The NSA tracks peoples' porn habits in order to discredit "radicalizers"

[afa7336]

It's funny how you're the only one who has the opinion that this is all o.k and keeps going on about SORM, while EVERYONE else seems to disagree.  It would appear you are the odd one out and can't discuss anything else.

 

Newsflash,  whether it's right wrong or indifferent, the people are not happy with it, don't want it to continue and have other ideas about national security and foreign affairs.  

 

Newsflash for you, why don't you look up why I bring up SORM in relation to Edward Snowden. GG for AGAIN not checking facts before typing. I mean really people, do any of you do research AT ALL or do you just type things out?

 

Snowden condemns spying, then runs to a Country with worse spying and NO ONE finds that odd? No one does research when I point this out? Is it because it doesn't fit your ideas of Edward Snowden? Or is it something else?

[beebskadoo]

Newsflash for you, why don't you look up why I bring up SORM in relation to Edward Snowden. GG for AGAIN not checking facts before typing. I mean really people, do any of you do research AT ALL or do you just type things out?

 

Snowden condemns spying, then runs to a Country with worse spying and NO ONE finds that odd? No one does research when I point this out? Is it because it doesn't fit your ideas of Edward Snowden? Or is it something else?

Didn't Snowden try Brazil first...

He was SEEKING asylum, and Russia was the one that gave him that.

[mr moose]

Newsflash for you, why don't you look up why I bring up SORM in relation to Edward Snowden. GG for AGAIN not checking facts before typing. I mean really people, do any of you do research AT ALL or do you just type things out?

 

Snowden condemns spying, then runs to a Country with worse spying and NO ONE finds that odd? No one does research when I point this out? Is it because it doesn't fit your ideas of Edward Snowden? Or is it something else?

NEWSFLASH,  no one cares about your opinions on SORM,  they are just that, your opinions and your justification for hating Snowden. 

[beebskadoo]

But to get back on topic with things, Why exactly are they monitoring porn traffic.... catching terrorists eh?

I mean what can you truly learn about a person by what kind of porn they watch?

I mean even if I was in to weird terrorist porn, that doesn't really mean anything.

 

Jihad Jugz Volume 3

Boobs, Behinds, and Burkas

Mohammed Mammas

Hosama BlowJoben

 Great titles eh?

[afa7336]

But to get back on topic with things, Why exactly are they monitoring porn traffic.... catching terrorists eh?

I mean what can you truly learn about a person by what kind of porn they watch?

I mean even if I was in to weird terrorist porn, that doesn't really mean anything.

 

Jihad Jugz Volume 3

Boobs, Behinds, and Burkas

Mohammed Mammas

Hosama BlowJoben

 Great titles eh?

 

You have to remember, Islamic Extremists have a certain view that is totally different then our own. This is a culture that if you even suspect your wife (one of them) of cheating, by law you can kill them with no proof. If your child does something to shame the family, you can kill your child. If you are Gay, you can be stoned to death.

 

For instance, say we have a guy that is planning on setting off an IED in front of a school using children as the delivery mechanism, but he also has access daily to other intelligence about other cells. Valuable intelligence. But what he hides from everyone is that he likes men. He is Gay. (No one is saying this is wrong, I really want to point that out clearly.) Now we found this information out, and NOW we can turn this one time terrorist into an asset and gain valuable intelligence about the inner workings of the organization and other cells. As well, we can get him to stop the plot. (Which ironically happened sorta this way in Germany in WWII. No one really wanted to wear a pink triangle back then and you can't blame them either.)

[beebskadoo]

You have to remember, Islamic Extremists have a certain view that is totally different then our own. This is a culture that if you even suspect your wife (one of them) of cheating, by law you can kill them with no proof. If your child does something to shame the family, you can kill your child. If you are Gay, you can be stoned to death.

 

For instance, say we have a guy that is planning on setting off an IED in front of a school using children as the delivery mechanism, but he also has access daily to other intelligence about other cells. Valuable intelligence. But what he hides from everyone is that he likes men. He is Gay. (No one is saying this is wrong, I really want to point that out clearly.) Now we found this information out, and NOW we can turn this one time terrorist into an asset and gain valuable intelligence about the inner workings of the organization and other cells. As well, we can get him to stop the plot. (Which ironically happened sorta this way in Germany in WWII. No one really wanted to wear a pink triangle back then and you can't blame them either.)

I know how backward the middle east is...

You're preaching to the choir I have done a decent amount of research into middle eastern theology. This type of extremist behavior isn't exclusive to radical Muslims, it is present in a lot of (Mostly extinct and less practiced) forms of Middle Easter faiths. World wide faiths aren't exempt from this either, BUT Islam gets 'picked on' for being the most radical, (Though there are radicals that exist in the Islamic world) most Muslims don't subscribe to radical teachings. The same can be said about Jews, Christians, Hindu's etc.

I am in no way defending any sort of radical faith, I don't defend ANY faith, I do however defend peoples rights to have that faith (unless it's radical and then I think it's certainly MORE out of place in society) 

 

Essentially what I am trying to say is that ALL Abrahamic religions and All earlier Middle Eastern faiths that Judaism, Christianity and Islam were based upon have the capability to practice radical teachings. It's certainly found in the texts of each of these faiths. (Sorry if I ramble, it's how my brain works sometimes)

Each of these religions' respective holy book encourages radical behavior, though the Koran/Islam gets the brunt of it.

The words Koran or Islam have been demonized more than the other aforementioned faiths have been, and for no reason. This is not a religious argument that I am posing, it is simply a cultural one, but this case the Religion and culture of the Middle East are so intertwined, it's hard to separate them.

 

On to the Pink triangle thing, Hitler had a mix of faiths, He was a catholic that believed he was doing gods work. But Catholics aren't considered radical are they?

the plot thickens...

[afa7336]

I know how backward the middle east is...

You're preaching to the choir I have done a decent amount of research into middle eastern theology. This type of extremist behavior isn't exclusive to radical Muslims, it is present in a lot of (Mostly extinct and less practiced) forms of Middle Easter faiths. World wide faiths aren't exempt from this either, BUT Islam gets 'picked on' for being the most radical, (Though there are radicals that exist in the Islamic world) most Muslims don't subscribe to radical teachings. The same can be said about Jews, Christians, Hindu's etc.

I am in no way defending any sort of radical faith, I don't defend ANY faith, I do however defend peoples rights to have that faith (unless it's radical and then I think it's certainly MORE out of place in society) 

 

Essentially what I am trying to say is that ALL Abrahamic religions and All earlier Middle Eastern faiths that Judaism, Christianity and Islam were based upon have the capability to practice radical teachings. It's certainly found in the texts of each of these faiths. (Sorry if I ramble, it's how my brain works sometimes)

Each of these religions' respective holy book encourages radical behavior, though the Koran/Islam gets the brunt of it.

The words Koran or Islam have been demonized more than the other aforementioned faiths have been, and for no reason. This is not a religious argument that I am posing, it is simply a cultural one, but this case the Religion and culture of the Middle East are so intertwined, it's hard to separate them.

 

On to the Pink triangle thing, Hitler had a mix of faiths, He was a catholic that believed he was doing gods work. But Catholics aren't considered radical are they?

the plot thickens...

 

Can't argue there, I mean throughout history, and even today we have radical sects of every religion. We don't even have to go far to see some in the United States. Then again, most aren't using radical teachings on the scale that radical Islamic extremists are either. They are a threat, plain and simple though, not just to us but to everyone. I mean, look at the mall shooting in Kenya, which targeted non-muslims from all accounts. Or the many fatwas issued against non-muslims. If we have information or access to information to turn one of these people, to stop attacks and gain intelligence I say we use it. Just because its porn doesn't make it less useful or distasteful either. I mean, if it were an accountant embezzling money from terrorists and we used it, its the same thing. Just a lot less sensational. 

 

Hitler was an extremely sick and twisted individual, of course, and used faith as well. And while challenging him finally was a good thing, would you say finding out one of his generals was gay and liked looking at photos of men having relations together and using that to our advantage was wrong? Because its the same thing really, when you boil it down to its core. Using information you have gained on a target, to get said target to work for you. Make him a double agent, its a staple of the Intelligence World since time immemorial. 

[beebskadoo]

Can't argue there, I mean throughout history, and even today we have radical sects of every religion. We don't even have to go far to see some in the United States. Then again, most aren't using radical teachings on the scale that radical Islamic extremists are either. They are a threat, plain and simple though, not just to us but to everyone. I mean, look at the mall shooting in Kenya, which targeted non-muslims from all accounts. Or the many fatwas issued against non-muslims. If we have information or access to information to turn one of these people, to stop attacks and gain intelligence I say we use it. Just because its porn doesn't make it less useful or distasteful either. I mean, if it were an accountant embezzling money from terrorists and we used it, its the same thing. Just a lot less sensational.

Hitler was an extremely sick and twisted individual, of course, and used faith as well. And while challenging him finally was a good thing, would you say finding out one of his generals was gay and liked looking at photos of men having relations together and using that to our advantage was wrong? Because its the same thing really, when you boil it down to its core. Using information you have gained on a target, to get said target to work for you. Make him a double agent, its a staple of the Intelligence World since time immemorial.

you keep bringing up the 'what if they do I.d out he was gay' thing.... just curious as to why? Is it because I am gay or is it to make a point? Not trying to sound rude, just trying to follow you

[Lays]

who cares...

[Giggitygoebbels]

@afa7336

I do not mind you calling Snowden a Criminal.However if that is true the NSA is as criminal as him for spying on us.

They are all just spying.Simple as that.

[Faba]

So, why don't we show what every apparatus of every intelligence agency is doing? I mean, fudge keeping us safe, right? Lets just let every citizen know what they are spending their tax money on.

 

Lets not care how many people could be saved. Lets not care about the lives that would be lost by outing such information. Lets not worry about the damage that is done by exposing such information. Lets not worry at all about losing access to information which is valuable and can stop terrorist acts or god for bid WAR. Just so you and everyone knows what is going on, right?

 

 

 

The Boston Bomber posted Al Qaeda prophecy's on YouTube and the Russian FSB warned the FBI, that these guys are dangerous.

 

sooo seems like you can't stop terrorism by watching porn 

 

 

Most we know yet about the NSA is, that they spy at south american and european politicians and that they do industrial espionage

[naca1227]

This is just silly. If I were an American I would be seriously pissed right now about how my government spends my money watching the porn that other people are watching.

 

On the other hand, this caught my eye:

 

"NSA believes the targeted individuals radicalize people through the expression of controversial ideas via YouTube, Facebook and other social media websites.".

 

So the "expression of controversial ideas" is indoctrination and radicalization. What is a "controversial idea", in NSA's opinion? Someone saying in their youtube channel that what NSA is doing is breaking the most basic of human right qualifies as an "expression of controversial ideas"? Is saying that NSA Director General Keith Alexander is a felon for lying to the Congress and should get a much, much harsher punishment than retirement a "controversial idea"? It scares me that the door to abuse is so wide-open.

I assure you 99% of 1st world countries monitor you. 

[naca1227]

I don't really get why everyone is so surprised about this. 

 

Everyone spies on everyone. 

[afa7336]

The Boston Bomber posted Al Qaeda prophecy's on YouTube and the Russian FSB warned the FBI, that these guys are dangerous.

 

sooo seems like you can't stop terrorism by watching porn 

 

 

Most we know yet about the NSA is, that they spy at south american and european politicians and that they do industrial espionage

 

See, this is the oh so fun part of intelligence that is the hardest to actually explain or understand. Things are secret, we just don't know. When people run their mouths, they cost lives, money, and blow the hell out of operations. Can you tell me how sucessful this operation was? Nope. Can I? Nope. But we do know it worked since they used it. 

 

I do not mind you calling Snowden a Criminal.However if that is true the NSA is as criminal as him for spying on us.

They are all just spying.Simple as that.

 

 

A little different there, and its actually a lot more complicated then that as I have tried to explain every time. For instance, yes we are safe and there is a "low" chance of attack, but how low is that chance because of the all the agencies working together to keep us safe?

 

 

you keep bringing up the 'what if they do I.d out he was gay' thing.... just curious as to why? Is it because I am gay or is it to make a point? Not trying to sound rude, just trying to follow you

 

Because its the easiest one to take, out of the collection you can choose, with known consequences of what would happen to the person if it was revealed. If I were to use something more obscure it would involve explaining why every time, in lots more detail. Nothing more, nothing less. Heck, you yourself even know the consequences of it in that area, yet you're still asking why. And hence why I use it as an example. 

[Zeo2002]

Oh really, so the court orders to operate weren't legal? The law to gather wasn't on their side (psst. its an older law, on the books for a long time)? The Oversight from Congress wasn't on their side? GG for no research, and going with what you feel. Sorry, you're wrong. Do I REALLY have to explain this, or can you manage research?

 

Oh and as for other Countries? Here is a NEWS FLASH for you, are you prepared to condemn every Nation that has a Foreign Intelligence Service? Are you prepared to not ever gather intelligence, whether it is against an enemy, or it is against a threat against our borders and citizens? You people really do have a warped sense of the World with these thoughts.

I think you are missing some of the target of our outrage (at least mine). I understand that countries are going to spy on other countries, it's something we have to live with. It's crappy we have to do it and that it's done to us - even more so that the USA sucks so bad that it gets released to everyone. I don't care if the NSA spies on enemies and finds their habits and uses it to turn them - though I also understand that "the enemy" can do the same to our people. I care if they do it to an American citizen without proper legal channels to identify that one person (and no "I choose John/Jane Doe 202") to search and seize their information.

 

The question you brought up is what would we allow the country (NSA) to do to us (their citizens) who have a right against unreasonable search and seizure - which grabbing up our internet data and communications is. My problem is that the NSA has grabbed up mass amounts of data that also encompasses my data, your data, and millions of others in their attempts to grab and filter through for "terrorist activities". That is trampling on our Fourth amendment as they are not surgically pulling only data for a few people who they have been given judicial right to search for. Also, just because doing something is legal, doesn't mean it is constitutional. There have been many laws that have been repealed or changed because it was deemed unconstitutional.

 

To give this another analogy, this is like a fisherman who throws a net into the ocean and pulls out 1,000 fish. He is looking only for the cuttlefish, yet he catches 999 other fish in the net and handles each one (or has a machine do so) as he goes through the net making sure that each of the other fish is not a cuttlefish. Now, there are (hypothetically) laws against any fisherman using a net solution for fishing in these waters - what this guy is doing is illegal, even though he's been given a license to fish cuttlefish. That is what the NSA is doing, there are laws that protect us (US Citizens) and our information against unreasonable search and seizure, but they are getting and looking at that information. This is what I and many in the country are outraged that the NSA is allowed to do so. Now, I will be honest and say I haven't really researched much of what Snowden has or released, but it's my belief he has released some of this information that the NSA is doing this with the American people (and citizens of other countries). So, we as American citizens are being violated by our own country that is supposed to "protect" and "uphold" our rights (not to mention, they most likely distribute this information for sharing with other countries and vice-versa).

 

Now as to Snowden running to Russia, yea it may be quite hypocritical - but it's definitely safer for him as he's looking for asylum. Does this excuse everything he's done, probably not -- but does it inform the American people that such illegal activities by their own agencies are happening and something needs to be corrected - absolutely. Is there a whistleblower program, yes... is it flawed and impracticable in this example, most likely. This is why I would support his actions in revealing all the information he has received - transparency of ones actions is a growing trend in upcoming generations. Other countries know we are spying on them and vice versa - the problem Snowden brought up is that those venues may be closed and now we'll need to be "the smart one" again and develop another way into their systems, I'm not sad or scared about the time it will take for that to happen.

 

As for other countries and where my outrage is, Yes - I've had problems with a few that you listed (such as what Syria had done) but can't say I'm exactly aware of everything (no one person can be). I'm sure the citizens of those countries when (or if) they find out are just as outraged or more than we are - especially if they have similar rights as we do listed in our constitution.

 

As for our soldiers -- I have the utmost respect for them, especially for those have died to protect our constitutional rights. Also, those who put on a uniform have also sworn to serve the country and give their lives if needed. That is an additional burden that they choose (at this time) to bear. There are also lots of people who have given their lives for others and not worn the uniform (many in NYC on 9/11). It's the soldier, not the government agency, who has given us the right against unreasonable search and seizure. It is the NSA who is trampling over the soldiers dead bodies and what they died to protect in illegally spying and grabbing data on the American people. These soldiers may have died for our lives, but they died for our freedom as well. We, and the NSA, are not honoring their lives and dedication if we take those rights and trample over them.

 

As to other examples to my questions about relocation, I'm pretty sure I've used examples such as or pointing to times like the Boston Marathon lockdowns as well. However, perhaps these were used in other threads - I don't remember everything I post and where exactly they are posted. There are many examples, I try not to use the same one over and over and go for the more widely known examples to make the better point to a wider audience.

[Faba]

See, this is the oh so fun part of intelligence that is the hardest to actually explain or understand. Things are secret, we just don't know. When people run their mouths, they cost lives, money, and blow the hell out of operations. Can you tell me how sucessful this operation was? Nope. Can I? Nope. But we do know it worked since they used it. 

 

what worked? they spy on bin laden before 9/11...

iceland has no secret service and they did not get attacked. its easy to say "nothing happened, because we keep the country safe" but how do we know, that something would happened, when nobody would have spied?

 

So you think you need them, because you can't know, how it's without them.

 

We both can't proof our points. Same like religion 

[afa7336]

what worked? they spy on bin laden before 9/11...

iceland has no secret service and they did not get attacked. its easy to say "nothing happened, because we keep the country safe" but how do we know, that something would happened, when nobody would have spied?

 

So you think you need them, because you can't know, how it's without them.

 

We both can't proof our points. Same like religion 

 

You sure you want to go with Iceland not having anything? I mean, its so temp... You know what, lets do this the fun way.

 

 

Greiningardeild Ríkislögreglustjóra

Icelandic Defence Agency's Intelligence Unit

 

GG on your research there hoss, just GG. Seriously do more research before speaking up next time!

[LAwLz]

Okay, so this perceived low risk... have you ever thought it is at a low risk BECAUSE they are doing this? Because they are finding and stopping them? Because they are actively out there, forcing these groups to change methods? To actively discourage them?

It was already low before they started this mass surveillance. Just look at the number of terrorist attacks we had before PRISM and such programs started.

 

 

 

 

See you are basing your notion of low risk while they are actively trying to stop attacks from happening. Lets take a look at a Country that doesn't look for terrorists, but still have a threat of terror attacks. Can you name me said Country you want to base it off of? I can't think of ANY Country that is under the threat of Terror Attack that doesn't actively look and try to stop terror attacks.

 

What's funny though, is I mentioned something earlier about SORM, and no one has commented. You think the NSA is bad, please do some research on where your boy Snowden is holed up. SORM is a million times worse then whatever you think the NSA has done. The sad part is, you don't care as much because why? You all are for "I want privacy", but ignore the bigger violations of it day in and day out.

 

No I haven't read all posts in this thread. Your post about SORM was most likely not a reply to me so I didn't look for it. I'll try to find it and see what you said. Oh and just because I dislike the NSA does not mean I am OK with other kinds of spying. The whole "b-b-but X is much worse than Y, so please don't hate Y" argument is completely illogical. Just because someone is worse does not mean it is acceptable. The lesser of two evils is still an evil.

 

 

Oh and I am not saying Snowden is an angel that did nothing wrong. That does not mean the NSA should be ignored though. You're just trying to make an ad hominem attack on Snowden.

[Giggitygoebbels]

See, this is the oh so fun part of intelligence that is the hardest to actually explain or understand. Things are secret, we just don't know. When people run their mouths, they cost lives, money, and blow the hell out of operations. Can you tell me how sucessful this operation was? Nope. Can I? Nope. But we do know it worked since they used it. 

 

 

 

A little different there, and its actually a lot more complicated then that as I have tried to explain every time. For instance, yes we are safe and there is a "low" chance of attack, but how low is that chance because of the all the agencies working together to keep us safe?

 

 

 

Because its the easiest one to take, out of the collection you can choose, with known consequences of what would happen to the person if it was revealed. If I were to use something more obscure it would involve explaining why every time, in lots more detail. Nothing more, nothing less. Heck, you yourself even know the consequences of it in that area, yet you're still asking why. And hence why I use it as an example.

The problem is,that this cannot stop terrorists because they always find alternatives to internet,however it is effective for anti-piracy,anti pornography etc which is not the point of PRISM.To me this is just the comeback of SOPA and PIPA and stuff like that.