Utah Considers Cutting Off Water to the NSA’s Monster Data Center

> The bill, H.B. 161, directs municipalities like Bluffdale to “refuse support to any federal agency which collects electronic data within this state.”

What about the IRS? Doesn't actually every government agency collect data?

Collecting and analyzing information for foreign intelligence and counter-intelligence. This seems like a fairly necessary organ of state for the country with the largest military in the world.

Possibly one of the most naive comments I've ever seen on here.

We keep a military at the most basic level - so that another country can't send a boat full of troops over here, or airplanes filled with troops - invade us - and take over. In other words, basic protection against normal acts of war. Imagine if you, thizzbuzz, suddenly awoke tomorrow and found out the dictator of some small European country died, and you were the heir apparent. What would you want to have to make sure that Russia didn't just come in the next day with tanks and declare your country was now theirs? Oh - that would be a military.

So great, you've made sure you have that. Now at the very least, if some other country violates your sovereignty, you can at least put up a fight, and it will be a visible spectacle to the rest of the world, which might come in and try and help you.

Next up - Inhabitants of your country speak one language. The rest of the world speaks other languages. If a newspaper in a neighboring country starts publishing articles calling for an invasion of your country, in a language most of your inhabitants don't speak...isn't that something you'd like to be aware of? Who do you expect to be responsible for keeping tabs on that? Are you just going to hope that one of your citizens keeps tabs on it for you and drops you an email (at dictator@smalleurocountry.eu) to let you know you might want to be on the lookout for an invasion? Or would your citizens prefer your government is a little proactive about this? (assuming you're a benevolent dictator that wants to keep his country.) Sounds to me like you want some sort of government agency that keeps tabs on such things - you know, for NATIONAL SECURITY.

What you DON'T want, if you have an American mindset, is for that agency to be spying on all of its native citizens. That doesn't mean you don't want such an agency to exist.

See my reply to "thizbuzz" in this thread for a very basic understanding of why I think having an intelligence agency makes sense at a basic level.

As for your mentions of karma, and my commenting on "throwaway" being in your name - you're right, I don't click through and check the status of a user before replying to their comment on this forum, or any other - because I'd rather reply to what they wrote. Was I tricked by the "throwaway" in your username? Absolutely - your plan worked as you desired. If you think this makes me lazy, so be it. I'd say you intentionally mislead me, because putting "throwaway" in a profile is a common convention on internet forums, and I absolutely just accepted it as is.

What does "American" mean to me in general? I'd say the founding fathers of our country made clear their intentions in the Constitution, and Bill of Rights. To me, being American at present means agreeing with those intentions - which encompass a lot of ideals about personal freedoms, and rights to privacy.

I think the current attitude of many branches of our government toward our rights to privacy is "un-American" - especially with respect to the NSA. I'm not going to write a treatise here on exactly what that means, however I think it should be self evident to those who have a good grasp of American history. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that recent immigrants who have achieved citizenship and taken the requisite tests might have a better understanding of the concept of what "American" ideals supposedly are than many native born citizens.

Isn't this a semantic argument? There's really not much of a difference between "getting rid of the NSA" and "reforming the NSA by kicking out anyone in any way involved in the spying scandals and drastically overhauling the rules and oversight." Either way, you're getting rid of anything recognizable as the current NSA, and it doesn't really matter what you call the new agency that performs the legitimate tasks that the NSA is supposed to perform.