Obama on Surveillance: "We Can and Must Be More Transparent" 537
Today President Obama held a press conference to address the situation surrounding the NSA's surveillance activities. (Here is the full transcript.) He announced four actions the administration is undertaking to restore the public's confidence in the intelligence community. Obama plans to work with Congress to reform the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to give greater weight to civil liberties, and to revisit section 215 of the PATRIOT Act, which is the section that allowed bulk collection of phone records. (Of course, "will work with Congress" is a vague term, and Congress isn't known for getting things done lately. Thus, it remains to be seen if anything substantive happens.) Obama is ordering the Dept. of Justice to make public their legal rationale for data collection, and there will be a new NSA official dedicated to transparency efforts. There will also be a new website for citizens to learn about transparency in intelligence agencies. Lastly, a group of outside experts will be convened to review the government's surveillance capabilities. Their job will include figuring out how to maintain the public's trust and prevent abuse, and to consider how the intelligence community's actions will affect foreign policy. In addition to these initiatives, President Obama made his position very clear about several different aspects of this controversy. While acknowledging that "we have significant capabilities," he said, "America is not interested in spying on ordinary people." He added that the people who have raised concerns about privacy and government overreach in a lawful manner are "patriots." This is in stark contrast to his view of leakers like Edward Snowden: "I don't think Mr. Snowden was a patriot." (For his part, Snowden says the recent shut down of encrypted email services is 'inspiring.') When asked about how his opinion of the surveillance programs have changed, he said his perception of them has not evolved since the story broke worldwide. "What you're not seeing is people actually abusing these programs." Obama also endorsed finding technological solutions that will protect privacy regardless of what government agencies want to do.
Better idea, shut it down - it's illegal.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Nuff said.
We Can and Must Be More Transparent (Score:5, Insightful)
Except that we all know he's actually talking about the PEOPLE being made more transparent, NOT the Government.
Experts (Score:5, Insightful)
Secret Courts (Score:5, Insightful)
When the secret courts are open to public review and observation there might be more transparency and trust. Till then it's just smoke and mirror talk.
Hope and Change (Score:5, Insightful)
was replaced by Fear and Lies on January 20, 2009. Anyone who thinks anything Obama says (or does) will result in your privacy being respected and warrantless surveillance ended is delusional.
Results (Score:5, Insightful)
Awesome (Score:5, Insightful)
Their job will include figuring out how to maintain the public's trust and prevent abuse
Isn't it a little late for that?
Short of stopping indiscriminate surveillance, but that does not seem to be in the cards.
Dont kid yourselves Obamabots (Score:1, Insightful)
Obama is part of the abuse.
Transparency is good (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Experts (Score:5, Insightful)
Likely, yes.
I don't believe a single thing about this is going to change, they're just trying to manage the message and sell it to us.
But given how many public statements about this have been contradicted within a week or two by other facts, I fully expect this to be more of the same -- "Honestly, we're not doing it. OK, maybe we're doing it, but we're doing it under strict control. OK, maybe we're doing other things that we don't want to admit to. Hey look, a pony".
The O in Obama stands for Zero Credibility (Score:5, Insightful)
"What you're not seeing is people actually abusing these programs." - Obama.
You're not seeing the abuse, therefore it's not happening. Good one. Alternatively, the system IS the abuse, and we're all very well aware of it now, thanks to that courageous Mr. Snowden.
By the way, it's not OK to spy on Americans, but it is fine to invade the privacy of everyone else on the planet? Hmm. As a non-American, I can't say I agree.
Transparency (Score:5, Insightful)
Transparency is not the issue. Constitutionality is.
A lost case (Score:0, Insightful)
I seldom call someone stupid. But if someone that voted on Obama, still thinks any good of him, then I would call that person stupid. It's very clear that the man is lost.
Fox in the henhouse (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd have a lot more trust in Obama if he weren't the one responsible for ramping it up to the level it is today. (If not, remind me again where the buck stops?)
Also, of course they're not interested in "ordinary" people. The instant they're interested in you, you're no longer ordinary.
Imagine Snowden was some political candidate's nephew. And imagine that, instead of leaking details of the entire operation to the press, he leaked details of the other candidate's campaign strategies (or sexual exploits) back to his uncle. You know, like the Watergate breakins?
If a junior flunky can do that sort of thing and get away with it, what makes you think it's not standard operating procedure?
The NSA has the power to utterly control the entire political process with an iron grip -- and that's before we start to worry about political dissidents being extraordinarily renditioned.
If Obama truly wanted to "address the situation," he'd completely dismantle the NSA. But, somehow, even if he truly wanted to, I rather doubt the NSA would let him....
Cheers,
&
Re:Better idea, shut it down - it's illegal.... (Score:2, Insightful)
What Obama didn't say... (Score:5, Insightful)
"What you're not seeing is people actually abusing (Score:5, Insightful)
> "What you're not seeing is people actually abusing these programs."
That's like saying, it is OK for the government to keep a loaded gun pointed at the head of every citizen because they haven't shot anyone.
Then Why Is It? (Score:5, Insightful)
"America is not interested in spying on ordinary people."
Then why is it? Why is it storing the metadata on every call and every HTTP request everyone makes? Is everyone not ordinary, or is America doing things in which it is not interested? I'm guessing it is option 3: You have redefined spying as "not spying" in your twisted little lawyer brain, to which I say, "Screw you, you forked-tongue traitor."
Ignoring the U.S. Constitution = not abuse? (Score:5, Insightful)
When asked about how his opinion of the surveillance programs have changed, he said his perception of them have not evolved since the story broke worldwide. "What you're not seeing is people actually abusing these programs."
So I guess bypassing the Fourth Amendment doesn't count as abuse.From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Search_and_seizure#United_States [wikipedia.org] :
"A search occurs when an expectation of privacy that society is prepared to consider reasonable is infringed."
Re:The O in Obama stands for Zero Credibility (Score:5, Insightful)
As an American, I'm not sure I agree either.
I'm not reassured. (Score:5, Insightful)
This quote really bothers me:
What you're not seeing is people actually abusing these programs.
On the surface, it sounds like a fair point. To my knowledge, there haven't really been allegations of people digging into these records for specific unethical and abusive purposes. However:
(a) I would question whether the collection and warehousing of this data is, in itself, and abuse.
(b) It's pretty much impossible for us to know whether these programs are being abused, since there is no public oversight.
(c) If there were reports of abuse, I'm not sure we'd know about it, since it's apparently illegal to talk about this program.
All told, I don't feel particularly reassured. Even if there's no malicious abuse of the system, I would bet money that there's some casual abuse going on. As Obama is fond of saying, sunlight is the best disinfectant. If the NSA has done nothing wrong, then they have nothing to hide.
Bow! Yield! Kneel! (Score:3, Insightful)
> "What you're not seeing is peopleactually abusingthese programs."
Given alarm bells don't go off if someone listens to content without a warrant, i.e. no physical mechanism to prevent, much less track this, how would he know?
Any one of a hundred senators or other powerful people know people in the NSA and could have an otherwise seemingly honest agent actually spying for them -- on business dealings, or opposing candidates. This doesn't even begin to address the supposedly "lesser-protected" metadata on who calls whom, which would have been more than enough to figure out who all the founding fathers were and round them up.
And even if every agent and powerful person were honest today, what about 10 or 50 years from now? I keep bringing this up, but a G. Gordon Liddy type wouldn't think twice about listening in on the opposition.
Re:Better idea, shut it down - it's illegal.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:We Can and Must Be More Transparent (Score:5, Insightful)
Transparency? I care more about the fact that they seem to be violating the constitution; whether or not that's done transparently is utterly irrelevant to me.
The TSA's flagrant disregard of the constitution and people's rights is plainly visible to everyone, and yet I still feel that their actions are wrong. Transparency is simply not the main problem.
Re:Hope and Change (Score:3, Insightful)
And Obama promised to repeal it. And then he turned out to be a closet conservative republican with a tan.
Re:We Can and Must Be More Transparent (Score:5, Insightful)
Less than 48 hours ago with Jay Leno he said, and repeated: "We don't have a domestic spying program."
The program is still classified, so it does not exist. Just like drones bombing several countries do not really exist.
and the domestic spying program has safeguards to help keep it from being abused.
It looks like Snowden was the only safeguard NSA had.
Re:Better idea, shut it down - it's illegal.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Agreed. The problem is, Obama's idea of transparent is to attack Lavabit.
Abandon all Hope, all ye who voted here. (Score:5, Insightful)
GW Bush signed the patriot act.....not obama.....the patriot act created these programs.....
Who cares? After 4 1/2 years, you can firmly say that Obama has taken ownership of that problem, especially after the "compromise" reauthorization in 2011. Obama ran on a campaign that in part was supposed to be about putting an end to war on terror abuses. Instead, the only "wrongdoers" Obama has pursued with any vigor in connection with war on terror crimes and state surveillance are government whistleblowers.
I voted twice for Obama. And now, I just feel like I've been voting against "the wrong lizard" [williams.edu] the whole time (because I don't believe for a second that Romney or McCain would have been better on 4th Amendment rights). I'm getting incredibly disillusioned with American democracy, and it's the fault of the people for spending far more time getting worked up on partisan circus issues than real, substantial matters of policy. I'd say we need a revolution, but I'm even more terrified of the most eager revolutionaries than I am of the lizards in charge.
I just don't know what to do anymore.
Help 3rd party get past 5% pop vote (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, I guess this is as good a time as any to remind you guys that 5% popular vote for any Presidential candidate gives his/her party total ballot access, federal funds, and most importantly a legitimate voice that no media outlet can ignore without discrediting itself. Due to its popularity, the Libertarian party is the easiest to take across this hurdle, but an effort to organize a 5% vote for any 3rd party can work just as well. It doesn't even matter if you disagree with the party, anything that disrupts the celebrity-focused and soundbite-based political environment will be to your benefit.
Remember that the winner takes all electoral college system makes your vote in a non-battleground state absolutely worthless. Your deep red/deep blue state is staying that color with or without you. Invest your vote instead into something worthwhile.
Re:Hope and Change (Score:5, Insightful)
Anyone who thinks anything Obama says (or does) will result in your privacy being respected and warrantless surveillance ended is delusional.
Ah, if only there were some other branches of the government that were tasked with supervising and controlling the executive branch. Too bad we don't have any.
Yea, well, perhaps if "Checks and Balances" hadn't been replaced with "Collusion and Mutual Back-Scratching..."
Re:Hope and Change (Score:5, Insightful)
Please please please could someone tell me just what you believe is being done with this information?
It's a standard tactic in modern tyrannies. If you know everything about your subjects, then you have much more power over them. That comes both from the raw information, such as the weaknesses and associations of your subjects, and the fear inspired in them by that knowledge.
But I'm trying and failing to think of something bad being done with it that would still be secret.
Well, what would a Gestapo or KGB do with such information? You having any luck thinking now?
Re: Hope and Change (Score:5, Insightful)
Because they can harass anyone they want at any point in the future. If any corrupt person (and there are many and will be many) manages to get into the government, suddenly you have a problem on your hands. Surely you're not so naive as to trust the government? History gives you no reason to do such a silly thing.
Re:We Can and Must Be More Transparent (Score:5, Insightful)
And remember that their definition of "ordinary people" is people who are further than three degrees of separation from someone they think is a terrorist. So, for example, you go to a doctor who also had a guy named Ahmed as a patient, and Ahmed had a buddy who got involved in terrorism, congratulations, you (and your doctor) are now being spied on.
Re:Better idea, shut it down - it's illegal.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Agreed. The problem is, Obama's idea of transparent is to attack Lavabit.
In a such transparent way, that the owner of Lavabit is apparently not allowed to say what happened, either.
This is tiresome (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Better idea, shut it down - it's illegal.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Having Congress look at it was a very funny joke, since they're in recess and useless anyway.
Re:Hope and Change (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Hope and Change (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Better idea, shut it down - it's illegal.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh transparency was never about government, it was always about you.
Re:Better idea, shut it down - it's illegal.... (Score:5, Insightful)
I second that EMOTION! seriously, passions are running hot on both sides... hopefully Obama's steps today will provide a "cooling off period" so we can step back and look at this from all angles.
I have some news for you :
No cooling off period or further looks are necessary.
The facts are in and the government has been illegally SPYING ON ITS OWN CITIZENS.
Re:Better idea, shut it down - it's illegal.... (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm so fucking sick of this president. On every issue that has opposition he always takes the stance of "Oh you don't agree with me, I must not be explaining it well enough" NO SHITHEAD WE DISAGREE! We understand you just fine, we just don't want your stupid bullshit policies.
Re:Better idea, shut it down - it's illegal.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Seriously. Posse Comitatus was intended to prevent secret intelligence from undermining democracy.
We cannot know what we do not know. So long as there are secrets, we only have the credibility of the intelligence agency that they are respecting the honor systems placed on them. Their credibility is lost. They lied. They lied about lying. They lied when caught lying. They got caught lying every step of the way. They have permanently lost my trust, and these intelligence agencies will represent banana republic, Nazi SS, KGB level chilling effects on our democracy as long as they continue exist.
An "Under new management" sign isn't good enough for a financial brand caught in the act of running a ponzi scheme. Why would "more transparency" be acceptable for an intelligence agency thumbing their nose at Posse Comitatus?
Re:Results (Score:4, Insightful)
Whistle blower laws are precisely written, they do not include anything and everything that you or I would call whistle blowing. One of the caveats in the laws is that they do not apply if it is illegal for you to release the information even if releasing that information is an act of whistle blowing. Whistle blower laws were written to prevent illegal reprisals for releasing confidential data, not to prevent legal prosecution for releasing classified data.
Leaking documents classified Top Secret is unarguably illegal, in this case it was an act of civil disobedience to expose a greater evil. IMO he should be pardoned and welcomed home with opened arms, that's not going to happen but it's what I think is right. That doesn't mean whistle blower laws apply to his situation.
Re:Better idea, shut it down - it's illegal.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Better idea, shut it down - it's illegal.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Not just spying, but using this for ordinary crime. Kind of like how RICO was once upon a time ONLY for going after the mafia and then it morphed into something that applies to even the kid selling joints on the street corner.
The selling point for this program, to get people to accept it, is "terrorism", but it's already being used unconstitutionally by law enforcement for ordinary shit:
DEA Parallel Construction: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/05/us-dea-sod-idUSBRE97409R20130805 [reuters.com]
IRS Parallel Construction: http://dailycaller.com/2013/08/08/reuters-irs-manual-instructed-agents-how-to-hide-secret-deansa-intel/ [dailycaller.com]
Fruit of the poisonous tree: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fruit_of_the_poisonous_tree [wikipedia.org]
This will just expand to the point that unconstitutionally gathered evidence will be used for everything down to parking tickets, like RICO metastasized into what it is now.
The Constitution is just a piece of paper (Score:3, Insightful)
I think the worse offense is that the US government is compelling its citizens to spy on each other and abridging their First Amendment free speech right to complain about it without due process using all three branches of government: Legislative, Executive and Judicial. The checks and balances have failed. The US President has come before the world and said as much - and he is a professor of constitutional law. As much as any run-of-the-mill tyrranny the US is no longer about the consent of the governed, but about raw force and power. Speak out, go to prison. The noble experiment is over.
I propose that we all sit around whining about it.
Re:Better idea, shut it down - it's illegal.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Better idea, shut it down - it's illegal.... (Score:5, Insightful)
What "steps?" Pretty words and a website?
He gave us lots of "pretty words" in 2008, and then completely ignored them and instead fell right in line with every one of his predecessors; doing the same obnoxious shit with his own special brand of "fuck you" on top.
A website? Really? Have you already forgotten how well the last one worked out?
How is coming down on the NSA for a lack of transparency going to work? He threw that word around back then, too. Obviously, he's using a different definition than the rest of us.
He hasn't taken any steps, much less the one that would actually count: the removal and indictment of the sons of bitches who actually committed these crimes.
He's spinning this.
Re:Transparency is good (Score:5, Insightful)
This is what I don't get. The PR machine failed. Their reaction shouldn't have been to cover up and hide, and then somewhat admit to the truth. Snowden should've been called a hero, welcomed back, etc., Obama should've retired a few top folks from NSA, saying he wasn't aware of the full extent of the problem, and uh, oh, how would this ever happen, accept full responsibility (e.g. Reagan), make a big deal about dismantling the programs (while simply just renaming them)... and continue everything as is.
Everyone's happy, and only conspiracy nuts don't believe the official story. As it is, this is just proof that just 'cause you're paranoid, does not mean they're not after you.
Re:Better idea, shut it down - it's illegal.... (Score:3, Insightful)
I do hope this serves as a valuable lesson though, that just because somebody has a D after their name don't mean shit, actions speak louder than words and the only ones who can say Obama is left wing anymore is Fox news. To the rest of us it should be obvious by now what we are seeing is Dubya's third and fourth terms
Nice attempt at defending the "D" name, by separating Obama from them and instead associating him with the Republican Bushies. perhaps the message is that D's are worse because their feet aren't held to the fire nearly as much as the "R". Bush farts, and there are millions marching around the world.. Obama strips away the Constitution, and puts big brother into overdrive. and not a peep until fairly recently. Even still nowhere near the concern publicly there needs to be. I used to think it was people didn't want to admit they've been fooled. Now I'm concerned people are far more stupid than just pride. It's almost a religious denial of anything negative which scares the S*hit out of me.
Re:Better idea, shut it down - it's illegal.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Even then, for the most part the majority of our country were just fine with everything Bush was doing until it become apparent to even the most ill-informed that the Iraq war was a giant clusterfuck. Pretty similar to the Obama presidency, really. For the most part the President gets to do whatever the hell he wants for four or five years before the general public catches on. It has nothing to do with their political affiliation.
Re:Better idea, shut it down - it's illegal.... (Score:5, Insightful)
The current administration is certainly transparent about one thing, how they will treat any and all whistle blowers. Whistle blowers will be sexually humiliated and abused, threatened with death and subject to life imprisonment. Any country that harbours US whistle blowers will be threatened with economic warfare and other political targeted 'sanctions'.
So the Uncle Tom Obama administration is pretty transparent when it comes down to it and all the slick, teleprompter bullshit about anything they publicly say is, typical corporate marketing, about the way they want to be seen rather than the ugly reality of who they are.
Apart from the whistle blower stuff, that they are truly transparent about, as a US whistle blower you have no rights under law, you have no right to life and the government will do everything in it's power to completely and utterly fuck you up. A big ol thumbs up to the choom gang coward for that defence of the US constitution.