Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Rand Paul: NSA Routinely Monitors Americans’ Communications Without Warrants

theintercept.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 300 posts

Re: Rand Paul: NSA Routinely Monitors Americans’ Communications Without Warrants

#221

Post by willstrafach »

grandalf wrote: post #202
irishcoffee wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My impression is that he held several jobs over a few years which gave him access to more of the breadth of what was going on. This is your impression because it's the impression people want you to have.

> people want you to have. Well, putting aside the observation that the documents speak for themselves, and ignoring the inaccurate claims made by leaders to the American people about surveillance, what impression should I have?

I believe that was a (not so nice) way of saying that Snowden had intentionally exaggerated his history in order to establish himself as more of an authority on these matters regarding things he did not actually have access to.

Personally, even if I disagree with most of what he did, I think that specifically was an understandable move as he seemed to be genuine about his beliefs and desire to spread his message.

Re: Rand Paul: NSA Routinely Monitors Americans’ Communications Without Warrants

#222

Post by 55555 »

mixmastamyk wrote: post #207
55555 wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me first say that I don't particularly care if Obama was born outside of the US. George Washington, perhaps our greatest president, was obviously an immigrant of sorts. Let me also say that I don't believe beyond a reasonable doubt that Obama wasn't born in America, as there are several other reasons for faking a birth certificate; perhaps the original has been lost and you've decided that it's worth doing in ord…

George Washington was born in Virginia colony.

Right. Doesn't that make him British? Asking honestly... How could he have been American if the USA didn't exist yet. Obviously he was North American, but his citizenship at birth would have been British, no?

Re: Rand Paul: NSA Routinely Monitors Americans’ Communications Without Warrants

#223

Post by dragonwriter »

55555 wrote: post #195
colanderman wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why place any weight on Trump's wiretap claim? He was one of the loudest voices in the "birther" movement. That he's now president doesn't mean his self-serving crackpot conspiracy theories suddenly deserve credit.

Let me first say that I don't particularly care if Obama was born outside of the US. George Washington, perhaps our greatest president, was obviously an immigrant of sorts. Let me also say that I don't believe beyond a reasonable doubt that Obama wasn't born in America, as there are several other reasons for faking a birth certificate; perhaps the original has been lost and you've decided that it's worth doing in ord…

> George Washington, perhaps our greatest president, was obviously an immigrant of sorts.

No, he wasn't an immigrant of any sort. He was a native born citizen of one of the states that formed the United States, and one of the leaders of the movement by which they became the United States.

Re: Rand Paul: NSA Routinely Monitors Americans’ Communications Without Warrants

#224

Post by willstrafach »

grandalf wrote: post #217
unclebucknasty wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Only to the extent that is typically the sitting president's responsibility to jump on board with the campaign rhetoric of his/her own party No. In this case, simply carrying out the normal duties of the president could have been seen as political, given the context. Obama himself later mentioned this and indicated it was why he hadn't acted sooner, especially with Trump already making the "rigged election" charges…

> There was evidence, as repeatedly and publicly corroborated by 17 U.S. intelligence agencies. This is one of the false statements that gets repeated over and over. There was not evidence presented to the public, only an assessment in which the NSA felt it was only marginally probable that meddling had occurred, and it was only from a small number of agencies. The document was also an informal, unusual concoction th…

The implication of CIA having high confidence and NSA having moderate confidence was that the intelligence came more from humans sources rather than signals intelligence.

This makes it more difficult to show proof. What kind of proof would be sufficient enough to be convincing, without burning the source? I cannot think of a good answer to that question, although I truly wish they did figure out a way to declassify some of the evidence used to create their judgements.

> not the typical product of intelligence analysis under any circumstances.

This statement is untrue. That release is absolutely what an Intelligence Community Assessment looks like. Other declassified ICAs are public, so you do not even need to take my word for it.

Re: Rand Paul: NSA Routinely Monitors Americans’ Communications Without Warrants

#225

Post by 55555 »

dragonwriter wrote: post #223
55555 wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me first say that I don't particularly care if Obama was born outside of the US. George Washington, perhaps our greatest president, was obviously an immigrant of sorts. Let me also say that I don't believe beyond a reasonable doubt that Obama wasn't born in America, as there are several other reasons for faking a birth certificate; perhaps the original has been lost and you've decided that it's worth doing in ord…

> George Washington, perhaps our greatest president, was obviously an immigrant of sorts. No, he wasn't an immigrant of any sort. He was a native born citizen of one of the states that formed the United States, and one of the leaders of the movement by which they became the United States.

Immigrant is possibly the wrong word, but wouldn't he technically have been a British citizen prior to the founding of the USA?

Re: Rand Paul: NSA Routinely Monitors Americans’ Communications Without Warrants

#226

Post by 55555 »

Criticesid wrote: post #212
unclebucknasty wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You watched a video that is over an hour long and you generally seem to have put a lot of thought into the veracity of Obama's birth certificate for someone who claims to "not particularly care" about it. Then you move on to discuss your feeling that Obama wiretapped Trump, based only on the fact that Trump said it and you find the "style" of Obama's denial unconvincing. It doesn't seem to matter one bit that Trump h…

> Saying "we don't know for sure" is dissembling nonsense that can be stated of any claim. It's a transparent device for sowing disinformation without challenge. This needs to repeated more! Thank you internet stranger, your words have lifted my spirits today.

> Saying "we don't know for sure" is dissembling nonsense that can be stated of any claim. It's a transparent device for sowing disinformation without challenge.

It is that at times. At other times, it is simply something people say when they suspect something but do not know it for sure.

Re: Rand Paul: NSA Routinely Monitors Americans’ Communications Without Warrants

#227

Post by code_duck »

55555 wrote: post #222
mixmastamyk wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

George Washington was born in Virginia colony.

Right. Doesn't that make him British? Asking honestly... How could he have been American if the USA didn't exist yet. Obviously he was North American, but his citizenship at birth would have been British, no?

When the area you were born or live in changes governments, does that make you an immigrant?

Re: Rand Paul: NSA Routinely Monitors Americans’ Communications Without Warrants

#228

Post by lern_too_spel »

grandalf wrote: post #202
irishcoffee wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My impression is that he held several jobs over a few years which gave him access to more of the breadth of what was going on. This is your impression because it's the impression people want you to have.

> people want you to have. Well, putting aside the observation that the documents speak for themselves, and ignoring the inaccurate claims made by leaders to the American people about surveillance, what impression should I have?

The documents agree with the person you're arguing with and disagree with you and Snowden.

Re: Rand Paul: NSA Routinely Monitors Americans’ Communications Without Warrants

#229

Post by mythrwy »

youdontknowtho wrote: post #179
sctb wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we're going to have the occasional political discussion on Hacker News, we're going to have to please refrain from calling names like "apocalyptic cult".

I'm not the one that came up with that term. I think it was Norm Ornstein? What I don't understand is how you think you can have a discussion with one side willing to do anything to subvert your position. My point is that republicans have been playing to win and Democrats have been playing along. If you value science or secular society there isn't another choice. You have to oppose them.

Someone else said it first isn't really a good excuse for that kind of rhetoric though.

I understand you feel strongly about your beliefs but you really are out of line. Everyone else is not evil nor wrong for not supporting the Democratic party in all they do.

Re: Rand Paul: NSA Routinely Monitors Americans’ Communications Without Warrants

#230

Post by lern_too_spel »

grandalf wrote: post #206
willstrafach wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The biggest breakdown in the democratic process has been a lack of appreciation on the part of the public for all that we consent to by not actively dissenting and demanding answers and accountability. I agree. I don't intend to defend anything problematic. I just worry that it will be hard to demand actual changes if people are concerned about vague issues driven by a misunderstanding of how things work, versus ac…

> I would think there would be far more leniency. I'm less concerned with Snowden's treatment than with the way that our leaders dealt with the revelation that crimes had been committed in the excessive collection of data. In my opinion, at least a few senior intelligence officials should have faced prison time, several more should have stepped down, and we should have seen full details disclosed about the problemati…

There was only one illegal program in the leaks — the phone metadata collection program that the GP mentioned. At the time it was leaked, its legality was unknown, but the leaks contained arguments from the government's attorneys explaining why it was probably legal. Their arguments had merit and were supported by the District Court of Judge William Pauley, who agreed that Smith v. Maryland's ruling was precedent. Only after appeal was the program ruled illegal, but by that time, the government had already stated the program would be replaced.
Post reply on HN