Slashdot Mirror


Edward Snowden Says a Report Critical To an NSA Lawsuit Is Authentic (techcrunch.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: An unexpected declaration by whistleblower Edward Snowden filed in court [last] week adds a new twist in a long-running lawsuit against the NSA's surveillance programs. The case, filed by the EFF a decade ago, seeks to challenge the government's alleged illegal and unconstitutional surveillance of Americans, who are largely covered under the Fourth Amendment's protections against warrantless searches and seizures. It's a big step forward for the case, which had stalled largely because the government refused to confirm that a leaked document was authentic or accurate. News of the surveillance broke in 2006 when an AT&T technician Mark Klein revealed that the NSA was tapping into AT&T's network backbone. He alleged that a secret, locked room -- dubbed Room 641A -- in an AT&T facility in San Francisco where he worked was one of many around the U.S. used by the government to monitor communications -- domestic and overseas. President George W. Bush authorized the NSA to secretly wiretap Americans' communications shortly after the September 11 terrorist attacks in 2001.

Much of the EFF's complaint relied on Klein's testimony until 2013, when Snowden, a former NSA contractor, came forward with new revelations that described and detailed the vast scope of the U.S. government's surveillance capabilities, which included participation from other phone giants -- including Verizon (TechCrunch's parent company). Snowden's signed declaration, filed on October 31, confirms that one of the documents he leaked, which the EFF relied heavily on for its case, is an authentic draft document written by the then-NSA inspector general in 2009, which exposed concerns about the legality of the Bush's warrantless surveillance program -- Stellar Wind -- particularly the collection of bulk email records on Americans.
"I read its contents carefully during my employment," he said in his declaration. "I have a specific and strong recollection of this document because it indicated to me that the government had been conducting illegal surveillance."

70 comments

  1. One problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Echelon data taps were being installed by the USG before 9/11. I was there for an install.

    1. Re:One problem by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1

      Surveillance dates back to the 60s and 70s in the US, if not earlier. It just became expanded and more accepted after 9/11. People went from happy ex-hippies to scared suburbanite sheep in one day. Bleating... "anything to keeeeeep uuusssssss ssaaaaaaafe."

    2. Re:One problem by Narcocide · · Score: 2

      But what if they didn't, though? What if that perception of that particular public preference was just the symptoms of coordinated astro-turfing already, way back then? What if we all fell for it? I know I was one of the people clamoring against creating a giant creeping national security liability under the guise of national security. Weren't you, too? What if we all were? What if nobody wanted this except for a handful of rich and viciously evil traitors or foreign nationals? What if they tricked us into all blaming each other for it instead of taking action before it was too late?

    3. Re:One problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And exactly how would we take action short of shooting these traitors? Passing laws doesnt matter as the highest law in the land clearly says its illegal. At a certain point when you scream "step across this line" and the other party does it over and over again you should either shut up or put up.

    4. Re:One problem by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1

      Sadly, the average American DID turn into a scared lemming after 9/11 and was willing to accept a high level of inconvenience and surveillance just to be "saaaaafe."

    5. Re:One problem by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

      The sea change for post-Vietnam American defensive-aggression came in 1979 with the Iran hostage crisis. I was there and saw it happen. The 9/11 attack was just a further and much greater escalation.

    6. Re:One problem by Narcocide · · Score: 1

      But you don't actually know that. You didn't talk to them each personally. Nobody did. You couldn't possibly have even got a reasonable sized sample set by now if you had tried.

    7. Re: One problem by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Then surveys wouldn't indicate that many, if not most, Americans support surveillance.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    8. Re:One problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      After 9/11, people were scared and ready for war. Gallup did talk to these folks personally. Poll

    9. Re:One problem by Rockoon · · Score: 0

      Exactly. I live in New England and know NOBODY as described, not at work, not at home, not in the family, not in the neighborhood.

      I only witnessed the media saying it. Yes, the fake media.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    10. Re:One problem by Rockoon · · Score: 0

      Is this the same Gallup that predicted Hillary would win by a landslide?

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    11. Re:One problem by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Project SHAMROCK https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... and Project MINARET https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... show the domestic spying goes back generations with no protections against collect it all.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    12. Re:One problem by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      No, but I personally watched conservatives (the traditional check on this type of thing) quickly become pro mass surveillance.

      And it wasn't until the Snownden leaks that anyone really seemed to care.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    13. Re:One problem by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      Do you have any citation for that?

      I don't think Gallop polls elections, and the polls in general showed a very close race (and were about as accurate as any given year).

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    14. Re:One problem by currently_awake · · Score: 1

      If your Gallup Poll is based upon voter oppinions while your electoral results are based on jerymandering/collusion/vote rigging then those results make sense.

    15. Re:One problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is this the same Gallup that predicted Hillary would win by a landslide?

      She probably would have if the votes weren't tampered with.

    16. Re:One problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gerrymandering has nothing to do with Presidential elections as the entire State votes. It only affects the House of Representatives.

      The only proven vote rigging was the "super delegate" votes in the Democratic primary that prevented Bernie Sanders from actually beating Hillary in the primary as it looked like he was going to do. Hillary is batting a thousand, she's never won an actual race. She was handed the Senate seat in NY because she knew the Democrat will always win in NY unlike Arkansas, and she was handed the primary. Her only two real campaigns, the primary against Obama and the general against Trump, she lost.

      The only collusion that has been positively identified is the DNC colluding with a British Spy who was taking disinformation from Russians to create a fake document, and got paid over $12m to do so. Not a single shred of evidence has been produced linking the Trump campaign with any collusion and the only supposed connections between members of the Trump campaign and Russia were either years before the campaign (Manafort) or an attempted FBI sting operation (Papadopoulos) that failed because he didn't take the bait and carry $10k back to the US but left it with an attorney in Greece or a fake meeting with a Russian lawyer who met the day before and the day after the meeting with Fusion GPS, the same group that hired the foreign spy to write the fake document.

      captcha: acolyte - seems fitting

    17. Re: One problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is that the lie you keep telling yourself? The leaked email revealed how she stole the primary. The private email and her idiotic inability to keep classified documents from being sent in plain text over the internent while proving those in power are never held to the same standards as the lowliest employee. The outing from the former dnc chair, debbie hyphonated schultz, in her book that detailed how the HRC campaign bailed out the dnc only to take over control long before the primary, and subsequently witheld money to other dnc candidates to keep for her own selfish aspirations.

      These are the reasons she lost. Ive said it before, Iâ(TM)ll say it again. It was a race between the Never Trumpâ(TM)s and the Never Hillaryâ(TM)s. The Never Hillaryâ(TM)s won. She just is that unlikeable. I personally think Trump is an ass, but I would STILL vote against Hillary if she decides to fuck over the DNC and run again. Youve heard The phrase Country over Party??? Well she is squarely Hillary over, well, fuck everybody else.

    18. Re: One problem by e3m4n · · Score: 0

      I cared. I voted for Obozo in 2008 hoping he would reverse this shit, as said during campaign speeches. I did NOT vote for him in 2012, because by then he had not only kept them in place but expanded them several fold. Ordered assasinations of us citizens without at least holding a trial or military tribunal in absense. We are seeing exponential growth in surveilance since 2001. In Obozos second term he got REAL buddy-buddy with Facebook and Google. It wasnt because he needed inside tips for Farmville.

    19. Re:One problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is this the same Gallup that predicted Hillary would win by a landslide?

      They predicted correctly that she would win the popular vote. They never used the term landslide. Trump uses that. They said "90% probability that Clinton will win".

    20. Re:One problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, no, and no.

  2. Too late to vote tem out, too early to start shoot by denis.goddard · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The Federal Government is corrupt beyond fixing. Which is why I joined thousands of others to concentrate our efforts â" the Free State Project. Itâ(TM)s also why I use Tor, Monero, Signal, and look forward to getting a Purism phone. They will try to surveil; we will encrypt and use open systems!

  3. Snowden is a hero. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Snowden should be pardoned and welcomed home for the good deeds he did for us.

    He broke the law because the law was being abused, and he revealed the ways that our government was boldfacedly betraying all of us and lying to us. He didn't weaken national security, he gave us the evidence we needed to call our government on their treachery.

    1. Re:Snowden is a hero. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cool story Adolf Stalin. Perhaps we want to live in this country where it is illegal for the government to spy on its citizens. And perhaps you should move to Russia where the government provides the type of surveillance you love.

    2. Re:Snowden is a hero. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where to start... even if you were right, shouldn't the people know what the Govt was doing? Shouldn't there be a law to allow it instead of them monitoring people illegally and even denying that they are doing it?

      Next where is the empirical evidence this works and does keep people safe? Or are unwilling to accept that the Govt might just be creating a system of control over us rather than to protect us. I know..... you can let them spy on you and not speak for me, how about that?

    3. Re:Snowden is a hero. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By all means. Since Snowden claims the document in question was real he will obviously come back to the US so he can testify in the case. Without that how gives a shit what he thinks. People who believe everything Snowden utters are as bad as those who think the government is always lying. The arrogance displayed by Snowden and his enablers is breath taking to say the least. He dumped GB's of data from an American Intelligence agency and deemed himself an expert on the consequences of releasing the information. He and his enablers believed they were qualified to determine which documents would not degrade US foreign policies and intelligence operations around the world. He can get a slap on the hand for dumping the domestic related information but he will eventually be held responsible for dumping data concerning US foreign intelligence operations. Manning was a bumbling fool who just dumped everything in one go and got lucky with his pardon (which he probably deserved). Snowden's actions were calculated and he knew what he wanted. He wanted to become a hero for truth and justice. When compromising US foreign intelligence information there is no way in hell the government will let that go. Maybe his enablers were able to convince him the people were all on his side and he would suffer no great harm. Spying on other countries is not against the law no matter what anyone thinks. The US Constitution and Bill of Rights are not international protections and only a mob of morons would not know that. This fact is rooted in that little place known as "reality". The US is the most spied upon country on the planet and trying to hamper the US counter intelligence operations is a serous crime no matter what the out rage of the day mob thinks.

      And nobody ever asks where are the remaining unreleased documents? So far the documents that have been released were obviously cherry picked to promote one political ideology. Look at the timing of the released documents. The releases have been spaced out and released when they can have the biggest political impact and keep those releasing the documents in the headlines. Look at who is holding the documents before they are released. A group of people that have a long and documented hatred of anything related to the US. How do we know all the documents being released are authentic and not created out of thin air or modified?

      Am I just suppose to believe everything Snowden and his supporters without question? Am I suppose to believe everything published just because it makes the government look bad? Is making the government look bad the only requirement when it comes to the judging truth? And the biggest mystery surrounding Snowden is why did he not wait until he was in some South American paradise with no extradition treaty with the US to release the documents? Nobody was chasing him or investigating him. The US government did not have a clue until Snowden went public. His journalistic enablers were able to get back to their South American hideouts with no problem so why didn't Snowden join them?

    4. Re:Snowden is a hero. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The primary function of government is to protect its citizens, in your opinion.

      And it's a good one. However, the actual members of government have a different opinion. They think their primary function is to assert their will on to the citizens, to profit themselves at their citizen's expense.

      History shows that most governments to terrible things to their people. So, we can't just let that power run unchecked, lest we be the next victims in that same history book.

    5. Re:Snowden is a hero. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They do want to know if that same 42 y/o white male is spewing anti semitic hate on social media forums and looking up how to kill as many people with an AR-15 style rifle.

      That's why the government efforts are spying on non-social, non-media communications between individuals and why we've consistently seen lone wolves on social media forums talking their anti-Semitic hate and killing people. Not only do the not look in the right places but generally there's way too many people making the same sort of noise and doing nothing to actually figure out the one guy who is actually go through with it until after they do it. It's like "A Penny for Your Thoughts"--just being able to reach into someone's head/secret communication doesn't magically tell you the future.

      Of course the cynic would argue that the government does know and could act but refuses to either because they don't care or they wish to exploit each attack for their own benefit. One thing is certain is that for all the talk, the sort of surveillance of Americans has done little to nothing to protect us from each other. There's a reason why the NSA's mandate is to spy on other countries: they're the ones who are a potential treat to Americans in a substantial way. If they couldn't figure out 9/11 was going to happen from monitoring non-Americans for years, what makes you think monitoring Americans will suddenly stop the next 9/11? More importantly, to stop before it starts the next possible war that will result in the death of millions to hundreds of millions is actually the purpose of NSA spying, not the relatively minor terrorist attacks, foreign or domestic.

      In almost every conceivable way, not only is the NSA spying of Americans illegal and ineffectual for what it claims to be, it diverts resources towards meaningful and legal activities. It's the precise opposite of what should have been done.

    6. Re: Snowden is a hero. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck the NSA, thinking their cowardice excuses treason against fellow American citizens. Warrantless wiretapping to save democracy is an admission that the morons who attempt to lead have no legitimate plan for managing challenges. How about legally investigating crime? If this is how American civil rights are managed now, how long before we have full-on dystopian fascism? Ten years? Or two?

    7. Re: Snowden is a hero. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Am I just suppose to believe everything Snowden and his supporters without question? Am I suppose to believe everything published just because it makes the government look bad? Is making the government look bad the only requirement when it comes to the judging truth?"

      You are a coward.

    8. Re:Snowden is a hero. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Snowden should be pardoned and welcomed home for the good deeds he did for us.

      He broke the law because the law was being abused, and he revealed the ways that our government was boldfacedly betraying all of us and lying to us. He didn't weaken national security, he gave us the evidence we needed to call our government on their treachery.

      I feel so betrayed knowing my ISP reads my emails and shares with the government, and I’m shocked, shocked I tell you. Wasn’t I read your email a sysadmin meme back in what, the 90s, earlier even?

    9. Re:Snowden is a hero. by Curunir_wolf · · Score: 5, Informative

      The primary function of government is to protect its citizens

      No, that's false. Politicians say that all the time, but it's NOT true. No public office holder (in the US), nor military person or Federal law enforcement officer, ever makes such a promise. Instead, the oath they are required to make is to "protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." The Constitution that includes the 4th Amendment, which forbids unreasonable search and seizure.

      It doesn't matter what they think they should be doing to "protect" the citizens. Their first obligation, which they swore to as a condition of serving, is to defend the Constitution. Full Stop.

      --
      "Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
      --- Jerry Garcia
    10. Re:Snowden is a hero. by jd · · Score: 2

      The first job of government is to obey the law. If the law won't cut it, change it.

      The problem with Big Data, which you still miss, is that. Individuals are irrelevant. It's not about people, it's about populations. These tools could not be used the way you suggest.

      Third, terrorism has increased as surveillance has, none of whom were caught by
        surveillance, proving it is not about protecting people.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    11. Re:Snowden is a hero. by jd · · Score: 1

      Agreed. If they do not accept the bill of rights, have them put the changes to Congress lawfully.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    12. Re:Snowden is a hero. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Before Snowden these were jokes, anyone who claimed it seriously was considered a tin-foiled weirdo. After Snowden it become undeniable reality.

      I agree that he is a hero. Thousands of people directly involved in surveillance, he is the only one who decided to do something about it. Illegal surveillance in US doesn't concern me in any way other then curiosity. Still, this guy is definitely a hero for me. He had nothing to gain and much to lose. If it was a movie he certainly would be pardoned.

    13. Re:Snowden is a hero. by rainer_d · · Score: 1

      He is a hero - and a traitor at the same time.

      And I'm pretty sure he, being the smart kid he is, was always aware of that, too. Ever since he copied the first file.
      It's an enormous sacrifice.

      --
      Windows 2000 - from the guys who brought us edlin
    14. Re:Snowden is a hero. by ogdenk · · Score: 1

      Snowden is a fucking traitor and nothing more than a russian spy/tool. Period.

      He's a whistle blower. The government is commiting criminal acts against American citizens. The NSA's job is NOT to spy on American citizens on US soil unless they are communicating with foreigners.

      The primary function of government is to protect its citizens, so no shit the government is going to surveil its citizens.

      Bullshit. The primary function of government is to secure the rights of its citizens. Not to protect us from ourselves. Not to surveil us.

      Do you honestly think they give a crap if some 42 y/o fat ass white man likes to watch midget porn? Nope...

      The old you've got nothing to hide if you have nothing to fear trope. Whether they give a crap as a whole or not, the government is made up of people happy to abuse their power for their own personal profit or amusement. People have used these powers to stalk girlfriends and any other stupid shit you can imagine.

      They do want to know if that same 42 y/o white male is spewing anti semitic hate on social media forums and looking up how to kill as many people with an AR-15 style rifle.

      Hate is not illegal. Looking up info is not illegal. This is not minority report. There is no "pre-crime". You are not guilty of a crime until you actually commit a violent act. In fact, building an unregistered AR on your kitchen table with parts ordered off of the net is perfectly legal in most states.

      It's hilarious how butthurt people are over a souped-up .22 rifle. The AR15 is not that impressive. 5.56x45 is not some super round with ultimate killing power. AR15s just look cool. An AR10 or old M1A will shred people far more effectively. And the M1A looks like grandpas hunting rifle.

      Guns are fucking legal. So are big magazines. Get over it. There's no magic knowledge on "killing as many people as possible.

      Insert mag. Pull charging handle. Point. Start squeezing repeatedly. Guns are not fucking rocket science. Most of us gun owners have a few scary looking black rifles. Yet we all are not running around shooting up places. The AR15 is the most popular rifle in the united states. It's a standardized platform produced by every manufacturer that can be customized for any purpose. It's the "PC clone" of rifles. They aren't any better or worse than any other gun. Just scary looking and standardized.

      Get off your high horses and if you don't like what the government is doing you can find another country to live in. Perhaps Russia?

      Just because it can be worse doesn't mean we shouldn't fix this shit as soon as possible before regaining liberty without mass bloodshed and horror is out of our grasp permanently. We are on a rapid slide into inescapable tyranny and complacent pussies like you are the main problem.

    15. Re:Snowden is a hero. by ogdenk · · Score: 1

      Or put more simply:

      It's their job to secure the rights of the people.

    16. Re:Snowden is a hero. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Snowden is a fucking traitor and nothing more than a russian spy/tool. Period.

      That's so hilarious how you put "Period" ... after an actual grammatical period ... as if that give your statement some level of credibility.

    17. Re:Snowden is a hero. by Agripa · · Score: 1

      The primary function of government is to protect its citizens

      No, that's false. Politicians say that all the time, but it's NOT true. No public office holder (in the US), nor military person or Federal law enforcement officer, ever makes such a promise. Instead, the oath they are required to make is to "protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." The Constitution that includes the 4th Amendment, which forbids unreasonable search and seizure.

      It doesn't matter what they think they should be doing to "protect" the citizens. Their first obligation, which they swore to as a condition of serving, is to defend the Constitution. Full Stop.

      Further, the courts have repeated ruled that absent a statute saying otherwise, the government has no obligation to protect citizens or people under its jurisdiction. And there is no obligation even if that same government places them in peril.

  4. Admissible? by david.emery · · Score: 1

    IANAL, but the inability to cross-examine Snowden might well make this inadmissible.

    (And that's without expressing my highly unfavorable opinion of the author.)

    1. Re:Admissible? by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      They could choose to allow a deposition, a remote one even.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    2. Re: Admissible? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By being outside of the jurisdiction of the court a deposition is meaningless.

    3. Re: Admissible? by AvitarX · · Score: 2

      That is completely untrue.

      I've edited hundreds of depositions to use as court testimony specifically because the witness was outside of court jurisdiction and couldn't be compelled to testify in person.

      Not only were they valid for discovery, but they were also valid for use as evidence.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    4. Re: Admissible? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's going to be interesting to see if it is admissible seeing as he is an ex-intelligence employee who fled to another (possibly not friendly) power after releasing secrets (for whatever reason).

      This would tend to hurt his credibility in court. Since he has already committed crimes to push this narrative, it is an open question if mere perjury (that can't be enforced anyway) would compel him to be honest. In other words, his situation impeaches his credibility as a witness.

    5. Re: Admissible? by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      I would lean on agreeing with you, they won't allow a proper deposition.

      But they certainly could. I doubt either decision (to allow or to block) would be reversible, it's pretty much up to the judge.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
  5. James Clapper should be in Gitmo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He is a liar, and a treasonous asshat. Lock that bastard up.

    1. Re:James Clapper should be in Gitmo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like everyone else, he's complicated. But for now he's a hero. Doubly so if he releases the pee tape.

    2. Re: James Clapper should be in Gitmo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He should be killed..clapper should be skullfucked with a rusty screwdriver

    3. Re: James Clapper should be in Gitmo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... together with Bush and Cheney.

  6. You have no rights by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Other than the ones those who hold the guns provide you. In this case it looks like they have bigger guns. Just be glad that in this country you still have the right to a gun and by extension some say. Even though your guns may be small, if you support your fellow Americans rights to gun ownership your numbers are large. If there has been one constant law in life it is this, those that have the weapons make the rules. The only true Democratic society is one that allows it citizens the right to own weapons. All others may last for a short while but eventually be run completely by those that control the weapons.

    1. Re:You have no rights by Drishmung · · Score: 1
      "The right to buy weapons is the right to be free" The Weapon Shops of Isher .

      I really enjoyed that book when I was a kid. (Unfortunately, it's got rather a lot of magical thinking, around the nature of the weapons themselves.)

      If there were a correlation between gun ownership and freedom, you'd expect the top 10 gun owning nations to largely overlap the top 10 most free nations. Oh well, correlation does not imply causation.

      To think about it another way, and quoting some pop culture: "Culture eats Strategy for breakfast". Countries with a culture of democracy don't mind if their citizens have guns---Switzerland and New Zealand both have quite a few guns, but very strict laws about their ownership. Without the culture, giving your citizens guns doesn't make them democratic, it just makes more of them dead.

      --
      Protoplasm. Quiet Protoplasm. I like quiet protoplasm.
    2. Re:You have no rights by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is still true that without the ability to apply force, you are powerless to achieve, or regain, freedom. Without the possibility of the force of violence, you can be thoroughly ignored.

      It sucks, but it is true.

  7. Re:Too late to vote tem out, too early to start sh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It is the nature of governance that it corrupts. No government can ever be kept free of corruption, it's impossible.

    The only thing we can do is keep it accountable. The more public their actions, the better behaved they are. Public accountability is the only thing we have that works.

    Tools that allow us to sneak around unseen may help us to do things of which they disapprove (including completely legal things such as honest journalism and so forth), but it won't stop them from being corrupt nor from harming us with their corruption. A shadow state is not a free state; it is merely an anarchic one (which, as we all know, is inherently unstable and vulnerable to malicious criminal elements). There can be no "final victory" over corruption, not by means of encryption, not by any other means.

    Apply political pressure towards the goal of keeping our leaders' actions visible and accountable. That is how we keep their evil in check, and endure.

  8. Re:Too late to vote tem out, too early to start sh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Federal Government is corrupt beyond fixing. Which is why I joined thousands of others to concentrate our efforts â" the Free State Project.
    Itâ(TM)s also why I use Tor, Monero, Signal, and look forward to getting a Purism phone. They will try to surveil; we will encrypt and use open systems!

    Fantastic. Once you have all those secure systems in place, you and the other 723 Americans who still give a shit about security and privacy will be able to communicate!

    If you truly want to know what's corrupt beyond fixing, it is the average American who no longer gives a shit about your privacy concerns, and certainly won't spend the extra money to participate. Blood would have to run in the streets for GenY/Z to give up their precious social media and other "free" services.

  9. Re:Too late to vote tem out, too early to start sh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "They will try to surveil; we will encrypt and use open systems!" --- Good luck with that on your fucking iphone you goof! Shouldn't you be naked in a forest somewhere?

  10. Re:Too late to vote tem out, too early to start sh by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

    This is why reading comprehension is important, folks.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  11. Easy Fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Next time you want NSA and others to performs such surveillance, just ask for an explicit constitutional exception from your legislators. Due process, preserved. And everything was legal again. Or declare special circumstances, or national emergency for the next five years, to be renewed as needed.

  12. Lying is LEGAL including to congress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    https://www.fff.org/2014/09/12/remembering-the-criminal-conviction-of-the-director-of-the-cia/
    Using that twisted logic you could argue with is more important in the constitutional pecking order. The CIA or whoever do not want black letter law interpretation to go to trial. A reasonable person would say doing a Helms is OK - if you had no jurisprudence awareness.

  13. Re:Too late to vote tem out, too early to start sh by jd · · Score: 1

    You are correct about the nature of the problem, so one option is a heuristic. If government is self-replacing, it never lasts long enough to corrupt.

    A second option is to have no common vector. Have the second house be chosen at random from a meritocracy or a noocracy. Hybrids are stronger than pure systems. Fixed, single terms from a random population of achievers and thinkers mean all the attack vectors for a democracy don't work. There are new attack vectors, but they don't work on a democracy.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  14. Re:Too late to vote tem out, too early to start sh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Federal Government is corrupt beyond fixing

    It is the nature of governance that it corrupts. No government can ever be kept free of corruption, it's impossible.

    If it is impossible, like you say, to keep our government free of corruption --- why then we never stop harping on those corrupt governments in foreign countries ??

    Doesn't that make us motherfucking hypocrites ??

  15. Re:Too late to vote tem out, too early to start sh by currently_awake · · Score: 2

    A constantly changing government of amateurs means the beurocracy runs the country. Experienced politicians are better at the job. Outlaw politicians taking money from anyone who can't vote for him/her. Have a cap on donations from a single person. Force politician to put their investments/company in a blind trust while in office. Adopt a Proportional Representation system, so you don't have a government that 2/3 of the voters voted against and voting third party isn't throwing away your vote.

  16. You're a troll, even prolly a bot. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The sad thing is that these days it's impossible to know whether you work for the NSA, Putin's Internet Research Agency, Iran or wtf knows, Noth Korea.

  17. Re:Too late to vote tem out, too early to start sh by Megol · · Score: 1

    That's why democracy is the best system we know for the long term. It surely isn't perfect, far from it, but it allows moderation of the corruption as long as the system is balanced.

  18. Re: Too late to vote tem out, too early to start s by e3m4n · · Score: 1

    For the legislative branch, make it like jury duty. Itâ(TM)s not like these fucking idiots know what the hell theyre doing. Didnâ(TM)t know anything about the shit they vote on. They go ask a few questions and talk to a few advisors. Anybody can fucking do that. The problem with people that of been in there so long is that they know where all the bodies are buried. They use that to get their way and thats part of the reason why they are corrupt. Someone like you or me should go to their mailbox, opened up, and then say shit I have senate duty this year.

  19. Re: Too late to vote tem out, too early to start s by e3m4n · · Score: 1

    Every time you Give examples of hypocrisy, for either fucking party, both the candidates and all their supporters rally to explain how it is not hypocrisy because they dont believe in such a word. Give examples of hypocrisy, for either fucking party, both the candidate and all their supporters ralley to explain how it is not hypocrisy because they dont believe in such a word.

      And if you do not believe the media is purposely against you, think about the way they demonize the word nationalism. Doesnt the idea of country first also mean not putting our fucking nose in other countries business? But the media will make that into an evil evil idea. However will they sell newspapers if we are not always at each others throat?

  20. illegal and unconstitutional surveillance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shouldn't we be calling this Undocumented Surveillance?

  21. I remember a lawsuit against the telcos by 3seas · · Score: 1

    For participating in helping the US gov spy on US citizens in many different ways, from email to financial transactions to listening in on phone calls after 9/11. It was thrown out by the judge.

    The claim was the government was looking for terrorists but the fact of the matter is that is as insane as looking for a needle in a hay producing state. Given the fact that any terrorist group if using such vulnerable communication would simply use common phrases of which they would have different meaning among themselves but perceived by others as common. In a word or two, double speak. And we all know how well skilled politicians are at this.

    Ultimately, the current lawsuit regardless if won or lost is not going to stop government unconstitutional spying on US citizens. How to know this: Understand the pentagon cannot account for 10's of trillion of US taxpayer dollars spent. Why? Because they have used it to develop and expand the Deep State spying facilities and technology as Snowden has referred to but without mention of where they got the funds from. What lead up to 9/11? The Trillion Dollar Bet world stock market draining South East Asia finances, Indonesia was hit hard and at that time it had, by CIA stats 88% Muslim. 9/11 a cover up of a massive theft? Building 7 contained the SEC investigation into the this stock market matter and the pentagon, it was the accounting department destroyed. Enron, Worldcom, etc, investors in the bet w/o telling their share holders what they were doing (embezzlement?) ?

    Given such a buildup expansion of the deep state spying as Snowden has made the world aware of, who really thinks all this buildup is going to be dismantled?

    Vault 7....