Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Coach is Back! on June 09, 2013, 03:02:01 PM
-
Too much to cut and paste
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/09/edward-snowden-nsa-whistleblower-surveillance
-
The US intelligence services have been monitoring telecommunications for 80 years...not saying it is right...but is nothing new. That is how they got the Rosenbergs...also Klaus Fuchs (what a name) They wanted to prosecute many more in that case, but didn't want to reveal the investigative sources.
February 3, 2009 PBS....."Spy Factory" Nova Episode
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/military/spy-factory.html
-
I have some issues with this dude....he went from a GED..to SOF training. The number of folks who are allowed to enlist into SOF directly from a recruiter are limited. That program was in its infancy then and they really only took ex cops etc. Then he went from a security guard to IT guy...to secret agent......hmmm.
-
He shouldn't have come out.
Obama's gonna drone attack this mofo... :P
-
Edward Snowden: the whistleblower behind the NSA surveillance revelations
Snowden will go down in history as one of America's most consequential whistleblowers, alongside Daniel Ellsberg and Bradley Manning. He is responsible for handing over material from one of the world's most secretive organisations – the NSA.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/09/nsa-whistleblower-edward-snowden-why
-
Edward Snowden: the whistleblower behind the NSA surveillance revelations
Snowden will go down in history as one of America's most consequential whistleblowers, alongside Daniel Ellsberg and Bradley Manning. He is responsible for handing over material from one of the world's most secretive organisations – the NSA.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/09/nsa-whistleblower-edward-snowden-why
Manning, lol. GMAFB.
When you provide the names, emails, ranks, and positions of some 70000 or so of our service members, you're a fucking traitor.
Manning has already admitted it. He should shot and shit on.
Snowden is no piece of shit Manning. Not even close.
-
I have some issues with this dude....he went from a GED..to SOF training. The number of folks who are allowed to enlist into SOF directly from a recruiter are limited. That program was in its infancy then and they really only took ex cops etc. Then he went from a security guard to IT guy...to secret agent......hmmm.
???
As in, you doubt the legitimacy of his claims? I think they pretty much checked out his background, I would fucking hope anyway. Could you imagine the shitstorm if it turned out they reported all this shit, and the dude was full of shit?
-
I have some issues with this dude....he went from a GED..to SOF training. The number of folks who are allowed to enlist into SOF directly from a recruiter are limited. That program was in its infancy the and they really only took ex cops etc. Then he went from a security guard to IT guy...to secret agent......hmmm.
I think its pretty safe to say that his backgroind check was more thorough than Obamas.
-
Dem. Senator disputes Obama’s claim that Congress was briefed
The Hill ^ | 06/07/13 | Jonathan Easley
Posted on June 7, 2013 8:40:01 PM EDT by neverdem
Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) on Friday disputed a claim President Obama made at a press conference only moments earlier, when the president said that every member of Congress had been briefed on the National Security Agency’s (NSA) domestic phone surveillance program.
Merkley said only select members of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees had been briefed on the program, and that he was only aware of it because he obtained “special permission” to review the pertinent documents after hearing about it second-hand.
“I knew about the program because I specifically sought it out,” Merkley said on MSNBC. “It’s not something that’s briefed outside the Intelligence Committee. I had to get special permission to find out about the program. It raised concerns for me. … When I saw what was being done, I felt it was so out of sync with the plain language of the law and that it merited full public examination, and that’s why I called for the declassification.”
At a press conference on Friday, Obama said that every member of Congress had been briefed on the phone monitoring program. The president argued that the policy, which was implemented in 2007, struck the “right balance” between privacy and national security, and that it had been helpful in thwarting terrorist attacks.
Obama also noted that federal judges had to sign off on the data gathering requests, which did not encompass the content of phone calls, but only the phone numbers.
But Merkley on Friday blasted the administration’s handling of the program, saying it had ignored requests from Congress to explain the NSA’s domestic surveillance actions, and that it was implementing the program in a way that did not follow the “standard of the law.”
Merkley argued that “plain language of the law” said that the NSA should only be allowed to collect phone data that related to an open investigation, but that the agency was using a “broad vacuum” to sweep up data from ordinary Americans.
“The administration hasn’t listened at all,” Merkley said. “We’ve asked for the rulings of the FISA court – the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court – about how it interprets the laws Congress passes to be declassified so we can have a conversation with the American people about that.”
“For example, the question is — how is scooping up your cellphone data, which tracks where you are, my cellphone data, related to an investigation?” he asked. “That’s the plain language of the law — related to an investigation. Well, certainly anyone would hear that and think that’s a certain hurdle that has to be met. That there’s a crime or a potential crime or a potential national security threat that justifies scooping up your information and my information. Clearly the administration has not followed what an ordinary person would consider to be the standard of the law here, and has not been willing to release the opinion of the FISA court in how they’re interpreting that language, despite repeated requests from Congress to do so.”
Revelations that the NSA seized millions of Americans’ phone records has pit the White House against civil liberties activists on the political left.
Many lawmakers knew of the practice, which had been going on privately since 2007, and defended it as a critical tool in the war on terror. But Merkley and his Democratic colleague from Oregon, Sen. Ron Wyden, have joined with some on the right, including Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), in denouncing the measures as riding “roughshod over liberty.”
The scope of the controversy broadened on Friday after the administration acknowledged a top-secret NSA program that collects information on Internet users, called PRISM, that taps directly into the servers of nine U.S. Internet companies.
The White House insisted PRISM was only aimed at foreign terrorism suspects.
“By the way,” Merkley continued. “When I sought information [on the phone surveillance program], the only information I got was that, yes there is a program sweeping up broad amounts of data through the records act. This second thing, which we just learned about, called PRISM, I had no idea about.”
“I don’t know how many people knew about it in Congress, but I suspect a very small number on the Intelligence Committee, so when the president says all members of Congress were briefed … well, I think a very small number of Senators in Congress had full details on these programs,” Merkley said.
-
http://www.businessinsider.com/glenn-greenwald-mika-brzezinski-video-morning-joe-nsa-scandal-2013-6
Poor Mika
-
https://content.bitsontherun.com/previews/n9V24Ey1
Cenk screams "OBAMA IS A LIAR"
-
Manning and this guy are heroes of humanity exposing the fradulent, murderous, imperial war machine that America is. America is just another nazi state about to fail.
-
Manning and this guy are heroes of humanity exposing the fradulent, murderous, imperial war machine that America is. America is just another nazi state about to fail.
Your an idiot Achmed.
I wish you were born in Nazi Germany sometimes, then you would'nt make such stupid posts.
-
I'm thinking there is a good chance this guy will be black bagged in Hong Kong and grilled in China for more information. Stupid fucking choice going to Hong Kong.
An article just posted says he's already disappeared.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/10/us-usa-security-idUSBRE95910O20130610
-
I'm thinking there is a good chance this guy will be black bagged in Hong Kong and grilled in China for more information. Stupid fucking choice going to Hong Kong.
An article just posted says he's already disappeared.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/10/us-usa-security-idUSBRE95910O20130610
Yeah, dude is fucked. Im pretty sure he's going to wind up in a dark room in the corner of some CIA building, and will probably never see the light of day again.
-
Yeah, dude is fucked. Im pretty sure he's going to wind up in a dark room in the corner of some CIA building, and will probably never see the light of day again.
and Obama's failed and miserable presidency is ground to a halt - fair trade off
F Obama
-
Yeah, dude is fucked. Im pretty sure he's going to wind up in a dark room in the corner of some CIA building, and will probably never see the light of day again.
That's not what I was thinking. The Chinese are not our buddies and won't be handing him over easy. I think the Chinese gov will want this guy and he's in their territory now. Snowden, in his video, talked about how he had the names of assets all over and alluded to having a lot more critical information on NSA operations that he didn't release and he clearly has a lot of info on NSA computer network info. Yea, the Chinese government are probably going to be on this guy like white on rice. He's probably already in China now being grilled. And from his video, he has the notion China means us no harm, oh brother, he'll spill it all...
Even though I disagree with the NSA snooping on everyone, this is not good and does put our country at risk. All over one person wanting to avoid the ramifications of blowing the whistle. Total dumbshit going to Hong Kong imo... He should have just stayed here. I like what he did because he only revealed what is wrong and not shit that endangers the country... but you gotta own that kind of decision and running to the Chinese to do it, yea, not fucking cool.
-
Guy is a fucking hero.
-
Ellsberg: Snowden’s NSA leak more important than my Pentagon Papers
Yahoo ^
Posted on Monday, June 10, 2013 11:05:42 PM by chessplayer
Daniel Ellsberg, whose leak of the so-called Pentagon Papers to The New York Times in 1971 exposed the secret history of the war in Vietnam, thinks Edward Snowden's leak of the National Security Agency's surveillance programs was more important than his.
"In my estimation, there has not been in American history a more important leak than Edward Snowden's release of NSA material, and that definitely includes the Pentagon Papers 40 years ago," Ellsberg wrote in an op-ed published by the Guardian on Monday. "Snowden's whistleblowing gives us the possibility to roll back a key part of what has amounted to an 'executive coup' against the U.S. constitution."
Ellsberg added on CNN Sunday night that “it can’t be overestimated to this democracy. It gives us a chance, I think, from drawing back from the total surveillance state that we could say we’re in process of becoming, I’m afraid we have become.
Government claims it has a court warrant under Fisa – but that unconstitutionally sweeping warrant is from a secret court, shielded from effective oversight, almost totally deferential to executive requests. As Russell Tice, a former National Security Agency analyst, put it: "It is a kangaroo court with a rubber stamp."
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
-
NSA surveillance played little role in foiling terror plots, experts say
The Guardian via Drudge ^ | June 12, 2013 | Nicholas Watt Ed Pilkington
Posted on Wednesday, June 12, 2013 1:10:38 PM by Hojczyk
Rogers told ABC's This Week that the NSA's bulk monitoring of phone calls and internet contacts was central to intercepting the plotters. "I can tell you, in the Zazi case in New York, it's exactly the programme that was used," he said.
A similar point was made in anonymous briefings by administration officials to the New York Times and Reuters.
But court documents lodged in the US and UK, as well as interviews with involved parties, suggest that data-mining through Prism and other NSA programmes played a relatively minor role in the interception of the two plots. Conventional surveillance techniques, in both cases including old-fashioned tip-offs from intelligence services in Britain, appear to have initiated the investigations.
In the case of Zazi, an Afghan American who planned to attack the New York subway, the breakthrough appears to have come from Operation Pathway, a British investigation into a suspected terrorism cell in the north-west of England in 2009. That investigation discovered that one of the members of the cell had been in contact with an al-Qaida associate in Pakistan via the email address sana_pakhtana@yahoo.com.
British newspaper reports at the time of Zazi's arrest said that UK intelligence passed on the email address to the US. The same email address, as Buzzfeed has pointed out, was cited in Zazi's 2011 trial as a crucial piece of evidence. Zazi, the court heard, wrote to sana_pakhtana@yahoo.com asking in coded language for the precise quantities to use to make up a bomb.
The Headley case is a peculiar choice for the administration to highlight as an example of the virtues of data-mining. The fact that the Mumbai attacks occurred, with such devastating effect, in itself suggests that the NSA's secret programmes were limited in their value as he was captured only after the event.
(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...
-
can someone explain why we are giving top secret security clearance to high school drop outs?
-
Holy shit...straw and I are about to agree. There is something funny about this guy. I know some of the milblogs have FOIA'ed his records to see if he enlisted for an 18 series MOS (SOF - Green Beret). They don't take GED's. They don't like to take direct SOF packages unless the guy has a background that should ensure they'll make it through SFAS and the Q course. Most SOF guys have been in 3-5 years. He went from NSA security guard to IT guy..where did he get his IT training?
-
That claim is “absolutely outrageous,” former NSA and CIA director Michael Hayden tells The Daily Beast. Snowden “was not a collector,” and no low-ranking contractor like him would have the authority to access anyone’s phone calls or read anybody’s emails.
Robert Deitz, a former top lawyer at the NSA and CIA, agrees that Snowden’s boast is a “complete and utter” falsehood. “First of all it’s illegal,” he tells the Los Angeles Times. “There is enormous oversight. They have keystroke auditing. There are, from time to time, cases in which some analyst is [angry] at his ex-wife and looks at the wrong thing and he is caught and fired.”
-
Remember when Israel warned some dude to stay inside, then dropped a bomb on him a few months ago? Somebody better tell Snowden to stay inside. lol
-
Remember when Israel warned some dude to stay inside, then dropped a bomb on him a few months ago? Somebody better tell Snowden to stay inside. lol
We don't really know anything about this guy, and you're joking about killing him... lol
-
We don't really know anything about this guy, and you're joking about killing him... lol
Funny how we know more about this guy background than we do about O-Twink
-
That claim is “absolutely outrageous,” former NSA and CIA director Michael Hayden tells The Daily Beast. Snowden “was not a collector,” and no low-ranking contractor like him would have the authority to access anyone’s phone calls or read anybody’s emails.
Robert Deitz, a former top lawyer at the NSA and CIA, agrees that Snowden’s boast is a “complete and utter” falsehood. “First of all it’s illegal,” he tells the Los Angeles Times. “There is enormous oversight. They have keystroke auditing. There are, from time to time, cases in which some analyst is [angry] at his ex-wife and looks at the wrong thing and he is caught and fired.”
this is the conclusion I've been seeing in the last 24 hours
-
We don't really know anything about this guy, and you're joking about killing him... lol
didn't you start a thread about king nutbag Ron Paul saying he is worried we are going to send a drone to Hong Kong to publicly assassinate this guy
seems just a bit far-fetched don't you think?
-
From Blackfive.....
NSA leaker Ed Snowden claimed to have broken both of his legs while training for Special Forces.
In 2003, he enlisted in the US army and began a training program to join the Special Forces. Invoking the same principles that he now cites to justify his leaks, he said: "I wanted to fight in the Iraq war because I felt like I had an obligation as a human being to help free people from oppression".
That is simply not true as the statement from the Special Warfare Center & School below clearly points out.
Snowden was never a student at SWCS. He broke his legs while at Fort Benning. His intent was to enter the X-ray program – but that never happened and would not have happened because he only had a GED. Hope this helps.
Janice Burton
Deputy
Office of Strategic Communications
The 18 X-ray program is a way to go directly from the street to the Special Forces course. You first would attend basic and advanced individual training and then airborne school. Upon successful conclusion of those you head to Bragg for some prep training and the Special Forces Assessment and Selection course. If you pass all of those, then and only then do you start Special Forces training.
Mr. Snowden wasn't even eligible for this program as he didn't even graduate from High School. So the claim that he broke his legs in Special Forces training is BS and that makes him a poseur. Well actually not even a poseur, he claimed to be training to be SF, so that makes him a poseur wannabe, or a wannabe poseur. I'm not real sure how the semantics of that work out. But either way, not really a great way to build credibility. He also made this claim that never rang true when I first read it.
-
From Blackfive.....
NSA leaker Ed Snowden claimed to have broken both of his legs while training for Special Forces.
In 2003, he enlisted in the US army and began a training program to join the Special Forces. Invoking the same principles that he now cites to justify his leaks, he said: "I wanted to fight in the Iraq war because I felt like I had an obligation as a human being to help free people from oppression".
That is simply not true as the statement from the Special Warfare Center & School below clearly points out.
Snowden was never a student at SWCS. He broke his legs while at Fort Benning. His intent was to enter the X-ray program – but that never happened and would not have happened because he only had a GED. Hope this helps.
Janice Burton
Deputy
Office of Strategic Communications
The 18 X-ray program is a way to go directly from the street to the Special Forces course. You first would attend basic and advanced individual training and then airborne school. Upon successful conclusion of those you head to Bragg for some prep training and the Special Forces Assessment and Selection course. If you pass all of those, then and only then do you start Special Forces training.
Mr. Snowden wasn't even eligible for this program as he didn't even graduate from High School. So the claim that he broke his legs in Special Forces training is BS and that makes him a poseur. Well actually not even a poseur, he claimed to be training to be SF, so that makes him a poseur wannabe, or a wannabe poseur. I'm not real sure how the semantics of that work out. But either way, not really a great way to build credibility. He also made this claim that never rang true when I first read it.
Figures.
-
can someone explain why we are giving top secret security clearance to high school drop outs?
You and I actually agree.
And it's looking like this guy is a total douchebag.
But, it doesn't change the fact that the program exists, and IMO, is just wrong. I don't care who started, blah, blah, blah. Obama should end it - immediately.
Unfortunately, all 3 branches are in on it.
-
Obama's Snooping Excludes Mosques, Missed Boston Bombers
Posted 06/12/2013 06:34 PM ET
Email
Print
License
Comment
inShare.
Homeland Insecurity: The White House assures that tracking our every phone call and keystroke is to stop terrorists, and yet it won't snoop in mosques, where the terrorists are.
That's right, the government's sweeping surveillance of our most private communications excludes the jihad factories where homegrown terrorists are radicalized.
Since October 2011, mosques have been off-limits to FBI agents. No more surveillance or undercover string operations without high-level approval from a special oversight body at the Justice Department dubbed the Sensitive Operations Review Committee.
Who makes up this body, and how do they decide requests? Nobody knows; the names of the chairman, members and staff are kept secret.
We do know the panel was set up under pressure from Islamist groups who complained about FBI stings at mosques. Just months before the panel's formation, the Council on American-Islamic Relations teamed up with the ACLU to sue the FBI for allegedly violating the civil rights of Muslims in Los Angeles by hiring an undercover agent to infiltrate and monitor mosques there.
Before mosques were excluded from the otherwise wide domestic spy net the administration has cast, the FBI launched dozens of successful sting operations against homegrown jihadists — inside mosques — and disrupted dozens of plots against the homeland.
If only they were allowed to continue, perhaps the many victims of the Boston Marathon bombings would not have lost their lives and limbs. The FBI never canvassed Boston mosques until four days after the April 15 attacks, and it did not check out the radical Boston mosque where the Muslim bombers worshipped.
The bureau didn't even contact mosque leaders for help in identifying their images after those images were captured on closed-circuit TV cameras and cellphones.
One of the Muslim bombers made extremist outbursts during worship, yet because the mosque wasn't monitored, red flags didn't go off inside the FBI about his increasing radicalization before the attacks.
This is particularly disturbing in light of recent independent surveys of American mosques, which reveal some 80% of them preach violent jihad or distribute violent literature to worshippers.
What other five-alarm jihadists are counterterrorism officials missing right now, thanks to restrictions on monitoring the one area they should be monitoring?
Read More At Investor's Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/061213-659753-all-intrusive-obama-terror-dragnet-excludes-mosques.htm#ixzz2W6CtyuPY
Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook
-
NSA Leaker's Former Employer Makes $5.8 Billion Almost Entirely Off Taxpayers
Big Government ^ | 6/13/2013 | Wynton Hall
Posted on Thursday, June 13, 2013 8:41:43 AM by markomalley
Private equity titan Carlyle Group, which has over $176 billion in assets, has a 67% stake in Booz Allen Hamiliton, the 24,500-person firm who hired the man responsible for the major National Security Agency (NSA) leaks, Edward J. Snowden.
The New York Times says the government’s increasing reliance on private contractors like Booz Allen has created a revolving door through which former government workers pass.
“Thousands of people formerly employed by the government, and still approved to deal with classified information, now do essentially the same work for private companies,” notes the Times. “Mr. Snowden, who revealed on Sunday that he provided the recent leak of national security documents, is among them.”
As U.S. budget cuts have taken hold, Booz Allen has shopped its cybersecurity services to Middle Eastern companies and governments, reports the Washington Post.
Booz Allen, which generated $5.8 billion in revenue last fiscal year, previously employed current Director of National Intelligence James Clapper. Booz Allen’s current vice chairman Mike McConnell is also a former NSA director.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
-
I agree that the program exists. I think this particular guy is overblowing his roll, saying wild shit that can and will destabilize relations with friends and enemies. He was not SOF, never going to be SOF and am not sure what his motivation really is.
-
https://content.bitsontherun.com/previews/n9V24Ey1
Cenk screams "OBAMA IS A LIAR"
he is..
We all know that, all presidents etc do. Doesn't make it right but it's not a revelation.
Politics is as corrupt as fuck, I wanted ron paul but he is half batshit.
principal is the most important factor for a president imo.
-
Obama's Snooping Excludes Mosques, Missed Boston Bombers
Posted 06/12/2013 06:34 PM ET
Email
Print
License
Comment
inShare.
Homeland Insecurity: The White House assures that tracking our every phone call and keystroke is to stop terrorists, and yet it won't snoop in mosques, where the terrorists are.
That's right, the government's sweeping surveillance of our most private communications excludes the jihad factories where homegrown terrorists are radicalized.
Since October 2011, mosques have been off-limits to FBI agents. No more surveillance or undercover string operations without high-level approval from a special oversight body at the Justice Department dubbed the Sensitive Operations Review Committee.
Who makes up this body, and how do they decide requests? Nobody knows; the names of the chairman, members and staff are kept secret.
We do know the panel was set up under pressure from Islamist groups who complained about FBI stings at mosques. Just months before the panel's formation, the Council on American-Islamic Relations teamed up with the ACLU to sue the FBI for allegedly violating the civil rights of Muslims in Los Angeles by hiring an undercover agent to infiltrate and monitor mosques there.
Before mosques were excluded from the otherwise wide domestic spy net the administration has cast, the FBI launched dozens of successful sting operations against homegrown jihadists — inside mosques — and disrupted dozens of plots against the homeland.
If only they were allowed to continue, perhaps the many victims of the Boston Marathon bombings would not have lost their lives and limbs. The FBI never canvassed Boston mosques until four days after the April 15 attacks, and it did not check out the radical Boston mosque where the Muslim bombers worshipped.
The bureau didn't even contact mosque leaders for help in identifying their images after those images were captured on closed-circuit TV cameras and cellphones.
One of the Muslim bombers made extremist outbursts during worship, yet because the mosque wasn't monitored, red flags didn't go off inside the FBI about his increasing radicalization before the attacks.
This is particularly disturbing in light of recent independent surveys of American mosques, which reveal some 80% of them preach violent jihad or distribute violent literature to worshippers.
What other five-alarm jihadists are counterterrorism officials missing right now, thanks to restrictions on monitoring the one area they should be monitoring?
Read More At Investor's Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/061213-659753-all-intrusive-obama-terror-dragnet-excludes-mosques.htm#ixzz2W6CtyuPY
Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook
LMAO..excludes mosques
-
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/06/13/Bank-robber-NSA-records
LOL!!!!
I love it!
-
Loretta Sanchez, Dem Rep, Says NSA Revelations Only 'The Tip Of The Iceberg' (VIDEO)
The Huffington Post | By Melissa Jeltsen Posted: 06/13/2013 4:11 pm EDT | Updated: 06/13/2013 4:16 pm EDT
House Democrats, Loretta Sanchez, National Security Agency, edward snowden, Loretta Sanchez House, Nsa, Nsa Leaks, Nsa Surveillance, The Guardian, Politics News
.
Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-Calif.) warned that the recent revelations on the government's clandestine national surveillance programs, brought to light by an NSA whistleblower, are just the "tip of the iceberg."
Sanchez spoke to CSPAN's "Washington Journal" on Wednesday, after attending a briefing Tuesday with intelligence officials. While she said she couldn't repeat much of what she and other House members were told, she said they learned "significantly more" than what is currently being reported in the media.
"I believe it's just the tip of the iceberg," she said.
Last week, The Guardian published a bombshell report detailing how the U.S. government has been secretly collecting phone and Internet data. Edward Snowden, who came out as the individual responsible for the explosive leaks, is currently hiding in Hong Kong.
"I think it's just broader than most people even realize," Sanchez went on.
(h/t The Hill)
-
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-14/u-s-agencies-said-to-swap-data-with-thousands-of-firms.html
Read this!
-
-
The US intelligence services have been monitoring telecommunications for 80 years...not saying it is right...but is nothing new. That is how they got the Rosenbergs...also Klaus Fuchs (what a name) They wanted to prosecute many more in that case, but didn't want to reveal the investigative sources.
February 3, 2009 PBS....."Spy Factory" Nova Episode
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/military/spy-factory.html
What's truly disgusting is they KNEW the Rosenbergs were innocent, but hung them anyway. >:(
-
Boston Bomb victims might all be unharmed but Hussein Obama doesn't want to monitor Muslim Mosques.
-
NSA admits listening to U.S. phone calls without warrants
cnet ^ | June 15, 2013 4:39 PM PDT | Declan McCullagh
Posted on Saturday, June 15, 2013 7:52:01 PM by tje
The National Security Agency has acknowledged in a new classified briefing that it does not need court authorization to listen to domestic phone calls.
Rep. Jerrold Nadler, a New York Democrat, disclosed this week that during a secret briefing to members of Congress, he was told that the contents of a phone call could be accessed "simply based on an analyst deciding that."
If the NSA wants "to listen to the phone," an analyst's decision is sufficient, without any other legal authorization required, Nadler said he learned. "I was rather startled," said Nadler, an attorney who serves on the House Judiciary committee.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.cnet.com ...
-
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57589495-38/nsa-spying-flap-extends-to-contents-of-u.s-phone-calls
Bbbboooommmmm
-
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/17/obama-nsa-surveillance_n_3455771.html#comments
LMFAO!!!! What a liar
-
Edward Snowden blames Obama
Politico ^
Posted on Monday, June 17, 2013 12:17:35 PM by Sub-Driver
Edward Snowden blames Obama By: Tal Kopan June 17, 2013 11:39 AM EDT
NSA leaker Edward Snowden criticized President Barack Obama for empty promises in an online Q-and-A on Monday, saying the president’s alleged failings influenced his decision to release the secret information on surveillance.
“Obama’s campaign promises and election gave me faith that he would lead us toward fixing the problems he outlined in his quest for votes. Many Americans felt similarly. Unfortunately, shortly after assuming power, he closed the door on investigating systemic violations of law, deepened and expanded several abusive programs, and refused to spend the political capital to end the kind of human rights violations like we see in Guantanamo, where men still sit without charge,” Snowden said in a response to a question from a commenter on The Guardian’s website.
Snowden was responding to this question: “Why did you wait to release the documents if you said you wanted to tell the world about the NSA programs since before Obama became president?”
Snowden also said the U.S. would not be able to silence him.
“All I can say right now is the US Government is not going to be able to cover this up by jailing or murdering me. Truth is coming, and it cannot be stopped,” Snowden said when asked by Guardian reporter Glenn Greenwald what would happen to the information he possessed if something happened to him.
He defended his decision to flee to Hong Kong, claiming the U.S. government did what he expected when the story came out and ruined his chance of a fair trial.
“First, the US Government, just as they did with other whistleblowers, immediately and predictably destroyed any possibility of a fair trial at home....
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
-
This guy is a traitor.
G20 summit: NSA targeted Russian president Medvedev in London
Leaked documents reveal Russian president was spied on during visit, as questions are raised over use of US base in Britain
The Guardian, Sunday 16 June 2013
American spies based in the UK intercepted the top-secret communications of the then Russian president, Dmitry Medvedev, during his visit to Britain for the G20 summit in London, leaked documents reveal.
The details of the intercept were set out in a briefing prepared by the National Security Agency (NSA), America's biggest surveillance and eavesdropping organisation, and shared with high-ranking officials from Britain, Australia, Canada and New Zealand.
The document, leaked by the NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden and seen by the Guardian, shows the agency believed it might have discovered "a change in the way Russian leadership signals have been normally transmitted".
The disclosure underlines the importance of the US spy hub at RAF Menwith Hill in Harrogate, North Yorkshire, where hundreds of NSA analysts are based, working alongside liaison officers from GCHQ.
. . .
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/16/nsa-dmitry-medvedev-g20-summit
-
This guy is a traitor.
G20 summit: NSA targeted Russian president Medvedev in London
Leaked documents reveal Russian president was spied on during visit, as questions are raised over use of US base in Britain
The Guardian, Sunday 16 June 2013
American spies based in the UK intercepted the top-secret communications of the then Russian president, Dmitry Medvedev, during his visit to Britain for the G20 summit in London, leaked documents reveal.
The details of the intercept were set out in a briefing prepared by the National Security Agency (NSA), America's biggest surveillance and eavesdropping organisation, and shared with high-ranking officials from Britain, Australia, Canada and New Zealand.
The document, leaked by the NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden and seen by the Guardian, shows the agency believed it might have discovered "a change in the way Russian leadership signals have been normally transmitted".
The disclosure underlines the importance of the US spy hub at RAF Menwith Hill in Harrogate, North Yorkshire, where hundreds of NSA analysts are based, working alongside liaison officers from GCHQ.
. . .
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/16/nsa-dmitry-medvedev-g20-summit
Yeah...inexcusable if true.
-
Who's more the traitor, Obama and his administration or Snowded?
-
Who's more the traitor, Obama and his administration or Snowded?
Obama/Bush and their administrations, no question
Snowden has done us all a good service by outing these government criminals. They should take Obama's Peace Price and give it to Snowden.
-
US Government Claims That 'Nobody' Is Listening To Your Phone Calls Are Simply False
Glenn Greenwald, The Guardian 8 minutes ago 25
Since we began began publishing stories about the NSA's massive domestic spying apparatus, various NSA defenders – beginning with President Obama - have sought to assure the public that this is all done under robust judicial oversight.
"When it comes to telephone calls, nobody is listening to your telephone calls," he proclaimed on June 7 when responding to our story about the bulk collection of telephone records, adding that the program is "fully overseen" by "the Fisa court, a court specially put together to evaluate classified programs to make sure that the executive branch, or government generally, is not abusing them". Obama told Charlie Rose [on Monday] night:
"What I can say unequivocally is that if you are a US person, the NSA cannot listen to your telephone calls … by law and by rule, and unless they … go to a court, and obtain a warrant, and seek probable cause, the same way it's always been, the same way when we were growing up and we were watching movies, you want to go set up a wiretap, you got to go to a judge, show probable cause."
The GOP chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Mike Rogers, told CNN that the NSA "is not listening to Americans' phone calls. If it did, it is illegal. It is breaking the law." Talking points issued by the House GOP in defense of the NSA claimed that surveillance law only "allows the Government to acquire foreign intelligence information concerning non-U.S.-persons (foreign, non-Americans) located outside the United States."
The NSA's media defenders have similarly stressed that the NSA's eavesdropping and internet snooping requires warrants when it involves Americans. The Washington Post's Charles Lane told his readers: "the government needs a court-issued warrant, based on probable cause, to listen in on phone calls."
The Post's David Ignatius told Post readers that NSA internet surveillance "is overseen by judges who sit on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court" and is "lawful and controlled". Tom Friedman told New York Times readers that before NSA analysts can invade the content of calls and emails, they "have to go to a judge to get a warrant to actually look at the content under guidelines set by Congress."
This has become the most common theme for those defending NSA surveillance. But these claim are highly misleading, and in some cases outright false.
Top secret documents obtained by the Guardian illustrate what the Fisa court actually does – and does not do – when purporting to engage in "oversight" over the NSA's domestic spying. That process lacks many of the safeguards that Obama, the House GOP, and various media defenders of the NSA are trying to lead the public to believe exist.
No individualized warrants required under 2008 Fisa law
Many of the reasons these claims are so misleading is demonstrated by the law itself. When the original Fisa law was enacted in 1978, its primary purpose was to ensure that the US government would be barred from ever monitoring the electronic communications of Americans without first obtaining an individualized warrant from the Fisa court, which required evidence showing "probable cause" that the person to be surveilled was an agent of a foreign power or terrorist organization.
That was the law which George Bush, in late 2001, violated, when he secretly authorized eavesdropping on the international calls of Americans without any warrants from that court. Rather than act to punish Bush for those actions, the Congress, on a bipartisan basis in 2008, enacted a new, highly diluted Fisa law – the Fisa Amendments Act of 2008 (FAA) – that legalized much of the Bush warrantless NSA program.
Under the FAA, which was just renewed last December for another five years, no warrants are needed for the NSA to eavesdrop on a wide array of calls, emails and online chats involving US citizens. Individualized warrants are required only when the target of the surveillance is a US person or the call is entirely domestic. But even under the law, no individualized warrant is needed to listen in on the calls or read the emails of Americans when they communicate with a foreign national whom the NSA has targeted for surveillance.
As a result, under the FAA, the NSA frequently eavesdrops on Americans' calls and reads their emails without any individualized warrants – exactly that which NSA defenders, including Obama, are trying to make Americans believe does not take place. As Yale Law professor Jack Balkin explained back in 2009:
"The Fisa Amendments Act of 2008, effectively gives the President - now President Obama - the authority to run surveillance programs similar in effect to the warrantless surveillance program [secretly implemented by George Bush in late 2001]. That is because New Fisa no longer requires individualized targets in all surveillance programs. Some programs may be 'vacuum cleaner' programs that listen to a great many different calls (and read a great many e-mails) with any requirement of a warrant directed at a particular person as long as no US person is directly targeted as the object of the program. . . .
"New Fisa authorizes the creation of surveillance programs directed against foreign persons (or rather, against persons believed to be outside the United States) – which require no individualized suspicion of anyone being a terrorist, or engaging in any criminal activity. These programs may inevitably include many phone calls involving Americans, who may have absolutely no connection to terrorism or to Al Qaeda."
As the FAA was being enacted in mid-2008, Professor Balkin explained that "Congress is now giving the President the authority to do much of what he was probably doing (illegally) before".
The ACLU's Deputy Legal Director, Jameel Jaffer, told me this week by email:
"On its face, the 2008 law gives the government authority to engage in surveillance directed at people outside the United States. In the course of conducting that surveillance, though, the government inevitably sweeps up the communications of many Americans. The government often says that this surveillance of Americans' communications is 'incidental', which makes it sound like the NSA's surveillance of Americans' phone calls and emails is inadvertent and, even from the government's perspective, regrettable.
"But when Bush administration officials asked Congress for this new surveillance power, they said quite explicitly that Americans' communications were the communications of most interest to them. See, for example, Fisa for the 21st Century, Hearing Before the S. Comm. on the Judiciary, 109th Cong. (2006) (statement of Michael Hayden) (stating, in debate preceding passage of FAA's predecessor statute, that certain communications 'with one end in the United States" are the ones "that are most important to us').
The principal purpose of the 2008 law was to make it possible for the government to collect Americans' international communications - and to collect those communications without reference to whether any party to those communications was doing anything illegal. And a lot of the government's advocacy is meant to obscure this fact, but it's a crucial one: The government doesn't need to 'target' Americans in order to collect huge volumes of their communications."
That's why Democratic senators such as Ron Wyden and Mark Udall spent years asking the NSA: how many Americans are having their telephone calls listened to and emails read by you without individualized warrants? Unlike the current attempts to convince Americans that the answer is "none", the NSA repeatedly refused to provide any answers, claiming that providing an accurate number was beyond their current technological capabilities. Obviously, the answer is far from "none".
Contrary to the claims by NSA defenders that the surveillance being conducted is legal, the Obama DOJ has repeatedly thwarted any efforts to obtain judicial rulings on whether this law is consistent with the Fourth Amendment or otherwise legal. Every time a lawsuit is brought contesting the legality of intercepting Americans' communications without warrants, the Obama DOJ raises claims of secrecy, standing and immunity to prevent any such determination from being made.
The emptiness of 'oversight' from the secret Fisa court
The supposed safeguard under the FAA is that the NSA annually submits a document setting forth its general procedures for how it decides on whom it can eavesdrop without a warrant. The Fisa court then approves those general procedures. And then the NSA is empowered to issue "directives" to telephone and internet companies to obtain the communications for whomever the NSA decides – with no external (i.e. outside the executive branch) oversight – complies with the guidelines it submitted to the court.
In his interview with the president last night, Charlie Rose asked Obama about the oversight he claims exists: "Should this be transparent in some way?" Obama's answer: "It is transparent. That's why we set up the Fisa Court." But as Politico's Josh Gerstein noted about that exchange: Obama was "referring to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court – which carries out its work almost entirely in secret." Indeed, that court's orders are among the most closely held secrets in the US government. That Obama, when asked about transparency, has to cite a court that operates in complete secrecy demonstrates how little actual transparency there is to any this.
The way to bring actual transparency to this process it to examine the relevant Top Secret Fisa court documents. Those documents demonstrate that this entire process is a fig leaf, "oversight" in name only. It offers no real safeguards. That's because no court monitors what the NSA is actually doing when it claims to comply with the court-approved procedures. Once the Fisa court puts its approval stamp on the NSA's procedures, there is no external judicial check on which targets end up being selected by the NSA analysts for eavesdropping. The only time individualized warrants are required is when the NSA is specifically targeting a US citizen or the communications are purely domestic.
When it is time for the NSA to obtain Fisa court approval, the agency does not tell the court whose calls and emails it intends to intercept. It instead merely provides the general guidelines which it claims are used by its analysts to determine which individuals they can target, and the Fisa court judge then issues a simple order approving those guidelines. The court endorses a one-paragraph form order stating that the NSA's process "'contains all the required elements' and that the revised NSA, FBI and CIA minimization procedures submitted with the amendment 'are consistent with the requirements of [50 U.S.C. §1881a(e)] and with the fourth amendment to the Constitution of the United States'". As but one typical example, the Guardian has obtained an August 19, 2010, Fisa court approval from Judge John Bates which does nothing more than recite the statutory language in approving the NSA's guidelines.
Once the NSA has this court approval, it can then target anyone chosen by their analysts, and can even order telecoms and internet companies to turn over to them the emails, chats and calls of those they target. The Fisa court plays no role whatsoever in reviewing whether the procedures it approved are actually complied with when the NSA starts eavesdropping on calls and reading people's emails.
The guidelines submitted by the NSA to the Fisa court demonstrate how much discretion the agency has in choosing who will be targeted. Those guidelines also make clear that, contrary to the repeated assurances from government officials and media figures, the communications of American citizens are – without any individualized warrant – included in what is surveilled.
The specific guidelines submitted by the NSA to the Fisa court in July 2009 – marked Top Secret and signed by Attorney General Eric Holder – state that "NSA determines whether a person is a non-United States person reasonably believed to be outside the United States in light of the totality of the circumstances based on the information available with respect to that person, including information concerning the communications facility or facilities used by that person." It includes information that the NSA analyst uses to make this determination – including IP addresses, statements made by the potential target, and other information in the NSA databases.
The decision to begin listening to someone's phone calls or read their emails is made exclusively by NSA analysts and their "line supervisors". There is no outside scrutiny, and certainly no Fisa court involvement. As the NSA itself explained in its guidelines submitted to the Fisa court:
"Analysts who request tasking will document in the tasking database a citation or citations to the information that led them to reasonably believe that a targeted person is located outside the United States. Before tasking is approved, the database entry for that tasking will be reviewed in order to verify that the database entry contains the necessary citations."
The only oversight for monitoring whether there is abuse comes from the executive branch itself: from the DOJ and Director of National Intelligence, which conduct "periodic reviews … to evaluate the implementation of the procedure." At a hearing before the House Intelligence Committee Tuesday afternoon, deputy attorney general James Cole testified that every 30 days, the Fisa court is merely given an "aggregate number" of database searches on US domestic phone records.
Warrantless interception of Americans' communications
Obama and other NSA defenders have repeatedly claimed that "nobody" is listening to Americans' telephone calls without first obtaining warrants. This is simply false. There is no doubt that some of the communications intercepted by the NSA under this warrantless scheme set forth in FAA's section 702 include those of US citizens. Indeed, as part of the Fisa court approval process, the NSA submits a separate document, also signed by Holder, which describes how communications of US persons are collected and what is done with them.
One typical example is a document submitted by the NSA in July 2009. In its first paragraph, it purports to set forth "minimization procedures" that "apply to the acquisition, retention, use, and dissemination of non-publicly available information concerning unconsenting United States persons that is acquired by targeting non-United States persons reasonably believed to be located outside the United States in accordance with section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, as amended."
That document provides that "communications of or concerning United States persons that may be related to the authorized purpose of the acquisition may be forwarded to analytic personnel responsible for producing intelligence information from the collected data." It also states that "such communications or information" - those from US citizens - "may be retained and disseminated" if it meets the guidelines set forth in the NSA's procedures.
Those guidelines specifically address what the NSA does with what it calls "domestic communications", defined as "communications in which the sender and all intended recipients are reasonably believed to be located in the United States at the time of acquisition". The NSA expressly claims the right to store and even disseminate such domestic communication if: (1) "it is reasonably believed to contain significant foreign intelligence information"; (2) "the communication does not contain foreign intelligence information but is reasonably believed to contain evidence of a crime that has been, is being, or is about to be committed"; or (3) "the communication is reasonably believed to contain technical data base information, as defined in Section 2(i), or information necessary to understand or assess a communications security vulnerability."
Although it refuses to say how many Americans have their communications intercepted without warrants, there can be no question that the NSA does this. That's precisely why they have created elaborate procedures for what they do when they end up collecting Americans' communications without warrants.
Vast discretion vested in NSA analysts
The vast amount of discretion vested in NSA analysts is also demonstrated by the training and briefings given to them by the agency. In one such briefing from an official with the NSA's general counsel's office - a top secret transcript of which was obtained by the Guardian, dated 2008 and then updated for 2013 - NSA analysts are told how much the new Fisa law diluted the prior standards and how much discretion they now have in deciding whose communications to intercept:
"The court gets to look at procedures for saying that there is a reasonable belief for saying that a target is outside of the United States. Once again - a major change from the targeting under Fisa. Under Fisa you had to have probable cause to believe that the target was a foreign power or agent of a foreign power. Here all you need is a reasonable belief that the target is outside of the United States ...
"Now, all kinds of information can be used to this end. There's a list in the targeting procedures: phone directories, finished foreign intelligence, NSA technical analysis of selectors, lead information. Now, you don't have to check a box in every one of those categories. But you have to look at everything you've got and make a judgment. Looking at everything, do you have a reasonable belief that your target is outside the United States? So, cast your search wide. But don't feel as though you have to have something in every category. In the end, what matters is, 'Does all that add up to a reasonable belief that your target is outside the United States?'"
So vast is this discretion that NSA analysts even have the authority to surveil communications between their targets and their lawyers, and that information can be not just stored but also disseminated. NSA procedures do not ban such interception, but rather set forth procedures to be followed in the event that the NSA analyst believes they should be "disseminated".
The decisions about who has their emails and telephone calls intercepted by the NSA is made by the NSA itself, not by the Fisa court, except where the NSA itself concludes the person is a US citizen and/or the communication is exclusively domestic. But even in such cases, the NSA often ends up intercepting those communications of Americans without individualized warrants, and all of this is left to the discretion of the NSA analysts with no real judicial oversight.
Legal constraints v technical capabilities
What is vital to recognize is that the NSA is collecting and storing staggering sums of communications every day. Back in 2010, the Washington Post reported that "every day, collection systems at the National Security Agency intercept and store 1.7 billion e-mails, phone calls and other types of communications." Documents published by the Guardian last week detail that, in March 2013, the NSA collected three billions of pieces of intelligence just from US communications networks alone.
In sum, the NSA is vacuuming up enormous amounts of communications involving ordinary Americans and people around the world who are guilty of nothing. There are some legal constraints governing their power to examine the content of those communications, but there are no technical limits on the ability either of the agency or its analysts to do so.
The fact that there is so little external oversight is what makes this sweeping, suspicion-less surveillance system so dangerous. It's also what makes the assurances from government officials and their media allies so dubious.
A senior US intelligence official told the Guardian: "Under section 702, the Fisa court has to approve targeting and minimization procedures adopted by the Attorney General, in consultation with the Director of National Intelligence."
"The targeting procedures ensure that the targets of surveillance are reasonably believed to be non-US persons outside of the US", the official added.
"Moreover, decisions about targeting are memorialized, reviewed on a regular basis and audited. Moreover, Congress clearly understood that even when the government is targeting foreign persons for collection, communications of US persons may be acquired if those persons are in communication with the foreign targets, for example as was testified to in today's hearing when Najibullah Zazi communicated with a foreign terrorist whose communications were being targeted under Section 702.
"That," the official continued, "is why the statute requires that there be minimization procedures to ensure that when communications of, or concerning, US persons are acquired in the course of lawful collection under Section 702, that information is minimized and is retained and disseminated only when appropriate. These procedures are approved on an annual basis by the Fisa court.
"Compliance with them is extensively overseen by the intelligence community, the DOJ, the ODNI and Inspectors General," the official said. "Both the Fisa court and Congress receive regular reports on compliance."
This article originally appeared on guardian.co.uk
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/us-government-claims-that-nobody-is-listening-to-your-phone-calls-are-simply-false-2013-6#ixzz2WfG263jA
-
Free Republic
Browse · Search Pings · Mail News/Activism
Topics · Post Article
Skip to comments.
US seizure of journalist records called 'chilling'
AFP ^ | June 19, 2013 | AFP
Posted on June 19, 2013 10:19:42 PM EDT by Jet Jaguar
The US government's secret seizure of Associated Press phone records had a "chilling effect" on newsgathering by the agency and other news organizations, AP's top executive said Wednesday.
"Some longtime trusted sources have become nervous and anxious about talking with us," AP president and chief executive Gary Pruitt said in a speech to the National Press Club.
"In some cases, government employees we once checked in with regularly will no longer speak to us by phone. Others are reluctant to meet in person ... This chilling effect on newsgathering is not just limited to AP.
"Journalists from other news organizations have personally told me that it has intimidated both official and nonofficial sources from speaking to them as well."
Pruitt spoke one month after the US news agency revealed that it had been notified after the fact that the US Justice Department had secret subpoenas of two months of phone records from its news operations.
The AP has said US authorities appeared to have sought out the records as part of a criminal investigation into leaked information contained in a May 2012 AP story about a foiled terror plot.
Pruitt, who previously called the seizure "a massive and unprecedented intrusion" into newsgathering, said the Justice Department "violated its own rules" on how it handles investigations of leaks to news media.
He said the collection of records pertaining to more than 100 journalists was "an overbroad and sloppy fishing expedition" and failed to follow procedures on notification.
Pruitt said that authorities maintained that by notifying the AP ahead of the sweep "it would have tipped off the leaker" but argued "that kind of reasoning would apply in every single case."
This rationale would mean news organizations would never know when its records are being obtained, news sources would become less willing to speak and "the public will only know what the government wants them to know."
The Justice Department has told the AP "that our phone records have been and will continue to be walled off, protected and used for no other purpose other than the leak investigation," Pruitt said.
"We appreciate these assurances. But that does not excuse what they did. We need to make sure it doesn't happen again."
The AP chief said the US administration should reaffirm the right of advance notice to news organizations, and use the courts to adjudicate any disputes on whether certain records are needed.
He also called for a "federal shield law with teeth" to ensure that journalists are not prosecuted for doing their jobs.
"We do not dispute that the government has the right to pursue those who leak classified information," he said.
But he argued that "no one in this country should ever be prosecuted for committing journalism."
Last month, Attorney General Eric Holder said the leak which prompted the seizure of journalist phone records was a "very serious" matter which "puts the American people at risk."
Pruitt said Wednesday however that the AP waited five days before publishing the article, until after it had been assured by US officials that "the national security risk had passed.
The US administration under President Barack Obama has been aggressive in pursuing leaks of secret government information.
Authorities have said they had opened a probe into Edward Snowden, the former government contractor who leaked details about a cast US government electronic surveillance program.
Former CIA officer John Kiriakou was sentenced in January to two and a half years in prison for leaking the name of a secret agent implicated in harsh interrogations of Al-Qaeda suspects.
-
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/20/fisa-court-nsa-without-warrant
Holder is knee deep in this mess too.
-
Good. Lock that traitor up.
Charges filed against NSA secrets leaker
Published June 21, 2013
FoxNews.com
DEVELOPING: Federal prosecutors have filed a sealed criminal complaint against NSA secrets leaker Edward Snowden charging him with espionage, theft and conversion of government property, A senior U.S. official told Fox News.
The Washington Post reported the U.S. also had asked Hong Kong to detain Snowden on a provisional arrest warrant.
He fled to Hong Kong last month after leaking highly classified documents about government information gathering that he acquired while working as a contractor for the NSA.
The U.S. official told Fox the White House would have no immediate comment on the filing of charges.
The complaint was filed in the Eastern District of Virginia, the Post said.
Snowden’s disclosures, reported over the last few weeks, have ignited a political storm over the balance between privacy rights and national security in the U.S.. The NSA has defended the programs, saying they have disrupted possible terrorist attacks in the country.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/06/21/charges-reportedly-filed-against-nsa-secrets-leaker/
-
There's a very remote chance that the CIA got to him before the Chinese secret service did.
If Snowden is ever extradited to the US it will be because the Chinese handed him to the US authorities (after some serious grilling by the Chinese of course).
-
Question is, now that Federal prosecutors have filed charges against Snowden, can a group of citizens file a class action lawsuit against the US Government for their illegal monitoring of US citizens?
-
Question is, now that Federal prosecutors have filed charges against Snowden, can a group of citizens file a class action lawsuit against the US Government for their illegal monitoring of US citizens?
Lolz. Point out the governments illegal actions, get thrown in jail or dead. Derp.
-
[...]this is all done under robust judicial oversight.[...]
Illegal too.
-
Lolz. Point out the governments illegal actions, get thrown in jail or dead. Derp.
Well, no. If the population of let's say Seattle want to take the federal government to court they can do that, and there isn't a think Obama the Tyrant can do about it.
-
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/24/edward-snowden-cuba-russia_n_3489332.html
Making O-TWINk look like a real buffoon
-
So now we learn that he told both the Chinese and Russians that we are spying on them. How the heck does that protect the privacy of American citizens?
Somebody is going to put a bullet in this dude's brain.
-
Terrorists changing tactics in wake of surveillance program leaks, officials say
By Justin Fishel
Published June 25, 2013
FoxNews.com
Known terrorist groups already have begun to change the way they communicate in the wake of classified leaks detailing U.S. surveillance tactics, U.S. intelligence and counterterrorism officials tell Fox News.
"We are already seeing indications that they are attempting to change their communications behaviors," said one senior U.S. official, speaking to Fox News on the condition of anonymity. "That is a direct result of what we are seeing in the media. That is a fact."
Former NSA contractor Edward Snowden has acknowledged providing sensitive information to the media on U.S. surveillance programs. Facing federal charges in the U.S., Snowden continues to evade capture and is said to be in a Moscow airport.
Counterterrorism officials say that although some of the basic principles of U.S. surveillance were known before the leaks, terrorist groups are now armed with new details that can help them keep their communications private.
"They now know the scope and breadth of our abilities and our collection," one official said.
Terror and extremist groups are likely to become must more cautious with Internet and telephone communications, considering revelations on just how much so-called "meta-data" the NSA has legal justification to collect. Officials told Fox News that terrorists, while routinely careful of their communications, would have been unaware about the sheer scope of the NSA's blanket warrants with Internet giants like Google and Facebook, or phone companies like AT&T and Verizon.
"The real-world implication is these people will stop talking and change how they communicate," said a senior U.S. official. "We are going to have less abilities if they change electronically and until we are able to regain communications we will miss what they are saying. We will miss those dots."
One fear is that terror networks could turn to couriers, similar to the system used by the former Al Qaeda leader Usama bin Laden. Although it was the courier that eventually led U.S. Special Forces to his compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan, it took over 10 years to find him.
At a Pentagon press conference Tuesday, Gen. Ray Odierno, chief of staff of the Army, said he is concerned about the safety of U.S. troops because of this leak.
"It's not just about leaking information," Odierno said. "It's much bigger than that. … It puts American soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines at risk who are overseas conducting operations."
In an interview on CNN Monday, Secretary of State John Kerry went so far as to say, "people may die as a consequence of what this man did."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/06/25/terrorists-changing-tactics-in-wake-surveillance-program-leaks-officials-say/#ixzz2XHGxKNqb
-
Well, no. If the population of let's say Seattle want to take the federal government to court they can do that, and there isn't a think Obama the Tyrant can do about it.
Can't take someone to court about illegal actions that people aren't aware of.
Dude tried to make us aware of unconstitutional actions the government was committing against it's citizens. From the view of the federal government, he's a traitor. In the eyes of the citizens, he's a hero. Who's right? To me, since it's the job of the government to represent the citizens and they're ultimately answer to the citizens, I think the man is a hero for what he did. If he hadn't, we would never know just how far they're going, and we all know one thing... unless they're caught and stopped, they'll just keep going.
They've shown they have no respect for either the constitution, nor the privacy of the very citizens they're sworn to serve, so fuck them. And IMHO, no amount of abstract "terrorist threats" that have been "stopped" justify such a blatant violation of citizens rights.
The very definition of terrorism is to make the target change their way of life, and it seems like we're happy to oblige, and make their missions success'.
-
Can't take someone to court about illegal actions that people aren't aware of.
Dude tried to make us aware of unconstitutional actions the government was committing against it's citizens. From the view of the federal government, he's a traitor. In the eyes of the citizens, he's a hero. Who's right? To me, since it's the job of the government to represent the citizens and they're ultimately answer to the citizens, I think the man is a hero for what he did. If he hadn't, we would never know just how far they're going, and we all know one thing... unless they're caught and stopped, they'll just keep going.
They've shown they have no respect for either the constitution, nor the privacy of the very citizens they're sworn to serve, so fuck them. And IMHO, no amount of abstract "terrorist threats" that have been "stopped" justify such a blatant violation of citizens rights.
The very definition of terrorism is to make the target change their way of life, and it seems like we're happy to oblige, and make their missions success'.
I'm glad we know about the NSA spying, but I don't think it that justifies what the guy did.
What about telling the Chinese and Russians that we are spying on them. What is heroic about that? How does it make us safer?
-
I'm glad we know about the NSA spying, but I don't think it that justifies what the guy did.
What about telling the Chinese and Russians that we are spying on them. What is heroic about that? How does it make us safer?
Yeah... that I'm not a big fan of. He should have just made the citizens aware of the NSA's domestic actions and left if at that... The government has no clause in the constitution about spying on other countries. He stepped out of bounds there, but maybe he was just trying to make people understand the scope of the NSA program?
On the flip side, I think it's pretty well accepted that we spy on the rest of the world all the time... Hell, we have dedicated alphabet agencies that we've never heard of that do that kind of shit.
-
Yeah... that I'm not a big fan of. He should have just made the citizens aware of the NSA's domestic actions and left if at that... The government has no clause in the constitution about spying on other countries. He stepped out of bounds there, but maybe he was just trying to make people understand the scope of the NSA program?
On the flip side, I think it's pretty well accepted that we spy on the rest of the world all the time... Hell, we have dedicated alphabet agencies that we've never heard of that do that kind of shit.
Agree. Everyone is spying. The Chinese are all over us. We're always spying on the Russians. They're always spying on us.
If you're ever in DC check out the International Spy Museum. Takes you through the history of spying going back a couple thousand years to present day. Very cool stuff.
-
I'm glad we know about the NSA spying, but I don't think it that justifies what the guy did.
What about telling the Chinese and Russians that we are spying on them. What is heroic about that? How does it make us safer?
Well, let's not act as though Russia and China didn't know we were spying on them.
And I'm not even sure it's true yet. I don't believe shit from this administration. The director of NSA lied to Congress about this, who the hell knows what's going on.
That said, if he did provide intel to our enemies, then props for exposing the program...but enjoy the electric chair. He could've exposed the program without aiding our enemies.
-
Well, let's not act as though Russia and China didn't know we were spying on them.
And I'm not even sure it's true yet. I don't believe shit from this administration. The director of NSA lied to Congress about this, who the hell knows what's going on.
That said, if he did provide intel to our enemies, then props for exposing the program...but enjoy the electric chair. He could've exposed the program without aiding our enemies.
I agree everyone knows spying has been and will always be done, but giving them details is entirely different. I don't trust the government either, although I think this came straight from Hong Kong:
Snowden, who had been hiding in Hong Kong for several weeks, had also revealed to a local newspaper details about the NSA's hacking of targets in Hong Kong. The revelations ratcheted up tensions between Washington and Beijing, which for months has been trying to counter U.S. accusations that its government and military are behind computer-based attacks against America.
The Hong Kong government said it allowed Snowden to leave because the U.S. request to provisionally arrest Snowden did not comply with legal requirements. However, the U.S. Justice Department rejected that claim, saying its request met all of the requirements of the extradition treaty between the U.S. and Hong Kong.
The Hong Kong government also mentioned that it asked the U.S. for more information on the hacking, suggesting the issue played some role in its decision.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/24/edward-snowden-china_n_3489861.html
-
Terrorists changing tactics in wake of surveillance program leaks, officials say
By Justin Fishel
Published June 25, 2013
FoxNews.com
Bullshit... That's hilarious
-
:D
-
Ron Paul: My understanding is that espionage means giving secret or classified information to the enemy. Since Snowden shared information with the American people, his indictment for espionage could reveal (or confirm) that the US Government views you and me as the enemy.
-
Snowden thought leakers should be 'shot,' 2009 chat logs reveal
Published June 27, 2013
FoxNews.com
June 9, 2013: This photo provided by The Guardian Newspaper in London shows Edward Snowden, who worked as a contract employee at the National Security Agency, in Hong Kong. (AP/The Guardian)
What a difference four years has apparently made for Edward Snowden, the National Security Agency contractor who passed secret documents to journalists — but seemingly had nothing but contempt for those who leaked classified information in 2009.
Snowden, while using the online handle “TheTrueHOOHA,” was particularly livid during a January 2009 chat about a New York Times article detailing secret negotiations between the United States and Israel regarding how best to address Iran’s suspected nuclear program.
“Are they TRYING to start a war? Jesus Christ,” Snowden wrote, according to chat logs uncovered by Ars Technica, a technology news website. “They're like Wikileaks.”
“Those people should be shot in the balls.”
- Edward Snowden, using the handle 'TheTrueHOOHA'
When another chat room participant replied, “they’re just reporting, dude,” Snowden shot back: “You don't put that [expletive] in the NEWSPAPER.
“Moreover, who the [expletive] are the anonymous sources telling them this?” Snowden continued. “Those people should be shot in the balls.”
The messages by Snowden, who was 25 at the time and reportedly stationed in Geneva by the Central Intelligence Agency, are in sharp contrast to his more recent views regarding executive secrecy, which he claims prompted him to go public with the federal government's snooping tactics.
“I wonder how many hundreds of millions of dollars they just completely blew,” he continued, in reference to The New York Times. “It's not an overreaction. They have a HISTORY of this [expletive].”
But the logs of the Internet Relayed Chat (IRC) server associated with Ars Technica don't necessarily show a 180-degree shift in Snowden's worldview, according to an article that accompanied release of the logs.
“It's hardly a perfect parallel,” Ars Technica wrote in the article. “Snowden was upset about leaks over U.S. covert operations in Iran, which is different from the domestic spying and offensive cyberwar programs he felt compelled to make public.”
Snowden, who turned 30 last week and is believed to be encamped in a Moscow airport, last logged on to the chatroom in May 2009, Ars Technica reports. President Obama has said he won’t engage in negotiations to have Snowden extradited to the United States, rejecting suggestions that the Air Force consider forcing down a plane carrying Snowden from Russia to another country. Obama said the fact that Snowden obtained the secret documents shows significant NSA vulnerabilities.
Snowden has cast himself as a fierce defender of individual privacy and someone determined to expose vast U.S. surveillance powers.
“I have no intention of hiding who I am because I know I have done nothing wrong,” he told Britain’s Guardian newspaper in a June 9 report, which revealed he was in Hong Kong at the time.
He said he became “hardened” later in 2009 as President Obama advanced “the very policies” Snowden thought would be curtailed.
By April of that year, a few months into his appointment in Switzerland, Snowden reported to the chatroom about his time in the country, saying it was like “living in a postcard” and that prostitution was legal.
“It's just nightmarishly expensive and horrifically classist,” Snowden continued, according to chat logs. “I have never, EVER seen a people more racist than the Swiss. Jesus god they look down on EVERYONE. Even each other.”
Snowden then told a user he liked the “friendly” Italians he had met during his travels. An unidentified user then commented how the United Kingdom did not have “ghettos,” prompting Snowden to respond forcefully.
“Sure you do,” he replied. “I went to London just last year … It's where all of your Muslims live … I didn't want to get out of the car. I thought I had gotten off of plane in the wrong country.”
Snowden said the experience was “terrifying,” adding the Muslims “just seemed awfully … orthodox.”
“I mean it wasn't like, ‘Hi, we're your friendly neighborhood Muslim community. welcome to our main street,” he wrote. “It was more like, ‘SUBMIT TO THE WILL OF ALLAH. SHARIAH REGULATIONS POSTED AT ALL CORNERS.’”
Some chatroom participants who were familiar with Snowden, meanwhile, told Ars Technica they recognized his username shortly after a Reuters profile revealed it.
"I remember that guy," one user wrote. "He was kind of a d---. But fair play to him for what he's done."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/06/27/snowden-thought-leakers-should-be-shot-in-200-chat-logs-reveal/?test=latestnews#ixzz2XSDNozBY
-
Whatever the govt/media complex is doing is working like a charm.
Everyone is transfixed on Snowden, where he is, what is background is, what he is eating for lunch.....
They have gotten the public attention fixed on Snowden and not what Snowden revealed....no one is talking about PRISIM or anything.
Someone in the limelight has to get the focus back on the unconstitutional snooping programs.
-
Whatever the govt/media complex is doing is working like a charm.
Everyone is transfixed on Snowden, where he is, what is background is, what he is eating for lunch.....
They have gotten the public attention fixed on Snowden and not what Snowden revealed....no one is talking about PRISIM or anything.
Someone in the limelight has to get the focus back on the unconstitutional snooping programs.
x2
Snowden is a smart MOFO - he saw what happened to Bradley manning.
F Obama and the govt trying to go after this guy
-
I'm sure Snowden will be safe and secure in Russia or China or Cuba
Those countries have a long and proud history of respecting their citizens privacy and human rights
-
I'm sure Snowden will be safe and secure in Russia or China or Cuba
Those countries have a long and proud history of respecting their citizens privacy and human rights
Oh the irony of it all.
-
Oh the irony of it all.
So true. Americans piss me off. No one gives a shit about prism, all they care about is mcdonalds. One dude at my work knew and gave a shit. Half dozen others thought it is great. Fuck these people, they deserve to live under a tyrant, content to hand over their liberty for chic and jerry springer.
How sad.
-
Disclosing this information, again, has nothing to do with keeping Americans safe.
The German news magazine Der Spiegel reported Sunday that classified leaks by former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden detailed NSA bugging of European Union offices in Washington and New York, as well as an "electronic eavesdropping operation" that tapped into an EU building in Brussels.
Mounting anger throughout Europe on Monday included a threat by French President Francois Hollande to halt talks with the United States on trade and other issues unless the bugging stopped.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/01/world/europe/eu-nsa/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
-
Disclosing this information, again, has nothing to do with keeping Americans safe.
The German news magazine Der Spiegel reported Sunday that classified leaks by former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden detailed NSA bugging of European Union offices in Washington and New York, as well as an "electronic eavesdropping operation" that tapped into an EU building in Brussels.
Mounting anger throughout Europe on Monday included a threat by French President Francois Hollande to halt talks with the United States on trade and other issues unless the bugging stopped.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/01/world/europe/eu-nsa/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
Snowden is a hero - just shows how evil out govt is and why the whole fucking charade we engage in on holidays "land of the free" bullshit needs to be brought to a head.
-
Snowden is a hero - just shows how evil out govt is and why the whole fucking charade we engage in on holidays "land of the free" bullshit needs to be brought to a head.
yeah, I'm sure the great hero is sharing classified information with his new Russian friends
-
Snowden is a hero - just shows how evil out govt is and why the whole fucking charade we engage in on holidays "land of the free" bullshit needs to be brought to a head.
Hero? He's a traitor in my book. I think the "hero" label would be debatable if he all he did was disclose the NSA spying on Americans. But telling China, Russia, Germans (and probably others) about spying is indefensible.
-
Hero? He's a traitor in my book. I think the "hero" label would be debatable if he all he did was disclose the NSA spying on Americans. But telling China, Russia, Germans (and probably others) about spying is indefensible.
If he leaked something Obama said is transparent and something we all knew about - what crime did he commit?
-
If he leaked something Obama said is transparent and something we all knew about - what crime did he commit?
refer to the charges against him for you answer
-
If he leaked something Obama said is transparent and something we all knew about - what crime did he commit?
Disclosing classified information is a crime. And disclosing classified information about the U.S. spying on other countries is treason.
-
Disclosing classified information is a crime. And disclosing classified information about the U.S. spying on other countries is treason.
Leahy, Biden, Panetta, and many others have leaked info and nothing happened to them why again?
Because it has ZERO to do w the law and everything on how it makes Obama and his illegal junta appear.
-
Leahy, Biden, Panetta, and many others have leaked info and nothing happened to them why again?
Because it has ZERO to do w the law and everything on how it makes Obama and his illegal junta appear.
go find a dictionary
-
Disclosing classified information is a crime. And disclosing classified information about the U.S. spying on other countries is treason.
Is what he leaked show the NSA committing a crime?
-
Is what he leaked show the NSA committing a crime?
Yes. Anyone with a security clearance who discloses classified information is committing a crime.
-
Yes. Anyone with a security clearance who discloses classified information is committing a crime.
No, what i mean is, is the content of what Snowden leaked constitute a crime committed by the NSA?
-
No, what i mean is, is the content of what Snowden leaked constitute a crime committed by the NSA?
Ah so. Sorry. No, I doubt it, because the FISA court approved it.
-
Yes. Anyone with a security clearance who discloses classified information is committing a crime.
So leahy, biden and panetta committed crimes and Obama never did shit about it right?
-
Ah so. Sorry. No, I doubt it, because the FISA court approved it.
Ok so a little confused here, mainly because i haven't been drenching myself in detail much on this.
If FISA authorized it and its within the law for them to do this, why is it that Snowdens information is so classified? I mean, if they were with in the law to do so and we the public should know about it, why is it classified that they were doing it?
-
PRISM scandal: Big Obama is watching you browse the web. Even Bush wasn't this power mad
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/timstanley/100220730/prism-scandal-big-obama-is-watching-you-browse-the-web-even-bush-wasnt-this-power-mad
By Tim Stanley US politics Last updated: June 7th, 2013
174 Comments Comment on this article
Internet companies deny helping the NSA to spy on customers
What next? We’ve had the IRS targeting conservative groups, journalists hounded by the state, the NSA collecting phone record data – and now it seems that the US government has been watching what you click on. According to The Guardian and the The Washington Post, the NSA is monitoring internet traffic through Google, Facebook, YouTube, Skype, Yahoo etc. The programme even has a sci-fi sounding name that conjures up images of some 25th century dystopia: PRISM. Would it also surprise you to learn that the FBI, CIA and post office are controlled by a megalomaniac computer with the voice of Betty White? No, me neither.
There’s some dispute over the details. 1) Were the tech firms complicit in the data recording? The Post and the Guardian initially stated that they were, which all but two of the companies have subsequently denied. Nevertheless, some are pointing out that if they were involved they would be prevented by law from talking about it. 2) Did the US government effectively spy on people without a warrant? If it did, it would arguably be entitled to do so under the Protect America Act passed by Congress in 2007. 3) Director of National Intelligence James R Clapper insists that the press has misrepresented the programmes and that its reporting is effectively undermining anti-terrorism efforts. Although quite how the US government knowing that I’m addicted to watching videos of sneezing pandas on YouTube helps anti-terrorism efforts has yet to be explained.
No one is suggesting that this all began under Obama. Nixon had his dirty tricks, Teddy Kennedy was an enthusiast for wiretapping mobsters, and George W Bush’s administration created most of the apparatus currently being exploited by Obama’s. But we should reserve special anger for Big Barack for the following reasons:
1. He was for surveillance before he was against it. Obama opposed the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act during the 2008 primaries when he was trying to look all civil libertarian. Once he had the nomination in the bag, he was suddenly for it.
2. He’s a liberal and liberals aren’t supposed to do this sort of thing. That’s presumably why the New York Times – the New York Times! – has produced such a hurt-sounding op-ed stating that he’s “lost all credibility” on civil liberties.
3. Obama has broadened the scope of the Bush plan. Take phone record surveillance. Bush used it to unearth phone calls overseas with the specific goal of tackling terrorism – and when his misdeeds were exposed he created a new programme with judicial oversight to appease liberals. By contrast, Obama’s administration has been monitoring all Verizon domestic calls with an indiscrimination that is an abuse even of the authoritarian Patriot Act.
Finally, Michelle Malkin raises a very good question. On the one hand, Obama recently declared that the War on Terror was basically over. On the other hand, he has stepped up efforts to carry out domestic surveillance. So, why the contradiction? Malkin concludes that while it’s possible that the NSA has a counter-terrorism motive, its moral cause is undermined by the attacks on political enemies and the crazy scope of the snooping. Big government likes power – and it wants more.
-
Ok so a little confused here, mainly because i haven't been drenching myself in detail much on this.
If FISA authorized it and its within the law for them to do this, why is it that Snowdens information is so classified? I mean, if they were with in the law to do so and we the public should know about it, why is it classified that they were doing it?
The FISA court deals with classified information. The information doesn't become unclassified just because they make rulings or authorize subpoenas. \
I don't know what the exact federal law is, but anyone who is given access to classified info is precluded from disclosing it both by the agreement they sign and the law.
-
So leahy, biden and panetta committed crimes and Obama never did shit about it right?
Not sure what crimes you're talking about?
-
The FISA court deals with classified information. The information doesn't become unclassified just because they make rulings or authorize subpoenas. \
I don't know what the exact federal law is, but anyone who is given access to classified info is precluded from disclosing it both by the agreement they sign and the law.
I agree with that. If they disclose classified info they are subject to the law, however, if the info is something that exposes a crime by the government I think it becomes a grey area.
-
I agree with that. If they disclose classified info they are subject to the law, however, if the info is something that exposes a crime by the government I think it becomes a grey area.
Maybe, although there is a specific way to become a legitimate whistle blower and this isn't it.
-
Maybe, although there is a specific way to become a legitimate whistle blower and this isn't it.
What would that be?
-
I agree with that. If they disclose classified info they are subject to the law, however, if the info is something that exposes a crime by the government I think it becomes a grey area.
Snowden blew the whistle because he thought what the NSA was doing was unconstitutional. It remains to be seen, just because a "secret court" gave them the thumbs up does NOT mean what they were doibg was constitutional or ok.
-
What would that be?
He should have contacted the IG (or whatever independent agency that would investigate complaints from workers like him) and filed a complaint. His job would have been protected.
-
PRISM scandal: Big Obama is watching you browse the web. Even Bush wasn't this power mad
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/timstanley/100220730/prism-scandal-big-obama-is-watching-you-browse-the-web-even-bush-wasnt-this-power-mad
By Tim Stanley US politics Last updated: June 7th, 2013
174 Comments Comment on this article
Internet companies deny helping the NSA to spy on customers
What next? We’ve had the IRS targeting conservative groups, journalists hounded by the state, the NSA collecting phone record data – and now it seems that the US government has been watching what you click on. According to The Guardian and the The Washington Post, the NSA is monitoring internet traffic through Google, Facebook, YouTube, Skype, Yahoo etc. The programme even has a sci-fi sounding name that conjures up images of some 25th century dystopia: PRISM. Would it also surprise you to learn that the FBI, CIA and post office are controlled by a megalomaniac computer with the voice of Betty White? No, me neither.
There’s some dispute over the details. 1) Were the tech firms complicit in the data recording? The Post and the Guardian initially stated that they were, which all but two of the companies have subsequently denied. Nevertheless, some are pointing out that if they were involved they would be prevented by law from talking about it. 2) Did the US government effectively spy on people without a warrant? If it did, it would arguably be entitled to do so under the Protect America Act passed by Congress in 2007. 3) Director of National Intelligence James R Clapper insists that the press has misrepresented the programmes and that its reporting is effectively undermining anti-terrorism efforts. Although quite how the US government knowing that I’m addicted to watching videos of sneezing pandas on YouTube helps anti-terrorism efforts has yet to be explained.
No one is suggesting that this all began under Obama. Nixon had his dirty tricks, Teddy Kennedy was an enthusiast for wiretapping mobsters, and George W Bush’s administration created most of the apparatus currently being exploited by Obama’s. But we should reserve special anger for Big Barack for the following reasons:
1. He was for surveillance before he was against it. Obama opposed the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act during the 2008 primaries when he was trying to look all civil libertarian. Once he had the nomination in the bag, he was suddenly for it.
2. He’s a liberal and liberals aren’t supposed to do this sort of thing. That’s presumably why the New York Times – the New York Times! – has produced such a hurt-sounding op-ed stating that he’s “lost all credibility” on civil liberties.
3. Obama has broadened the scope of the Bush plan. Take phone record surveillance. Bush used it to unearth phone calls overseas with the specific goal of tackling terrorism – and when his misdeeds were exposed he created a new programme with judicial oversight to appease liberals. By contrast, Obama’s administration has been monitoring all Verizon domestic calls with an indiscrimination that is an abuse even of the authoritarian Patriot Act.
Finally, Michelle Malkin raises a very good question. On the one hand, Obama recently declared that the War on Terror was basically over. On the other hand, he has stepped up efforts to carry out domestic surveillance. So, why the contradiction? Malkin concludes that while it’s possible that the NSA has a counter-terrorism motive, its moral cause is undermined by the attacks on political enemies and the crazy scope of the snooping. Big government likes power – and it wants more.
LOL - he's a liberal and he's not living up to conservatives stereotypical assumptions of how a liberal is supposed to act
that is fucking hilarious
so far the only crime Obama seems to have committed is not acting like a liberal in the way that conservatives like to imagine that liberals should behave
-
Snowden blew the whistle because he thought what the NSA was doing was unconstitutional. It remains to be seen, just because a "secret court" gave them the thumbs up does NOT mean what they were doibg was constitutional or ok.
This.
-
I hope he spends the rest of his life looking over his shoulder.
Snowden breaks silence amid request for asylum in Russia, says he is "free and able" to continue leaking
Published July 01, 2013
FoxNews.com
NSA leaker Edward Snowden broke his weeklong silence Monday, defending his “right to seek asylum” while separately claiming he remains “free and able” to publish sensitive information on U.S. surveillance.
The statement came as it was reported Snowden was now seeking asylum in Russia, which says it will not grant him refuge unless he stops leaking.
In his statement issued on theWikiLeaks website, Snowden attacked the Obama administration, saying, “On Thursday, President Obama declared before the world that he would not permit any diplomatic ‘wheeling and dealing’ over my case. Yet now it is being reported that after promising not to do so, the President ordered his Vice President to pressure the leaders of nations from which I have requested protection to deny my asylum petitions.
“This kind of deception from a world leader is not justice, and neither is the extralegal penalty of exile. These are the old, bad tools of political aggression. Their purpose is to frighten, not me, but those who would come after me.”
Snowden added, “In the end the Obama administration is not afraid of whistleblowers like me, Bradley Manning or Thomas Drake. We are stateless, imprisoned, or powerless. No, the Obama administration is afraid of you. It is afraid of an informed, angry public demanding the constitutional government it was promised — and it should be.”
Separately, in a letter in Spanish sent by Snowden to Ecuador President Rafael Correa and obtained and translated by Britain's Press Association, he declared, "I remain free and able to publish information that serves the public interest. No matter how many more days my life contains, I remain dedicated to the fight for justice in this unequal world.”
It was the first known statement from Snowden since he flew out of Hong Kong into Moscow more than a week ago.
Since then, Snowden has been seeking asylum in Ecuador. But he also reportedly is seeking asylum in a number of other countries, including Russia.
The Interfax news agency quoted a Russian official on Monday as saying that Snowden's representative, Sarah Harrison, handed over his request for political asylum on Sunday.
Yet Russia's President Vladimir Putin publicly issued a condition for any asylum request from Snowden -- he must stop leaking America's secrets.
"If he wants to go somewhere and there are those who would take him, he is welcome to do so," Putin said. "If he wants to stay here, there is one condition: He must stop his activities aimed at inflicting damage on our American partners, no matter how strange it may sound coming from my lips."
Snowden’s letter to Ecuador gave no indication he plans to meet that condition, though the letter may have been sent before Putin’s comments.
Putin addressed the controversy as Obama, during a visit to Tanzania, reiterated that he's "hopeful" Russia will take up the United States' request for extradition.
"There have been high-level discussions with the Russians about trying to find a solution to the problem," Obama said.
Officials still believe Snowden is in the transit zone somewhere in the Moscow airport. He found his status even more in limbo late last week, after Ecuador revoked travel documents that WikiLeaks, which is aiding Snowden, got from a lower-level Ecuadorian official.
With the U.S. also revoking Snowden's passport, Snowden has no apparent way -- at the moment -- to leave the Moscow airport without risking arrest.
State Department spokesman Patrick Ventrell, while saying he could not confirm Snowden's latest asylum request, reiterated that the U.S. can issue Snowden "one-entry travel documents" back to the United States, where he would presumably face the charges against him.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/07/01/snowden-breaks-silence-amid-request-for-asylum-in-russia-vows-to-continue/
-
-
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324436104578579152400246308.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_LEFTTopStorie
-
Dude is as close to pure evil as can be.
-
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/07/01/snowden-in-new-statement-accuses-obama-of-using-old-bad-tools-of-political-aggression
;D
-
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/02/glenn-greenwald-fox-news-world-shocked_n_3533536.html
Greenwald says a ton more is comin out that will be way worse than what has been revealed so far.
-
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/10/national-security-poll_n_3572406.html
:o
-
Egregious Cases Of US Government Employees Abusing Databases To Spy On Americans
Michael Kelley Jul. 9, 2013, 1:52 PM 2,795 5
inShare.6
Email
More
.
Headphones NSA Spy
Gary Nichols via U.S. Military
See Also
Experts Destroy Obama's Argument That Americans Must Sacrifice Privacy For Security
America's Secret Spy Court Has Been Radically Expanding The Powers Of The NSA
Vice President Joe Biden Asked Perhaps The Most Important Question About NSA Domestic Spying In 2006
Ever since Edward Snowden blew the whistle on the National Security Agency's massive domestic spying apparatus, Americans have been told that the government collects virtually all U.S. electronic communications for our own safety.
That assertion — which has since been disputed by security experts and two senators on the intelligence committee — also implies that we should totally trust the government, its employees, and its contractors having access to reams of private information about their fellow Americans.
(One of Snowden's leaks revealed that NSA analysts are permitted to look at the content of messages, or listen to phone calls, based on loose rules and their own discretion.)
"The real problem comes with trust," NSA Whistleblower William Binney told USA Today. "It's not just the trust that you have to have in the government. It's the trust you have to have in the government employees, [that] they won't go in the database — they can see if their wife is cheating with the neighbor or something like that."
Here are few examples of what can happen when humans have access to massive databases of electronic data:
• In 2008 two former NSA analysts who worked at the NSA center in Fort Gordon, Georgia told ABC they and their coworkers had listened in on the personal phone calls of soldiers stationed overseas.
"Hey, check this out," one said he would be told, "there's good phone sex or there's some pillow talk, pull up this call, it's really funny, go check it out. It would be some colonel making pillow talk and we would say, 'Wow, this was crazy.'"
• NSA analyst Adrienne Kinne told ABC she listened to hundreds of private conversations between Americans, including many from the International Red Cross and Doctors without Borders.
• NSA whistleblower Russ Tice claims that he saw NSA orders to tap the phone of then-Senator Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Senators John McCain and Diane Feinstein, then-Secretary of State Colin Powell, Gen. David Petraeus, and a current Supreme Court Justice.
"Outrageous abuses ... have happened, and it's all being kept hush hush," Tice told Business Insider.
• Michael Hayden, who was NSA director (1999 – 2005) when the first domestic spying programs began, corroborated Binney's claim when he told The Daily Beast that he remembered a collector who was fired for snooping on his ex-wife overseas.
• Tom Hays of The Associated Press reports there are "a batch of corruption cases in recent years against NYPD officers accused of abusing the FBI-operated National Crime Information Center database to cyber snoop on co-workers, tip off drug dealers, stage robberies and — most notoriously — scheme to abduct and eat women."
The National Crime Information Center (NCIC) database, which is maintained by the FBI and provides 9 million data points every day, can be accessed by 90,000 law enforcement agencies across the country.
Hays notes: "How often the database is used for unauthorized purposes is unclear."
In response to the AP report, Timothy B. Lee of The Washington Post writes: "These stories illustrate some of the kinds of misconduct that could occur with the NSA’s database of the nation’s phone calls."
Here's what Jonathon Turley, a constitutional law professor at George Washington University who has testified before Congress on the country's warrantless surveillance program, told ABC in 2008 after hearing the analysts' claims (emphasis ours): "This story is to surveillance law what Abu Ghraib was to prison law."
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/how-nsa-can-abuse-data-on-americans-2013-7#ixzz2YeuMgmvu
-
-
Germany nixes surveillance pact with US, Britain
By FRANK JORDANS
Associated Press
AP Photo
AP Photo/Matthias Schrader
Technology Video
Buy AP Photo Reprints
Interactive
Berlin Wall: 20 Years Later
BERLIN (AP) -- Germany canceled a Cold War-era surveillance pact with the United States and Britain on Friday in response to revelations by National Security Agency leaker Edward Snowden about those countries' alleged electronic eavesdropping operations.
Chancellor Angela Merkel had raised the issue of alleged National Security Agency spying with President Barack Obama when he visited Berlin in June. But with weeks to go before national elections, opposition parties had demanded clarity about the extent to which her government knew of the intelligence gathering operations directed at Germany and German citizens.
Government officials have insisted that U.S. and British intelligence were never given permission to break Germany's strict privacy laws. But they conceded that an agreement dating back to the late 1960s gave the U.S., Britain and France the right to request German authorities to conduct surveillance operations within Germany to protect their troops stationed there.
"The cancellation of the administrative agreements, which we have pushed for in recent weeks, is a necessary and proper consequence of the recent debate about protecting personal privacy," Germany's Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle said in a statement.
A German official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the cancellation would have no practical consequences.
He said the move was largely symbolic since the agreement had not been invoked since the end of the Cold War and would have no impact on current intelligence cooperation between Germany and its NATO allies. The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he wasn't authorized to publicly discuss the issue, said Germany was currently in talks with France to cancel its part of the agreement as well.
In March 2011, two U.S. Air Force members were killed and two others wounded when a gunman from Kosovo fired on a military bus at Frankfurt International Airport. The gunman told police he was motivated by anger over the U.S.-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
A spokeswoman for the U.S. embassy in Berlin, Ruth Bennett, confirmed that the agreement had been canceled but declined to comment further on the issue. Officials at the United Kingdom's embassy in Berlin couldn't immediately be reached for comment.
© 2013 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Learn more about our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
-
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/02/glenn-greenwald-fox-news-world-shocked_n_3533536.html
Greenwald says a ton more is comin out that will be way worse than what has been revealed so far.
Good, let her rip.
-
Putin gave Obama a big middle finger. Will be interesting to see how Obama responds.
Snowden should be in a cell with Bradley Manning.
-
Putin gave Obama a big middle finger. Will be interesting to see how Obama responds.
Snowden should be in a cell with Bradley Manning.
For the other info he leaked, I'd have to agree. But for blowing the whistle on the unconstitutional crap the NSA has been pulling on the public, absolutely not, IMHO.
-
For the other info he leaked, I'd have to agree. But for blowing the whistle on the unconstitutional crap the NSA has been pulling on the public, absolutely not, IMHO.
I'm glad we found out about the NSA spying, but did he really blow the whistle? He went to Hong Kong, then gave the information to the European media, without first trying to do what real whistle blowers do here. I'm not sure what to call him, other than a traitor.
I heard a Republican Congressman calling him a whistle blower yesterday. I'm not comfortable with that. We cannot encourage people to do what this guy did, in the manner in which he did it. Dangerous precedent.
-
I'm glad we found out about the NSA spying, but did he really blow the whistle? He went to Hong Kong, then gave the information to the European media, without first trying to do what real whistle blowers do here. I'm not sure what to call him, other than a traitor.
I heard a Republican Congressman calling him a whistle blower yesterday. I'm not comfortable with that. We cannot encourage people to do what this guy did, in the manner in which he did it. Dangerous precedent.
If he had stayed he would be in Guantanimo hours after leaking the information. On top of that, who knows what the American MSM would have done with it anyway, it's a high possibility they would have just buried it.
-
If he had stayed he would be in Guantanimo hours after leaking the information. On top of that, who knows what the American MSM would have done with it anyway, it's a high possibility they would have just buried it.
I think that was his motivation more than anything.... It's already came out that they have been wiretapping MSM reporters... He probably woulnd't have ever gotten it TO the MSM, or if he did, it would have just disappeared, covered up or marginalized, just like they're trying to do now.
The more I think about it, the more I believe he really had no choice but to get it out like he did. I still think he deserves to be tried for revealing National Security secrets that involve our actions abroad, but I can still understand from a certain point. If you're going to go on a moral crusade, it wouldn't make much sense to only blow the whistle on the fucked up shit going on within the borders.
But IMHO, everyone outside the US borders takes a backseat to the rights of the US citizens. I think we all know that every 1st world government does immoral shit to their neighbors in an effort to stay the dominant superpower and to protect it's interests, there is nothing you can do about that. But when the citizens are having their rights infringed on in the way we are..
Im glad someone in their had the balls to do something about the gross abuse of power the NSA displayed. I know I wouldn't have... for all my libertarian leaning moral grandstanding, I would have just taken the money, fucked my stripper gf, and kept going. If it weren't for people like him, willing to put his well being aside in order to try and ensure that our government respects the constitution and fears it's citizens.. well, this country would look far different. I may have made a different decision when I was younger, (during my military service period I was pretty fucking moto) but with a wife and child? I'd definitely take the money and try to ensure a comfortable future for my family.
I think all his efforts will be in vain though.... They can, and will, completely destroy his character, and use his release of other, sensitive information to brand him as a traitor (and arguably so). Hell, no one even gives a shit about PRISM, barely anyone I know has any idea what it is. They're too concerned with the Royal Baby (fucking ridiculous), the Kardashians, their X-box or getting fucked up to give a fuck about anything the governments doing. The others that know about it, are so jaded that they just shrug their shoulders and sigh.
Hell, my brother in law thinks it's fine, he actually said they can sneak up on his window and watch him do his business if they want, he doesn't have anything to hide so why should he care about what he cannot change? It's sickening how many people actually applaud the government creating a database of information on the citizens by illegally and unconstitutionally spying... these people actually believe that the government is doing this for righteous reasons, and that they're protecting us from some invisible boogeyman that would instantly vaporize half the country if the NSA shut down it's program.
It's un-fucking-real.
In short, fuck people.
-
Bro - that is the best post I ever read from you.
I think that was his motivation more than anything.... It's already came out that they have been wiretapping MSM reporters... He probably woulnd't have ever gotten it TO the MSM, or if he did, it would have just disappeared, covered up or marginalized, just like they're trying to do now.
The more I think about it, the more I believe he really had no choice but to get it out like he did. I still think he deserves to be tried for revealing National Security secrets that involve our actions abroad, but I can still understand from a certain point. If you're going to go on a moral crusade, it wouldn't make much sense to only blow the whistle on the fucked up shit going on within the borders.
But IMHO, everyone outside the US borders takes a backseat to the rights of the US citizens. I think we all know that every 1st world government does immoral shit to their neighbors in an effort to stay the dominant superpower and to protect it's interests, there is nothing you can do about that. But when the citizens are having their rights infringed on in the way we are..
Im glad someone in their had the balls to do something about the gross abuse of power the NSA displayed. I know I wouldn't have... for all my libertarian leaning moral grandstanding, I would have just taken the money, fucked my stripper gf, and kept going. If it weren't for people like him, willing to put his well being aside in order to try and ensure that our government respects the constitution and fears it's citizens.. well, this country would look far different. I may have made a different decision when I was younger, (during my military service period I was pretty fucking moto) but with a wife and child? I'd definitely take the money and try to ensure a comfortable future for my family.
I think all his efforts will be in vain though.... They can, and will, completely destroy his character, and use his release of other, sensitive information to brand him as a traitor (and arguably so). Hell, no one even gives a shit about PRISM, barely anyone I know has any idea what it is. They're too concerned with the Royal Baby (fucking ridiculous), the Kardashians, their X-box or getting fucked up to give a fuck about anything the governments doing. The others that know about it, are so jaded that they just shrug their shoulders and sigh.
Hell, my brother in law thinks it's fine, he actually said they can sneak up on his window and watch him do his business if they want, he doesn't have anything to hide so why should he care about what he cannot change? It's sickening how many people actually applaud the government creating a database of information on the citizens by illegally and unconstitutionally spying... these people actually believe that the government is doing this for righteous reasons, and that they're protecting us from some invisible boogeyman that would instantly vaporize half the country if the NSA shut down it's program.
It's un-fucking-real.
In short, fuck people.
-
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/04/congress-nsa-denied-access
>:(
-
Hell, my brother in law thinks it's fine, he actually said they can sneak up on his window and watch him do his business if they want, he doesn't have anything to hide so why should he care about what he cannot change? It's sickening how many people actually applaud the government creating a database of information on the citizens by illegally and unconstitutionally spying... these people actually believe that the government is doing this for righteous reasons, and that they're protecting us from some invisible boogeyman that would instantly vaporize half the country if the NSA shut down it's program.
This ridiculous logic, unfortunately shared by many people in this board, is just sick.
-
If he had stayed he would be in Guantanimo hours after leaking the information. On top of that, who knows what the American MSM would have done with it anyway, it's a high possibility they would have just buried it.
He would never be in Guantanamo as an American citizen, but he could have wound up in jail if he just went the New York Times and did an information dump.
Or he could have gone to someplace like Judicial Watch, hired someone, and made disclosures like a real whistle blower. I doubt he would have wound up in prison if he did it that way.
There is no way all of the media would have ignored the information. MSNBC? Yes. Fox News? No way.
-
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-administration-asserts-broad-surveillance-powers/2013/08/09/ff429504-0134-11e3-96a8-d3b921c0924a_print.html
Sick
-
He would never be in Guantanamo as an American citizen, but he could have wound up in jail if he just went the New York Times and did an information dump.
Or he could have gone to someplace like Judicial Watch, hired someone, and made disclosures like a real whistle blower. I doubt he would have wound up in prison if he did it that way.
There is no way all of the media would have ignored the information. MSNBC? Yes. Fox News? No way.
IMO, I have no doubt he would have wound up in prison that way. Obama's lying through his ass on this. The Congress and the courts are covering for him. Anybody wanting to bring this to the attention of the American people is fucked.
When the game's rigged, you gotta find different avenues.
Now there's some shit I think you and I agree that Snowden shouldn't have given away and charge him with that...but I'm not big on throwing this guy in jail for life over this (and I have zero doubt they will try and portray some inflated bullshit about the danger posed.
If it's such a big threat to our security, where are the attacks? They might be off, but why wait? If he opened a hole, the longer they wait, the more likely we'll close it. So I'm just not buying the National Security bullshit.
They want to spy on citizens and they want to do it with a free pass. Lobby your congressperson!!
-
IMO, I have no doubt he would have wound up in prison that way. Obama's lying through his ass on this. The Congress and the courts are covering for him. Anybody wanting to bring this to the attention of the American people is fucked.
When the game's rigged, you gotta find different avenues.
Now there's some shit I think you and I agree that Snowden shouldn't have given away and charge him with that...but I'm not big on throwing this guy in jail for life over this (and I have zero doubt they will try and portray some inflated bullshit about the danger posed.
If it's such a big threat to our security, where are the attacks? They might be off, but why wait? If he opened a hole, the longer they wait, the more likely we'll close it. So I'm just not buying the National Security bullshit.
They want to spy on citizens and they want to do it with a free pass. Lobby your congressperson!!
Definitely see an argument that he would have wound up in prison either way, although imagine the support he would have gotten if he did it the right way. I would have supported him. Many in Congress probably would have supported him.
At the end of the day, I'm glad we know about it.
-
good post
IMO, I have no doubt he would have wound up in prison that way. Obama's lying through his ass on this. The Congress and the courts are covering for him. Anybody wanting to bring this to the attention of the American people is fucked.
When the game's rigged, you gotta find different avenues.
Now there's some shit I think you and I agree that Snowden shouldn't have given away and charge him with that...but I'm not big on throwing this guy in jail for life over this (and I have zero doubt they will try and portray some inflated bullshit about the danger posed.
If it's such a big threat to our security, where are the attacks? They might be off, but why wait? If he opened a hole, the longer they wait, the more likely we'll close it. So I'm just not buying the National Security bullshit.
They want to spy on citizens and they want to do it with a free pass. Lobby your congressperson!!
-
More fallout.
France summons U.S. ambassador over spying
By Deb Riechmann & Kimberly Dozier
Associated Press
POSTED: 09:57 a.m. HST, Oct 21, 2013
LAST UPDATED: 10:22 a.m. HST, Oct 21, 2013
WASHINGTON » France joined a growing list of angry allies today who are demanding answers from the United States over aggressive surveillance tactics by the National Security Agency, this time, that it swept up — and in some cases recorded — 70.3 million French telephone calls and emails in one 30 day period.
Keeping tabs on allies is classic spycraft but the sweep and scope of the National Security Agency program has irritated Germany, Britain, Brazil, and most recently Mexico and France.
Calling the practice "totally unacceptable,'" an indignant French government demanded an explanation and summoned U.S. Ambassador Charles Rivkin for answers.
State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf said the U.S. already is reviewing its intelligence gathering to strike a "balance between the legitimate security concerns that our citizens have and the privacy concerns that we and our allies have as well about some of these alleged intelligence activities."
"We certainly hope that it doesn't" damage the United States' close working relationship with France, she said.
"The ambassador expressed his appreciation of the importance of the exchange, and promised to convey the points made back to Washington," a statement released by the U.S. Embassy in Paris said.
Rivkin assured Alexandre Ziegler, chief of staff to Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius that "our ongoing bilateral consultations on allegations of information gathering by U.S. government agencies would continue," the embassy statement said.
The level of the meetings, between the U.S. ambassador and an aide to Fabius suggested that France wasn't overly outraged by the revelations. Secretary of State John Kerry landed in Paris early today for meetings on Middle East issues and could have been contacted if relations were in danger.
The report in Le Monde, co-written by Glenn Greenwald, who originally revealed the surveillance program based on leaks from former NSA contractor Snowden, found that when certain numbers were used, the conversations were automatically recorded. The surveillance operation also swept up text messages based on key words, Le Monde reported, based on records from Dec. 10 to Jan 7.
The French government, which wants the surveillance to cease, also renewed demands for talks on protection of personal data.
"This sort of practice between partners that invades privacy is totally unacceptable and we have to make sure, very quickly, that this no longer happens," French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said during a meeting in Luxembourg with his European counterparts. Fabius said the U.S. ambassador had been summoned to the Foreign Ministry.
The most recent documents cited by Le Monde, dated to April 2013, also indicated the NSA's interest in email addresses linked to Wanadoo — once part of France Telecom — and Alcatel-Lucent, the French-American telecom company. One of the documents instructed analysts to draw not only from the electronic surveillance program, but also from another initiative dubbed Upstream, which allowed surveillance on undersea communications cables.
The U.S "gathers foreign intelligence of the type gathered by all nations," said Caitlin Hayden, spokeswoman for the National Security Council at the White House. "We've begun to review the way that we gather intelligence, so that we properly balance the legitimate security concerns of our citizens and allies with the privacy concerns that all people share."
http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/breaking/20131021_France_summons_US_ambassador_over_spying.html?id=228663981
-
I think this is public posturing, in this case for the sake of the French public and CYA for Hollande.
I am sure the Europeans (at high enough levels) knew this was going on. But none of the public was supposed to. Hence, all the official expressions of outrage.
More fallout.
France summons U.S. ambassador over spying
By Deb Riechmann & Kimberly Dozier
Associated Press
POSTED: 09:57 a.m. HST, Oct 21, 2013
LAST UPDATED: 10:22 a.m. HST, Oct 21, 2013
WASHINGTON » France joined a growing list of angry allies today who are demanding answers from the United States over aggressive surveillance tactics by the National Security Agency, this time, that it swept up — and in some cases recorded — 70.3 million French telephone calls and emails in one 30 day period.
Keeping tabs on allies is classic spycraft but the sweep and scope of the National Security Agency program has irritated Germany, Britain, Brazil, and most recently Mexico and France.
Calling the practice "totally unacceptable,'" an indignant French government demanded an explanation and summoned U.S. Ambassador Charles Rivkin for answers.
State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf said the U.S. already is reviewing its intelligence gathering to strike a "balance between the legitimate security concerns that our citizens have and the privacy concerns that we and our allies have as well about some of these alleged intelligence activities."
"We certainly hope that it doesn't" damage the United States' close working relationship with France, she said.
"The ambassador expressed his appreciation of the importance of the exchange, and promised to convey the points made back to Washington," a statement released by the U.S. Embassy in Paris said.
Rivkin assured Alexandre Ziegler, chief of staff to Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius that "our ongoing bilateral consultations on allegations of information gathering by U.S. government agencies would continue," the embassy statement said.
The level of the meetings, between the U.S. ambassador and an aide to Fabius suggested that France wasn't overly outraged by the revelations. Secretary of State John Kerry landed in Paris early today for meetings on Middle East issues and could have been contacted if relations were in danger.
The report in Le Monde, co-written by Glenn Greenwald, who originally revealed the surveillance program based on leaks from former NSA contractor Snowden, found that when certain numbers were used, the conversations were automatically recorded. The surveillance operation also swept up text messages based on key words, Le Monde reported, based on records from Dec. 10 to Jan 7.
The French government, which wants the surveillance to cease, also renewed demands for talks on protection of personal data.
"This sort of practice between partners that invades privacy is totally unacceptable and we have to make sure, very quickly, that this no longer happens," French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said during a meeting in Luxembourg with his European counterparts. Fabius said the U.S. ambassador had been summoned to the Foreign Ministry.
The most recent documents cited by Le Monde, dated to April 2013, also indicated the NSA's interest in email addresses linked to Wanadoo — once part of France Telecom — and Alcatel-Lucent, the French-American telecom company. One of the documents instructed analysts to draw not only from the electronic surveillance program, but also from another initiative dubbed Upstream, which allowed surveillance on undersea communications cables.
The U.S "gathers foreign intelligence of the type gathered by all nations," said Caitlin Hayden, spokeswoman for the National Security Council at the White House. "We've begun to review the way that we gather intelligence, so that we properly balance the legitimate security concerns of our citizens and allies with the privacy concerns that all people share."
http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/breaking/20131021_France_summons_US_ambassador_over_spying.html?id=228663981
-
I think this is public posturing, in this case for the sake of the French public and CYA for Hollande.
I am sure the Europeans (at high enough levels) knew this was going on. But none of the public was supposed to. Hence, all the official expressions of outrage.
Yep, I think you're right... More theatrics for the voters. :-\
-
http://www.thelocal.de/national/20131023-52547.html
Obama tapped Merkels phone and she is pissed off.
LOL - you schmucks voted for this asshole - eat it
-
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/23/merkel-phone-tapped_n_4150812.html#comments
-
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/10/23/german-chancellor-calls-president-obama-to-confront-him-over-completely-unacceptable-nsa-claims
FAIL
-
http://www.businessinsider.com/european-leaders-say-latest-spying-revelations-have-destroyed-their-trust-in-the-us-government-2013-10
Nice. Obama is a real peach aint he
-
http://www.businessinsider.com/european-leaders-say-latest-spying-revelations-have-destroyed-their-trust-in-the-us-government-2013-10
Nice. Obama is a real peach aint he
that was a fucked up thing to do. I dont think i can remember any us president in that have destroyed europes trust in usaa goverment like obama. If any other country had done the same thing and tapped obamas phone it would have been a big isaue and obama would have punished that country hard. But obama and your goverment thinks that they can do wtf they want to. Sad thing is they can, the countrys here are pussies and will forgive the kneegrow. And usa calla snowden a terrorist lol. Obama waa liked here in the beginning but he is pretty much hated know....bush did the same thing when they tried to get un to give them green light for the iraq war. They tapped there phones in hope to find spme dirt so they couöd blackmaiö the un delegate. But obama has take it a step farther
-
that was a fucked up thing to do. I dont think i can remember any us president in that have destroyed europes trust in usaa goverment like obama. If any other country had done the same thing and tapped obamas phone it would have been a big isaue and obama would have punished that country hard. But obama and your goverment thinks that they can do wtf they want to. Sad thing is they can, the countrys here are pussies and will forgive the kneegrow. And usa calla snowden a terrorist lol. Obama waa liked here in the beginning but he is pretty much hated know....bush did the same thing when they tried to get un to give them green light for the iraq war. They tapped there phones in hope to find spme dirt so they couöd blackmaiö the un delegate. But obama has take it a step farther
Give me a break. Everyone is spying on everyone else, sometimes with the support of the regime being spied on. For example, I am sure that the UK has asked the US to assist them in finding moles, and perhaps vice versa.
In any case, these NSA policies started under Bush. The disappointment I have with Obama is that he just continued Bush's initiatives. He apparently never formulated a strategy for US foreign policy to replace the Bush policies he ran against. So he has just muddled along, defensively reacting to each crisis on a purely ad hoc basis.
There is a lot to criticize Obama about, but the outrage over the NSA is not something that should be directed at him alone.
-
Give me a break. Everyone is spying on everyone else, sometimes with the support of the regime being spied on. For example, I am sure that the UK has asked the US to assist them in finding moles, and perhaps vice versa.
In any case, these NSA policies started under Bush. The disappointment I have with Obama is that he just continued Bush's initiatives. He apparently never formulated a strategy for US foreign policy to replace the Bush policies he ran against. So he has just muddled along, defensively reacting to each crisis on a purely ad hoc basis.
There is a lot to criticize Obama about, but the outrage over the NSA is not something that should be directed at him alone.
of course it should be directed to him now, he is the sitting president and can stop it, why go after bush who cant do shit about it?
and i wonder how it would sound if it was united states that where phone tapped by mexico or another country, usa would call it an outrage and threat mexico with embargos etc. its not for nothing the rest of the world thinks poorly of usa today, 20 years ago it was the opposit. i know i know usa is the best and dont care what the rest of the world thinks.