Slashdot Mirror
Obama Announces Surveillance Reforms
In a speech today, U.S. President Barack Obama announced changes for the operations of the country's intelligence agencies. He says the current program will end "as it currently exists," though most of the data collection schemes will remain intact. However, the data collected in these sweeps will not be stored by the U.S. government, instead residing with either the communications providers or another third party. (He pointed out that storing private data within a commercial entity can have its own oversight issues, so the attorney general and intelligence officials will have to figure out the best compromise.) In order for the NSA to query the database, they will need specific approval from a national security court. Obama also announced "new oversight" to spying on foreign leaders, and an end to spying on leaders of friendly and allied countries. Further, decisions from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court will be annually reviewed for declassification. A panel advocating for citizen privacy will have input into the FISC. There will be chances to national security letters: they will no longer have an indefinite secrecy period. Companies will be able to disclose some amount of information about the NSLs they receive, something they've been asking for. Another change is a reduction in the number of steps from suspected terrorists that phone data can be gathered. Instead of grabbing all the data from people three steps away, it's now limited to two.
Except that everyone is a suspect...so gee I feel so much better now.
And the intertwining of corporation and state increases.
Remember, libertarians: power will always find a vacuum. So there will always be strong government - the only thing we can influence is who controls the strings.
...this sounds to me like rebranding.
In other words:
1) A private enterprise will store secret data: What could possibly go wrong?
2) More secret court oversight: as if the secret court that exists right now is not rubber-stamping everything the NSA passes its way.
3) Companies will be able to talk about the secret court orders: Google and Facebook signed a big check for the future Obama Presidential Library?
4) Rest assured this is a true reform! Nothing to see here, folks, move along...
The right to offend is far more important than the right not to be offended. (Rowan Atkinson)
YEAH I TOTALLY BELIEVE THAT.
and finally everything is resolved!
"If you like your privacy, you can keep it, period."
So, aside from a few window dressing changes and a toss to the big Internet companies - the biggest difference is that another company is going to 'store' the info and the government is going to have to ask itself if it can get access to it?
Another nice contract to somebody. No real change in the Status Quo.
Gotta love that hope and change.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
Unless laws change to explicitly ban behavior there is little to stop them from creating exceptions to their own policies and procedures.
Keep the Classic Slashdot.
I watched the whole thing. He chose to focus on phone meta data collection and not even address prism and the likes of the new utah data center. The speech and these new "reforms" are all about preserving the NSA ecosystem (read money) that spends billions of dollars of tax payer money on programs we don't want. For christs sake they are tapping domestic fiber lines and siphoning everything into storage (including phone calls) and the language in the law doesn't even consider it a search until the data (that they already stored) is queried. He won't address it because they already spend billions on it and he who upsets the flow of money in washington might as well tie their own noose. The dollar sign is the new swastika.
DO. NOT. TRUST.
EVER.
He has become a worse president than Dubya.
And the best part? This is not even his final form!
*cue music as Obama goes super-sucky-saiyan*
So much change. Except, there is no change.
I read the article and the Slashdot summary seems quite disconnected from the facts of the CNN report.
'Let me be perfectly clear. We are making broad changes. But, data collection will continue. We might move the storage out of the NSA, or not. We won't listen in on Americans or our allies, unless we think we need to. We might add privacy advotaces to the FISA court, but we might not. So, you understand, this is change you can believe in.'
So it's a mix of bullshit and nothing. Fake oversight with "input" and everything stays the same.
"Says here we need to review our decisions to see if they're fit to be declassified."
"This all looks like information on critical national security matters to me! Classified!"
"Same time next year?"
So, they're going to juggle how it all works but not actually change any of the creepy facts regarding storage of everyone's correspondence and secret, unopposable usage of this data. Help me out here: Is this, and Ms Feinstein's 'no drone spying' nonsense actually going to work to convince people they're undoing their panopticon programs?
Who will be stupid enough to believe this?
Total joke not a darn thing will change.
Great, what possibly could go wrong there?
I heard that Target put in a bid to securely host all of the secret data.
Are these third party companies the Israeli companies that are already working with AT&T and Verizon (Narus and Verint) in order to collect the data?
If so, then NOTHING is changing.
http://www.businessinsider.com/israelis-bugged-the-us-for-the-nsa-2013-6
... but also go fuck yourself, Barry. Can't believe I voted for you. Ah well, let me look over the protest options next cycle.
When you live in a sick society, just about everything you do is wrong.
Like lipstick on a pig.
What about oversight? They say they're going to stop doing this and that, but how will we ever know whether they're being honest about it? How will we know whether the next president decides to turn the bus back around? Congressional oversight is a joke, as members of Congress (e.g,, Feinstein) are as much in favor of running roughshod over citizens' rights and allies' respect as Gen. Alexander is. FISC oversight is likewise pointless, and several of those judges have argued against even having an opposing side arguing for the privacy protections of the people. Short of another Snowden, there's no way to know.
and take his peace prize away
... recognized that his administration has slipped up in allowing the NSA to have 100% free feign with civilian surveillance. Our bad.
To reward the citizens continued support of out cause we will be increasing the official ObamaChocolate programs weekly individual chocolate allowance from 30 grams to 25 grams.
I'm sure the NSA will have about as much trouble getting to that as they did getting into other companies' data centers.
It is time to ask everybody you know the rhetorical question "When everybody is the enemy..."
Just who's side do these spy's think they are on?
The governments responses to 9/11 and 7/7 have done more damage to our societies than the terrorist attacks ever did.
When Obama mentioned Snowden's name, you could see a bit of disgust and a sneer streak across his face for a brief moment. He then felt the need to point out that he was ahead of Snowden, planning to confront the system anyway.
Nothing is more dangerous than a programmer with a screwdriver.
How about U.S. citizens can query the database and receive a report on what data the NSA has collected?
Read "Enemies: A History of the FBI" by Tim Weiner and you'll see that we have been through this BS before. Nothing changes.
"I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
.that there was indeed surveillance taking place. Get it?
Is Gitmo still open? Are the lights still on at the NSA? I trust you not.
Don't You Believe It
Regardless of one's feelings about Snowden, I think it's pretty clear these changes (IF actually implemented) are a result of him opening peoples' eyes to the extent of the surveillance and spying on the American people. We seriously owe him, big time imo.
As an left-leaning independent, I was generally optimistic about Obama entering office, sadly, not so much any more --- NOT that I think things would be better under Republicans mind you, who seem to say 'less government' only in regards to their corporate overlords, but are heavy handed in wanting to legislate their personal morality (gay marriage/rights, religion, women's issues, etc)
Many days I wish the US had a parliamentary system such as England or Canada, this two party sh*t if for the birds. At least in those countries, minority parties can actually gets seats and have some representation -- here, we are stuck with two lame ass parties.
'The unexamined life is not worth living' - Socrates
Obviously LOVEINT is one example. But more details are coming out about how David Patraues was caught having an affair because of "metadata" collected by the NSA.
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2013/06/17/4111871/metadata-helped-reveal-gen-petraeus.html#.Utlud2nfqCg
When Jill Kelley first reported getting threatening emails about Patraues, the FBI read all her emails as part of "a routine step".
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/06/us/from-petraeus-scandal-an-apostle-for-privacy.html
They didn't have a warrant to read her email, they just hacked into google and made a copy of everyone's email. If you report a crime to the FBI they read your email. Simple as that.
There! I feel the hot breath of reform already. Big brother is a subcontract.
Now the secret courts will have to examine secret accusations with extra secrecy. The NSA building data centers will be reversed, so that the commercial sector can occupy this function. And send the bill for "services".
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
Notice how this is a curb on the *use* of the collected data - not on collecting it in the first place.
In other words, politicians have realised how much power this level of information can give them - and that is why control of it is far too important to be left in the hands of the NSA.
So what we have is just a power struggle over the strings of control - and not over the real issue of overbearing intrusion into the private lives of the people of this planet.
All your ghosts are just false positives.
He won't address it because they already spend billions on it and he who upsets the flow of money in washington might as well tie their own noose.
Or maybe he actually believes the surveillance is a good thing. Given his voting record, that seems likely. Obama has faults, but being a slave to money doesn't seem to be one of them.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
I'm sure Kevin Bacon is breathing a lot easier now!
#DeleteChrome
The real surveillance and intelligence community crimes and abuses were not addressed.
They did nothing about the remote sensing and energy weapons abuses. Because they'd surely have to convict the President and others of crimes.
Dr. Robert Duncan of the CIA says that radar systems were retro fitted with mind reading and mind altering technology in the 1970s and 1980s. Which they are using to remotely decode peoples thoughts, emotions, memories, and also to remotely control and commit secret assassinations and experimentation right here domestically for the last 35 years.
These black operations can also be confirmed by NSA whistleblower Russell Tice, who said they target Americans with space capability during their black operations. That includes illegal surveillance called Remote Neural Monitoring and Electronic Brain Link, based on the same technologies Duncan disclosed.
A US Investigative Services (defense contractor) employee also came forward to say that these weapons are real and being used to target people to me in private. In fact, she presumes, that I was targeted during highly illegal psych / weapons experimentation.
This technology is the ultimate surveillance gear, and our fuck tard police, FBI, CIA, NSA, DoD and Homeland Security agents are running around using this in secret on us. Spying on our thoughts, memories, what we see, hear, think, and feel. Agents link up and covertly communicate and spy on citizens, and they attack and brutalize people, set them up to look mentally ill.
Read USIS employee transcripts here : http://www.oregonstatehospital.net/d/USIS.html
Read Remote Neural Monitoring article and 4+ patents covering these weapons, watch the 23+ videos including ones with Russell Tice and Dr. Robert Duncan admitting it here : http://www.oregonstatehospital.net/d/russelltice-nsarnmebl.html
Finally, see my homepage with more information including Dr. Robert Duncan's book about these abuses here : http://www.obamasweapon.com/
My full story is on the site including names of people involved in targeting me with these weapons. It all started during the big US Department of Justice investigation of the mental health system going on here in Oregon, which has been going on since 2006.
The thing is, Obama knows this is going on. And so do these intelligence analysts who created the recommendations for Obama. They did not even come close to addressing these issues, and covered it all up. Tice is also claiming the program PRISM that was the target of the recommendations, is the low tech side of the surveillance issue, while the space capabilities are the high tech side which were not mentioned or addressed once. The media has been retardly covering only the low tech side, censoring revelations from Russell Tice and others. Like Tice said in July 2013, Snowden's allegations were only scratching the surface. They are never going to stop illegally watching us, .. they got 30+ electron imaging Electronic Intelligence satellites watching us now, globally, and in America.
Likely the 'new' program is already up and running, this just provides a distraction for the masses.
Unix, an obscure operating system developed by bored researchers in an attempt to get a better game playing experience.
Also, the President is not allowed to know everything about what the secret agencies do. There have been many examples of that.
The U.S. government has engaged in violence each year for more than 100 years, to make a profit for a few. Anyone desiring more information about that can, for example, read these highly rated books:
Overthrow: America's century of regime change from Hawaii to Iraq by Stephen Kinzer
The brothers: John Foster Dulles, Allen Dulles, and their secret world war by Stephen Kinzer
So since the commercial entities will now be responsible for storing all of this data, care to guess as to how much the big carriers are going to charge us, the customer, for this now-mandatory requirement?
One can only imagine the cost of storing the NSAs requirements for oversight. All I do know is the costs sure as hell won't come out of the executive bonus fund. The customer will foot that bill. I promise you.
And forget deleting the data. Any of it. Ever. That's not an option.
Then the US government, for the sake of "redundancy", will still contract with some other 3rd party to store all of the same data over again, so they can create a new "Federal Communications Security Act" tax or some other horseshit to bilk the American people out of even more money, and fund PRISM v2.0
Oh...I'm sorry, did you actually believe they wouldn't do this again? Please. Besides, PRISM v2.0 has an app store, and the drone app I hear is killer.
I know I'll be modded down for this, but whatever.
I just don't see the big deal over any of the surveillance going on. I guess that now the data is structured and easily searchable rather than having to stitch together random analog phone conversations. But in a country of 300 million people, no one is interested in your text messages, emails, etc. unless you're using them to actively plan something. The Internet is a collection of semi-public networks, always has been. And spying has always existed; that shouldn't be a surprise to anybody.
Everyone loves to bash the president, but I'll bet it's not an easy job. Imagine what it was like for Cold War presidents...when the Soviet Union was actively planning our destruction and we were planning theirs. Coming back from the inauguration party, you meet with your top generals and are told of every threat that hasn't been made public. On top of that, you're ultimately responsible for nuclear weapons AND you somehow have to make everyone like you. I imagine something like this happened with Obama...once he got the job he was briefed on what's actually happening outside of the public eye, and chose to continue the spying programs. Post 9/11, there were many people who didn't want to see that relatively minor event repeated at any cost, which is why these programs were put in place to begin with. An entity that was determined enough and had enough resources would be able to cause way worse devastation if they wanted to.
So call me an ignorant sheep or whatever -- I just don't see why so many people are up in arms. I'd expect the rabid anti-government crowd to be shouting their protests from within their mountaintop compounds, but not the average citizen.
Constitutional scholar.
Believes mass surveillance of the general population is a good thing.
There is an inconsistency there. Unless he was studying the Constitution as a "quaint, archaic, no longer applicable historical document"....
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
...all about preserving the NSA ecosystem (read money) that spends billions of dollars of tax payer money on programs we don't want.
I think Obama's actions in office are disgusting, but remember that it is a bi-partisan (in this regard) Congress that continually votes more and more billions for black-budget agencies that have no congressional oversight.
Prove anything by multiplying Huge Number times Tiny Number
Obama has faults, but being a slave to money doesn't seem to be one of them.
You're joking, right? I mean, I know we're 6 years in and it doesn't come up anymore, what with the idiocy that is ObomneyCare (a giftwrapped blowjob to the InsCos) and doing his damndest to keep us moving down that path to "1984 Meets Shadowrun," but it was less than a month before he threw himself right into the same pit as all of his predecessors, in the face of his own "promise" to "stop the revolving door."
He's as much of a whore as any of them.
So everything on the internet is still being monitored heavily? Makers sense,.... gotta fill up that new data center in Utah.
Which is an entirely moot point given the 4th Amendment is a guarantee against unwarranted search *and* seizure. One could try to argue that since a copy is being made, it's not really a seizure. But that sort of logic goes right out because honestly that's precisely what the 3rd Amendment is all about--after all, the 3rd Amendment is merely an establishment of the idea that government shouldn't be invading ones home in peace and should only strict rules be allowed to during war.
The only big quibbling point is that the 3rd Amendment speaks of "any house" and honestly the founding fathers knew of factories and other private non-house buildings so one could presume they weren't speaking as to protect companies from being used in such a fashion. Yet considering the way in which we have turned corporations into people and justify it all under the idea that those rights or privileges stem from corporations being made of people, then by some twisted logic the company lives in those factories and other buildings and they are a form of house. So, the only thing left is that companies (ie, their people) can and are often bought--a provision that no amendment can really protect against.
Still, at least it'd be something to argue about beyond the insanity that is currently otherwise going on that we speak only of the 4th Amendment as if what the NSA and ilk do is not akin to a seize upon the people using government force to enter and cohabitate their homes through a, often willing, proxy. Of course we accept this cohabitation usually because companies are their own sort of evil and this cohabitation of business is a necessary regulation upon their own excess. If we can acknowledge at all that regulation is necessary upon business because of the immediate harm they can, have, and do cause the people--that no amount of "vote with your wallet" will protect you against the direct and indirect harm from their productions, activities, or general actions--, then it stands to reason that a government that snakes its way into buying or regulating spying through said companies is just as evil an unacceptable, regardless of any spelled out Amendment to that effect.
True. Nazi fascism favored spending on the political connected, not on pure efficiency; it just happened that even being ran very efficiently made them at least as economically competent as the Allies. Corruption and inefficiency are everywhere. And the "invisible hand" doesn't magically erase it but instead encourages this waste, to have many companies doing the same task so many can falter and die and those that survive to profit massively of which most often said profits are then further wasted. In the end, this is precisely why eternal vigilance towards specific examples of corruption and waste are necessary and why, ironically, we need the constant competition that there is reason and power for the oligarchy to be at constant war to show each others treachery. The real beauty is this pseudo war can offer real peace. The real sadness is that too often instead the third world is considered the expendable battleground to test the new real weapons of war. If all we had to really argue about was a huge waste of money or a peeping-tom government, then we'd be in a much better place no matter how much we at times felt personally violated. The latter is a much more reversible situation than the death of millions and why the Nazis and 1984 as a lesson always include death.
Obama has these Executive powers because...??
Maybe a previous administration or two of another political party who fought tooth and nail to get these powers from a Congress of the same party??
And the next Administration, regardless of party, will have these powers. That's why folks when one party gets control of the Executive and the Legislative, We the People get screwed - see 2001 - 2008. (Yes, I'm trying my best to be a bit more than Bu..bu..bu...t Bush! But let's face it, it was his administration who got these obscene executive powers. And now Obama has them.)
Ya know, we can all bitch and moan here on Slashdot, but the MAJORITY of people out there only care about the issues that are spoon fed to them. Abortion, Gay Marriage, insisting on teaching Creationism in science class, getting rid of Obamacare ...
That last one is Obama's wet dream. He can pull this shit and just go - "Let's talk about the Affordable Care Act" and the attention just shifts.
The media has been been corrupted and turned into mindless entertainment for those of us who like to delude ourselves into being informed.
CNN will run with the story for a few hours in the background and then they'll move on to something else - most likely a Republican doing something to get attention - like try to defund Obamacare.
... then why not have them be the keepers of the data?
Then they'd be able to accurately monitor how it's actually being used.
Having some third party manage it just seems like one of those 'well, technically we're not supposed to, so we found a loophole' ... like how they're not allowed to operate spy satellites over the US, so they have to instead buy imagery from commercial businesses to get those images.
Build it, and they will come^Hplain.
Geeks: "The public does a bunch of very insecure things. Someone could abuse all the myriad mistakes, where we don't even vaguely try to adopt best practices, and they do something bad."
News: "These people have started exploiting everyone's known bad practices. So have these people. And these people. And them. And them."
Geeks: "Also, theoretically, these people and these people and these other people, could started exploiting our bad practices too."
Public: "Yeah, but that's hypothetical."
Snowden: "The government has decided to exploit everyone's bad practices."
Public: "HEY!!!!"
President: "Oh. Ok, we'll stop exploiting it quite so much."
Problem solved.
Geeks: "No, act--"
I SAID, PROBLEM SOLVED.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
Obama said absolutely nothing about making needed reforms to /. beta.
Everything Obama SAYS today can be reversed with a secret executive order tomorrow.
I'm HOPING for some CHANGE, Obama!
*Do* as little as possible, while making it *sound* as much as possible.
Perhaps he was studying it to learn best how to kill it. Know your enemy.
Good luck on that constitutional convention getting called.
When you live in a sick society, just about everything you do is wrong.
Obama just EXPANDED surveillance on US citizens and Foreign nationals!
Jobs and Building-Facilities program in a Congressional Election Year at its best.
Hire the Contractor, or give the metadata to Homeland Security for storage; hay they do an excellent 'hand job' on Grandpa's and baby's testicles.
Three steps to two steps: micromanagement at its best! Expand the 'two steps' to cover the previous 'three steps' and save a little money. Typical solution from the Stoner-N-Chief.
"Input" from citizens privacy advocacy groups to FISC? The "input" will go straight to the trash can!
Fun all around for a Friday.
I am shocked that he did not include amnesty for Snowden. I think it is a distinct possibility for his last day in office. For Obama to have to rewrite public policy because of Snowden's action - and essentially admit the government was wrong (by virtue of the fact that he is correcting actions) - Snowden should be given Amnesty and the Presidential Medal of Freedom. He risked a LOT more than Oprah did - and did a LOT more to assure the freedom of all Americans.
Apparently Obama's handlers discovered that the world doesn't appreciate being spied on, and the world has started to decrease the amount of business they do with American companies. This hits the real power people in the wallet, and we can't have that! Quick, have Obama issue a statement. Yep, that ought to fool the 99% for another couple of years.
Often, and through a straw - http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2013/12/psa-why-there-wont-be-a-third-.html - time to quit bothering with fiction for entertainment, the news is where it's at.
By "new oversight" he actually means drones... :)
Nice try barry but... no cigar. The only people who care about spying on foreign countries (friend OR foe) are the foreign countries. Who likely all do it themselves anyway. Spying on your own people reeks of Stalin and Hitler. (the list goes on)
Using a court order? No problem since you'd have to introduce reason. Just for the hell of it? Might as well just burn the constitution.
Wuddooeyeno? IITYWYBMAD? Like nuts? eclecticallyincorrect.com
Obama panders while people reading between the lines translate the speech to mean "suck it".
3. Court orders will no longer be secret forever, and the companies that hold the data can report on how many times the NSA demands to look at it
So, like copyrights, they will last until 70 years after the death of that author, right? That's not "forever" any more...
Sometimes its just plausible deniability. In those cases, the president is not supposed to know, but he damned well knows and nobody can prove he did. Dont be naive.
NO SIG
"Rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic" is the only phrase that comes to mind.
That I'm right, and you don't like it, doesn't mean I'm a troll.
Obama used the word change? Without irony?
Requiem for the American Dream
About the only thing glaringly missing from the President's statement was that apparently he didn't mention a single thing about encryption. I can only assume this means that they're going to continue subverting encryption standards and such.
Stop funding the NSA. They are not protecting us! They are the new age NAZI SS
I'm sure everyone in PLA unit 61398 is hard over the prospect of mining all the intelligence data that we're going to conveniently outsource for them.
I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
This is not where we need to be, nor anywhere near it. But it is a step in the right direction, and should be both encouraged and taken.
This does not mean we should let up in even the slightest degree. Far from it: we will need to intensify the message after this, to counteract the inevitable complacency that comes with having done a tiny amount. But this is how battles like these are won: take what is offered, then demand the rest, and repeat until you've got it.
"While the bulk telephone data remains with the NSA for now, Obama wants those records moved out of government hands, though it is uncertain where, a senior administration official said in briefing reporters on condition of not being identified."
I'm thinking, some analyst's laptop. Stored in the back of his car while he stuffs a few bills at the kitty kat lounge.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
You're missing the simplest explanation: during his campaign, Obama lied.
Dead on.
Obama learned politics in Chicago - the current record holder for corrupt big-city political machines. He is a classic example of a corrupt machine politician.
The Clintons are also masters of the (less intense) state-level version of the form, having risen to the top in Arkansas, which has been run by a corrupt machine since a Mafia family from New York took it over when the big city got too hot for them. Obama beat them for the Democratic nomination. He has now remade the Federal government on the model of Chigago.
This was predicted and announced by quite a large number of people well before the election. Nevertheless, he won. So how did this come about?
There are a number of factors. But IMHO this is the most decisive: The Republican Party's organization, for well over a decade, has been solidly controlled by the Neocon faction (one of the four major and several minor factions of the party). In the last two presidential nomination battles, the Liberty wing (another of the big four), under the inspiration of Ron Paul and drawing members mainly from the young and/or Internet connected, made substantial inroads.
Their successes in the 2008 nomination process threatened to eventually displace the Neocons' control of the party machinery, as the Neocons had displaced their predecessors (mainly the Christian Right) previously. So in the 2012 nomination the Neocons fought an extremely dirty battle, with large amounts of cheating, rule-breaking, and even incidents of violence (including broken bones). This so alienated the Liberty wing (and some members of other factions) that they refused to support the Neocon's nominee in the general election. Romney lost five states by margins substantially less than the number of people who voted for Ron Paul in those states' primaries, and those states' electoral votes would have swung the general election. It's a good bet that virtually none of the Ron Paul supporters voted for Romney, and even those would have been more that balanced by Republican voters for other candidates who were also appalled at the machine's treatment of their opposition.
One circulating meme was: "If this is how they behave in the nomination process, how can we allow them to control of the machinery of the Federal Government?" Even KNOWING that Obama would run the Fed like a Chicago-style machine and use it to stomp on the people, letting the Neocon's machine continue to consolidate their control of the major opposition party and drive the big-government non-choice-election system into the foreseeable future could still look like a worse choice.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Business as usual, and absolutely everyone knows it.
> Also, the President is not allowed to know everything about what the secret agencies do.
Anyone old enough to remember "plausible deniability"?
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
Translated: We're shuffling the deck, but it's still stacked.
In other news the Brit spooks get a sudden flush of extra funding
Having said that, I believe critics are right to point out that without proper safeguards, this type of program could be used to yield more information about our private lives and open the door to more intrusive bulk collection programs in the future. They’re also right to point out that although the telephone bulk collection program was subject to oversight by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and has been reauthorized repeatedly by Congress, it has never been subject to vigorous public debate.
And such vigorous public debate would never have occurred without the Snowden leaks.
So, Mr. President, you outline good first steps. Now show us that you admit you were wrong in the unilateral vigorous defending of the NSA: Pardon Snowden NOW.
Suspected Terrorist, A, is in the United States; Barack Obama is President of the United States (step #1); Every U.S. Citizen is subject to laws enforced by the President (step #2). Therefore, every U.S. Citizen can still be monitored.
Why would anyone believe the POTUS now? They'll just tap that database secretly.
gotta fill up that new data center in Utah.
Correction: gotta fill up that new data center in Utah ran by the NDSA (National Data Storage Agency) - a new subset of the NSA, but under different management.
You can keep it.
"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
'Obama also announced "new oversight" to spying on foreign leaders, and an end to spying on leaders of friendly and allied countries`
..
Reminds me of a quote from V for vendetta
Prothero: Do you believe this crap, Dascombe?
Dascombe: It's not our job to believe it, Lewis. Our job is to tell the people --
you can keep your privacy....righhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhht
Unless you are a Republican rival like Christie then we reserve the right to read all your emails
I suspect that being president, he gets to hear mostly from security people, from the armed forces and the like - he has a daily security briefing at least (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President's_Daily_Brief). Is the material in this scrutinized by anyone outside the mainstream security establishment? Does he have a daily economics briefing (if he does, I can only imagine what it consists of). Does he have a daily "we heard from the people" briefing? Or even a weekly ACLU briefing?
No? Then don't be surprised when he tends to give the security folks what they want. They have the high bandwidth conduit to him.
All this "we promise to" is grounded on trust. And there is no trust anymore, nor there will be.
Obama can say anything he wants, and some people might even believe him. But whatever he says the fact is that NSA will continue as before, they will just try to hide their tracks better.
Trust isn't there anymore, no amount of words will fix it. Encrypt everything with quality tools, keep good key hygiene, avoid all closed source, avoid all American products and especially avoid everything with a "cloud" element. That is the only rational course of action a privacy conscious person can take.
I think what's missed is that "no drama" Obama is a pragmatist first. I think he feels genuine empathy and believes (for obvious reasons) in civil rights, but in office has been willing to sacrifice little in the name of idealism. Guantanamo, for example; I think he would have liked to close it but found out how political impossible it was unless the detainees disappeared somehow. In fairness, in the wake of 9/11 and a ridiculously reactionary right it's been pretty hard to do much for civil liberties without an avalanche of criticism for beign soft and withering blame for any terrorist acts (Benghazi). But at bottom I think pragmatism, political and leadership, explains most of his choices. I wish he'd tried to be more inspirational and led in a direction that might last for generations, but I settle for (partially corrupt but historically huge) health-care reform.
I can imagine better alternatives, but I worked for Obama because I saw considerably worse. You don't have to pick sinners and saints in these things, sometimes both sides are deficient. Just try for what's best for the time being. If I tried to confront the true enormity of what we're doing out there rather then try for incremental change, i think I'd implode. I don't think much of the "idealists" attacking Obama on morally correct grounds but without a realistic path to improvement. That's just ego.
Obama won't make any grand stands on privacy or civil rights generally (gay marriage is an exception, but I think the financial incentive there was pretty big). It's a rare politican who would, unfortunately. I hope the people will.
So I read through the whole transcript. There's a lot of fluff in there and lip-service about reform and oversight. Which, hey, is better than coming out swinging claiming that the NSA can do no wrong, which is kinda what we got at the start. The good news is that he understands that we do need people investigating terrorism and that there is a valid reason to keep a leash on those spooks.
Of the ACTUAL changes he's proposing:
-National security letters should not be indefinite ("unless the government demonstrates a real need for further secrecy"). Despite the major cop-out, this is a good thing.
-Asking congress to make an oversight panel in FISC. Which, you know, is asking someone else to watch over your department.
-Treat foreigners like real people. Hey, that's nice.
-Outsourcing the master database to a third party.
Wait, what was that last one?
I am therefore ordering a transition that will end the Section 215 bulk metadata program as it currently exists and establish a mechanism that preserves the capabilities we need without the government holding this bulk metadata.
Well that's a gooooowwwaaaitaminute... That just means someone other than the government is holding EVERYONE'S DATA...
replaced by one in which the providers, or a third party, retain the bulk records, with government accessing information as needed.
HOLY FLIPPING BALLS! What the fuck are you thinking!? You're outsourcing the fucking keys the freaking kingdom to a "third party"!?!?!? Hey, I hear India will do it on the cheap. Maybe China will undercut them.
On the other hand, any third party maintaining a single, consolidated database would be carrying out what's essentially a government function, but with more expense, more legal ambiguity, potentially less accountability, all of which would have a doubtful impact on increasing public confidence that their privacy is being protected.
No fucking shit sherlock. So then why are you doing that?
I suspect that Obama is talking about reforming the least useful of the surveillance programs.
They keep talking about "how useful" the surveillance is. "How many" terrorist plots have been thwarted. "How necessary" spying is. "How clean" the latest internal (or scope-limited external) review came out.
They never talk about "how constitutional" the programs are. Never "how democratic" these activities. No "how liberating" analyses.
It's all just: War! Terrorists! Safety! Squirrel!
Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Todd Giffen, also known as "StrStr", also known in Springfield Oregon as the Park Masturbater , as he likes to "whip it out" in a number of the public parks near his Centennial Blvd. digs... Todd will tell you (on his Twitter feed) that the NSA beams instructions into his head to "pleasure" himself...
Immediately.
NSA is the most powerful organization in the world. It has all of the world's blackmail information in a searchable database.
Nothing can work with this blackmail information hanging over the rest of society. At least not until we begin electing consistently honest, blameless politicians.
They rewrote the US Constitution in secret. That is a coup, a change in government by force.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
I think the spooks got to him before we even became president. During the campaign, they create a culture of fear by offering secret service protection. Whether or not it's needed (it's probably a good idea) it starts to change your perspective. Then, just before his inauguration, they gave him a classified briefing about a threat to his life. Perhaps they mentioned his family. Suddenly, terrorist threats became deeply personal. Then, each morning he receives briefings from the intelligence agencies. In a very real way, they can shape his perspective.
And in this way, perhaps, he might become pro-surveillance.
Just a hypothesis.
"Dont be naive."
You missed something. There is "plausible deniability". Then there are numerous issues that the president is never told.
The US Has 761 Military Bases throughout the world.
The Worldwide Network of US Military Bases
LOL
Who cares how hard the job is... if he's sticking a rusty piece of barbed wire up your "opinion" its still a rusty piece of barbed wire. It won't feel any better either way. The problem is the legitimizing of the spying yes, illegal shit happens but once you OK it it just gets worse from there. I'm not anti-government but this shit is absolutely anti citizen and who can support that with a good conscience. I'm not an Obama basher but he has maintained, escalated and enacted policies that are simply wrong if you like freedom and democracy! America is dying from the inside out like all great empires.
It's data. WTF is up with this ridiculous parsing of language to search for imaginary loopholes? Noobs: Metadata is: Data about data. It's Data. Period. Bend over kid.
As someone else said, he isn't really a scholar. Yes, he taught, but in the context as a businessman acting as a visiting professor in an MBA program. That's a very loose, but I suppose technically accurate definition of a scholar. Where has he been published? I've been published in at least one small Canadian academic journal. It wasn't much, but it's an academic publishing credit all the same. But I'd feel dishonest referring to myself as a scholar. He taught Constitutional law. But that doesn't mean he is a civil libertarian. I had a torts professor that was impossible to read, an evidence professor that was ever harder to read. My civil procedures prof seemed very liberal, but who knows? I would say Scalia is a constitutional scholar, but Christ, I find his interpretation of the Constitution at times frightening.
I supported Candidate Obama early on, but I realize his campaign was entirely smoke and mirrors, even beyond what I expect in a general campaign. Looking back, there was no substance, none. It was very much like John Edwards and very much unlike John Kennedy. Obama was youthful, but intelligent. He was an American success story. He was attractive and tall. He spoke with eloquence and careful pause unlike the broad field of competitors that ran the gambit from fumbling idiot to rage. He was insightful, which the former President Bush wasn't. Obama was a fresh light after a particularly bad time in our political history. If you didn't like the way the previous 8 years went, he was the only practical choice of all the candidates. People bring up Ron Paul. He could never win a presidential election, and if he could, he could never effectively lead as a president. Clinton had unclean hands, as did McCain et al. Romney might have been a stronger candidate, but he had no actual substance either.
You had to know that Obama would expand on presidential powers whatever his feelings on the Constitution. I think even a President Ron Paul would have found himself expanding his powers. I'm sorry about the length.
How would you know that?
Good to see that foreign leaders get better treatment than american citizens.
This just means the d1cksux are moving over to spy 2.0 and probably increased antagonism and harassment of ordinary folk. You probably won't be able to go to the shop without being annoyed by someone. Luckily these people have no spine matter and u can f*k with their putty dead brains and make them cry or freak out.
Because of books written by historians, and book written by former presidents.
More lies from king b. o.!!