The Whole Haystack: The N.S.A. claims it needs access to all our phone records

Re:The Whole Haystack: The N.S.A. claims it needs access to ... by thatcherclay on Monday January 19, 2015 @01:46PM (#8913290)

FWIW, I find the comparison to getting struck by lighting to be somewhat facetious. Sure, goes to show just how unlikely it is to be killed in a terrorist attack, but I wager that the purpose of a terrorist attack is often more than just the immediate deaths.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Whole Haystack: The N.S.A. claims it needs access to ... by moe on Monday January 19, 2015 @02:40PM (#8913628)

Every single terror victim is a tragedy and one too many.

However, when you follow the news media and the politician speeches you are led to believe that we're all going to die from a terrorist attack any minute now. In my opinion, the numbers don't support that.

Moreover, it's this perception of an urgent threat that governments worldwide use to justify an unprecedented curtailment of civil rights (privacy, presumption of innocence, etc.).

So yes, the comparison may be seen as facetious or tasteless.

But at this point I'm far more worried about the NSA and the increasingly commonplace "us vs them" rhetoric, than about being harmed by a terrorist.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Whole Haystack: The N.S.A. claims it needs access to ... by bediger4000 on Monday January 19, 2015 @03:50PM (#8913989)

Moreover, it's this perception of an urgent threat that governments worldwide use to justify an unprecedented curtailment of civil rights (privacy, presumption of innocence, etc.).

Exactly right. But why? Is this curtailment of civil rights an emergent behavior, or is it on purpose? Back in 2001, I was pretty shocked at how fast the PATRIOT Act went into law: it was signed Oct 26, 2001. Was there some kind of potential candidate law lying around, ready to be put into the hopper for Congressional approval? If so, who wrote it, and why?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Whole Haystack: The N.S.A. claims it needs access to ... by bostik on Monday January 19, 2015 @03:06PM (#8913748)

> I wager that the purpose of a terrorist attack is often more than just the immediate deaths.

And judging by the last 13 years, rather succesfully too.

The US has not gone on a global campaign to install lightning rods everywhere, nor have they declared a War on Thunder.

Instead they are happily responding to terrorists' incitements in the most desirable way: creating the atmosphere to breed the current and the next generation of terrorists. (The domestic ones have been so incompetent that they've needed assistance from the FBI with their plans and attempts.[0][1])

0: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/08/fbi-terrorist-in...

1: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/01/terror-factory-f...

Note: the two links contain mostly the same material.

[ Parent | on HN ]