PRISM

[ZenGum]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/04/us...nail-mail.html

Mr. Pickering was targeted by a longtime surveillance system called mail covers, a forerunner of a vastly more expansive effort, the Mail Isolation Control and Tracking program, in which Postal Service computers photograph the exterior of every piece of paper mail that is processed in the United States — about 160 billion pieces last year. It is not known how long the government saves the images.

It's not just your email and phone meta data. The old system of "mail covers" (where the USPS would record the metadata for snail mail of specific addresses upon the individual request of law agencies) has been expanded to automatic collection of all snail mail metadata.

Happy 4th of July, guys. Enjoy your independence and freedom.

[Lamplighter]

My question was supposed to be rhetorical.

Originally Posted by Lamplighter

<snip>
My hypothetical would be to change only the timing in his example.
Instead of urgency, the terrorists use the postal services of each country.

So now, would that justify a government database of the addresses
and return addresses on every piece of mail handled by the post office ?
Who knows, maybe such already exists.
<snip>

[tw]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

So how do you get more specific information without spying?

We know that terrorist attacks were routinely averted without spying; that may 'violate civil rights' and other nation's integrity and interests. An LAX bomber was caught by an alert Border Agent while to cross from British Columbia to Washington. Because the leader in Washington was told lights were flashing red. And therefore ordered all government agencies to be vigilant. The resulting capture then may averted a potential Time Square bombing, a bombing in Canada was averted, an attack on the Raddison in Aman Jordan was averted, and an attack on tourists in Egypt was averted.

Not averted was the bombing of the USS The Sullivans. But those terrorists overloaded their boat with explosives causing that boat to sink.

Because they completely ignored warnings - the same flashing red lights - then George Jr's administration did nothing to avert 11 September. Then used it as an excuse for unlimited spying, extraordinary rendition, secret prisons, holding over 600 innocent people in Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, Mission Accomplished, and even performing torture (as if acting like a Nazi Gestapo agent was acceptable).

We have numerous despicable and illegal actions to undo or discover. Many were ongoing because they were kept secret (as WikiLeaks demonstrated) or because their actions involve new technologies not yet defined by laws (in a Congress with many who say they want America to fail).

The Eagle and the Snowman was because the US government intentionally tried to subvert presidential elections in Australia. Because the powers that be knew a socialist must be a communist. Many leaks occurred because government actions were contemptuous. Ie Viet Nam resulted in the Pentagon Papers. Watergate and all other Nixon activities were finally exposed by people doing what would otherwise be called illegal.

Nobody can yet honestly say whether Snowden is a traitor or a hero. Too many facts are unknown; and maybe for years.

But we do know that major attacks are easily averted with less intelligence gathering and more intelligence in the leadership. Most failures to avert such attacks are found in leadership; not in insufficient spying.

We have examples of attacks averted because the leadership was intelligent. And other attacks permitted because the leadership was inspired by rhetoric rather than their job.

We must still publicly decide the limits of electronic spying. That (and not Snowden) should be an entire discussion that so many are still trying to avoid.

[sexobon]

Originally Posted by tw

We know that terrorist attacks were routinely averted without spying; that may 'violate civil rights' and other nation's [nations'] integrity and interests. ...

We also know that terrorists are adaptive and smart enough to exploit any limitations we impose upon ourselves. So are drug cartels, human trafficking organizations, global MBAs ... etc. [I threw MBAs in there just for you.]

Originally Posted by tw

... Nobody can yet honestly say whether Snowden is a traitor or a hero. Too many facts are unknown; and maybe for years. ...

Maybe not for years. Maybe we could find out in months by putting him on trial and letting the discovery process work. Heroes welcome that process, traitors shun it. If he's found to be a hero, he'll be exonerated. If he's found to be a traitor; but, later proved to be a hero, he can be pardoned. If we had to wait until all of the possibilities played out before even beginning the process, every petty thief claiming to be a Robin Hood would be walking free.

Originally Posted by tw

... But we do know that major attacks are easily averted with less intelligence gathering and more intelligence in the leadership. Most failures to avert such attacks are found in leadership; not in insufficient spying. ...

We know that our top general leadership, which also appoints subordinate specializing leaders, is derived from a popularity contest, not an intelligence contest. Increased spying is a compensating mechanism used by people capable of adjusting to this fact as oppose to people who can't and just complain about it. The cognoscenti know the mechanism works, just not as well as having more intelligent leaders. Adults can accept not being privy to how and when it has worked in the interest of continued success, others just poo poo the whole idea because they're not privy.

Originally Posted by tw

... We must still publicly decide the limits of electronic spying. That (and not Snowden) should be an entire discussion that so many are still trying to avoid. ...

They should both be an entire discussion. The limits of electronic spying needs to be discussed for all the reasons given in this thread. Snowden et al. needs to be discussed to protect altruistic citizens from their own government. Adults can handle both conversations:

On the issue of leaking classified information - We have specialized courts for everything from contesting traffic violations to immigrant sanctuary status. Even the hard-nosed US military can take someone who has refused to fight, find them to be a conscientious objector and simply separate them from service. Perhaps we need specialized courts for those claiming whistleblower status. Courts that can not only adjudicate; but, recommend directly to the President whether or not a pardon is warranted even if the law was broken. This would help maintain confidence in the integrity of our security methods for those whose lives depend directly upon them (e.g. military personnel) and the population at large which can pressure the President to act on the court's recommendations.

The alternative would be going back to compartmentalized information if the government decides the compromise of shared information is potentially more dangerous to national security than the limitations of compartmentalization in preventing terrorist attacks. This would also make it once again more difficult for those with altruistic motives to uncover government abuse of power.

On the issue of government monitoring - After a reasonable time period following recent events, the government should poll the American people via the US Census taking apparatus using a questionnaire covering "hypothetical" monitoring methods. The questions would cover monitoring methods previously used, currently used, others currently available, and viable wish list methods for which the technology may not yet even exist without disclosing which category each falls into. Next to each method would be three pair of Yes/No check boxes. One each for: 1) Do you object to the government using this method on you? 2) Do you object to the government using this method on people in other countries? 3) Would you want our enemies to know if we did this (public disclosure)? The results of the poll could be made public since it contains hypothetical capabilities and the world already knows the US government doesn't always fall in line with the majority of Americans. People can vote for elected officials who endorse it.

Less criticism and I told you so(s) and more constructive criticism with proposed solutions is what we need. A) A Whistleblower Court that can take defendants into protective custody least intrusive on their civil liberties until final disposition of their cases. B) Three criteria polling on government's potential monitoring methods administered via the US Census taking apparatus. That's my . What's yours?

[tw]

Unfortunately WE don't have sufficient facts to even guess where the boundaries should be. But we do know the boundaries do not exist when intelligence services take all information. And then say, we will not look at it unless the super secret court says we can.

The telco companies and others, including Google and Microsoft, want to tell a US public what they have been forced to surrender. We cannot even know that. Without even that information, then we have few if any facts to define the boundaries. The 'secret' government is hiding behind its skirts to even keep such facts from most Senators and Congressmen. And was even denying the Supreme Court access to such information - on a theory that it is National Security.

Even the President does not know unless he asks the right questions. This is, in part, a legacy of Cheney who subverted intelligence so egregiously that the intelligence community became even more secretive and less forecoming. Even a cover up of torture and extraordinary rendition became normal operations.

BTW, a November voting booth (not the Census) is where public plebiscites are best enacted. Unfortunately, some (ie California's Propositions) get subverted by a legacy of their original purpose. But we have a bigger problem. Insufficient information. And a system that will make excuses to keep us ill informed. Because even secret prisons and torture made that secrecy necessary and routine.

[Lamplighter]

But we have a bigger problem. Insufficient information

Now TW, you're just trying to be ironic again.

[Undertoad]

Because the leader in Washington was told lights were flashing red.

How was this determined?

[ZenGum]

at lamplighter

The 'secret' government is hiding behind its skirts to even keep such facts from most Senators and Congressmen.

I can't find the link, but there were stories about a few days back, that there had been a special briefing for congress on the NSA matters. However, it was just at the end of a congressional sitting session, and more than half of your duly elected representatives chose to skip the presentation rather than miss their scheduled flights back home.

I mean, not like it was important or anything.

[ZenGum]

Okay, I'll admit that when I started this thread, I was not clear about what was going on and what was properly controversial and what was not.

This article from the New York Times captures what I think is most worrying. It is the failure of the oversight mechanisms (esp FISA) that are supposed to keep bodies like the NSA in check.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/07/us...rs-of-nsa.html

The 11-member Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, known as the FISA court, was once mostly focused on approving case-by-case wiretapping orders. But since major changes in legislation and greater judicial oversight of intelligence operations were instituted six years ago, it has quietly become almost a parallel Supreme Court, serving as the ultimate arbiter on surveillance issues and delivering opinions that will most likely shape intelligence practices for years to come, the officials said.

SNIP

Unlike the Supreme Court, the FISA court hears from only one side in the case — the government — and its findings are almost never made public. A Court of Review is empaneled to hear appeals, but that is known to have happened only a handful of times in the court’s history, and no case has ever been taken to the Supreme Court. In fact, it is not clear in all circumstances whether Internet and phone companies that are turning over the reams of data even have the right to appear before the FISA court.

[sexobon]

Just whistle while you work (whistling)
Just whistleblow while you work (downloading)
And cheerfully together we can tidy up the place
And covertly together we can empty out the place
So hum a merry tune (humming)
So tell a secret or two (uploading)
It won't take long when there's a song to help you set the pace
It won't take long to right their wrong and help you save the day

And as you sweep the room
And as you leave the room
Imagine that the broom is someone that you love
Imagine that the gloom is someone else's doom
And soon you'll find you're dancing to the tune
But soon you'll find you're singing another tune
When hearts are high the time will fly so whistle while you work...
When treason is high the reasons won't fly so whistleblow while you work...

[xoxoxoBruce]

Because the leader in Washington was told lights were flashing red.

Originally Posted by Undertoad

How was this determined?

Stop asking rational questions.

[Lamplighter]

HIGH TREASON
by José Emilio Pacheco
translation of “Alta traición” and comments by Dave Bonta

I don’t love my country. Her abstract glory eludes me.


But (this may sound bad) I would give my life


for ten of her places, for certain people,


ports, pine forests, fortresses,

for a ruined city, gray and monstrous,


for several of her historical figures,


for mountains — and three or four rivers.

[Lamplighter]

Originally Posted by ZenGum

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/04/us...nail-mail.html<snip>
It's not just your email and phone meta data.
<snip>

I continue to be astounded by the vast array of resources being used in NSA surveillance programs.
It's as if someone said, Let's tap every possible way that people can communicate with one another.

To wit:




Washington Post
7/10/13

The NSA slide you haven’t seen

A classified NSA slide obtained by The Washington Post and
published here for the first time lists “Two Types of Collection.”

One is PRISM, the NSA program that collects information from technology companies,
which was first revealed in reports by the Post and Britain’s Guardian newspaper last month.

The slide also shows a separate category labeled “Upstream,” described as
accessing “communications on fiber cables and infrastructure as data flows past.”

The interaction between Upstream and PRISM
— which could be considered “downstream” collection because the data is already processed by tech companies —
is not entirely clear from the slide.
In addition, its description of PRISM as “collection directly from the servers”
of technology giants such as Google, Microsoft and Facebook has been disputed
by many of the companies involved. (They say access to user data is legal and limited).
<snip>

The slide also shows a crude map of the undersea cable network that
carries data from either side of North America and onto the rest of the world.
As a story in Sunday’s Post made clear, these undersea cables are essential
to worldwide data flows – and to the surveillance capabilities of the U.S. government and its allies.

The Post version lists Fairview, Stormbrew, Blarney and Oakstar but does not describe any of them.
The Guardian slide lists Fairview and Blarney but has two others blacked out.

The Post has previously reported that Blarney gathers up metadata –
describing who is speaking to whom and through what networks and devices
– as data flows through the Internet’s backbone.[

/

Has anyone seen Madam Defarge's knitting lately ?

.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Snowdon's a fool, otherwise he'd have headed straight for where the US government can't touch him...

Wall Street.

[piercehawkeye45]

Snowden made an appearance today and his remarks are below:

Hello. My name is Ed Snowden. A little over one month ago, I had family, a home in paradise, and I lived in great comfort. I also had the capability without any warrant to search for, seize, and read your communications. Anyone’s communications at any time. That is the power to change people’s fates.

It is also a serious violation of the law. The 4th and 5th Amendments to the Constitution of my country, Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and numerous statutes and treaties forbid such systems of massive, pervasive surveillance. While the US Constitution marks these programs as illegal, my government argues that secret court rulings, which the world is not permitted to see, somehow legitimize an illegal affair. These rulings simply corrupt the most basic notion of justice – that it must be seen to be done. The immoral cannot be made moral through the use of secret law.

I believe in the principle declared at Nuremberg in 1945: "Individuals have international duties which transcend the national obligations of obedience. Therefore individual citizens have the duty to violate domestic laws to prevent crimes against peace and humanity from occurring."
Accordingly, I did what I believed right and began a campaign to correct this wrongdoing. I did not seek to enrich myself. I did not seek to sell US secrets. I did not partner with any foreign government to guarantee my safety. Instead, I took what I knew to the public, so what affects all of us can be discussed by all of us in the light of day, and I asked the world for justice.

That moral decision to tell the public about spying that affects all of us has been costly, but it was the right thing to do and I have no regrets.
Since that time, the government and intelligence services of the United States of America have attempted to make an example of me, a warning to all others who might speak out as I have. I have been made stateless and hounded for my act of political expression. The United States Government has placed me on no-fly lists. It demanded Hong Kong return me outside of the framework of its laws, in direct violation of the principle of non-refoulement – the Law of Nations. It has threatened with sanctions countries who would stand up for my human rights and the UN asylum system. It has even taken the unprecedented step of ordering military allies to ground a Latin American president’s plane in search for a political refugee. These dangerous escalations represent a threat not just to the dignity of Latin America, but to the basic rights shared by every person, every nation, to live free from persecution, and to seek and enjoy asylum.

Yet even in the face of this historically disproportionate aggression, countries around the world have offered support and asylum. These nations, including Russia, Venezuela, Bolivia, Nicaragua, and Ecuador have my gratitude and respect for being the first to stand against human rights violations carried out by the powerful rather than the powerless. By refusing to compromise their principles in the face of intimidation, they have earned the respect of the world. It is my intention to travel to each of these countries to extend my personal thanks to their people and leaders.

I announce today my formal acceptance of all offers of support or asylum I have been extended and all others that may be offered in the future. With, for example, the grant of asylum provided by Venezuela’s President Maduro, my asylee status is now formal, and no state has a basis by which to limit or interfere with my right to enjoy that asylum. As we have seen, however, some governments in Western European and North American states have demonstrated a willingness to act outside the law, and this behavior persists today. This unlawful threat makes it impossible for me to travel to Latin America and enjoy the asylum granted there in accordance with our shared rights.

This willingness by powerful states to act extra-legally represents a threat to all of us, and must not be allowed to succeed. Accordingly, I ask for your assistance in requesting guarantees of safe passage from the relevant nations in securing my travel to Latin America, as well as requesting asylum in Russia until such time as these states accede to law and my legal travel is permitted. I will be submitting my request to Russia today, and hope it will be accepted favorably.

If you have any questions, I will answer what I can.

Thank you.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slate...in_russia.html