U.S. Politics: lt's not hard

[Inigima]

No, you collect data on what appears to be basically all foreign communication. Metadata on basically everyone too I guess, although the law doesn't consider that spying by any measure.

You seem to be trying to be extremely unspecific in what you are talking about here.

That doesn't actually appear to be what's happening.

I want some of what you're smoking. See: http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130806/20552924088/every-time-nsa-is-asked-about-its-ability-to-spy-everyone-it-answers-about-its-authority.shtml

Before getting to the X-KEYSCORE questions, Burnett runs a clip of Gen. Alexander being lobbed softballs by Sen. Mike Rogers back on June 18th. Note Alexander's verbal head fake that makes it appear he has actually answered what was asked.

Rogers: Does the NSA have the

ability

to listen to American's phone calls and read their emails?

Alexander: No. We do not have that

authority

.

That wasn't what was asked. Without a doubt, the agency does not have the authority to perform these acts. But what was asked was if the agency had the ability, whether or not it was being utilized.

NSA analysts have abused their power. Multiple times. The agency has illegally spied on journalists, broken wiretapping laws, viewed President Clinton's emails and recorded calls from American soldiers back to America, passing around tapes of ones containing "phone sex" or "pillow talk." That's just a few instances that we KNOW about. To pretend the abuse is limited to the events revealed by whistleblowers is the height of condescension. To make the assertion that NSA analysts will only act within the limits of laws (not that much is limited) is downright insulting.

and

http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2013/08/06/michael_hayden_talks_to_cnn_about_xkeyscore_program.html

Was there any truth to claims that the NSA is sifting through millions of browsing histories and able to collect virtually everything users do on the Internet? “Yeah,” Hayden said. “And it's really good news.”

Analysts can enter search terms to sift through data and select from a drop-down menu a target’s “foreignness factor,” which is intended to minimize the warrantless surveillance of Americans. However, operating a vast electronic dragnet such as this is far from an exact science, and the NSA’s system of sifting data from the backbone of international Internet networks likely sometimes involves gobbling up information on Americans’ communications and online activity—whether it is done wittingly or not. Indeed, the NSA reportedly only needs to have 51 percent certainty that it is targeting a foreigner. And as leaked secret rules for the surveillance have shown, even if the NSA does “inadvertently” gather Americans’ communications, it can hold on to them if they are deemed valuable for vague “foreign intelligence” purposes or if the communications show evidence of a crime that has occurred or may occur in the future.

I'm not going to tell you we have a smoking gun like the Watergate recordings, but it's hard to credit any denial that Americans aren't being surveilled -- spied on, to my mind -- on a large scale.

[Tormund Ukrainesbane]

That doesn't actually appear to be what's happening.

Unless you are familiar with the term "X-Keyscore" in which case you know it's exactly what's happening.

[DanteGabriel]

I think the fine parsing of what the law actually allows and what the programs ostensibly do is fairly pointless, because I believe that if the government has the power, they're using it.

[Gertrude]

On taxes, I would love to get rid of all the loopholes and exemptions - I mean all of them. Just tax percentage per bracket and done. If the gov't wants to encourage social behavior through exemptions, I'd rather they offer stimulus on a smaller scale. So instead of getting a mortgage exemption, you'd have to apply for that stimulus package.

So I don't know enough about how the cogs and nitty gritty of the system to know if this would actually work, but I would imagine that the effects would be about the same, but the tax code is kept clean. Am I wrong in thinking it would be easier to examine what we now know as loopholes and subsidies if it was separate? Have limits on each exemption-like stimulus so that they need to be looked at periodically and voted on. I know it's inefficient to give money to the IRS to just have them send back a check, but it could be tied into that process - apply for your exemptions at the same time as filing for taxes and then have it all greenlighted with the total rebate or amount due rather than two separate transaction.

What am I missing as to why this is a bad idea?

[Tormund Ukrainesbane]

What am I missing as to why this is a bad idea?

It doesn't help rich people.

[Gertrude]

Oh yeah, duh.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

DG,

I think the fine parsing of what the law actually allows and what the programs ostensibly do is fairly pointless, because I believe that if the government has the power, they're using it.

Oh, it does have the power. The more important question, in my opinion is whether it should have that power. I believe it should not without strict public constraints and clear boundaries on when the power may be used.

[Tormund Ukrainesbane]

DG,

Oh, it does have the power. The more important question, in my opinion is whether it should have that power. I believe it should not without strict public constraints and clear boundaries on when the power may be used.

That's the thing with the government anymore. Look at the modern police, look at the feds reaction to leaks, look at the people from the last 2 administrations who have refused to answer congressional subpoenas, look what Obama did when congress specifically forbade intervention in Libya. They already have the power and it doesn't matter if you pass laws against it or not. The only way to check that power is literally to physically stop them, and you know that's not going to happen.