ForgotPassword?
Sign Up
Search this Topic:
Posts: 27156
May 29 15 6:01 PM
icepick wrote:Rand is surprising me. I do not agree with him on everything, but he does seem to be the only candidate who tries to address the needs of all the people. Too bad the press keeps trying to trash him. But if he keeps this up, nothing they do will matter. No, that watered down version should never get on the books. It was time for this monster to die the day that it was passed.
"What lies behind us and what lies before us are small matters compared to what lies within us." ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~
Interact
May 29 15 7:38 PM
https://twitter.com/hashtag/SunsetThePatriotAct?src=hash
Posts: 14359
May 29 15 8:36 PM
PeacefulSwannie wrote:icepick wrote:Rand is surprising me. I do not agree with him on everything, but he does seem to be the only candidate who tries to address the needs of all the people. Too bad the press keeps trying to trash him. But if he keeps this up, nothing they do will matter. No, that watered down version should never get on the books. It was time for this monster to die the day that it was passed.It was only supposed to be temporary, and I think that when they discovered how lucrative it was they don't want to give it up. Basically its the US version of the Stasi. America has always stood for freedom and democracy, but now that has all changed....
Jun 1 15 9:25 AM
icepick wrote:PeacefulSwannie wrote:icepick wrote:Rand is surprising me. I do not agree with him on everything, but he does seem to be the only candidate who tries to address the needs of all the people. Too bad the press keeps trying to trash him. But if he keeps this up, nothing they do will matter. No, that watered down version should never get on the books. It was time for this monster to die the day that it was passed.It was only supposed to be temporary, and I think that when they discovered how lucrative it was they don't want to give it up. Basically its the US version of the Stasi. America has always stood for freedom and democracy, but now that has all changed.... No, it has not changed, but there are a lot of people working very hard to make it that way. An internal struggle in this nation that will inevitably lead to civil war if it's not stopped. And I would call that background group you mentioned an American Gestapo, not Stasi, because that would be closer to the truth. It's how we know that the true culprit here is Obama. Not Bush, who has been Obama's whipping boy so to speak, because the press has helped Obama to pass the blame for all of his criminal activities on to Bush, ever since Obama has been in office. The goal appears to be to bring enough Muslims across our southern border in order to establish a foothold. Unfortunately for him, the Supreme Court has ruled against the illegal INS practices, at least until the states suing Obama has had time to bring their lawsuit into the courts. It's more than obvious that the villain here is Obama, whose sympathies for the Muslims are now so far out in the open that they can no longer be ignored. Bush is a Presbyterian, whose main crime is having not exactly been the sharpest tool in the shed.I know what most of the papers are trying to say. It's all lies. But much of the public rushes to believe Obama. Or they did, until he started all of this race baiting business. When people believe Obama's lies about this not being a big deal because the practices reach all the way back to Reagan, they increase Hillary's chances in 2016, which is precisely what we must stop. Yes, Bush did engage in some illegal surveillance, INSIDE OUR BORDERS. Obama expanded that to take in every nation on Earth. In my opinion it was so he could collect enough dirt on everybody to blackmail them. We need everybody to spot who the true criminals are, so that we can deal with this evil administration without having to resort to bloodshed.
Jun 1 15 9:28 AM
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.
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 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.
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
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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?"
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/
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.
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/
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.
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
Read more @ http://edition.cnn.com/2015/05/22/politics/patriot-act-debate-explainer-nsa/
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."
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
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.”
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/
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.
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
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."
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
Read more @ http://www.mediaite.com/tv/joseph-gordon-levitt-hopes-snowden-movie-will-influence-surveillance-debate/
Jun 1 15 12:07 PM
Jun 1 15 1:27 PM
icepick wrote:http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/freedom-act-senate-vote-surveillance/2015/05/31/id/647832/
Jun 1 15 4:37 PM
Jun 1 15 5:42 PM
icepick wrote:Yeah, Rand managed to block it, but I sense some blackmail going on.
Jun 1 15 6:19 PM
Jun 1 15 8:58 PM
icepick wrote:Exactly. Mr Paul appears to have some serious guts, and a pair of big iron balls. How many people have had bad things happen to them when they took on the system like this in recent times?
Jun 1 15 10:00 PM
Jun 2 15 7:54 AM
icepick wrote:It might be coincidence, but an awful lot of people are, as you say, turning up dead.I can't believe that he managed to block the vote. Next, go after DHS.
Jun 2 15 10:48 AM
Jun 2 15 11:57 PM
icepick wrote:They seem quite depressed and angry that they cannot legally spy on us now:http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Rand-Paul-Patriot-act-USA-Freedom-Act-metadata/2015/06/01/id/647916/
Paul also said on Sunday that he believes there are some in the Senate who want to see an attack, so he can be blamed for the lapse the Patriot Act, a comment that Pataki found "outrageous." "I can't speak for him, but I think the idea that anyone would want to see an attack in America so that he gets political blame is outrageous," Pataki said. "The thought that someone would want to see Americans killed for some political reason is just beyond the line to me."
Jun 2 15 11:58 PM
THE Federal Bureau of Investigation is operating a small air force with scores of low-flying planes across the US carrying video and, at times, mobile phone surveillance technology — all hidden behind fictitious companies that are fronts for the government, the Associated Press has learned. The planes’ surveillance equipment is generally used without a judge’s approval, and the FBI said the flights were used for specific, ongoing investigations. In a recent 30-day period, the agency flew above more than 30 cities in 11 states across the country, an AP review found.Aerial surveillance represents a changing frontier for law enforcement, providing what the government maintains is an important tool in criminal, terrorism or intelligence probes. But the program raises questions about whether there should be updated policies protecting civil liberties as new technologies pose intrusive opportunities for government spying.US law enforcement officials confirmed for the first time the wide-scale use of the aircraft, which the AP traced to at least 13 fake companies, such as FVX Research, KQM Aviation, NBR Aviation and PXW Services. Even basic aspects of the program are withheld from the public in censored versions of official reports from the Justice Department’s inspector general.
THE Federal Bureau of Investigation is operating a small air force with scores of low-flying planes across the US carrying video and, at times, mobile phone surveillance technology — all hidden behind fictitious companies that are fronts for the government, the Associated Press has learned.
The planes’ surveillance equipment is generally used without a judge’s approval, and the FBI said the flights were used for specific, ongoing investigations. In a recent 30-day period, the agency flew above more than 30 cities in 11 states across the country, an AP review found.
Aerial surveillance represents a changing frontier for law enforcement, providing what the government maintains is an important tool in criminal, terrorism or intelligence probes. But the program raises questions about whether there should be updated policies protecting civil liberties as new technologies pose intrusive opportunities for government spying.
US law enforcement officials confirmed for the first time the wide-scale use of the aircraft, which the AP traced to at least 13 fake companies, such as FVX Research, KQM Aviation, NBR Aviation and PXW Services. Even basic aspects of the program are withheld from the public in censored versions of official reports from the Justice Department’s inspector general.
Read more @ http://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/fbi-behind-mysterious-surveillance-aircraft-over-us-cities/story-fnjwubd2-1227380210635
Jun 4 15 10:05 AM
Anti-Spying Law Wins Cautious Praise From Edward Snowden
The USA Freedom Act limits the NSA's power to collect phone data Former National Security Agency (NSA) contractor Edward Snowden has called the USA Freedom Act “an important step” but urged further congressional limits on surveillance. Speaking via video link at a London Amnesty International event Tuesday, Snowden said the law, which will limit the power of the NSA to access telephone data from millions of Americans with no connection to terrorism, was historic. “For the first time in recent history we found that despite the claims of government, the public made the final decision and that is a radical change that we should seize on, we should value and we should push further,” he said from Russia, where he has been given asylum since he leaked information about Washington’s domestic spying programs to the media in 2013. The new legislation, which President Obama signed into law on Tuesday night, requires the NSA and other intelligence agencies to obtain a warrant from a counter-terror court before accessing data from telephone companies, AP reports. “This legislation will strengthen civil liberty safeguards and provide greater public confidence in these programs,” Obama said in a statement. But the Act also renews still-controversial governmental powers granted by older legislation, such as roving wiretaps and tracking of so-called “lone wolf” suspects. For that reason, Snowden urged Congress to consider more limits on surveillance.
Former National Security Agency (NSA) contractor Edward Snowden has called the USA Freedom Act “an important step” but urged further congressional limits on surveillance.
Speaking via video link at a London Amnesty International event Tuesday, Snowden said the law, which will limit the power of the NSA to access telephone data from millions of Americans with no connection to terrorism, was historic.
“For the first time in recent history we found that despite the claims of government, the public made the final decision and that is a radical change that we should seize on, we should value and we should push further,” he said from Russia, where he has been given asylum since he leaked information about Washington’s domestic spying programs to the media in 2013.
The new legislation, which President Obama signed into law on Tuesday night, requires the NSA and other intelligence agencies to obtain a warrant from a counter-terror court before accessing data from telephone companies, AP reports. “This legislation will strengthen civil liberty safeguards and provide greater public confidence in these programs,” Obama said in a statement.
But the Act also renews still-controversial governmental powers granted by older legislation, such as roving wiretaps and tracking of so-called “lone wolf” suspects. For that reason, Snowden urged Congress to consider more limits on surveillance.
Read more @ http://time.com/3906703/usa-freedom-act-nsa-edward-snowden-surveillance-amnesty-international/
Bulk collection of Americans’ phone records to end as US Senate passes USA Freedom Act The US Senate on Tuesday passed a bill to end the bulk collection of millions of Americans’ phone records, ushering in the country’s most significant surveillance reform since 1978 two years after NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden’s revelations to the Guardian. Senators voted 67-32 to pass the USA Freedom Act, which overwhelmingly cleared the House of Representatives. Hours later, Barack Obama signed the legislation, after saying he would “work expeditiously to ensure our national security professionals again have the full set of vital tools they need to continue protecting the country”. The passage of the USA Freedom Act paves the way for telecom companies to assume responsibility of the controversial phone records collection program, while also bringing to a close a short lapse in the broad NSA and FBI domestic spying authorities. Those powers expired with key provisions of the Patriot Act at 12.01am on Monday amid a showdown between defense hawks and civil liberties advocates.
Bulk collection of Americans’ phone records to end as US Senate passes USA Freedom Act
The US Senate on Tuesday passed a bill to end the bulk collection of millions of Americans’ phone records, ushering in the country’s most significant surveillance reform since 1978 two years after NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden’s revelations to the Guardian.
Senators voted 67-32 to pass the USA Freedom Act, which overwhelmingly cleared the House of Representatives. Hours later, Barack Obama signed the legislation, after saying he would “work expeditiously to ensure our national security professionals again have the full set of vital tools they need to continue protecting the country”.
The passage of the USA Freedom Act paves the way for telecom companies to assume responsibility of the controversial phone records collection program, while also bringing to a close a short lapse in the broad NSA and FBI domestic spying authorities. Those powers expired with key provisions of the Patriot Act at 12.01am on Monday amid a showdown between defense hawks and civil liberties advocates.
Read more @ http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/02/congress-surveillance-reform-edward-snowden
Of course the charges stand…. What else can be expected ….? They were being very sneaky, cunning and underhanded and Snowden sprung them, and we now know what they were doing was illegal, and they must have known that too and went ahead anyway …. We all saw how angry they were at the beginning of the Snowden revelations…… Just imagine that you had the ability to know every single persons private business, could listen into their private conversations, read their private e-mails, know everything they looked up on the internet …. Know all their secrets, their assets…. Everything…. And suddenly the spectre was on the horizon of that ability being taken away from you…. Not any wonder they were angry. When you think about it the first thing they would do is find other avenues to keep on doing it….. What we saw was other countries laws changing to protect the spying…. Because they must have known at the beginning that the ability was illegal and they would eventually lose it, so it gets dragged on for a very long time to give them time to find other ways of getting it. That is what I sensed was happening behind the scenes…. And then there was spying on corporations so they knew who was putting their money where….. what the latest inventions were ahead of everyone else….. I can see where Snowden was coming from and I believe he was in the right to do what he did, and anyone with conscience should feel the same way.
The former NSA contractor revealed the banned surveillance programme, but an Obama administration spokesman says they will not review his charges The White House refused to reconsider its legal pursuit of Edward Snowden on Monday, while it sought to take credit for outlawing the bulk telephone surveillance programme he revealed. Obama administration spokesman Josh Earnest rejected the argument that the imminent passage of legislation banning the practice meant it was time to take a fresh look at the charges against the former National Security Agency contractor. “The fact is that Mr Snowden committed very serious crimes, and the US government and the Department of Justice believe that he should face them,” Earnest told the Guardian at the daily White House press briefing.
The former NSA contractor revealed the banned surveillance programme, but an Obama administration spokesman says they will not review his charges
The White House refused to reconsider its legal pursuit of Edward Snowden on Monday, while it sought to take credit for outlawing the bulk telephone surveillance programme he revealed.
Obama administration spokesman Josh Earnest rejected the argument that the imminent passage of legislation banning the practice meant it was time to take a fresh look at the charges against the former National Security Agency contractor.
“The fact is that Mr Snowden committed very serious crimes, and the US government and the Department of Justice believe that he should face them,” Earnest told the Guardian at the daily White House press briefing.
Read more @ http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/01/charges-against-edward-snowden-stand-despite-telephone-surveillance-ban
Prominent US whistleblowers applaud Snowden’s Patriot Act revelation for inciting Congress to take action, though they doubt he can ever return to the US NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden should be thanked for sparking the debate that forced Congress to change US surveillance law, Daniel Ellsberg, the man who leaked the Pentagon Papers, said Monday. Other prominent US whistleblowers also gave Snowden credit and argued that the curbs in the NSA’s surveillance powers by Congress – combined with a federal court ruling last month that bulk phone record collection is illegal – should open the way for him to be allowed to return to the US, although they conceded this was unlikely. Ellsberg, the former US military analyst who risked jail in 1971 by leaking Pentagon papers showing the White House lied about the Vietnam war, welcomed the concessions made by the Senate, limited as they are. Sweeping US surveillance powers used by the NSA expired at midnight after a dramatic showdown in the Senate. Some are likely to be replaced with those in new legislation, the USA Freedom Act.
Prominent US whistleblowers applaud Snowden’s Patriot Act revelation for inciting Congress to take action, though they doubt he can ever return to the US
NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden should be thanked for sparking the debate that forced Congress to change US surveillance law, Daniel Ellsberg, the man who leaked the Pentagon Papers, said Monday.
Other prominent US whistleblowers also gave Snowden credit and argued that the curbs in the NSA’s surveillance powers by Congress – combined with a federal court ruling last month that bulk phone record collection is illegal – should open the way for him to be allowed to return to the US, although they conceded this was unlikely.
Ellsberg, the former US military analyst who risked jail in 1971 by leaking Pentagon papers showing the White House lied about the Vietnam war, welcomed the concessions made by the Senate, limited as they are.
Sweeping US surveillance powers used by the NSA expired at midnight after a dramatic showdown in the Senate. Some are likely to be replaced with those in new legislation, the USA Freedom Act.
Read more @ http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/01/edward-snowden-nsa-surveillance-patriot-act-whistleblowers-daniel-ellsberg
Score one for the whistleblower. Congress' decision to abandon the federal government's bulk collection of the phone records of American citizens represents vindication of the much-pilloried former NSA contractor Edward Snowden. While scrambling over expired elements of the Patriot Act continues in Washington this week, it's clear that when the dust settles, the feds will no longer be in the bulk collection business. And that's a good thing. When Snowden leaked classified documents to journalists two years ago outlining the hitherto secret scooping up of the records of millions and millions of Americans with absolutely no connection to terrorism, he was vilified as a traitor by House Speaker John Boehner and former vice president Dick Cheney. Politico's Roger Simon dismissed him as "the slacker who came in from the cold" and for being "29 and possessing all the qualifications to become a grocery bagger" (who knew being 29 was a felony?). The Washington Post's Richard Cohen said incomprehensibly that Snowden would "go down as a cross-dressing Little Red Riding Hood."
Congress' decision to abandon the federal government's bulk collection of the phone records of American citizens represents vindication of the much-pilloried former NSA contractor Edward Snowden.
While scrambling over expired elements of the Patriot Act continues in Washington this week, it's clear that when the dust settles, the feds will no longer be in the bulk collection business. And that's a good thing.
When Snowden leaked classified documents to journalists two years ago outlining the hitherto secret scooping up of the records of millions and millions of Americans with absolutely no connection to terrorism, he was vilified as a traitor by House Speaker John Boehner and former vice president Dick Cheney. Politico's Roger Simon dismissed him as "the slacker who came in from the cold" and for being "29 and possessing all the qualifications to become a grocery bagger" (who knew being 29 was a felony?). The Washington Post's Richard Cohen said incomprehensibly that Snowden would "go down as a cross-dressing Little Red Riding Hood."
Read more @ http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/columnist/rieder/2015/06/01/vindication-for-snowden-bulk-collection-phone-records/28304535/
Somebody got at John Moorman?
From the Cold War to the Patriot Act, librarians have fought to defend privacy against the intrusions of the security state. This resistance, which I wrote about a few weeks ago, has come both from individual librarians like Zoia Horn, and from the American Library Association, which lobbies on legislative issues in Washington and advocates broadly for intellectual freedom. However, there is also a serious debate within the profession about whether the ALA is doing enough to put its privacy and intellectual freedom principles into action. That long-simmering controversy spilled over in the summer of 2013, shortly after documents leaked by Edward Snowden made their way into the pages of The Guardian, The Washington Post, and other outlets. At its meeting in late June of that year, the ALA’s governing council considered a resolution to recognize Snowden as “as a whistleblower who…has performed a valuable service in launching a national dialogue about transparency, domestic surveillance, and over classification.” The resolution passed easily, by a vote of 105 to 39. “It had more resonance than anything else we had done,” recalled Al Kagan, a member of the ALA council who represents the Social Responsibilities Roundtable (SRRT), a progressive unit with the ALA. “Actions taken by Edward Snowden have given us an extraordinary opportunity to make important strides in public policy that relates fundamentally to [librarianship’s] core values of privacy, open access to government information, over-classification, [and] an informed electorate,” Jack Kuhn, one of the authors of the resolution, said at the time. The point of the resolution, he argued, was “to make it clear to folks who are taking great personal risk in revealing important details about what is going on in our name that we do stand with them on the basis of our core values.” The next morning, a member of the ALA’s executive board, John Moorman, stunned supporters of the Snowden resolution by proposing to have it reconsidered and replaced, arguing that the previous days’ vote had been rushed and ill-considered. Further, he argued, the resolution might impair “the ability of our Washington office to work with legislators and the ability of librarians in their community to effectively discuss issues from a neutral stance.” The motion to reconsider passed by a vote of 96 to 42. The council went on to approve a substitute resolution erasing all mentions of Snowden by name and instead urging Congress and the White House to “provide authentic protections” to whistleblowers, including private contractors.
From the Cold War to the Patriot Act, librarians have fought to defend privacy against the intrusions of the security state. This resistance, which I wrote about a few weeks ago, has come both from individual librarians like Zoia Horn, and from the American Library Association, which lobbies on legislative issues in Washington and advocates broadly for intellectual freedom.
However, there is also a serious debate within the profession about whether the ALA is doing enough to put its privacy and intellectual freedom principles into action. That long-simmering controversy spilled over in the summer of 2013, shortly after documents leaked by Edward Snowden made their way into the pages of The Guardian, The Washington Post, and other outlets.
At its meeting in late June of that year, the ALA’s governing council considered a resolution to recognize Snowden as “as a whistleblower who…has performed a valuable service in launching a national dialogue about transparency, domestic surveillance, and over classification.” The resolution passed easily, by a vote of 105 to 39. “It had more resonance than anything else we had done,” recalled Al Kagan, a member of the ALA council who represents the Social Responsibilities Roundtable (SRRT), a progressive unit with the ALA.
“Actions taken by Edward Snowden have given us an extraordinary opportunity to make important strides in public policy that relates fundamentally to [librarianship’s] core values of privacy, open access to government information, over-classification, [and] an informed electorate,” Jack Kuhn, one of the authors of the resolution, said at the time. The point of the resolution, he argued, was “to make it clear to folks who are taking great personal risk in revealing important details about what is going on in our name that we do stand with them on the basis of our core values.”
The next morning, a member of the ALA’s executive board, John Moorman, stunned supporters of the Snowden resolution by proposing to have it reconsidered and replaced, arguing that the previous days’ vote had been rushed and ill-considered. Further, he argued, the resolution might impair “the ability of our Washington office to work with legislators and the ability of librarians in their community to effectively discuss issues from a neutral stance.” The motion to reconsider passed by a vote of 96 to 42. The council went on to approve a substitute resolution erasing all mentions of Snowden by name and instead urging Congress and the White House to “provide authentic protections” to whistleblowers, including private contractors.
Read more @ http://www.thenation.com/blog/208857/how-edward-snowden-sparked-librarians-quarrel
Excerpt:
On the American government: "Edward Snowden is a hero. I like what he did. My idea of treason is that you sell secrets to the enemy. He gave information to the American people. Snowden didn't take information for money or dogmas. Governments claim to write endless laws to protect us, a law for this, a law for that, but are they working? I don't think so. The consequences are that there is a staggering loss of freedom for the individual. I look at the drug wars and they are absolutely f***ing ridiculous. There is a black market and the prisons are overcrowded and it's not preventing drug use. There's a corruption that goes all the way to the top."
On the American government:
"Edward Snowden is a hero. I like what he did. My idea of treason is that you sell secrets to the enemy. He gave information to the American people. Snowden didn't take information for money or dogmas. Governments claim to write endless laws to protect us, a law for this, a law for that, but are they working? I don't think so. The consequences are that there is a staggering loss of freedom for the individual. I look at the drug wars and they are absolutely f***ing ridiculous. There is a black market and the prisons are overcrowded and it's not preventing drug use. There's a corruption that goes all the way to the top."
Read more @ http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/entertainment/articles/2015-05/29/vince-vaughn-covers-july-issue-british-gq
Infosec 2015 A top GCHQ official opened the Infosecurity Europe trade show in London with an on-message keynote that focused on promoting best practice rather than dealing with Edward Snowden and the ongoing controversy over the so-called Snoopers’ Charter. Ciaran Martin, director general of cyber-security at GCHQ, gave a broad overview of the threat landscape before going on advise delegates to focus on getting the basics right and promoting government schemes, such as the Cyber Essentials programme. Martin started off his presentation with a suggestion that the denial of cyber-security is the Y2K bug of this generation. A variety of hackers motivated by either “money, power or propaganda” stand ready to ransack corporate systems, he told a packed audience at London’s Olympia. Martin said GCHQ "reluctantly" takes on the role of top scarer, comparing GCHQ's role to a character in Pixar’s Monsters Inc. GCHQ – now 96 years old – has always had an information assurance role, but its function as a signal intelligence agency has always had a higher public profile. This intelligence role has been the source of privacy controversy since the revelations of Edward Snowden. Martin, in best civil servant mode, said the balance between security and privacy is a matter for debate in parliament, which is due to discuss the Investigatory Powers Bill. The senior GCHQ official made no mention of Snowden, beyond suggesting that reports of overarching surveillance were well wide of the mark and that GCHQ’s intelligence role helped in defence. Martin said GCHQ doesn't talk about who it helps. "Infosec 2115 might have a historical talk on our files,” he joked, during a speech that touched on the centuries-old debate among historians about the fall of the Roman Empire.
Infosec 2015 A top GCHQ official opened the Infosecurity Europe trade show in London with an on-message keynote that focused on promoting best practice rather than dealing with Edward Snowden and the ongoing controversy over the so-called Snoopers’ Charter.
Ciaran Martin, director general of cyber-security at GCHQ, gave a broad overview of the threat landscape before going on advise delegates to focus on getting the basics right and promoting government schemes, such as the Cyber Essentials programme.
Martin started off his presentation with a suggestion that the denial of cyber-security is the Y2K bug of this generation. A variety of hackers motivated by either “money, power or propaganda” stand ready to ransack corporate systems, he told a packed audience at London’s Olympia.
Martin said GCHQ "reluctantly" takes on the role of top scarer, comparing GCHQ's role to a character in Pixar’s Monsters Inc. GCHQ – now 96 years old – has always had an information assurance role, but its function as a signal intelligence agency has always had a higher public profile.
This intelligence role has been the source of privacy controversy since the revelations of Edward Snowden. Martin, in best civil servant mode, said the balance between security and privacy is a matter for debate in parliament, which is due to discuss the Investigatory Powers Bill. The senior GCHQ official made no mention of Snowden, beyond suggesting that reports of overarching surveillance were well wide of the mark and that GCHQ’s intelligence role helped in defence.
Martin said GCHQ doesn't talk about who it helps. "Infosec 2115 might have a historical talk on our files,” he joked, during a speech that touched on the centuries-old debate among historians about the fall of the Roman Empire.
Read more @ http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/06/02/infosec_conference_keynote_gchq_ciaran_martin_snowden/
GCHQ’s cybersecurity boss has warned that money, power and propaganda are motivating hugely damaging online attacks against UK organizations, but the best way to fight back is to take a leaf out of the spy agency’s book and render them “as irrelevant as possible.” Speaking at the opening keynote of Infosecurity Europe 2015 in London this morning, the agency’s director general of cybersecurity, Ciaran Martin, argued that while much of the past decade was spent talking about “what might happen,” it’s now a case of “what is happening … on a daily basis.” The bad news is that GCHQ is seeing organizations of all shapes and sizes being targeted today – by nation states, financially motivated gangs and hacktivists. “We’ve been genuinely surprised by the extent and variety of UK organizations subject to intrusions,” Martin revealed, adding that a useful way of approaching cybersecurity is to “think about what makes you attractive as a target.” There are simply too many incidents to worry about “stopping attacks always and everywhere” – so the key is to focus on “what you care about most,” he argued. GCHQ’s website has been a victim of DDoS attacks in the past, for example, but while it is defended as best as the agency can, this public site is not “an existential information security risk,” he said – hinting that other assets are assigned greater protection.
GCHQ’s cybersecurity boss has warned that money, power and propaganda are motivating hugely damaging online attacks against UK organizations, but the best way to fight back is to take a leaf out of the spy agency’s book and render them “as irrelevant as possible.”
Speaking at the opening keynote of Infosecurity Europe 2015 in London this morning, the agency’s director general of cybersecurity, Ciaran Martin, argued that while much of the past decade was spent talking about “what might happen,” it’s now a case of “what is happening … on a daily basis.”
The bad news is that GCHQ is seeing organizations of all shapes and sizes being targeted today – by nation states, financially motivated gangs and hacktivists.
“We’ve been genuinely surprised by the extent and variety of UK organizations subject to intrusions,” Martin revealed, adding that a useful way of approaching cybersecurity is to “think about what makes you attractive as a target.”
There are simply too many incidents to worry about “stopping attacks always and everywhere” – so the key is to focus on “what you care about most,” he argued.
GCHQ’s website has been a victim of DDoS attacks in the past, for example, but while it is defended as best as the agency can, this public site is not “an existential information security risk,” he said – hinting that other assets are assigned greater protection.
Read more @ http://www.infosecurity-magazine.com/news/gchq-uk-firms-fight-power-money/
Of course it isn’t they would use it to their fullest ability…..
GCHQ's director general of cyber security, Ciaran Martin, today refused to talk about the resurrection of the so-called "Snooper's Charter" in his opening keynote at InfoSecurity Europe 2015, and instead launched a defence of the spy agency's actions. Telling delegates that it's "absolutely not our aim to slow down or stop the march of technology and even if it was, we wouldn't be allowed to," Martin deftly sidestepped concerns around surveillance, even when the issue was put to him in a direct question from the audience.
GCHQ's director general of cyber security, Ciaran Martin, today refused to talk about the resurrection of the so-called "Snooper's Charter" in his opening keynote at InfoSecurity Europe 2015, and instead launched a defence of the spy agency's actions.
Telling delegates that it's "absolutely not our aim to slow down or stop the march of technology and even if it was, we wouldn't be allowed to," Martin deftly sidestepped concerns around surveillance, even when the issue was put to him in a direct question from the audience.
Read more @ http://www.computing.co.uk/ctg/news/2411169/gchq-it-is-absolutely-not-our-aim-to-slow-down-or-stop-the-march-of-technology-and-even-if-it-was-we-wouldn-t-be-allowed-to
Whistleblower Edward Snowden has criticized the UK for playing an active role in the worldwide surveillance network set up by the US National Security Agency (NSA), saying the rights and needs of British citizens are being sacrificed. READ MORE: ‘GCHQ doesn’t spy on everyone, we don’t have enough staff’ – intelligence officer “Why is the UK government so secretive? What is it so afraid of – its people? They are afraid of a damaging public debate,” said Snowden during a Q&A video link with London hosted by the human rights group Amnesty International. “Because if we the public knew about what they were doing, we could bring legal public challenges against their activities and succeed… The UK government isn’t trying to preserve civil liberties, but to limit them,” he argued. During the 40-minute session ahead of a special showing of Citizenfour, the Oscar-winning documentary about the whistleblower himself, Snowden repeatedly dismissed big-data surveillance as “ineffective” for catching terrorists, but said it allowed the government to pry into the lives of law abiding citizens. READ MORE: 72% of Brits concerned about online privacy since Snowden leaks “The government in the UK is actually trying to reform laws in a very negative way,” Snowden said, adding that politicians want to amend legislation to “hack into people’s computers who aren’t an intelligence target at all.”
Whistleblower Edward Snowden has criticized the UK for playing an active role in the worldwide surveillance network set up by the US National Security Agency (NSA), saying the rights and needs of British citizens are being sacrificed.
READ MORE: ‘GCHQ doesn’t spy on everyone, we don’t have enough staff’ – intelligence officer
“Why is the UK government so secretive? What is it so afraid of – its people? They are afraid of a damaging public debate,” said Snowden during a Q&A video link with London hosted by the human rights group Amnesty International. “Because if we the public knew about what they were doing, we could bring legal public challenges against their activities and succeed… The UK government isn’t trying to preserve civil liberties, but to limit them,” he argued.
During the 40-minute session ahead of a special showing of Citizenfour, the Oscar-winning documentary about the whistleblower himself, Snowden repeatedly dismissed big-data surveillance as “ineffective” for catching terrorists, but said it allowed the government to pry into the lives of law abiding citizens.
READ MORE: 72% of Brits concerned about online privacy since Snowden leaks
“The government in the UK is actually trying to reform laws in a very negative way,” Snowden said, adding that politicians want to amend legislation to “hack into people’s computers who aren’t an intelligence target at all.”
Read more @ http://rt.com/news/264409-snowden-answers-questions-spying/
Oslo, Norway: Former security contractor Edward Snowden won a Norwegian prize for freedom of expression Tuesday and received yet another invitation to leave his exile and receive the award in person. The Norwegian Academy of Literature and Freedom of Expression said the 31-year old fugitive had won the Bjornson Prize -- named after a Norwegian Nobel literature laureate -- "for his work protecting privacy and for shining a critical light on US surveillance of its citizens and others." Snowden, a former analyst at the US National Security Agency, has lived in exile in Russia since 2013 after revealing mass spying programmes by the United States and its allies. The US administration has branded him a hacker and a traitor who endangered lives by revealing the extent of the NSA spying program. The academy requested assurances from the Norwegian government that Snowden would not be extradited to the US if he travelled to Norway to receive the 100,000 kroner ($12,700, 11,500 euros) prize money in person on September 5. Norway's justice ministry said it was up to immigration authorities, who indicated they would consider any entry request when and if they received one. Snowden was awarded Sweden's Right Livelihood Award in 2014 but chose to accept it by video link rather than leaving his exile in Russia. He has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize for the second year in a row. The Nobel will be awarded in Oslo on October 9.
Oslo, Norway: Former security contractor Edward Snowden won a Norwegian prize for freedom of expression Tuesday and received yet another invitation to leave his exile and receive the award in person. The Norwegian Academy of Literature and Freedom of Expression said the 31-year old fugitive had won the Bjornson Prize -- named after a Norwegian Nobel literature laureate -- "for his work protecting privacy and for shining a critical light on US surveillance of its citizens and others."
Snowden, a former analyst at the US National Security Agency, has lived in exile in Russia since 2013 after revealing mass spying programmes by the United States and its allies. The US administration has branded him a hacker and a traitor who endangered lives by revealing the extent of the NSA spying program. The academy requested assurances from the Norwegian government that Snowden would not be extradited to the US if he travelled to Norway to receive the 100,000 kroner ($12,700, 11,500 euros) prize money in person on September 5. Norway's justice ministry said it was up to immigration authorities, who indicated they would consider any entry request when and if they received one. Snowden was awarded Sweden's Right Livelihood Award in 2014 but chose to accept it by video link rather than leaving his exile in Russia. He has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize for the second year in a row. The Nobel will be awarded in Oslo on October 9.
Read more @ http://www.ndtv.com/world-news/edward-snowden-awarded-freedom-of-expression-prize-in-norway-768177
Jun 5 15 9:52 AM
Jun 5 15 12:04 PM
icepick wrote:About those planes ............... the FBI is part of the Justice Department. Eric Holder ring a bell? If they would check, I'm certain they would catch the administration continuing with the spying. This is why I insist Obama is so much worse than Bush. Things like Bush did have been done in time of war before. Abe Lincoln comes quickly to mind. But the things Obama has done, have never been done before. Not even close.
Jun 5 15 1:29 PM