"Snowden’s alleged actions will generate the very result he was fighting against: greater secrecy"
Oh, wow, the hallmark of an agenda-pushing government propaganda operation!
Cui bono? Who benefits?
"Democrat says IRS manager set reviews" by Philip Elliott | Associated Press, June 10, 2013
WASHINGTON — A self-described conservative Republican who is a manager in the Internal Revenue Service office that targeted Tea Party groups told investigators that he, not the White House, set the review in motion, the top Democrat on the House watchdog committee said Sunday.
Then why were letters found with direction from Washington?
Representative Elijah Cummings, Democrat of Maryland, released a partial transcript of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform interview with the unnamed manager in the IRS’s Cincinnati office.
Then it's a LEAK!
In it, the employee said the extra scrutiny for Tea Party groups’ tax-exempt status was an effort to be consistent in reviewing applications and not driven by politics.
‘‘He is a conservative Republican working for the IRS. I think this interview and these statements go a long way to what’s showing that the White House was not involved in this,’’ Cummings said....
That's the goal (just like back in Nixon's time at first). Shield the president.
‘‘The testimony excerpts ranking member Cummings revealed today did not provide anything enlightening or contradict other witness accounts,’’ oversight committee chairman Representative Darrell Issa, a California Republican, said in statement.
--more--"
Last I saw of any of the other various scandals swirling around the Obama administration at this point in time, save for the spying scandal.
Related: Seeing Through the PRISM of Obama's Spying Program
Also see: Sunday Globe Special: NSA Clapper Trapper
Got caught up in today's post.
"Leaks show US intelligence vulnerability; Little chance to halt those with data access" by Noah Bierman and Bryan Bender | Globe Staff, June 11, 2013
WASHINGTON — The American intelligence community spends billions of dollars trying to protect the United States from foreign agents. But it was “just another guy who sits there day to day in the office” who showed how easy it is for someone within to weaken the National Security Agency’s information fortress....
By his telling, a few clicks on a computer by any number of employees could do significant damage to US interests.
The revelations from Edward Snowden, a midlevel computer technician, coupled with the trial this month of Army Private Bradley Manning on 2010 charges that he leaked hundreds of thousands of classified documents to the website WikiLeaks, have exposed damaging security holes in an era where ever more secrets are being kept in digital files — and are accessible by a greater number of people.
In a short period of time, stealing secrets has gone from the laborious task of copying papers taken surreptitiously from filing cabinets to the current age in which files can be electronically copied onto thumb drives. Manning was said to have disguised his efforts by downloading secrets onto compact discs made to look like pop music recordings....
As for Snowden, the challenge for intelligence agencies has intensified since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, and more recently the Boston bombings, as they have come under increased pressure to share information with each other, thus opening more online pathways to more hard drives. At the same time, partly as a result of rapid expansion since 2001, the federal government is increasingly reliant on outside contractors, including Snowden’s employer Booz Allen Hamilton, further expanding the universe of people with access to that information. And the ability to gather and store greater amounts of information in a digital format requires more people with the ability, and access, to analyze it.
With that comes more potential people who could either spy for profit or leak information out of personal conviction....
Manning, who is now standing trial before a military court martial and faces more than 150 years in prison, is the lowest rank of soldier. Yet he had computer access to highly sensitive documents ranging from secret diplomatic cables to military commanders’ assessments in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The trove obtained by WikiLeaks, which amounted to the largest single leak of classified information in history, prompted the Pentagon to tighten access to its classified computer networks.
For example, the State Department communications that Manning is accused of downloading from the Department of Defense’s so-called Secret Internet Protocol Router Network are now much harder to access.
Computers that are compatible with thumb drives, DVD recorders, or other removable devices have been sharply restricted. And in some cases, a “two-person” rule was instituted before classified data could be downloaded from a government computer, to prevent single individuals from removing protected data.
Robert Bryant, the top US counterintelligence officer, recently issued a warning to all intelligence personnel, in which he labeled insider threats “the top counterintelligence challenge to our community.”
***************************
President Obama established an “Insider Threat Task Force” in 2011 to “develop a “governmentwide program for deterring, detecting, and mitigating insider threats, including the safeguarding of classified information from exploitation, compromise, or other unauthorized disclosure.”
Steven Aftergood, who runs the Project on Government Secrecy at the Federation of American Scientists, predicted that the Snowden disclosures will lead to more fundamental changes, especially at NSA.
“Why should a junior tech person have such broad access?” he said. “But a larger policy question is: Why should anyone have such access?”
Others with intimate knowledge of the classification system suspect that Snowden’s alleged actions will generate the very result he was fighting against: greater secrecy.
“The knee-jerk reaction is building more secure facilities and doing more polygraphs,” said J. William Leonard, who until 2008 was director of the Information Security Oversight Office at the National Archives, referring to the common steps to safeguard sensitive data and screen people for access....
--more--"
Related:
Firm slips after staffer leaks spying news
Government contractor says it has fired Edward Snowden
Doubts of fair trial seen as fueling run
So I guess everyone will be looking towards the Guardian for the next big break.
Edward Snowden is an American hero
Based on all the press and publicity, one must conclude this story is a controlled leak like the IRS scandal.
"US spy program raises ire at home and abroad; Germany, EU vow to press President Obama" by Lara Jakes | Associated Press, June 11, 2013
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration faced fresh anger Monday at home and abroad over US spy programs that track phone and Internet messages around the world in the hope of thwarting terrorist threats.
Now it is worldwide!
But a senior intelligence official said there are no plans to end the surveillance.
And that is really that, isn't it?
The programs causing the global uproar were revealed by Edward Snowden, a 29-year-old employee of government contractor Booz Allen Hamilton.
Coolly but firmly, officials in Germany and the European Union issued complaints over two National Security Agency programs that target suspicious foreign messages — potentially including phone numbers, e-mail, images, video, and other online communications transmitted through US providers.
The British foreign secretary tried to assure Parliament that the spy programs, which were also used by British intelligence services, do not encroach on UK privacy laws.
In Washington, members of Congress said they would take a new look at potential ways to keep the United States safe from terror attacks without giving up privacy protections....
Too late.
‘‘There’s very little trust in the government, and that’s for good reason,’’ said Representative Adam Schiff, Democrat of California, who sits on the House Intelligence Committee. ‘‘We’re our own worst enemy.’’
How about none?
*************************
A senior US intelligence official said there are no plans to scrap the programs despite the backlash. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive security issue.
Then it's a LEAK, right?
Privacy laws across much of Western Europe are stricter than they are in the United States. On Tuesday, the European Parliament, through its 27-nation executive arm, will debate the spy programs and whether they have violated local privacy protections.
EU officials in Brussels pledged to seek answers from US diplomats at a trans-Atlantic ministerial meeting in Dublin that begins Thursday.
‘‘It would be unacceptable and would need swift action from the EU if indeed the US National Security Agency were processing European data without permission,’’ said Guy Verhofstadt, a leader in the Alde group of liberal parties.
German government spokesman Steffen Seibert said Chancellor Angela Merkel would question President Obama about the NSA program when he’s in Berlin on June 18 for his first visit to the German capital as president. In Germany, privacy regulations are especially strict, and the NSA programs could tarnish a visit that both sides had hoped would reaffirm strong German-American ties.
In London, British Foreign Secretary William Hague was forced to deny allegations that the UK government had used information provided by the Americans to circumvent British laws. ‘‘We want the British people to have confidence in the work of our intelligence agencies and in their adherence to the law and democratic values,’’ Hague told Parliament.
That's not an actual denial, is it?
--more--"
Related: U.S. Official: Spy Programs to Continue
Honestly, I didn't expect them to end, but you "gotta start someplace."
"Amid struggles, Obama hits trail in Boston; President to appear at rally for Markey" by Matt Viser | Globe Staff, June 12, 2013
WASHINGTON – President Obama arrives in Boston on Wednesday on the kind of mission for which he is known to excel — headlining a rally for Democrats, in this case Senate candidate Edward J. Markey. But Obama arrives at a difficult moment in his presidency.
Related: Sunday Globe Special: Gomez Closing the Gap on Markey
The visit didn't help.
Much of his agenda has stalled in Congress and even some Democrats from Massachusetts are pounding him on key issues. Seven months after he was reelected by a wide margin, Obama has struggled to convert any mandate he had from voters into broad changes.
Gun control, one of his biggest priorities, failed in the Senate and most other legislative initiatives appear stalled. Instead of pushing new policies, he has become more reactive, responding to controversies over the IRS targeting conservative groups, the Justice Department’s aggressive approach to leak investigations, and the leaking of national intelligence surveillance programs.
And don't forget Benghazi.
Markey and his Republican rival, Gabriel E. Gomez, have traded barbs about the president's visit, which includes a rally at the Reggie Lewis Track and Athletic Center in Roxbury. Before the rally, Obama will also attend a smaller private event, which a White House official described as “a photo line for donors.”
*************************
A presidential visit can help a candidate raise money, boost exposure, and motivate campaign workers. But it rarely makes or breaks a campaign; that type of moment would be more likely to come in a candidate debate, such as the one Tuesday night in Springfield. Still, Markey said Obama’s appearance is a plus.
“The state very strongly supports the president,” Markey said in an interview. “They gave him a historic victory just last November that was an endorsement of his vision for our state and our nation. I welcome his support in this race.”
Gomez, however, said the president’s appearance showed that Democrats were worried about losing the Senate election....
Obama’s visit could revive memories of his trip here more than three years ago when he campaigned for Martha Coakley in the waning days of her unsuccessful Senate bid.
It's Gomez in an upset!
The two visits offer bookmarks of two difficult moments of Obama’s presidency. When he came to campaign for Coakley, his health care legislation was under siege from the emerging Tea Party movement. Scott Brown’s victory was a sign of national unrest, and the moment reportedly led Michelle Obama to tell her husband that his administration’s “rudder isn’t set right.”
It is too early to tell whether the latest Massachusetts special election indicates any broader moment – indeed, Markey leads in recent polls – but Obama’s presidency is in another period of uncertainty.
Now, with the national discussion consumed with whether he has threatened civil liberties with his approach to national security, Obama risks alienating some of his most ardent supporters....
Still, while Democrats are frustrated, their angst is directed mostly on a stuck agenda, not the president himself.
Representative James P. McGovern, the Worcester Democrat, asked what the president could do to get things back on track, responded, “I think at this point what is key to a successful presidency is keeping a Democratic Senate and trying to win back the House in a year and a half,” McGovern said.
That supposes that he escapes these scandals, and the Senate looks like it is going Republican next time out.
While Obama still has better numbers in the Bay State than he does nationally, his approval and favorability ratings in Massachusetts have dropped over the past month, according to a poll released on Monday by Suffolk University....
Gee, I can't imagine why.
White House advisers insist they are moving forward. Most meetings begin with what they say is their “North Star,” passing new policies that will help the middle class....
David Simas, Obama’s deputy senior adviser, ticked off several things that the White House has done while most of the attention has been on scandals: cracking down on those who abuse the US patent system; holding a mental health conference; and starting an expansion of broadband and wireless Internet access to every public school and library....
Pffft!
A review of some of Obama’s promises he made four months ago during the State of the Union address finds little progress.
More broken promises from this guy?
Gun control legislation was voted down by the Senate, one of the most stinging defeats. The conflict in Syria has only grown more intractable.
He's escalated it.
Some of the broadest proposals — overhauling the tax code, cutting another $1.5 trillion from the deficit, and doing more to address climate change — appear no closer to reality now than they did then.
Several promises are either completed or appear on track, including drawing down troop levels in Afghanistan, reauthorizing the Violence Against Women Act, and establishing a nonpartisan commission to improve voting issues.
An immigration bill, one of the major focuses of the administration, is set for debate in the Senate this week.
Related: Floored by Framing of Immigration Reform
Some of his other proposals — such as $50 billion for a program to repair the nation’s infrastructure and expanding prekindergarten access — were included in Obama’s budget proposal. But that blueprint is unlikely to go anywhere.
Obama, meanwhile, went on a “charm offensive,” treating Republicans to dinner and golf outings that has yet to translate into legislative accomplishments.....
At least the picnic was postponed.
--more--"
He's going to start losing friends:
UPDATE: Poll: President Obama approval, trust drops
Who could ever trust him again?
"ACLU files suit to stop collection of phone logs; Seeks court order requiring NSA to purge records" by Charlie Savage | New York Times, June 12, 2013
WASHINGTON — The American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit on Tuesday against the Obama administration over its “dragnet” collection of logs of domestic phone calls, contending that the once-secret program — whose existence was exposed by a former National Security Agency contractor last week — is illegal and asking a judge to both stop it and order the records purged.
How embarrassing for an alleged constitutional law professor.
The lawsuit, filed in New York, could set up an eventual Supreme Court test. It could also focus attention on this disclosure amid the larger heap of top secret surveillance matters that were disclosed by Edward J. Snowden, a former NSA contractor who came forward on Sunday to say he was the source of a series of disclosures by The Guardian and The Washington Post.
The program “gives the government a comprehensive record of our associations and public movements, revealing a wealth of detail about our familial, political, professional, religious and intimate associations,” the complaint says, adding that it “is likely to have a chilling effect on whistle-blowers and others who would otherwise contact” the ACLU for legal assistance.
And who benefits?
The Justice Department did not respond immediately.
Who would care what that criminal cabinet department says?
The ACLU has frequently assisted other plaintiffs in challenges against national security policies, but the government has generally persuaded courts to dismiss such lawsuits without any ruling on the legal merits after arguing that litigation over any classified program would reveal state secrets or that the plaintiffs could not prove they were personally affected and so lacked standing to sue.
It's called a soft tyranny, folks.
This case may be different. The government has now declassified the existence of the program on domestic call record “metadata.” And the ACLU itself is a customer of Verizon Business Network Services — the subsidiary of Verizon Communications that was the recipient of a secret court order for all its domestic calling records — which it says gives it direct standing to bring the lawsuit.
The call logging program is keeping a record of “metadata” from domestic phone calls, including which numbers were dialed and received, from which location, and the time and duration of the communication, officials have said.
The program began as part of the Bush administration’s post-9/11 programs of surveillance without warrants, and, it is now known, it has continued since 2006 with the blessing of a national security court, which has ruled in still-secret legal opinions that such bulk surveillance was authorized by a section of the Patriot Act that allows the FBI to obtain “business records” if they are relevant to a counterterrorism investigation.
Congress never openly voted to authorize the NSA to collect logs of hundreds of millions of domestic phone calls, but the administration notes that some lawmakers were briefed on the program. Some members of Congress have backed it as a useful counterterrorism tool, while others have denounced it.
“The administration claims authority to sift through details of our private lives because the Patriot Act says that it can,” wrote Representative Jim Sensenbrenner, Republican from Wisconsin. “I disagree. I authored the Patriot Act, and this is an abuse of that law.”
Over the weekend, in hope of preventing a backlash, James R. Clapper, the director of national intelligence, also disclosed details about privacy protections built into the program.
Turns out Clapper lied to Congress.
Among them, officials may access the database only if they can meet a legal justification — “reasonable suspicion, based on specific facts, that the particular basis for the query is associated with a foreign terrorist organization.” To deter abuse, queries are audited under the oversight of judges on a national security court.
Executive branch officials and lawmakers who support the program have hinted in public that some terrorist plots have been foiled and intelligence leads have been identified by using the database.
I'm tired of this government hollering terrorist to justify everything when they are the terrorists.
In private conversations, they have also explained how it is used: Investigators start with a specific phone number that is already believed to be linked to terrorism, and scrutinize the group of people who have called that number — and other people who in turn called those in the first group, and so on — in an effort to identify any co-conspirators.
Meaning the ever-expanding circle never ends!
--more--"
"Lawmakers miss briefings on intelligence" by Julia Edwards and Noah Bierman | Globe Correspondent and Globe Staff, June 13, 2013
WASHINGTON — It was a striking moment when Senator Susan Collins said this week that she was surprised to learn that government spies were routinely collecting telephone records from ordinary citizens, echoing a common refrain on Capitol Hill.
“The first I heard of the program was when it broke in the news,” the Maine Republican said.
That is the weak, lame-ass lie Obama used regarding the IRS scandal.
But Collins is one of the few Americans who could have demanded more details. She serves on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, with access to classified briefings. And although she joined the committee only this year, she was, like all members of the Senate, eligible to attend or request off-the-record sessions.
Many members of Congress, despite possessing security clearances and repeatedly voting to grant legal authority to monitor civilian activities, have said over the past week that, in effect, they knew less about some key aspects of American intelligence gathering than Edward Snowden, the government contractor who has said he was the source for leaked information about the National Security Agency’s programs to track phone records and Internet databases.
Senator Jon Tester, a Montana Democrat, went so far as to say that Snowden’s action was beneficial.
“Quite frankly, it helps people like me become aware of a situation that I wasn’t aware of before, because I don’t sit on that Intelligence Committee,” Tester said on MSNBC.
The lack of knowledge about the NSA programs among many members of Congress has focused new attention on whether the seemingly scattershot system of briefing lawmakers has led to a breakdown in congressional oversight of intelligence matters.
Numerous lawmakers chose not to attend briefings offered by the House and Senate intelligence committees, even as they were repeatedly approving the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and the Patriot Act, which granted the National Security Agency the authority to mine information from private citizens.
“They certainly voted on these programs,” said Senator John McCain, an Arizona Republican. “And if they didn’t know what they were voting on, I’m not sure that it is the executive branch’s responsibility.”
*******************************
“You can sit there as an elected member and say, ‘Gee I didn’t know anything about this,’ ” said Robert Blitzer, senior fellow at George Washington University’s Homeland Security Policy Institute and the FBI’s former counterterrorism chief. “But at the same time, maybe it is your business to know what is going on in general with the intelligence community.”
The Congress has ABSOLUTELY FAILED in its oversight responsibilities.
Is it because the NSA was SPYING on THEM?
*********************************
Intelligence briefings are typically held in a windowless room, often in the Capitol or a congressional office building. Lawmakers are not permitted to bring telephones and are briefed by intelligence agency officials on what they may and may not discuss publicly....
Lawmakers say that even when they ask the right questions, the answers are not always candid. Oregon Senator Ron Wyden, a Democrat who serves on the Intelligence Committee, accused James R. Clapper, director of national intelligence, of misleading the public during a March hearing.
We call it lying.
Wyden had asked if the NSA collected any type of data on millions of Americans, to which Clapper responded: “No, sir.” Clapper said in a Sunday interview on NBC that he had given the “least untruthful” answer, saying he was thinking of collection of information about individuals, not amassing telephone records....
Can't believe anything Clapper says!
At least he told the lesser of a lie!
Wyden wasn’t satisfied, saying this week that he had given Clapper his question in advance but still didn’t receive a “straight answer.”
He lies to Congress and no big deal? Isn't that a CRIME?
--more--"
"NSA director: Programs disrupted dozens of attacks" by Donna Cassata and Connie Cass | Associated Press, June 13, 2013
WASHINGTON — The director of the National Security Agency said Wednesday that once-secret surveillance programs disrupted dozens of terrorist attacks, explicitly describing for Congress how the programs worked in collecting Americans’ phone records and tapping into their Internet activity.
Is that how many FBI frame-ups that didn't reach fruition?
Vigorously defending the programs, General Keith Alexander said the public needs to know how they operate amid growing concerns that government efforts to secure the nation are encroaching on Americans’ privacy and civil liberties.
Then why weren't we told before, and why are you guys so upset?
‘‘I do think it’s important that we get this right and I want the American people to know that we’re trying to be transparent here, protect civil liberties and privacy but also the security of this country,’’ Alexander told a Senate panel.
PFFFFFFFFT!
Alexander said he will provide additional information to the Senate Intelligence Committee in closed session on Thursday and hopes to have as many details as possible within a week. He said he wants the information to be checked first by other agencies to ensure that the details are correct.
Yeah, that's transparent.
But he warned that disclosures about the secret programs have eroded agency capabilities and, as a result, US allies and Americans will not be as safe as they were two weeks ago....
What horse shit! How can we not be safe when every single communication is being scooped up and sifted, never mind the fact that all this spying was based on that damnable 9/11 inside job and official lie?
US law enforcement officials have said they are building a case against Edward Snowden, the former contractor who fled to Hong Kong and leaked the documents, but have yet to bring charges. Hong Kong has an extradition treaty with the United States; there are exceptions in cases of political persecution or where there are concerns about cruel or humiliating treatment.
Translation: the Chinese may not extradite him because he could be tortured.
Snowden told the paper from a location the paper did not disclose that he has no plans to leave.
‘‘I have had many opportunities to flee [Hong Kong], but I would rather stay and fight the US government in the courts, because I have faith in [Hong Kong’s] rule of law,’’ he said.
On Tuesday, a phalanx of FBI, legal, and intelligence officials briefed the entire House of Representatives in an effort to explain National Security Agency programs that collect millions of Americans’ phone and Internet records. Since they were revealed last week, the programs have provoked distrust in the Obama administration from around the world.
No one likes being spied on, even if it is by a "friend."
House members were told not to disclose what they heard in the briefing because it is classified.
But they are being transparent.
Several said they left with unanswered questions.
‘‘People aren’t satisfied,’’ said Tim Murphy, a Pennsylvania Republican. ‘‘More detail needs to come out.’’
While many rank-and-file members of Congress have expressed anger and bewilderment, there is apparently very little appetite among leaders and intelligence committee chiefs to pursue any action. Most have expressed support for the programs as invaluable counterterrorism tools and some have labeled Snowden a traitor.
This country is finished.
Congressional leaders and intelligence committee members have been routinely briefed about the spy programs, officials said, and Congress has at least twice renewed laws approving them. But the disclosure of their sheer scope stunned some lawmakers, shocked foreign allies from nations with strict privacy protections, and emboldened civil liberties advocates who long have accused the government of being too invasive in the name of national security.
--more--"
So is Snowden a hero?
"Is Snowden a whistleblower? Only if NSA broke the law" June 13, 2013
Edward Snowden broke the law. Failing to prosecute him would send the message that people with top-secret clearance can choose for themselves whether to respect the law or not. That can’t happen. If Snowden made a sacrifice to protect civil liberties, then his sacrifice should extend to answering for his actions in court.
So when do the war crimes for the Bush administration begin?
The law should give appropriate latitude to whistleblowers who uncover government wrongdoing — even if they are, like Snowden, government contractors rather than official employees. As a contractor working for the National Security Agency, Snowden isn’t protected by the Whistle-blower Protection Enhancement Act, which excludes intelligence agencies, or a 2012 Obama administration directive, which covers intelligence workers but excludes contractors. Intelligence contractors should be covered. But whistle-blowing protections should only shield those who expose illegal wrongdoing — not people who merely want to make political statements against policies that, however objectionable, are properly authorized....
As if whistleblowers were protected by this administration. They have prosecuted more in the last four years than all the other administrations in history combined.
This is a troubling case on many levels, although a healthy debate over which tradeoffs Americans are willing to make between privacy and national security has begun.
Sorry, but there is NO DEBATE when it comes to the BILL of RIGHTS!!
RIGHTS, not privileges!
But Americans must also recognize the limits of that debate — and the cost. The pros and cons of an intelligence tactic can rarely be weighed in public without rendering it less useful. According to IntelCenter, a company that monitors jihadists online, Snowden’s revelations have already prompted groups that plot attacks on Americans to beef up their use of encryption tools and adopt stronger measures to avoid detection.
See: Crotch Bombers, Jewish Media Groups and the USA's 'War of Terror'
IntelCenter, huh? Aren't they affiliated with the Pentagon?
Snowden, following in the footsteps of WikiLeaks and championing the larger cause of Internet freedom, represents both the promise and the danger of the information age. The technological advances that made metadata spying possible also made it possible for him to expose the program to the entire world in an instant. That’s powerful. But it is also dangerous. It took years following Sept. 11, 2001, for the national security apparatus to agree to share information across agencies in a way that could detect future attacks. Now Snowden has shown, with a single keystroke, the potential downside of making so much information available to so many people. A single breach — whether by a vigilante like Snowden or a spy — can compromise everything. His actions, along with other leaks, will undoubtedly have a chilling effect on various agencies’ willingness to open their files to one another.
Whether the benefits to society of Snowden’s revelations are worth the cost remains to be seen. His trial should illuminate the question.
We already know the answer. We are better of knowing than not.
--more--"
"Chinese media suggest NSA revelations will hurt US ties" by GERRY MULLANY and DIDI KIRSTEN TATLOW | New York Times, June 14, 2013
HONG KONG — After several days of relative silence on the issue, Chinese state media Thursday highlighted revelations that the US government was engaged in widespread monitoring of Internet and telephone communications, carrying reports suggesting the disclosures could damage relations between the countries.
Related: Sunday Globe Specials: Chinese Chat
Also see: Obama Takes a Hack at China
How do you say asshole in Chinese?
The disclosures come at an uncomfortable time for US officials, just after President Obama pressed for Beijing’s cooperation in curtailing Chinese cyberespionage.
Chinese government officials have refrained from directly criticizing the United States on the disclosures, but state media have been reporting on the controversy.
“The massive US global surveillance program revealed by a former National Security Agency employee in Hong Kong is certain to stain Washington’s overseas image and test developing Sino-US ties,” said an article in the state-run China Daily, citing analysts.
The newspaper quoted Li Haidong, a researcher of American studies at China Foreign Affairs University, warning of the impact the disclosure could have on relations between the United States and China.
“For months, Washington has been accusing China of cyberespionage, but it turns out that the biggest threat to the pursuit of individual freedom and privacy in the US is the unbridled power of the government,” Li was quoted as saying.
Yep!
Edward J. Snowden, the former NSA computer technician who disclosed the surveillance, is now believed to be in Hong Kong, which is administered by China but has a large degree of legal autonomy.
As US officials pursue possible charges against him in preparation for an extradition effort, authorities in Hong Kong, rather than the mainland government, are likely to decide whether to turn Snowden over. The United States has a long history of cooperation with Hong Kong on such matters.
I don't know about this one.
Snowden said in an interview on Wednesday with The South China Morning Post that the United States had gained access to hundreds of computers in Hong Kong and China since 2009.
Aren't those where the hacks have come from?
One mainland newspaper, The Global Times, which is part of the Communist Party-run People’s Daily group, called for assertive Chinese action to confront Washington in the wake of Snowden’s revelations.
“Before the US government rushes to shut Snowden’s mouth, China also needs to seek an explanation from Washington,” the newspaper said in an editorial. “We are not bystanders. The issue of whether the US as an Internet superpower has abused its powers touches on our vital interests directly.”
For the Chinese media, coverage of the issue can be a delicate balancing act, since the allegations that the United States is employing a double standard naturally focuses attention on its assertions that Chinese entities are engaged in widespread cyberspying, an issue that Chinese state media outlets have shied away from.
I'm tired of pot-hollering kettle, crap AmeriKan media.
There is also the tricky issue of Snowden’s presence on Hong Kong soil, a potentially problematic development as China and the United States have worked to improve relations.
Officials in the United States have rebuffed suggestions that the surveillance by the NSA was in any way comparable to Chinese cyberspying.
It's worse.
One intelligence employee, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said the two situations — China’s stealing of trade and military secrets and NSA surveillance to track possible terrorist attacks — were not comparable, calling them “apples and oranges.”
“I can tell you with absolute certainty the US government does not pass on technological secrets obtained through (strictly speaking, as a byproduct of) espionage to US firms, both as a matter of principle and because there is no fair way to do it,” he wrote in an e-mail.
Pfffffft! That is such a lie!
See: THE BUGGING OF THE APEC IN SEATTLE
They have spying on you for a long, long time.
--more--"
"NSA leaker could win aid of China; He reveals data on surveillance of US government" by Keith Bradsher | New York Times, June 15, 2013
HONG KONG — The decision by a former contractor to divulge classified data about the US government’s surveillance of computers in mainland China and Hong Kong has complicated his legal position but may also make China’s security apparatus more interested in helping him stay there, law and security experts said Friday.
Imagine all the secrets they could learn. From what I saw on the web, the AmeriKan media has only revealed 10% of the files Snowden exposed.
The South China Morning Post, a local newspaper, reported Friday that Edward J. Snowden, the contractor, had shared detailed data showing the dates and Internet Protocol addresses of specific computers in mainland China and Hong Kong that the National Security Agency penetrated over the past four years.
I think we just found who is responsible for the hacking of AmeriKan computers.
The data also showed whether the agency was still breaking into these computers, the success rates for hacking, and other operational information. Snowden told the newspaper that the computers were in the civilian sector. But Western experts have long said that the dividing line between the civilian sector and the government is blurry in China.
State-owned or state-controlled enterprises still control much of the economy, and virtually all are run by Communist Party cadres who tend to rotate back and forth between government and corporate jobs every few years as part of elaborate career development procedures.
Oh, the Chinese have a revolving door regarding their politics, too?
Related: Sunday Globe Special: NSA Scandal a Mess For McConnell
In Dublin on Friday, Attorney General Eric Holder said national security had been damaged as a result of leaks about the NSA surveillance programs, and that the United States will punish the person who is responsible. No charges have been filed.
That criminal hasn't resigned yet?
In a separate development, the British government warned airlines around the world not to allow Snowden to fly to the United Kingdom. The travel alert said carriers should deny Snowden boarding because ‘‘the individual is highly likely to be refused entry to the UK.’’
--more--"
"Mueller calls NSA surveillance legal; FBI director says leaks have hurt national security" by Pete Yost | Associated Press, June 14, 2013
WASHINGTON — FBI Director Robert Mueller staunchly defended a pair of controversial government surveillance programs on Thursday, telling Congress that leaking information on them harms national security.
Unless it is leaked by the government or administration itself.
You know, like on how butch Obama is signing of on drone strikes after he consults his kill list.
In his final appearance as FBI director before the House Judiciary Committee, Mueller said the leaks give valuable information to those seeking to harm the United States.
‘‘Every time that we have a leak like this — and if you follow it up and you look at the intelligence afterwards — they are looking at the ways around it,’’ Mueller said. ‘‘One of my problems is that we’re going to . . . lose our ability to get their communications. We are going to be exceptionally vulnerable.’’
So WHEN is the NEXT FALSE FLAG TERROR ATTACK, Bob?
As for losing access, not happening. Program isn't going to end.
Last week’s revelations that the National Security Agency is collecting millions of US phone records along with digital communications stored by nine major Internet companies have touched off a fiery national debate. Several lawmakers suggested the Obama administration, in its efforts to thwart terrorism, has overstepped proper bounds by using intrusive surveillance methods whose scope is stunning.
The admitted leaker of the NSA’s secrets, 29-year-old contractor Edward Snowden, is the subject of an ongoing criminal investigation, Mueller testified....
Representative John Conyers, the committee’s ranking Democrat, said, ‘‘It’s my fear that we are on the verge of becoming a surveillance state.’’
On the verge, John? We have been there for quite some time, you f***ing fraud.
All I remember about him was thundering on Democracy Now about attorneygate and Karl Rove, and then.... nothing.
In defending the programs, Mueller called attention to the run-up to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, saying that if the controversial surveillance efforts had been in place back then, they might have uncovered the hijackers’ plot....
He was ON DUTY THEN!
So WHY DID YOU IGNORE FBI FIELD REPORTS about HIJACKERS, Bob?
That's if you believe the official cock-and-bull cover story.
Mueller is nearing the end of his 12 years as head of the agency conducting high-profile investigations of the Boston Marathon bombings; the attacks in Benghazi, Libya, that killed four Americans; and leaks of classified government information. Mueller’s last day on the job is Sept. 4.
‘‘These leaks illustrate the delicate balancing act between the need to protect national security information and investigate leaks, and the need to preserve the First Amendment to freedom of the press,’’ said committee chairman Representative Bob Goodlatte of Virginia.
NO! There is NO BALANCING ACT when it comes to the BILL of RIGHTS!
Btw, Bob, FREE SPEECH is the RIGHT of ALL AMERICANS, not just the agenda-pushing pre$$titutes!
The Justice Department revealed last month that it had secretly gathered phone records of the Associated Press and e-mails of Fox News journalist James Rosen in an effort to crack down on leakers of classified information.
‘‘The Obama administration takes credit for having investigated more national security leaks than any previous administration,’’ Goodlatte said. ‘‘While this may be true, I’m not certain whether it is due to a more aggressive investigative approach to national security leaks or the simple fact that there have been a shockingly high number of leaks in the last 4½ years.’’
On Benghazi, Republicans accuse the administration of misleading the public about an act of terrorism in the heat of the presidential campaign by saying the Sept. 11, 2012, assaults on the US diplomatic post grew out of spontaneous demonstrations over an anti-Muslim video. In the immediate aftermath, UN Ambassador Susan Rice described it as a ‘‘horrific incident where some mob was hijacked, ultimately, by a handful of extremists.’’ The White House says Rice reflected the best information available.
Goodlatte said the committee planned to find out more about the status of what the congressman called the FBI’s stalled investigation in Libya.
GOP lawmakers also have questioned why the military could not get aircraft or troops to Benghazi in time to thwart a second attack after the first incident that killed US Ambassador Chris Stevens. Four Americans, including Stevens, died in two attacks that took place several hours apart.
I'm surprised to see the staged and scripted Libyan hostage scenario that went bad given three paragraphs -- admittedly at the end of the piece.
--more--"
More from Mueller:
"FBI director admits to lapse before Marathon bombing" by Noah Bierman | Globe Staff, June 14, 2013
WASHINGTON — FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III acknowledged on Thursday that a lack of formal communication within the agency may have prevented investigators from alerting Russian authorities that Tamerlan Tsarnaev had returned to Russia before the Marathon bombing, information that Russian officials say could have averted the act of terrorism.
That's bulls***. He was one of their assets or agents, that's why they gave him a clean check.
Mueller also told the House Judiciary Committee that the government’s recently exposed surveillance techniques, which have been criticized as too sweeping, can be credited with helping spur an investigation of an associate of Tsarnaev, Ibragim Todashev, 27. Todashev was shot to death by an FBI agent in Florida last month during an interview related to his and Tsarnaev’s possible involvement in a Waltham triple homicide. Mueller declined to comment on the specific circumstances during Thursday’s hearing, citing an ongoing investigation.
Great, an innocent man was murdered because of this total surveillance system.
Mueller, who is preparing to step down after 12 years leading the FBI, said that the agency has changed its procedures following the Boston Marathon bombings to require a more formal process of communication between investigators. But he disputed speculation that any communication breakdown facilitated the bombings. “Even if [procedures] had been fixed prior to the Boston bombing, I do not think it would have stopped it,” he said....
He blamed the Russians, can you believe it?
And if so, Bob, then THE WHOLE THING is a FAILURE!
The NSA has been collecting all communications for the LAST SEVEN YEARS at least!
Mueller’s other significant disclosure involved Todashev, the Tsarnaev associate killed in Florida. Federal law enforcement officials have been quoted anonymously in various publications as saying that Todashev was confessing to a role in a Waltham triple homicide in 2011 and also implicating Tsarnaev in that crime. The FBI has yet to clarify the circumstances of death of Todashev, who has not been linked to the Marathon bombings.
And they already said they would be saying nothing more on the matter.
Mueller shed no new light on that investigation Thursday, saying only “there was a response to a threat,” apparently referring to reports that Todashev threatened an FBI agent during questioning.
Threatened him with what?
Related: Long Jog in the Boston Globe
Another Leg in Marathon Bombing Posts
Mueller a liar!
But in his comments Thursday he used the case to bolster his argument that government surveillance techniques revealed recently are an important tool for law enforcement. There has been extensive debate over two programs to collect millions of phone, e-mail, and Internet records.
And CUI BONO?
When asked how Todashev came to the agency’s attention, he said it was through “a number of ways including one of the programs that is under scrutiny today.”
What garbage.
Mueller spent much of his three-hour testimony on Thursday defending those programs, facing skepticism from some lawmakers who argued that they are too invasive. At one point, he said that if such programs had existed before the Sept. 11 attacks, those acts of terrorism might have been derailed.
Uh-huh.
What, you would have all busted the Israeli spies?
--more--"
This is shit!
Related:
Hospital visit inspires Marathon amputee J.P. Norden
Officer wounded in shoot-out heads home
Volunteers, companies help Marathon bombing victims
One Fund receives about 200 applications
Amid death and anguish of bombing, a gift of life
Another gift:
"Bomb threats, hoaxes have public and police on edge; Cases rise since April 15 attacks" by Maria Cramer | Globe Staff, June 17, 2013
State Police say such incidents have caused chaos and fear, putting authorities and the public on edge. One official said troopers are “running ragged” responding to bomb threats, hoax devices, and calls about an unattended backpack or suitcase....
Well, TOO FUCKING BAD!
You want to play the false flag, agenda-pushing, staged and scripted hoax events, then LIVE WITH IT!!
Sergeant Paul Horgan of the State Police, said, “There are people jumping on this bandwagon who like to cause mayhem. They’re taking advantage of this situation to continue to put the fear in people.”
Oh, it is AmeriKan newspaper behind it all, 'eh?
All of this comes at a time when the State Police bomb squad, a unit of 11 bomb technicians, says it is already busy chasing down amateur bomb-makers. As summer approaches and children are out of school, many, particularly teenage boys, while away lazy days making explosive devices using blueprints they take from the Internet.
Then government should know all about it.
Generally, police need to be aggressive even in cases where the intent of the suspects was to have fun with explosives, not destroy property or hurt someone, said Trooper Justin Peledge....
“Lighting paper towels in the sink turns into lighting up dumpsters, and that dumpster can be next to an apartment building,” Peledge said. He recalled a case when small pipe bombs were placed inside a series of mailboxes, when children were coming home from school.
“I don’t think it’s an attempt to hurt people, though clearly that’s what can happen,” Peledge said.
Gone are the days when intrepid teens looking to cause mischief would seek out a copy of the Anarchist Cookbook, a how-to guide for building bombs, said Trooper Stephen Sicard, a bomb technician.
“It went from an underground press into something that now everybody can find online,” he said. And while police may be busier than they wish, officials are encouraging parents, and storekeepers to watch for certain signs. For example, a teenage boy buying toilet cleaner is most likely not interested in tidying up the bathroom, Horgan said....
Yeah, everyone knows teenage boys or their families don't clean their toilets.
Hey, see something, say something.
--more--"
I have about as much sympathy for the bomb squad as I do for this guy:
"Dick Cheney defends national surveillance policies; Calls contractor who disclosed them a traitor" by John M. Broder | New York Times, June 17, 2013
NEW YORK — Former vice president Dick Cheney defended the newly disclosed electronic surveillance programs operated by the government on Sunday and called the former National Security Agency contract worker who disclosed them a criminal and a traitor.
What rock did they find him under?
Appearing on “Fox News Sunday,” Cheney, a forceful advocate for the classified programs when he was in office, said that Edward J. Snowden, a Booz Allen Hamilton employee who was assigned to a NSA facility in Hawaii, had severely undermined US intelligence capabilities.
How?
Snowden, who flew to Hong Kong from Hawaii last month with a trove of documents about top-secret telephone and Internet surveillance programs, has since revealed that the United States had penetrated the computer systems of China and numerous other countries.
No wonder the REST of the WORLD is PISSED OFF!
“I think it’s one of the worst occasions in my memory of somebody with access to classified information doing enormous damage to the national security interests of the United States,” Cheney said.
Yeah, almost as bad as your office outing a CIA operative and exposing all her contacts.
Related: Cheney Fibbed to FBI
Cheney said that Snowden had violated US law and might be a Chinese spy.
Then why did he blow a whistle? We didn't he stay silent and in the job?
C'mon, DICK!!!
“I’m suspicious because he went to China,” said Cheney, who flew to Washington from his home in Jackson Hole, Wyo., on Saturday to appear on the Fox program. “That’s not a place where you would ordinarily want to go if you are interested in freedom, liberty, and so forth. It raises questions whether or not he had that kind of connection before he did this.”
Is that why so many people are leaving AmeriKa?
Snowden had written in earlier Internet postings that he was interested in Chinese language and culture and suggested that a posting in the country could be a good career move....
Cheney said he is concerned that Snowden has additional damaging information. He said he thought the Chinese authorities might welcome the opportunity to provide him sanctuary from American law enforcement officials who are expected to seek his extradition to face charges in the United States.
Imagine all the secrets he can tell, too!
Michael Hayden, the former director of the CIA and National Security Agency, said Sunday that the government’s reliance on data collection from both Americans and foreign nationals was constitutional and carefully overseen by executive, legislative, and court authorities.
That DOESN'T MAKE IT RIGHT! Everything Hitler did was legal, too!
In an interview on NBC’s “Meet the Press,’’ Hayden said he worried that news reports about the programs have often provided erroneous information, ‘‘much to the harm of a rational national debate.’’ He did not specify those concerns.
That wouldn't be the first time for AmeriKan media, but this is pathetic. Bunch of fascist f***s out here defending the indefensible.
Senator Mark Udall, a Colorado Democrat who has been a critic of the secrecy surrounding the government’s surveillance, raised doubts about the effectiveness of the widespread collection of US phone metadata.
‘‘I don’t think collecting millions and millions of Americans’ phone calls — now this is the metadata, this is the time, place, to whom you direct the calls — is making us any safer,’’ Udall said on the NBC program.
Udall said he is introducing a bill to narrow the reach of that collection to only ‘‘those who have a link to terrorism.’’
President Obama has defended the electronic eavesdropping programs, saying they were closely monitored and were a useful tool in fighting terrorism.
Yeah, just holler communist, I mean, terrorist, and we will all get scared and fall in line.
But Cheney said Obama could not mount an effective defense because of investigations into the Internal Revenue Service treatment of Tea Party groups and continuing questions about the terrorist attacks on an American diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya. “He’s got no credibility,” Cheney said.
HA! Is that ever the pot calling the kettle black!
Related: Obama Defends Dick Cheney
Dick is also an ungrateful asshole, or he is playing his role in the s***-show fooley!
Btw, Dick, can we get those records regarding the 9/11 situation room and the war games you were directing so we can clarify that stand-down order.
US Representative Mike Rogers, a Michigan Republican who chairs the House Intelligence Committee, defended the surveillance programs on Sunday, saying they were tightly monitored by Congress, the courts, and the executive branch. He appeared on the CNN’s “State of the Union.”
“We’ve used it sparingly,” Rogers said of the capacity to collect records of telephone calls and Internet traffic. He said that much of the reporting on the programs has been exaggerated and that most Americans would support the data collection if they understood its narrow scope.
If we would support it why has it remained so secret?
This attempt at damage control is OFFENSIVE, folks!
The whole government is filled with nothing but LYING SHITS!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Rogers said most of the information is kept in a “lockbox” and not scrutinized unless it correlated with activity of known or suspected foreign terrorists.
“The NSA is not listening to Americans’ phone calls, and it is not monitoring their e-mails,” said Rogers, a former agent in the FBI. “If it did, it’s illegal. It’s breaking the law.”
And because he says it we must believe it!
He also referred to a letter delivered to Congress on Saturday from the office of James R. Clapper Jr., the director of national intelligence, in which he said that the surveillance programs had helped thwart “dozens” of terrorist plots in the United States and more than 20 other countries. The letter said fewer than 300 American phone records were reviewed in 2012.
Yeah, except CLAPPER was ALREADY CAUGHT LYING to CONGRESS!!
Sorry!
The White House chief of staff, Denis McDonough, appearing on CBS’s “Face the Nation,” said that he did not know where Snowden was now hiding but said that he had exaggerated his access to sensitive materials.
Then WHY are you ALL SO UPSET?!!!
Snowden, in interviews from Hong Kong, has said that he had the ability to tap into virtually anyone’s telephone conversations or to monitor the president’s private e-mail, if he had the address. McDonough called such assertions “incorrect.”
--more--"
Also see: AmeriKan MSM Covering Up Cheney's Crimes
Have been for years.
Related:
"Over the weekend, the Washington Post published yet another revelation about the NSA's surveillance capabilities, including some details of various "code named" data collection projects like MAINWAY, MARINA and NUCLEON. NUCLEON is the program for intercepting telephone calls (the actual content)....
--MORE--"
Also see: NSA Copies All Internet Data, Creates Dossiers on Every User
I didn't see that in my Globe.
"Support slim in Mass. for scrutiny of data; Poll shows 40% opposed to US surveillance" by Joshua Miller | Globe Staff, June 17, 2013
Forty percent of Massachusetts residents oppose the government obtaining telephone records and electronic information of Americans, according to a new Boston Globe poll, while a quarter of Bay Staters support those efforts.
The WHOLE COUNTRY DOES, and anyone who supports it is likely working or living off the government!
The survey, conducted a week after disclosure of secret government surveillance programs by contractor Edward Snowden also found that more than a third have not heard enough to form an opinion or are neutral on the issue.
Yes, readers, Massachusetts is filled with a bunch of brain-dead f***s.
Intelligence officials say the programs, which collect millions of US phone records and a wide swath of Internet communication, are operated lawfully and narrowly under judicial review and are essential to national security.
Just because it is "legal" doesn't make it right!
But privacy advocates and some members of Congress believe the data gathering goes too far. US representatives from Massachusetts have been among the strongest critics of the programs.
Their criticism was reflected in the comments of poll respondent Nelson Read, 43, of Northampton, who said he was angry about what he saw as government overreach.
“To sit there and have the government actively pursuing information on its citizens, it’s not right, not in a republic anyhow,” said Read, an independent. “I think our Fourth Amendment rights should be enough to prevent them doing that,” he said, referring to the portion of the US Constitution that prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures.
But opposition to the government’s gathering of data is, by no means, universal in the state.
A quarter of Massachusetts adults support the broad data-gathering programs, first reported in the Washington Post and the Guardian.
Respondent Ann Rettman, a 33-year-old from Watertown, was one of them and saw “a fine line” between security and privacy.
Is not!
“Ideally, if they could keep us safe without that level of intrusion into our lives, that would be great,” Rettman said. “But I don’t think that’s realistic.”
And she smartly sieg heiled and moved on her way.
******************************
The opposition to the data-gathering is similar across racial and gender lines.
I thought that was important.
“There’s general opposition — it’s not strong opposition, but it’s opposition — and it comes across all demographic groups,” said Andrew E. Smith, director of The Survey Center at the University of New Hampshire, which conducted the poll.
Hey, look, folks! Obama spying has BROUGHT AMERICANS TOGETHER!
White people and members of minorities support and oppose the data sweeps at similar rates....
I thought that was important.
Opposition differs somewhat based on political party affiliation: 47 percent of those who are unenrolled oppose the surveillance; 41 percent of registered Republicans oppose it; and 31 percent of registered Democrats oppose it.
I'm of the first group, and Democraps are pathetic.
Overall, 18 percent of those surveyed are neutral on the issue and 17 percent do not know enough about it to have an opinion.
Those saying neutral knew the government was listening.
Those numbers were a sign that a significant portion of residents had not “tuned in” to the debate over the programs, said Smith, the pollster.
Respondent Frederick R. Levy, a 67-year-old Cambridge resident, said he needed more information before coming to a conclusion on the programs.
“I don’t know enough to make such a snap decision,” he said.
Levy explained he had an inherent wariness about government surveillance, but is “skeptically willing to believe that there is a possibility that they are of value.”
Former counterterrorism officials say that, as the public learns more, support for the data-mining operations will grow....
Then why was it all being kept so secret?
If the more we know the more we are in favor.... SIGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
“I’m convinced a lot of Americans don’t have a lot of the right facts.”
Facts are facts!
There is no RIGHT or WRONG FACTS, FBI a**hole!
“It’s one of these things, if it’s local, and you were being threatened, you would want government agents to be able to” have access to data from the programs, said Tom Powers, a former Boston-based FBI agent who worked for years on terrorism issues.
What if government is the threat?
Privacy advocates vehemently disagree. Carol Rose, the executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts, decried the programs, calling them a “huge dragnet that the government has secretly been carrying out against all of us.”
“I think when people realize that the government can look at practically any information about ordinary Americans’ everyday activities,” said Rose, “they’ll be less inclined to support the programs.”
That is why it HAD TO BE KEPT SECRET, and it shows the government sources and voices on this to be LIARS!!!
Over the weekend, in an effort to show that the phone-tracking program is relatively narrow in scope, intelligence officials said....
Why would anyone believe a word they say?
--more--"
And look what made an appearance in my paper today:
"IRS supervisor describes Tea Party scrutiny; Contradicts initial statements by the agency" by Stephen Ohlemacher | Associated Press, June 17, 2013
WASHINGTON — An Internal Revenue Service supervisor in Washington says she was personally involved in scrutinizing some of the earliest applications from Tea Party groups seeking tax-exempt status, including some requests that languished for more than a year without action.
And we were told it was all rogue agents in the Cincinnati office.
Holly Paz, who until recently was a top deputy in the division that handles applications for tax-exempt status, told congressional investigators she reviewed 20 to 30 applications.
Her assertion contradicts initial statements by the agency that a small group of agents working in an office in Cincinnati was solely responsible for mishandling the applications.
Oh, the IRS LIED?
Paz, however, provided no evidence that senior IRS officials ordered agents to target conservative groups or that anyone in the Obama administration outside the IRS was involved.
Just her testimony under oath, which apparently means nothing.
Instead, Paz described an agency in which IRS supervisors in Washington worked closely with agents in the field but didn’t fully understand what those agents were doing.
Right.
Paz said agents in Cincinnati openly talked about handling ‘‘Tea Party’’ cases, but she thought the term was merely shorthand for all applications from groups that were politically active — conservative and liberal.
Paz said dozens of Tea Party applications sat untouched for more than a year while field agents waited for guidance from Washington on how to handle them. At the time, she said, Washington officials thought the agents in Cincinnati were processing the cases.
And this "don't know its ass from its elbow" agency is going to be handling health care financing?
Paz was among the first IRS employees to be interviewed as part of a joint investigation by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee and the House Ways and Means Committee.
Congressional investigators have interviewed at least six IRS employees as part of their inquiry. The Associated Press has reviewed transcripts from three interviews — with Paz and with two agents, Gary Muthert and Elizabeth Hofacre, from the Cincinnati office.
The IRS declined to comment for this story.
A yearlong audit by the agency’s inspector general found that IRS agents had improperly targeted conservative political groups for additional and sometimes onerous scrutiny when those groups applied for tax-exempt status.
That is a CRIME, and it got Nixon IMPEACHED!
The audit found no evidence that Washington officials ordered or authorized the targeting. But the IRS watchdog blamed ineffective management by senior IRS officials for allowing it to continue for nearly two years during the 2010 and 2012 elections.
Since the revelations became public last month, much of the agency’s leadership has been replaced and the Justice Department has started a criminal investigation.
Paz and her supervisor, Lois Lerner, who headed the division that handles applications for tax-exempt status, have been replaced.
Agency officials told congressional aides that Lerner was placed on administrative leave. They did not disclose the status of Paz, other than to say she was replaced June 7.
Lerner is the IRS official who first disclosed the targeting at a legal conference May 10.
In a controlled leak. The question was planted.
That day, she said: ‘‘It’s the line people that did it without talking to managers. They’re IRS workers, they’re revenue agents.’’
On May 22 — the day after Paz was interviewed by investigators — Lerner refused to answer questions from lawmakers at a congressional hearing, citing her Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate herself.
Yeah, only the criminals of government have a right to privacy!
--more--"
The other notorious leaker:
"In opening of Wiki case, clashing portrait of leaker; US says Manning a threat; defense calls him naive" by Charlie Savage | New York Times, June 04, 2013
FORT MEADE, Md. — The dueling portrayals underscored the oddity at the heart of the trial, which is expected to last as long as 12 weeks.
There is no doubt that Private First Class Bradley Manning did most of what he is accused is doing, and he has already pleaded guilty to 10 charges for that conduct, for which he could be sentenced to up to 20 years.
After he was TORTURED while being confined!
But his plea was not part of any deal with the government, and prosecutors are moving forward with the trial because they hope to convict him of a far more serious set of charges, including violating the Espionage Act and aiding the enemy, that could result in a life sentence.
Translation: they want to keep Manning quiet forever.
The government’s decision not to accept a plea deal with Manning and to pursue life imprisonment is just one piece of the aggressive tactics the Obama administration has used in its pursuit of leakers. The administration has brought six prosecutions in leak-related cases, compared with three under all previous presidents.
But he has the most transparent administration in history.
Last month, a furor erupted following the disclosure that the Justice Department had secretly obtained phone call logs for reporters for the Associated Press and Fox News as part of leak investigations — and that it had told a judge, as part of a search warrant application for the Fox News reporter’s e-mails, that the reporter most likely violated the Espionage Act....
In his 58-minute opening presentation, Captain Joe Morrow’s portrayal dovetailed in many ways with Manning’s own confession in February, but the prosecutor appeared to be laying the groundwork to argue that Manning started downloading files earlier in his deployment than he had confessed to doing and that he played a more active role in interacting with WikiLeaks. In particular, Morrow contended that some of Manning’s searches were undertaken in response to public requests by WikiLeaks for certain documents, such as files related to detainee interrogations. He also said Manning had made suggestions about how to edit a video showing an Apache airstrike on a group of men in Baghdad in 2007 that he provided; two Reuters journalists died in the strike.
The prosecutor repeatedly emphasized that Manning had been trained to be wary of posting material on the Internet and had specifically uncovered an intelligence report warning that foreign adversaries could be gaining access to the information posted on WikiLeaks.
But defense lawyer David Coombs rejected the notion that Manning was working for WikiLeaks and tried to show that Manning’s mindset and motivations were focused on helping society, not the enemy....
Has Wikileaks been shut down because they haven't leaked anything in a long time -- at least, not that my paper has noticed.
--more--"
"Former computer hacker testifies in WikiLeaks case" by Charlie Savage | New York Times, June 05, 2013
FORT MEADE, Md. — Adrian Lamo, the former computer hacker who reported Private First Class Bradley Manning to military authorities in May 2010 after Manning confided that he had leaked vast archives of secret government documents to WikiLeaks, testified at Manning’s court-martial trial Tuesday that he saw parallels between his own youthful hacking offenses and those of the young Army intelligence analyst.
Lamo has been a polarizing figure in the WikiLeaks saga. He is despised by many of Manning’s supporters for betraying the trust of a person they see as an important whistle-blower; Lamo has maintained that turning Manning in was the socially responsible thing to do because Manning’s wholesale leaking recklessly endangered others. Lamo said he reached out to the military the day after his first online talk with Manning, while continuing to chat online with him over the next week.
When Lamo was 22, he hacked into the networks of several companies, including The New York Times. He pleaded guilty in 2004 to the offenses and was sentenced to six months of home arrest and two years of probation. He has since become a network threat analyst.
OH! There goes his credibility!
During cross-examination, Manning’s defense lawyer, David Coombs, stressed the portions of the chat logs showing that his client had reached out to Lamo at a time when he was struggling with his own gender identity, had just spent several months downloading government secrets, and sending them to WikiLeaks, and was scared, confused, and possibly suicidal.
So the government is nothing but a gay-bashing bully?
While the trial could last 12 weeks, there is no doubt that Manning did nearly everything that he is accused of doing: He confessed in detail in February to being WikiLeaks’ source and pled guilty to nine lesser versions — and one full version — of the charges he is facing, which has exposed him to up to 20 years in prison.
After he was tortured!
The government is pressing forward with a trial because it wants to convict him of 20 more serious versions of the charges, like espionage and aiding the enemy, which could result in a life sentence.
Related: Burying Bradley Manning
That will shut him up.
--more--"
Also see: House Settles With Homeland Security
"US says Manning leaked crucial data" by David Dishneau | Associated Press, June 12, 2013
FORT MEADE, Md. — The mountain of classified material Army Private First Class Bradley Manning gave to the antisecrecy organization WikiLeaks revealed sensitive information about military operations and tactics, including code words and the name of at least one enemy target, according to evidence the government presented Tuesday.
Manning has said he did not believe that the more than 700,000 battlefield reports, diplomatic cables, and video clips he leaked while working as an intelligence analyst in Baghdad would hurt national security. Prosecutors want to convict him of aiding the enemy, which carries a potential life sentence, for leaking information they say found its way to Osama bin Laden.
They made their way into his gravesite on an Afghan mountainside, huh?
For the first time, prosecutors presented evidence that Manning’s leaks compromised sensitive information in dozens of categories. The evidence was in the form of written statements that the defense and prosecutors accepted as substitutions for live testimony. It was read aloud in court....
What a FARCE!
--more--"
So much for coverage of the trial in my Boston Globe.
Also see: How to keep data away from prying eyes
Unfortunately, government can still get a look at it.
"US security — too big not to fail" by James Carroll | Globe Columnist, June 17, 2013
The view through a prism can distort shapes and fragment color — perhaps heightening the beholder’s interest, but offering anything but an authentic glimpse of reality.
Related:
Six Zionist Companies Own 96% of the World's Media
Declassified: Massive Israeli manipulation of US media exposed
Operation Mockingbird
Why Am I No Longer Reading the Newspaper?
The National Security Agency’s ironic choice of “PRISM” as the code name for a massive data-collection program, recently exposed in documents leaked by federal contractor Edward Snowden, only begins to suggest the problems with this clandestine intrusion into the lives of citizens.
Government snooping is nothing new. But PRISM, which gathers information from Facebook, Google, and other tech giants, appears unusually far-reaching; the security agency was gathering detailed phone-call data from Verizon as well. These initiatives have moved the potential scale of government surveillance into a whole new realm whose limits are unknown — not only to citizens, but to officials responsible for the management of intelligence collection.
Two new factors have changed the game entirely. The first is the transformation of the government’s security apparatus from a relatively small enterprise, in which figures like J. Edgar Hoover could exercise dominating influence, into a security bureaucracy vast enough to elude description, much less regulation.
As Dana Priest and William M. Arkin pointed out in their 2010 Washington Post series “Top Secret America,” more than 1,000 government organizations are paired with more than 1,000 private companies in the security labyrinth, all moving about blindly and haphazardly. Almost a million people hold top-secret security clearances, including janitors who manage the waste. Many others hold lesser security classifications. The Post subtitled its series “A hidden world, growing beyond control.” PRISM shows where that loss of control leads, but so does the fact that a low-level analyst like Snowden could lay bare one of the NSA’s deepest secrets.
Such massive bureaucracy, staffed by unnamed millions but commanded by no one, generates an impersonal dynamic of its own. No individual or group of individuals, no matter how well-intentioned, is capable of supervising it. Moral responsibility is diffuse. Such a massive institution gathers its own momentum, and neither laws nor the Constitution nor oath-bound authorities may be able to channel it or stop it.
To the fiercest of national-security hawks, this expansion of a one-track-minded bureaucracy is not intrinsically a problem. But it is, because of a second factor: unfettered technology that also resists all efforts at supervision.
The National Security Agency’s intrusions are possible because Verizon and other telecoms already possess a near universal wealth of personal data on every user, and because computers can sort through such information with astounding efficiency. Quite aside from any government policy, citizens who prefer new-world communication to a Luddite solitude are forfeiting traditional protections of privacy.
But this transformation, beyond shaking loose vast quantities of personal data, has also spread the idea that all information can and should be made transparent. That’s wrong.
The greatest secret being revealed through all of this is that secrets themselves are becoming a thing of the past.
And the greatest conspiracy of all is government and its mouthpiece claiming there are no government conspiracies.
How can Edward Snowden and WikiLeaks whistleblower Bradley Manning, each from his unimportant place deep in the bureaucracy, yet each wielding the radically unchecked power of the computer, so readily penetrate the most secure of government barriers? Their access shows what an illusion those barriers have become. The crisis here is that responsible governance, including that of a liberal democracy, requires the reasonable management of secrecy. What happens when both responsibility and management become impossible?
Turning the prism toward the individual, the crisis can seem even graver. A culture of unlimited personal exposure — whether driven by commerce, government, or the pure exhibitionism evident on social-networking sites — will destroy what makes for human identity. Personhood requires privacy, but privacy is elusive, which is why we depend on one another to safeguard it.
The most basic function of government is to protect each citizen’s inner life, the sacred realm of moral discovery and self-knowledge.
Oh, is that what government is for? What world has he been living in?
Indeed, the freedom that America promises to citizens is the freedom of thought and choice — of nothing less than conscience. The stakes here could not be higher.
But a government unable to protect its own secrets cannot defend the privacy of its citizens. Two sides of the same threat.
--more--"
