National Security

wkmac

Well-Known Member
Glenn Greenwald exposes NSA Operation XKeyscore thanks to Snowden NSA revelations.

A top secret National Security Agency program allows analysts to search with no prior authorization through vast databases containing emails, online chats and the browsing histories of millions of individuals, according to documents provided by whistleblower Edward Snowden.
The NSA boasts in training materials that the program, called XKeyscore, is its "widest-reaching" system for developing intelligence from the internet.

The latest revelations will add to the intense public and congressional debate around the extent of NSA surveillance programs. They come as senior intelligence officials testify to the Senate judiciary committee on Wednesday, releasing classified documents in response to the Guardian's earlier stories on bulk collection of phone records and Fisa surveillance court oversight.
The files shed light on one of Snowden's most controversial statements, made in his first video interview published by the Guardian on June 10.
"I, sitting at my desk," said Snowden, could "wiretap anyone, from you or your accountant, to a federal judge or even the president, if I had a personal email".
US officials vehemently denied this specific claim. Mike Rogers, the Republican chairman of the House intelligence committee, said of Snowden's assertion: "He's lying. It's impossible for him to do what he was saying he could do."
But training materials for XKeyscore detail how analysts can use it and other systems to mine enormous agency databases by filling in a simple on-screen form giving only a broad justification for the search. The request is not reviewed by a court or any NSA personnel before it is processed.
XKeyscore, the documents boast, is the NSA's "widest reaching" system developing intelligence from computer networks – what the agency calls Digital Network Intelligence (DNI). One presentation claims the program covers "nearly everything a typical user does on the internet", including the content of emails, websites visited and searches, as well as their metadata.
Analysts can also use XKeyscore and other NSA systems to obtain ongoing "real-time" interception of an individual's internet activity.
 

cheryl

I started this.
Staff member
Tony, once again, what liberties have you lost?

Rights and freedoms we have all needlessly lost in the name of National Security. Graphic courtesy of http://www.nyclu.org/
eroding_liberty-1-1.jpg
eroding_liberty-2-2.jpg
 

wkmac

Well-Known Member
Rights and freedoms we have all needlessly lost in the name of National Security. Graphic courtesy of New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU) - American Civil Liberties Union of New York State

WOW! There must be some kind of consciousness thing going on here because earlier when I saw Road's question to Tony, that very document from the NY Civil Liberties Union immediately came to mind. I was thinking what a good response to the question that would make. Tip of the hat!
 

tonyexpress

Whac-A-Troll Patrol
Staff member
Noam Chomsky: Obama's Attack on Civil Liberties Has Gone Way Beyond Imagination

On Obama's 2012 election campaign web site, it clearly states that Obama has prosecuted six whistleblowers under the Espionage Act. Does he think he's appealing to some constituency with that affirmation? I don't know what base he's appealing to.

If he thinks he's appealing to the nationalist base, well, they're not going to vote for him anyway. That's why I don't understand it. I don't think he's doing anything besides alienating his own natural base. So it's something else.

What it is is the same kind of commitment to expanding executive power that Cheney and Rumsfeld had. He kind of puts it in mellifluous terms and there's a little difference in his tone. It's not as crude and brutal as they were, but it's pretty hard to see much of a difference.

It also extends to other developments, most of which we don't really know about, like the surveillance state that's being built and the capacity to pick up electronic communication. It's an enormous attack on personal space and privacy. There's essentially nothing left. And that will get worse with the new drone technologies that are being developed and given to local police forces.


From the ACLU: Supreme Court Rules "Material Support" Law Can Stand Under the law, individuals face up to 15 years in prison for providing "material support" to FTOs, even if their work is intended to promote peaceful, lawful objectives. "Material support" is defined to include any "service," "training," "expert advice or assistance" or "personnel."


Obama DOJ, Yahoo Battle Over E-Mail Privacy


2001-2011: A decade of civil liberties’ erosion in America

To quote Glenn Greenwald again: “A primary reason Bush and Cheney succeeded in their radical erosion of core liberties is because they focused their assault on non-citizens with foreign-sounding names, casting the appearance that none of what they were doing would ever affect the average American. There were several exceptions to that tactic — the due-process-free imprisonment of Americans Yaser Hamdi and Jose Padilla, the abuse of the “material witness” statute to detain American Muslims, the eavesdropping on Americans’ communications without warrants — but the vast bulk of the abuses were aimed at non-citizens. That is now clearly changing.

“The most recent liberty-abridging, Terrorism-justified controversies have focused on diluting the legal rights of American citizens (in part because the rights of non-citizens are largely gone already and there are none left to attack). A bipartisan group from Congress sponsors legislation to strip Americans of their citizenship based on Terrorism accusations. Barack Obama claims the right to assassinate Americans far from any battlefield and with no due process of any kind.

The Obama administration begins covertly abandoning long-standing Miranda protections for American suspects by vastly expanding what had long been a very narrow “public safety” exception, and now Eric Holder explicitly advocates legislation to codify that erosion.

............
 

tonyexpress

Whac-A-Troll Patrol
Staff member
WOW! There must be some kind of consciousness thing going on here because earlier when I saw Road's question to Tony, that very document from the NY Civil Liberties Union immediately came to mind. I was thinking what a good response to the question that would make. Tip of the hat!

Funny I was also on that document and Cheryl beat me too it...
 

wkmac

Well-Known Member
Noam Chomsky: Obama's Attack on Civil Liberties Has Gone Way Beyond Imagination

On Obama's 2012 election campaign web site, it clearly states that Obama has prosecuted six whistleblowers under the Espionage Act. Does he think he's appealing to some constituency with that affirmation? I don't know what base he's appealing to.

If he thinks he's appealing to the nationalist base, well, they're not going to vote for him anyway. That's why I don't understand it. I don't think he's doing anything besides alienating his own natural base. So it's something else.

What it is is the same kind of commitment to expanding executive power that Cheney and Rumsfeld had. He kind of puts it in mellifluous terms and there's a little difference in his tone. It's not as crude and brutal as they were, but it's pretty hard to see much of a difference.

It also extends to other developments, most of which we don't really know about, like the surveillance state that's being built and the capacity to pick up electronic communication. It's an enormous attack on personal space and privacy. There's essentially nothing left. And that will get worse with the new drone technologies that are being developed and given to local police forces.


From the ACLU: Supreme Court Rules "Material Support" Law Can Stand Under the law, individuals face up to 15 years in prison for providing "material support" to FTOs, even if their work is intended to promote peaceful, lawful objectives. "Material support" is defined to include any "service," "training," "expert advice or assistance" or "personnel."


Obama DOJ, Yahoo Battle Over E-Mail Privacy


2001-2011: A decade of civil liberties’ erosion in America

To quote Glenn Greenwald again: “A primary reason Bush and Cheney succeeded in their radical erosion of core liberties is because they focused their assault on non-citizens with foreign-sounding names, casting the appearance that none of what they were doing would ever affect the average American. There were several exceptions to that tactic — the due-process-free imprisonment of Americans Yaser Hamdi and Jose Padilla, the abuse of the “material witness” statute to detain American Muslims, the eavesdropping on Americans’ communications without warrants — but the vast bulk of the abuses were aimed at non-citizens. That is now clearly changing.

“The most recent liberty-abridging, Terrorism-justified controversies have focused on diluting the legal rights of American citizens (in part because the rights of non-citizens are largely gone already and there are none left to attack). A bipartisan group from Congress sponsors legislation to strip Americans of their citizenship based on Terrorism accusations. Barack Obama claims the right to assassinate Americans far from any battlefield and with no due process of any kind.

The Obama administration begins covertly abandoning long-standing Miranda protections for American suspects by vastly expanding what had long been a very narrow “public safety” exception, and now Eric Holder explicitly advocates legislation to codify that erosion.

............

I've been reading and keeping up with critiques of Obama's record on the surveillance over reach from the paleo-right to the paleo-left, anarchists, left libertarians and even the socialists and the critiques are almost uniform in their condemnation of the current administration. Now I agree with Road there are some here who are only critical as a result of Obama and as soon as the fortunes of power in Washington swing back in the other direction, those now critical will return to being defenders of.

Now this is directed to Road,

Whether Cheryl made a mistake or not in posting what she posted, you can question that but your veiled assertion she does so for motive of "it's about Obama only" is flat wrong. I, as well as she have been posting and being critical of over reach by both Obama/democrats just as I/she did when it was Bush/republicans. When the threat to the internet over reach first appeared on the scene under Bush, Cheryl was right in the middle with several of use who were critical of such efforts. She even started a number of threads on the issue in criticism of Washington DC of these policies instigated by the republicans. In fact, Tony also has been equally critical of both sides.

Interpretation of a news story is one thing and is fair game in the discussion but I'll challenge you when it comes to accusing either one of playing a political agenda when it pertains to this issue.
 

cheryl

I started this.
Staff member
Whether Cheryl made a mistake or not in posting what she posted, you can question that but your veiled assertion she does so for motive of "it's about Obama only" is flat wrong. I, as well as she have been posting and being critical of over reach by both Obama/democrats just as I/she did when it was Bush/republicans. When the threat to the internet over reach first appeared on the scene under Bush, Cheryl was right in the middle with several of use who were critical of such efforts. She even started a number of threads on the issue in criticism of Washington DC of these policies instigated by the republicans. In fact, Tony also has been equally critical of both sides.

Interpretation of a news story is one thing and is fair game in the discussion but I'll challenge you when it comes to accusing either one of playing a political agenda when it pertains to this issue.
Thanks wkmac. I appreciate that you posted that.
 

cheryl

I started this.
Staff member
US secrets—and lies—unravel in NSA leaks - MSNBC

Eight weeks ago a series of explosive leaks blew the hinges off the closet containing the National Security Agency’s skeletons.

Before Snowden’s leaks, reauthorizations of laws like the Patriot Act or the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Amendments Act were mere occasions for Cassandras in Congress to espouse vague prophesies about the eroding of American freedoms. Legislation was crafted in such opaque terms that the government could collect information on Americans as long as it wasn’t “targeting them,” or when one end of the communication was presumed to be outside the country. Legislators used that linguistic distinction to publicly insist no information was being gathered on Americans at all.

“What made this so important was not simply that it was unknown or unfamiliar, but that it was directly at odds with what the public had been told was the case,” says Steven Aftergood, director of the Federation of American Scientists’ Project on Government Secrecy. “In other words, it meant we had been misled.”
 

roadrunner2012

Four hours in the mod queue for a news link
Troll
I've been reading and keeping up with critiques of Obama's record on the surveillance over reach from the paleo-right to the paleo-left, anarchists, left libertarians and even the socialists and the critiques are almost uniform in their condemnation of the current administration. Now I agree with Road there are some here who are only critical as a result of Obama and as soon as the fortunes of power in Washington swing back in the other direction, those now critical will return to being defenders of.

Now this is directed to Road,

Whether Cheryl made a mistake or not in posting what she posted, you can question that but your veiled assertion she does so for motive of "it's about Obama only" is flat wrong. I, as well as she have been posting and being critical of over reach by both Obama/democrats just as I/she did when it was Bush/republicans. When the threat to the internet over reach first appeared on the scene under Bush, Cheryl was right in the middle with several of use who were critical of such efforts. She even started a number of threads on the issue in criticism of Washington DC of these policies instigated by the republicans. In fact, Tony also has been equally critical of both sides.

Interpretation of a news story is one thing and is fair game in the discussion but I'll challenge you when it comes to accusing either one of playing a political agenda when it pertains to this issue.

Perhaps Cheryl did complain back in the Bush/Cheney days, maybe a link or three could be provided. I do recall some posters here saying that whatever powers Bush grabbed would only be expanded upon by the next President. I bet you'd do the same if it were you ;)

I have never assumed that anything I write on the internet is private, and I don't have any doubts that if Cheryl was presented with a valid warrant she would give the authorities everything they asked for. I also do not assume that my telephone conversations are private, or my mail, for that matter.

I still dont think Tony has lost any rights, him being a well off white man and all. Now if he were a young person of color in NYC, I'd say yes indeed, his rights are being infringed upon.

Do I approve of what the NSA is doing? Likely not, but it would seem that no one really knows what they are doing, so I really can't answer intelligently. I have to figure that as technology advances, even less will be truly private. How far off is the ability to read thoughts? Not that far would be my guess.
 

cheryl

I started this.
Staff member
Perhaps Cheryl did complain back in the Bush/Cheney days, maybe a link or three could be provided. I do recall some posters here saying that whatever powers Bush grabbed would only be expanded upon by the next President. I bet you'd do the same if it were you ;)
No, I always stood up for net neutrality. I believe your statement says something about your personal beliefs.
I have never assumed that anything I write on the internet is private, and I don't have any doubts that if Cheryl was presented with a valid warrant she would give the authorities everything they asked for. I also do not assume that my telephone conversations are private, or my mail, for that matter.
Perhaps I am too idealistic because I was on the internet in the mid 1990's when corporations and the government were not in control.
I still dont think Tony has lost any rights, him being a well off white man and all. Now if he were a young person of color in NYC, I'd say yes indeed, his rights are being infringed upon.
mmmm, if you read the text of the nyclu graphics I posted you would know the facts about how every US citizen has lost rights regardless of their race etc. I do however respect your personal right to voluntarily give up your own personal rights for the greater good if that is the way you see it.
Do I approve of what the NSA is doing? Likely not, but it would seem that no one really knows what they are doing, so I really can't answer intelligently. I have to figure that as technology advances, even less will be truly private. How far off is the ability to read thoughts? Not that far would be my guess.
Unfortunately most US citizens seem as unconcerned as you are about the the erosion of their constitutional rights and liberties. To extend that to giving up access to your personal thoughts is even more worrisome to me.

I respect your right to voluntarily give up your privacy or thoughts if that is your choice. I choose to voice my opinion that privacy is a constitutional right of US citizens and my thoughts are my own. None of this is the business of any government or corporation.

Maybe I'm a dinosaur.
 

wkmac

Well-Known Member
Perhaps Cheryl did complain back in the Bush/Cheney days, maybe a link or three could be provided. I do recall some posters here saying that whatever powers Bush grabbed would only be expanded upon by the next President. I bet you'd do the same if it were you ;)

I have never assumed that anything I write on the internet is private, and I don't have any doubts that if Cheryl was presented with a valid warrant she would give the authorities everything they asked for. I also do not assume that my telephone conversations are private, or my mail, for that matter.

I still dont think Tony has lost any rights, him being a well off white man and all. Now if he were a young person of color in NYC, I'd say yes indeed, his rights are being infringed upon.

Do I approve of what the NSA is doing? Likely not, but it would seem that no one really knows what they are doing, so I really can't answer intelligently. I have to figure that as technology advances, even less will be truly private. How far off is the ability to read thoughts? Not that far would be my guess.

I think Cheryl covered it quite nicely so I'll just leave it there. You might do well to look at the history of suppression of dissent from the Civil War, WW1, crushing of unions, through the red scare of the 50's, antiwar and civil rights of the 60's or the latest in those opposing corporatist globalism and economic New World Orderism or what others rightly call Anglo Americanism. The suppression was always preceded by a snooping gov't prying into people's lives. The idea was to gather information in order to incite or intimidate objecting voices. Ask African American civil rights folk or Black Liberation activists of the 60's about CoIntelPro.

I have to say I found it ironic that when the Bush era over reach was taking place and I as well as a few others were objecting, of the several who did defend Bush, Tieguy asserted the same questions about "what rights have you lost?" Ironic that you and he are on the same page but then I've been saying all along there is no damn difference between a partiarch democrat and a partiarch republican and Tie and yourself are just proving my point!

BTW: Like Tieguy, how does it feel to have voted twice for a murderer? In your case Obama!
 

BrownArmy

Well-Known Member
I had an interesting conversation with my old, old friend, on our cell-phones.

We were discussing the NSA; the Snowden-leaks had just come out, and several months prior, we had both read about the huge Godzilla-byte facility the NSA was building (my guess - not in the budget).

I proposed that we start a national campaign wherein every text-message sent, every e-mail, every cell conversation, use one or more of these keywords:

***
**-*****
****
*******
*****
*****-***-*****
*-**
****
*****-**-*****
etc.

Flood the system, as it were.

We decided that we couldn't take the heat.

Our conversation is on record, somewhere.

(NSA says they can't access actual cell conversations, I call ****-****)
 

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
I think I understand where roadrunner is coming from and I share some of his nonchalance. I remember my own incredulity at the passing of the Patriot Act. It was all too easy. And now people are surprised and "shocked"? And they worry about background checks for guns and instead insist on psychological evaluations? LOL. We consistently give our rights away without even thinking twice...until we are "shocked" that our rights have been "taken" from us.
 

wkmac

Well-Known Member
I think I understand where roadrunner is coming from and I share some of his nonchalance. I remember my own incredulity at the passing of the Patriot Act. It was all too easy. And now people are surprised and "shocked"? And they worry about background checks for guns and instead insist on psychological evaluations? LOL. We consistently give our rights away without even thinking twice...until we are "shocked" that our rights have been "taken" from us.

I don't disagree with that point either. We've also forgotten how to protect the rights of those in minority groups in order to preserve said rights for everyone else.
 
Top