[dgunn]

Is anyone else still trying to understand the goal here? I know the big lofty goal is to cause NSA to stop spying on people but what will convince people that they have stopped?

Is everyone unaware that the NSA's mission is to collect digital intelligence through clandestine means? It's right on their website. Their mission is to spy on people and has been for decades.

I may be unaware of what people are really upset about. I just can't understand how people are so up in arms by this. I'm legitimately interested in how I'm affected by this as a person who doesn't conduct activity online that the NSA would ever care about. Can someone help me out here?

[grey-area]

I'm legitimately interested in how I'm affected by this as a person who doesn't conduct activity online that the NSA would ever care about. Can someone help me out here?

Sure, here's a little hypothetical story:

2014 arrives, and your information is being stored indefinitely. Let's say you're interested in comics and you store some on your github account. One of those comics is V for Vendetta or some other innocuous story. You delete the comics pretty quickly, so after a few months there's nothing there, but the record stays because the file was once transmitted. Nobody cares at this point, but the information is stored.

2015, and your phone records are used to pinpoint your location at a known collection point for subversives (a comic shop). Known terrorist symphasers used this shop as a meeting point in 2013 and 2015 (animal rights terrorists), which puts you with them. You're now on a watch list along with 10 million other Americans - no-one is ever taken off the list once they go on.

2018 arrives, with a new president who's hard on security and terrorism and subversive literature is banned, including some strange titles like the bomb-makers handbook. You're not too worried about this, as who would read that sort of thing, right? Unknown to you, one of your students has been reading it, and shared the link to you on a page linked in an email, so that link goes in your file. The student also voices subversive thoughts to you, and you don't report them.

2020 arrives, and more materials judged subversive are banned, including certain comics judged too subversive and supportive of terrorism. Due to advances in storage tech and analysis, the NSA can now go back to 2014, and every year after, and see exactly what banned information you've been trafficking in, along with analysing documents linked in emails, and your location at every point in your life. 100 million Americans are now on the list, because so many subversives are being found with the new technology. It seems there are a lot of enemies within. The new president is worried and orders more surveillance.

2022, and you are pulled in for questioning due to your suspicious profile. No matter how you protest your innocence, it seems no-one will listen - the facts are just too damning, and your lawyer can't find you because your arrest was secret. You're just another traitor and terrorist sympathiser. You end up in a black site for 5 years, and are released a broken man.

The technical advances to make this possible are just developing, but it will soon be a reality, so I do believe we need restrictions on the collection and storage of this sort of information - it's just not good enough to leave that decision to the intelligence services, because they will naturally want to keep everything, and analyze everything, and grow their power. We need a check on that power which is not technical but enshrined in law - at present those laws are being ignored.

[pyre]

  | We need a check on that power which is not
  | technical but enshrined in law - at present
  | those laws are being ignored.

We need to fix the problem of laws being ignored with another law?

[grey-area]

A law which more specifically limits surveillance, as opposed to the broad permissions which are given at present. In the UK especially we have practically no supervision on this surveillance, and there are loopholes of sharing data between nations, which is happening without permission.

[kcorbitt]

dgunn, what a lot of people are upset over isn't necessarily that the government is recording a lot of conversations per se. It's the fact that this program is constitutionally and ethically questionable and that it was enacted without any public debate or supervision whatsoever. America behaves in some ways like a democracy, and big issues like this deserve to be discussed and weighed in the public forum.

In general, the government taking powers and responsibilities upon itself without a public discussion tends to be a bad deal for everyone. We've all lived under presidents that we didn't particularly like or trust. If we let the executive branch off the hook for behaving this way that reinforces executive independence and gives more legitimacy to the next guy, who we may like even less, to do something even worse.

There are exceptions, explicit and implied, to this process for states of emergency when decisive action needs to be taken immediately. But it's untenable to claim that America has been in a continuous state of emergency for the past twelve years and that there hasn't been a moment to step back and evaluate where we're at -- and where we're going.

[jdp23]

The July 4th demonstrations seek to demand an end to the unconstitutional surveillance methods employed by the U.S. government and to ensure that all future government surveillance is constitutional, limited, and clearly defined.

More spefically, three points are called out in Restore the Fourth's press release, on StopWatching.us's site, and in an open letter that 80+ groups including EFF, BORDC, etc. signed on to:

1. Enact reform this Congress to Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act, the state secrets privilege, and the FISA Amendments Act to make clear that blanket surveillance of the Internet activity and phone records of any person residing in the U.S. is prohibited by law and that violations can be reviewed in adversarial proceedings before a public court;

2. Create a special committee to investigate, report, and reveal to the public the extent of this domestic spying. This committee should create specific recommendations for legaland regulatory reform to end unconstitutional surveillance;

3. Hold accountable those public officials who are found to be responsible for this unconstitutional surveillance.

[3327]

Great points and clear explanation.

We (I) are not against the NSA spying as some people think. Thats their job and we need it because everyone spies. Espionage is a way of life for every country.

1. The constitution cannot be violated 2. Accountability

And to make myself clear, I don't like guns or ever used them but If need be I would also stand for the second amendment. I would stand for every amendment in the constitution for that matter.

If leaders think they can bend the rules here and there than we are no longer a nation that stands on the shoulders of giants that sacrificed their lives so YOU and I could stand here say what we want, do what we want. Remember all these people lived and they died forming this country from ashes:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

[3327]

YES the NSA's mission is to spy. We are fine with that but NOT domestically. We are not fine with that.

In the borders of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA according to the 4th Amendment of te UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION domestic spying is not legal.

1: NSA should be subject to accountability like everyone in this country 2: All NSA activities should be restricted to foreign intelligence gathering.

This is the jist of it.

[dllthomas]

Not all of us are "fine with that"; we've just agreed to focus primarily on the bits where we have the broader support.

[ajuc]

So existence of organisation with particular goal is good enough reason to pursue that goal, no matter if its ethical or no?

Seriously Americans, what's wrong with you?

[cobrausn]

It is absolutely colorblind to be calling out America specifically as 'unethical' because it spies on foreigners. Every government ever spies on foreigners - some just do it more than others. Hell, Germany just convicted a Russian spy couple not one week ago (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-23145426).

I'm not convinced the whole game is worth the effort, but I'm not going to pretend there isn't an actual need for government intelligence gathering. And there are quite a few of us who see a big distinction between targeted intelligence gathering and broad spectrum communications interception.

[dgunn]

I think your comment was intended for me.

Their goal is protect the US. Do you think there are no threats within our borders? Seriously Americans, what's wrong with you?

See? We can all try to make each other look stupid if we want. It doesn't make your opinion correct. Show me how I will be negatively affected by the NSA continuing to do what they've always done. I assure you, I can be convinced if you're right and I'm wrong. I just can't see the down side.

[ajuc]

Secret services spying on each other is a sad reality, but till now all countries spied on each other spies/politicians/diplomats etc, not on regular people. When you work at embassy you know from the start thay you are under observation. It's like soldier going to a war for money - it was his choice. Spying on everybody is like killing civilians at war. It's worse.

Another analogy - putting everybody from a street in jail just in case. The fact that you can put criminals in jail and every country does this (and sometimes jail innocent people by error) doesn't make putting in jail EVERYBODY and releasing them when they prove they are innocent acceptable.

You may be not affected, but that doesn't make it any less evil. I am not affected by the lack of LGBT rights in Poland, but I still support them, cause it's stupid to revoke rights from people without reason.

Also allowing people to get so much power make it almost impossible to later revoke that power when they switch their goals or abuse it. Who can guarant you that nobody uses PRISM for personal benefit? Like people betting on stock exchange because they read that some company is going to default in private emails, and all other people on stock lose their money to these assholes? That's just the first example that came to my mind. Do you trust every person in NSA that they won't do such stuff? Or are you OK with it?

There is a point after which "to protect my country" is not good enough excuse to revoke people rights.

I have right to not trust officials from foreign country (that I have no way to vote out of office) with my secrets. They already are doing crazy stuff. Are you OK with what USA is doing to Snowden? Cause I'm not.

[3327]

> Also allowing people to get so much power make it almost impossible to later revoke that power when they switch their goals or abuse it. Who can guarant you that nobody uses PRISM for personal benefit? Like people betting on stock exchange because they read that some company is going to default in private emails, and all other people on stock lose their money to these assholes? That's just the first example that came to my mind. Do you trust every person in NSA that they won't do such stuff? Or are you OK with it?

I agree with this statement,

I would like to add: That this nation was built on a very powerful constitution. What makes America different than most nations is that the Constitution amendments are like Axioms. Unlike many places these rules cannot be changed, shifted or broken. Yes I am saying that the US constitution is stronger than any other constitution out there today.

The forefathers lived in a very different age but were bright people. Technology changes, times change but human nature and instinct does not. If we do not stand for the constitution and what it means you will be accepting a different reality and a different America. We will die time will continue but to ensure that America is what it was intended to be we must show our presence today and protect the basic civil rights of Americans.

>Their goal is protect the US. Do you think there are no threats within our borders? Seriously Americans, what's wrong with you?

There were always threats within our borders. Thats why we have the DEA, FBI, ATF, Homeland Sec., etc.

Billions of dollars of data and wire tapping is not going to protect you. A person with will an intent to do evil will and can do it no matter what.

However, if the solution is to give up our civil liberties which makes this country the best place on earth in panic, distrust and spying on our own people; then we have already lost and they (evil) have won.

[dgunn]

One, I don't think the NSA isn't allowed to spy domestically. The NSA is charged with collecting foreign and counter intelligence in an effort to protect the interests of the US. If there is an intelligence need which requires domestic collection methods, you better believe they are allowed, by law, to collect.

Even if they weren't allowed to spy domestically, I'm not convinced that would be an appropriate limitation on the NSA. They are the best at this type of intelligence collection. As long as the US has enemies within it's own borders, tying the hands of people who can help us is going to be a pretty bad idea.

[ajuc]

> As long as the US has enemies within it's own borders, tying the hands of people who can help us is going to be a pretty bad idea.

You are aware that this sentence sounds like from worst communist propaganda from stalinist period?

[3327]

> As long as the US has enemies within it's own borders, tying the hands of people who can help us is going to be a pretty bad idea.

A constant state of fear, always at war, our enemies are about to attack us.

Isn't this what North Korea fuels the fire with?

I will be protesting and the point is that a multibillion dollar infringement of the constitution is not whats going to stop domestic "enemies". Its stemming hate and spreading peace that will ultimately matter. If someone is willing to attack you, if they are smart, and if they have nothing to loose and are willing to die for it then NOTHING, NOTHING can stop them. Not even Minority Report.

We whom will protest will protest because there are other ways to attain these goals, without breaking the constitution.

[dgunn]

> A constant state of fear, always at war, our enemies are about to attack us. Isn't this what North Korea fuels the fire with?

If you think a country this size could ever reach the point of having no enemies, you are delusional. We will never be close to this condition. Spreading peace sounds great. In fact, I fully believe that the highest calling of mankind is to respect and care for others. I don't want hate and fear. But I'm also not delusional. We are a highly targeted country. We have enemies and will continue to have them inside and outside of our borders. Recognizing that does not make me or any other rational person a fear monger. Not recognizing it makes you appear naive.

[ajuc]

The point isn't that there are no enemies. The point is that the cure is worse than the sickness.

Anyway, what are you worrying about? Another 9/11? Car accidents are more probable causes of death, and you could eliminate most of them cheaper and with no ethical issues, boosting economy as a byproduct (build fast railroads, subsidize the tickets). Gun ownership is another low hanging fruit. Hell, even just making flying cheaper and more accessible will probably save more lives than NSA.