General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsObama administration threatens criminal probe for leak of NSA's surveillance of Americans.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/08/us-usa-security-leaks-idUSBRE95700K20130608
Expect an example to be made of those who thought the American people have a right to know.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
randome
(34,845 posts)Someone who wanted 15 minutes of fame will find that to be poor consolation.
[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)I want to see Obama follow through on that promise.
His threat to pursue the "leaker" just makes the fact that he hasn't ended these programs all the worse.
This is government repression and surveillance beyond what is rational.
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)Obama is doing what bush did. that makes him wrong. period.
indepat
(20,899 posts)wrong in the first degree. 
pnwmom
(108,995 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)to be smeared, called a traitor, lied about, prosecuted with some screaming for the death penalty. I'm sure the leaker, whose ID we now know and the smearing has already begun btw, knew what he was doing and what would happen to him.
More and more whistle blowers are emerging, maybe it's because more of them just cannot go along with what they know to be wrong. And the more who do this, the harder it will be to be creative in the smear department.
To stop all this whistle blowing, all the government has to do is abide by the law of the land. They need to start prosecuting War Criminals, they don't need to smear them, just present the facts, they need to start prosecuting Wall St. criminals, same thing, just present the facts and they need to do what Bush did with War Criminals, give give medals to Whistle blowers for doing their duty if what they are leaking is true and if it exposes corruption of any kind.
siligut
(12,272 posts)Yes, get the loose-cannons to a place where they can't do anymore harm.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)The authoritarians among us want us to sit down and shut up and let fascism make us happy.
siligut
(12,272 posts)Sorry, but I know too much about the people who want to undermine our government from within. And I think we might disagree on the definition of loose-cannons.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)our government from within"? Tell us more.
What can undermine our government more than this utterly unconstitutional program of surveillance? There can't be anything worse unless they are really, as some claim, gathering all the actual content of our electronic communications including phone calls and internet usage.
Imagine. All your Google searches being perused by nosy characters from the NSA. Isn't that the nuttiest thing you can imagine. I can't imagine anything that could undermine the government more than some members of the government spying on other members of the government in this fashion.
The repercussions are mind-boggling.
I am amazed at the lack of intelligence and imagination and understanding of those who think these revelations are unimportant. The extent of the invasion of our privacy is unacceptable.
ReRe
(10,597 posts)Last edited Sat Jun 8, 2013, 09:09 PM - Edit history (1)
.... rolling in his grave. He's loving every bit of this and so wishes that he was alive right now. Hell, maybe he is. I agree, totally, with you JD...
Edit: It just occurred to me that I stuck the wrong given name in for J. Edgar Hoover yesterday!!! Whenever I do that kind of stuff, just know that I was having a senior moment the time! Sorry!!!! ReRe 
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)because it creates an entire infrastructure that could be used to preemptively target any citizen the government has a problem with, for any reason. They are creating a database on every single citizen's movements and activities. Those who don't see the danger in that are either rank apologists, or they have not thought through the possibilities.
Citizen 1,675,402 begins to look a little too angry or activist, or they pose a threat to a secret or a planned piece of legislation, and it will be no trouble at all to comb through their data and find some reason, somewhere, to call the local officers to check out some violation from 2013. To arrest, or have someone quietly detained or disappeared.
It provides the means for real-time monitoring and pre-emptive silencing of any opposition to the government, even before it has a chance to materialize.
We saw already what the government did to proactively target Occupy. This surveillance program savagely violates the fundamental trust Americans are supposed to have in their representative government. It is deeply disturbing, creepy as hell, and ALL Americans should be standing together now to stop it.
"The Mass Surveillance program is to protect the government FROM the people."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2962737
mercymechap
(579 posts)someone's life in danger. And since when is revealing classified information to sources not authorized to see it okay?
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)OK? What does the Fourth Amendment protect? I'd like to see the list of things. I suspect it protects my piano and my old-fashioned typewriter and my U.S. mail, but I'm beginning to wonder whether my vitamin shipments brought by UPS are also examined or recorded before I get them.
I'd like to see the list of things that are still considered to be my personal things subject to the 4th Amendment. I suspect it would not fill a half a page.
mercymechap
(579 posts)the records are only accessed if someone is caught in terrorist acts, and they happen to have accessed your phone number.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)What would keep them from accessing any information they wish to access?
I don't think there are any real, day-to-day checks and balances in place on this program.
I haven't heard of any.
mercymechap
(579 posts)reported that is in the order.
What data exactly is Verizon required to provide to the NSA? The court order requires Verizon to provide call metadata records such as the originating and dialed number, call time and duration, location data, calling card numbers, International Mobile Station Equipment Identity numbers and other unique device identifiers. It excludes subscriber name and address information and the actual content of phone conversations.
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9239892/FAQ_What_the_NSA_phone_snooping_uproar_is_all_about?taxonomyId=15
If your phone number is associated to some terrorist group, I suppose that nothing will keep them from accessing other information they wish to access, and frankly, I would hope they would do so.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)who I am.
We don't yet know the scope of the program, but the whistleblower described it as being much more than just gathering numbers.
mercymechap
(579 posts)I have for wanting to? They are gathering numbers and connections to those numbers. They are not getting names, addresses or the conversations themselves, but sure, if they have reason to suspect that your number is connected to a terrorist that has been apprehended because your number pops up in his list of numbers that he has called, sure, they are going to find out who you are and check to see what your connection to the terrorist is, and they should.
That is how they found out that friend of Tsarnaev in Florida.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)This program is just one of a number of programs which, together, add up to violations of our Bill of Rights, the Constitution, and that lead to the possibility if not likelihood of a dictatorship.
The Atlantic lists these programs.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022973186
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)them yellow pages from all over the country and they will have everyone's phone number. They are not just 'collecting phone numbers' they are tracking phone calls, who people call, who those people call etc. Why are they doing this? How does this make us 'safe'?
Remember, we were told that the Naked Scanners were absolutely necessary to stop terrorists. We disagreed, people sued due to the violations of rights those machines were responsible for, Civil liberties organizations condemned them, the EU banned them, but our Government told us we must submit to these rapiscans for our security. Arguments in favor of them were made here on DU passionately. I know, I was involved in many of those discussions. I opposed those violations of our rights.
And then, suddenly, the rapiscans were removed from the airports. What happened? They never caught a terrorist, they traumatized children and grandmothers and women who were groped, but they never caught one terrorist. Still, the government said we needed them or we would be in danger. So are we now in danger? Or was the government lying to us after all? Was it all about money as we suspected from the beginning?
No one in government who so adamantly defended them has had anything to say about why they are gone. How strange, something we needed for our security, now gone. Why?
mercymechap
(579 posts)able to supply the government with every single yellow pages book in the US! Yes, they can track the numbers that your phone number accesses, and how they keep us safe is, if they catch a terrorist and his cell phone number can be tracked to your cell, they can find out if you are part of a terrorist group.
The rapiscans have been removed, but they have been replaced with some that will only give an outline. Of course they didn't catch any terrorist when they were using the Rapiscans, because terrorists were not stupid enough to board a plane with bombs on their bodies knowing they would be scanned, would you? Things have changed in the US since 9/11. Security is no longer free for the taking, and frankly, I don't care if I have to relinquish some of my privacy, I prefer life to privacy.
This doesn’t mean you no longer have to go through full-body scanners, maximum-security prison style, at the airport. It just means that all machines that scan your body will display a generic stick figure body to TSA security agents rather than the X-ray nudie shot, seen at right.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2013/01/18/tsa-abandons-rapiscans-nude-body-scanners/
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)The people won that battle, the law suits, the outrage, the refusal to fly anywhere those machines were used, the reports from credible sources of the danger to people being exposed to them, which they tried to deny, finally became too much for them to continue their use. We never needed them, it was about money. Chertoff made out very well from the millions of wasted dollars so I suppose someone benefited!
You stated that all they wanted were phone numbers. Now you admit they want more than phone numbers. They are spying on the American people.
Am I a suspect or something? The 4th Amendment forbids this kind of invasion of anyone's privacy without a warrant. An INDIVIDUAL warrant. That was to ensure there was some probable cause for the invasion of someone's personal property. Last I saw, the 4th Amendment is still part of the law of the land.
So what probable cause does the government have to invade the property of millions of Americans?
YOU can be willing to 'give up rights for safety' but you have zero right to give up anyone else's rights.
And just how does spying on millions of innocent people make us safe?
All totalitarian governments have used the 'national security' excuse to justify the surveillance of their populations.
This will stop, and this period will be recorded as a very dark period in our history. It may take a while, but the rapiscans, so 'necessary' to our security, are gone now due to the outrage of the American people.
I support the Constitution of the US, it has protected us from from the government, as was intended btw, for over two centuries. We can survive a terrorist attacks, they have been around from the beginning of time, but we cannot survive as a democracy with a government that does not respect the law of the land and spies on its own people.
mercymechap
(579 posts)Re-read my post, obviously if they are replacing the Rapiscans with another device, you can't truly say they were not needed. And the last time I looked, it didn't seem that too many people were boycotting flying. You do seem to exaggerate a tad, don't you?
And, no, they are not getting the names, addresses nor the conversations, so all they are getting are numbers, connections which are numbers.
Oh spare me your bullshit about being invaded. If you are a terrorist and are afraid they are going to catch your ass talking about bombs, who gives a crap about your rights. What about the rights of the people you may be plotting against?
The probable cause is the fact that there are terrorist groups that exist here in the US. The United States has more terrorist groups than any other country. If you are so concerned about your privacy (as if anybody gives a damn about your conversations with your neighbor), then move to a country that doesn't have that problem.
And your claim that we can survive a terrorist attack - tell that to the family that lost their 8 year old son in the Boston bombing, and the many people that lost limbs. And you keep saying that the rapiscan is gone, but you fail to acknowledge that another device has taken it's place. They are still doing the scans, so don't be an idiot.
If you want to find out how it makes us safe, I already gave you some examples, go and do some research instead of joining the mass hysteria from the right screeching "the sky is falling, the sky is falling". This practice has been in effect for more than 7 years, so tell me, how in the heck has it affected you so far?
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)usGovOwesUs3Trillion
(2,022 posts)or will he get all behind the extra scrutiny given ALL Americans?
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)it is illegal to leak classified information.
If the Justice Department wants to look at Greenwald and see where he got the information from, a Federal Magistrate would sign off on the search warrant instantly because there is probable cause (FISA document in Greenwald's possession).
If the leaker is found, prosecution could ensue and conviction would be assured. This is the risk people take when they break the law.
Although, I doubt Greenwald will be prosecuted, but the Justice Department could easily obtain a search warrant and check his communications in order to find and prosecute the leaker.
The law is on the side of the Justice Department in all cases like this.
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)In the light of your post about leaking classified information, please juxtapose Manning against the Faux reporter who got tagged as a "criminal co-conspirator" in the North Korean nuclear test bullshit.
Do it for ME.
Manning... good or bad?
Other guy... good or bad?
Enquiring minds want to know.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)If Manning broke the law, he should be prosecuted, but he should get his day in court and he is. My problem with the Manning case isn't prosecuting him for leaking classified information. My problem is that he was, IMO, tortured while he was in military jail.
In the Rosen case, the Justice Department obtained a search warrant from a federal magistrate and it was also approved by a federal judge. This is why we have an independent judiciary. The judge and the magistrate determined there was probable cause and approved the search warrant for Rosen's emails. Totally legal and by the book.
In the case of the FISA warrant leak to Greenwald, don't be surprised if the US attorney opens up a probe first thing Monday morning. He/she is probably salivating. The case would be a slam dunk.
This Justice Department is extremely aggressive against leaks and they have shown no reluctance prosecuting people who leak classified information.
Th1onein
(8,514 posts)THEY ARE ALREADY SCOOPING UP EVERYTHING.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)Thats very disappointing.
villager
(26,001 posts)n/t
boilerbabe
(2,214 posts)this doesn't jibe with the defenders' spin. 
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)the article is in reference to the FISA warrant that was leaked recently. That's illegal and there would be little trouble convicting the leaker if they are found. It is illegal to leak classified information.
boilerbabe
(2,214 posts)convenient. thanks!
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)(d) Whoever, lawfully having possession of, access to, control
over, or being entrusted with any document, writing, code book,
signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint,
plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the
national defense, or information relating to the national defense
which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used
to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any
foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or
causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted or attempts to
communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated,
delivered or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to
receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it
on demand to the officer or employee of the United States entitled
to receive it;
http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/18/I/37/793
Case would be a slam dunk
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)is classified is that it would be embarrassing to the Obama administration because Obama promised, with a stroke of his pen, to end this intrusion on our rights.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022968735
I don't think that national security laws should be invoked to protect a president from embarrassment.
And far too much information is classified. It makes trying to find out some of it into a game. That is not healthy. It reduces the respect that our government and the system of secrecy and classification has. That also is not healthy for our country.
We have gone too far in terms of the security state and secrecy. Much too far.
And the fact that sitting presidents and their staff members have access to these phone records places the integrity and fairness of our elections in question. I doubt that Obama has abused his access to this information, but a president could. This program needs to end. It makes our democracy into a farce.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)But the law is the law. We should definitely work on changing some of these invasive laws. But the president has the constitutional obligation to enforce the laws currently on the books.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)I think he could issue an executive order limiting the program. He is not required to do this. He has a lot of discretion as to how the Patriot Act is carried out. He does not have to agree to the subpoenaing of all these records.
The fact that the subpoena has to be renewed every few months is proof of his authority to end or drastically amend the program. I certainly hope that he will.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)So it kind of doesn't make any sense to bring that up.
Demit
(11,238 posts)I haven't been following this closely, but observing the reactions of people here acting all blasé about how this isn't really news makes this sentence from the article leap out:
"Leaks to media outlets this week have revealed a government campaign of domestic surveillance going far beyond anything that had been acknowledged previously."
That tells me there is news here, and by his reaction Obama is revealing himself to be conducting an imperial presidency. There's little doubt now.
Purveyor
(29,876 posts)Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #14)
Post removed
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)What a despicable con job those words turned out to be.
LuvNewcastle
(16,856 posts)Obama promised to end this shit, but he's kept it going all this time. I would say that Obama's a hypocrite, but a hypocrite still has some idea of the way people should behave, he just chooses not to when confronted with the same problems of the person he criticizes. No, I think Obama is just a liar. He never had any intention of doing some of the things he promised to do.
burnodo
(2,017 posts)but his tune has been decidedly different
Iliyah
(25,111 posts)goper house of rep. issa, investigation to start next week. since no cares about the three other so called scandals, lets start another, and this time, go full force with the corporate media! hooray
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)program and that Obama would sign the bill to end it. Now that would be a positive bi-partisan action.
Thanks to Glenn Greenwald for letting us know that this is still going on and that President Obama went back on his promise to the American people.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022968735
Iliyah
(25,111 posts)Nada. OK.
Fire Walk With Me
(38,893 posts)Iliyah
(25,111 posts)we have civil liberties and eff women rights to boot, baby makers and stay home moms so the kids will be sorta smart, blacks and other minorities need to stay in line or else, nope.
2014 the Dems are gonna take the house and keep the senate. Suck on that.
shawn703
(2,702 posts)Jobs in this area that require a top secret clearance are highly coveted because of how much they pay. Many employers require that you have your clearance before even being considered for the job because of how costly it is to get somebody cleared, especially at a TS level. Those that can't handle being cleared should make way for those who can. A lot of people needing jobs that could be trusted a lot more than some of the people that have them, apparently.
sibelian
(7,804 posts)... namely, what the law SHOULD BE.
I refuse to beleive that this idea is unknown to you.
shawn703
(2,702 posts)Rather than putting words in your mouth, I will await your response.
byeya
(2,842 posts)And, the "it's the law" argument doesn't pass my laugh test considering how self-serving most laws now are and how anti-Bill of Rights many laws are.
Things that should be secret for real national security are 1 on 1000
shawn703
(2,702 posts)As in-demand cleared personnel are, employees can easily find other employment if they aren't happy where they are. Keeping secrets is part of the job. Individuals that can't keep secrets are not qualified.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Or, more importantly, why the secrecy in the first place?
Recursion
(56,582 posts)The information Snowden allegedly leaks seems to describe some of the system, but doesn't address whether it's Obama or Snowden that is lying about who it's being used on.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)
wandy
(3,539 posts)As wretched as the thing that was leaked on is, it was still wrong.
If we are to pretend to be a nation of laws then comprising security integrity can not be right because 'we have a right to know',
and at the same time condem things like the outing of Valerie Plame.
Can I assume that we all still think that the outing of Plame was wrong?
If we do, then painful as it is, we must play by our own rules.
