was the first thing I thought. Sadly doesn't sound like that :(

Not in the way you think, friend. Anyhoo, good luck with your future efforts at reasoning.

I don't believe there are any "whistleblower" protection for people who shop secret national security information around to hostile foreign governments for fame and other forms of personal gain (such as getting laid via hot FSB girls). I believe you have to do it in a way that is not calculated to be as destructive as possible. There are countless avenues within U.S. gov't that he could have followed (cue uninformed OMG NO THEN HE'D WIND UP IN A BLACK PRISON hysteria).

On turkey day we watched a VHS version to avoid this.

Same reason people clapped like trained seals when Obama moronically proclaimed in 2008 that we would look back upon that day as the moment "our planet began to heal" Self-congratulation is the object of the exercise. OMG AREN'T WE SO WONDERFUL

carry on with those completely not-evil activities that can't be entrusted to any communications method accessible by law enforcement Because we all know the dastardly American NSA wants to snoop on your conversations with Aunt Sally and steal your pumpkin pie recipe, you are displaying true moral courage by striving constantly to ensure that total stealth is possible on the global information network. PAT SELF ON BACK POSTHASTE

Also, not to sound like a troll, but "kill the baby killers" is a little more principled and focused than "f*** Americans, kill them all indiscriminately". So long as we've got the Vice President of the United States rationalizing Charlie Hebdo as more *reasonable* than Bataclan, let's dish out that same sympathy for white boys, k?

Your User ID is very impressive, but personally I think that my scenario is more likely and that the full details of this usage, if presented to a federal judge, would pass muster. From the description, it sounds like a goodly chunk of the thing's OS is devoted to ceasing surveillance of unlikely targets as quickly as possible. Of course, it could all be a smokescreen, but it's also quite possible for a reasonable surveillance algorithm to implemented. Not a constitutional scholar but as I recall, all that would be required is that the activity be reasonable and proportionate to the threat presented.

Can't collect any data till after people are already dead. Strong privacy for the win.

Without looking too far into it, I suspect the thing's stock operational parameters are carefully designed to withstand constitutional scrutiny.

Instead of performing mildly intrusive surveillance sweeps all the timeâ"unthinkable!â"just stick with extremely intrusive sweeps every single time something bad happens or is expected to happen!

You are dumb. Just shut up.

I don't think that statement correctly refers to any country in the world, but to the extent that you had intended it to be understood to refer to the United Statesâ"then yes, I'll trust that country's intentions over those of Iran twenty-eight days a week and eight hundred times on Sunday. Enjoy your god-awful world view, most kind sir/madam.

No concerns.

The criticism is justified. We can't let a few powerful entities control the spice.