In Case You Missed This Little Nugget From Edward Snowden This Week...

[WillyT]

Through his lawyer at the American Civil Liberties Union, Mr. Snowden did not specifically address the government’s theory of how he obtained the files, saying in a statement: “It’s ironic that officials are giving classified information to journalists in an effort to discredit me for giving classified information to journalists. The difference is that I did so to inform the public about the government’s actions, and they’re doing so to misinform the public about mine.”

From: 'Snowden Used Low-Cost Tool to Best N.S.A.'

Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/09/us/snowden-used-low-cost-tool-to-best-nsa.html?_r=0

[sabrina 1]

1. Well, if they have nothing wrong they have nothing to worry about.

But they do seem to be very, very worried.

I remember Right Wingers telling me that when we found that Bush was spying on the American people.

Back then they were okay with the massive spying because they were incapable of thinking ahead to one day when maybe, THEIR guy wouldn't be in the WH. NOW they are beginning to see why EVERYONE should oppose these egregious violations of EVERYONE's rights. But we have our own contingency, similarly unaware that their party won't always be in power either.

[suffragette]

2. Spot on Sabrina

[malthaussen]

4. They've been saying it for at least 50 years.

Ever read Night of Camp David?

In fact they were using that one even in Judge Brandeis's time.

-- Mal

[A Simple Game]

10. I may be wrong but back then I can't remember anyone on DU defending the practice. n/t

[billhicks76]

76. Sock Puppets

Fake profiles have mushroomed exponentially since then.

[JDPriestly]

13. +1000

Laws are meant to apply to everyone. That includes people at the NSA. And our Constitution protects us from this broad surveillance network.

[pnwmom]

21. Depends completely on your definition of "wrong." I don't think it was "wrong" that

the US spied on Japan before WW2, and had already broken some of their codes, saving thousands of American lives in the war.

I think some of what Snowden released, about US internal surveillance, was wrong and it was good that it was exposed.

But I disagree with all the leaks from Snowden/Greenwald about international spying, which is what we pay our spy agencies to do.

[rhett o rick]

24. I am going to cautiously say that I think I agree with you. But let's keep it between us. nm

[WillyT]

31. Ahh... The Good Old Days... Not What THESE Guys Fought And Died For Though...

Having talked with one of those heroes for a number of years.



Top Row... Second from left... My old man... and he would disagree.

[sabrina 1]

34. Wrong is the massive spying on the American people. It was when Bush did it, it was

good that Whistle Blowers exposed it.

It is still bad and in fact, worse, because we worked hard to elect Democrats so that all these policies that we knew were so wrong, could be reversed. Yet, not only has no one been held accountable for all the crimes of the Bush administration, many of their policies have been enhanced, rather than obliterated.

There will continue to be Whistle Blowers thankfully, so long as the country is on this very wrong path. Snowden is just the latest since Bush and his minions began taking us down this path.

What is also wrong is that any Democrat who was outraged over all this during the Bush should not be trying to excuse it in any way.

[WillyT]

38. + 1,000,000,000... What You Said !!!

[pnwmom]

39. Read my post again. I agreed with you that US internal surveillance is wrong. But I don't think

international spying falls in the same category.

[sabrina 1]

40. I did read it. I believe the point was wholesale abuse of the technology

that is now available and the hope was that some laws, preferably International Laws would finally be passed, as they have each time new technology has been abused, to get some control over the abuse. And that is happening. It SHOULD have happened long ago, at least after Bush was exposed using the Telecoms to spy on Americans.

It would benefit the US to get such laws passed in order to protect this country from any similar abuses and if it ends up doing that it will be a good thing.

But I doubt other countries are listening in on President Obama's private cell phone. However, is the NSA doing so? They still haven't answered the question Bernie Sanders asked them about spying on members of Congress.

Congress will not do anything to stop these abuses. But maybe, even for their own protection, if not ours, other nations will now start the ball rolling to end these egregious practices that have gone way, way over the line.

[pnwmom]

44. You don't think Russia and China would listen in on the President's cell if they could? Get real. n/

[merrily]

51. Of course they do and of course he knows it, just as they know America listens in on them.

[delrem]

57. I absolutely do!

And like you I think what Russia and China do makes it right to do, so because no doubt Russia and China use the same powers to spy on their own populations, massively and with blanket parameters so none of their citizens are free, so the US should do the same. Because, after all, Russia and China do it.

[pnwmom]

60. If they are spying on us, we would be incredibly naive not to reciprocate. n/t

[delrem]

63. *cough cough*

Who are you trying to kid, pretending that the issue is whether the US should spy on Russia and China, rather than the actual issue whether the NSA should have blanket programs spying on and recording info on every US citizen?

hmm? How do you explain your ignorance to yourself, when you reply to comment after comment correcting you on this issue by ignoring it completely? What, exactly, do you expect to gain by misrepresenting the issue in such a blatant and, well, trite way?

[pnwmom]

65. Who are you trying to kid, pretending that leaking information about international spying,

as Snowden/Greenwald have done, isn't a serious issue, too?

What, exactly, do you expect to gain by misrepresenting what I said in such a blatant and, well, trite way?

[delrem]

75. But I didn't represent your statements at all.

[sabrina 1]

79. It doesn't matter what I think, the fact that the technology is available to so is the problem, not

the question 'will someone abuse it'. Of course they will that is why we have laws. Because we know human nature. And we know someone has already abused it, possibly more for all we know.

So the LOGICAL thing to have done was NOT to be ones who abused it, but to be the ones who took steps on the International level, to minimize the probably abuse of the technology and be the LEADERS of the world, rather than the ones who got caught. Because that should have been expected also, that someone would find out. The exposures began in 2001 so it's not like there was no chance of being found out.

Now others are leading the way as far as getting laws passed to minimize the abuse, when it should have been us.

[merrily]

50. I doubt Angela was surprised. Germans were in an uproar; and she wanted to show

she was "suffering" from US spying, right along with them. Meanwhile, her intelligency operation has probably been scouring the NSA records on calls in and out of Germany all along.

Notice, Angele never even feigned surprise about any phone but her personal cell. Implied: The US bugging her entire government was no biggie. We ordinary people have known for several years that cell phones are vulnerable. Hell, even Osama knew it and stayed off phones and the net. Assuming Angela did not know that hers was a target is probably a sign that are still trusting all of them too much.

Luckily, for Angela (1) the German government will pay for couriers to carry her messages; and (2) being a plutocrat, she has no reason to want to overthrow the German government.

This left of the 99% is the target of this stuff and the only ones surprised by it, not heads of government, even heads of supposedly leftist governments. I'd be floored if Putin and Xi Jinping had no clue their personal cells were on the list.

[merrily]

45. They already knew they were being spied on by us. So did terrorists.

Many of us were in the dark, though.

If you tell people something they already know, it's not a disclosure.

[pnwmom]

46. There's a vast difference between knowing it in theory, and knowing it in its DETAILS.

We know that Russia and China are spying on us, too, but we don't know exactly how.

The disclosure is in the details, not in the fact that countries are spying on each other.

[merrily]

48. They did not know only in theory, so there goes that argument.

First, unlike we ordinary shlubs who have to walk past cameras and listening devices on our city streets, and have our phone conversations and emails stored, at a minimum, foreign nations they have their own intelligence agencies. Beside, we voluntarily share information with many nations and they with us.

[MyNameGoesHere]

78. And I am glad that spying helped reduce casualties by informing Pearl Harbor

an attack was imminent. Wait my history book is wrong, says here Pearl Harbor was decimated by a surprise attack. Guess that spying thing doesn't always help.

[grahamhgreen]

86. Then you must be as shocked as I was to see Obama say he would reduce foreign spying!!!!

[closeupready]

41. There we go. +1.

[merrily]

47. The peope who refused to ratify the Constitution unless

the Framers promised to add the Bill of Rights ASAP had done a boatload--many boatloads--that their former government considered wrong, including overthrowing it a few years earlier. I doubt those who planned and fought the Revolutionary War thought they had done something wrong, even though what they did was pretty much unprecedented at that time.

[hueymahl]

87. What? Democrats might lose the presidency??

Clearly you are an Obama Hater!!

The myopia of the pure partisans, regardless of stripe, always amazes me. I hope a republican never wins again, but when they do, and if we have not reigned in this surveillance state, it has the potential to get real ugly real fast.

[bemildred]

3. "It's secret because we say so." nt

[malthaussen]

5. "We can't say if it's secret. That's secret." n/t

[bemildred]

6. Even better. And I give you the words of Sir Edward Coke:

"It is one of the genuine marks of servitude to have the law either concealed or precarious." -- Sir Edward Coke

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Coke

[malthaussen]

8. I know Sir Edward well.

Love finding someone on the 'net who even knows the name. One of the problems with our society is that only lawyers seem to know anything about jurisprudence.

-- Mal

[bemildred]

9. I'm not a lawyer, but I do read pretty well.

And I just love the logic which says that you can't reveal secrets that you aren't allowed to know if they are secrets of not, on pain of immediate removal from society and a kangaroo court to put you away.

But we both know they have been making it up as they go for some time now.

[malthaussen]

11. It's pretty inevitable, though.

Counter-intelligence is, by necessity, a paranoid profession. Or a profession for paranoids. I don't even think that there is mendacity present, at least not in most operatives (their directors are another matter, because their directors come from the ruling class). I've known the odd spook in my day (used to work with an ex-Treasury guy), and they really are largely bright, patriotic, and devoted. But they have this huge blind spot: they don't comprehend Nietzsche's warning to beware, when fighting monsters, not to become a monster oneself. They really don't, I think, because they know they're the good guys, they can't possibly become monsters. It's the same mentality of that oft-quoted Air Force officer in Vietnam: "We had to destroy the village to save it." They will dismantle the Constitution down to the last iota in order to "preserve and defend" it. It's kind of breathtakingly awesome that they cannot see the contradiction.

-- Mal

[JDPriestly]

15. Excellent post.

It is very easy when in a position of responsibility and privilege to abuse that position for good purposes. It always ends badly.

And so the parent accused of beating his child says, "I had to do it to prevent her/him from doing something bad." I had to beat her. I had to hit her. It was for her/his own good. That is the logic of the abusive parent.

[erronis]

23. Or to prevent the child being like the parent ---

Do as I say, not as I do.

How many times have I seen parents (or others in authority) try to prevent their children, their subjects, from growing up doing the same things.

It can be called protective parentism but it is usually just a way to not have to deal with the unpleasantness that comes from children (and subjects).

Go to your room, right now!

[bemildred]

20. Indeed. nt

[rhett o rick]

25. To repeat, excellent post. nm

[merrily]

52. And they have already dismantled the Constitution.

We, all of us, only have the rights they choose to allow us. That is not a right. That is being too unimportant to warrant their attention. Unless and until, of course, we do something like Occupy Wall Street. Then, they can destroy our belongings and put some of us in the hospital without an arrest, let alone a warning.

Besides all that, is there now any doubt that they planted listening and watching devices around the protest sites?

Gee, if only Bushco hadn't been in charge of Homeland Security then, huh?


ETA: Around the 50th anniversary of the March on Washington, people who had participated in the pre-March events were telling their war stories. And, while I credit JFK for his part in moving civil rights forward and many other things, he was President then.

When the rubber hits the road, it's a lot more about 99% vs. plutocrat than it is about party labels.

[truedelphi]

17. bemildred, that quote is a treasure! n/t

[bemildred]

19. It is free, I don't even remember which book I stole it from.

[riderinthestorm]

7. I can't believe this narcissist continues to point out how the emperor is wearing no clothes

er, how the NSA is exposed as the shitty organization they are.



Sorry. Just thought I'd get a head start on the usual parade....

Big K&R.



(And a tip to msanthrope who continues to repeat the lie that Snowden has no US attorneys....)

[sabrina 1]

35. Lol, that was funny, re the lawyers.

[riderinthestorm]

73. Figured you'd know exactly what I meant. Your previous exchange @ that was epic nt

[merrily]

49. The American Civil Liberties Union is obviously not American.

Besides, everyone on the right knows it's a commie front. The right has been saying that for almost a hundred years, especially since the start of the African American civil rights movement, so it must be so. Right?

That "rightness: is no doubt, why so many Democrats have been joining the RW chorus since the ACLU has found it necessary to sue this administration early in Obama's first term.

[sulphurdunn]

12. If the NSA and the rest of the security state

was half as well designed to spy on the American people as it is to spend their money there would never have been 4 million employees with top secret security clearances of whom 400,000 some are private contractors.

[truedelphi]

18. + 10,000. n/t

[zeemike]

14. Poor WillyT, you just don't understand.

It is not a crime if the government does it....I thought that was firmly established by Nixon.
I will check back to make sure the usual ones show up to set you strait.
You and a lot here are seriously in need of re education.

[WillyT]

29. I Know... I Feel So Mislead...

[Douglas Carpenter]

16. knr

[cantbeserious]

22. Kick And Recommend

eom

[bvar22]

26. DURec for the Whistle Blowers!

The more I hear from Edward Snowden, the more I like him!

THIS is very good word-smithery:

[font size=3] “It’s ironic that officials are giving classified information to journalists in an effort to discredit me for giving classified information to journalists. The difference is that I did so to inform the public about the government’s actions, and they’re doing so to misinform the public about mine.”[/font]

*Rampant Government Secrecy and Democracy can not co-exist.

*Persecution of Whistle Blowers and Democracy can not co-exist.

*Government surveillance of the citizenry and Democracy can not co-exist.

*Secret Laws and Democracy can not co-exist.

*Secret Courts and Democracy can not-co-exist.

*Our Democracy depends on an informed electorate.

You either believe in Democracy
or you don't.
It IS that simple.

[840high]

27. +100

[MannyGoldstein]

30. +101 nt

[ucrdem]

28. David Sanger is the NYT's go-to neocon fixer.

You can count on anything bearing his name to be 100% certified baloney and yep, that's his byline on the NYT's latest Snowball story.

[sabrina 1]

36. So what do you think of Bush's massive spying on the American people program

by the NSA and Private Contractors, hundreds of thousands of them, still being in effect after we threw them out so that we could get these Constitutional violations fixed?

You haven't said where you stand now, or did when Bush was caught doing it, at least I haven't seen you address the actual issue.

[ucrdem]

74. Private contractors like Snowball? Words cannot express my contempt. nt

[DeSwiss]

32. K&R

''...Because a body of men, holding themselves accountable to nobody, ought not to be trusted by anybody....'' ~Thomas Paine, The Rights of Man

[NYtoBush-Drop Dead]

33. it's hysterical that Snowden is in

Russia!!! I wonder if he knows he's being spied on when he pees.

[sabrina 1]

37. Why did the US Government force Snowden to be in Russia? I have asked this

question over and over again and no one seems to have an answer. Did you know that he was not planning on being in Russia, that it was the US Government who caused him to be there?

[VanillaRhapsody]

55. "forced" I love that.....

his decision....

[merrily]

56. When left with no other reasonable alternative.

We actually interfered with the transit of the head of state of another nation, in violation of international law that dates back to biblical times, to make sure Snowden did not escape.

Before you say he should have come home to be screwed, Ellsberg, once a hero of the Democrats--when we were still capable of criticizing a Democratic Administration. , says otherwise. I'm thinking Ellsberg, of all people, would know.

[struggle4progress]

58. Paranoid hallucinations are a poor substitute for fact-based analysis

I know many posters appear to believe "... We .. interfered with the transit of the head of state .. to make sure Snowden did not escape ..." -- butevidence for the claim is essentially non-existent: it's really just a conspiracy theory

[merrily]

59. Um, it was in all the papers at the time. Really.

ETA: Besides, that is sub-issue. The underlying point is whether Snowden should have come back to "face the music."

And I take the word of people like Ellsberg over anyone else's.

[struggle4progress]

64. Unless you read a lot of news accounts, pick out the statements closest to verifiable facts,

and fit them together, you generally won't have a clear idea what's actually happened: you'll merely have some story based on some rather abstract statements reflecting various opinions

Here's an exercise for you. Get multiple versions of what the Portuguese said, what the Spanish said, what the Italians said, what the French said, and what the Austrians said. Get versions of the actual air traffic control conversations. Get versions of what the Spanish ambassador to Austria said. Get versions of what the Bolivian president said and what various people actually on his plane said. Try to get multiple independent sources, where possible, and you should avoid axe-grinding state media like PressTV. You don't have to take any statements at face value, but, so far as you can, you should avoid evaluating statements on the basis of any preconceived notions. Then try to construct the simplest story, avoiding conspiracy-type thinking whenever you cannot provide clear evidence supporting such analysis

But here's what often happens instead: people echo whatever supports their biases and filter out anything that doesn't fit into the story matching their favorite worldview -- that's a great way to feed one's emotional self-righteousness, but it's a lousy way to learn how to think clearly and accurately about events

[merrily]

66. Here's an exercise for you: who was most concerned that Snowden not get out of the reach of the US?

But here's what often happens instead: people echo whatever supports their biases and filter out anything that doesn't fit into the story matching their favorite worldview -- that's a great way to feed one's emotional self-righteousness, but it's a lousy way to learn how to think clearly and accurately about events

You are implying that I do what is done by Those on this board who take everything the US govt takes at face value, who support Obama at every turn. I don't do those things, but thanks for continuing your ad hominem insults and condescension toward me. Too bad they don't alter reality.

[struggle4progress]

68. I suggested to you a way of reading the news, that has become more easily available

to us now that we can search online for stories, instead of having to wander through indices of newspaper articles on microfilm. The advantage of checking through multiple independent sources for exact statements, made by named individuals, whose ability to assess the facts is verifiable, goes some way towards eliminating urban legends produced by mindless repetition of others' opinions. It is a useful skill to practice, because it brings with it the ability to conduct fact-based discussions with people even if one does not always share their opinions

[merrily]

69. You don't mind if I stop replying to posts that are nothing but condescension, do you?

What the fuck makes you think I don't know how to read news or research? Or that my alleged filter is worse than yours?

[struggle4progress]

71. Well, then, let us by all means test your version of events against the facts. The way to start

is to hear your version of events, presented in the most factual manner possible

[merrily]

72. Test this.

[struggle4progress]

77. Res ipsa loquitur

[merrily]

62. BTW, thanks for the strong implication that my post was

the product of paranoid hallucination.

Meanwhile, most of the posts on this board attacking Snowden and defending the NSA are laughable and utterly devoid of even a hint of fact or reasonable analysis, including your reply to me.

[struggle4progress]

70. I am quite aware that you did not invent the story but merely repeated it from other sources

But if you look carefully into the sparse facts supposedly supporting that story, you will find it is mostly glued together by paranoid-style reasoning which begins with the desired conclusion and hallucinates facts-not-in-evidence in order to reach the conclusion

[sabrina 1]

83. The US Government made it impossible for Snowden to continue his journey and forced him to remain

in the airport in Russia when they took away his passport. Even after that, while he waited in the airport, they could have allowed him to leave by reinstating his passport, but instead they made it impossible for him to leave Russia.

The Conspiracy Theory is that someone else is responsible for him not having a passport to continue on his way out of an airport which was merely a stopover on his journey.

You can keep on denying it, the question remains, why did the US Govt ensure that Snowden remained in Russia? If all the accusations they have made re him being a spy, passing documents, etc, it sure was crazy to make sure he got 'home' safely.

[treestar]

81. Only if you think he should be above the law

It's his only alternative to not answering to charges made against him in the US.

[VanillaRhapsody]

82. He CHOSE to go to Russia!

He could have chosen Tahiti! Russia in the Winter....bad decision.

[sabrina 1]

84. The US Government is responsible for stopping him from leaving Russia, a stopover airport on his way

to his final destination. Why did they do that if they didn't want him in Russia? Why didn't they reinstate his passport so that he could leave Russia?

Are you claiming someone else cancelled his passport?? That sure is a CT. Lol!

[Hissyspit]

43. No, it's not.

[eridani]

53. Now we know that being spied on in the US is a really wonderful thing--

--just because it's worse in Russia. Thanks for the insight.

[merrily]

54. Unlike us? LOL!

I often grab take out for lunch. I pass cameras every block or two. yeah, yeah, I know. Keeping me safe.

[struggle4progress]

61. Can Eddie point out any officials who traveled to a foreign country, (say) China, and provided

the government there with a list of URLs of interest to the NSA? Cuz that seems to be how Eddie started his overseas escapade

Looks to me like the poor guy is losin it: recently he was making news by warning about the dangers of privatizin national security, his proof bein his own actions

[merrily]

67. Double standards are the new normal. Shame on Snowden for pointing out

things like that.

[Whisp]

80. Fuck Ron Paul

[woo me with science]

85. K&R

[Pholus]

88. Yet we are supposed to TRUST the NSA?

Let's tick off the strikes JUST in the OP link:

1) Snowden, a contractor hired for sysadmin work, had unsupervised priviledged access to everything. Privitization 101 fail.

2) Supposedly secure network run by world class experts can't detect a f'in web spider. Networking 101 fail.

3) Inability to read their system logfiles to realize unauthorized access was occuring. Sysadmin 101 fail.

4) Security applied unevenly across secure network. Computer science 101 fail.

5) Violations of the network were challenged but not investigated. Management 101 fail.

Irrespective of the Pole Dancing girlfriend angle sooooo many here love to discuss, one thing is plain -- you're an idiot if you don't realize that for every one Snowden at the NSA there are at least 100 capitalists/corpo-moles/organized crime/foreign spies doing the same stuff, but quietly and for the cash. And unlike Snowden, they're still there.

And it's supposed to be okay that these rank amateurs are allowed to record and store several years worth of information about ordinary Americans without suspicion? Fuck no. Might as well just make a law that our passwords need to be tattooed on our foreheads cause it looks like the moment the NSA hoovers it up it apparently is left laying around quite insecure. If they were this bad at managing their OWN security, no wonder we've been getting surprised by foreign events left and right recently. Why these Republican whooshing door fuckups manage to still have jobs is quite probably the final yet greatest scandal of the Snowden affair.

I guess that's another reason the IT corporations are pissed off about this -- it's professional disdain for the obvious amateur hour!