Block NSA funding for collecting the call records of all Americans • Hacker News Board

Re: Block NSA funding for collecting the call records of all Americans

#191

Post by ataggart » Tue, Jul 23, 2013, 5:44 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #176

LoganCale wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First, the Constitution itself doesn't say that only U.S. citizens in U.S. territory enjoy its protections. And the Declaration of Independence (which is not legally binding the way the Constitution is, but should give an idea of the mindset of the time) states all men are created equal. Second, if we believe ideologically that privacy is a human right that should be protected, it is hypocritical to then say "Oh, but…

> First, the Constitution itself doesn't say that only U.S. citizens in U.S. territory enjoy its protections. If the Constitution said: "people in France owe us taxes" would that be valid and binding? Of course not. American law cannot impose obligations on the French, and reciprocally, American law cannot give rights to the French. The Constitution is law, and American law extends to American soil and American citiz…

>If the Constitution said: "people in France owe us taxes" would that be valid and binding?

Yes, because the text would be a grant of power to the US federal government to try and collect taxes from the people of France. Such text says absolutely nothing about the rights or obligations of the people of France.

Likewise the Constitution does not "give rights" to people, except insofar as it prohibits/mandates actions of the Federal and/or State governments.

Re: Block NSA funding for collecting the call records of all Americans

#192

Post by ensignavenger » Tue, Jul 23, 2013, 5:58 PM UTC

oleganza wrote: post #130

king_jester wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 1. Withhold your taxes. > 2. Protect yourself against the police and the military who will try to extract them by force (possibly by having crowdfunded guards). > 3. Switch from using US Dollar as most of the money government generates comes from inflation (gov sells "bonds" that it will never repay in exchange for new money). Since all national currencies are inflationary and controlled by similar institutions all…

Government != society. By not allowing any excuse for violence (including self-defence) and seeking voluntary arrangement with people around you to protect yourselves you are not isolating yourself. On contrary, you solve the social problem socially , not brutally like today with government.

Are you proposing that it isn't okay to use violence to defend yourself- but that it is okay to make "voluntary arrangement with the people around you" to use violence to protect you? So then it is okay for me to use violence to protect a neighbor, but not to protect myself?

I'm confused at what you are trying to advocate here?

Re: Block NSA funding for collecting the call records of all Americans

#193

Post by Cederfjard » Tue, Jul 23, 2013, 5:59 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #176

LoganCale wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First, the Constitution itself doesn't say that only U.S. citizens in U.S. territory enjoy its protections. And the Declaration of Independence (which is not legally binding the way the Constitution is, but should give an idea of the mindset of the time) states all men are created equal. Second, if we believe ideologically that privacy is a human right that should be protected, it is hypocritical to then say "Oh, but…

> First, the Constitution itself doesn't say that only U.S. citizens in U.S. territory enjoy its protections. If the Constitution said: "people in France owe us taxes" would that be valid and binding? Of course not. American law cannot impose obligations on the French, and reciprocally, American law cannot give rights to the French. The Constitution is law, and American law extends to American soil and American citiz…

So I know it is not nor has it ever been legally binding, but what are your thoughts on the UDHR with regards to this discussion? Is it just a document of pretty words to disregard when convenient, or does it hold any signifigance?

Article 12 states that:

"No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks."

Re: Block NSA funding for collecting the call records of all Americans

#194

Post by mnemonik » Tue, Jul 23, 2013, 6:02 PM UTC

ndesaulniers wrote: post #152

Just called my representative! I spoke the receptionist, who was very nice. I told her repeatedly to support Representative Amash's amendment to HR-2397. She requested my full name, zip code, and email address. Happy to help, from Restore the Fourth San Francisco!

When I called in the first time, I got a busy line. When I called in a second time, I was directed to Nancy Pelosi's voice mail.

Hopefully, this means we are flooding the lines!

Re: Block NSA funding for collecting the call records of all Americans

#195

Post by meepmorp » Tue, Jul 23, 2013, 6:03 PM UTC

pavanred wrote: post #146

meepmorp wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? Persons who are not US citizens who are not on US territory aren't given protections under our constitution. What's the reasoning behind this? Surveillance serves a national interest for the US, and while there ought to be limitations for domestic surveillance, I don't see why those ought to exist for foreigners in other countries.

Well, does that mean that every other country in the world is well within its rights to spy on every US citizen? I am sure no other country's constitution stipulates protections for US citizens either.

> Well, does that mean that every other country in the world is well within its rights to spy on every US citizen?

Yes, that's exactly what it means. This is how governments operate, all over the world, and it's been like this for centuries, if not longer.

Re: Block NSA funding for collecting the call records of all Americans

#196

Post by LoganCale » Tue, Jul 23, 2013, 6:12 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #176

LoganCale wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First, the Constitution itself doesn't say that only U.S. citizens in U.S. territory enjoy its protections. And the Declaration of Independence (which is not legally binding the way the Constitution is, but should give an idea of the mindset of the time) states all men are created equal. Second, if we believe ideologically that privacy is a human right that should be protected, it is hypocritical to then say "Oh, but…

> First, the Constitution itself doesn't say that only U.S. citizens in U.S. territory enjoy its protections. If the Constitution said: "people in France owe us taxes" would that be valid and binding? Of course not. American law cannot impose obligations on the French, and reciprocally, American law cannot give rights to the French. The Constitution is law, and American law extends to American soil and American citiz…

The Constitution limits the abilities of the U.S. government. When people say Constitutional rights should apply outside of the U.S. as well, they mean those limitations should apply to the U.S. government in their dealings with people outside of the U.S.

Re: Block NSA funding for collecting the call records of all Americans

#197

Post by rayiner » Tue, Jul 23, 2013, 6:23 PM UTC

Cederfjard wrote: post #193

rayiner wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> First, the Constitution itself doesn't say that only U.S. citizens in U.S. territory enjoy its protections. If the Constitution said: "people in France owe us taxes" would that be valid and binding? Of course not. American law cannot impose obligations on the French, and reciprocally, American law cannot give rights to the French. The Constitution is law, and American law extends to American soil and American citiz…

So I know it is not nor has it ever been legally binding, but what are your thoughts on the UDHR with regards to this discussion? Is it just a document of pretty words to disregard when convenient, or does it hold any signifigance? Article 12 states that: "No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has t…

Like most UN declarations, it's meaningless. Among other things, it guarantees:

Article 23: unions; Article 24: leisure and paid holidays; Article 25: food, clothing, housing, medical care, unemployment benefits, sickness and disability benefits, old age benefits; Article 26: free education.

None of these things are recognized as "rights" in the U.S. The U.S. has assiduously avoided being bound by international tribunals, and thus nothing in the UNDHR can be enforced as a right against the U.S., and nothing that can't be enforced merits the name "right."

The UNDHR was an aspirational document that was conceived at a time before it was realized how awful an idea it was to enter into an international union with all of the nations of the world, and before Americans fully appreciated how unwilling they were to cede any sovereignty to an international body.

Re: Block NSA funding for collecting the call records of all Americans

#198

Post by chernevik » Tue, Jul 23, 2013, 6:52 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #181

oleganza wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So violence in Somalia is not acceptable to you, but allowing your government a lot of violence is acceptable? If people in Somalia cannot find out a way to avoid violence it does not mean it's not possible in principle, or that government is somehow "good".

Somalia, Yemen, Pakistan, etc. I love white people who are satiated by the blessings of good government that they can talk, without irony, about how they don't need government. I don't meet many anarchists from my part of the world... The state of human nature is lawlessness and violence. The only thing keeping society from collapsing into the hell that people in those countries live with is the collective force of t…

It takes considerably more than "government". It takes a society, with culture and virtues and churches and economy and civic institutions and traditions. There many places in the world that have actual elections were those elections are used by some factions to abuse others. There are still more where decent democracies ultimately collapsed.

Democratic government, government by discourse and persuasion, is a remarkable achievement of a society. It is maintained and supported and continued by that society. There is nothing inevitable about it.

Re: Block NSA funding for collecting the call records of all Americans

#199

Post by rayiner » Tue, Jul 23, 2013, 6:59 PM UTC

chernevik wrote: post #198

rayiner wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Somalia, Yemen, Pakistan, etc. I love white people who are satiated by the blessings of good government that they can talk, without irony, about how they don't need government. I don't meet many anarchists from my part of the world... The state of human nature is lawlessness and violence. The only thing keeping society from collapsing into the hell that people in those countries live with is the collective force of t…

It takes considerably more than "government". It takes a society, with culture and virtues and churches and economy and civic institutions and traditions. There many places in the world that have actual elections were those elections are used by some factions to abuse others. There are still more where decent democracies ultimately collapsed. Democratic government, government by discourse and persuasion, is a remarka…

You're right that it does take more than government. The western world enjoys not just (relatively) good government, but a virtuous culture and people. But government by itself can be better than culture by itself. I'd imagine a lot of Iraqis miss the strong but dictatorial government under Saddam as compared to the weak but democratic government they have now. Basic security is a higher need (in the Maslovian sense) than self determination. That is the history of the world, after all. People embraced the kings that saved them from the petty warlords and criminals long before they instituted democratic government.

Re: Block NSA funding for collecting the call records of all Americans

#200

Post by sneak » Tue, Jul 23, 2013, 7:07 PM UTC

meepmorp wrote: post #127

LoganCale wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It should be banning surveillance of anyone not under active investigation, not simply domestically.

Why? Persons who are not US citizens who are not on US territory aren't given protections under our constitution. What's the reasoning behind this? Surveillance serves a national interest for the US, and while there ought to be limitations for domestic surveillance, I don't see why those ought to exist for foreigners in other countries.

> Why?

Because there's nothing inherently special about the humans born inside of the imaginary lines that comprise the US borders that entitles them to privacy denied to others.

In short, none of us are free until all of us are equal.

Also, in the off chance you don't give a shit about basic human dignity for those filthy foreigners: it's also simply bad business. It puts all US internet companies at a huge starting disadvantage against internet companies in countries which don't force private organizations to silently spy for their national militaries by default.