Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Douglas Carpenter

(20,226 posts)
35. an excellent article for a reality based assessment of the situation
Tue Jul 9, 2013, 06:34 AM
Jul 2013
It is hyperbolic, and even hysterical, to say, as Glenn Greenwald has, that the United States has a secret plan "to destroy privacy and anonymity not just in the United States but around the world."

In fact, the U.S. government is, right this second, pouring untold billions into what is ultimately an effort to monitor all digital communications; scan all mail; amass a fleet of surveillance drones that can hover in the sky for days on end; develop technology to scan all faces in crowds; assemble gigantic databases of biometric data; break all encryption efforts; indiscriminately spy on millions of citizens in friendly countries like Germany and Brazil; and share spy technologies with allies. None of that is in dispute. What's hyperbolic is calling people hysterical because they see the endgame of various plans to impose ever broader surveillance on whole societies. There isn't a government document somewhere titled, "The Plan to Destroy Global Privacy," but that is exactly what Western intelligence agencies will do if adequately funded and left, unopposed, to their own devices. Anyone who can't see that hasn't adequately grappled with the implications of Snowden's revelations, the history of spy agencies allowed to operate in secret, or the radical new capabilities that advances in data analysis and retention have given states (and are likely to give them in the near future if they aren't stopped).

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/07/the-problem-with-the-privacy-moderates/277561/

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Excellent article LuvNewcastle Jul 2013 #1
Always attacking people, not the issue treestar Jul 2013 #2
It's plain ridiculous vdogg Jul 2013 #28
I think it has more to do with "Pre emptive Strike" strategy. dtom67 Jul 2013 #3
That's because of idiotic phrases like this. randome Jul 2013 #5
another example of the " pre emptive strike " doctrine... dtom67 Jul 2013 #7
That's the point: there is NO EVIDENCE of ILLEGAL SPYING. Amonester Jul 2013 #31
Privacy moderates are pro security state and anti the 4th amendment as understood byeya Jul 2013 #4
As long as he has another group of people to malign. nt longship Jul 2013 #6
k/r marmar Jul 2013 #8
In other words, if you disagree with the Snowden cultists you suck no matter what. geek tragedy Jul 2013 #9
It's more the starting point than any sort of purist attitude Android3.14 Jul 2013 #11
Might as well ask if I stopped beating my wife. geek tragedy Jul 2013 #13
How about we use the Oxford English definition Android3.14 Jul 2013 #15
Is possession of or access to this information enough to be considered spying? geek tragedy Jul 2013 #16
Still ignoring the essential question Android3.14 Jul 2013 #17
Obviously, having the government create files on people and examine their geek tragedy Jul 2013 #21
Now we are getting somewhere Android3.14 Jul 2013 #22
Point 2 does not represent my thinking. geek tragedy Jul 2013 #23
Then why did you state Android3.14 Jul 2013 #30
That is a starting point. It does not follow that everything else is ok. nt geek tragedy Jul 2013 #32
Are we still trying to agree on terms? Android3.14 Jul 2013 #34
I guess I don't see a great deal of difference between geek tragedy Jul 2013 #36
Rumor? Android3.14 Jul 2013 #37
recording content or recording metadata? geek tragedy Jul 2013 #38
Not rumor Android3.14 Jul 2013 #39
That story has been thoroughly debunked. It's false. geek tragedy Jul 2013 #40
Sorry, but no Android3.14 Jul 2013 #43
Without public oversight or permission, no. nt geek tragedy Jul 2013 #44
Thank you Android3.14 Jul 2013 #45
Likewise. I think there is probably more agreement than geek tragedy Jul 2013 #46
Logic and facts do not matter... kentuck Jul 2013 #10
...yeap, don't trust the government with medical records either uponit7771 Jul 2013 #12
This is a newer tact that seems to be trotted out by some. TheKentuckian Jul 2013 #14
Unless having a heart murmur has a high correlation to domestic terrorism NoOneMan Jul 2013 #20
Sure, don't. NoOneMan Jul 2013 #19
They'll know if you've been treated for addiction. JoePhilly Jul 2013 #24
Depends on how you want to structure your claims department NoOneMan Jul 2013 #25
But why would we expect our totalitarian government to JoePhilly Jul 2013 #26
You can't if you don't demand accountability and privacy NoOneMan Jul 2013 #27
Perhaps not. sibelian Jul 2013 #42
The problem is that Snowden may be a narcissist with ulterior motives who is not championing reform NoOneMan Jul 2013 #18
K&R for attracting the tragically handicapped. n/t Egalitarian Thug Jul 2013 #29
+ + Snowden attracts the slugs doesn't he? byeya Jul 2013 #41
An excellent article! Waiting For Everyman Jul 2013 #33
an excellent article for a reality based assessment of the situation Douglas Carpenter Jul 2013 #35
The problem with the NSA Agitators is… they don't talk about the NSA in any relevant way. Nothing KittyWampus Jul 2013 #47
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The Problem With the 'Pri...»Reply #35