General Discussion

The Second Stone

(2,900 posts)

135. What would you accept as evidence?

Mon Aug 12, 2013, 12:48 PM

Aug 2013

There are four NSA whistle blowers and now a White House aide that claim there is inappropriate spying. You are free to reject that as evidence.

However, it is not a crime to make up a bunch of lies about the government, even if you had top security clearance. If everything Snowden is saying is a lie, he is merely engaging in the writing of fiction, which is not at all chargeable as spying. Nor is it civilly actionable as defamation because you cannot defame the government. You can infer from the complete freak out from D.C. powers that be that Snowden isn't merely some ex-NSA employee now writing fiction. Ian Flemming was not hunted by MI6 because he was writing fiction. Official D.C. is freaking out because Snowden is outing them, and by the way the less famous whistleblowers who didn't flee the country largely confirm it. Welcome to the United Stasi of America. But at least it protects us from terrorist attacks like the Boston Marathon bombing. Not.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

168 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

I still haven't seen any evidence of the NSA spying on Americans. [View all] ProSense Aug 2013 OP

Whew. That's a relief. AnotherMcIntosh Aug 2013 #1

So you don't need evidence before making judgments? tridim Aug 2013 #2

Judgments? If the poster says she hasn't seen any evidence of NSA spying, why isn't that good enough AnotherMcIntosh Aug 2013 #3

So, I was chewing on my lip... Wait Wut Aug 2013 #4

I don't need the likes of you telling me how to make judgments, that's for sure. DisgustipatedinCA Aug 2013 #106

"I still haven't seen any evidence of the NSA spying on Americans" Bay Boy Aug 2013 #5

It means one needs to prove NSA is spying on Americans Life Long Dem Aug 2013 #27

It's not the stuff you know, it's the unknown you should be paranoid about! DontTreadOnMe Aug 2013 #6

ROFLMAO Coyotl Aug 2013 #74

and if that evidence was posted here, the poster would have to flee to russia lol nt msongs Aug 2013 #7

Wha... WHA!!?!?!! You DOUBT Limbaugh, SNOWDEN, Greenwald, Some Random Guy on a blog!!?!?!?!?! uponit7771 Aug 2013 #8

You would think at least one person would come forward and claim harassment JaneyVee Aug 2013 #9

http://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/nsa-surveillance-order-explained-aclu Warren Stupidity Aug 2013 #10

"regularly tracking" and "potentially" in the same sentence is rather odd phrasing. randome Aug 2013 #14

nobody is seriously contesting that the government hasn't been engaged Warren Stupidity Aug 2013 #23

Obama is lying. He isn't "serious." ProSense Aug 2013 #25

GD needs evidence? madokie Aug 2013 #40

It's tabu ProSense Aug 2013 #46

He isn't. He's just going through the talking points on this. Warren Stupidity Aug 2013 #53

Every time I ask for evidence, I am told, basically, that it's out there. randome Aug 2013 #59

Could and actually are doing are 2 different things altogether. When I worked in law enforcement I appleannie1 Aug 2013 #129

It's called "doublespeak" ConcernedCanuk Aug 2013 #81

That's the metadata program jeff47 Aug 2013 #128

The problem with the ACLU's argument is that it has been tossed out of court Warren Stupidity Aug 2013 #143

That just gets them in front of a judge jeff47 Aug 2013 #149

That remains to be seen. Warren Stupidity Aug 2013 #155

lol. and you won't. Even if you were presented with irrefutable information cali Aug 2013 #11

+1000 cali LondonReign2 Aug 2013 #18

+1000. What utter Nonsense. GoneFishin Aug 2013 #58

"if" ProSense Aug 2013 #19

"if" = she hasn't been presented with evidence...but who gives a shit about facts? uponit7771 Aug 2013 #49

From the person who said LondonReign2 Aug 2013 #54

You nailed the words, Egalitarian Thug Aug 2013 #89

I'm sure evidence will be acceptable, hughee99 Aug 2013 #93

Well, then Team Democrat won't be responsible! NuclearDem Aug 2013 #156

The government itself TOLD US ALL that they ARE spying on us but that is not enough for the OP KurtNYC Aug 2013 #95

Except not so much. jeff47 Aug 2013 #131

Yet you keep not quite providing such evidence jeff47 Aug 2013 #130

You're not supposed to see the evidence PsychoBunny Aug 2013 #12

Post proves nothing creon Aug 2013 #31

You don't understand spying? PsychoBunny Aug 2013 #35

By that reasoning, you're always being spied on no matter what Silent3 Aug 2013 #76

Wait we aren't always being spied on? Egnever Aug 2013 #159

Call the ACLU and tell them they are worried for nothing Mojorabbit Aug 2013 #13

You call them. ProSense Aug 2013 #21

I am not the one denying all the information leaked about multiple programs Mojorabbit Aug 2013 #29

Read Obama's Lips: There's No Spying On Americans! leftstreet Aug 2013 #15

Are you just being sarcastic?? darkangel218 Aug 2013 #37

Funny thing about "not seeing evidence" . . . LumosMaxima Aug 2013 #16

And thus PsychoBunny Aug 2013 #17

Please share if your looking at it Life Long Dem Aug 2013 #38

Ok, post it. jeff47 Aug 2013 #132

LOL, you are a piece of work! n-t Logical Aug 2013 #20

"Well, not intentionally..." DNI Clapper kentuck Aug 2013 #22

Call Congress right now!1!!1! nt Zorra Aug 2013 #24

They are collecting and storing our data communications without warrant or probable cause davidn3600 Aug 2013 #26

Its not "our" data, it actually belongs to the companies that provide us with these services. phleshdef Aug 2013 #51

So our emails don't belong to us either? How about our phone conversations? dkf Aug 2013 #56

I'm still operating under the assumption that wiretapping is only being done... phleshdef Aug 2013 #61

The content of your emails is yours jeff47 Aug 2013 #133

The emails belong to you. The routing logs belong to me (or whoever your mail provider is) Recursion Aug 2013 #144

So, when we send a letter by regular mail, the words don't belong to us, either? Th1onein Aug 2013 #68

Nope. You bought that envelope from a company, right? And the paper. And the pen. Warren DeMontague Aug 2013 #120

lol Th1onein Aug 2013 #124

USPS has taken photos of the outside of every letter mailed since World War 1 Recursion Aug 2013 #145

You know what's really, really sad? Th1onein Aug 2013 #163

Good point, Davidn3600, this information is gathered by the communication companies. The Thinkingabout Aug 2013 #101

"I still haven't seen any evidence that humans cause climate change" villager Aug 2013 #28

I haven't seen any evidence aliens cause climate change Coyotl Aug 2013 #75

If this were "Human Underground," you'd be in violation of the rules! villager Aug 2013 #96

Neither have I creon Aug 2013 #30

they've admitted to collecting information alc Aug 2013 #32

It also comes down to bureaucracy. randome Aug 2013 #50

For once, I agree with you. When actual US terrorist attacks occurred, NSA spying was useless. leveymg Aug 2013 #33

Very informative post... ljm2002 Aug 2013 #154

I had hopes for constructive change to CIA Counter-terrorism operations in 2008. leveymg Aug 2013 #160

You'd think in those 20,000 files, there'd be at least one recording of a phone call... millennialmax Aug 2013 #34

But Snowden said he "saw things". That should be enough! randome Aug 2013 #48

This is what I keep coming back to Egnever Aug 2013 #158

Thanks for the laugh, prosense. darkangel218 Aug 2013 #36

Why? Because the administration says so? AngryOldDem Aug 2013 #39

See, that's the whole point - you can't prove a negative tularetom Aug 2013 #41

So you have to assume you're always being spied on no matter what you read... Silent3 Aug 2013 #79

Well that's that. Puglover Aug 2013 #42

You haven't seen any... sagat Aug 2013 #43

oh, my. .. . niyad Aug 2013 #44

This message was self-deleted by its author damnedifIknow Aug 2013 #45

But, snowden, greenwald, putin, and limbaugh are all in accord.. "USA=bad Russia= Cha Aug 2013 #47

Of course you haven't because you REFUSE to see usGovOwesUs3Trillion Aug 2013 #52

+1 Thank you. nt snappyturtle Aug 2013 #57

Good. Apparently, Snowden revealed nothing and they can call off the dogs and return his passport. Tierra_y_Libertad Aug 2013 #55

Yeah, he told us nothing, plus everyone already knew it all already, plus it's a danger to national GoneFishin Aug 2013 #60

Silly Feds! markpkessinger Aug 2013 #80

Well shit... Hey kids! Fold the tents! ProSense has links to ProSense posts proving no spying! cherokeeprogressive Aug 2013 #62

Well, I guess you couldn't find the evidence either ProSense Aug 2013 #63

Im am very sad about this. Socal31 Aug 2013 #64

What do you think the Congress wanted it for? Amonester Aug 2013 #67

collecting data on Americans is spying. limpyhobbler Aug 2013 #65

Then each person "spies" everyday just looking outside at crap uponit7771 Aug 2013 #69

Collecting logs of everyone's calls, emails and websites = looking outside at crap... limpyhobbler Aug 2013 #70

"logs" = hell yes, if that's all they're collecting by law that's equivalent of looking at people in uponit7771 Aug 2013 #71

So you're saying everyone's phone and internet use is public information like something hanging on a limpyhobbler Aug 2013 #72

No, you said logs...I know the difference between "use" and logs like what IP address's a computer uponit7771 Aug 2013 #73

So you're saying everyone's phone & internet logs are public information like something hanging on limpyhobbler Aug 2013 #78

The people sending the email don't own the switches, like people don't own the street they travel on uponit7771 Aug 2013 #84

But there is a reasonable expectation of privacy with web browsing history. limpyhobbler Aug 2013 #86

Not remotely Recursion Aug 2013 #92

This is nonsense. It would be completely illegal for a citizen hack in and read such logs. limpyhobbler Aug 2013 #97

Those routers are run by citizens Recursion Aug 2013 #98

No, internet routers are run by organizations. Companies, governments, universities. limpyhobbler Aug 2013 #99

Very much so. If you don't know that, you need to learn it. Recursion Aug 2013 #91

Except they aren't doing that. jeff47 Aug 2013 #134

1) A warrant that covers everyone is illegal and unconstitutional. limpyhobbler Aug 2013 #136

There isn't a warrant that covers everyone. jeff47 Aug 2013 #138

Warrants that require collection of data of millions of people not suspected of any crime... limpyhobbler Aug 2013 #139

Only if that was those people's data. jeff47 Aug 2013 #151

I think that is why they call it spying. Rex Aug 2013 #66

By that reasoning, you're always being spied on no matter what Silent3 Aug 2013 #77

Not at all, that is what good spying is. Rex Aug 2013 #82

It's one one of those open your eyes experiences, not close your eyes and imagine on point Aug 2013 #83

Some people don't look very hard. hobbit709 Aug 2013 #85

very patriotic, don't let the enemies of the state win, fight terrorism AppleBottom Aug 2013 #87

Here: Jewel V. NSA hootinholler Aug 2013 #88

That's it? A 2008 case? n/t ProSense Aug 2013 #100

Thanks for confirming hootinholler Aug 2013 #102

I looked at the link. Is that all you have because ProSense Aug 2013 #104

Picking Cherries are we? hootinholler Aug 2013 #109

Evidently, you are. Again, where is the evidence? ProSense Aug 2013 #111

Bless your heart hootinholler Aug 2013 #112

You're ProSense Aug 2013 #116

Again, you need evidence of spying on US persons jeff47 Aug 2013 #137

Um, there were are 2 programs hootinholler Aug 2013 #141

By my count, there's about 8 programs. jeff47 Aug 2013 #150

very true - and it's against the spyocratic oath, to do anything in secret markiv Aug 2013 #90

Post removed Post removed Aug 2013 #94

collecting and analyzing why are h is spying. Collecting it is abuse. bowens43 Aug 2013 #103

Uh, Why would the DEA have to perform "parallel construction" (read: Lie in court) to cover up Warren DeMontague Aug 2013 #105

Because the ProSense Aug 2013 #108

The DEA is getting tips from the NSA and the DEA is covering it up in court. That's obvious. Warren DeMontague Aug 2013 #117

The DEA program has nothing to do with the NSA ProSense Aug 2013 #118

That's absurd. It obviously has to do with the NSA. Warren DeMontague Aug 2013 #119

No, ProSense Aug 2013 #122

Pah. Did you even -read- the rest of that? Warren DeMontague Aug 2013 #148

So That's Why I Haven't Been Arrested otohara Aug 2013 #107

Sec 702 of the FISA Amendment Act... MrMickeysMom Aug 2013 #110

Well, thank fucking god! RetroLounge Aug 2013 #113

Nor will you. krispos42 Aug 2013 #114

Shhhhh! Don't tell anybody. Turbineguy Aug 2013 #115

Semantics dipsydoodle Aug 2013 #121

I think I found that evidence ProSense Aug 2013 #125

I should've said dipsydoodle Aug 2013 #147

Hard to see when your eyes are closed. hobbit709 Aug 2013 #123

well nixon didn't spy and didn't lie so i guess it's ok for our government to have toys like this. unblock Aug 2013 #126

You would think that if Snowden had something, it would be evidence of that very thing liberal N proud Aug 2013 #127

What would you accept as evidence? The Second Stone Aug 2013 #135

I know. bravenak Aug 2013 #140

There is none, and there's one easy way to tell: CakeGrrl Aug 2013 #142

K&R stonecutter357 Aug 2013 #146

Same with Birthers... Lancero Aug 2013 #152

Then why does Obama think Snowden is a traitor? WinkyDink Aug 2013 #153

Because he revealed the scope of our foreign survielance Egnever Aug 2013 #157

"Spy vs. Spy." WinkyDink Aug 2013 #162

i saw you pose for a photo during your research markiv Aug 2013 #161

I'm not white or that young, but it's an interesting attempt at a personal attack. n/t ProSense Aug 2013 #164

it was an opinion and observation markiv Aug 2013 #165

A silly photo is your "opinion"? ProSense Aug 2013 #166

a picture is worth a thousand words markiv Aug 2013 #167

I disagree David Krout Aug 2013 #168