Spy Chief: We Should’ve Told You We Track Your Calls

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Wasn't this the guy that told the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence that the government doesn't spy on us?

“I don’t think it would be of any greater concern to most Americans than fingerprints. Well people kind of accept that because they know about it. But had we been transparent about it and say here’s one more thing we have to do as citizens for the common good, just like we have to go to airports two hours early and take our shoes off, all the other things we do for the common good, this is one more thing.”
Click to expand...
 
Be right back as laugh in the corner over this.

TL;DR-- Spy chief: "Oops. I guess we forgot something."
 
what i want to know is why this jackamole isnt rotting in jail for actually getting caught lying to congress whih is a gd felony
 
In a few years it will be:
"I don't think mandatory home contents inspections would be of any greater concern to most Americans than wire tapping"

Then
"I don't think nation-wide psychological evaluations would be of any greater concern to most Americans than home contents inspections"

Then
"I don't think forced civilian medication would be of any greater concern to most Americans than psychological evaluations"
 
"The common good" and then lists things that the vast majority of Americans DON'T AGREE WITH AND DON'T WANT TO COMPLY WITH!!!

This guy is so out of touch. The only common good most of us want is them leaving us alone and to stop spying on us through our personal communications, our gps locations, our driving patterns, and even our home appliances such as our washer and dryer. (not joking about that last one - http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/03/petraeus-tv-remote/)
 
ROTO said:
what i want to know is why this jackamole isnt rotting in jail for actually getting caught lying to congress whih is a gd felony
Click to expand...

Because he and the congressmen he's testifying to are all in the same bed.
 
ROTO said:
what i want to know is why this jackamole isnt rotting in jail for actually getting caught lying to congress whih is a gd felony
Click to expand...
If a Republican were in the Oval Office, that ass-hat would be in a SuperMax prison... after at least a year of congressional hearings and media outrage.
 
Except that most people don't get fingerprinted. And the lines and shoes are pretty much regarded by everyone as a useless imposition that they would rather see ended.

So... yeah.. the dude has a grasp on the pulse of John Q Public.
 
ROTO said:
what i want to know is why this jackamole isnt rotting in jail for actually getting caught lying to congress whih is a gd felony
Click to expand...

Simple answer, Clapper was lying FOR Congress. It was theater, practiced by all involved with the hearing.
 
Tyler-Durden said:
If a Republican were in the Oval Office, that ass-hat would be in a SuperMax prison... after at least a year of congressional hearings and media outrage.
Click to expand...

Considering this has been going on since at least 2001, probably not, except maybe the media outrage (God forbid they question anything that might come back to Obama). I think the higher levels of Government love this crap since they're always looking for some juicy tidbit to smear someone with. It's only when they think it might cost them some votes that they give a crap.
 
Typical DC circle jerk. And give the partisan shit a rest. It was GWB who brought the "Patriot" Act to bear to begin with. It's the same bucket of crooks on either side of the aisle, and neither party gives 2 shits about us little people...
 
raz-0 said:
Except that most people don't get fingerprinted.
Click to expand...

I did in elementary school. It was for records and protection (in case of kidnapping and such). That was in the early 80's. Not sure how common it was, or if it was optional or what (I was 10, I didn't know).

I've also got my prints taken optionally for a concealed weapon permit (and for buying guns).

There are a lot of reasons to give your prints to the feds. I'd say a lot of people have, mostly willingly.

I say make an example out of him. We need more of those 'examples' to get politicians in line. He directly lied to congress. String him up, put him on trial.
 
Ur_Mom said:
I did in elementary school. It was for records and protection (in case of kidnapping and such). That was in the early 80's. Not sure how common it was, or if it was optional or what (I was 10, I didn't know).

I've also got my prints taken optionally for a concealed weapon permit (and for buying guns).

There are a lot of reasons to give your prints to the feds. I'd say a lot of people have, mostly willingly.

I say make an example out of him. We need more of those 'examples' to get politicians in line. He directly lied to congress. String him up, put him on trial.
Click to expand...

Same for me. That was a big thing in the early 80's I think. I remember my mom had to give permission for me to be fingerprinted though.

And I also willingly gave updated prints when I got my CC permit as well. But honestly, what does it matter really? Beyond being able to say "his finger prints are in this house", I don't see how that's invasive. Tracking calls on the other hand? Absurdly invasive....
 
Yeah, using fingerprints is a bad example. Part of my job deals with setting up biometric fingerprint readers on time clocks at hospitals. The readers take only a small set of data points, and it's all encrypted. The data can only be used for verification. It's not even remotely detailed enough for identification, and we don't store a picture of the print itself, just 40-50 contact points. The point of the system is to keep a coworker from clocking in for work in your place, so there isn't a need for much detail at all.

Even after explaining all of that, a very large number of our customers firmly believe that we keep extremely-detailed high resolution scans of their fingerprints. The level of paranoia is pretty high with fingerprinting and finger scanning. Not only that, but shows like CSI have made juries start demanding fingerprint evidence in non-murder cases. The public probably has too much confidence in how effective fingerprinting can be for tracking people. But, who would expect someone from the NSA to actually be in touch with reality.
 
delsydsoftware said:
Yeah, using fingerprints is a bad example. Part of my job deals with setting up biometric fingerprint readers on time clocks at hospitals. The readers take only a small set of data points, and it's all encrypted. The data can only be used for verification. It's not even remotely detailed enough for identification, and we don't store a picture of the print itself, just 40-50 contact points. The point of the system is to keep a coworker from clocking in for work in your place, so there isn't a need for much detail at all.

Even after explaining all of that, a very large number of our customers firmly believe that we keep extremely-detailed high resolution scans of their fingerprints. The level of paranoia is pretty high with fingerprinting and finger scanning. Not only that, but shows like CSI have made juries start demanding fingerprint evidence in non-murder cases. The public probably has too much confidence in how effective fingerprinting can be for tracking people. But, who would expect someone from the NSA to actually be in touch with reality.
Click to expand...

Great example there. I'm very curious where those customers think you're tracking their prints outside of that time clock. Unless there are magical fingerprint fairies that run around and dust every surface in America on a daily basis...........just can't see how this is even close to comparable to tracking your cell phone activity (which most of us have in our pockets 95% of the time.) So agreed, what a shitty example, but not surprising from the crooked fucks in DC.
 
Tyler-Durden said:
If a Republican were in the Oval Office, that ass-hat would be in a SuperMax prison... after at least a year of congressional hearings and media outrage.
Click to expand...

republicans and democrats are two sides of the same coin. it doesn't matter who is in charge because the political system is flawed fundamentally if every politician is on the payroll of some corporation.
 
Tyler-Durden said:
If a Republican were in the Oval Office, that ass-hat would be in a SuperMax prison... after at least a year of congressional hearings and media outrage.
Click to expand...

Not... sure... if... serious....?



The last republican in the whitehouse authorized torture and extrajudical killings, and extraordinary renderings to hostile nations, of both enemy combatants and unarmed foreign civilians. Not to mention the wars he started without congressional approval.


Bush and some of his top advisers should, very reasonably, be rotting in a jail cell for treason and war crimes at this very moment. I will never argue that Obama has been a good president, but claiming that a republican would have done better just because they are a republican... thats ridiculous. Republicans will continue to loose elections because republicans don't understand this point.


the entire Republican platform is "make the other guy look like shit, so when we stand next to him, we dont look nearly as bad".

If im trying to get the sociopaths OUT of the government... im certainly not going to vote republican, at current.
 
Steve said:
Wasn't this the guy that told the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence that the government doesn't spy on us?
Click to expand...

Yes, but he's trying to scare everyone into thinking this is what's needed to stop a 9/11. Last time I checked, we had information on an attack prior to 9/11. We just didn't act on it. We them spying on us to improve on those results.

That said, we could start by tossing this guy in jail. Lying to congress is a felony. I guess you have to play sports for that law to apply.
 
what i want to know is why this jackamole isnt rotting in jail for actually getting caught lying to congress whih is a gd felony
Click to expand...
What I want to know is why you don't know that lying to congress is only a felony if you are under oath.
 
Lying to congress is a felony. I guess you have to play sports for that law to apply.
Click to expand...
Not if you are not under oath.

Not if you are not under oath.

Not if you are not under oath.

Not if you are not under oath.

Not if you are not under oath.
 
Yes, but he's trying to scare everyone into thinking this is what's needed to stop a 9/11.
Click to expand...

No he isn't, he is trying to say that "At the time it was something we could do that could help us pick up on things like 9/11 before they happen again."

Is that too tough for you to figure out on your own, reading comprehension a challenge for you?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyler-Durden View Post
If a Republican were in the Oval Office, that ass-hat would be in a SuperMax prison... after at least a year of congressional hearings and media outrage.


Not... sure... if... serious....?
Click to expand...

Completely sure he is lost. There is no rational basis for this statement, none. It's silly.
 
The guy didn't take an oath when he took office?
Click to expand...

No idea, the position of DNI is by appointment I believe, but I don't know about an oath of office for the DNI.

But the oath I am referring to here is an Oath to tell the truth, the whole hand on the bible kind of thing. You and I can lie all we want to whoever we want, it's not perjury until we lie under oath in court, and then we go to jail. It's no different for the DNI. I still don't get the rage over this, a sitting US Congressman who is a member of the House Intelligence Committee ask Clapper a question to which he already knew the answer. There is only one reason he would have done this, he wanted to make the DNI look bad. Well to many Americans it worked, but that old bastard isn't fooling me with his tricks, maybe I should be DNI, but I doubt anyone will be offering. But I do wonder what it takes for people to see through a trick like this and hold the Congressman at fault for risking the unauthorized release of classified information in an open forum at the risk of causing harm to the nation for his personal political gain. I don't believe for one minute the Congressman did this for your's and my benefit. He did it to make George Clapper look bad and make himself look like a good guy. Hell if he knew this stuff to begin with and he is so concerned for American privacy, why wait till now to ask questions?

If you are fool enough to buy into the guy's trickery then you deserve everything you get in this world.
 
I shoulda said, "If anyone is fooled enough to buy into the guy's trickery then they deserve everything they get in this world."

Not singling you out Chockomonkey.
 
lcpiper said:
No idea, the position of DNI is by appointment I believe, but I don't know about an oath of office for the DNI.

But the oath I am referring to here is an Oath to tell the truth, the whole hand on the bible kind of thing. You and I can lie all we want to whoever we want, it's not perjury until we lie under oath in court, and then we go to jail. It's no different for the DNI. I still don't get the rage over this, a sitting US Congressman who is a member of the House Intelligence Committee ask Clapper a question to which he already knew the answer. There is only one reason he would have done this, he wanted to make the DNI look bad. Well to many Americans it worked, but that old bastard isn't fooling me with his tricks, maybe I should be DNI, but I doubt anyone will be offering. But I do wonder what it takes for people to see through a trick like this and hold the Congressman at fault for risking the unauthorized release of classified information in an open forum at the risk of causing harm to the nation for his personal political gain. I don't believe for one minute the Congressman did this for your's and my benefit. He did it to make George Clapper look bad and make himself look like a good guy. Hell if he knew this stuff to begin with and he is so concerned for American privacy, why wait till now to ask questions?

If you are fool enough to buy into the guy's trickery then you deserve everything you get in this world.
Click to expand...

You've brought this up in other threads. I looked at your sources and I believe what you are saying is true. Unfortunately, all political moves are made for the benefit of those making them, never the people. So I view his actions as an "IIWII" situation. There's nothing we can do to change this.

However, all this being true doesn't change the fact that the DNI did lie. Now, this is really what gets me:

Why the hell WASN'T he under oath? If he's being questioned in front of congress, you'd think that'd warrant the whole truth and nothing but the truth.=
 
lcpiper said:
No he isn't, he is trying to say that "At the time it was something we could do that could help us pick up on things like 9/11 before they happen again."

Is that too tough for you to figure out on your own, reading comprehension a challenge for you?
Click to expand...

Analysts already pointed out the info. There was no follow through. If analysts reported the exact same info today, we'd follow through.

There's always been the "I'm scared something bad could happen, we must give up liberties to be safe" people. You're one of them...or alternatively you work in the industry that makes money by propagating such paranoia. It's worked for decades, so it probably will continue to work, but I'm not buying it. 9/11 was a horrible thing, but bad shit happens. There are mass murderers among us, but that doesn't mean I want the police to gather info on everything everyone does so we can stop the relatively rare mass murderers/serial killers in the world.
 
lcpiper said:
No idea, the position of DNI is by appointment I believe, but I don't know about an oath of office for the DNI.

But the oath I am referring to here is an Oath to tell the truth, the whole hand on the bible kind of thing. You and I can lie all we want to whoever we want, it's not perjury until we lie under oath in court, and then we go to jail. It's no different for the DNI. I still don't get the rage over this, a sitting US Congressman who is a member of the House Intelligence Committee ask Clapper a question to which he already knew the answer. There is only one reason he would have done this, he wanted to make the DNI look bad. Well to many Americans it worked, but that old bastard isn't fooling me with his tricks, maybe I should be DNI, but I doubt anyone will be offering. But I do wonder what it takes for people to see through a trick like this and hold the Congressman at fault for risking the unauthorized release of classified information in an open forum at the risk of causing harm to the nation for his personal political gain. I don't believe for one minute the Congressman did this for your's and my benefit. He did it to make George Clapper look bad and make himself look like a good guy. Hell if he knew this stuff to begin with and he is so concerned for American privacy, why wait till now to ask questions?

If you are fool enough to buy into the guy's trickery then you deserve everything you get in this world.
Click to expand...

Your statement would hold far more weight if the Snowden papers had been released when he lied, but there wasn't.

Not if you are not under oath.
Click to expand...
He was under oath. I don't no why you claim otherwise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top