forum Politics and Society ›› NSA tracking all U.S. phone calls ›› new reply Post Reply
crunkmoose
Fuck Nazis.
24,526 Posts
60/M/MA


offline   (9)
August 11 2013 5:09 PM   QuickQuote Quote  
Originally posted by: Man is Truth

you on page 1 when Bush was president



Warrantless wiretapping was basically made legal by fiat... and Bush, not Obama started it.

Yes, Obama has lied to us, but nowhere near as much as Bush did and with nowhere near the same consequences as Bush.

Aaaand... he hasn't detained citizens without charges or tried to make citizens "enemy combatants" who were subject to military trials (Nadal Hassan being an exception to the military trials as he was actually in the military).

You'll forgive me if I forgot every little thing I posted on the first page of this thread.

Basically, yes, Obama has done some terrible stuff, but it seems very little of that stuff was STARTED by Obama, which is what bothers me most. Yes, he should have been honest about it and should ahve stopped it.
crunkmoose
Fuck Nazis.
24,526 Posts
60/M/MA


offline   (9)
August 11 2013 5:10 PM   QuickQuote Quote  
Originally posted by: Jason Voorheees

there were a lot of reasons to impeach bush and cheney and this one was almost just lost in the crowd. manipulating public trauma over 9/11 to start an unnecessary war in iraq that got 4,000 americans and 100,000 iraquis killed and cost taxpayers $2 trillion dollars so cheney's business cronies could make some money was probably a better one. not that this wasn't a major constitutional violation, as is what obama is doing. nixon was threatened for impeachment for something on a much, much, smaller-to-barely-comparable scale.



Also, this.
Man is Truth
sleeps on hills
5,530 Posts
41/M/NJ


offline   (11)
August 11 2013 5:53 PM   QuickQuote Quote  
Totally flaccid weakness, and evidence why the 2-party dialectic is stupid and childish horseshit
crunkmoose
Fuck Nazis.
24,526 Posts
60/M/MA


offline   (9)
August 11 2013 8:47 PM   QuickQuote Quote  
Originally posted by: Man is Truth

Totally flaccid weakness, and evidence why the 2-party dialectic is stupid and childish horseshit



No, that would be the utter sameness of the two parties. There IS a difference between someone who starts an obviously illegal program and then has government approve it as being legal and continuing that program. Bush WAS breaking the law... and as was pointed out, Bush did FAR more that was legal and impeachable.
Man is Truth
sleeps on hills
5,530 Posts
41/M/NJ


offline   (11)
August 11 2013 8:56 PM   QuickQuote Quote  
But how can the president break the law? Obama is doing the same thing and now you are saying it is legal.

(also pretending total ignorance to the great many people that he is murdering by signing a document and calling that "due process.")
LEATHERFACE
Hail Caesar
3,756 Posts
34/M/NC


offline  mobile reply   (7)
August 12 2013 1:14 AM   QuickQuote Quote  
I dont entertain any difference between the one who initiated the crime versus the one who is perpetuating it. This entire "but he did it first" method of justification is just childish and willfully ignorant of reality.
TOOTHPAC SHAKUR
master quoter
30,897 Posts
31/M/OH


offline  mobile reply   (15)
August 12 2013 11:46 AM   QuickQuote Quote  
Good they can hear me talk a out dicks all day fuck um
crunkmoose
Fuck Nazis.
24,526 Posts
60/M/MA


offline   (9)
August 12 2013 5:59 PM   QuickQuote Quote  
Originally posted by: Man is Truth

But how can the president break the law? Obama is doing the same thing and now you are saying it is legal.

(also pretending total ignorance to the great many people that he is murdering by signing a document and calling that "due process.")



I haven't pretended ignorance. It simply hasn't been mentioned recently in this thread. I don't like it, I think it is illegal, but I dunno if I would go so far as to call it impeachable.
the cat
numetal/juggalo
7,339 Posts
34/M/DC


offline   (5)
August 12 2013 6:04 PM   QuickQuote Quote  
Originally posted by: LEATHERFACE

I dont entertain any difference between the one who initiated the crime versus the one who is perpetuating it. This entire "but he did it first" method of justification is just childish and willfully ignorant of reality.

crunkmoose
Fuck Nazis.
24,526 Posts
60/M/MA


offline   (9)
August 15 2013 11:58 AM   QuickQuote Quote  
Originally posted by: the cat

Originally posted by: LEATHERFACE

I dont entertain any difference between the one who initiated the crime versus the one who is perpetuating it. This entire "but he did it first" method of justification is just childish and willfully ignorant of reality.



Well, I do make a distinction there, at least when something as drastic for the entire nation as impeachment is concerned.
Bashar al-Asad
In sha'Allah
37,643 Posts
31/M/PA


offline   (11)
August 15 2013 10:33 PM   QuickQuote Quote  
kill my penis
Jason Voorheees
dogfood meatballs
6,446 Posts
39/M/NY


offline   (4)
August 16 2013 8:28 AM   QuickQuote Quote  
NSA broke privacy rules 'thousands of times each year,' , audit finds

August 16, 2013 wp.com

The National Security Agency has broken privacy rules or overstepped its legal authority thousands of times each year since Congress granted the agency broad new powers in 2008, according to an internal audit and other top-secret documents.

Most of the infractions involve unauthorized surveillance of Americans or foreign intelligence targets in the United States, both of which are restricted by statute and executive order. They range from significant violations of law to typographical errors that resulted in unintended interception of U.S. e-mails and telephone calls.

The documents, provided earlier this summer to The Washington Post by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden, include a level of detail and analysis that is not routinely shared with Congress or the special court that oversees surveillance. In one of the documents, agency personnel are instructed to remove details and substitute more generic language in reports to the Justice Department and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.

In one instance, the NSA decided that it need not report the unintended surveillance of Americans. A notable example in 2008 was the interception of a “large number” of calls placed from Washington when a programming error confused the U.S. area code 202 for 20, the international dialing code for Egypt, according to a “quality assurance” review that was not distributed to the NSA’s oversight staff.

In another case, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which has authority over some NSA operations, did not learn about a new collection method until it had been in operation for many months. The court ruled it unconstitutional.

[FISA judge: Ability to police U.S. spying program is limited]

The Obama administration has provided almost no public information about the NSA’s compliance record. In June, after promising to explain the NSA’s record in “as transparent a way as we possibly can,” Deputy Attorney General James Cole described extensive safeguards and oversight that keep the agency in check. “Every now and then, there may be a mistake,” Cole said in congressional testimony.

The NSA audit obtained by The Post, dated May 2012, counted 2,776 incidents in the preceding 12 months of unauthorized collection, storage, access to or distribution of legally protected communications. Most were unintended. Many involved failures of due diligence or violations of standard operating procedure. The most serious incidents included a violation of a court order and unauthorized use of data about more than 3,000 Americans and green-card holders.

In a statement in response to questions for this article, the NSA said it attempts to identify problems “at the earliest possible moment, implement mitigation measures wherever possible, and drive the numbers down.” The government was made aware of The Post’s intention to publish the documents that accompany this article online.

“We’re a human-run agency operating in a complex environment with a number of different regulatory regimes, so at times we find ourselves on the wrong side of the line,” a senior NSA official said in an interview, speaking with White House permission on the condition of anonymity.

3 more pages click here for link


****************************************************************************

Court: Ability to police U.S. spying program limited

The leader of the secret court that is supposed to provide critical oversight of the government’s vast spying programs said that its ability to do so is limited and that it must trust the government to report when it improperly spies on Americans.

The chief judge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court said the court lacks the tools to independently verify how often the government’s surveillance breaks the court’s rules that aim to protect Americans’ privacy. Without taking drastic steps, it also cannot check the veracity of the government’s assertions that the violations its staff members report are unintentional mistakes. The leader of the secret court that is supposed to provide critical oversight of the government’s vast spying programs said that its ability to do so is limited and that it must trust the government to report when it improperly spies on Americans.

The chief judge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court said the court lacks the tools to independently verify how often the government’s surveillance breaks the court’s rules that aim to protect Americans’ privacy. Without taking drastic steps, it also cannot check the veracity of the government’s assertions that the violations its staff members report are unintentional mistakes.

“The FISC is forced to rely upon the accuracy of the information that is provided to the Court,” its chief, U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton, said in a written statement to The Washington Post. “The FISC does not have the capacity to investigate issues of noncompliance, and in that respect the FISC is in the same position as any other court when it comes to enforcing [government] compliance with its orders.”

Walton’s comments came in response to internal government records obtained by The Post showing that National Security Agency staff members in Washington overstepped their authority on spy programs thousands of times per year. The records also show that the number of violations has been on the rise.

The court’s description of its practical limitations contrasts with repeated assurances from the Obama administration and intelligence agency leaders that the court provides central checks and balances on the government’s broad spying efforts. They have said that Americans should feel comfortable that the secret intelligence court provides robust oversight of government surveillance and protects their privacy from rogue intrusions.

President Obama and other government leaders have emphasized the court’s oversight role in the wake of revelations this year that the government is vacuuming up “metadata” on Americans’ telephone and Internet communications.


click here for link
LEATHERFACE
Hail Caesar
3,756 Posts
34/M/NC


offline  mobile reply   (7)
August 16 2013 12:12 PM   QuickQuote Quote  
Originally posted by: crunkmoose

Originally posted by: the cat

Originally posted by: LEATHERFACE

I dont entertain any difference between the one who initiated the crime versus the one who is perpetuating it. This entire "but he did it first" method of justification is just childish and willfully ignorant of reality.





Well, I do make a distinction there, at least when something as drastic for the entire nation as impeachment is concerned.



Wow thanks for saying absolutely nothing of value
Jason Voorheees
dogfood meatballs
6,446 Posts
39/M/NY


offline   (4)
August 19 2013 12:10 PM   QuickQuote Quote  
Britain Detains the Partner of a Reporter Tied to Leaks nytimes.com August 18, 2013

WASHINGTON — The partner of Glenn Greenwald, the journalist for The Guardian who has been publishing information leaked by the former National Security Agency contractor Edward J. Snowden, was detained for nine hours by the British authorities under a counterterrorism law while on a stop in London’s Heathrow Airport during a trip from Germany to Brazil, Mr. Greenwald said Sunday.

Mr. Greenwald’s partner, David Michael Miranda, 28, is a citizen of Brazil. He had spent the previous week in Berlin visiting Laura Poitras, a documentary filmmaker who has also been helping to disseminate Mr. Snowden’s leaks, to assist Mr. Greenwald. The Guardian had paid for the trip, Mr. Greenwald said, and Mr. Miranda was on his way home to Rio de Janeiro.

Mr. Miranda, Mr. Greenwald said, was told that he was being detained under Section 7 of the British Terrorism Act, which allows the authorities to detain someone for up to nine hours for questioning and to conduct a search of personal items, often without a lawyer, to determine possible ties to terrorism. More than 97 percent of people stopped under the provision are questioned for under an hour, according to the British government.

“What’s amazing is this law, called the Terrorism Act, gives them a right to detain and question you about your activities with a terrorist organization or your possible involvement in or knowledge of a terrorism plot,” Mr. Greenwald said. “The only thing they were interested in was N.S.A. documents and what I was doing with Laura Poitras. It’s a total abuse of the law.” He added: “This is obviously a serious, radical escalation of what they are doing. He is my partner. He is not even a journalist.”


********************************************************************


theguardian.com


Is Glenn Greenwald's journalism now viewed as a 'terrorist' occupation?

David Miranda's detention shows that being the partner of the man who interviewed the NSA whistleblower is enough to see you treated like a terrorist

The detention at Heathrow on Sunday of the Brazilian David Miranda is the sort of treatment western politicians love to deplore in Putin's Russia or Ahmadinejad's Iran. His "offence" under the 2000 Terrorism Act was apparently to be the partner of a journalist, Glenn Greenwald, who had reported for the Guardian on material released by the American whistleblower, Edward Snowden. We must assume the Americans asked the British government to nab him, shake him down and take his personal effects.

Miranda's phone and laptop were confiscated and he was held incommunicado, without access to friends or lawyer, for the maximum nine hours allowed under law. It is the airport equivalent of smashing into someone's flat, rifling through their drawers and stealing papers and documents. It is simple harassment and intimidation.

Greenwald himself is not known to have committed any offence, unless journalism is now a "terrorist" occupation in the eyes of British and American politicians. As for Miranda, his only offence seems to have been to be part of his family. Harassing the family of those who have upset authority is the most obscene form of state terrorism.

Last month, the British foreign secretary, William Hague, airily excused the apparently illegal hoovering of internet traffic by British and American spies on the grounds that "the innocent have nothing to fear," the motto of police states down the ages. Hague's apologists explained that he was a nice chap really, but that relations with America trumped every libertarian card.

The hysteria of the "war on terror" is now corrupting every area of democratic government. It extends from the arbitrary selection of drone targets to the quasi-torture of suspects, the intrusion on personal data and the harassing of journalists' families. The disregard of statutory oversight – in Britain's case pathetically inadequate – is giving western governments many of the characteristics of the enemies they profess to oppose. How Putin must be rubbing his hands with glee.
Jason Voorheees
dogfood meatballs
6,446 Posts
39/M/NY


offline   (4)
August 21 2013 6:05 PM   QuickQuote Quote  
NSA unlawfully collected tens of thousands of U.S. emails

latimes.com August 21, 2013

WASHINGTON -- The National Security Agency collected the emails of tens of thousands of Americans for three years before acknowledging the problem in 2011 and bringing it to the attention of the secret intelligence court, which ordered the program overhauled.

Officials disclosed the history of that unlawful surveillance Wednesday, releasing three partially redacted opinions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which detailed the concerns judges had about how the NSA had been siphoning data from the Internet in an effort to collect foreign intelligence.

The court ordered the NSA to stop what it had been doing and impose a technical solution that separated emails between Americans from messages involving foreigners, which the NSA legally can collect. Where that technical solution didn’t work, the court required the NSA to restrict the use of any domestic emails and destroy the records after two years, instead of the normal five years.

PHOTOS: 2013's memorable political moments

U.S. intelligence officials, who briefed reporters under ground rules that they not be named, sought to portray the matter as a technical glitch that they caught and fixed. But in the court opinion, judges said the NSA repeatedly misled them about the scope of what it was doing.

“The court is troubled,” Judge John D. Bates wrote in a footnote, that the email problem “marked the third instance in less than three years in which the government has disclosed a substantial misrepresentation regarding the scope of a major collection program.”

The footnote described another violation involving a different NSA program -- the bulk collection of U.S. calling records, so-called metadata that include which numbers call which other numbers, the dates and times of calls and their duration. That violation was discovered in 2009 and apparently involved the process under which NSA analysts search its vast database of calling records looking for suspicious numbers.

“Contrary to the government’s repeated assurances, NSA had been running queries of the metadata using query terms that did not meet the required standard,” the judge wrote.

The opinion offered no further details on that assertion, but it appears to contradict assurances by U.S. intelligence officials that there have been no major compliance issues with the U.S. phone records database. The existence of the massive collection of telephone records was the first in a series of disclosures about intelligence programs made this year by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden.

*******************************************************

NSA misrepresented scope of data collection to secret court

CNN August 21, 2013

Washington (CNN) -- The Obama administration on Wednesday declassified opinions from a secret court that oversees government surveillance showing the National Security Agency was broadly collecting domestic Internet communications of Americans and misrepresenting the scope of that effort to the court.

The three opinions include one from October 2011 by U.S. District Judge John Bates, who scolded government lawyers that the NSA had, for the third time in less than three years, belatedly acknowledged it was collecting more data than it was legally allowed to.

The focus of the opinion was the government's admission that for three years, under its authority to monitor foreign communications, it had been collecting information beyond what it gets from Internet service providers, and included data that was entirely domestic.

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court estimated the mistaken collection of domestic data, including e-mails and other Internet activity of Americans, totaled 58,000 communications a year.

Report: NSA can see 75% of U.S. web messages

The NSA said the collection was a mistake that went beyond its authority under Section 702 of the Patriot Act.

The agency has come under pressure from lawmakers of both parties over the sweeping nature of its secret data collection, most recently surveillance that captures telephone metadata related to communications to and from the United States.

That program and the one addressed in the document release on Wednesday were brought to public light through leaks to media outlets by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden, who fled the United States and is now in Russia under temporary asylum. He faces espionage charges.

Their exposure also has generated concern from privacy groups and libertarians.

In 2008, the NSA began collecting what it called "upstream" communications, essentially information that travels across the Internet, separate from the what it receives from Internet service providers that filter data to respond to agency requests.

The NSA is supposed to be targeting foreign communications, such as e-mail addresses it believes relate to foreign intelligence, that have to do with potential terrorism investigations.
forum Politics and Society ›› NSA tracking all U.S. phone calls ›› new reply Post Reply

Quick Reply - RE: NSA tracking all U.S. phone calls

Connect with Facebook to comment: Login w/FB

or Sign up free! - or login:







Subject


wrap selection with italics
wrap selection with bold
insert less than symbol
insert greater than symbol


google image Insert Google Images
Share a Band



Your ad here?