EUGENE ROBINSON: America Should Thank Snowden For Revealing NSA Snooping

[Purveyor]

By
Posted 06:28 PM ET

Edward Snowden's renegade decision to reveal the jaw-dropping scope of the National Security Agency's electronic surveillance is being vindicated — even as Snowden himself is being vilified.

Intelligence officials in the Obama administration and their allies on Capitol Hill paint the fugitive analyst as nothing but a traitor who wants to harm the United States. Many of those same officials grudgingly acknowledge, however, that public debate about the NSA's domestic snooping is now unavoidable.

This would be impossible if Snowden — or someone like him — hadn't spilled the beans. We wouldn't know that the NSA is keeping a database of all our phone calls. We wouldn't know that the government gets the authority to keep track of our private communications — even if we are not suspected of terrorist activity or associations — from secret judicial orders issued by a secret court based on secret interpretations of the law.

Snowden, of course, is hardly receiving the thanks of a grateful nation. He has spent the last five weeks trapped in the transit zone of Sheremetyevo Airport outside Moscow. Russian officials, who won't send him home for prosecution, wish he would move along.

MORE...

http://www.pottsmerc.com/article/20130729/OPINION03/130729352/eugene-robinson-we-should-thank-edward-snowden

[Cooley Hurd]

1. Gene Robinson, the newest speedbump under the bus.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

97. Edward Snowden is a modern day Paul Revere with a thumb drive full of news that Tyranny is coming!

Edward Snowden is a modern day Paul Revere with a thumb drive full of news that Tyranny is coming!

Edward Snowden's Dad Calls Him 'Modern Day Paul Revere'
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/edward-snowdens-dad-calls-modern-day-paul-revere/story?id=19554337

Hmmm... who knew who influential a DU meme could be

[snappyturtle]

2. If nothing else: last two paragraphs at link:

Less than two weeks ago, the office of Director of National Intelligence James Clapper issued a public statement to announce that the secret Federal Intelligence Surveillance Court has renewed the government’s authority to collect “metadata” about our phone calls. This was being disclosed “in light of the significant and continuing public interest in the ... collection program.”

Isn’t that rich? If the spooks had their way, there would be no “continuing public interest” in the program. We wouldn’t know it exists.

[DeSwiss]

22. What I want to know is why is Clapper still free after lying to the Senate?

- I guess their laws only apply to us.






*** Above question was rhetorical. He knows too much.

[snappyturtle]

24. Yes, he probably knows way too much and would be more than

willing to drag a few more from under their slimey rock into the daylight.

[delrem]

91. Yes, it's that corrupt.

[Enthusiast]

99. Yes, it is..........nt

[sabrina 1]

137. Not to worry, we have a new system now to make legal anything ILLEGAL they do.

Sometime in the near future we will learn about a 'retroactive' amendment, passed quietly by Congress, legalizing 'lying to Congress for National Security reasons'.

After that happens, if you mention that 'Clapper lied to Congress', someone will come along with a link to inform you that 'what he did was legal' and to 'see Amend. #3 for details'.

Just as they made Bush's illegal spying, legal. I'm sure you have been accosted with a link, if you have called the current policies 'illegal', to Amendment #1 in this series of 'Save the Criminals from Prosecution' Amendments pointing out that it is LEGAL, unlike Bush, because, when he did, it was ILLEGAL.

We have become a banana republic when it comes to the law being applied to the wealthy and powerful and those who work for their interests.

[DeSwiss]

162. No need for pesky law changes. Doublethink is here.

“Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them. Thus, the Ministry of Peace concerns itself with war, the Ministry of Truth with lies, the Ministry of Love with torture and the Ministry of Plenty with starvation. These contradictions are not accidental, nor do they result from from ordinary hypocrisy: they are deliberate exercises in doublethink.” ~George Orwell, 1984

- Welcome to 1984.....

[East Coast Pirate]

3. Under the bus with him!

[randome]

4. What evidence did S&G provide that shows the NSA operating illegally or abusively?

Lots of claims. Lots of insinuations. But no evidence.

We need more transparency and less secrecy but to take S&G's word for anything without looking at the evidence smacks of lazy thinking, IMO.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[AllyCat]

13. Secret laws, court, and interpretation

And a Constitution that says that is not okay, but they did it anyway, then get their helpers on the inter tubes to say "what law did they break?"

[randome]

62. Too much secrecy, no argument there. Now what evidence did S&G show?

[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[truedelphi]

70. That all of our phone conversatons and email data has been collected -

And can be re-constituted into real conversations any time any authority wants it. (Yes yes, the FISA court could rule in favor of a defendant, but so far there has not been one such ruling. Any requests are approved.)

Now maybe this doesn't mean much to you. But for those of us who are activists, it is scarey. Anyone protesting Monsanto or Keystone Pipeline is not happy with this.

The chances for bribery, for insider business information, etc is huge.

[Mojorabbit]

94. This poster posts the same question almost every day

No matter how many people answer the question with examples, he pretends like nothing new has been revealed and the next day asserts the same. Rinse, Repeat.

[Enthusiast]

100. It is an effective strategy.

Obviously operating on strict instructions.

[randome]

116. Then answer it one more time, if you please.

You can 'convert' me if that's what you want to do. But I need to see evidence first.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[Mojorabbit]

132. I do not care if you are converted or no.

Many people over the past several weeks have listed all the information for you. Go look back at your posts. You will easily find it.

[truedelphi]

169. You are now trying to make Enthusiast your mommy or daddy -

[h2][font color=red]

And here I thought I was the only one on DU whom you entrusted to regurgitate hundreds of articles that would answer your questions (if you cared to have them answered.)

I AM SHATTERED, I TELL YA, SHATTERED!

[/h2][/font color=red]

[randome]

109. S&G did not produce evidence of that. If they did, please point to it.

They have made claims of nefarious activities but produced no evidence to support it.

Maybe the NSA is 'watching our thoughts form as we type'. But I need evidence before I let the outrage bull off its leash.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[NorthCarolina]

114. Why do you need that info, or even care, since you're obviously OK with spying on Americans? nt

[randome]

115. I'll show the acceptable amount of outrage once someone shows me the evidence.

To me, that's part of what sets us apart from the Conservatives -critical thinking should always over-ride emotional fears.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[NorthCarolina]

118. To me though, if you are OK with our government spying on its citizens,

and you obviously are OK with that, then you likely are a Conservative. We have become the same demon we supposedly stood against during the cold war. What I find difficult to believe is that you are on-board with that.

[randome]

120. There is no evidence they are spying on American citizens.

The purpose of NSA is to monitor foreign communications. If the NSA is spying on us all, I want to see evidence of that. But so far, nothing that S&G have stolen and printed points to that happening.

The metadata records are only viewed when one communicant is from another country. It sounds pretty straight-forward to me and it makes sense that an investigation would take place when a suspected terrorist in another country is calling someone inside this country.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[truedelphi]

141. Grow up!

You have been offered the needed info - there have been entire topics on what this means.

You don't think that the same people who snooped to listen in on service people having intimate conversations with their spouses would be above monitoring a company's email if they could put that information to advantage?

[randome]

158. You respond to a request for evidence with no evidence.

Then veer off into what spouses may be talking about.

Again, one more time? Where is the evidence that S&G provided that points to illegality or abuse? It's a simple question that no one in this thread can apparently answer. Possibly they don't like the answer they would be forced to give: the answer is 'None'.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[truedelphi]

165. If you are in grammar school, and unable to read adult news reports, I will gladly

Assemble such evidence.

But if you are not in GS, then please stop making me your mother!

I am not on DU for the express purpose of regurgitating five weeks of news reports, that you as an adult can read if you wish to. I hang out on DU for solidarity with other radicals.

There is quite a bit of wisdom in mojorabbit's reply number 94, as far as wasting time on certain people.

[tex-wyo-dem]

96. Okay, randome...

Consider for a moment how much power all this communication data gives to our corporate-owned government. Think about it.

Let's say that some multinational corporations want to build a massive factory pig farm in your community, but there are serious concerns about the farms affect on the local environment. You decide to create an movement against the pig farm and become a leader in the protest. Problem is that the pig farm means a lot of payola for certain Influential wealthy groups and government officials. All they have to do is pull up data on all your phone calls, email, texts, Internet searches, etc etc to get any dirt on you they want. Character assassination, bribery, etc follow forcing you to abandon your Constitutional right of protest. Pig farm gets built and the corporatists have won again.

Now imagine this happening to thousands of other well intentioned activists...

You see where I'm going with this.

[Enthusiast]

101. Those corporations only have our bests interests at heart.

Don't ya know?

[randome]

122. The same can be said for FBI records. CIA records. Your local LE records.

Carl Bernstein said, and I agree, that from what we know the personal data at NSA is well protected.

In fact, S&G's inability to get at personal data supports that idea.

Every single LE agency in the world has the capacity to engage in illegal or abusive activity. But until we see evidence they are, I don't intend to get outraged over something that isn't happening.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[truedelphi]

168. Exactly the concerns I have.

Add in the fact that 17 states here in the USA have binding contracts with privatized prison contractors that they will keep the jail cells 98% occupied, and you can see what a scarey era we average Americans are entering.

A privatized prison operator gets $ 40,000 per year per prisoner. Since they don't even bother to provide clean water to the inmates, and it is PRISON PROFIT, PRISON PROFIT, PRISON PROFIT and then of course, in this example you cite, PIG FARM PROFIT, as well

[RetroLounge]

107. "what law did they break?"

RL

[snappyturtle]

36. I'm done wasting my time with folks who won't, don't or are

seemingly incapable of retaining information that has been none stop
for over a month now followed by your repetitive hammering of the same
questions, over, and over and over. Much like what I imagine it was
like for Alice to have tea with the Mad Hatter. eom

[randome]

65. Reality is that S&G have shown nothing that is illegal or abusive

They have made vague claims and insinuations. I think we all agree that we want more transparency and less secrecy where the NSA is involved. But to run around as some do with their hair on fire and with very clear expressions of disdain for other DUers does not represent a rational, objective viewpoint.

I maintain that one of the key factors that separate Progressives from Conservatives is our ability to evaluate based on evidence, not emotions.

If I am wrong in that, then I see little difference between the two groups. And I want very much to see the difference.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[snappyturtle]

74. This has been addressed upside down and inside out many times.

You're omnipresence should have picked up on it. I do not put people
on ignore because I like to keep abreast of the tenor of talk. Just rest
assured that everytime you hit the "Post My Reply" button the hissing
you hear is from me. eom

[RetroLounge]

108. "what law did they break?"

RL

[randome]

110. So you can't answer that question, I take it.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[RetroLounge]

164. "what law did they break?"

"what law did they break?"
"what law did they break?"
"what law did they break?"
"what law did they break?"



RL

[delrem]

92. bullshit. you're *against* S&G, against transparency.

you're a sock.

[randome]

111. Point to the evidence that S&G produced that indicates illegal or abusive activities.

It's a simple question. The 'outragers' don't appear to have an answer other than to point to the FISA court that reined in the NSA in one instance.

And which still has nothing to do with S&G.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[Logical]

5. Waiting for Prosense to attack Robinson! n-t

[Purveyor]

7. Glad I won't get to see it. I shut that one 'off' a few days back. eom

[ProSense]

21. The good thing is "that one" can still see you

and laugh at the hilarious comments.

[malokvale77]

86. I can do that also...

[Puglover]

124. I know it's just so scathing innit it?

Almost as clever as their other favorite.

"You Better Believe It"

[backscatter712]

27. I too keep it in my ignore list. n/t

[grasswire]

31. if I were it, I'd be ashamed to show my hand..

...tainted as it is by propaganda.

[Demeter]

12. If Ever there was a litmus test for true democrats, it is Edward Snowden

Thanks to his bravery, I have shuffled a lot of trolls off into the Ignore Lists, where they may sit and jabber at each other.

Anyone who cannot recognize Snowden's enduring contribution to the US and the world is not worthy of one moment of my attention. It's the equivalent of bad-mouthing the Kennedys or MLK, Jr and the other civil rights martyrs. Or our Founding Fathers and Mothers.

[Andy823]

33. Interesting

So I take it that anyone who disagrees with you and the rest of the Snowden gang must not be "true democrats"? Is that kind of like the christian zealots, cults, etc. that say that if you don't believe them you are "not a true christian"?

I have said many times that if there is proof of abuse in the NSA, then let them be investigated and face the music. I also have said many times that Snowden and Greenwald are not heroes. Snowden seems to have done this for political reasons, being a follower of Ron Paul and Rand, seems to point to that. The things he said about SS, kicking whistle blowers in the nuts, etc. pretty much show me this man is a libertarian, just like Greenwald is a libertarian. The fact Greenwald is going to write a book to make money off of this shows me he also had an agenda, and it wasn't patriotism.

I also think that the right wing trolls, and the Paulbot trolls, have done a great job of keeping this stirred up, whether they are paid or doing it for free. I also think there are trolls that on both sides of the issue doing their job of causing divisions here at DU.

I have never said that anyone who doesn't think like I do is "not a true democrat". I think that is just plain insane and makes the trolls and the right wing morons that come here to watch DU fighting each other happy as hell.

[rhett o rick]

93. Democrats support freedom and liberty. Those that have nothing but hatred for Snowden

are not Democrats. THey are conservatives and we need them to go back to the Republican Party where they fucking belong.

Democrats support whistle-blowers and REpublicans support Gen Clapper, Gen Alexander, Herr Mueller and Mr. Torture Comey.

You are either with the 99% or the 1%. Clapper is the 1%.

[Kolesar]

152. I am a skeptic. Edward Snowden just smells bad to me

figuratively

[Enthusiast]

103. "let them be investigated"

[Bluenorthwest]

128. True Democrats? Let's start with 'decent human beings' becaue all the name calling, invective

and creepy ass attempts to smear by nonexistent associations are not traits of people who respect others, and lack of respect for others in politics indicates Conservatism in deeply engrained. Just look at your post, chock full of adjectives, insinuations, inferences and general sleaze. The lexicon and style serve to define.

[bvar22]

156. I agree.

[font size=3]"The lexicon and style serve to define."[/font]


Its ALL there,
and it ain't pretty.

[RC]

34. +10

I'm sure you have noticed that those that think spying on everyone, all the time is both somehow legal and a fun, harmless thing for our government to do, keep trying to bring the root problem back to Snowden, down playing the total control the holders of the data bases have over any and everyone they have hoovered communications from.

[snappyturtle]

39. You might as well save your breath RC. These folks cannot

fantom what the spying is leading to in the future.

[Andy823]

54. Of course

I coud say that "you folks" can't fantom the effects of putting libertarian and Ron Paul teachings above everything else. You can be upset with the spying, you can be upset with anything you want, but do you really think allowing the teachings of people like Ron Paul and Rand Paul to be spewed here on a daily basis is really a good idea? That's my problem. I don't know about you but the though of a president Rand Paul simply makes me sick as hell, and the though of more people like Rand Paul getting elected to any office in this country makes me feel the same way.

[Caretha]

72. ....................

STRAW MAN - STRAW MAN - STRAW MAN - STRAW MAN - STRAW MAN

I decided to repeat that 5 times so that you would realize that everyone with 1/2 of a brain cell on DU knows your tactics and will not confuse common sense with your failure to understand not everyone is as stupid as you think.

[JoeyT]

75. Apparently Ron Paul invented civil liberties!

Who knew?

I mean besides anyone with any sense whatsoever.

What the short sighted among us fail to realize is that by insisting anyone that supports civil liberties is libertarian scum, they're going to hand defense of civil liberties entirely to the libertarians. The defenders of this shit are working toward president Ron Paul, not the people attacking it.

[DJ13]

79. And what happens when someone you dont like is in the WH with these powers?

This isnt about Obama, its about keeping this from the other side.

[NorthCarolina]

117. It's about keeping EITHER side from doing it. nt

[Doctor_J]

112. Read my sig, Andy. Your subspecies needs to get off the "President Rand Paul" strawman

You agree with John Boner that prisons should be for profit. Does that mean you want "president John Boner"?

[Andy823]

47. I have a question

So your really think they are "spying" on you and everyone else, that they are listening in on all your calls, and reading all your e-mail?

As I said I think there needs to be and investigation, but what I have a problem with is the hero worship here on DU where Snowden and Greenwald, neither one a democrat, liberal or a progressive, are held in such high esteem. I also have a problem with the fact they are "believed" over anyone else no matter what facts are brought forward. I remember when Paulbots were a bad thing here, when libertarian views were not given hundreds of recs, but banned from the site. It's just crazy around here these days, crazy as hell!

[RC]

90. It does not matter what Snowden's or Greenwald's political views are.

That is totally immaterial. It is doubtful either are DU'ers either, so why would it matter?
What does matter is what they did. They brought to everyone attention, i.e., the world, what our government is doing on a very large scale, in secret. Collecting our meta data, Internet, E-mails, and phone calls and storing them in a huge data base for later combing through, looking for who know what.
Snowden and Greenwald are believed over everyone else because what they say checks out. Unlike our own government, they are telling the truth. Remember the least untruthful statement in front the Senate Intelligence Committee, on March 12, 2013?

Clapper indicated that he skated close to the line.

In an interview with NBC’s Andrea Mitchell, he said that “I responded in what I thought was the most truthful, or least untruthful manner, by saying no,” though he also called his answer “too cute by half.” He indicated that his response to Wyden turned on a definition of “collect:” “There are honest differences on the semantics of what -- when someone says ‘collection’ to me, that has a specific meaning, which may have a different meaning to him.”

One wonders why Clapper or his staff did not seek a clarification, given the apparent heads up by Wyden. Clapper apparently thinks the NSA “collects” only on specific targets — what he called, in the interview with NBC, “taking the book off the shelf and opening it up and reading it.” But that is a rather slippery answer.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/james-clappers-least-untruthful-statement-to-the-senate/2013/06/11/e50677a8-d2d8-11e2-a73e-826d299ff459_blog.html

All the NSA needs to do is in type in a name, IP address, phone number and all the information they have hoovered up concerning the search terms comes up on the screen. A few more key clicks and they can listen to the phone calls, or read the E-mails. That is what Snowden exposed.

If Snowden had little to nothing, then why does our government want him so bad? They want him so bad precisely because he has some very damning and embarrassing information, taken from the inside. Our government wants him so they can make an example of him, as they did Manning.

[snappyturtle]

37. Thank you Demeter...well said. nt

[backscatter712]

88. I couldn't have said it better myself.

If I were Skinner, I'd throw all the shit-smearing McCarthyist un-Americans off this board. I don't know why Skinner tolerates them.

Whatever happened to the rule "Don't be a right winger"?

[Waiting For Everyman]

129. Completely agree, Demeter. It's a "tell".

It's very useful that way, isn't it? This and the TPP free trade deal. I found that using the two together makes a nearly perfect dividing line, or handy scorecard to tell who's who.

I don't put them on ignore though (just my way of doing it), I like to keep an eye on what they're doing and they don't get under my skin (except for the annoyance of trashing up a thread to the point that it's nearly unreadable).

[backscatter712]

18. Didn't you know, Eugene Robinson's a racist!

Why only now did you realize he's Uncle Ruckus in disguise!

(WARNING: Uncle Ruckus uses quite a bit of racist foul language in this video.)

[Logical]

32. LOL! n-t

[ProSense]

20. There's that creepy obsession thing.

I don't have to agree with Eugene Robinson.

We’re talking about these issues. You can wish Edward Snowden well or wish him a lifetime in prison. Either way, you should thank him.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/eugene-robinson-snowden-performed-a-valuable-service/2013/07/29/b232965a-f866-11e2-8e84-c56731a202fb_story.html

Snowden has no crediblity, and deserves no thanks.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023288332

[burnodo]

25. c'mon Pro!

You know you want to do it! You know you want to post sub-OP! C'mon. You can do it!

[ProSense]

29. Damn,

"c'mon Pro!"

...really creeps me out. I just responded to you here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023369460#post2

[burnodo]

35. WAIT! I forgot

You'll be starting a NEW thread countering this thread without actually naming Robinson. Please proceed.

[snappyturtle]

40. LOL! nt

[ProSense]

43. You really think about me a lot, don't you? n/t

[burnodo]

44. DAMN!

And I was just going to post to snappyturtle that they'd gone and done it...since they responded to my response of you you'd HAVE to post a response!

And here it is

[ProSense]

46. How much do you think about my comments and what I'll post next?

Estimate will do.

[burnodo]

58. Oh, honey, I dream about it every night

N t

[JackRiddler]

50. There's little choice about that when...

one encounters your extremely repetitive, noxious and persistent talking-points material every fifteen seconds while browsing this site.

[ProSense]

56. OMG

"There's little choice about that when...one encounters your extremely repetitive, noxious and persistent talking-points material every fifteen seconds while browsing this site."

It's my fault that anyone is obsessed with me? Are my threads and comments that compelling that they can't be ignored?

What prevent you from not clicking on the link?

If you don't want to encounter my "extremely repetitive, noxious and persistent talking-points material every fifteen seconds while browsing this site" put me on ignore.

Frankly, I think continuing to obsess and talking about how much you dislike my comments is weird. No one is forcing you to engage in any of my threads.

No one.

[JackRiddler]

61. No, I think it would be better if you put me on ignore.

Long as we're both here, I'm not going to be missing what you do.

[ProSense]

64. LOL!

[JackRiddler]

76. You totally win when you use the ROFL smiley.

One of your many endearing qualities.

[Logical]

30. You never agree with anyone who does not think Snowden is Satan. Obsession, yes....

I am obsessed with calling out your blatant, rampant bias.

[ProSense]

41. Did you

" You never agree with anyone who does not think Snowden is Satan. Obsession, yes....I am obsessed with calling out your blatant, rampant bias."

...expect me to suddenly support Snowden because some said something? "Satan"? WTF?

Yes, serious obsession and denial:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022592785#post6

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022807040#post8

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022831006#post57

[Logical]

49. You LOVE being the center of attention. Bumping own posts. Posting dozens of links in a thread....

back to your OWN posts.

And all the discussion about the NSA and privacy was because of SNOWDEN, nothing else. And your perfect Obama is now willing to have a discussion about security and privacy when he ignored it before. WHY? Even you know the answer.

The fact that you will not admit Snowden exposed stuff that needed discussed is a farce.

[ProSense]

51. Apparently, you "LOVE" obsessing over me. n/t

[Logical]

52. LOL, you are obsessed with yourself. n-t

[ProSense]

57. Says the person who sent me weird PMs.

[Logical]

60. Chained CPI, and now Snowden. You are in a slump! LOL! n-t

[ProSense]

66. And yet you're still obsessed. n/t

[Logical]

67. I will say, you never tire of getting your ass kicked on most topics. n-t

[ProSense]

68. LOL! Whatever helps you feel better about your obsession.

[ljm2002]

144. "There's that creepy obsession thing."...

...er, yeah. There it is.

[Capt. Obvious]

121. I finally caved

off to ignore it went

[lark]

133. Too funny

I was just scrolling thru looking for a post from Prosense as well since she's so sure that the Obama government would NEVER do this, because it's just, well, it's not nice and anyone who dares say otherwise is certainly not a Democrat.

[MotherPetrie]

6. K&R

[pscot]

8. We should name a medal after him

[Thinkingabout]

9. Credit should be given where it is due, try George Bush talking about this in 2005.

Maybe Snowden slept from 2005 to 2013.

[snappyturtle]

45. Speaking of sleeping....where where you in 2004?

This is from a bio on Judge Kollar-Kotelly on wikipedia: One of her 'notable' cases:

On July 14, 2004, barely two months after President Bush was forced to end NSA domestic internet metadata collection by Attorney General John Ashcroft, Kollar-Kotelly issued a FISA court order allowing the NSA to resume unconstitutional domestic internet metadata collection.

Maybe Snowden had had enough by 2013....just sayin'

[Thinkingabout]

84. Did Snowden go a press conference in 2005 and say the records were being examined?

I was speaking to the fact George Bush gave the information in 2005 and if my calculations serves me correctly this was before GG came out with his column and Snowden claimed he was the one in 2013, as you say just saying, please proceed Snappy.

[snappyturtle]

87. Gave what information in 2005? I have no idea what Snowden

was doing in 2005. Actually, in re-reading your post I find it incoherent.

[Thinkingabout]

95. Well, we can begin again to see if you can understand.

Starting with post #9 I posted

"9. Credit should be given where it is due, try George Bush talking about this in 2005.

Maybe Snowden slept from 2005 to 2013."

You posted #45

"
Speaking of sleeping....where where you in 2004?

This is from a bio on Judge Kollar-Kotelly on wikipedia: One of her 'notable' cases:


On July 14, 2004, barely two months after President Bush was forced to end NSA domestic internet metadata collection by Attorney General John Ashcroft, Kollar-Kotelly issued a FISA court order allowing the NSA to resume unconstitutional domestic internet metadata collection. "


I posted #84


"84. Did Snowden go a press conference in 2005 and say the records were being examined?

I was speaking to the fact George Bush gave the information in 2005 and if my calculations serves me correctly this was before GG came out with his column and Snowden claimed he was the one in 2013, as you say just saying, please proceed Snappy. "

You posted #87

"
87. Gave what information in 2005? I have no idea what Snowden

was doing in 2005. Actually, in re-reading your post I find it incoherent."


I don't understand why it is so difficult for you to understand George Bush spoke of collecting phone call data in a press conference in the year of 2005 and to have some apparently think the first release of this type of information occurred in 2013. So many wants to give credit to Snowden for revealing this information, I said the credit should go to Bush since he gave this information well before Snowden did.

[limpyhobbler]

10. racist, libertarian government hater!.. a real traitor

.
.

.
..
.
...

[Demeter]

11. I Expect the WORLD will be thanking Snowden Publicly and Frequently

and the Nobel Committee will fund his exile...with a Peace Prize. Perhaps shared with Manning?

We are going to need a whole new category of awards for such brave souls.

[snappyturtle]

48. What a stellar and noble idea. I hope it happens! nt

[DJ13]

80. Obama's not using his, we could give him that one

[truedelphi]

166. I believe here in the USA, there is a National Association of News Reporter awards

The award exists, but can't find my notes about the exact title of the award.

It is highly coveted, and it means not only that the reporter was awesome, but before the nominated story and article can receive the award, it is carefully vetted. that way, the reporter not only gets a great award, but they can tell the numerous Establishment detractors, "Every word of my article has been independently vetted, and was found to be true."

I found this out when listening to indie reporter Peter Byrne and his account of writing about Diane Feinstein's corrupt policies, an article he wrote back in 2006.

[WillyT]

14. HUGE K & R !!!

[forestpath]

15. knr

[Arctic Dave]

16. It's as if I felt millions heads exploding at once.

[Luminous Animal]

55. With exploded heads they have to figure out how to discredit Mr. Robinson.

[cantbeserious]

17. K&R - Thank You For Sharing

eom

[bullwinkle428]

19. With apologies to the late Freddie Mercury -

"And another one goes,
And another one goes,
Yes another one goes under the bus!"

K&R.

[DeSwiss]

23. K&R

[burnodo]

26. Watch out!

You may be accused of adoration!

[DeSwiss]

28. I do adore being informed!!!

Like this guy used to:

Protect Whistleblowers: Often the best source of information about waste, fraud, and abuse in government is an existing government employee committed to public integrity and willing to speak out. Such acts of courage and patriotism, which can sometimes save lives and often save taxpayer dollars, should be encouraged rather than stifled. We need to empower federal employees as watchdogs of wrongdoing and partners in performance. Barack Obama will strengthen whistleblower laws to protect federal workers who expose waste, fraud, and abuse of authority in government. Obama will ensure that federal agencies expedite the process for reviewing whistleblower claims and whistleblowers have full access to courts and due process. ~Barack Obama, Change.gov. 2008

[burnodo]

38. that was nth-dimensional Obama!

He meant GOVERNMENT whistleblowers...you know, those exposing GOVERNMENT fraud, waste, and abuse. Not those exposing the government's OWN waste, fraud and abuse. The distinction without a difference is very important in your assessment of Obama's n-th dimensional maneuvering

[DeSwiss]

42. Oh, I think he meant to include contracted-employees as well back then....

...but he was thinking of people who steal [font color=gray]paperclips[/font], [font color=orange]post-it notes[/font] and [font color=red]red staplers[/font].

[20score]

59. Great find! Thanks.

[DeSwiss]

71. De nada.

[treestar]

53. They are not "snooping"

It is ridiculous that this is being made such a deal of.

[think]

73. The NSA would never snoop on anyone or lie before congress....

or hide crimes behind classified documents....

Never ever ever! They promise!

[think]

63. Snowden should've been a good spy & just kidnapped someone & tortured them

instead of whistle blowing.

Then no one would care what the fuck he did and let him just "disappear"......

[DeSwiss]

69. It's been tried:

- Even the kidnappers are being convicted and boy are they pissed!

“It’s always the minions of the federal government who are thrown under the bus by officials who consistently violate international law and sometimes domestic law and who are all immune from prosecution. Their lives are fine. They’re making millions of dollars sitting on corporate boards.”

The former CIA operative, she resigned from the agency in 2009, says that the rendition program was approved of at the highest levels but that those officials—including President Bush, Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, and CIA Director George Tenet—will never be held accountable.

“I find this coverup so egregious," she said when asked about her decision to speak out now. "That’s why I find it really important to talk about this. Look at the lives ruined, including that of Abu Omar. And I was caught in the crossfire of anger directed at U.S. policy.” ~Former CIA operative Sabrina De Sousa

[think]

78. Yes in Italy ,but she fears US prosecution for speaking out not for

the torture and kidnapping that she would be discussing:

U.S. allowed Italian kidnap prosecution to shield higher-ups, ex-CIA officer says

By Jonathan S. Landay | McClatchy Washington Bureau

~Snip~

My life has been hell,” De Sousa said, explaining that her Italian conviction left her career in ruins, crippled her ability to find a good paying private-sector job and left her liable to arrest abroad. Her resignation, which she submitted after the CIA barred her from visiting her ailing, elderly mother in Goa for Christmas, and then refused to fly her mother to the United States, left her without a pension.

“In addition to losing your pension, you’re blacklisted in Washington,” De Sousa said. “Anyone who has anything to do with the agency will never hire you. I lost my clearances.”

Asked why she’d agreed to be interviewed, De Sousa replied, “I find this coverup so egregious. That’s why I find it really important to talk about this. Look at the lives ruined, including that of Abu Omar. And I was caught in the crossfire of anger directed at U.S. policy.”

Now, she noted, she also could face prosecution in the United States for revealing what she has. “You’ve seen what’s happened lately to anyone who has tried to disclose anything,” she said.

But her treatment, she said, provides a warning to U.S. employees serving around the world. If they get prosecuted while doing their jobs, she said, “You have no protection whatsoever. Zero.”

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/07/27/197823/us-allowed-italian-kidnap-prosecution.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter#.Ufclfm2f7ax#storylink=cpy

[DeSwiss]

81. I think she fears being killed. :-| n/t

[Ichingcarpenter]

102. When I posted that story did you see how fast it was

attacked and marginalized as being not recent and irrelevant?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023353283

[DeSwiss]

125. Actually.....

...due to my previous encounters with what now passes for democratically-thinking members of the DU, I only saw a smattering of the 59 replies since all the other responders are now safely gagged in my I-Bin along with all the other white noise makers.

But I know what you mean.

- Just keep hacking away and telling the TRUTH. They'll wake up eventually......

[MrMickeysMom]

77. I've come to expect that speaking truth to power will always be vilified...

We surely are having the conversation we need.


Look at the post count, and it's clear that we NEED to take a hard look, which would be impossible, were it not for the whistle blowers

[ecstatic]

83. Why did you put Eugene's name in caps?

Is he the ultimate authority now? Not trying to be sarcastic... Just curious.

[malokvale77]

89. Are you really that obtuse...

Or just pretending?

[polynomial]

85. The really good deal

From my view there are some people who do not sense that this NSA Meta data collection is epoch making. What puzzles me is to know that a very connected one percent type business like Booz Allen and Hamilton can secretly collect a huge meta data base likely about millions of regular citizens.

The behavior pattern of America can be built into a distribution form with incredible accuracy for decision making. Not only for Homeland security but also for marketing, banking, personal habits, you name it just about anything can be patterned from just connected Meta data information.

The calculus is potentially very powerful political characterization of local areas would too tempt to pass up. Talk about the marketing end, it cannot be dismissed that our very own Mainstream media likely has an inside connection to all this Meta data stuff.

So here we have the basic definition of too big to fail. Certainly when wiretaps are secret, plus the whole job done under cover would be so compelling for all sorts of profiteering minds scramble to invest in bribery, blackmail, and fraud. It’s the best news making material your tax money can buy.

[Luminous Animal]

98. K&R

[Douglas Carpenter]

104. knr

[spicegal]

105. Frankly, the govt is the least of your worries. Loss of privacy is the price we pay for living in a

high tech society. If you want privacy, cut off every device that allows any type of personal surveillance, i.e., any social media, phone, computer, etc. I just listened to an interview with a guy on NPR who tried to do that, while still having the tools to do his job. He cut out a lot, but couldn't make it to 100%. And it wasn't the government "spying" on him.

[DCBob]

106. Eugene is right as always.. but..

Snowden still broke the law. There are legal avenues for whistleblowers... Snowden chose not to take them and is now paying the price.

[Civilization2]

113. "The spooks don’t decide how far is too far. We do." hell yeah, too bad we have not control over,.

then at all though.

It be hard to control secret group in secret organisations, that do secret spying, under secret authorization that makes it legal.

[Capt. Obvious]

119. Jesus H Cracker

Last edited Tue Jul 30, 2013, 09:41 AM - Edit history (1)

I finally put that bot on ignore - and this thread is much more readable.

[justiceischeap]

123. I'd rather thank PBS' Frontline program from 2007, "Spying on the Home Front"

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/homefront/

Snowden's "revelations" were not new.

[ljm2002]

145. So is there a statute of limitations...

...a specified time period during which we are allowed to become concerned and discuss such things? If we don't have the discussion within the specified time period, then too bad but it's too late to either discuss it or do something about it?

Even IF you were correct about the revelations not being new, it is entirely, 100% irrelevant.

[justiceischeap]

150. What IS relevant is that this isn't new information

Hell, if you want to talk about American's being spied on you need to go back to J. Edgar Hoover (maybe even earlier). Does that make it right to spy on American's? No, but this isn't a new development. Our government has been spying on us for a very long time.

So, I prefer not to give "props" to some guy who, depending on what you read, may have had ulterior motives in doing what he's done. I also have a problem with Snowden being held up as a whistleblower or some kind of hero when we haven't a clue what information he may or may not have given to China and Russia. Does he get a pass if he shared information that puts undercover operatives in harms way? Does he get a pass if he told them information they shouldn't have or are you one of those people who think spying on foreign countries is bad too?

The point of my original comment is that Frontline, in 2007, told us the same information that Snowden did this year, without the ambiguity of possibly passing on other secrets to foreign nations.

[ljm2002]

154. That is exactly what is not relevant...

...it really doesn't matter when these things were first revealed.

I don't have a problem with people believing Snowden was wrong to do what he did. People do have different viewpoints on the matter. What chaps my hide, though, is the assertion that we knew about it before so why are we talking about it now?

We are talking about it now because Snowden and Greenwald managed to bring the issue to the forefront. Now it is true, the timing is inconvenient for the present Administration; and it is true, Obama's hands may be somewhat tied on this issue, in that he is both a Democratic President and the first black President. It would be very, very hard for him to try and dismantle a lot of the security apparatus that has been constructed over the years. I get that.

But the bottom line for me is, it's Constitutional, or it's not. I fall into the camp that says it's not, that there has been a severe overreach by the NSA. Getting metadata of all calls, domestic and foreign, is not acceptable to me. So whatever Snowden's motivations are, or Greenwald's motivations are, and whatever hay the right can make and whatever damage this might do to Obama's presidency, are side issues. But again: when it comes to the right making hay, and damage to Obama's presidency, yes I wish it were not so. But that is not reason enough to sweep this under the rug yet again.

[justiceischeap]

163. I don't disagree with any of your points

but it seems to me people weren't paying attention in 2007 when this was first spoken about. That's my only contention with this. Snowden didn't "break" this story and neither did Greenwald. I think both are getting too much credit for something akin to a game of "telephone." That's the only point I was making with my original comment. It makes me wonder if more people were paying attention in 2007, we would be this far along in the metadata collection or would we have been just as collectively outraged then?

[xchrom]

126. du rec.

[KoKo]

127. Recommend.

[DirtyDawg]

130. Seems to me...

...that the issue is whether or not our Government is actually listening to conversations - even capturing them for future review - or just maintaining the records of calls/emails/etc. to like them to others under investigation. I don't see a problem with the latter, especially, after all the folks on Law & Order have been 'checking the LUDs', and if Lennie Briscoe could do it then what could be wrong with it? And furthermore, all the damned storage space to capture and keep everything seems an absolute impossibly idiotic exercise...and if we still have a problem with the Guv doing I then change the 'ownership' of the data to the corporations that capture it in the first place...which I expect they already do and just charge them a fee to manage it...see?

[ljm2002]

146. My impression is...

...that they track the metadata for every call or email, and rely on the telecomms to keep the actual calls for a certain period of time. Then if they need to expand out to listen to the call or read the email, they can track back to the telecomm's records to pull up the content.

So the government does not have to store the entire content itself.

That is how I think it could easily be done.

[D23MIURG23]

131. BUT BUT BUT... SNOWDEN IS A LIBERTARIAN!!

That makes him practically the same thing as Alex Jones!!!

[Skittles]

134. Mr. Robinson is a critical thinker

yes INDEED

[sofa king]

136. God damn it, WE ALREADY KNEW!!!

Every single damned one of you who has been reading DU has seen MORE information than was "revealed" by Snowden in the years 2005-2009.

I have yet to see a single disclosure from Snowden that was not previously reported right the hell here.

There is a very, very dangerous deception afoot, here. The Snowden disclosures are being repeatedly bashed over the heads of the American public to make them forget that all of Snowden's disclosures were previously reported, more or less as it happened, while the Bush Administration feloniously expanded domestic spying and lied about it.

There is a reason for that, and I'm pretty sure it has to do with the fact that the Bush Administration used NSA to read all of John Kerry's plans in the 2004 election.

The only way you can allow yourselves to believe that Snowden's revelations are new and important is if you also allow yourselves to believe that the Bush Administration was telling the truth when they lied their asses off to all of us, every day, for years, and destroyed any journalist who dared to contradict them.

[Deb]

139. What you said...

I feel like logging in just to respond with "DUPE" to those threads.
DU, where the old becomes new once again.

[ljm2002]

147. I'm going to keep harping on this:

Is there a statute of limitations, after which we are no longer allowed to question something? So if the government has been spying on us for the last 10 years, and we all sorta kinda knew it, but then someone comes along and focuses our attention on the issue -- you seem to be saying too bad, too late, we already knew and we did not freak about it so there's just nothing we can do now but accept it.

I will never subscribe to that viewpoint. Therefore, whether or not we "already knew" everything that Snowden has revealed, it is completely irrelevant to the issue at hand.

[sofa king]

148. It is entirely relevant.

This story is an elaborate exercise in perception management, arranged by the very people who perpetrated these crimes.

The purpose of it is to shift the onus of blame upon this Presidency and what is happening now, now that it has been painstakingly made legal--after the fact.that the Bush Administration forged and pursued these same policies in a completely illegal fashion.

Legal now. Not legal then. If you want to talk about now, then god damn it, we had better be talking about how to prosecute the people who did it then.

And yet we are not talking about that, are we?

[ljm2002]

151. Nonsense.

If your concern is our civil rights, and whether massive domestic surveillance by the NSA is acceptable, then whether it was known about 1 year ago or 10 years ago or 20 years ago is 100% irrelevant.

If your concern is defending the current President no matter what, then yes, I can see how the timing would be a concern. That does not, however, even begin to prove there is any intent to undermine this President.

Furthermore, EVEN IF there were players whose intent was to undermine this President -- and yes, there may be such players -- that still is not relevant to the issue of massive domestic surveillance.

Right is right, and wrong is wrong, and that is true regardless of who is in office.

[sofa king]

155. Yes, and just how would you dismantle it?

Would you dismantle it by forgiving the Bush Administration for what they have done? Because that is what we are doing by pretending we all just found out about this.

The way to dismantle it is to fucking destroy the people who created this policy, illegally, in secret, for unknown and unstated purposes, and then begin dismantling the current legal framework which was hastily thrown up, using the prosecutions as political and legal ballast.

But so long as we don't talk about prosecuting those who clearly violated the law, all the talk about our imaginary civil rights today is bullshit.

[ljm2002]

157. You ask, "Would you dismantle it"...

...by forgiving the Bush Administration for what they have done?"

and then claim "that is what we are doing by pretending we all just found out about this."

First: I'm not the one "forgiving the Bush Administration". Those of us who object to the massive surveillance state are not the ones who are "forgiving the Bush Administration". You want to know who really did forgive the Bush Administration? That would be Obama and his administration, when they refused to do any prosecutions of the previous administration for any reason whatever. "Looking forward", I think was the reason we were given. So your line of argument there, just doesn't fly.

Second: No one is "pretending we all just found out about this." We have now had our suspicions verified and our attention focused on this issue. And there was no guarantee that would happen; other whistle blowers have come before Edward Snowden, but none of them was able to be effective in creating a debate on this issue. Also, even if your accusation here were true, it is irrelevant to the issue of the massive surveillance state.

Now I agree wholeheartedly we should dismantle the current legal framework, and I'm all for destroying the people who created this abomination (legally destroying them, that is). So sure, let's talk about prosecuting these people. But if our civil rights are imaginary, as you say, then what grounds would we have to do so? In fact, our civil rights will become imaginary in a hurry if we cease to defend them.

You seem to be a bit confused.

[randome]

159. You first need to cite evidence of this 'massive surveillance state'.

Granted, maybe it exists. But the documents S&G stole and printed show no evidence of illegality or abuse.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[ljm2002]

161. First of all...

...legality vs. illegality is not the issue. The telecom companies were granted retroactive immunity from prosecution, with the new law making their previously illegal behavior legal.

Re: "no evidence ... of abuse". Really? We already know that spooks listened in on private conversations of our troops with their significant others:

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/exclusive-inside-account-us-eavesdropping-americans/story?id=5987804

Exclusive: Inside Account of U.S. Eavesdropping on Americans

So yeah, I am concerned.

[randome]

167. Another Bush, Jr. illegality.

Among many. Has nothing to do with the documents S&G stole.

[Hubert Flottz]

138. I couldn't agree more with EUGENE ROBINSON!

IMHO, Edward Snowden did the best he knew how, to defend our American Democracy. It's a god damned shame our "Leaders" don't defend him for being the type of patriot, that they all took an oath to be. The kind of patriot that defends the Constitution of the USA the best way he can. What really pisses me off, is that Obama doesn't bring this man to the White House and give him a medal. Instead Obama is willing to hunt this man down, for telling us the truth, about what our secret government is doing to us behind our backs, with our tax dollars.

This country has gone to the PIGS!

[Puzzledtraveller]

140. k&r

[Fantastic Anarchist]

143. We're gonna need a new bus ...

[Kolesar]

153. ... for the sophomoric drama

of the bored chair occupants.

[tavalon]

149. I do thank him

[GiaGiovanni]

160. Interesting. Thank you.