Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

CNN.com: NSA leaker fears for democracy


isle-hawg

Recommended Posts

serious question. I'd always assumed law enforcement trolled the web looking for kiddie porn sickos. Am I wrong about that?

If not, whats the difference?

I have no problem with the Feds trolling the web looking for terrorists.

I have a problem with them trolling my computer, my phone records, my text records looking for "terrorists" or "evidence of terrorism".

Let's say that I decide to sext my wife when I'm away on work. Let's say I want to FaceTime sex with her or whatever you'd call it. I should be able to send these images and videos to my wife without fear of them being intercepted by the government. These are private messages to be shared by only one other person. Hence, I think that the government has no business looking at the contents of my personal equipment and the transmissions of said equipment.

I don't care if they won't arrest me for sending penis pics to my wife. I don't want them to look at them, I don't want them to know that they were sent at all. It's my freaking privacy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the difference to me is one is more dangerous(not to downplay the harm to kids of course)

 

doing what needs doing does not require court sanction if the need exists imo, but it does reassure some

 

add

The question of need must be answered though

Link to comment
Share on other sites

serious question.  I'd always assumed law enforcement trolled the web looking for kiddie porn sickos.  Am I wrong about that?

 

If not, whats the difference?

What if it was not just kiddie porn that was illegal, but all porn?   Then would they be justified?    Its easy to justify when the bad guys are so clearly bad, and law enforcement is so clearly good.  Its when the government views bad guys with much broader and greyer terms, from much shakier moral ground themselves, that things spiral out of control.   It has happened before, many times, although never has any goverment had more power to watch its citizens,  then ours has.  Which means we have to be that much more careful about letting them use it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

6-10-13-4.png

...and here are the wordings...

6-10-13-3.png

Very telling statistics. Not to single any group out because it definitely works both ways, but look at the massive shift for democrats from unacceptable to acceptable. It dropped in half.

The partisan mindset is the dominant opinion making force in this county, not morals or philosophy.

Go team.

What is more appalling to me is that it shifted from only a majority republicans finding it acceptable in 2006 to a majority of ALL demographics finding it acceptable today.

Sad.

 

What changed? Look what letter party is in power now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

actually the approval from a secret court is what changed as well( not that I like covering for the hacks)

 

if it was simply party how do you explain the Indies?

 

using millions might be a factor as well (as Larry mentioned earlier ,different wording makes apple to apple impossible)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

serious question. I'd always assumed law enforcement trolled the web looking for kiddie porn sickos. Am I wrong about that?

If not, whats the difference?

The difference between standing on a street corner, dressed like a hooker, and seeing who stops to talk to her, (and ignoring the cars who didn't stop), and following every car in the county, 24-7-365, and keeping the records forever, just in case you find out, later, that a crime was committed somewhere in town?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he is in China, that will be very interesting to see if China does extradite him. If they do, could it open the door for an extradition agreement for Chinese hackers targeting the private sector? I imagine China not wanting to give up its guys for espionage (how can they when we're spying, too?). But the guys breaking into google on behalf of China's private sector shouldn't be protected at all.

Wishful thinking, I guess, but this cat needs to be brought back to the states for a paddling...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

actually the approval from a secret court is what changed as well( not that I like covering for the hacks)

if it was simply party how do you explain the Indies?

using millions might be a factor as well (as Larry mentioned earlier ,different wording makes apple to apple impossible)

The 06 question involved suspected terrorists, listening to phone conversations, and no warrant.

The 13 question involved everybody, only collecting phone numbers, and a warrant.

Hard to say that Person X changed his vote because of A, B, or C.

(And I LOVE the people trying to claim that what's important is that ONE party changed their mind, because ONE party (that other one, the one in he White House) changed).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

serious question. I'd always assumed law enforcement trolled the web looking for kiddie porn sickos. Am I wrong about that?

If not, whats the difference?

The difference between standing on a street corner, dressed like a hooker, and seeing who stops to talk to her, (and ignoring the cars who didn't stop), and following every car in the county, 24-7-365, and keeping the records forever, just in case you find out, later, that a crime was committed somewhere in town?

How does keeping the records really differ from fingerprint or DNA databases IF their use is strictly limited?

 

once ya put someone on the street corner .......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I want my government to have expansive access to information so they can track and identify bad guys. Can I trust that the information will never be used for political purposes? The problem isn't that information shouldn't be used. It's the lack of checks and balances...but maybe they do exist and are classified?

We'll never be satisfied because we'll never know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are two sides in this debate. One side believes the people are sovereign and the government is limited. The other believes the government is sovereign and the people are limited.

 

 

I am not ashamed of what side I am on.

Holy self righteous post, Batman!   :rolleyes:

 

Yep, you nailed it. This is purely a simple, binary issue and there are only two sides with you, of course, being on the side "fighting the good fight". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey look, Boehner, DiFi and the administration all agree on something!

 

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/nsa-leak-edward-snowden-john-boehner-92562.html#ixzz2VuYV8JLk

 

 
John Boehner calls Edward Snowden a ‘traitor’

House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) on Tuesday called NSA leaker Edward Snowden a “traitor” and said his actions are a “giant violation of the law.”

“He’s a traitor,” Boehner said on “Good Morning America.” “The president outlined last week that these are important national security programs to help keep Americans safe and give us tools to help fight the terrorist threat we face. The disclosure of this information puts Americans at risk.”

Boehner said Congress was fully briefed on the programs and that lawyers were always present to “protect the privacy of Americans.”

 

“There is heavy oversight of this program, by the House Intelligence Committee on a bipartisan basis and the Senate Intelligence Committee,” Boehner said. “And that’s why I feel comfortable that we can operate this program and protect the privacy rights of our citizens.”

“When you look at these programs, there are clear safeguards.There are no Americans that are going to be snooped on in anyway unless they’re in contact with some terrorist around the world,” he said.

 


 


Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/nsa-leak-edward-snowden-john-boehner-92562.html#ixzz2VutNrQhD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6-10-13-4.png

 

...and here are the wordings...

 

6-10-13-3.png

I know that i will totally come off as an appoligist for saying this, but the "..without court approval" is very much key for me.  My position during the Bush years was that I agree, governemnt security NEEDS to gather intelligence in sometimes intrusive manners, but, and this is key, there needs to be arms length oversight of the programs.  While Joe Q Public cannot and shouldnot know the details of security gathering techniques for what should be fairly obvious reasons... somebody that is not invovled in collecting or using the data has to have the authority to dig in to all the details and provide oversight, and a backstop to guard against misuse of power.   

 

i don't know enough of what has happened here yet, and it may well prove to be a huge problem. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.businessinsider.com/booz-allen-fires-nsa-whistleblower-2013-6

 

According to BAH, Snowden made only 122k. 

 

If that is base and you add on COLA (cost of living adjustment) for Hawai, it could get close to 200k, but not quite there 

Booz Allen likes to pay a low salary and a huge bonus. It's more than likely that he exceeded the reported 200k in his yearly bonus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.businessinsider.com/booz-allen-fires-nsa-whistleblower-2013-6

 

According to BAH, Snowden made only 122k. 

 

If that is base and you add on COLA (cost of living adjustment) for Hawai, it could get close to 200k, but not quite there 

Booz Allen likes to pay a low salary and a huge bonus. It's more than likely that he exceeded the reported 200k in his yearly bonus.

 

BAH has the ECAP program which is essentially they put 10% of your salary into the 401k and you fully vest after 5 years.

 

Since Carlyle took over the bonuses have generally gone down as have lots of pre-Carlyle perks

 

I can accept that with a TS/SCI clearance, plus 7-8 years experience and COLA put in there his salary was 122k with some uplifts. I don't know the certifications he was required to have for the job, but 200k is still a reach for me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

http://www.businessinsider.com/booz-allen-fires-nsa-whistleblower-2013-6

 

According to BAH, Snowden made only 122k. 

 

If that is base and you add on COLA (cost of living adjustment) for Hawai, it could get close to 200k, but not quite there 

Booz Allen likes to pay a low salary and a huge bonus. It's more than likely that he exceeded the reported 200k in his yearly bonus.

 

BAH has the ECAP program which is essentially they put 10% of your salary into the 401k and you fully vest after 5 years.

 

Since Carlyle took over the bonuses have generally gone down as have lots of pre-Carlyle perks

 

I can accept that with a TS/SCI clearance, plus 7-8 years experience and COLA put in there his salary was 122k with some uplifts. I don't know the certifications he was required to have for the job, but 200k is still a reach for me. 

 

I can't say anything beyond the fact that I am intimately acquainted with how Booz Allen operates and what types of bonuses they've generally paid out both in the past and following their IPO. 200k is certainly not out of the question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

http://www.businessinsider.com/booz-allen-fires-nsa-whistleblower-2013-6

 

According to BAH, Snowden made only 122k. 

 

If that is base and you add on COLA (cost of living adjustment) for Hawai, it could get close to 200k, but not quite there 

Booz Allen likes to pay a low salary and a huge bonus. It's more than likely that he exceeded the reported 200k in his yearly bonus.

 

BAH has the ECAP program which is essentially they put 10% of your salary into the 401k and you fully vest after 5 years.

 

Since Carlyle took over the bonuses have generally gone down as have lots of pre-Carlyle perks

 

I can accept that with a TS/SCI clearance, plus 7-8 years experience and COLA put in there his salary was 122k with some uplifts. I don't know the certifications he was required to have for the job, but 200k is still a reach for me. 

 

I can't say anything beyond the fact that I am intimately acquainted with how Booz Allen operates and what types of bonuses they've generally paid out both in the past and following their IPO. 200k is certainly not out of the question.

Hey, as am I, and as are most contractors in the region who have dealt with BAH.

 

200k isn't out of the question but again bonuses generally aren't put into salary.

 

The term used wasn't total comp (which could include COLA/HOLA, which would be a surprise in Hawaii), bonuses, total benefits (health and welfare, ECAP, etc)

 

Salary. That is what was said. Salary=base pay which is the basis for everything else. If I heard "salary, bonuses and total comp" coming out to 200k it would pass the smell test a bit more

 

122k is believable especially in Hawaii where its hard to find sys admin people. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

http://www.businessinsider.com/booz-allen-fires-nsa-whistleblower-2013-6

 

According to BAH, Snowden made only 122k. 

 

If that is base and you add on COLA (cost of living adjustment) for Hawai, it could get close to 200k, but not quite there 

Booz Allen likes to pay a low salary and a huge bonus. It's more than likely that he exceeded the reported 200k in his yearly bonus.

 

BAH has the ECAP program which is essentially they put 10% of your salary into the 401k and you fully vest after 5 years.

 

Since Carlyle took over the bonuses have generally gone down as have lots of pre-Carlyle perks

 

I can accept that with a TS/SCI clearance, plus 7-8 years experience and COLA put in there his salary was 122k with some uplifts. I don't know the certifications he was required to have for the job, but 200k is still a reach for me. 

 

I can't say anything beyond the fact that I am intimately acquainted with how Booz Allen operates and what types of bonuses they've generally paid out both in the past and following their IPO. 200k is certainly not out of the question.

Hey, as am I, and as are most contractors in the region who have dealt with BAH.

 

200k isn't out of the question but again bonuses generally aren't put into salary.

 

The term used wasn't total comp (which could include COLA/HOLA, which would be a surprise in Hawaii), bonuses, total benefits (health and welfare, ECAP, etc)

 

Salary. That is what was said. Salary=base pay which is the basis for everything else. If I heard "salary, bonuses and total comp" coming out to 200k it would pass the smell test a bit more

 

122k is believable especially in Hawaii where its hard to find sys admin people. 

http://www.informationweek.com/security/privacy/9-facts-about-nsa-prism-whistleblower/240156431?cid=RSSfeed_IWK_All

 

"Snowden is a 29-year-old former technical assistant for the Central Intelligence Agency who's been working at the National Security Agency for the past four years as a contractor employed by various firms, including Dell and most recently Booz Allen. He told The Guardianthat he earned about $200,000 a year, which commentators said would be a commensurate salary for a contract NSA IT administrator who holds a valuable top-secret clearance.

 

Sunday, Booz Allen issued a statement confirming that Snowden "has been an employee of our firm for less than three months, assigned to a team in Hawaii."

 

How did Snowden come to work in IT? Long interested in computers, he enlisted in the Army Reserve in 2003 in a Special Forces training program, but was discharged four months later after breaking both of his legs in a training accident. According to news reports, he then began a job as a security guard at a covert CIA facility in Maryland, then moved to an information security job with the CIA."

 

Funny that he should say that as the news reported that he was a low-level IT help desk specialist. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/1259422/edward-snowden-let-hong-kong-people-decide-my-fate

 

Edward Snowden says he wants to ask the people of Hong Kong to decide his fate after choosing the city because of his faith in its rule of law.

 
The 29-year-old former CIA employee behind what might be the biggest intelligence leak in US history revealed his identity to the world in Hong Kong on Sunday. His decision to use a city under Chinese sovereignty as his haven has been widely questioned – including by some rights activists in Hong Kong.
 
Snowden said last night that he had no doubts about his choice of Hong Kong.
 
“People who think I made a mistake in picking Hong Kong as a location misunderstand my intentions. I am not here to hide from justice; I am here to reveal criminality,” Snowden said in an exclusive interview with the South China Morning Post.
 
“I have had many opportunities to flee HK, but I would rather stay and fight the United States government in the courts, because I have faith in Hong Kong’s rule of law,” he added.
 
Snowden says he has committed no crimes in Hong Kong and has “been given no reason to doubt [Hong Kong’s legal] system”.
 
“My intention is to ask the courts and people of Hong Kong to decide my fate,” he said.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...