President Obama Slays Edward Snowden's "Whistleblower" Myth

[michigandem58]

...Among other issues, the President took on the accusations that the government is spying on the American people without the proper Constitutional safeguards. He told the truth - that it wasn't, and that most of the manufactured outrage has been centered around what people thought the government could do, not what it was actually doing. He called out The Guardian and their Attention-Whore in Chief Glenn Greenwald without mentioning them by name, but pointing out that the drip by drip release of the leaks is meant to maximize attention, rather than to contribute to any legitimate debate.

The president also hit the nail on the head on head when he called out the canonization of a traitor (Edward Snowden), by pointing out the fact that he and not Edward Snowden had called for a review of the surveillance programs and their transparency - and that Snowden's only contribution to that process was to disrupt it and hurt the actual debate by generating heat rather than light, as well as the fact that it was the president that provided safeguards for whistleblowers within the intelligence community...

http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2013/08/president-obama-slays-edward-snowdens.html

[dkf]

1. Well if he wants us to believe he can show us tangible results. We are and have been waiting.

I'm a huge skeptic but I will let him "show me the money".

[Summer Hathaway]

27. I agree.

If Snowden wants us to believe him, he can show us tangible results.

His initial claim, which started this entire debate, was that someone in his position could access anyone's personal communications, up to and including the president's. I'm still waiting for SnowGreen to "show me the money" on that one ...

[dkf]

29. Snowden gave all that to Greenwald and Poitras who are figuring out how to best divulge it all.

20,000 docs...we have a looooong way to go.

[Summer Hathaway]

33. Oh, I see.

So Greenwald and Poitras have the 'proof' that Snowden had access to anyone's and everyone's communications?

That's funny. I figured that given Snowden's initial assertion, he would have disclosed it himself right up front, as evidence of the easy access he was claiming the NSA has.

Actually, it's more than funny - it is downright laughable.

If Snowden had any proof whatsoever that his claim was true, he would have disclosed it immediately to substantiate that claim. But we're supposed to believe that instead of doing so, Snowden just threw that "proof" in with a pile of 20,000 documents in hopes that Greenwald would eventually find it.

Yeah, THAT makes sense.

[tsnew]

2. No way

There was zero chance of Obama doing anything about the NSA until Snowdens disclosures. All the sudden, 5 years into his presidency, he was going to finally reign things in, which is the opposite of all his past national security policies? I dont believe it.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

3. Laughable CYA. Where was the "debate" befor Snowden?

[Recursion]

9. See Obama's 5/23 NDU speech

It's not his fault you don't pay attention.

[snappyturtle]

11. This is from the President's speech at the National Defense University on

May 23, 2013. The excerpt is all I could find directly related to privacy concerns
regarding the citizens-at-large. No specific mention of the NSA. He did go on to
elaborate about a shield law for journalists. You can read all you want into the
excerpt but I find it vague.

Thwarting homegrown plots presents particular challenges in part because of our proud commitment to civil liberties for all who call America home. That’s why, in the years to come, we will have to keep working hard to strike the appropriate balance between our need for security and preserving those freedoms that make us who we are. That means reviewing the authorities of law enforcement, so we can intercept new types of communication, but also build in privacy protections to prevent abuse.

The transcript of the President's speech is on the NYTimes website.

[dkf]

30. Note: "so we can intercept new types of communication". He wants to EXPAND mass surveillance...

And he announced it right there.

[snappyturtle]

31. Yes he did. Scary. Yet there are people today here on DU who look

at these words and see a President wanting to protect us. Amazing.

[mindwalker_i]

13. Not even a link?

See, Obama's said some stuff. Like most recently, that they was going to be this bunch of people who reviewed the whole "gathering information" thing to make sure civil liberties were protected and all that, then put Clapper in charge of it.

Why, oh why, would that not inspire confidence?

Yep, he says some stuff, then we all find out that it really is just a pretty-looking patch that does nothing to adress the problem: that government is collecting ass-loads of data, probably not just meta-data but the conversations themselves, storing them, and that those records can be accessed later. Seriously, does anyone really believe taht all that data is just going to sit there untouched?

Really?

Even in the future when we have a Republican president, you think this data will remain untouched except when the "bad guys" need to be stopped?

That's the thing. When people consistently defend this whole thing without ever even questioning whether it should be done, regardless of new information or issues, it's imposibile to believe they are interested in a serious debate. No, this is just pure cheerleading. I hated it with Bush, and I hate it now.

[bvar22]

18. What Obama "says",

....and what he "does" has been proven to be something of a problem.




You will know them by their [font size=3]WORKS,[/font]
not by their promises, or excuses.

[frylock]

22. 3 days after snowden's disclosures..

better luck tomorrow!

[cthulu2016]

24. What in that speech is germane?

[dkf]

32. The part where he says he wants to "intercept new types of communication".

I'd sure like to hear more about that.

[Mojorabbit]

34. That has pretty much been debunked on other threads you have posted this in. nt

[Rex]

12. A few here are pretending a speech on drones

and terrorism counts as 'the speech' in May...that has nothing to do with reducing the NSA's power. IOW, they are totally desperate by now.

[1StrongBlackMan]

36. The “Debate” …

Was occurring in the Executive Office (along with Congress) where things could actually get done (without compromising national security).

But ... I think I see the problem … It seems that too many people have arrived at a belief that typing their (scantly informed) outrage on an anonymous message board is:

1) Actually, participating in a “debate.”
2) Actually, participating in “democracy”
3) Actually, having some effect on governance.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

38. If this isn't a debate here on DU, what is it?

Do you think that only politicians should talk about politics?

Do you think that only politicians should participate in a democracy?

Who do the politicians work for? Or, to rephrase that, who do you think the politicians should work for? Assuming, of course, that their "work" consists of something other than answering to those who bribe..er...donate to their campaigns.

As for the "debates" occurring in the Executive office and congress....in secret? How is that "democratic"?

[bowens43]

4. More bullshit pathetic

[villager]

8. With the incendiary rightwing rhetoric in the OP, the post is even more pathetic than usual

Fewer attempts to rhetorically mask a vicious defense of the MIC....

[michigandem58]

10. The People's View is a progressive site

Check it out.

[villager]

16. No, it appears to be one person's blog

That person rather uncritically supports the Democratic Party apparatus.

And the rhetoric in the OP would be entirely familiar to someone like Joseph McCarthy.

[bvar22]

19. Nailed It!

Thanks!

[G_j]

5. just a coincidence

that he calls for a "review" now....

[EC]

6. This is true

and those on this thread that are boo-hooing it, sorry, but it is the truth. Maybe you missed it, but he did ask Congress to reign in these programs and the Patriot Act at least a month before Snowdon was even heard of.

[frylock]

25. is this the much referenced 5/23 speech?

[uponit7771]

28. no

[brush]

7. Larry Ellison was just on CBS's morning show

Charlie Rose asked him about the NSA info gathering and he said that this stuff has been going on way before Obama. It started with the credit card companies and dept. stores gathering info card holders and it just expanded from there.

Everyone blames Obama but it's been going on forever. The so called blame has to be share with the aforementioned companies and all the administrations that this info gathering spanned. Snowden brought attention to it but it seems he was used by Greenwald who has had it in for Obama for some time.

Snowden as a whistleblower, IMHO, should have stayed in the country because he is now a defector who divulged info to foreign entities, which is tantamount to being a traitor.

[PowerToThePeople]

14. stand with the citizens Obama

Push for "Change" that we can believe in.



4th Amendment for the 21st century

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, digital footprint, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

digital footprint being any data of any form which is capable of being associated with a specific citizen.

[AZ Progressive]

15. So all these previous Whistleblowers are wrong?

And don't give me the BS that the Government would voluntarily shut down such programs.

"Edward Snowden was not the first high-profile person to reveal secrets about the National Security Agency's surveillance operations after September 11th. He was the third. The first two — Thomas Drake and Mark Klein — have now come forward to express support for Snowden's revelations. Part of their motivation, it seems safe to assume, is to ensure that this time, something actually changes.

Klein is the better-known of the two. While working for AT&T in 2002, a representative from the NSA came to interview technicians in preparation for a special project. That project, details of which Klein later leaked to The New York Times and the Los Angeles Times, involved building a special room in an AT&T building in San Francisco, Room 641A. In that room was, among other things, a splitter, a device that took a stream of data from a fiber optic cable and split it into two streams. Think of a water pipe coming to a T and then flowing down two separate tubes. That's what the NSA had AT&T build, with one of those streams of data flowing to the agency."

Read more at http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2013/06/other-nsa-whistleblowers-hope-time-different/66166/

[AZ Progressive]

17. More Propaganda from the Astroturfers

All these people that continually post propaganda tirelessly day after day smells like a paid propaganda operation of which has been described as being done by big corporations and the Israeli government before. It's actually a variant of astroturfing

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

[The Link]

20. ...

[Incitatus]

21. "is meant to maximize attention"

Good. This is something that needs maximum attention.

[Whisp]

23. I think he meant maximize attention to Greenwald's 'Donations' fund.

[Mojorabbit]

35. It is a brilliant strategy and has keep the topic in the news so that it stays past a

news cycle. I think it has been beautifully handled. So sorry the writer in the blog is upset about it. LOL

[frylock]

26. yeah, you lost me at "Attention-Whore in Chief.."

fuck this shit.

[mick063]

37. You know a losing argument when you see one.

And here we go again.

Diverting attention to Snowden. Look at the shiny object.

Data is stored. Saved. Archived.

This creates needed infrastructure to keep it secure, both internally and externally.

Even then, it isn't eternally secure.

The day will come when a federal grand jury will subpoena this stored data for a case unrelated to terrorism. Perhaps not in the near future, but that day will certainly come, as we gradually, collectively become conditioned to the notion that storage of such data is "ordinary" or "not unusual". As it is, there is suspicion that the data is being used in cases unrelated to terrorism, but not submitted as evidence to keep this data "secure". An incredible tool for those that wish to tactically use entrapment to selectively pinpoint a desired target. The potential for extortion of our elected representatives is frightening.


As long as stored data exists, there will always, always be forces that attempt to gain access.

[Douglas Carpenter]

39. here is an excellent interview that discusses the President's speech on NSA oversight