Comment by WarOnPrivacy
1 day ago
> that the US government has had this capability for decades now, with mass dragnet surveillance of all internet traffic.
This is an important point.
The Bush admin established systems to surveil ~everyone in the US (not suspected of a crime) in bulk. Bulk surveillance is the well known, core component of systems intended to harm people (in bulk).
This got a pass from Bush supporters (inc me at first). It got little-to-no strong pushback elsewhere.
The Obama admin massively expanded Bush era surveillance systems. This got a pass from nearly everyone (excepting a period after the Edward Snowden revelations).
Not holding a reasonable PotUS accountable - this gifts power to the unreasonable ones that follow.
> The Obama admin massively expanded Bush era surveillance systems. This got a pass from nearly everyone.
Obama's first campaign ran on him opposing warrantless wiretapping and blanket immunity for telecoms. He also unequivocally condemned torture, promised to revise/sunset the Patriot Act, copperfasten Roe v Wade 'Day 1', etc...
But virtually all the Democrats I knew didn't give a single shit when he 180'd on all of that in his first few months. Still blows my mind a bit to this day; a marvel of mass brainwashing.
Now we're at the point where Democrats can arm and enable a literal holocaust inflicted on some of the world's poorest and most beautiful people, then get on a high horse when someone suggests voting for a non-genocidal party.
The ratchet effect is beyond extreme; and quite obvious for observant people with an outside perspective. Yet somehow Americans still seem to have hope that voting Dem hard enough will fix things. I wish I knew what it would take to inflict a sense of morality on the country.
> Obama's first campaign ran on him opposing warrantless wiretapping and blanket immunity for telecoms
That's what I thought.
What I recall more clearly: He and Clinton both pausing their 2008 PotUS election campaigns to return to DC and vote in favor of granting retroactive immunity to AT&T.