It's official !
Now France will have it's own legal NSA.
If you participate to a social movement, like a strike or a protest, you'll be automatically put on a watchlist. And there is a lot more coming with this law. Any suspect comportment (using encryption, going on some websites) will be enough to put you on a watchlist.
There is no need of a law, and there is nobody to regulate it.
Reason ? to fight terrorists that doesn't use internet because they know it is compromised.
The law was voted exceptionally in 3 - 4 days, there were only 30 persons to vote it the last day (there is 576 deputy/congressman in total in France).
562 were okay with this law / 16 were opponent.
but yeah "there is no mass surveillance, that's fantasy."
source in french :
http://www.lemonde.fr/pixels/article/2015/04/16/les-deputes-approuvent-un-systeme-de-surveillance-du-trafic-sur-internet_4616652_4408996.html
>>47548310
Nobody thinks that mass-surveillance is fantasy, but most people don't give a fuck anyway, because they have to much shit going on in their lives or are just plain retarded.
>>47548462
Give it another 10 years and Europe will be a police state under supreme command of the United States.
I don't understand this notion of a "legal NSA". It's a government organization. why can't they move some shit around to make whatever they want to do legal, and then do that thing?
This is like expressing outrage at a court ruling and saying "and it's legal for the court to make this ruling!" well, yeah, that's the design of the court. you may be upset with the way the wind blew, but that's how wind blows.
>>47548310
Who cares about frogs
>>47548480
they don't respect citizen right.
before this law, they shouldn't be allowed to do that.
After this law, they are allowed to do whatever they want with a law.
That's not how it should works.
>>47548519
so you disagree with the law. but you understand that laws and ethics do not always perfectly overlap in the real world, right?
some laws are shit. this is a shit law. noting that the government did something legal is not sufficiently shocking to me that i'll do a spit take. MAYBE i'll be surprised by the government passing laws that make this stuff legal, but that would have happened a while ago. More likely, I'll just shrug and say "well a fuckload of laws on the books are shit, and that's not new, and a politician isn't going to retardedly make an NSA counterpart that's extralegal. Politicians literally don't know anything EXCEPT for how to make stuff into laws, so of course they'll do that.
>>47548310
>giving a fuck bout what smelly frenchfries do with thieir gipsyridden shithole of a country
lul
>>47548480
> It's a government organization. why can't they move some shit around to make whatever they want to do legal, and then do that thing?
> If the President Does It, That Means It's Not Illegal
Apparently Nixon is not only alive, but he's a fa/g/got.
Government agencies can't just do whatever the fuck they want. And the vast majority of them have absolutely no control over what is and isn't legal.
Futhermore, laws need to be publicly accessible (otherwise, how could you enforce them) - hence the Congressional Record / Hansard. Even if the NSA could just change the law on a whim, they'd have to publish it - and they're probably not interested in publishing a list of all the dodgy shit they get up to.
Fascists love things like the USA Patriot Act
East Germany here we come
>>47548480
>this is the average /g/ poster's understanding of law
Why aren't politicians being murdered in the streets with this shit going on?
>>47548310
OP, you are now on our watchlist for this reason:
"Potential terrorist posting on 4chan."
>>47548809
Not because I browse 4chan.
The only fact that I defend my right of privacy means that I have something to hide, so that I'm dangerous.
>>47548817
Thanks, we have now enough evidence.
I don't see why this is a problem. Governments need these tools to combat terrorism effectively. What alternative is there even?
