Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
November 27, 2014, 06:17:13 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Edward Snowden: the whistleblower behind the NSA surveillance revelations  (Read 160558 times)
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 10114


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #50 on: June 19, 2013, 05:26:55 AM »

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

Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 10114


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #51 on: June 20, 2013, 03:21:53 AM »

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.
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 10114


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #52 on: June 20, 2013, 12:30:45 PM »

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/20/fisa-court-nsa-without-warrant


Holder is knee deep in this mess too. 
Report to moderator   Logged
Dos Equis
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 42309

I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)


« Reply #53 on: June 21, 2013, 05:12:10 PM »

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/
Report to moderator   Logged
Slapper
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 2590


Conservatives are to be hung by their balls.


« Reply #54 on: June 21, 2013, 08:35:19 PM »

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).
Report to moderator   Logged
Slapper
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 2590


Conservatives are to be hung by their balls.


« Reply #55 on: June 21, 2013, 08:43:35 PM »

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?
Report to moderator   Logged
Shockwave
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 20872


Decepticons! Scramble!


« Reply #56 on: June 21, 2013, 09:05:44 PM »

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.
Report to moderator   Logged
Slapper
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 2590


Conservatives are to be hung by their balls.


« Reply #57 on: June 21, 2013, 09:09:24 PM »

[...]this is all done under robust judicial oversight.[...]

Illegal too.
Report to moderator   Logged
Slapper
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 2590


Conservatives are to be hung by their balls.


« Reply #58 on: June 21, 2013, 09:10:52 PM »

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.

Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 10114


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #59 on: June 24, 2013, 06:03:48 AM »

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/24/edward-snowden-cuba-russia_n_3489332.html

Making O-TWINk look like a real buffoon
Report to moderator   Logged
Dos Equis
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 42309

I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)


« Reply #60 on: June 24, 2013, 03:33:21 PM »

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. 
Report to moderator   Logged
Dos Equis
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 42309

I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)


« Reply #61 on: June 25, 2013, 05:51:30 PM »

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
Report to moderator   Logged
Shockwave
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 20872


Decepticons! Scramble!


« Reply #62 on: June 25, 2013, 06:14:32 PM »

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'.
Report to moderator   Logged
Dos Equis
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 42309

I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)


« Reply #63 on: June 25, 2013, 06:32:13 PM »

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? 
Report to moderator   Logged
Shockwave
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 20872


Decepticons! Scramble!


« Reply #64 on: June 25, 2013, 06:37:06 PM »

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.
Report to moderator   Logged
Dos Equis
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 42309

I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)


« Reply #65 on: June 25, 2013, 06:56:04 PM »

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. 
Report to moderator   Logged
Skip8282
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 6484



« Reply #66 on: June 25, 2013, 06:58:37 PM »

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.

Report to moderator   Logged
Dos Equis
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 42309

I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)


« Reply #67 on: June 25, 2013, 07:14:20 PM »



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
Report to moderator   Logged
Roger Bacon
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 21015


Roger Bacon tries to be witty and fails


« Reply #68 on: June 25, 2013, 07:18:10 PM »

Terrorists changing tactics in wake of surveillance program leaks, officials say
By Justin Fishel
Published June 25, 2013
 FoxNews.com


Bullshit... That's hilarious

Report to moderator   Logged

Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 10114


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #69 on: June 25, 2013, 07:26:49 PM »

 Cheesy


* 1000799_507072399366746_732063322_n.jpg (19.04 KB, 314x403 - viewed 46 times.)
Report to moderator   Logged
Roger Bacon
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 21015


Roger Bacon tries to be witty and fails


« Reply #70 on: June 25, 2013, 07:27:10 PM »

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.
Report to moderator   Logged

Dos Equis
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 42309

I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)


« Reply #71 on: June 27, 2013, 02:23:33 PM »

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
Report to moderator   Logged
GigantorX
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 5465


GetBig's A-Team is the Light of Truth!


« Reply #72 on: June 27, 2013, 02:28:01 PM »

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.
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 10114


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #73 on: June 27, 2013, 02:29:06 PM »

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
Report to moderator   Logged
Straw Man
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 25592


one dwells in nirvana


« Reply #74 on: June 27, 2013, 03:02:41 PM »

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
Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Theme created by Egad Community. Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!