In terms of surveillance, which era of the US would you prefer to live in?

[Recursion]

It's not as if overturning FISA gets us a country with no surveillance; which time period has your preferred surveillance laws?

The protections offered by the 4th Amendment have to my knowledge only been asserted in the context of criminal defenses, so surveillance for purposes other than law enforcement is in an interesting legal position. FISA has problems, but simply dumping it doesn't necessarily make things better, because that law is all that limits the inherent executive surveillance powers.

0 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	1789-1978: Inherent Presidential powers of surveillance are unchecked (other than for law enforcement)
	0 (0%)
	1978-1979: Inherent Presidential powers limited by FISA
	0 (0%)
	1979-1986: The same, with the addition that metadata is no longer protected
	0 (0%)
	1986-2001: Metadata protected from surveillance by statute
	0 (0%)
	2001-2008: Metadata protections extended to computer traffic; inherent surveillance powers reasserted
	0 (0%)
	2008-present: Inherent surveillance powers rejected
	0 (0%)
	0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[think]

1. The one where private contractors with investors who bribe govt officials

aren't involved....

[Recursion]

2. Check out the history of the Hampton Roads lighthouse sometime

That started about 1789 or so.

[think]

3. A history of political bribery does not excuse it in the current day....

[think]

4. Why would you even deflect on such an issue as bribery?

[Recursion]

5. "Deflect"? *you're* the one who wanted to live in a time when contractors didn't bribe the gov't

And I pointed out that such a time never existed.

right back at you.

[think]

6. Do you feel the Carlyle Group should be allowed to own Booz Allen after bribing govt

officials?

[think]

8. I guess the question was too difficult....

[Recursion]

9. No I just think the question is dumb

If they're found guilty of bribery they should have whatever penalty the court directs. If not, I don't particularly think which group of rich people owns the company makes a huge difference

[think]

10. OK so you are fine with Carlyle Group owning Booz Allen despite the allegations.

Thank you.

[Recursion]

11. I'm not sure what "fine" means in your question

In general, I don't get to decide what other people do with their money.

[think]

12. And I'm not sure if you are ok with a company involved in bribery allegations

over seeing the spy network which collects meta data on Americans for the NSA.

The Carlyle Group paid a $20 million fine to make those charges go away.

I'm not trying to ask a trick question. I don't believe a company that has paid a $20 milion fine to make bribery charges go away should be allowed to own a private contractor that is spying for the NSA.

Do you believe they should or not? You answered whatever the courts decide.

So I guess you are ok with it as they are still doing it. But you are unwilling to make an opinion of your own as to whether it is right.

Do you think Snowden broke the law? Yes or No

Do you think Carlyle paid bribes to govt officials? Yes or no

Do you think a company that bribes govt officials is ethically compromised and should be barred from owning a company that oversees their collection of American citizen's meta data?

[Recursion]

13. I don't think allegations should deprive people of property (nt)

[think]

15. Did Snowden commit a crime? Did Carlyle pay a fine?

[Recursion]

16. Neither has had their guilt proven in court (nt)

[think]

17. Thank you for replying. I appreciate it. I'm trying to make a point as you know

and paying a $20 million dollar fine to avoid going to court on charges that they bribed a govt employee is quite revealing about a company.

Except for it won't be revealed as I'm sure part of the condition of the settlement with the state of New York would be that the facts of the matter be sealed and classified.

So yay. Pay a $20 million dollar fine to avoid bribery charges going to court while making billions collecting spy data for the NSA.

I see a conflict of interest based on serious unethical conduct and it appears that you don't.

[bemildred]

7. Other: the future, when we have outlawed all this paternalistic government horseshit. nt

[closeupready]

14. No offense, but stupid poll. I get it - your living depends on

the surveillance secret state, or your investments. You just keep trying too hard to convince liberals here not to be liberal. Ain't gonna work.