Friday, June 07, 2013
Rachel Maddow takes a deep dive into our lack of privacy, the government's domestic spying program, and why we should or should not be upset by it. Update!
A whole lot of you were upset yesterday by my post yesterday suggesting that in a summer of scandals drummed up by the Republican in order to damage the President that the NSA spying one was the most likely to hurt the President far more than the Benghazi "scandal." the IRS "scandal," or the "he's actually a foreign born gay Muslim scandal."
And the reason for that was NOT because President Obama was doing anything worse than the previous administration, but because he was doing things almost exactly LIKE the previous administration.
My point, and I think a whole lot of people missed it, was that this NSA thing had been largely ignored by most of the American people because they were so terrified of terrorist attack they were willing to allow the CIA to bug their phones, monitor their movements, and possibly hide under their beds if it were deemed necessary.
However THIS President was supposed to change all of that.
He was going to respect the Constitution far more than George W. Bush ever did, and he was only going to use his powers for good. However we have seen him punish whistle blowers at an alarming rate, use drones to kill targets in Pakistan who were very possibly innocent, and now engage in the kind of draconian overreach of powers here in the United States that angered us so much when the Bush administration utilized them.
So yes I am both happy that we know that this is still going on, and saddened that we know this is still going on. And I want the President, his administration, and the Congress that okays this kind of overreach to answer for it.
Which means, just speaking for myself here, that I want this "scandal" to stick. I want it to have real consequences, and hopefully those consequences will be a reduction of this kind of data mining, or at least stricter guidelines for its use.
Look the President is no longer a candidate, so this cannot hurt any reelection chances, and Hillary is too far removed for it to damage her in any way. And I certainly don't think it will place the President in danger of impeachment, the Republicans have too many domestic spying skeletons in their closet for that ever to happen.
So going forward I see this as an opportunity for the kind of transparency that a certain candidate for President in 2007 promised all of us. And I only see that as a good thing.
Update: The President just addressed this issue and I actually feel pretty good about his response.
He said he welcomes the questions, thinks it is a good idea that we are questioning these policies, and kind of wonders where everybody has been on this issue.
He also made sure to spread the responsibility around including both the Congress and the FISA court in the decision making process.
When I get the video I will post it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I'm sorry, I'm so sick of everyone going after President Obama - it's been constant since prior to his first election as POTUS. It's old and tiresome.
ReplyDeleteI see nothing wrong w/him continuing this for national security. What other methods does he have available for crying out loud? People in the US are connected to terrorists - it's simple as that!
I'm not afraid of him having my phone number. I know I have nothing to worry about and most American citizens should and probably feel the same.
I cannot believe how the media is running w/this and creating MORE negative for the American people. "The government is snooping!" - what crap!
IT WILL NOT EFFECT THE MAJORITY OF US! Our world has changed considerably folks and President Obama is doing nothing more than trying to protect all of us.
He's free to call me if he wants to replace Arne Duncan.
DeleteI'm better qualified and have more experience in education.
I don't think Obama can be impeached over the spying scandal. He is in fact only following an extension of a law duly voted on by Congress. And it was a 5 year extension, as well, which means it's still active into the next President's term, where he/she will get to extend it even further, and you know they will.
ReplyDeleteThe other thing that needs to be said about President Obama is that Congress is a large part of this! They will not and cannot impeach him - they would not vote to do so!
DeleteAlso, even if President Obama did everything he could to repeal the Patriot Act, or to get rid of the PRISM program, he'd get absolutely nowhere because Congress wouldn't let him. This isn't something that could get eliminated via executive order, since Congress voted on both these issues to become law in the first place.
DeleteYet, they AND the President's purported allies have bitched and moaned because he hasn't closed Gitmo. Guess what, Congress just had another vote REFUSING his request for that.
Just how far does anyone think POTUS would get trying to please the ACLU types and Glenn Greenwald, who are ranting and raving about these "secret" surveillance laws?
Congress voted for this, the President can't just abolish it.
DeleteI think you are living in a dream world if you believe surveillance of this kind will ever stop. It is the digital world's answer to the cold war spying of the 50s thru the 80s.
ReplyDeleteWithout knowledge incidents like 9/11 will happen & although a republican President is NEVER blamed for terrorism on his watch - a democratic President will always be blamed for such things.
The major reason for all the "scandals" continues to be the GOP's belief of its "right to rule". President Obama is damned if he does - and damned if he doesn't. At least he has the intelligence and the love of country to know that - and he does what needs to be done in a digital era.
I am a damn sight more bothered by hackers getting into my bank accounts/credit cards than by the government seeing anything I receive via email, text message or phone call.
What this nonsense IS doing - is irreparable harm to the agenda that was voted for by the American people. There are millions more concerned about gun control and immigration reform than give a damn about stupid media tarts having their moment in the sun.
I'm sure many may disagree - lucky that there is a democracy and people can have differing ideas.
Anyone who didn't think this has been going on has their head in the sand.
ReplyDeleteIf the president went against congress and the senate to stop the program everyone would howl that he was soft on terrorism and not protecting us. If he goes with the program he has let you down.
They are collecting numbers-they are not listening in on our conversations! To even come close to doing that they need to follow due process.
I do not understand this sudden outrage-this is nothing new! Obama has not broken any laws nor is he the one who passed the extension of the patriot act. This is bipartisan-maybe they know what they're doing????
Scream and wail and protest against the act but don't toss the president under the bus for this!! He has not disappointed me nor do I feel he is breaking the law.
This is a gray area and there are gray areas. You mention drones-shall we shut down the drone program? Casualties are a very real part of war and terrorism. I do not like many aspects of the world we live in but I am typing on my iPad knowing you can collect my ipo addy and from that get my location and more information so I have accepted the good with the bad.
Everyone needs to be thankful this man is the president in these times.
How can this hurt?
ReplyDeleteMidterms! Granted, this is about the only window of opportunity we can do this... but midterms are right around the corner.
The LAST thing any of us want is a house *and* senate that goes Republican
The Scandal Is Congress, Not the NSA
ReplyDeleteA highly classified court order, leaked to the British paper The Guardian and published on Wednesday, details a practice civil libertarians have long feared: indiscriminate surveillance of U.S. citizens. While on its surface, this order — which authorized the secretive National Security Agency to collect data on phone calls placed by Verizon customers for a period of three months — seems blatantly illegal, the reality is that Congress has been enabling and legalizing such surveillance for years.
The NSA was collecting so-called metadata: information about call duration, location, and numbers, but not the identities of the callers or the content of their conversations. It was not wiretapping or eavesdropping as they’re traditionally known. This type of data is most useful for pattern analysis, which might be clarified to focus on an individual or a group of individuals, but to collect the content of their conversations the NSA would need another warrant.
The last time the NSA came under fire for its surveillance of Americans was in 2005, when the New York Times broke the story that the NSA had been collecting data on American citizens without a court order. Though Bush administration officials insist the collection was instrumental in breaking up terrorist plots, it also marked a new expansion of NSA authority – directly listening to American citizens.
Many viewed the NSA eavesdropping, enabled without much protest by US telecom companies, to be patently illegal. In order to protect telecoms from legal reprisals by angry customers, Congress passed, in 2008 amendments to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, a retroactive legal immunity protecting them from lawsuit.
Those changes to FISA had a rippling effect on the government’s ability to collect information on citizens. The NSA spied on Americans without even seeking a warrant, but instead of punishing them or the companies who assisted them, Congress instead gave them the go-ahead. In other words, they set a new norm that made it okay for an intelligence agency to seek data about Americans.
Continue Reading
http://www.nationalmemo.com/the-scandal-is-congress-not-the-nsa/
The New York Times Quietly Softened Its Scathing Obama Editorial
ReplyDelete...This evening, after a full day of news outlets sharing the Times editorial, and after the Guardian dropped yet another bombshell about governmental spying, the website NewsDiffs (and others) are reporting that the Times editorial board appears to have quietly crept into its now famous rebuke and, for reasons undeclared, updated the claim that the administration is no longer credible. The sentence now reads, "The administration has now lost all credibility on this issue," which is quite a different statement altogether. The paper also seems to have added sentences referencing the new Guardian article.
http://gawker.com/the-new-york-times-quietly-softened-its-scathing-obama-511791553
From huffpo
ReplyDeleteUPDATE: 10:25 p.m. -- James Clapper, the director of National Intelligence, has released his first on-the-record statement about the PRISM program, calling the disclosure of it “reprehensible” and insisting that Americans aren’t targeted. The full statement is below.
The Guardian and The Washington Post articles refer to collection of communications pursuant to Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. They contain numerous inaccuracies.
Section 702 is a provision of FISA that is designed to facilitate the acquisition of foreign intelligence information concerning non-U.S. persons located outside the United States. It cannot be used to intentionally target any U.S. citizen, any other U.S. person, or anyone located within the United States.
Activities authorized by Section 702 are subject to oversight by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, the Executive Branch, and Congress. They involve extensive procedures, specifically approved by the court, to ensure that only non-U.S. persons outside the U.S. are targeted, and that minimize the acquisition, retention and dissemination of incidentally acquired information about U.S. persons.
Section 702 was recently reauthorized by Congress after extensive hearings and debate.
Information collected under this program is among the most important and valuable foreign intelligence information we collect, and is used to protect our nation from a wide variety of threats.
The unauthorized disclosure of information about this important and entirely legal program is reprehensible and risks important protections for the security of Americans.
Where is your outrage over all of these top level leaks? Where was the outrage over the Chinese hackers who got into our defense program files?
ReplyDeleteUsing Rachel Maddox as defense for attacking the president is not a defense at all. She is in entertainment. The Rachel Maddox show not the nightly news with Rachel Maddow. Yes she reports on current events but she like other cable companies do gin up their stories to get viewers and controversy is one of their best tools.
From the daily beast
The information collected by the NSA, known as “metadata,” does not include the content of the phone calls or the names of the people associated with the accounts. But it does tell the government when calls were made, what numbers were dialed, and the location and duration of those calls. Current and former U.S. intelligence officials familiar with the longstanding program to collect metadata from American telecommunications and Internet companies tell The Daily Beast that, in a few discreet cases, the NSA has shared unedited analysis of these records with its British counterpart, the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ).
Once again, journalists are getting a free pass to violate national security.
DeleteApparently they no longer have the common sense to know when to draw the line.
I want the media to start to be prosecuted for violating our national security and stealing and leaking government secrets.
Just because you say you're a journalist is not some get out of jail free card. You do not have carte blanche to solicit classified information and publish it.
Wow lots of Obama apologists here showing their ignorance. It's okay guys, you're allowed to criticize his policies. That's part of living in America. There's something wrong with you if you don't. I voted and donated in 2008 and 2012 but I realize he's not perfect. The DOJ is out of control. The NSA is out of control. The NSA is useless and doesn't "keep us safe". They should be disbanded immediately.
ReplyDelete8:09
DeleteNot Obama apologists-just pointing out the fact that this is not Obama going rogue. This has been going on for years and is sanctioned by dems and repubs in house and senate and it is Not an Obama issue-it is a government issue and is not anything new.
Re:"the NSA is useless, etc." what level of security are you cleared for that makes it possible for you to make this statement?
When terrorists are caught /killed and there are reports of our government intercepting cell phone communications that lead to the capture/kill-just how do you think they got that cell phone communication?
When another terrorist is caught/killed there sure is a lot of applauding and cheers.
Yep that's what I thought-you can't handle the truth about the life you live.
There was an uproar over the marathon bombers not being monitored by our government. Their response was they didn't have enough to warrant following them. Then you said the government/Obama wasn't doing it's/his job. Which is it? What do you want? Wanting the government to act outside the law and spy on the bombers yet don't collect cell phone numbers legally-yeah-you know what you are saying!
These are complex times and complicated issues and many gray areas exist.
The DOJ is NOT out of control and the NSA should not be disbanded. There are terrorist amongst us in the USA.
DeleteIssa is the one that needs to be voted out of office. Another Republican lying, cheating, stealing and fabricating!
And, 8:09 - Congress is very much a part of this latest leak. President Obama is operating w/in the law!
I have a good idea of anon 8:09. Don't take your shoes off the next time you go through security at the airport. Tell the TSA that you are sick and tired of the government telling you what to do. Your shoes are not a threat to anyone. Oh, maybe that stops some hothead from trying to be the next shoe bomber.
DeleteI have the feeling that there are a lot more crazy people out there, ready, willing and able to do some kind of harm. The example of the poor soldier who was murdered in London is an example of something that could happen here, too. The are all kinds of loosely knit groups who just might go off the deep end. Two guys in Boston just did that.
I don't mind the fact that President Obama cannot discontinue the programs started during the Bush administration. They must know something that we don't know. There have been more death threats against President Obama, and our presence in the Middle East has produced plenty of people who wish us harm. Sometimes, it's just dumb luck that the guy who wanted to blow up Times Square botched his own terrorist plot. And, sometimes, they might catch some high information character who has knows things-- and we don't have to know about it.
We're allowed to criticize Obama, but we weren't allowed to criticize Bush, his administration or any of his policies.
DeleteWell, thankyouverymuch for your permission.
Police are useless too. They don't deter anything. They just fill out reports and clean up afterwards. But the crime still happens.
The NSA is trying to do the impossible; stop the crime before it happens. The odds are not in their favor.
And all of this started with BUSH and the Patriot Act.
Only the liberals were outraged then and they were quickly suppressed with "well, if you're not a terrorist you have nothing to be afraid of."
But now that it's still going on under Obama's administration, all the right wing nutjobs suddenly have their panties in a twist.
You got what you voted for. You voted for the clowns that created and approved all these laws. And you voted for the clowns that renewed them and refused to rescind them.
We have nothing to complain about. We got the congress we voted for. So we either shut up or we vote every last one of the OUT.
Where was the outrage when this was proposed 7 years ago during the GWB administration? Oh yeah, then we were worried about another terrorist attack, and we were willing to sacrifice some privacy in order for government agencies to collect information that might prevent another attack. Now, when they renew the provisions of the law, they don't like it.
ReplyDeleteAs I understand it, they are not listening to our conversations. They ears would fall off. But, if they have the phone number of a suspicious character overseas, they do want to know who that person may be calling in the United States. In case anyone forgets, during the Bush administration, they DID know where Osama bin Laden was because they tracked his cell phone conversations-- until GWB bragged about it and blew the secrecy of it.
If people are searching for bombs or how to join al qaeda on the internet, I don't mind if our government knows about it. (Not me! I just googled that word to see how to spell it correctly). But I would like to recommend that the Secret Service monitor C4P, Breitbart and some of the other anti-Obama, rage-filled websites for credible threats made against the life of The President of the United States. Those people write some really nasty stuff, which may either be a very nasty joke or the rallying cry for some crazy person to actually take action. The constant drum beat of "Tiller the Killer" lead to the death of a doctor who provided abortions.
And add Sarah Palin to the list of someone who constant issues veiled threats against President Obama. She really is shouting "Fire" in a crowded theater. I know, Track was over there in Afghanistan and Iraq defending her freedom of speech, but she uses her Facebook and twitter to attract attention and raise money for her PAC by spreading lies and inflammatory remarks. Example: Yesterday Sarah judged the nominee for Secretary of State based on her husband's position regarding animal abuse-- which has nothing to do with her qualifications for office. And he is against animal abuse. Palin mistook that position of animal rights to mean that a dog would appear in court. No, Sarah, that's dumb. But, the dog's owner will be sitting in court if the dog is found to be abused.
Sarah Palin is the last one that should judge the husband of someone when her own husband, Todd Palin, is a proven 'pimp'! ("Boys Will be Boys" is a good read about him!)
Delete@anon 8:31 Todd was a member of the Alaska Independence Party, hardly a patriotic red-white-and-blue organization. Yes, we should judge Sarah by Todd's activities, if she wants to judge Ms.Power's qualifications for office that way.
DeleteOff subject a bit, but I just read where McCain is going to Gitmo. This guy needs to be chained to his desk in Congress (if it were in session!). All he is doing is making continued trouble.
ReplyDeleteI think the Republicans are putting on 'a full court press' to do everything they can to create chaos within our government!
Vote them out of office next election cycle folks. As many Republicans as possible. Their party is a disgrace to our nation!
I like and respect our President and think he is doing a good job in spite of their varied actions/claims and lies!
Well, this is OT but here we go:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.earnedmedia.org/blss0607.htm
Gov. Sarah Palin to Address Faith & Freedom Coalition 'Road to Majority' Conference
Look at the list of other speakers. That's a who's who of assclowns.
DeleteGovernor Palin will speak Saturday morning and joins other notable speakers including: Senator Ted Cruz, Senator Rand Paul, Senator Marco Rubio, Governor Rick Perry, former Senator Rick Santorum, former Governor Jeb Bush, Rep Paul Ryan, Rep. Michelle Bachmann, Ambassador John Bolton, Rep. Randy Forbes, Rep. Louie Gohmert, Senator Mike Lee, radio host Michael Medved, actor John Ratzenberger, Dr. Pat Robertson, Senator Mike Lee, Senator Ron Johnson, Senator Jeff Sessions, Donald Trump, and former Rep. Allen West
My only real complaint with what Gryphen said is simple: It is NOT a scandal of President Obama's. It is a GOVERNMENTAL scandal and should be treated as such - even if it means they ALL get tossed on their ears. (And in my book that would be a good thing since the majority really don't seem to be doing that which is good for the country anyway.)
ReplyDeleteYes, some good ones would be hurt, but maybe if we did change them all - or at least, most of them - we could get a few limiting things applied to Congress.
Things like term limits (to prevent the acquisition of excessive power by a few members of Congress, like Boehner and other seniors) and a reworking of the retirement/benefits programs they enjoy.
Will we ever be free of this program and others like it? (And I am quite certain there are others!) No.
NIBBLE NIBBLE NIBBLE
Two things come to mind.
ReplyDeleteFirst. All this started with the patriot act under Bush. Now suddenly everyone is upset?
Two. Google, Facebook. Twitter. Plenty of commercial corporations have this data and are not only sharing it amongst themselves but selling it. We have no problem with for profit capitalists invading our privacy. In fact we voluntarily tell them everything. Oversharing on Facebook and Twitter. Yet we suddenly have a problem with the government having the same data in order to secure the country from terrorists, foreign and domestic?
Yeah, I want my privacy. For that very reason I don't have a Facebook or Twitter account. I don't use those social picture sharing networks. But I do have a Google account and I know that has violated my privacy a lot more than I care to have it out there.
But I am not whining about this. We did it to ourselves. We do it voluntarily through joining social networking sites and agreeing to their policies. And we did it through electing the clowns that passed the Patriot Act and then electing clowns that renewed the Patriot Act and then electing clowns that wouldn't rescind the Patriot Act.
We whine out our privacy being violated but we still want the government to protect us from acts like the Boston Bombers and find perpetrators like Newtown asap.
In this day and age where information is everything, you can't have it both ways.
What we need is a happy medium, a balance we can live with. We don't have that yet.
"Things like term limits (to prevent the acquisition of excessive power by a few members of Congress, like Boehner and other seniors) and a reworking of the retirement/benefits programs they enjoy."
ReplyDeleteThat would also go a long way toward the deficit problem. lol
I agree Leland, it IS a government problem, it needs a huge overhaul. There is so much more waste that we don't even know about. Forget taking away public assistance (it could use some checks and balances too though). We really need better govt oversight, and preferably not done by those who are guilty of the waste.
President Barack Obama responded Friday to reports that the National Security Agency is collecting millions of phone records and tapping into data from leading tech companies, pushing back against what he described as "hype."
ReplyDeleteObama said that the revelations in the reports should not have come as a surprise to members of Congress.
"Now the programs that have been discussed over the last couple of days in the press are secret in the sense that they're classified but they're not secret in the sense that, when it comes to telephone calls, every member of Congress has been briefed on this program," Obama said during a press briefing in San Jose, Calif. "With respect to all these programs, the relevant intelligence committees are fully briefed on these programs."
The President then insisted that the government is not eavesdropping on anyone's phone calls.
"When it comes to telephone calls, nobody is listening to your telephone calls. That's not what this program's about," Obama said. "As was indicated, what the intelligence community is doing is looking at phone numbers and durations of calls. They are not looking at peoples' names and they're not looking at content. But by sifting through this so-called metadata, they may identify potential leads with respect to folks who may engage in terrorism."
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/obama-dismisses-hype-over-nsa-reports-nobody-is
Yes, President Obama needs to be accountable for this, and yes, he didn't start it, Bush did. Anyone upset by Gryphon or Rachel insisting on that needs to think: Which Republican president would YOU trust with these powers? I believe that Obama is following the law & not abusing it, but you can bet that if Jeb, Christie, or any of the other Republicans ever make it back to the White House, they will be abusing it. Think about it.
ReplyDeleteOf course. That's why Congress should take on this issue as well as the OTHER one they've ignored for the past 4 years (jobs). It's their responsibility to curtail the Patriot Act, the PRISM expansion, or to eliminate the Act altogether.
DeleteBut you know they won't. For all the conservatives' drumbeating about "smaller government", they want MORE domestic surveillance, and there are plenty of liberals who look at surveillance as a necessary safeguard against international attacks.
As far as Congressional oversight is concerned, are we supposed to continue to rely on John Boehner letting nutjobs like Michele Bachmann be on the House Intelligence Committee, or Mr. Grand-Theft-Auto Darrell Issa on the House Oversight Committee? Or should we expect a little more of the Speaker, like assigning actual qualified people to serve on these committees?
Boehner should be fired from his position w/in the House of Congress. He is horrible and has created so much of the trouble during the past recent years.
DeleteHe needs to have blood tests done for his alcohol levels too - on a weekly basis.
We were told when Bush enacted the Patriot Act that are phones would be monitored, but no one really said anything at the time. I remember I was not happy about it, and was even more displeased when Obama extended the program. The uproar were hearing now is from those who failed to pay attention back when the program was started, or from those that simply want to make a political issue out of it. The problem of making a political issue is that Bush was as deeply involved as Obama is.
ReplyDeleteI think they just plain want to make an issue of it and blame President Obama. But, once again, he'll come out OK on this - Congress approved what he is doing under George Bush.
DeleteThe media and Republicans are going after POTUS - which is absolutely nothing new since they've been doing it since he was elected the first time. All the media/TV channels repeats what the others are saying. It's absolutely ridiculous!
... they were willing to allow the CIA to bug their phones, monitor their movements ...
ReplyDelete"We the people" had no choice in the matter, Gryphen. It was foisted upon us right after 9/11 by the Bush administration, Congress and the Senate who were so afraid of being called traitors they kept silent, except for Russ Feingold, who was replaced by a Tea Party Fool(R) to the detriment of the great State of Wisconsin. It is unfortunate indeed that BHO continued to reaffirm the Patriot Act multiple times. This country is fucked on so many levels.
I don't know if I should be disgusted or surprised at the number of Republicans and Democrats alike who are surfacing now to say they voted AGAINST the Patriot Act and the re-authorization votes.
DeleteI get a sense that they're all putting their dampened fingers in the wind to find out which way the political wind is blowing.
11:21 Agreed! I don't trust a damned one of them in Congress.
DeleteWe are so much more aware of their actions in our world today and they literally disgust me.
They do not represent us - especially Boenher, McCain, Cantor, McConnell and on and on. They need to be voted out of office and new, young blood (w/tenures) put in office.
You know Gryphen, I said yesterday, you need to TRUST your president.
ReplyDeleteEvery single time that the media orgasms over some sort of feigned 'scandal', it turns out to be one big fucking dud. And I mean EVERY SINGLE ONE. And Glenn fuckwad Greenwald is a prime example of this crap. He's been wanting to be in the limelight for a long time and has been gunning for President Obama since early on. He had no problem sucking GW's dick and 'deferred' to everything he and Cheney did. He's a fucking asshole of humongous proportions and he's just salivating in his media blitz and the you gave him juice to carry on as if what he did was valid.
Maybe you have just become cynical and paranoid in your old age. Maybe you are unable to see quality and integrity when it shows up because you've been immersed in the slime of the Palin crew, the Alaskan legal system, the GOP administrations and such. I'm here to remind you, again, President Obama is a man of integrity. He tries his utmost to keep his promises, to follow the letter of the law and to make things as transparent and available as he possibly can.
He is being held to RIDICULOUS STANDARDS THAT NO OTHER PRESIDENT has been held to and he keeps being gracious, respectful and committed to making this county a better place. By jumping on the hysteria bandwagon, you lowered the quality of your blog for a moment, and disappointed those of us who know you to be a better man than that.
I hope hearing DIRECTLY from your president will remind you that going off half-cocked, in such an over-reactive mode was out of line with your normal commitment to getting to the bottom of things and providing your readers with a more reasoned and reasonable response.
9:43 Well said! I love and respect our President. I don't know how he always keeps his cool to the public w/all the bullshit he has put up w/since having been elected the first time. It's gotten worse and now they are even going after our First Lady.
DeleteThe Republicans are a frightening bunch throughout the nation and they need to be voted out of office where ever possible, but especially in the U.S. Congress.
They are like a bunch of vultures and the media is just as bad - all channels!!! All the later does is repeat what another network says. Truly time to tune them out!
Obama Calls Surveillance Programs Legal and Limited
ReplyDeletePresident Obama on Friday offered a robust defense of the government surveillance programs revealed this week, and sought to reassure the public that his administration has not become a Big Brother with eyes and ears throughout the world of online communications.
“Nobody is listening to your telephone calls,” Mr. Obama said, delivering a 14-minute answer to two questions about the surveillance programs during a four-day trip to the West Coast at an event that was initially supposed to be devoted to the health care law. “That’s not what this program is about.”
The president’s remarks were his first since the revelations this week of programs to collect information about phone calls and Internet traffic. Mr. Obama said the programs help prevent terrorist attacks and they are kept in check by rigorous judicial and Congressional oversight.
He acknowledged that the public may be uncomfortable with the broad reach of the formerly secret programs, but he said he believed the government had struck the right balance between the need to fight terrorism and the need to protect privacy.
“You can’t have 100 percent security and then also have 100 percent privacy and zero inconvenience,” Mr. Obama said, repeatedly stressing that the lawmakers from both parties and federal judges were aware of the efforts. “You know, we’re going to have to make some choices as a society.”
But the disclosure of the programs, which involve some of the nation’s biggest technology and communications firms — including Google, Apple and Verizon — seemed likely to prompt a vigorous discussion among policy makers and Internet consumers about the expectations for privacy and security in an increasingly connected and online world.
Earlier Friday, lawmakers in Washington, many of whom have been privately briefed on the secret surveillance efforts for years, sought to balance their public expressions of concern about the impact on privacy with the need to combat national security threats. Senator Angus King, a Maine independent who often votes with Democrats, said Friday morning that there needed to be a discussion about that balance.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/08/us/national-security-agency-surveillance.html?emc=na&pagewanted=all&_r=1&
There was a leak to this information getting out and it will be interesting to find out who actually did it. Don't forget that Congress is part of this decision and President Obama has kept them up to date on all security matters.
DeleteVerizongate Fades With a Whimper as Obama Explains What the Program Really Does
ReplyDeleteThe Verizongate flap officially faded with a whimper today, as President Obama stood before the American people and explained what the program does.
Video:
The president said, “Nobody is listening to your telephone calls. That’s not what this program is about. As was indicated, what the intelligence community is doing is looking at the numbers and durations of calls. They’re not looking at names and they’re not looking at content, but sifting through this so-called meta data, they may identify potential leads with respect to people that might engage in terrorism.”
This really is a poor excuse for a scandal. It turns out the government is collecting as much metadata on you as your bank, employer, ISP, and search engine already do. This data collection is distasteful whether it is done in the private or public sector, but the fact of the matter is that somebody is watching and keeping tabs on almost everything that we do.
In the case of the federal government, the national security argument is tough hurdle for privacy advocates to overcome. Those who are concerned about privacy have not been able to put a dent in the Patriot Act, because most Americans decided to trade some liberty for security after 9/11.
From a pragmatically political point of view, President Obama had to embrace these programs to some degree. Imagine if the president would have rolled back everything to pre-9/11 status. What would have happened if another terrorist attack did occur? What if it was revealed later that these surveillance programs could have saved lives?
http://www.politicususa.com/verizongate-fades-whimper-obama-explains-program.html
The media has blown this thing completely out of proportion - way worse than anything I've seen. To include MSNBC and Rachel Maddow, which was a sad disappointment for me to watch yesterday.
DeleteYeah, walk up to an atm, your photo's taken, time stamped and geo tagged. Go through some red lights, you get a summons in the mail with your photo in the drivers seat juxtaposed to your license plate, time stamped and geo tagged. Log onto Google... walk down the street.. into stores , smile, you're on camera. Use your debit card, credit card, grocery bonus card, you're leaving a trail of where you go, what you do and what time you do it.
DeleteThe Government takes a slice of the pie, metadata, and we're losing our rights to privacy... but if the Government doesn't put the pieces together and something happens, we're the evildoers and unpatriotic.
http://cdn.lifeandtimes.com/uploads/2012/09/ObamaBrushingthatDirtOffHisShoulder.jpeg
ReplyDeleteAlan Dershowitz, professor of law at Harvard University, defended the Obama administration on Friday and excoriated those in the media who he says are discriminating a number of half-truths relating to the news that the National Security Administration has been warehousing the phone and email records of Americans. Dershowitz said that “we’re hearing a lot of lies” from people like The Guardian reporter Glenn Greenwald and radio talk show hosts who he says too often “foment a paranoid streak” in American life.
ReplyDelete“We’re hearing lot of lies about what’s going on – a lot of lies,” Dershowitz warned. “We heard lies from Greenwald. He says that we’re not targeting terrorism. He says this is because we want to get political information against political opponents. It’s just not the case.”
Dershowitz says the practice of data mining has been going on for 60 years, though he recognizes that the practice has expanded in scope in recent years.
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/dershowitz-to-cnn-hearing-lot-of-lies-from-people-like-greenwald-who-%e2%80%98foment-a-paranoid-streak%e2%80%99/
People were not upset by it back then because it wasn't some Kenyan Commie N word person doing it. A white guy can do way the hell worse than any black guy, just look at any prison and see who is in it and for what.
ReplyDeleteSo you prove that you are just as ignorant as Sarah Palin and every other tea party member. You actually believe the President is a dictator who can do ANYTHING deliberately, with no aid or assistance whatsoever from Congress!!! Do you REAAAAAAAALLLLLY believe that this is the way our government works? That THIS is how our Constitution is set up???? If Obama were so stupid as to do ANYTHING of this level in a unilateral way, then THAT would definitely be grounds for impeachment. But poutrage over the President FOLLOWING THE LAW???? No, sweetheart, that is not grounds for impeachment.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteMassive Government Spying Is The Result Of A Public Obsessed With Eliminating Terrorism
The revelations about massive National Security Agency snooping in Americans' phone records and Internet activities appear to be shocking, but they aren't.
The reason programs like these exist and persist isn't that the government keeps them secret. It's that our lawmakers tell the public they are necessary to achieve a goal of zero terrorism, which might well be true — and the public considers that a good enough reason.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) offered this very succinct justification for the phone records dragnet, in which Verizon and apparently all the other major cellular providers hand over all subscribers' phone records to the government: "It's called protecting America."
Both the public and politicians have been clear: The goal of policies on terrorism is not just to reduce terrorism deaths but eliminate them altogether. Lately, we've been getting pretty close. Over the last five years, Americans' annual odds of dying in a terror attack have been just 1 in 20 million.
If we hope to maintain that record, we had better not have any false negatives in our search for potential terrorists. If the government can't miss any terrorists, how can it not have a massively overbroad surveillance infrastructure that snoops on all of us?
The perverse impact of zero tolerance for terrorism doesn't just show up in surveillance. It's the reason we all have to take our shoes off at the airport, that Boston shut down for a day after the Marathon bombings at a likely cost of over $100 million, and that we invaded Iraq.
We don't think about other social ills this way. Nobody says we should have a goal of zero heart disease deaths or zero auto accident deaths, because that would be nuts. We balance the objective of saving lives against other considerations, like cost and individual rights and the fact that bacon is delicious.
We should apply this cost-benefit approach to terrorism too. This approach would allow us to say that the phone records dragnet can be a bad idea even if it saves lives. But the big resistance to that analysis doesn't come from Congress; it comes from the American public.
Update: As Radley Balko notes, there are promising signs; public polling on terorrism has shifted in recent years to reflect a decline in public alarm. The time might be more ripe now than previously to push back against the expansion of the antiterror apparatus.
http://www.businessinsider.com/massive-government-spying-is-inevitable-2013-6
If you aren't doing anything wrong, and you aren't a terrorist or talking to terrorists, why are you worried. If you are a terrorist or plotting crimes against others -- than I am very happy you are worried. Besides that, there aren't enough employees in our government to monitor this mass of information -- but they can find it if they need it.
ReplyDeleteAnd if there is somebody in Congress who wasn't aware that this was going on, they are NOT doing their job of being informed and taking care of business.
Add to the Obama list of disappointments ; his backing of Monsanto, the terrorist corporation tainting our food supply. His appointment of former CEO and corporate men from Monsanto to top positions in the USDA Food Administration , the same Administration responsible for ovesreeing Monsanto. When I learned about this it began the breaking of the bubble and hope that I voted for in Obama.
ReplyDelete