No doubt. That just would not make sense unless someone knew the issue. Any other time Glen Beck is just a loon set lose on some crazed ideas. Hey that Glen only has 1’n what a novel way to spell the name.ChewbaccaD said:I know, me and Glen Beck...
Read more: A Modern-Day Stasi State | The Nation http://www.thenation.com/article/174746/modern-day-stasi-state#ixzz2W2XeCzw6Edward Snowden, who is only 29, worked for Booz Allen at the NSA as an infrastructure analyst and telecommunications systems officer. His time there and at other private contractors included stints at NSA listening posts in Hawaii and Japan, and his job gave him access to some of the NSA’s most classified operations. They included a massive surveillance program called PRISM that monitors virtually all global Internet traffic on a real-time basis, and a telephone-monitoring program that gives the NSA access to millions of phone records of calls, including domestic ones, routed through telecom provider Verizon.
From his vantage point, he learned that the NSA monitors Americans “even if you’re not doing anything wrong.” From “just sitting at my desk,” Snowden said he had the “authority to wiretap anyone…” “If I wanted to see your e-mails or your wife’s phone, all I have to do is use intercepts. I can get your e-mails, passwords, phone records, credit cards.” He also discovered that the NSA is “using the system to go back in time to discover everything you’ve done.”
All of this is terrifying stuff that confirms much of what has been revealed about NSA surveillance by Bill Binney and his fellow NSA whistleblowers Tom Drake and Kirk Wiebe, who I recently profiled in The Nation.
Some news reports have focused on how such a “low level” contract employee could possibly have access to such secret material. But to me the greater revelation is what he has said about his employer. Thanks to Snowden, we now know that Booz Allen operates at the highest levels of the world’s most powerful intelligence-gathering organization and is engaged in operations that many Americans believe are unconstitutional and dangerous. We can only assume that the other companies at these heights—a list that includes SAIC, Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, CSC, CACI, ManTech and many others—are doing the same.
And the media (liberal in content, but owned by large corporations that are conservative in nature) is turning the story ever so slowly. Today, the line is that Snowden isn't a whistleblower and that the reporter from the Guardian is too close to the story to be trusted...Glenn_Wilson said:No doubt. That just would not make sense unless someone knew the issue. Any other time Glen Beck is just a loon set lose on some crazed ideas. Hey that Glen only has 1’n what a novel way to spell the name.
I have to say that this whole mess is unconstitutional and that it all started with the Patriot Act. That just opened the door for the abuse and manipulation.
That conclusion is a little melodramatic and premature, don't you think? I agree entirely that this is a serious matter, that we should all be concerned, and that some actions to counter these developments should be considered - and taken, but would suggest that we're a still some way off from needing to share extreme wingnut paranoia about "loss of freedom".ChewbaccaD said:We have lost our freedom. Period.
US whistle-blower Edward Snowden yesterday emerged from hiding in Hong Kong and revealed to the South China Morning Post that he will stay in the city to fight likely attempts by his government to have him extradited for leaking state secrets.
In an exclusive interview carried out from a secret location in the city, the former Central Intelligence Agency analyst also made explosive claims that the US government had been hacking into computers in Hong Kong and on the mainland for years.
http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/1259508/edward-snowden-us-government-has-been-hacking-hong-kong-and-chinaSnowden believed there had been more than 61,000 NSA hacking operations globally, with hundreds of targets in Hong Kong and on the mainland.
“We hack network backbones – like huge internet routers, basically – that give us access to the communications of hundreds of thousands of computers without having to hack every single one,” he said.
“Last week the American government happily operated in the shadows with no respect for the consent of the governed, but no longer. Every level of society is demanding accountability and oversight.”
Snowden said he was releasing the information to demonstrate “the hypocrisy of the US government when it claims that it does not target civilian infrastructure, unlike its adversaries”.
“Not only does it do so, but it is so afraid of this being known that it is willing to use any means, such as diplomatic intimidation, to prevent this information from becoming public.”
Since the shocking revelations a week ago, Snowden has been vilified as a defector but also hailed by supporters such as WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange.
“I’m neither traitor nor hero. I’m an American,” he said, adding that he was proud to be an American. “I believe in freedom of expression. I acted in good faith but it is only right that the public form its own opinion.”
i know you can have an opinion of your own, and often you do, plus u r quite observant and sharply express yourself... You mix plenty of acid...all that said, i suggest you use all those assests to to monitor a king bottom feeder you claim to cut the slack for...depending on the wind, he was all over...from defending the king fraud doper from texas to shedding crocodile tears to jumping on the band wagon to be one of the guys...(always after planting some crap like the last 'basher and haters'...use your own judgment, i have seen plenty of the fake to arrive at my own.Hugh Januss said:I mostly agree with you (I know, alert the media), but Glenn (or as you call him, Glen) falls under the heading of being sent off to set up the rules more than enjoying the benefits. True he lived through that so now he can enjoy the benefits, so I guess you can hate him for that.
Mostly I cut him a little slack because he is obviously slightly brilliant (after all he is friends with ChrisE).
Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein denounced his “act of treason” and DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz called for his prosecution. Republican House Speaker John Boehner bluntly called Snowden a “traitor.”
Maine Sen. Angus King, an independent who caucuses with Democrats, told reporters Tuesday: “He’s no hero. He put people’s lives at risk.” His Republican colleague, Susan Collins, lambasted Snowden as “a high-school drop-out who had little maturity [and] had not successfully completed anything he had undertaken.”
The New Yorker’s Jeffrey Toobin criticized Snowden for the temerity to think he was answering to a “higher calling” when he leaked all that information, despite the obvious criminality of his actions. “He wasn’t blowing the whistle on anything illegal; he was exposing something that failed to meet his own standards of propriety,” Toobin wrote. “In an act that speaks more to his ego than his conscience, he threw the secrets he knew up in the air—and trusted, somehow, that good would come of it.”
New York Times columnist David Brooks, who cast Snowden as a troubling archetype of the 21st-century antisocial male, one of “the apparently growing share of young men in their 20s who are living technological existences in the fuzzy land between their childhood institutions and adult family commitments.” (lolwut...)
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/nsa-scandal-peter-king-glenn-greenwald-92665.html?hp=l10“Reporters who helped reveal these programs, do you think something should happen to them — should they be punished as well?” Anderson Cooper asked King on CNN.
“If they knew that this was classified information, I think action should be taken, especially on something of this magnitude,” King said. “I think something on this magnitude, there is an obligation, both moral but also legal, I believe, against a reporter disclosing something which would so severely compromise national security. As a practical matter, I guess it happened in the past several years, a number of reporters who have been prosecuted under us, so the answer is yes to your question.”
Interesting commentary from "the Wire" producer:Rep. Peter King, who has been calling for leak journalists to be punished in light of the NSA scandal, is now specifically calling for legal action against The Guardian journalist Glenn Greenwald.
You would think that the government was listening in to the secrets of 200 million Americans from the reaction and the hyperbole being tossed about. And you would think that rather than a legal court order which is an inevitable consequence of legislation that we drafted and passed, something illegal had been discovered to the government’s shame.
Nope. Nothing of the kind. Though apparently, the U.K.’s Guardian, which broke this faux-scandal, is unrelenting in its desire to scale the heights of self-congratulatory hyperbole.
Having labored as a police reporter in the days before the Patriot Act, I can assure all there has always been a stage before the wiretap, a preliminary process involving the capture, retention and analysis of raw data. It has been so for decades now in this country. The only thing new here, from a legal standpoint, is the scale on which the FBI and NSA are apparently attempting to cull anti-terrorism leads from that data. But the legal and moral principles? Same old stuff.
Allow for a comparable example, dating to the early 1980s in a place called Baltimore, Maryland.
There, city detectives once began to suspect that major traffickers were using a combination of public pay phones and digital pagers to communicate their business. And they took their suspicions to a judge and obtained court orders — not to monitor any particular suspect, but to instead cull the dialed numbers from the thousands and thousands of calls made to and from certain city pay phones.
Think about it. There is certainly a public expectation of privacy when you pick up a pay phone on the streets of Baltimore, is there not? And certainly, the detectives knew that many, many Baltimoreans were using those pay phones for legitimate telephonic communication. Yet, a city judge had no problem allowing them to place dialed-number recorders on as many pay phones as they felt the need to monitor, knowing that every single number dialed to or from those phones would be captured. So authorized, detectives gleaned the numbers of digital pagers and they began monitoring the incoming digitized numbers on those pagers — even though they had yet to learn to whom those pagers belonged. The judges were okay with that, too, and signed another order allowing the suspect pagers to be “cloned” by detectives, even though in some cases the suspect in possession of the pager was not yet positively identified.
When the government grabs every single ****ing telephone call made from the United States over a period of months and years, it is not a prelude to monitoring anything in particular. Why not? Because that is tens of billions of phone calls and for the love of god, how many agents do you think the FBI has? How many computer-runs do you think the NSA can do — and then specifically analyze and assess each result? When the government asks for something, it is notable to wonder what they are seeking and for what purpose. When they ask for everything, it is not for specific snooping or violations of civil rights, but rather a data base that is being maintained as an investigative tool.
Indeed, one Republican author of the law, who was quoted as saying he didn’t think the Patriot Act would be so used, has, in this frantic little moment of national overstatement, revealed himself to be either a political coward or an incompetent legislator. He asked for this. We asked for this. We did so because we measured the reach and possible overreach of law enforcement against the risks of terrorism and made a conscious choice.
No.............Amsterhammer said:That conclusion is a little melodramatic and premature, don't you think? I agree entirely that this is a serious matter, that we should all be concerned, and that some actions to counter these developments should be considered - and taken, but would suggest that we're a still some way off from needing to share extreme wingnut paranoia about "loss of freedom".
Now things are gonna get tricky - revelations about our spying will quickly have many labeling him as a "traitor".
And some in the mainstream media are following along lock-step. They are playing a propaganda game now and hoping against hope that stupid stories like Trayvon Martin will distract people because it's a shiner penny. MSNBC is leading with Martin now...disgusting.Bala Verde said:Check this out, just the quotes:
You just figured that out?Scott SoCal said:I don't know when the exactly the country became so divided. I have opinions but I'm second guessing them. I found the poll odd for the same reason you did.
It appears many on the left and many on the right have no core beliefs other than party.
Re 9/11 the US had documentation warning that terroists might fly aircraft into buildings. The French had already intercepted a plot to fly aircraft into the Eiffel Tower. So you are right about paying attention to detail.Hugh Januss said:It is snooping on a giant scale, and every Legislator who calls Snowden a traitor should be waterboarded themselves, but I find myself wondering if surveillance of this type really could stop events like Boston and 9/11/01 do I really mind if they might know that on Tuesday I called the girlfriend at 6:15PM to see if I should pick up anything from the grocery store on the way home?
Of course it did not stop the Boston Marathon bombing, but maybe we just need guys running it to be a little more attentive to detail?
pricelessGlenn_Wilson said:Crazy Talk. That would be the name of the show. "Crazy Talk" on the EIB networks.
Are you upset about something? Spend less time calling people names and relive the laser like focus you have on my posts,,,,,,that might help ya out.python said:i know you can have an opinion of your own, and often you do, plus u r quite observant and sharply express yourself... You mix plenty of acid...all that said, i suggest you use all those assests to to monitor a king bottom feeder you claim to cut the slack for...depending on the wind, he was all over...from defending the king fraud doper from texas to shedding crocodile tears to jumping on the band wagon to be one of the guys...(always after planting some crap like the last 'basher and haters'...use your own judgment, i have seen plenty of the fake to arrive at my own.
I saw the original reply just as I was crashing, and decided to reply once I was fully awake and suitably medicated, however....ChewbaccaD said:No.............
The info they had pre 9/11 was presumably obtained by more 'old-fashioned' methods than what we're talking about today. I have no idea if the lore on this is apocryphal or not, but I remember reading that Bubba was presented with an intelligence report pointing a clear finger towards Al-Q and OBL, while enjoying a down month on the ranch, and either waved it off, didn't even read it, or chose to ignore it. Of course, it's impossible to judge if 9/11 could have been prevented even if the report had been acted on. But, they definitely knew that some sh!t was going to go down.Hugh Januss said:It is snooping on a giant scale, and every Legislator who calls Snowden a traitor should be waterboarded themselves, but I find myself wondering if surveillance of this type really could stop events like Boston and 9/11/01 do I really mind if they might know that on Tuesday I called the girlfriend at 6:15PM to see if I should pick up anything from the grocery store on the way home?
Of course it did not stop the Boston Marathon bombing, but maybe we just need guys running it to be a little more attentive to detail?
I had the "pleasure" to read the 9/11 commision report and there were reports as you say in your post above.Amsterhammer said:The info they had pre 9/11 was presumably obtained by more 'old-fashioned' methods than what we're talking about today. I have no idea if the lore on this is apocryphal or not, but I remember reading that Bubba was presented with an intelligence report pointing a clear finger towards Al-Q and OBL, while enjoying a down month on the ranch, and either waved it off, didn't even read it, or chose to ignore it. Of course, it's impossible to judge if 9/11 could have been prevented even if the report had been acted on. But, they definitely knew that some sh!t was going to go down.
There was a reason I deleted the majority of the post.Amsterhammer said:I saw the original reply just as I was crashing, and decided to reply once I was fully awake and suitably medicated, however....
No, I'm no constitutional scholar, nor any kind of legal expert. I have never claimed to be either of those either. I'm just a nobody posting my opinions, sometimes considered and thought through, sometimes just gut reactions, on one of a gazillion forums on the great and glorious webz.
What neither I, nor anyone else, really needs on these here webz is for someone to constantly be flaunting their superior legal knowledge and, in effect, telling others to stfu because they don't know as much about the law as 'someone' does, and that therefore their opinions are of inferior value.
Incidentally, neither lawyers nor law students are always right.
As to the meat of the argument, there's not really much of an argument. We pretty much agree. Like many (or even most,) I was prepared to 'accept' the post 9/11 reality that the PA had moved the boundaries of (domestic) intelligence gathering and surveillance onto a whole new level. The common supposition had always been (imo) that state snooping was basically targeted and limited, as opposed to widespread and random.
Now, we find out that state snooping has been, and is taking place in an entirely unprecedented, vast, and random manner - which is an entirely different cess-pool of rotting fish. My one and only disagreement with you was that I think it's way too early, and kind of exaggerated, to be saying stuff like, 'freedom is dead, etc'.
War of Independence (1775–1783)
Mexican–American War (1846-1848)
American Civil War (1861–1865)
Spanish-American War (1898)
Various Indian wars
First World War (1917-1918)
Second World War (1941-1945)
Korean War (1950-1953)
Vietnam War (1957-1975)
Panama Invaison (1989)
Gulf War (1990-1991)
Balkan War (1996-1999)
War on Terrorism & Afghanistan (2001–present)
Iraq War (2003-2011)
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57589252/u.s.-syria-used-chemical-weapons-crossing-red-line/The Obama administration has concluded that Syrian President Bashar Assad's government used chemical weapons against the rebels seeking to overthrow him and, in a major policy shift, President Obama has decided to supply military support to the rebels, the White House announced Thursday
nah, obama's spokesperson said, iirc, there will be no, as of now, american-enforced no fly zone and no ground troops plans...Scott SoCal said:I guess we should add another.