Surveillance

Carter Myers
Carter Myers

Holla Forums's views on surveillance?

Personally, I support surveillance because I want terrorists caught, and I don't care if the government can see my stupid text messages.

Daily reminder that if you oppose surveillance, you are literally in bed with whinging leftists who think that Trump is "literally Hitler":

theguardian.com/world/2016/nov/19/extreme-surveillance-becomes-uk-law-with-barely-a-whimper

Other urls found in this thread:

independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/terror-attack-foiled-final-hours-gchq-afghanistan-independent-reviewer-of-terrorism-legislation-a7200896.html
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Entry-Exit_Registration_System
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act
arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/04/what-besides-phone-records-does-the-nsa-bulk-collect/
nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2015/08/25/stingrays-used-to-track-petty-crime/

Joshua Harris
Joshua Harris

against commies, jews, muslims -sure

against normal white folk, no not really

Isaiah Stewart
Isaiah Stewart

Personally, I support surveillance because I want terrorists caught
GTFO

against commies, jews, muslims -sure
against normal white folk, no not really
you'll never be able to make that distinction, you fuckwit. my father thinks I'm a communist bc I think Wall Street is full of scheming kikes.

GTFO REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

Zachary Richardson
Zachary Richardson

Well obviously the surveillance will be on everyone.

BUT the important thing is what crimes people can be convicted of, after being surveilled. And that's what leftists ignore, because they're idiots.

People are not being arrested for texting a smiley face to their friend. They're being arrested for plotting terrorist attacks. So that's why I support surveillance.

Here's an instance of GCHQ (the UK's version of the NSA) foiling a terrorist plot:

independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/terror-attack-foiled-final-hours-gchq-afghanistan-independent-reviewer-of-terrorism-legislation-a7200896.html

Angel Wright
Angel Wright

I don't care if the government can see my text messages
I have nothing to hide!
Is this that "overton window shift" everyone keeps talking about?

Logan Thomas
Logan Thomas

We already have a shit ton of surveillance and it doesn't seem to stop the terror attacks.

And the law doesn't matter because fiveeyes nations give the data to Israel and let them do the digging, then they "voluntarily" give the needed intel back to us for kickbacks.

OP sounds pretty shilly

Dylan Price
Dylan Price

Congratulations, you are bedfellows with whinging leftists.

B-B-B-BUT TEH GUBBERMINT IS LITERALLY HITLER AND WILL ARREST JOURNOS FOR STANDING UP FOR MUH MINORITIES, WAH WAH WAH WAH

Yes it does stop terrorist attacks actually, here's an example:

independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/terror-attack-foiled-final-hours-gchq-afghanistan-independent-reviewer-of-terrorism-legislation-a7200896.html

Dominic Powell
Dominic Powell

Congratulations, you are bedfellows with whinging leftists.
I'd rather do that any day then run your spyware

Joseph Green
Joseph Green

You know what else would stop terror attacks? Not letting the cunts in to begin with and not destabilizing nations and intentionally importing their people to justify endless surveillance. Eat a cock

Henry Collins
Henry Collins

You're pathetic.

Enjoy Muhammad raping your daughter because WAH WAH I DON'T WANT THE GUBBERMINT READING MY INANE TEXT MESSAGES TO MY FELLOW LOSER LOLBERTARIANS, WAH WAH WAH

Christopher Gray
Christopher Gray

Woah watch that capslock you might scare someone!

Matthew Cooper
Matthew Cooper

I support surveillance because I want terrorists caught

Ryan Myers
Ryan Myers

Good goy, you don't want surveillance, just let Islamists kill your people!!! At least that lasagne recipe you emailed yourself will be safe from the evil prying eyes of the government!!!

Remember goy, surveillance is evil, you should ENCOURAGE Islamists to plot terrorist attacks because freedom of religion is sacred!!!

Jacob Turner
Jacob Turner

Against mass surveillance altogther, but it'll happen and is happening anyway. You''ve already had NSA analysts with multi-colored hair grinning to xirselves as they flick through photos of your girlfriend for the past 8 years or so. If you knew half the shit NSA/CIA/GCHQ were up to and the capabilities they have, there would be marches on their buildings tomorrow.

Luis Cook
Luis Cook

Who are you quoting?

Jaxson Lopez
Jaxson Lopez

Personally, I support surveillance because I want terrorists caught

Tyler Scott
Tyler Scott

Personally, I support surveillance because I want terrorists caught,

Modern free software is fully capable of encrypting anything in such way it does not get decrypted. How do you fix that? Block all encrypted messages or what?

Logan Morales
Logan Morales

I think that the NSA should be open sourced so that all information is available to everyone and therefore we live in a society of absolute truth.

Elijah White
Elijah White

We seem to be talking about surveillance without a warrant. It's by definition unwarranted, is it not? But I'm not opposed considering we live in a multicultural society and the people within that society are being bombarded with commie jew propaganda on all fronts. Warranted surveillance has been used by LE and alphabet for years and years and is, well, warranted unless you're some teenage anarchist.

Christopher Sanchez
Christopher Sanchez

How do you fix that?
You don't need to when over 95 percent of the population are wincucks.

Noah Ramirez
Noah Ramirez

If we just got rid of the mud people, we wouldn't need the security state..

Leo Gray
Leo Gray

What do you mean? Every Windows copy includes root certificates which make almost any decryption impossible.

Liam Martinez
Liam Martinez

You

Good goy, there's nothing wrong with 9/11! You deserve it for being evil white people! We must allow Islamists to plot terrorist attacks, they are people of peace!

Shitskins are too thick to do that, and GCHQ has said multiple times they have foiled terrorist attacks from being able to access communications of suspected terrorists.

You - 0
Me - 1

So in the meantime we should just let them plot terrorist attacks against our people?

Elijah Wilson
Elijah Wilson

muh goverment that imports millions of savages will save us from those savages, we just need to give muh goverment total power above every aspect of our life

enjoy FEMA camp

Austin Phillips
Austin Phillips

I never posted that though

Every Windows copy includes root certificates
They also include backdoors and spyware, windows 10 is nothing but a big keylogger for M$.

Gabriel James
Gabriel James

support surveillance because you want terrorists caught
dont care if the government look at your "silly" text messages
How have you arrived at this conclusion lad? You would allow TPTB to read your private messages to your wife or girlfriend in order to prevent suicide bombers? Blanket monitoring of white peoples phones would stop very, very few terrorist attacks. White people are smart enough to do it off the grid tbh.

Ethan Wright
Ethan Wright

most terrorist attacks are done by or greenlighted by western intelligence. if you arent a shill you are really stupid (you should just kys)

Sebastian Phillips
Sebastian Phillips

plus every Intel processor since mid 2006 has that Management Engine bullshit (bascially an internet-connected hardware backdoor)

AMD has their Platform Security Processor since 2013, which is the same thing

Julian Evans
Julian Evans

Good job responding to shitposts and meme's and completely ignoreing the only post in this thread that has made an actual point.

Unless you can refute this statement go shove a cactus up your ass kike.

Ryder Barnes
Ryder Barnes

lets throw out the fourth and fifth amendments

No.

Eli Cox
Eli Cox

This too. The whole expansion of intrusive snoop-security is partly from social cohesion taking a nose-dive and from us getting entangled in foreign conflicts that we shouldn't have bothered with. Then you have the inevitable mass society effect were hardly anybody knows each other and the improvements in technology.

End result is government doesn't trust the peple, who don't trust each other or the government, who face increased threats and have an increased capability to monitor everything. The natural consequences ensue.

Caleb Parker
Caleb Parker

Warranted surveillance has been used by LE and alphabet for years and years and is, well, warranted unless you're some teenage anarchist.
Exactly my point. People against surveillance are usually children who don't understand that these tools are used by intelligence agencies to prevent terrorist attacks.

We seem to be talking about surveillance without a warrant. It's by definition unwarranted, is it not?
To be honest, I wouldn't want a warrant process to hold up the authorities from doing their job and stopping a terrorist attack.

People try and mock this argument because they're delusional, conspiracy theorist, hyperbolic nutjobs who can't deal in facts and reality, but I will say it anyway: if you have done nothing wrong then you have nothing to hide.

Unless someone can give me cases of people being thrown in jail for dissenting political opinions, or other non-criminal activity, as a result of surveillance, then I will continue to support surveillance until the day I die.

You realise it's the left that imports the shitskins, and the right that sends them back and surveils them, right?

Or are you literally too fucking thick to realise this?

Things that Bush passed that a) vetted Muslims, and b) surveilled them:

a) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Entry-Exit_Registration_System
b) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act

Parker Mitchell
Parker Mitchell

invoking muh 9/11
as a reason for more centralization of power/control
kys m80

Luke Garcia
Luke Garcia

Surveillance in the current state of things may seem cool to you, surveillance in a neo USSR may not be of your taste, or it may be, fagget.
Sage.

Christian Bailey
Christian Bailey

This user said /gaymer gayte/ prevented terrorist attacks, he's clearly just (((pretending))) to be retarded.

Brayden Mitchell
Brayden Mitchell

This smells like a new shill tactic. With more surveillance this place would serve no purpose, fuck you op

Dominic Gomez
Dominic Gomez

would serve no purpose
I thought this places purpose was being a honeypot all along

Ryan Lewis
Ryan Lewis

You realise it's the left that imports the shitskins, and the right that sends them back and surveils them, right?

Sure Haim. I will just ignore there is no "left" and "right" anymore because goal of power structure is only one and they just use different hagelian retoric. I will too ignore that there is no diffrence to me if i'm spied upon by "left" or "right".

Asher Hughes
Asher Hughes

Definitely a shill
muzzies did 911:DDDD
Sage ad report shill threads

Luis Garcia
Luis Garcia

They already do surveil us and they already do prevent terrorist attacks

Picture and link related

independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/terror-attack-foiled-final-hours-gchq-afghanistan-independent-reviewer-of-terrorism-legislation-a7200896.html

Good goy, continue to believe in conspiracy theories so that you ignore the problems of reality!

I responded to it here you fucking moron:

Aaron Rivera
Aaron Rivera

Most of us could be charged with a (((crime))) based soley on our posts online.
Free speech and the right to privacy goes hand in hand.
I will always be against mass surveillance, targeted surveillance i agree with.

Jordan Ross
Jordan Ross

So in the meantime we should just let them plot terrorist attacks against our people?
The major issue I see with the security system as it exists is that it enables anarcho-tyranny. The authorities occasionally stop terrorist acts from being perpetrated by the invaders, but the very fact that security personnel exist whose job that is prevents the native populace from taking our safety and that of our posterity into our own hands. It would be better to have less law enforcement from the federal and state governments and leave the job to communities.

Matthew Jackson
Matthew Jackson

there are people on Holla Forums during the weekend that support unwarranted spying

Aaron Adams
Aaron Adams

Surveillance in the current state of things

is above everything that KGB could dream of.

Aiden Kelly
Aiden Kelly

The main concerns from mass surveillance can be packaged into two main points - that of false perception and that of future consequence engendered from mass collection.

While it is obviously of great benefit to those who would otherwise be affected by the actions of nefarious groups and individuals, to a certain degree the supression of "natural outcomes" from both the quality and quantity of immigrants implies to the sleeeping masses that the problems immigrants bring with them are far lower than they actually are, or at least, in propensity. Keep in mind that the unmeasurable effects from such individuals go hand in hand with the more evident effects. Propagation of such is skewed to a massive degree because of this. "What's the problem?" the sleeping masses ask, "I've not seen or heard of any of these immigrants doing anything bad lately." A dangerous game to play for any Western society.

The second concern, of more pertinence on a personal level, considers the hypothetical whereby, subject to the perspective of the individual, a nefarious government, government agency or entity with access to such information can find "a use" for it to advance their goals. For those of the perspective that is consitent with the majority who frequent this board, you might wish to consider the prospect of where the next refugee centre is to be built. Or if you foresee an extreme Left-wing or even a Conservative government in the future, where those with "incompatible" perspectives and beliefs live and work.

Many people find a certain comfort in anonymity/invisibility.

Andrew Morris
Andrew Morris

the right that sends them back
lel that doesn't happen.

Ryan Long
Ryan Long

If we wouldn't let in kikes, muslims, or other non-europeans, and would uncuck our country, there would be no need for surveillance in the first place, except surveillance on other countries. If there is a problem, you pick it by the root.

Current surveillance is NOT in favour of nationalists or our people, and therefore not even considered to be positive as it is.

Jackson Wood
Jackson Wood

We are not playing that game here kike. Take your political doublespeak back to 4land.

Evan Wright
Evan Wright

and the right that sends them back
Things that Bush passed
like the Dreamer program

Anthony Rivera
Anthony Rivera

Good goy, continue to believe in conspiracy theories so that you ignore the problems of reality!

1 shekel deposited

Adam Fisher
Adam Fisher

For actual citizens, get a warrant or fuck off.
Foreigners are fair game.

Justin Allen
Justin Allen

Hei rabbi, are you beginning to learn our speech? It seems like you completely ignored to stdy our values. Reported for being a shill

James Jenkins
James Jenkins

How is capturing my text and emails going to prevent my supposed daughter from being raped by a shitskin?
The mass surveillance is not to prevent shit from happening, it is so (((they))) can charge you with a crime for anything you've said and done after you became a thorn in their side.

Gavin Smith
Gavin Smith

So, my country spies on your country and your country spies on my country and then we become buddies and share intel? What is the difference?

Cooper Howard
Cooper Howard

kys for the fallacy, direct link, no archive, and plebian position.

I don't need surveillance to keep me safe because I am smarter and better armed (because my ancestors left bongistan), especially to the low-iq shitskins and commie scum, most of whom wouldn't exist in except the government encourages them. 'FBI foils FBI terror plot' exists for a reason.

Ian Miller
Ian Miller

But I thought Trump was breaking away from the EU and UN. :^)

Chase Baker
Chase Baker

How is capturing my text and emails going to prevent my supposed daughter from being raped by a shitskin?
It'll stop you or anyone else talking about it after the fact (which is hate speech!). If a tree falls in the woods with noone to hear it does it make a sound?

Gavin Nelson
Gavin Nelson

Hey OP, have you watch camera surveillance man?

Jace Flores
Jace Flores

In theory, that sounds good. In practice, international intelligence sharing makes it irrelevant.

Benjamin Evans
Benjamin Evans

Good goy, Islam is a religion of peace! We should let them plot terrorist attacks, because the privacy of your emoji text messages to your friends is more important than the lives of white people! White people deserve it for being evil colonialists!

It's not the surveillance that was wrong with the USSR - it was the fact that they criminalised dissenting political opinion, whether they captured it by surveillance or any other means.

What's criminalised is important. The method of law enforcement isn't, in my opinion.

You realise there's nothing to stop law enforcement from literally coming on Holla Forums and reading any thread they want, right?

You are literally morons

Unless you have sent messages plotting terrorist attacks, or have in some other way flagged yourself with suspicious/criminal behaviour, then they've likely never spied on you at all.

Kevin Williams
Kevin Williams

No, foreign nationals in your country. America shouldn't be spying on all the Chinese in China (the government and big corporations over there are reasonable targets), but it damn well should be spying on Chinese in America.

Elijah Williams
Elijah Williams

They also include backdoors and spyware, windows 10 is nothing but a big keylogger for M$.

That said, one cannot search all computers using that backdoor, it is targeted tool only.

Gabriel Adams
Gabriel Adams

Personally, I support surveillance because I want terrorists caught, and I don't care if the government can see my stupid text messages.

You fagot, if you don't let Muslims into the country there wont be any terrorism.

Chase Young
Chase Young

829881

Mods, do your job this shill has become completely obvious now, no need to hold the ban

Josiah Parker
Josiah Parker

That i can get behind.

Adam Wilson
Adam Wilson

I support surveillance
"He who would trade freedom for comfort deserves neither."

KILL YOURSELF.

Easton Harris
Easton Harris

Surveillance is good! It's the only way to ensure our cont- er, I mean to catch those pesky terrorists! Without constant monitoring you'll surely be killed by muslims in the street, and your wife and daughters will surely be raped! Just look at how much of that was prevented in the UK thanks to the use of CCTV! Add some mandatory spyware on every computer and phone and there will never be a terrorist attack again!

You don't have anything to hide anyway!

Oliver Wilson
Oliver Wilson

It's not the surveillance that was wrong with the USSR - it was the fact that they criminalised dissenting political opinion
criminalised dissenting political opinion

It's only reason there was survilance program in SU, and it's only reasen there is such program in west. "Wrog naroda" was just real as "jihadi terrorist".

Unless you have sent messages plotting terrorist attacks, or have in some other way flagged yourself with suspicious/criminal behaviour, then they've likely never spied on you at all.

Now they made everything a crime. Or they can just fabricate any proof they need. And all internet and phone traffic is analised and stored.

arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/04/what-besides-phone-records-does-the-nsa-bulk-collect/

Charles Gomez
Charles Gomez

Speaking of backwards ideas, what the fuck is the TV tax?

Carter Morales
Carter Morales

I will always be against mass surveillance, targeted surveillance i agree with.

Hard to see where you draw the line though. Personally I don't mind if the government can access my communications, because I know they have better things to do. I would only be worried if I was committing serious crime and flagging myself to the authorities.

You could say they should need a warrant / permission from a court to surveil someone, with good reasons for doing so. Yeah maybe, but that could prove to be a critical delay in a rapidly unfolding terrorist attack.

but the very fact that security personnel exist whose job that is prevents the native populace from taking our safety and that of our posterity into our own hands. It would be better to have less law enforcement from the federal and state governments and leave the job to communities.

So, vigilantism? Hm, maybe. As long as were actually enforcing laws, and not breaking others.

Levi Wright
Levi Wright

because the privacy of your emoji text messages to your friends is more important than the lives of white people

Yes, my liberty is more important.

Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

Brayden Gonzalez
Brayden Gonzalez

pic related

All I can say from reading the thread is that you want the government to use surveillance in order to solve a government created problem, melding in foreign affairs and letting in rapefugees.

Ryder Moore
Ryder Moore

Wow you sure care a lot about unwarranted surveillance for someone who so plainly doesn't know very much about the situation….almost like you are being paid to push this shit opinion.

Alexander Cook
Alexander Cook

what does Holla Forums think of /x/
sage

Ayden Nguyen
Ayden Nguyen

You realise there's nothing to stop law enforcement from literally coming on Holla Forums and reading any thread they want, right?
You are literally morons
And they can get your IP address to right and geolocations too right? I'm using a VPN regardless but enjoy your complete ignorance

Brayden Lewis
Brayden Lewis

Islamic terrorism in 2001 was a farce, 911 was an inside job and today's terrorism is happening because cucks and kikes won't close the borders an kick out immigrants.
Also everyone can read what's written here, but without savage surveillance it can't be tracked.

Now I'm responding just because there are newfriends lurking, obviously it's useless discussing with a shill.

Jonathan Jenkins
Jonathan Jenkins

I'm still not seeing a solid argument against not allowing nonwhites in your country as a means of preventing terrorism.

Aaron Gonzalez
Aaron Gonzalez

Hey OP, I want to ask your opinion on something:
What do you think of the idea of the police randomly entering any house they want, whether you are there or not and ransack the entire place with no warrant in order to search for bombs/plans for terrorist attacks. If you are there they will, of course, ask you to unlock your phone in order to read all your messages. If you are walking on the streets they will stop you, and politely ask you to take off your clothes and bend over so that they could search for explosive materials or weapons in your asshole as well as in your pockets and bags. Of course this is all to stop criminals and after they searched the place, if they have time, might put everything back as it was. I think that if you have nothing to hide or if you haven't done anything wrong, there is nothing to fear, it's all for your protection.

Nolan Russell
Nolan Russell

Obviously because these are CTR cucks enacting their post election b plan, thinking they can disrupt us, thinking theyca poison the well. We aare many, but in our hearts we are one

Hudson Morales
Hudson Morales

has a single person agreed with OP?

checked, kids are too scared to come here during school

Jackson Adams
Jackson Adams

While it is obviously of great benefit to those who would otherwise be affected by the actions of nefarious groups and individuals, to a certain degree the supression of "natural outcomes" from both the quality and quantity of immigrants implies to the sleeeping masses that the problems immigrants bring with them are far lower than they actually are, or at least, in propensity. Keep in mind that the unmeasurable effects from such individuals go hand in hand with the more evident effects. Propagation of such is skewed to a massive degree because of this. "What's the problem?" the sleeping masses ask, "I've not seen or heard of any of these immigrants doing anything bad lately." A dangerous game to play for any Western society.

So we should let terrorists commit their acts to show people how dangerous Islamists really are? Hm, maybe. As someone who has lived in a city where terrorist attacks have happened, though, and where I am sure they will continue to be a threat, I think I might just prefer if the authorities did their job and took these cunts out.

The second concern, of more pertinence on a personal level, considers the hypothetical whereby, subject to the perspective of the individual, a nefarious government, government agency or entity with access to such information can find "a use" for it to advance their goals. For those of the perspective that is consitent with the majority who frequent this board, you might wish to consider the prospect of where the next refugee centre is to be built. Or if you foresee an extreme Left-wing or even a Conservative government in the future, where those with "incompatible" perspectives and beliefs live and work.
Many people find a certain comfort in anonymity/invisibility.

Yes I understand this is a common concern. But surely this has more to do with the people that you are voting for, and what they would criminalise, rather than the methods of surveillance themselves.

I would probably be more concerned if law enforcement was arresting people, en masse, for petty crimes that were discovered through surveillance. But that isn't happening. And even if it were… just don't commit the crime.

Luis Green
Luis Green

Because this is a shill thread. OP is, without a doubt, a paid shill.

Connor Hernandez
Connor Hernandez

Hey OP, I really want to know what you think about this

Connor Wright
Connor Wright

Sure are a lot of non-archive links to leftist MSM sites.

Alexander Nelson
Alexander Nelson

one cannot search all computers using that backdoor
one cannot search all emails to form customer profiles and drive targeted advertisement
big data analytics aren't a thing
Jewgle et al. know your sex, age, education, where you live/work/shop/hang out, who your friends are, what you text and probably what you talk over the phone, what books you've read/sites you've visited/games you play. All this is compiled into a list of bad goyim to be singled out for escalated surveilance. An actual agent is only assigned to you once you've proven sufficently "interesting," so they can effectively monitor hundreds of millions of people with a reasonablely small number of people.
tv tax
the television license, it's a 150 GBP / year tax on pretty much every television set in the country, which goes to fund the (((BBC))).

Owen Collins
Owen Collins

Mass deportation of these people is not going to happen in the near future. Therefore, I support surveillance for the purposes of stopping terrorist attacks.

has literally no argument
Kektop

You're invading my safe space with your different opinions! Waaaaahhhhhh!!!!!!!!!
Lol

The mass surveillance is not to prevent shit from happening, it is so (((they))) can charge you with a crime for anything you've said and done after you became a thorn in their side.
When has that ever happened? Meanwhile, intelligence agencies have prevented terrorist attacks:

independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/terror-attack-foiled-final-hours-gchq-afghanistan-independent-reviewer-of-terrorism-legislation-a7200896.html

I've provided evidence of what I think surveillance is used for. Now you need to provide evidence for your claims.

Adam Kelly
Adam Kelly

This is no longer a safe space, there's cuckchan for that, go back there, this is now a pillar of thought.

Mods where are you?

Dominic Lewis
Dominic Lewis

First point - speaking in the short-term it invariably leads to a negative outcome, yet the outcome from non-suppression at least provides a stronger long-term position.

Second point - the concern is most salient with regards to retroactive criminality. The hypothetical "thought-criminality" that such topics might be categorised under could very well mark every name on the Right in the decades to come. What the law is today is not necessarily to be the law of tomorrow.

Liam Ross
Liam Ross

This is no longer a safe space

And yet you want dissenting opinions banned :^)

Josiah Clark
Josiah Clark

m8 let's be serious for a moment. Does someone pay you for this shit or do you do it for free?

I wonder how much he's getting per reply

Aaron Thompson
Aaron Thompson

Remember to sage and report

David Bell
David Bell

What do you think about

Cameron Collins
Cameron Collins

Personally, I support surveillance because I want terrorists caught

No, fuck surveillance, we REMOVE terrorists.

Dominic Bell
Dominic Bell

this is gonna be abused worse than your mom on her daily grocery shopping routine when she forgets her burka

Caleb Sullivan
Caleb Sullivan

End the NSA and the useless Dept. of Homeland Security.

Power corrupts, information is power, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Ayden Peterson
Ayden Peterson

lolbertarian meems xD
muh libertyyyyy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hilarious. Have any of you ever read Hobbes?

Liberty, or freedom, signifieth properly the absence of opposition (by opposition, I mean external impediments of motion)
Leviathan, 21.1

But as men, for the attaining of peace and conservation of themselves thereby, have made an artificial man, which we call a Commonwealth; so also have they made artificial chains, called civil laws, which they themselves, by mutual covenants, have fastened at one end to the lips of that man, or assembly, to whom they have given the sovereign power, and at the other to their own ears. These bonds, in their own nature but weak, may nevertheless be made to hold, by the danger, though not by the difficulty of breaking them.
Leviathan, 21.5

In short - the state is necessarily an impediment upon freedom and liberty.

Then again you guys are probably dirty an-cap scum so whatever.

I just checked and I'm pretty sure archiving isn't a rule. But if it is then please point me to the rule.

Ryan Adams
Ryan Adams

The mods really should teach this faggot a lesson in authoritarianism and permaban him for obvious shilling.

Brandon Torres
Brandon Torres

I think that will never happen is what I think.

You've got to think about it realistically. Surveillance tools are being used by GCHQ to stop terrorist plots. Not to arrest people for petty crimes.

Sure, I guess the police could get over-zealous. If that happens then I'll oppose it. But I don't think current surveillance techniques are over-zealous, and everyone that they catch with them is a serious criminal. So not only am I okay with it, I actively want it. I don't want terrorists flouting our laws and killing our people.

Camden Butler
Camden Butler

WAH WAH WAH GET OUT OF MY SAFE SPAAAAAACE

ALTERNATIVE OPINIONS NOT ALLOOWWWWEEEDDDDD

Kek.

Jordan Walker
Jordan Walker

how new are you?

their moms are taking them to the mall

Andrew Ortiz
Andrew Ortiz

Back to /liberty/index.html, lolbertarian cuck.

Jaxon Thompson
Jaxon Thompson

in order to be safe we need to give someone the monopoly of force in order to use force on us so that nobody else can use force on us, so that we might live safely in peace

Surveillance tools are being used by GCHQ to stop terrorist plots. Not to arrest people for petty crimes.
The scenario wasn't to arrest people of petty crimes, but to find terrorists. Who knows maybe they are so smart that they don't use phones and the internet. In order to stop them shouldn't the police enter every house, or at least randomly in order to search for bombs? Practicality, shouldn't be the concern. Maybe in the near future the state can create a device that if implanted in a person's brain will send the thoughts of that person to a computer that will search for any thoughts of terrorism. Of course such a thing should be mandatory, and if you refuse to put a listening device in your brain, then you are just a terrorist.

Caleb Watson
Caleb Watson

If that happens
Then it is too late. You don't choose to leap to the "what if" scenario. That's fine; I reject the vast majority that come my way. The problem with this particular one is that it is categorically in the State's interest to do so (any State, for that matter), and the veil of secrecy as to the detail of such surveillance provides an almost total freedom to do so. When you speak of mass arrests, such a system would be unlikely to roll out for minor crimes, this goes without saying. But, to put myself in the position of an overly zealous Liberal leader, I see little stopping me from collecting every single piece of information from those that don't support my position. I can use it to smear your name all over the media if you become a prominent figure in society, I could perhaps even set the police on you if they find some naughty words you posted on a social media site.

I don't like it. If you do, fine, it's entirely your choice. Chalk it up as paranoia.

Luke Hughes
Luke Hughes

This is a great bait thread op, you really got everyone mad with your retarded and enraging opinions. Make sure to keep it up and call me a fag or a lolbertarian so people know I'm wrong.

Sebastian Gutierrez
Sebastian Gutierrez

in order to be safe we need to give someone the monopoly of force in order to use force on us so that nobody else can use force on us, so that we might live safely in peace

Yes, the reason people agree to live in a state is because it provides a degree of protection. We trade some of our freedoms (e.g. the freedom to kill others) in order to have other freedoms protected (the freedom to not be killed by others)

Perhaps you prefer anarchism. It would be very brutal though. And even though I think it might be good to have survival of the fittest, I just don't think that anarchism on any large scale is ever going to happen.

Maybe in the near future the state can create a device that if implanted in a person's brain will send the thoughts of that person to a computer that will search for any thoughts of terrorism. Of course such a thing should be mandatory, and if you refuse to put a listening device in your brain, then you are just a terrorist.

I wouldn't support that degree of surveillance, no.

But I don't think our current level of surveillance is excessive.

What would your solution to terrorists be then? Just let them commit terrorist attacks?

Jack Reed
Jack Reed

In a White ethnostate I would be 100% all surveillance. In the multi-culti hell hole we live in today I'm ok with keeping an eye on the muds in public.

That being said shit is only going to get much worse. We've been living on borrowed time with a CIA/NSA etc. that are made up almost entirely of white males. Just wait until muds and kikettes weasel their way in through (((diversity))) programs. Then the surveillance state will truly be used against you. I don't know which will be first the US balkanizing or muds gaining control of the surveillance apparatus. The latter may be a pre-cursor to the former.

Landon Cooper
Landon Cooper

I only called someone a lolbertarian because it was pretty clear to me that they were a lolbertarian

Ethan Nguyen
Ethan Nguyen

you dont need surveillance in a homogenous white society

Colton Martinez
Colton Martinez

I almost wondered if you are another schizophrenic iteration of sperg/k/raut, but even he isn't this stupid

[citation needed]

Lucas Ross
Lucas Ross

Damn i got baited hard by OP. I thought he was just misinformed/retarded.
Sage/report this fagit

Xavier Jenkins
Xavier Jenkins

And I only called your opinions retarded because you're mentally deficient. It's a beautiful Saturday here, I'm not sure about where you are, why not go outside and now your moms boyfriends lawn? Once you finish you can do everyone a favor and stick your head in the blades.

Kayden Adams
Kayden Adams

How much computer plotting needs to happen to decide to build a few small bombs and load a gun? A lot of the coordinated stuff is probably disposable phones or hushed talk at a mosque, kebab house. These people personally know each other a lot of the time. The kind of communication you might get is vague encrypted messages about meeting somewhere etc at best 'delivery' or 'shipment'. Is that even actionable intelligence?

I think the push for surveillance is out of a feeling of impotence from intelligence agencies to actually stop terrorism.

oh we know what we're doing if we had just had these tools we didn't have we could have stopped it

Hacking random people's computers is going to uncover actionable intelligence? I don't know how many would be terrorists draw up battle plans in MS paint and leave them sitting on their desktop. Is that how people think it might work?

Getting contact information from cellphones and email, I thought they could already do that.

What's the point and what are they actually targeting? In Germany and other parts of Europe we know the government has framed nationalist political organizations as terrorists. So it might be for suppression of rival political parties by globalist cucks at the CIA etc

My opinion on it is they are doing a ton of surveillance for nothing, they themselves aren't getting much out of it in terms of intelligence. But they're setting up the surveillance tools and infrastructure that will be used in an abusive way by a 1984-esque regime , (for those who didn't read the book people were under 24/7 surveillance for signs of any sort of aberration from an extremely restrictive set of 'approved' behaviors including vocabulary usage - there we shrinking lists of approved words published you could speak or think in unapproved language .. leftist political correctness but more evolved).

Xavier Howard
Xavier Howard

He hit just the right level I knew it was bait but I still couldn't help myself

Isaiah Johnson
Isaiah Johnson

the state is necessarily an impediment upon freedom and liberty

No. And it's Hobbes opinion. And even if you follow this logic, 4th Amendment was included to protect you from unreasonable searches and seizures by overreaching state.

Then again you guys are probably dirty an-cap scum so whatever.

Nice ad hominem.

muh liberty

Safety is nothing without liberty. You can be perfectly safe - maybe goverment should lock you in cell with CCTV and give you food and water. You will be perfectly safe. At least until they decide to with you anything they want.

You've got to think about it realistically. Surveillance tools are being used by GCHQ to stop terrorist plots

nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2015/08/25/stingrays-used-to-track-petty-crime/

I'm sure that brit pigs don't do it.

Benjamin Martinez
Benjamin Martinez

Then it is too late. You don't choose to leap to the "what if" scenario.

Then you may as well just advocate anarchism.

Every society is a balance between freedoms and laws. I think the current balance with surveillance is pretty good. I want criminals to be punished. If I have to live by these fucking laws then I want to make sure shitskin scum have to live by them too.

Jayden Price
Jayden Price

Then you may as well just advocate anarchism
That kind of black and white thinking serves little purpose and is disappointing to read.

Andrew Evans
Andrew Evans

I wouldn't support that degree of surveillance, no.
Then you are in bed with the terrorists. If you have done nothing wrong, then there is no problem with the police reading all your thoughts. Them knowing that you like pizza more than hamburgers, or that you prefer blonds to redheads is the price people should pay in order to stop Ahmed from raping your daughter.

Colton Garcia
Colton Garcia

in order to stop Ahmed from raping your daughter.
And are you then happy with the police reading that? If you live in Glasgow, UK or anywhere in Germany, you could already be in trouble.

Connor Ortiz
Connor Ortiz

Surveillance on everyone is already the reality - NSA knows you like to post cartoon frogs on a melanesian ragdoll forum. Now, whether any of the data is admissible in court or even actionable? That's the issue, and I don't think anyone will be tried for the bullshit posted here. It would be absurd, just imagine the hearings
so you posted this meme?
yes sir
and this meme is?
it's a frog that supports the white nationalism
what significance does this "meme" have?
well I just like posting it every once in a while
for what purpose?
because I think the frog represents my frustration at the modern world
CASE DISMISSED
CASE IS SO FUCKING DISMISSED

Charles Nguyen
Charles Nguyen

You said "how new are you?" here:

To me it seemed you were implying everyone on Holla Forums is a lolbertarian, which isn't true. Go back to /liberty/index.html for that.

the state is necessarily an impediment upon freedom and liberty
No.
Er, yes. Yes it is. That is indisputable. A society is necessarily impinges upon freedom by having laws, which curtail your freedom to perform certain actions.

Whether you agree with the state, or whether you're a libertarian, is irrelevant. The state IS necessarily an impediment upon freedom. You can't argue against that. (but do try if you must, it will amuse me.)

ad hominem
I'm not going to engage with lolbertarianism because it's irrelevant to the point, and because it doesn't deserve discussion in my opinion.

But you employed exactly the same black and white thinking by saying that I can't select where the buck stops, and that if I accept current surveillance, that necessarily means I have to accept more dramatic surveillance.

You were the one who made it black or white, and I was just pointing that out.

Benjamin Jackson
Benjamin Jackson

I am just using OP's arguments in order to justify a system too extreme even for him, but which is the logical conclusion of him wanting the state to protect the people from terrorists

Anthony Price
Anthony Price

how new are you referencing
I just checked and I'm pretty sure archiving isn't a rule

Jacob Brooks
Jacob Brooks

I don't know how many would be terrorists draw up battle plans in MS paint and leave them sitting on their desktop

I'm loath to say anything for mass surveillance, but honestly you'd be surprised. Iirc There was a pair of Islamic would-be terrorists caught in the UK because they were making explosives IRL and talking about targets on Twitter. Given that kind of stupidity it's entirely plausible for authorities to think that the next Anders Breivik may well have his battle plans sitting around on his desktop.

But this "they are doing a ton of surveillance for nothing" is 100% true. It'll always be justified by that 1 in a million times the intrusion actually enables them to disrupt terrorism and save lives though. The vast majority of it is plain snooping and disruptive tactics which btw may extend to various forms of harassment.

Certainly if you're a Holla Forums regular don't think for a moment they haven't hacked into your webcam, your phone, read your emails and generally delved into every detail of who you are that was available to them. I don't want to go completely tin-foil here, but the Snowden revelations are the least interesting of all the stuff they're up to and can do.

Jason Rivera
Jason Rivera

saying that I can't select where the buck stops
I don't read that into anything I said; moreover it is the state in control of such a system that decides where the buck stops. You're nothing more than an economic blip on the map. You decide nothing other than a vote on occasion. It would be healthy for you to accept that.

On top of that, black and white scenario building is quite different from black and white conclusions.

Leo Williams
Leo Williams

You're a moron, OP. A simplistic little bitch who looks at government as some sort of daddy figure that you depend on for everything including your security. I feel no need to clue you in to anything. You're clearly an unread, dummy.

Jacob Ward
Jacob Ward

muh lolbertarian

Hi stormag

Er, yes. Yes it is. That is indisputable.

Ho it is indisputable? And why I would need state to impeding on my liberty?

I'm not going to engage with lolbertarianism because it's irrelevant to the point, and because it doesn't deserve discussion in my opinion.

You doing it again.

Wyatt Campbell
Wyatt Campbell

mass surveillance prevents terror attacks (by muslims)
[citation FUCKING needed]

Leo Thompson
Leo Thompson

according to government

Jaxon Morgan
Jaxon Morgan

Anders Breivik
That's actually a good example of what the authorities are looking for

Liam Butler
Liam Butler

If you're not with us, you're with the terrorists
Hello NSA

Austin Gomez
Austin Gomez

your either a troll, or retarded

apply your stance on guns
to your fucking privacy in your own home, on your own property

the government has no right to track what you do on the internet, before the mass surveillance state that we exist in today there was such a thing as probable cause. also why does the government need to know when you google about which toothbrush to buy?

they fucking dont. any intelligent individual would oppose mass surveillance.

Landon Rivera
Landon Rivera

In a white, free society we wouldn't need it.

Brayden Morris
Brayden Morris

It's a massive double edged sword.
The globalist left wanted to use the US alphabet soup against us, and now they and their golems will end up on the receiving end.
Just know that if we are okay with this, there is no going back. We cannot lose any election after this.
Any takeover by the globalist of the surveillance networks would pose an existential threat, and would without doubt ensure civil war.

Isaac Stewart
Isaac Stewart

I love the government having 24/7, 4K, live feeds of my colon. Sometimes it feels good to be watched.
Just as long as it's a Trump government.

Angel Garcia
Angel Garcia

our government is ran by traitorous whites along with kikes. fuck the nsa i hope they all burn alive.

Alexander Hughes
Alexander Hughes

MASS SURVEILLANCE WILL ALWAYS PRIMARILY BE USED AGAINST US, AS LONG AS (((THEY))) ARE IN POWER=

Thomas Adams
Thomas Adams

"existential threat" exactly user. anyone, especially someone on this board should oppose mass survelliance because its used against them. look at the media backlash against the so called alt right, and how theyre demonizing every republican as a nationalist. they could outlaw those opinions and censor freedom of speech, like theyre starting to do on twitter and facebook. guess who theyre going to target? /pol anons. How? by finding them through mass surveillance programs. these can be used against you. the people who implement these programs dont not have your best interests in mind.

Andrew Flores
Andrew Flores

*do not* have your best interests in mind

Robert Foster
Robert Foster

Meanwhile… in reality

it's a frog that supports the white nationalism
Sir, this is a hate crime. 10 years in prison.

Nicholas Perez
Nicholas Perez

Did you forget about Draconian copywrite laws you faggot?

Thomas Kelly
Thomas Kelly

what does Holla Forums think of X
promoting (((government surveillance)))

Evan Murphy
Evan Murphy

So, I would agree with you here, but let's be fucking realistic for a change: the American public has every reason to believe, given the full extent of publicly available knowledge about these surveillance programs, that the government is NOT using them to protect the people and stop terrorism; the government is abusing its power to keep its thumb on the Average Joe citizen so they can maintain their power. We know plenty of organizations that entrap underprivileged citizens in false-flag 'terror' attacks and then arrest them the moment they step out of line so they can hail themselves as heroes; all the while, shit like Orlando and Fort Hood keep happening while FBI tip hotline phones are ringing off the hook and they look the other way. There have been numerous times when the government effectively admits that it will refuse to investigate further on some of the worst happenings, yet they will expend endless time, effort, and money to stop trivial things and still somehow fuck it up, like operating kiddie porn sites serving tens of thousands of pedophiles so they can catch five retards one of whom the charges were dropped because the warrant was illegal and therefore the evidence was thrown out, giving drug cartels guns so they can 'track arms movements' before magically losing all of them, and other retarded shit.

Our government is all but openly against us, faggot. If they actually gave two shits about national security and the safety of their borders and citizens, would I agree that unwarranted surveillance via the Patriot Act would be important and necessary? Absolutely. The problem in your logic is that twofold:

hold up the authorities from doing their job and stopping a terrorist attack
They aren't doing their goddamn job trying to stop terror attacks. Fucking Orlando. Everybody had advanced notice. The gun shop owner tipped off the FBI regarding suspicious activity from a man they had personally investigated twice, yet they still determined he was not a threat until he committed one of the worst terror attacks in American history. The man's father was a CIA asset who was in good standing with the current administration, despite his public statements regarding known terrorist organization.

if you have done nothing wrong, then you have nothing to hide
Everyone has something to hide; it could be completely legal, like porn or a legally registered gun. It's called privacy, and now it's not only one of the most important luxuries people can have, it's a BOOMING industry. Millionaires and billionaires are spending massive amounts of money on security. Housing developments that are invisible to Google Maps, private security, fences/walls on private property, the best in digital security… If these people have done nothing wrong, then why do THEY get to have privacy while the filthy commoners have to prostrate themselves at the feet of the wealthy elitists and display all of their secrets for the entire world to see?

IF we had a government that did their job, cared about the people, and legitimately wanted to protect their country and citizens, then I would absolutely agree that something like the Patriot Act would be an important piece of the homeland security puzzle; the problem is that we know for fact that we CANNOT trust these faggots to do their job without labeling anti-government, white nationalist, pro-2nd Amendment people who just want to feel safe inside their own country as potential terrorists. Until we can trust that this power will be used for the proper reasons, they should not get it. Not that they'll give it up. We all know kikes that have power won't give up power until they die.

Luke Edwards
Luke Edwards

I support a Government that hates me gathering personal information that can be used to blackmail me or destroy my relationships

Greatest goy.

Oliver Jenkins
Oliver Jenkins

How is government surveillance going to stop muslims, when it was that same government that brought the muslims here in the first place?

Dominic Cook
Dominic Cook

Personally, I support surveillance because I want terrorists caught, and I don't care if the government can see my that I've been posting on an extreme white nationalist website and I end up being V&.

After all, we've already established that I, OP, am a colossal fagot, so why wouldn't I like cock up by bum in jail.

Aaron Price
Aaron Price

Britain

Tyler Russell
Tyler Russell

NEW THREAD
NEW THREAD

(hopefully) shill-free!

Ryan Jackson
Ryan Jackson

stormag
/cuckchan/index.html

Ian Martinez
Ian Martinez

Surveillance is just another way the kikes are trying to play God. I am against surveillance because homogenous people don't need to spy on each other.

Brayden Johnson
Brayden Johnson

you are literally in bed with whinging leftists who think that Trump is "literally Hitler":
Only non-Americans spell whining "whinging", so please fuck off commie faggot, even Trump has switched his position on the NSA.

Angel Hall
Angel Hall

t. shill

Mason Roberts
Mason Roberts

Spying at first can be used for your enemies but once you give the government that power it can easily be done to you later on.

DONT GIVE THEM THE POWER IN THE FIRST PLACE

Michael Morales
Michael Morales

believing fake stories

Jose Cox
Jose Cox

conspiracy theories
Nice COINTELPRO terminology you've got there.

Henry White
Henry White

Personally, I support surveillance