ForgotPassword?
Sign Up
Search this Topic:
Posts: 27156
Nov 12 15 4:12 PM
Daniel Ellsberg and Edward Snowden met last winter, says Ellberg, the Nixon-era whistleblower who leaked The Pentagon Papers to The New York Times back in 1971 Edward Snowden and Daniel Ellsberg met in Moscow recently to exchange view on freedom of information and Snowden’s fate. Ellsberg is a welcome guest on any campus these days. In 1971, while a military analyst at the Rand Corporation, he leaked the Pentagon Papers to The New York Times. The two met last winter, according to Ellsberg, who revealed details about the meeting this week. In a post announcing the meeting, Ellsberg wrote: ” is the quintessential American whistleblower, and a personal hero of mine, Leaks are the lifeblood of the republic and, for the first time, the American public has been given the chance to debate democratically the NSA’s mass surveillance programs. Accountability journalism can’t be done without the courageous acts exemplified by Snowden, and we need more like him . . .”
Daniel Ellsberg and Edward Snowden met last winter, says Ellberg, the Nixon-era whistleblower who leaked The Pentagon Papers to The New York Times back in 1971
Edward Snowden and Daniel Ellsberg met in Moscow recently to exchange view on freedom of information and Snowden’s fate.
Ellsberg is a welcome guest on any campus these days. In 1971, while a military analyst at the Rand Corporation, he leaked the Pentagon Papers to The New York Times.
The two met last winter, according to Ellsberg, who revealed details about the meeting this week.
In a post announcing the meeting, Ellsberg wrote:
” is the quintessential American whistleblower, and a personal hero of mine, Leaks are the lifeblood of the republic and, for the first time, the American public has been given the chance to debate democratically the NSA’s mass surveillance programs. Accountability journalism can’t be done without the courageous acts exemplified by Snowden, and we need more like him . . .”
Read more @ http://anewdomain.net/2015/11/11/profiles-courage-two-kind-rebels-nsa-barred-court/
It’s a photograph that may have left some people scratching their heads – a Hollywood film star meeting with perhaps the most wanted man in the world. But when John Cusack and former NSA spy Edward Snowden met in secrecy at a swanky hotel in Moscow – along with fellow whistle-blower Daniel Ellsberg and writer Arundhati Roy – it was a gathering of some of the leading advocates for press freedom and government transparency. Photos posted on Instagram and Twitter show the cosy encounter, which Cusack said was arranged after he wondered what it would be like for Ellsberg, Roy and Snowden to meet in person.
It’s a photograph that may have left some people scratching their heads – a Hollywood film star meeting with perhaps the most wanted man in the world.
But when John Cusack and former NSA spy Edward Snowden met in secrecy at a swanky hotel in Moscow – along with fellow whistle-blower Daniel Ellsberg and writer Arundhati Roy – it was a gathering of some of the leading advocates for press freedom and government transparency.
Photos posted on Instagram and Twitter show the cosy encounter, which Cusack said was arranged after he wondered what it would be like for Ellsberg, Roy and Snowden to meet in person.
Read more @ http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3310664/Edward-Snowden-meets-secret-John-Cusack-Arundhati-Roy-Daniel-Ellsberg.html
A US federal judge ruled yesterday (Nov. 9) against the National Security Agency for its bulk collection of phone call records, first disclosed by whistleblower Edward Snowden in 2013. It’s a largely symbolic win against the agency, but one still celebrated by Snowden and other opponents of mass surveillance. Washington, DC district court judge Richard Leon granted an injunction to bar the National Security Agency (NSA) from collecting the phone call data of J.J. Little, a California attorney and conservative activist, along with data from his small legal practice. In his ruling, Leon said it is “substantially likely” that the bulk collection program is “unlawful”—and furthermore, that Little and his law firm have “suffered a concrete harm” from of the collection and warehousing of their phone records.
A US federal judge ruled yesterday (Nov. 9) against the National Security Agency for its bulk collection of phone call records, first disclosed by whistleblower Edward Snowden in 2013. It’s a largely symbolic win against the agency, but one still celebrated by Snowden and other opponents of mass surveillance.
Washington, DC district court judge Richard Leon granted an injunction to bar the National Security Agency (NSA) from collecting the phone call data of J.J. Little, a California attorney and conservative activist, along with data from his small legal practice.
In his ruling, Leon said it is “substantially likely” that the bulk collection program is “unlawful”—and furthermore, that Little and his law firm have “suffered a concrete harm” from of the collection and warehousing of their phone records.
Read more @ http://qz.com/545978/a-federal-judges-ruling-against-the-nsa-is-a-big-win-for-edward-snowden/
Snowden's lawyer, Jesselyn Radack, explains why whistleblowers are the targets of government prosecution. Would Edward Snowden be better off if he had gone through official channels to expose multiple National Security Agency programs that violated the privacy rights of Americans? Snowden's lawyer, Jesselyn Radack, says no and points to the track record of whistleblowers who have faced criminal investigations over speaking out officially. "Tom Drake, Bill Binney, Kirk Wiebe, and Ed Loomis did go through the proper channels "and all of them fell under criminal investigations for having done so." Radack told Reason TV Editor-In-Chief Nick Gillespie. While Edward Snowden has become a popular debate topic posed to Democratic and GOP hopefuls, the real issue may be the U.S. government's war on information. For more watch, "Edward Snowden's Lawyer on the Government's War on Whistleblowers."
Would Edward Snowden be better off if he had gone through official channels to expose multiple National Security Agency programs that violated the privacy rights of Americans? Snowden's lawyer, Jesselyn Radack, says no and points to the track record of whistleblowers who have faced criminal investigations over speaking out officially.
"Tom Drake, Bill Binney, Kirk Wiebe, and Ed Loomis did go through the proper channels "and all of them fell under criminal investigations for having done so." Radack told Reason TV Editor-In-Chief Nick Gillespie.
While Edward Snowden has become a popular debate topic posed to Democratic and GOP hopefuls, the real issue may be the U.S. government's war on information. For more watch, "Edward Snowden's Lawyer on the Government's War on Whistleblowers."
Read more @ https://reason.com/blog/2015/11/08/here-is-why-edward-snowden-couldnt-have
NSA whistleblower points to ‘extraordinary change’ in attitudes as he notes that Democratic candidates for US president did not call him a traitor Edward Snowden has described the Democratic presidential debate last month as marking an “extraordinary change” in attitudes towards him. In a lengthy interview with Sweden’s Dagens Nyheter published on Friday, Snowden said he had been encouraged by the debate between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders, her main challenger for the Democratic nomination. During the televised encounter, both candidates called for Snowden to face trial, but Sanders said he thought the NSA whistleblower had “played a very important role in educating the American people”. That marked an important shift in the US debate over Snowden’s action, he said. The former National Security Agency analyst said it had taken 30 years for Daniel Ellsberg, who leaked the Pentagon Papers about the Vietnam war, to shift from being described regularly as a traitor. But not once in the debate had Snowden been referred to as a traitor.
NSA whistleblower points to ‘extraordinary change’ in attitudes as he notes that Democratic candidates for US president did not call him a traitor
Edward Snowden has described the Democratic presidential debate last month as marking an “extraordinary change” in attitudes towards him.
In a lengthy interview with Sweden’s Dagens Nyheter published on Friday, Snowden said he had been encouraged by the debate between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders, her main challenger for the Democratic nomination.
During the televised encounter, both candidates called for Snowden to face trial, but Sanders said he thought the NSA whistleblower had “played a very important role in educating the American people”.
That marked an important shift in the US debate over Snowden’s action, he said.
The former National Security Agency analyst said it had taken 30 years for Daniel Ellsberg, who leaked the Pentagon Papers about the Vietnam war, to shift from being described regularly as a traitor.
But not once in the debate had Snowden been referred to as a traitor.
Read more @ http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/nov/06/edward-snowden-democratic-debate
Certain parallels between 2012’s Skyfall, the most successful Bond film ever, and Spectre (Nov. 6) are too obvious to ignore. Both movies feature brooding British thespian Daniel Craig as an all-too-human 007 who must shoulder the heavy existential burden of being a superspy while simultaneously saving the world. Both were directed by Oscar-winner Sam Mendes, and each film showcases the same actors portraying MI6 support staff facing downward pressure from government bureaucracy: Ralph Fiennes as Secret Intelligence Service boss M, Naomie Harris as Eve Moneypenny, and Ben Whishaw as gadget master Q.
In a recent interview, Edward Snowden unveiled his top five security tools that he uses all the time to protect his communications and devices against surveillance and hacking. These include the Tor anonymizing network, the Signal private messenger, Off-The-Record (OTR) encryption protocol, TAILS, the portable anonymity-focused operating system, and Qubes OS, the operating system that offers security through compartmentalization. Tor Tor is an anonymizing network that can provide different IP addresses from around the world to anyone who wants to hide their location. The difference between Tor and a VPN is that Tor is more like a "chain VPN," because your data travels encrypted through multiple nodes situated in different locations of the world, making it difficult for most people, companies, or even countries to track you.
In a recent interview, Edward Snowden unveiled his top five security tools that he uses all the time to protect his communications and devices against surveillance and hacking. These include the Tor anonymizing network, the Signal private messenger, Off-The-Record (OTR) encryption protocol, TAILS, the portable anonymity-focused operating system, and Qubes OS, the operating system that offers security through compartmentalization.
Tor is an anonymizing network that can provide different IP addresses from around the world to anyone who wants to hide their location. The difference between Tor and a VPN is that Tor is more like a "chain VPN," because your data travels encrypted through multiple nodes situated in different locations of the world, making it difficult for most people, companies, or even countries to track you.
Read more @ http://www.tomshardware.com/news/edward-snowden-favorite-security-tools,30507.html
A man some people consider a hero and others believe is a criminal is to present the opening address at a Queen’s University conference later this week. Edward Snowden, 32, the former Central Intelligence Agency employee and United States government contractor who leaked thousands of classified documents that revealed the extent of global surveillance programs operated by the U S. and its English-speaking allies, is to present the opening keynote speech at the Queen’s International Affairs Association’s Model United Nations Invitational on Thursday. The event is to include 250 student delegates from 15 schools across North America. Snowden, who has asylum in Russia, is to speak about cyber security at the conference via video link. “We really wanted to bring this issue forward because, really, all of the people here at Queen’s, in terms of being university students, this issue is verya, very applicable to them,” said Jeremy Rogers, a third-year political student who arranged the Snowden talk, which is to include a 45-minute keynote address and a 35-minute question-and-answer session. “We’ve all grown up with social media from a very young age. Everything we’ve done is on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram. Our entire lives can be catalogued.”
A man some people consider a hero and others believe is a criminal is to present the opening address at a Queen’s University conference later this week.
Edward Snowden, 32, the former Central Intelligence Agency employee and United States government contractor who leaked thousands of classified documents that revealed the extent of global surveillance programs operated by the U S. and its English-speaking allies, is to present the opening keynote speech at the Queen’s International Affairs Association’s Model United Nations Invitational on Thursday. The event is to include 250 student delegates from 15 schools across North America.
Snowden, who has asylum in Russia, is to speak about cyber security at the conference via video link.
“We really wanted to bring this issue forward because, really, all of the people here at Queen’s, in terms of being university students, this issue is verya, very applicable to them,” said Jeremy Rogers, a third-year political student who arranged the Snowden talk, which is to include a 45-minute keynote address and a 35-minute question-and-answer session.
“We’ve all grown up with social media from a very young age. Everything we’ve done is on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram. Our entire lives can be catalogued.”
Read more @ http://www.thewhig.com/2015/11/09/snowden-to-speak-at-queens-conference
“I never thought that I would be Big Brother,” jokes Snowden as he is lowered down from the cloud and on to a projector screen. The crowd greets him like a rock star. He looks sheepish, perhaps overcome by the fervor of an audience in a country that he has no possibility of returning to under the present circumstances. On the stage to greet him is poet Ann Lauterbach and the Intercept’s Peter Maass. The dissident, the poet, and the journalist engaged in discussion at the penultimate talk of Bard College’s “Why Privacy Matters” conference held in October in the spirit of the college’s matron philosopher Hannah Arendt. Whether it is state-sponsored or corporate surveillance, or increasingly sousveillance, it seems privacy has become a relic of bygone days. In some sense, we have become unquestioning of this new reality of zero privacy put forth by government and corporate interests alike. But then I look up and see Snowden.
“I never thought that I would be Big Brother,” jokes Snowden as he is lowered down from the cloud and on to a projector screen. The crowd greets him like a rock star. He looks sheepish, perhaps overcome by the fervor of an audience in a country that he has no possibility of returning to under the present circumstances. On the stage to greet him is poet Ann Lauterbach and the Intercept’s Peter Maass. The dissident, the poet, and the journalist engaged in discussion at the penultimate talk of Bard College’s “Why Privacy Matters” conference held in October in the spirit of the college’s matron philosopher Hannah Arendt.
Read more @ http://www.thenation.com/article/the-poet-the-journalist-and-the-dissident/
In all probability, there wouldn’t have been a new investigatory powers bill without Edward Snowden and his Guardian revelations that galvanised change from the Obama administration and moved the whole issue of state surveillance centre stage in Britain. There wouldn’t have been specific clauses to safeguard the rights of journalists and doctors. And we wouldn’t have known, almost incidentally (to quote the Daily Mail), that MI5 “has been hoovering up our email and phone records while operating in a shady area of an outdated law” – in short, that this whole shady area needed drastic reform. Has Theresa May pulled it off? Campaigners from Liberty to the UK Press Gazette have certainly played a vibrant role in moving her and evasive “authority” this far. (The extent to which the police were abusing feeble statute and hacking into journalists’ phone and database records was, and remains, a scandal.) But don’t expect Fleet Street to sing from the same hymn sheet, because this whole area of reporting and analysis is a terrible muddle. Here’s Max Hastings, chuntering away in the Mail on “state snooping and why I trust our spies more than apologists for treachery”. And here’s contemporaneous Mail comment on “The duplicity of Tony Blair and his cronies”: cronies like the senior spies who signed off on the dodgy Iraq dossier. Either spying and secrecy are part of the problem of transparency and trustworthiness, or they’re not. Either Snowden played his part and ignited the issue, or it somehow self-ignited. Either you trust the latest reassurances from on high, or you don’t.
In all probability, there wouldn’t have been a new investigatory powers bill without Edward Snowden and his Guardian revelations that galvanised change from the Obama administration and moved the whole issue of state surveillance centre stage in Britain. There wouldn’t have been specific clauses to safeguard the rights of journalists and doctors. And we wouldn’t have known, almost incidentally (to quote the Daily Mail), that MI5 “has been hoovering up our email and phone records while operating in a shady area of an outdated law” – in short, that this whole shady area needed drastic reform.
Has Theresa May pulled it off? Campaigners from Liberty to the UK Press Gazette have certainly played a vibrant role in moving her and evasive “authority” this far. (The extent to which the police were abusing feeble statute and hacking into journalists’ phone and database records was, and remains, a scandal.) But don’t expect Fleet Street to sing from the same hymn sheet, because this whole area of reporting and analysis is a terrible muddle. Here’s Max Hastings, chuntering away in the Mail on “state snooping and why I trust our spies more than apologists for treachery”. And here’s contemporaneous Mail comment on “The duplicity of Tony Blair and his cronies”: cronies like the senior spies who signed off on the dodgy Iraq dossier.
Either spying and secrecy are part of the problem of transparency and trustworthiness, or they’re not. Either Snowden played his part and ignited the issue, or it somehow self-ignited. Either you trust the latest reassurances from on high, or you don’t.
Read more @ http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/nov/08/snoopers-charter-outrage-or-snowden-not-both
So what happens if you don’t agree to their terms?
User agreements are written for regulators and lawyers but a new database intends to help consumers make more informed choices to ensure data is protected No one reads those interminable terms of service agreements on Instagram, WhatsApp and their like. But they could make the difference between life and death, according to Rebecca MacKinnon. “It may be about whether you get tortured for what you wrote on Facebook or not, or whether you get tried based on some of the stuff you had in your text messages or something you uploaded. They’re worth a lot to human beings,” said MacKinnon, the leader of a new project that hopes to show people just what they are signing away when they blindly click “agree”.
User agreements are written for regulators and lawyers but a new database intends to help consumers make more informed choices to ensure data is protected
No one reads those interminable terms of service agreements on Instagram, WhatsApp and their like. But they could make the difference between life and death, according to Rebecca MacKinnon.
“It may be about whether you get tortured for what you wrote on Facebook or not, or whether you get tried based on some of the stuff you had in your text messages or something you uploaded. They’re worth a lot to human beings,” said MacKinnon, the leader of a new project that hopes to show people just what they are signing away when they blindly click “agree”.
Read more @ http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/nov/03/ranking-digital-rights-project-data-protection
"What lies behind us and what lies before us are small matters compared to what lies within us." ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~
Interact