NSA Spying: The Three Pillars of Government Trust Have Fallen

[kpete]

"The obscure we see eventually. The completely obvious, it seems, takes longer." -- Edward R. Murrow (1908-1965)


NSA Spying: The Three Pillars of Government Trust Have Fallen
EFF, August 15/13

First, the Executive. After a review of internal NSA audits of the spying programs provided by Edward Snowden, the Post lays out--in stark detail--that the claims of oversight inside the Executive Branch are empty.

Second, the FISA Court. The Post presents a second article in which the Chief Judge of the FISA Court admits that the court is unable to act as a watchdog or stop the NSA's abuses: "The FISC is forced to rely upon the accuracy of the information that is provided to the Court," its chief, US District Judge Reggie B. Walton, said in a written statement.

Third, the Congress. Last week, Representative Sensenbrenner complained that "the practice of classified briefings are a 'rope-a-dope operation' in which lawmakers are given information and then forbidden from speaking out about it."

The three pillars of American trust have fallen. It's time to get a full reckoning and build a new house from the wreckage, but it has to start with some honesty.


MORE (supporting links):
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/08/nsa-spying-three-pillars-government-trust-have-fallen

[uponit7771]

1. lol "fallen" as if it was ever there, seems like the people who already had an inherent distrust in

...gov are the ones the most animated about this issue.

I trust less the motives of SnowGlen than I do the government

It makes no sense that a bigger deal is made out of the 4th amendment vs the 15..

Without the 15th amendment what difference does the 4th make?

[Ed Suspicious]

2. XV is only under attack by one party, tragic as that attack is. The trouncing of the 4th has found

universal appeal (bipartisan support).

[uponit7771]

3. Trouncing of the 15th has MORE of an affect on the 4th no? If you can't vote the bumms out of office

...then they can do what they want in regards to the 4th.

It being bipartisan doesn't mean it's more effective

[ljm2002]

9. Doesn't matter if you trust Snowden...

...or Greenwald; they have no power over us. Our government does have power over us, and one of the guiding principles of this country is to limit that power by a number of means, including: separation of powers; checks and balances; free press; an informed public. Unfortunately, all of those have been compromised, and the NSA spying scandal perfectly illustrates that fact.

BTW: with all your apparent concern about voting rights, I haven't seen your OP on the topic. You seem to be using it solely as a distraction in threads about the NSA spying. Odd, that.

[uponit7771]

11. They DO have power over folk who don't know any better. Kind of like people who didn't know any

...better before the Iraq war...

Unfortunately, all of those have been compromised,

at one time or the other since the beginning of the country of course...don't see how that has changed this day

and the NSA spying scandal perfectly illustrates that fact.

Please show PROOF that the NSA has been "spying" vs watching traffic (NOT... NOT the same thing) and a basher and idiots word for the matter doesn't count.

watching traffic is NOT spying... stokers want to make them the same but it's not true.

Watched some FAUX news today, they heart Snowden...the traitor...fuck him...I trust this shit less now

[sabrina 1]

22. Well, if it were true that a bigger deal is being made out of one or the other of our

Constitutional Amendments you might have a point.

Is this a new distraction because I've seen it several times now and whenever something gets repeated ad infinitum and makes no sense, I assume it is not just the opinion of one person, but more likely the latest attempt to distract from a very important issue.

I would say it's time for whoever is in charge of all this to begin to acknowledge that there is no putting out this fire. Nearly 60% of the population care greatly about the way this country is going and no amount of distractions have been able to change that.

In fact the numbers go up every week as more and more people learn what we know already, despite the enormous campaign to make it about Greenwald, Snowden, narcissism, black helicopters or whatever the latest one is. Because some things are more important to the American people than anything else. Maybe they thought we had all accepted being spied on when they rescued Bush from prosecution for doing it. They were wrong.

And according to Wyden, what we KNOW is 'only the tip of the iceberg'.

[gulliver]

4. Not trusting the government is for Republicans.

It starts out being anti-NSA, then it turns into anti-government. We don't need to stray into Republican propaganda framings.

[ConcernedCanuk]

5. I don't trust MY own government

.
.
.

has nothing to do with party affiliates/choice

I base my opinion on my government's behavior, no matter what Party has the majority.

At the moment, I believe we have the worst government ever -

Harper is our "Bush", only with brains . .

Scary that , ,

CC

[FirstLight]

6. +1000

I am so sick of being told that distrust of Govt is a libertarian/republican stance.

we have MORE reason to distrust our government these days than ever. Occupy and the DHS involvement really did it for me...

[bemildred]

7. Right, us Democrats are supposed to just shutup and be obedient proles. nt

[uponit7771]

8. AMEN!! Somehow it looks like this is all aimed at "anit government" types who don't really know what

...computers can and can't do.

FAUX news loves Snowden

[ljm2002]

10. You need to read up on recent history...

...because your argument here is eerily similar to those made by conservatives back in the day, when us leftists and dirty hippies were protesting the actions of our government.

It is never a good idea to blindly trust the government. That is not a Republican position, far from it. Republicans absolutely trust the government, whenever a Republican is at the helm. Sure, Republicans love to mistrust Democratic administrations and anything and everything proposed by Democrats; and sure, Republicans will milk this and any other issue they can, for maximum damage to their political rivals. None of that has anything to do with the substance of the issue at hand.

[uponit7771]

12. Back in WHAT day?! During the Bush years?! or when a good portion of the racist were...

...a part of the democratic party?!

Don't understand this comment

[ljm2002]

14. So you are unaware...

...of the massive civil disobedience that went on in the 60s and 70s? You are unaware that it came pretty much exclusively from the left? You are unaware of COINTELPRO spying on Americans, used against the left? Really? No wonder you are prone to assuming that mistrust of the government is solely a Republican thing.

When GWB was in office, it was de rigueur for Republicans to demand trust in the government. Now it's not. That is no surprise. What is surprising, is to hear Democrats making the same arguments these days.

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." --Santayana

[gulliver]

15. The point you are making is one I take for granted.

I'm arguing for open-eyed trust and against blind mistrust.

It will be hard to have a discussion with you if you don't recognize that anti-government rhetoric is a Republican hallmark. That's just politics 101 and indisputable. And the fact that Republicans will milk anti-government rhetoric from the left could not be more germane.

[ljm2002]

16. Well, see, that's the heart of our disagreement right there:

You say, "I'm arguing for open-eyed trust and against blind mistrust."

In other words, you are characterizing your own position as "open-eyed" and the position of your opponents on this issue as "blind". Yet you provide no evidence to support those characterizations.

Again: you need only look back 30, 40 years or so to see plenty of anti-government rhetoric originating from the left. So while it may be a Republican hallmark today, it has not always been thus, even in the very recent past. In fact, you need only look back 8, 12 years or so to see plenty of anti-government rhetoric coming from the left.

Yes, there is a concerted campaign on the right, since Reagan was President, to shrink the government and drown it in a bathtub, to quote Grover Norquist. That, however, does not in any way mitigate the overreach of our military-industrial-espionage complex. The fact that some Republicans will use it for their own purposes is an unfortunate side effect. It has NO bearing on the merits of the case. None.

[bvar22]

17. Nonsense.

Not trusting the government is as American as the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution that gave us the tools to Oversee OUR government and its operation.

"Secrecy" is the province of monarchies and other non-democracies.

[gulliver]

18. Right, oversee so you can trust.

I keep my eyes open and then I trust the government, because I think it is an absolute necessity. Not trusting the government in a broad sense, especially the democratically elected, highly monitored, well-designed, time tested U.S. government is just, well, ignorant.

Nothing's perfect, and our government's actions certainly aren't. But we can't throw out the baby with the bath water. To say that the pillars of trust are gone...or something like that in the OP (please don't make me read it again)...is just asinine and anti-liberal. If you don't like the NSA, fine, just say so as I posted. But being against the U.S. government in the broad sense is just plain Republican rhetoric.

[bvar22]

20. When your government claims that what they are doing is "secret",

then you can no longer fulfill YOUR Constitutional Responsibility of overseeing the government
no matter HOW wide your eyes are open.
THAT is where we are.

Run away Government Secrecy,
Run Away domestic surveillance (which is exactly what Snowden & Greenwald disclosed)
is NOT compatible with a government OF The People and "informed consent".


Sounds like you are trying very hard to have it both ways.
Perhaps you should Pick One and STAND for it unambiguously.

[gulliver]

23. Right, both ways is the correct way to have it.

The government I elect keeps some secrets from me. I'm entitled to know a lot, and I do. But there are things I am willing not to know if I know that you (as an unelected person) or other people I don't want to know can't know either. I don't have to tell you my personal secrets, and I elect a government that doesn't have to tell you its. That gives me more control over my personal information and the information I own through my government.

I'm sorry if you think I have to give the information I own through my government to you, but that's just not the case. If there is something the government knows that I really feel I need to know, I'll put in a FOIA request, sue, or contact my elected representatives.

Finally, there is no runaway secrecy or domestic surveillance in evidence. You can't take a stand against something that doesn't exist. That makes it just a pose, and I do wonder just how much of this stuff is a pose. I don't hold my hand up over my head to protect the earth from asteroids and claim I am defending public safety.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

13. In a democracy, we're not supposed to "trust" the government. We are to hold in accountable.

And, we'd be damned fools to trust politicians.

[WillyT]

19. K & R !!!

[JoeyT]

21. Honestly, I think we should just trust our president in every decision he makes

and should just support that, you know, and be faithful in what happens.

So sayeth Brittney Spears and the segment of DU that apparently decides who is or is not a Republican or Democrat.

[DevonRex]

24. The NYT'S report is much better than WaPo's.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/16/us/nsa-often-broke-rules-on-privacy-audit-shows.html