Who Needs Edward Snowden?

With Congress now poised to renew, not renew, or revise the N.S.A.’s bulk metadata program, it’s worth thinking about where we would be now if a twenty-nine-year-old contractor for Booz Allen Hamilton hadn’t left Hawaii for Hong Kong, and a new life as an outlaw ombudsman.

Were it not for Edward Snowden or someone like him, the N.S.A. would likely still be collecting the records of almost every phone call made in the United States, and no one outside of government would know it. A handful of civil-liberties-minded representatives and senators might drop hints in hearings and ask more pointed questions in classified settings. Members of the public would continue making phone calls, unaware that they were contributing to a massive government database that was supposedly intended to make their lives safer but had not prevented a single terrorist attack. And, on Monday, the government’s Section 215 powers, used to acquire records from hundred of billions of phone calls, among other “tangible things,” would be quietly renewed.

Snowden shouldn’t have been necessary. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (or FISA Court), which evaluates Section 215 requests, is supposed to be interpreting the law to make sure that government surveillance doesn’t go outside of it. Congressional intelligence committees, which review the activities of the N.S.A., are supposed to be providing some oversight. The N.S.A. itself reports to the Department of Defense, which reports to the White House, all of which have dozens of lawyers, who are all supposed to apply the law. The government, in other words, is supposed to be watching itself, especially in matters of national security, which are, by necessity, shielded from daylight. The fact that it took thirteen years, and one whistle-blower, to expose a program that is conclusively ineffective and, according to one federal appeals court, illegal, points to a problem much larger than any one program. It suggests that claims about what is necessary to prevent the next terrorist attack are too sacrosanct to require evidence. As the debate over Section 215 has played out over the past two years, it has become clear that the punishments for exaggerating the efficacy of surveillance programs and downplaying their privacy implications are just about nonexistent.

The government enshrouds the details of its surveillance programs in a technical vocabulary (“reasonable articulable suspicion,” “seeds,” “queries,” “identifiers”) that renders them too dull and opaque for substantive discussion by civilians. As one Pentagon handbook put it, “one can be led astray by relying on the generic or commonly understood definition of a particular word.” There is a kind of legal subversion at work here. Broad and clearly worded laws, including the Fourth Amendment, are being undermined by a raft of quasi-legal documents, most of them too long, narrow, and boring to read—that is, if anyone were allowed to read them in full. Instead of being named for what they actually do, programs are named for the subsections of the laws that are supposed to authorize them, whether or not that authority is actually present in the language of the law. With all the attention being paid to Section 215, named for a part of the Patriot Act, which does not contain the words “bulk,” “phone,” or “metadata,” it’s easy to forget that the program is just one piece of the intelligence community’s legal armory. Little is known about how other authorities, including Executive Order 12333, which some consider the intelligence community’s most essential charter, are being interpreted to permit spying on Americans. And a redacted report, released last week by the Department of Justice’s Office of the Inspector General, hints at how much we still don’t know about Section 215. Nearly two years into the congressional debate over the use and legality of Section 215, the report provides the first official confirmation that the “tangible things” obtained by the F.B.I. through Section 215 include not just phone metadata but “email transactional records” and two full lines of other uses, all of which the F.B.I. saw fit to redact.

Read more @ http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/who-needs-edward-snowden

 

The Patriot Act Was Controversial Long Before Edward Snowden

The Obama administration claims the post-9/11 law is “noncontroversial” outside the NSA phone dragnet. But the law drew the ire of civil libertarians—and even Obama himself—long before the Snowden revelations began.

May 29, 2015 The Obama administration has launched an all-out lobbying blitz over the past two weeks to prevent the expiration, now just days away, of surveillance authorities it says are vital to preventing terrorist attacks.

In pressuring the Senate to end its standoff over the Patriot Act, officials claim that a spate of the law's "noncontroversial" powers are caught in the crossfire of a debate over the National Security Agency's phone dragnet, exposed publicly by former intelligence contractor Edward Snowden two years ago.

But such rhetoric—espoused by President Obama, Attorney General Loretta Lynch, FBI Director James Comey, and other senior administration officials—belies historic opposition to the broader substance of the Patriot Act from civil libertarians and members of both political parties that began long before the Snowden files first emerged.

It also is emblematic of the uneasy alliance forged between the administration and many privacy groups who desire the same resolution to the Senate standoff—passage of reform-minded legislation known as the USA Freedom Act—but for diametrically opposed reasons. While the White House likely views the reform package as a one-and-done deal intended to quell domestic-surveillance concerns, many privacy advocates see it as the best, most realistic shot at Patriot Act reform, and hope it leads to further legislation down the road.

Read more @ http://www.nationaljournal.com/tech/patriot-act-deadline-edward-snowden-nsa-spying-controversial-20150529

 

Surveillance powers set to lapse with no deal in Senate

WASHINGTON — The National Security Agency will lose its authority at midnight to collect Americans' phone records in bulk, after an extraordinary Sunday Senate session failed to produce an 11th-hour deal to extend the fiercely contested program.

Intelligence officials warned that the outcome amounts to a win for terrorists. But civil liberties groups applauded the demise, at least temporarily, of the once-secret post-Sept. 11 program made public by NSA contractor Edward Snowden, which critics say is an unconstitutional intrusion into Americans' privacy.

The program is all but certain to be revived in a matter of days, although it also looks certain to be completely overhauled under House-passed legislation that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell reluctantly blessed in an about-face Sunday evening. With most senators opposed to extending current law unchanged, even for a short time, McConnell said the House bill was the only option left other than letting the program die off entirely. The Senate voted 77-17 to move ahead on the House-passed bill.

But no final action was expected before Sunday's midnight deadline after McConnell's fellow Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul served notice that he would assert his prerogatives under Senate rules to delay a final vote for several days.

"This is what we fought the revolution over, are we going to so blithely give up our freedom? ... I'm not going to take it anymore," Paul declared on the Senate floor, as supporters wearing red "Stand With Rand" T-shirts packed the spectator gallery.

McConnell countered: "We shouldn't be disarming unilaterally as our enemies grow more sophisticated and aggressive, and we certainly should not be doing so based on a campaign of demagoguery and disinformation launched in the wake of the unlawful actions of Edward Snowden."

Paul's moves infuriated fellow Republicans and they exited the chamber en masse when he stood up to speak after the Senate's vote on the House bill.

Read more @ http://www.bostonherald.com/news_opinion/us_politics/2015/05/surveillance_powers_set_to_lapse_with_no_deal_in_senate

 

NSA reform advances as Senate moves to vote on USA Freedom Act – live updates

If you’re wondering how presidential candidates voted tonight on USA Freedom Act, here’s the list:

Independent Bernie Sanders and Republican Ted Cruz were both yes votes.

Republicans Marco Rubio and Rand Paul were both no votes (albeit for very different reasons)

And Republican Lindsey Graham just didn’t show up. He is scheduled to formally announce his presidential candidacy tomorrow in his home town of Central, South Carolina.

Read more @ http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2015/may/31/nsa-patriot-act-surveillance-reform-usa-freedom-live

 

Shows how thankful they are to Snowden for opening their eyes.  Sadly from following this story for a year I have seen that most of them are corrupt to their core.  In their short fleeting lives they have sought to make money over everything else….. even the future of humanity. 

How do the GOP's 2016 hopefuls feel about Edward Snowden?

Washington (CNN)If Sen. Rand Paul, the top antagonist of the National Security Agency, believes Edward Snowden should be locked up, the famed whistleblower is unlikely to get any reprieve from the rest of the 2016 Republican field.

The libertarian-leaning Kentucky senator said that while he believes Snowden "committed civil disobedience," the former NSA contractor who blew the lid off the NSA's domestic surveillance programs needs to face "punishment."

"So what I've proposed as punishment: Snowden and (Director of National Intelligence James) Clapper should be in the same cell talking about liberty and security," Paul said to laughter Wednesday evening at a New York bookstore, which is owned by the wife of Oregon Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden, who has stood alongside Paul in the debate over the Patriot Act and NSA reform.

That's the best Snowden's going to get from the 2016 field.

Here's how other 2016 hopefuls addressed the question Paul said he gets asked the most: "Is Snowden a hero or a villain?"

Jeb Bush

The former Florida governor is a big fan of the NSA, dubbing its surveillance programs "the best part of the Obama administration."

So it's no surprise he said last week that Snowden "is not a hero."

"He violated US law. That's why he's living large in Moscow, the land of freedom," Bush said with a hint of irony.

Read more @ http://edition.cnn.com/2015/05/27/politics/republicans-2016-edward-snowden/ 

Edward Snowden Cheers On Rand Paul

NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden on Thursday praised Sen. Rand Paul’s ten-and-a-half hour takeover of the Senate floor on Wednesday in protest of the Patriot Act.

Snowden, whose revelations about mass surveillance two years ago may finally result in reform legislation this week, said in a Reddit “Ask Me Anything” discussion that Paul’s action “represents a sea change from a few years ago, when intrusive new surveillance laws were passed without any kind of meaningful opposition or debate.”

Paul, who is running for the Republican presidential nomination, spent much of his time on the floor criticizing the massive surveillance regime that Snowden exposed by leaking top-secret documents to journalists.

It was all for show — Paul’s self proclaimed “filibuster” (minibuster? fauxbuster?) had no practical effect on upcoming Senate votes, although it did give his presidential campaign a boost. The Senate is due to vote in the next several days on the USA Freedom Act, which passed the House overwhelmingly last week, and which would eliminate one — but only one — of the programs Snowden disclosed: the bulk collection of domestic phone records.

Read more @ https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/05/21/edward-snowden-cheers-rand-paul/

 

Paul claims new momentum ahead of second Senate showdown

CHICAGO (AP) — A confident Rand Paul claimed new momentum Friday in his fight against government surveillance programs, just days ahead of his second Capitol Hill showdown in as many weeks.

The Republican senator infuriated leaders in his own party last week by almost single-handedly delaying the extension of the anti-terrorism Patriot Act. In a Friday interview between campaign stops in South Carolina, Paul said voters are encouraging him to continue fighting the National Security Agency's bulk collection programs when the Senate convenes Sunday.

"I find a great deal of interest among Republicans who tell me the NSA ought to stop collecting our phone records, that's it's wrong," he said in a phone interview with The Associated Press.

The 52-year-old libertarian favorite is working to transform his efforts on Capitol Hill into political capital as he ramps up his nascent Republican presidential bid.

Read more @ http://www.chron.com/business/technology/article/Paul-running-hard-on-civil-liberties-after-his-6293582.php

 

Everything you need to know about the Patriot Act debate

Read more @ http://edition.cnn.com/2015/05/22/politics/patriot-act-debate-explainer-nsa/

 

In One Quote, Snowden Just Destroyed the Biggest Myth About Privacy

Sequestered away in Russia, government whistleblower and former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden sometimes seems like he's light-years away from American society. But every so often, he drops a nugget of wisdom into the mix that reminds us why he's one of the most important voices of our generation — and why our online privacy still matters.

His visit to Reddit on May 21 was one such example. Snowden and the ACLU's Jameel Jaffer participated in an "Ask Me Anything" session in which they answered questions from users about Rand Paul, John Oliver and the NSA's continued surveillance efforts, among other things.

At one point, Snowden brought up a common defense from people who come down on the side of the government: "I don't care if they violate my privacy; I've got nothing to hide."

He then proceeded to obliterate that argument.

"Arguing that you don't care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don't care about free speech because you have nothing to say," he said. 

In other words, the right to privacy, just like the right to free speech, is fundamental for all Americans.

Snowden added that people who use the "I have nothing to hide" line don't understand the basic foundation of human rights. "Nobody needs to justify why they 'need' a right," he said. "The burden of justification falls on the one seeking to infringe upon the right."

If one person chooses to disregard his right to privacy, that doesn't automatically mean everyone should follow suit, either. "You can't give away the rights of others because they're not useful to you," Snowden said. "More simply, the majority cannot vote away the natural rights of the minority." 

Read more @ http://mic.com/articles/119602/in-one-quote-edward-snowden-summed-up-why-our-privacy-is-worth-fighting-for

 

Edward Snowden and the Treason Clause of the Constitution

In light of revelations about the National Security Agency’s surveillance programs, made thanks to Edward Snowden, many politicians, pundits and sections of American society are eager to brand him a traitor to his country.

But what does the Constitution have to say?

In “The Snowden Affair and the Limits of American Treason,” Associate Professor of Law, at the University of Detroit-Mercy, J. Richard Broughton concludes that despite any misgivings or qualms people may have about Snowden, a “traitor” he is not.

Incidentally, Broughton is no cheerleader for Snowden, and in his paper he goes as far as to express sympathy for, though not necessarily agreeing with, those that condemn him. However, Broughton’s intellectual honesty compels him to side with what the Founding Fathers intended in regards to prosecution for treason. For that, he should be commended.

What chiefly concerns Broughton is that some anti-Snowden opinions show the “potential shortcomings in the public understanding – and apparently, the understanding of our political leaders, in particular – about the law of American treason.”

Read more @ http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2015/05/27/edward-snowden-and-the-treason-clause-of-the-constitution/

Edward Snowden weighs in on the huge internet vulnerability that could have helped the US spy on citizens

Did the US exploit a vulnerability that made it possible to snoop on data traffic that was thought to be secure?

That’s been the question for the past 24 hours after news of the LogJam vulnerability became publicly known.

Now Edward Snowden has added his two cents on the issue.

Put simply, LogJam is a vulnerability that rests in encrypted internet traffic. When someone accesses a website that is ‘encrypted,’ it was thought to mean that the data being transferred can only be seen by the sender and the recipient.

This new issue, which was announced yesterday, shows that it is possible for large-scale online operations to actually intercept this data without anyone noticing and even being able to alter it. So even so-called secure data isn’t safe from external snooping thanks to this LogJam bug.

Even though the discovery is a big one — it shows that previous conceptions of internet security are actually false — many experts weren’t sure how likely it was that the vulnerability was exploited.

Read more @ http://www.businessinsider.com.au/edward-snowden-talks-about-logjam-on-reddit-2015-5

Gordon-Levitt has high hopes for impact of 'Snowden'

LOS ANGELES (AP) — Joseph Gordon-Levitt has big expectations for the impact of "Snowden."

The 34-year-old actor wrapped filming earlier this month on the Oliver Stone thriller about former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden, whose 2013 leaks to the media revealed the government's bulk collection of American calling records. Congress is set for an unusual weekend session to debate the records collection and two other surveillance laws.

"The laws are all in flux. ... I'm really curious what's going to happen. And I love the idea that we made the movie when we did so that it can participate in that conversation," Gordon-Levitt said in an interview Thursday. He noted a May 7 federal appeals court ruling that the NSA's actions were illegal.

"Hopefully, there will probably be a Supreme Court case about it at some point soon. And while the Supreme Court judges aren't supposed to really listen to popular opinion, they do," Gordon-Levitt said.

Gordon-Levitt plays Snowden in Stone's film, which is based on two books about the leaks and also features Shailene Woodley, Zachary Quinto and Melissa Leo. "Snowden" is set for release in December.

"I think it's really important for us to all talk about it and to talk about different sides," Gordon-Levitt said. "You don't really get much in the American media that explores why he did what he did, why the government could potentially be doing something wrong."

Read more @ http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_28212394/gordon-levitt-has-high-hopes-impact-snowden

 

Joseph Gordon-Levitt Hopes Snowden Movie Will Influence Surveillance Debate

Read more @ http://www.mediaite.com/tv/joseph-gordon-levitt-hopes-snowden-movie-will-influence-surveillance-debate/

 


"What lies behind us and what lies before us are small matters compared to what lies within us."  ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~