I don't get the Snowden/phone records thing. Yes, been offline.

[uppityperson]

He released info that phone companies were giving records of calls to the NSA, right? And last yr there was a to do here because it was revealed phone companies and cell companies were giving records of calls to the NSA, right?

Or do I remember wrong here? I've been offline mostly dealing with failing family member and have missed a lot but read outrage going all sorts of ways and am confused.

A brief answer without insults is preferred, thank you.

[pkdu]

1. How dare you taunt those presently suffering from the vapors over things we have known for years. Nt

Ok.

[The Straight Story]

4. True, we have known for years. But they want to prosecute him, revoked passport, and head of NSA

said today that what he did caused a lot of harm.

So the government seems outraged for some reason......

[pkdu]

6. I agree we still classify way too much as "secret"...on the other hand , confirming US and UK were

Spying on attendees at G20 etc, was unnecessary at best.

[uppityperson]

12. From what I read, he did break the law. Not judging is the law is good or not, but just that he brok

broke it and hence should be charged. Is the problem that he didn't "cause a lot of harm" but released "new" info into what we have known or that he did cause harm?

As far as whether or not he broke a "good" law, it seemsr like someone murdering a murderer still he broke the law.

[The Straight Story]

17. Ah, but there is the problem I see

He exposed others breaking laws and I don't see any of them getting in trouble for doing so.

But then the government seems rather lenient on itself and corporations.

If I illegally tap a phone in Ohio:

"Ohio's wiretapping law is a "one-party consent" law. Ohio law makes it a crime to intercept or record any "wire, oral, or electronic communication" unless one party to the conversation consents. Ohio Rev. Code § 2933.52. "

I would be charged. Now did the US break any laws? Maybe they did - but who is gonna investigate each and every case to find out?

With so many laws/regs on the books, needing a warrant, not needing one, etc and so on we will never know because the people most likely breaking the law in this case when exposed will redirect the press and use their power to prosecute the person who exposed them.

[Cali_Democrat]

20. "He (Snowden) exposed others breaking laws"

Do you have more information on this? Who are the "others" and what laws did they break?

[The Straight Story]

25. Well, this would be a place to start:

“It cannot be used to intentionally target any U.S. citizen, any other U.S. person, or anyone located within the United States,” James Clapper, the director of national intelligence, said in a statement, describing the law underlying the program.

Cannot be but was....Of course we may never know for sure unless more leaks come out....

[Ms. Toad]

5. You need to get in touch with the Supreme Court right away

to correct their error.

They dismissed the ACLU suit on the Patriot Act for lack of standing earlier this year. The Supreme Court determined it was entirely speculative that the plaintiff was impacted because they lacked precisely the kind of document Snowden released, and refused to review the constitutionality of the law.

So trot on over and inform them they dismissed the case in error. Let me know how that works out for you.

[uppityperson]

10. I am seeking info rather than desiring to turn yet another thread into useless snark. Thank you.

[99th_Monkey]

2. A little too much faux-outrage by Obama-bots for my taste

Snowden revealed the illegal and unconstitutional inner workings of our
over-privileged & powerful elite; with the blessings of Obama's WH.

I would think embarrassment would be a more appropriate feeling, more
than "outrage".

[uppityperson]

11. From what I've read, which isn't a lot, it seems what he revealed was already known, but again I

have not read a lot which is why I am asking here. Are you saying that what you see is that Obama administration continued what was known and this is the issue? I am not sure.

Thank you.

[99th_Monkey]

15. I think Snowden revealed the VAST EXTENT of spying on US citizens

There were reports about this before, but it was preemptive puff pieces
designed to make it all seem legit. I remember hearing a little about
this, prior to Obama's election.

I remember reading about that HUMUNGOUS spying complex being built
in the middle of nowhere USA, to spy on us, but it was spun to seem not-
so-bad, "only apply to foreign people calling someone in the US,
blah, blah.

Apparently, yes, Obama has continued this, at every level. So much for
having a "constitutional scholar" fix what's wrong with this country.

[uppityperson]

16. Thank you, that makes sense. nt

[Th1onein]

3. It's a lot more than that, uppityperson.

It seems that we've been spying on our allies, and spying on all Americans, and exchanging info with our allies, who are also spying on Americans and their own people.

If you're a foreigner, or speaking with a foreigner, or your emails are encrypted, or go through any foreign route, the NSA has a copy of them. And, if someone who knows someone who knows someone who knows someone you know, who is speaking to a foreigner, your communications (text, email, phone, etc.) are saved and read.

It's a mess.

[NightWatcher]

8. Breaking News: US spy agencies...spy

Is anyone surprised that our spy agencies spy? Every country we spy on, spies on us as well. It's what they do.

[elleng]

32. Right, thanks,

nothing like logic.

[uppityperson]

9. Thank you for the information as that part I hadn't heard. I appreciate your answering and

not just snarking or trying to use my questions to bash others. In this I am sincere and do thank you.

[jazzimov]

27. That's not entirely true.

What you said involves a lot of "spin". For instance, if a call is believed to involve an American on US soil, the surveillance is supposed to be ended immediately and all data destroyed - UNLESS the Director submits in writing that it should not for one of several reasons that are specifically enumerated. At that point, the NSA is required to forward the data to the FBI which has to get a court order based on probable cause.

Please read the underlying documents and not the "interpretations" (spin).

[NightWatcher]

7. Nope nothing new

[Recursion]

13. An attempt at a balanced appraisal

What he and the government reaction have revealed was:

1. The NSA has captured more information than it is mandated to

2. The CIA has been engaged in computer-based espionage on allied countries

3. When the NSA captures information it wasn't supposed to, in some situations it is legally allowed to keep it

3 was probably the big bombshell (though 2 is obviously irritating to our allies). The problem is he also seems to have said some stuff that is pretty clearly not true ("the NSA captures all internet traffic in real time and saves it" and "I could have read the President's email if I wanted to&quot and it's not always easy to parse out the real from the unreal in what he said.

[uppityperson]

14. Thank you. I appreciate the appraisal and information.

In the real world, few are all evil or all good but instead a mixture. Just throwing that out in addition.

I appreciate your taking time to help fill me in.

[HardTimes99]

18. I would add #4: The FISA court secretly ruled some of what the NSA was doing

'unconstitutional.' But because everything is shrouded in an all-enveloping secrecy, no one knows for sure what exactly was unconstitutional, nor what steps the NSA may have taken to rectify the constitutionality issue (which it supposedly did, but because everything is secret, no one who would know is allowed to say and those who don't know can only speculate).

And I apologize if I have mis-construed all the cloak-and-dagger-y stuff.

Argh, this is but one more evil of a secret government - it's like those 19th-century psychics who would read tea leaves or something. And I'm strictly a coffee drinker

[Recursion]

19. I don't think that was him

Or, to be more clear, if that was him, the Guardian, Greenwald, and Snowden aren't saying so. That was a separate leak about a weak before.

Actually it kind of reminds me of how the Manning dump happened right after the Gitmo/torture leak, which he didn't do. Maybe somebody has a way to "bury" leaks like that...

[HardTimes99]

21. Ah, got you. It has all sort of blended together in my head, I'll readily grant. Also, possible #5

would be what in the fuck private contractors like Booze Allen Hamilton (sp?) are doing with access to classified intelligence. Some who defend Obama have argued that is the real scandal and I don't think they are entirely wrong.

[Recursion]

22. Well, adding to the complexity, we don't know what came from BAH

and what came from his time before BAH (he was at one point a direct CIA employee. Allegedly).

[HardTimes99]

23. I think 'uppityperson' has his or her reading cut out for

him or her for the next few days

[TeeYiYi]

24. I think one thing that was revealed...

...that was previously unknown was the name of the spy program: PRISM.

TYY

[Recursion]

26. No. PRISM's name was revealed previously, and it's not a spy program

PRISM is an analysis program that the three (or possibly four) gathering programs feed into.

[TeeYiYi]

28. Not according to the Boston Globe...

”THE VIEW through a prism can distort shapes
and fragment color — perhaps heightening
the beholder’s interest, but offering anything
but an authentic glimpse of reality. The
National Security Agency’s ironic choice of
“PRISM” as the code name for a massive
data-collection program, recently exposed in
documents leaked by federal contractor
Edward Snowden, only begins to suggest the
problems with this clandestine intrusion into
the lives of citizens.”

http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2013/06/17/edward-snowden-reveals-deeper-secret-there-are-secrets/znKlnQQ6edHiWlsTQBHbYP/story.html

TYY

[Recursion]

30. Then the Globe needs a better reporter

Eichenwald sums up the history of the public acknowledgement of the program pretty well:

http://www.vanityfair.com/online/eichenwald/2013/06/prism-isnt-data-mining-NSA-scandal

[TeeYiYi]

34. Clandestine since 2007...

...and revealed to the public via Snowden in 2013.

”PRISM is a clandestine national security
electronic surveillance program operated by
the United States National Security Agency
(NSA) since 2007. [1][2][3][Notes 1] PRISM is
a government codename for a data
collection effort known officially as
US-984XN . [8][9] It is a SIGAD operated
under the supervision of the United States
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court
pursuant to the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Act (FISA). [10] The existence of
the program was leaked by NSA contractor
Edward Snowden and published by The
Guardian and The Washington Post on June
6, 2013.”

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_(surveillance_program)

TYY

[jazzimov]

29. First, if you haven't already, read the leaked documents

that were posted in the UK Guardian by Greenwald.

Then, read some of Greenwald's and others' "explanation" of the documents which misrepresent what is contained in the documents themselves.

That should bring you up to date.

[scarletwoman]

31. My take on it, if I may.

For me, one of the most important parts of Snowden's relevations is not just what they show about the extent of the NSA's surveillance, but the fact that this data collection has been placed in the hands of private contractors.

Private companies are being paid billions of taxpayer dollars and are profiting handsomely for doing NSA's dirty work. The current head of Booz Allen, the contractor who employed Snowden, is Mike McConnell, former head of the NSA. The current head of the NSA used to work for the Booz Allen. This incestuous revolving door relationship between private, for-profit corporations and government agencies basically guarantees that (a) funding for these operations will continue to grow, and (b) the War on Terror (which is the current raison d'etre for this whole surveillance apparatus) will never end, since it contributes so nicely to the private contractors' bottom line.

Aside from the scope of the surveillance itself, there's something very wrong here in regard to the whole paradigm of corporate/government entwinement. The trend is already well underway to treat activists and protestors as "terrorists" if they object to such things as environmental destruction (Fracking, Keystone Pipeline), animal cruelty (factory farms and slaughterhouses), or GMO crops (Monsanto).

It's not just the "Military Industrial Complex" that Eisenhower warned us about. It has now morphed into the Military Intelligence Complex, which cannot be anything but anathema to a "Republic of the People, by the People, and for the People." When the government can use its secret surveillance capability to treat its own people as potential threats, we are no longer living in a free democracy.

sw

[uppityperson]

33. Thank you for that info. argh

[scarletwoman]

35. You're welcome. In my opinion, we citizens really do need to discuss these matters.

It's not about Snowden - he simply acted as a catalyst - it's about the whole nature of how our government works in collusion with private monied interests to mess with the rest of us.

$80 billion (at least) a year to fund secret surveillance programs, but we need to cut Food Stamps because they're "unaffordable". It pisses me off, it does!

[TeeYiYi]

36. Exactly! +1

Perfectly stated. Thank you scarletwoman.

TYY

[suffragette]

37. You raise very important points here