass parties ought to be trusted with that HUGE NEW NSA complex in Utah.. And sometimes I don't think we're smart enough to have the keys to a nuclear arsenal..

The one good thing about it is that both parties have done the same thing, and there are those who support it and those who oppose it from both parties, so, in my opinion, if something irregular goes on, the other party will surely jump on it and expose it, and there will be some explaining to be done, for sure.

You missed MOST of the facts and points that I made. Relying SOLELY on the defensive propaganda that the Intel Committee and the NSA FBI have been spewing this week. You have been lied to.. You are CONTINUING to be lied to.. The FISA court is UNTOUCHABLE. NOT reviewable. Even it's documents and methods are state secrets.

You keep saying the same thing, but you are not providing any links to back up what you are saying. There is a lot of misinformation out there, some of the stuff that is making the rounds may not be accurate or even true.

SO --- let's just go with this. You're obviously a fan of Dianne Feinstein -- Chair of the Senate Intelligience Committee. SHE LOVES the Patriot Act.. Do YOU love the Patriot Act?
Think Congress should MISREPRESENT what NSA is doing to the public to protect the program??? She does...

No, I'm not a fan of Dianne Feinstein. I'm a fan of Grayson, and he is against it, but I don't go along with his claims either.

Do you love the P.Act even tho it CONTINUES to be violated and abused?
If so -- why are you different from Dick Cheney on this matter?

When Dick Cheney was doing it, they were not even getting warrants to listen in on the conversations. At least now, they have to get a warrant, so a court is aware of what is going on. And, I haven't been convinced that the Patriot Act continues to be violated and abused.

Do you any sense of self-preservation from an over-reaching govt

This has been going on for years and I have not felt an repercussions from it, and I've yet to hear of any person being wrongly accused or investigated due to this program, so, I'm not paranoid over it.

If yes to any of those... How scared are you really to give up all that and agree with those War on Terror Repubs?

Sometimes even the Republicans can come up with something worthwhile (even by accident, lol) - and when I first heard that Bush was doing it without warrants I was perturbed. But, I don't want to experience another 9/11, and I trust Obama's judgment. If I were to think that he had ulterior motives I would be the first one to jump ship.


[/QUOTE]

 

[daveman]

Seems like the NSA phone surveillance program has already paid off, at least in one case where it could have really affected us where Khalid Ouazzani for allegedly plotting with Yemeni co-conspirators to blow up the New York Stock Exchange.

Such a case makes the surveillance worth the effort.

National Security Agency Director Keith Alexander testified Tuesday before the House Intelligence Committee that phone and Internet surveillance programs made public by former defense contractor Edward Snowden prevented approximately 50 terrorist plots since 2001, 10 of which targeted the U.S., and said new policies are being crafted to prevent another large-scale leak.

Alexander disclosed that approximately 1,000 people are currently employed as NSA systems administrators – the position Snowden held – and that the agency is "working to come up with a two-person rule" to prevent people "from taking information out of our system." Snowden was a contractor assigned to the NSA by Booz Allen Hamilton before he downloaded and released information on the top-secret programs.

The intelligence agency leader didn't go into detail about what precisely the new "two person" rule would entail. "When one of those persons misuses their authority, that is a huge problem," Alexander said.

The government officials present at Tuesday's hearing publicly disclosed two cases they said were cracked with the broad communications surveillance: One in 2010, in which investigators nabbed Khalid Ouazzani for allegedly plotting with Yemeni co-conspirators to blow up the New York Stock Exchange and another in which a man was arrested for providing "financial support" to an extremist group in Somalia.

Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, questioned FBI Deputy Director Sean Joyce at the hearing, inquiring if the NYSE plotters were serious or if the plans were "something they kind of dreamed about talking among their buddies." Joyce said the conviction of plotters showed it was a serious plan.

NSA Director: Surveillance Stopped 50 Terror Plots - US News and World Report


More.......

Gov't claims spying programs stopped plot to bomb New York Stock Exchange - Jun. 18, 2013

NSA Claim of Thwarted NYSE Plot Contradicted by Court Documents - ABC News

Public Documents Contradict Claim Email Spying Foiled Terror Plot

The NSA is being less than honest.

 

[tubig]

I would never believe any of the claims of these Security State Goons unless I could check up properly what the real facts are. They have been caught lying and misrepresenting far, far too many times!

Too true - well said.

 

[Mertex]

Seems like the NSA phone surveillance program has already paid off, at least in one case where it could have really affected us where Khalid Ouazzani for allegedly plotting with Yemeni co-conspirators to blow up the New York Stock Exchange.

Such a case makes the surveillance worth the effort.

National Security Agency Director Keith Alexander testified Tuesday before the House Intelligence Committee that phone and Internet surveillance programs made public by former defense contractor Edward Snowden prevented approximately 50 terrorist plots since 2001, 10 of which targeted the U.S., and said new policies are being crafted to prevent another large-scale leak.

Alexander disclosed that approximately 1,000 people are currently employed as NSA systems administrators – the position Snowden held – and that the agency is "working to come up with a two-person rule" to prevent people "from taking information out of our system." Snowden was a contractor assigned to the NSA by Booz Allen Hamilton before he downloaded and released information on the top-secret programs.

The intelligence agency leader didn't go into detail about what precisely the new "two person" rule would entail. "When one of those persons misuses their authority, that is a huge problem," Alexander said.

The government officials present at Tuesday's hearing publicly disclosed two cases they said were cracked with the broad communications surveillance: One in 2010, in which investigators nabbed Khalid Ouazzani for allegedly plotting with Yemeni co-conspirators to blow up the New York Stock Exchange and another in which a man was arrested for providing "financial support" to an extremist group in Somalia.

Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, questioned FBI Deputy Director Sean Joyce at the hearing, inquiring if the NYSE plotters were serious or if the plans were "something they kind of dreamed about talking among their buddies." Joyce said the conviction of plotters showed it was a serious plan.

NSA Director: Surveillance Stopped 50 Terror Plots - US News and World Report

More.......

Gov't claims spying programs stopped plot to bomb New York Stock Exchange - Jun. 18, 2013

NSA Claim of Thwarted NYSE Plot Contradicted by Court Documents - ABC News

From your link:
But the FBI deputy director, Sean Joyce, provided Congress with a different version of events Tuesday as he cited the stock exchange plot as one of more than 50 "terror events" that had been disrupted with the help of the NSA's secret surveillance programs.

"We went up on the electronic surveillance and identified his co-conspirators and this was the plot that was in the very initial stages of plotting to bomb the New York Stock Exchange," Joyce testified.

Asked whether it was a "serious plot" by one member of Congress, Joyce said, "I think the jury considered it serious since they were all convicted."

Public Documents Contradict Claim Email Spying Foiled Terror Plot

From your link:
While the court documents don’t exclude the possibility that PRISM was somehow employed in the Zazi case, the documents show that old-fashioned police work, not data mining, was the tool that led counterterrorism agents to arrest Zazi.

The NSA is being less than honest.

That has yet to be proven without a doubt.

 

[Freewill]

The question is, are we willing to give up freedom on the pretext of security? In my opinion to give up one is to give up the other.

There is nothing that I read that says they could not have done the same thing and did it legally through the courts.

 

[daveman]

Seems like the NSA phone surveillance program has already paid off, at least in one case where it could have really affected us where Khalid Ouazzani for allegedly plotting with Yemeni co-conspirators to blow up the New York Stock Exchange.

Such a case makes the surveillance worth the effort.

National Security Agency Director Keith Alexander testified Tuesday before the House Intelligence Committee that phone and Internet surveillance programs made public by former defense contractor Edward Snowden prevented approximately 50 terrorist plots since 2001, 10 of which targeted the U.S., and said new policies are being crafted to prevent another large-scale leak.

Alexander disclosed that approximately 1,000 people are currently employed as NSA systems administrators – the position Snowden held – and that the agency is "working to come up with a two-person rule" to prevent people "from taking information out of our system." Snowden was a contractor assigned to the NSA by Booz Allen Hamilton before he downloaded and released information on the top-secret programs.

The intelligence agency leader didn't go into detail about what precisely the new "two person" rule would entail. "When one of those persons misuses their authority, that is a huge problem," Alexander said.

The government officials present at Tuesday's hearing publicly disclosed two cases they said were cracked with the broad communications surveillance: One in 2010, in which investigators nabbed Khalid Ouazzani for allegedly plotting with Yemeni co-conspirators to blow up the New York Stock Exchange and another in which a man was arrested for providing "financial support" to an extremist group in Somalia.

Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, questioned FBI Deputy Director Sean Joyce at the hearing, inquiring if the NYSE plotters were serious or if the plans were "something they kind of dreamed about talking among their buddies." Joyce said the conviction of plotters showed it was a serious plan.

NSA Director: Surveillance Stopped 50 Terror Plots - US News and World Report

More.......


NSA Claim of Thwarted NYSE Plot Contradicted by Court Documents - ABC News

From your link:
But the FBI deputy director, Sean Joyce, provided Congress with a different version of events Tuesday as he cited the stock exchange plot as one of more than 50 "terror events" that had been disrupted with the help of the NSA's secret surveillance programs.

"We went up on the electronic surveillance and identified his co-conspirators and this was the plot that was in the very initial stages of plotting to bomb the New York Stock Exchange," Joyce testified.

Asked whether it was a "serious plot" by one member of Congress, Joyce said, "I think the jury considered it serious since they were all convicted."

Public Documents Contradict Claim Email Spying Foiled Terror Plot

From your link:
While the court documents don’t exclude the possibility that PRISM was somehow employed in the Zazi case, the documents show that old-fashioned police work, not data mining, was the tool that led counterterrorism agents to arrest Zazi.

The NSA is being less than honest.

That has yet to be proven without a doubt.

Reasonable people have reasonable doubts.

 

[Mertex]

More.......


NSA Claim of Thwarted NYSE Plot Contradicted by Court Documents - ABC News

From your link:
But the FBI deputy director, Sean Joyce, provided Congress with a different version of events Tuesday as he cited the stock exchange plot as one of more than 50 "terror events" that had been disrupted with the help of the NSA's secret surveillance programs.

"We went up on the electronic surveillance and identified his co-conspirators and this was the plot that was in the very initial stages of plotting to bomb the New York Stock Exchange," Joyce testified.

Asked whether it was a "serious plot" by one member of Congress, Joyce said, "I think the jury considered it serious since they were all convicted."




From your link:
While the court documents don’t exclude the possibility that PRISM was somehow employed in the Zazi case, the documents show that old-fashioned police work, not data mining, was the tool that led counterterrorism agents to arrest Zazi.

The NSA is being less than honest.

That has yet to be proven without a doubt.

Reasonable people have reasonable doubts.

And that is a good thing, but sometimes it ends up being much ado about nothing.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

That's great news..

As soon as I see the COURT DATES or MORGUE tags for these 50 or more people -- I might HAVE to believe it.. Did you get names and court dates?

If "stopping financial support" of terrorists is the same as "stopping terrorist attacks" --- Then we should IMMEDIATELY charge our State Dept under the Patriot Act and bug them for sending money to Moslem countries like Pakistan and Egypt.. Somehow, THAT financial support isn't grounds for violating the Constitution ---- IS IT?

When terrorist attacks are "stopped" generally it saves lives. And drying up the money is basically a good way to stop them.

That posted, even if what the NSA is true, the price paid, is still too high.

We should not be giving up our right to privacy.

And there are other ways to stop attacks.

True.

Unfortunately there is no political will to make any such changes.

No president or member of Congress is going to risk another 9/11 during his watch, whatever political heat he many be experiencing now concerning the surveillance programs is infinitely preferable.

And ultimately it’s the American people who want and support the programs; the voters fear terrorism, and the politicians fear the voters.

 

[daveman]

From your link:
But the FBI deputy director, Sean Joyce, provided Congress with a different version of events Tuesday as he cited the stock exchange plot as one of more than 50 "terror events" that had been disrupted with the help of the NSA's secret surveillance programs.

"We went up on the electronic surveillance and identified his co-conspirators and this was the plot that was in the very initial stages of plotting to bomb the New York Stock Exchange," Joyce testified.

Asked whether it was a "serious plot" by one member of Congress, Joyce said, "I think the jury considered it serious since they were all convicted."




From your link:
While the court documents don’t exclude the possibility that PRISM was somehow employed in the Zazi case, the documents show that old-fashioned police work, not data mining, was the tool that led counterterrorism agents to arrest Zazi.
That has yet to be proven without a doubt.

Reasonable people have reasonable doubts.

And that is a good thing, but sometimes it ends up being much ado about nothing.

This is not one of those times.

 

[numan]

I would never believe any of the claims of these Security State Goons unless I could check up properly what the real facts are. They have been caught lying and misrepresenting far, far too many times!

Too true - well said.

Don't forget that ever since the days of J. Edgar Hoover, the Security State Goons have been collecting all sorts of information and dirt on all sorts of people -- including the most important people in the government.

They can use this information to blackmail the courts, the executive and the Congress. Collecting information and using it for blackmail and establishing dictatorial power was used by the Nazis and the Commies -- and don't fool yourself -- it has been used in the USA for decades.

Giving more power to snoop just means more power to blackmail, and extend the tyrannical power of unseen, unsupervised, unelected Spooks.

.

 

[flacaltenn]

Anyone notice how many anti-surveillance statements were "retracted" last week?

Lindsey Graham, Nadler and think one other.. Are we already there?

Not to mention the NY TImes doing that head-spinning edit on the the Prez's "credibility". Are our leaders already compromised by a security state?

 

[numan]

I would never believe any of the claims of these Security State Goons unless I could check up properly what the real facts are. They have been caught lying and misrepresenting far, far too many times!

Too true - well said.

Don't forget that ever since the days of J. Edgar Hoover, the Security State Goons have been collecting all sorts of information and dirt on all sorts of people -- including the most important people in the government.

They can use this information to blackmail the courts, the executive and the Congress. Collecting information and using it for blackmail and establishing dictatorial power was used by the Nazis and the Commies -- and don't fool yourself -- it has been used in the USA for decades.

Giving more power to snoop just means more power to blackmail, and extend the tyrannical power of unseen, unsupervised, unelected Spooks.

Anyone notice how many anti-surveillance statements were "retracted" last week?

Lindsey Graham, Nadler and think one other.. Are we already there?

Not to mention the NY TImes doing that head-spinning edit on the the Prez's "credibility". Are our leaders already compromised by a security state?

I presume that was a rhetorical question.

Obviously, the "Security Apparatus" has so much dirt and blackmail material about everyone important that they can threaten and browbeat virtually anyone. No one in a position of influence and power dared to say "Boo!" about the crimes and malfeasance of George W. Bush, did they? They had to toe the line and be very careful. At the very least, many highly placed people found themselves on airport security watch lists if they displeased the White House.

Foolish, childish people think there is some difference between the East German Stasi and the American Security Spooks.

There isn't.

The essence of Totalitarianism is that it ensures that all its subjects must break some law in order to survive -- and therefore, all are "criminals" and can be crushed by the power of the state if need be.
---Yours Truly
.

 

[Circe]

I feel just bewildered; as if there's no hope.

We are caught between the Devil and the Deep Blue Sea --

Between terrorists on the left hand and the government Stasi spying on us all on the other hand.

 

[tubig]

Foolish, childish people think there is some difference between the East German Stasi and the American Security Spooks.

There isn't.

There is one big difference. In East Germany the people did not want or worship the Stasi. In America, propaganda has been so thorough and effective that people believe they need it.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Too true - well said.

Don't forget that ever since the days of J. Edgar Hoover, the Security State Goons have been collecting all sorts of information and dirt on all sorts of people -- including the most important people in the government.

They can use this information to blackmail the courts, the executive and the Congress. Collecting information and using it for blackmail and establishing dictatorial power was used by the Nazis and the Commies -- and don't fool yourself -- it has been used in the USA for decades.

Giving more power to snoop just means more power to blackmail, and extend the tyrannical power of unseen, unsupervised, unelected Spooks.

Anyone notice how many anti-surveillance statements were "retracted" last week?

Lindsey Graham, Nadler and think one other.. Are we already there?

Not to mention the NY TImes doing that head-spinning edit on the the Prez's "credibility". Are our leaders already compromised by a security state?

I presume that was a rhetorical question.

Obviously, the "Security Apparatus" has so much dirt and blackmail material about everyone important that they can threaten and browbeat virtually anyone. No one in a position of influence and power dared to say "Boo!" about the crimes and malfeasance of George W. Bush, did they? They had to toe the line and be very careful. At the very least, many highly placed people found themselves on airport security watch lists if they displeased the White House.

Foolish, childish people think there is some difference between the East German Stasi and the American Security Spooks.

There isn't.

The essence of Totalitarianism is that it ensures that all its subjects must break some law in order to survive -- and therefore, all are "criminals" and can be crushed by the power of the state if need be.
---Yours Truly
.

It’s hyperbolic nonsense to compare the surveillance programs to the Stasi; the latter could detain at will absent evidence, probable cause, or a warrant, the former not.

No one likes being ‘spied on,’ everyone gets that – but it isn’t going to go away anytime soon. One lacks an expectation of privacy when personal information is provided to a third party, one also lacks standing to file a civil rights violation complaint because such a complaint can’t be predicated on what one thinks might happen or could happen with personal information acquired by the government.

Although the information gathering programs themselves are legal, the government can’t prosecute anyone using that information because it wasn’t obtained legally, and such information would be consequently thrown out by a Federal judge.

Remember that these programs exist because the American people are afraid and want the surveillance, the government is merely abiding the will of the people; if one doesn’t like the surveillance programs, take it up with your fellow Americans, not the government.

 

[Mertex]

Reasonable people have reasonable doubts.

And that is a good thing, but sometimes it ends up being much ado about nothing.

This is not one of those times.

That remains to be seen.

 

[numan]

Foolish, childish people think there is some difference between the East German Stasi and the American Security Spooks.

There isn't.

There is one big difference. In East Germany the people did not want or worship the Stasi. In America, propaganda has been so thorough and effective that people believe they need it.

I have long maintained that the United States is the most efficiently organized Totalitarian State that the world has ever seen.

I remember a story from the late 1950's when Nikita Krushchev made a trip to the U.S.A. and was fêted by President Eisenhower. Khrushchev was given a whirl-wind tour of the wonders of 1950's America. As the trip progressed, Krushchev became more taciturn and morose; finally, he could contain himself no longer. "How do you do it?" he burst out to Eisenhower. Eisenhower was taken aback, but he gamely replied, "Well, it is all the result of the free enterprise system, which liberates the forces of productivity and ...." "No, no," interrupted Krushchev, "I mean, how do you achieve such uniformity of thought without the use of terror?"

My Webster's Third New International Dictionary defines "totalitarian" as:

of or relating to a political regime based on subordination of the individual to the state and strict control of all aspects of the life and productive capacity of the nation, especially by coercive measures.

Based on this definition, all modern "developed" societies are totalitarian, and they have become more and more totalitarian ever since the end of the Second World War. Of course, to make this definition even more applicable to modern conditions, "and subliminal psychological pressure" should be added after "coercive measures."

If the following statement is indeed a quotation of Adolf Hitler, he enunciated a bitter truth:

The great strength of the totalitarian state is that it forces those who fear it to imitate it.

The word "totalitarian" derives from the Latin totaliter -- "wholly, completely" -- and it means a society totally controlled and composed of totally uniform sets of elements. Our societies are totalitarian beyond the wildest fantasies of a Hitler or a Stalin. Most people are carefully guided and brainwashed all through their lives ---- tens of millions all thinking the same thoughts, watching the same entertainment, all parroting the same simple-minded lies and half-truths which they have absorbed from the organs of propaganda (that is, the mass media). To anyone who is even half-awake, these zombies seem like the walking corpses of the Night of the Living Dead. If anyone does awake from this "Sleep of Reason," he finds that our present social system is impervious to change; it is like trying to swim in a sea of molasses: a system "of the zombies, by the zombies, for the zombies." Eventually, the insanity of the system produces catastrophic breakdowns, as we have seen periodically all through the twentieth century.

Only an incompetent totalitarianism employs terror: modern, efficient McFascism serves you with a smile and strives to make you love your slavery.
.

 

[Missourian]

How many were stopped by intercepting domestic to foreign calls...the original intention of the Patriot Act...and how many were stopped by the practice of spying on 315 million Americans?

I suspect ALL were stopped by intercepting FOREIGN calls...meaning it's total BS as it relates to the practice of spying on all Americans.