Prism

[Sanji Himura]

One thing I'm a little surprised at is the incredulous responses of Facebook, Apple, Google etc. who are all vehemently denying that they knew/know anything about PRISM, and yet, from my understanding anyway, all of these companies are in fact legally obliged to provide information under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) if and when they are requested to do so by the FIS court... these two things alone simply don't add up - how can these companies not know about these requests for data?

They have to deny it. If they came out and say that they are agreeing to this request, they would be the ones put in jail for breaking the Patriot Act.

 

[Touring Mars]

They have to deny it. If they came out and say that they are agreeing to this request, they would be the ones put in jail for breaking the Patriot Act.

The problem with that is that these companies are legally obliged to comply with these requests for data - in other words, they'd be breaking the law if they weren't handing over data when ordered to do so - so in denying that they have any knowledge of this data acquisition seems very odd.

 

[Famine]

The problem with that is that these companies are legally obliged to comply with these requests for data - in other words, they'd be breaking the law if they weren't handing over data when ordered to do so - so in denying that they have any knowledge of this data acquisition seems very odd.

They'd be breaking a much bigger law - the Patriot Act - if they confirmed it though.

It's like superinjunctions. You can't say who has it, or even that it exists. At all.

 

[Touring Mars]

I suppose it is a case of 'when is a denial not a denial'...

... however there's simply no way that these companies didn't know what was happening - so it would appear that their denials are merely cleverly worded statements to avoid a massive public backlash.

I still don't get why they couldn't just be honest and say something along the lines of 'we are complying with our legal obligations with respect to the FISA' - if it's a case of not being able to come clean because of the Patriot Act, then they should have just said nothing at all rather than issuing statements that can't possibly be true.

 

[playnthru]

You want the truth? Just exchange code red with Prism. Here's the video footage www.youtube.com/watch?v=5j2F4VcBmeo‎.👍

 

[FoolKiller]

One thing I'm a little surprised at is the incredulous responses of Facebook, Apple, Google etc. who are all vehemently denying that they knew/know anything about PRISM, and yet, from my understanding anyway, all of these companies are in fact legally obliged to provide information under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) if and when they are requested to do so by the FIS court... these two things alone simply don't add up - how can these companies not know about these requests for data?

Google has been fighting their NSL in court, but the nature of NSLs is that it is illegal to discuss them. Everyone who is being asked for data can't admit they have received a letter, because the letter says it is illegal to discuss the letter.

Screwed if they do, screwed if they don't. Their executives probably don't want to be bunking up with Edward Snowden, wherever he is now.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-5...tries-to-force-google-to-hand-over-user-data/

 

[Mark T]

That is crazy.

A law which requires a company to break the law if requested by the government.

Of course there needs to be a system of data retrieval if there is a need for evidence. However the information should only be available under a court order and maybe there should be a separate body that reviews all applications for data to ensure that it is being requested fairly. Although, then you have the problem of the government by-passing those independent bodies by creating new laws.

 

[Touring Mars]

That is crazy.

A law which requires a company to break the law if requested by the government.

That's what I was thinking - surely it cannot be right to effectively force people (or in this case these tech companies) to lie in order to stay on the right side of the law.

Everyone who is being asked for data can't admit they have received a letter, because the letter says it is illegal to discuss the letter.

So how do they know they received the letter??

 

[Dotini]

"Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive."

 

[BobK]

Something is seriously wrong when our lying government is forcing others to lie for them.

Interesting news clip: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/06/1...as-diverted-to-phoenix-after-possible-threat/

Wonder if we're going to have a spate of similar incidents, which will then be used to justify more phone surveillance.

 

[FoolKiller]

So how do they know they received the letter??

According to the article, Bloomberg supposedly unearthed the court filings.


And I just read about Operation Troll the NSA, a movement to get as many as possible to send an email loaded with keywords at the same time.

This should be fun.

 

[Zenith]

Are there any updates on this situation? It seems that the Obama Administration is playing it quiet until the American public forgets about it and moves along to the next controversy.

 

[Danoff]

It's an interesting legal distinction - that storing the data is not search. The search happens when the data is actually queried and read. I don't think that should hold up in court.

Even if it did, any software that interacts with, interprets, catalogs, or generates statistics based on the data is querying it and constitutes a search.

 

[Azure Flare]

If the NSA has been monitoring all Americans, I bet they have a pretty interesting file on me.

 

[Zenith]

It's an interesting legal distinction - that storing the data is not search. The search happens when the data is actually queried and read. I don't think that should hold up in court.

Even if it did, any software that interacts with, interprets, catalogs, or generates statistics based on the data is querying it and constitutes a search.

Would make a great excuse for peeping toms.

"Officer, I wasn't invading her privacy! I was just storing data in this camera."

 

[FoolKiller]

I've seen reports that Glen Greenwald, of The Guardian, says they will be releasing more info over time. We will probably find out more details about what exactly PRISM is doing.

I'm still curious about why it is that every time we catch the government doing stuff like this most of Congress is more upset about leaks than the policy. I've seen them online trying to make this about leaks and claiming Snowden is guilty of treachery and espionage. I've even seen comments taking his interview out of context, claiming he eluded to defecting to China.

This is the way we work now, apparently. Create a face for a boogeyman, claim he is under the bed or in the closet, say the only way to know is to check everything, and then tarnish the reputation of anyone who disagrees. Take their precise words and say they said something very different.

I don't see how any honest person can misunderstand, "Ideally, I'd like to go to Iceland," as, "I'd like to defect to China."


In a fun twist, Audible.com listed Julian Assange's book as a new audio release this month.

 

[Danoff]

Isn't it just a ton of fun to watch all the people who (rightfully) ruthlessly attacked the Bush administration for domestic spying now defend the Obama administration for taking the same exact policy even further? And all the people who so staunchly defended the Bush Administration now ruthlessly attack the Obama administration for the same thing?

It's like they think we can't remember anything that happened a few years ago.

 

[Pupik]

I'm still curious about why it is that every time we catch the government doing stuff like this most of Congress is more upset about leaks than the policy. I've seen them online trying to make this about leaks and claiming Snowden is guilty of treachery and espionage.

It's McCarthyism, all over again.

This is the way we work now, apparently. Create a face for a boogeyman, claim he is under the bed or in the closet, say the only way to know is to check everything, and then tarnish the reputation of anyone who disagrees. Take their precise words and say they said something very different.

This is the opportunity for the free and mainstream media to really tell the government to stick it where the sun don't shine, and instead, we're pointing fingers. Nobody wants to lose their White House credentials.

Isn't it just a ton of fun to watch all the people who (rightfully) ruthlessly attacked the Bush administration for domestic spying now defend the Obama administration for taking the same exact policy even further? And all the people who so staunchly defended the Bush Administration now ruthlessly attack the Obama administration for the same thing?

It's like they think we can't remember anything that happened a few years ago.

Seriously, between this and wiretapping of AP, this crap has got to stop, but once you give these greedy folks a new toy, you can't wrestle it away. And everyone's to blame, but nobody's getting punished, because everyone has some sort of dirty laundry.

We're so painted into a corner right now, it's scary.

 

[GTsail]

*snip*
I'm still curious about why it is that every time we catch the government doing stuff like this most of Congress is more upset about leaks than the policy. I've seen them online trying to make this about leaks and claiming Snowden is guilty of treachery and espionage.

According to some sources I've heard, I think its because Congress was already briefed about the PRISM program. Both the House and Senate Intelligence and Judiciary Committees. So its hard for them to complain about themselves.

It will be interesting to see just how extensive the briefings were, but since the briefings were highly classified, I suspect that we will only get very generalized info on what was said during the briefings. Now if we could only get the NSA to wire-tap the briefings.

Respectfully,
GTsail

 

[Zenith]

A good question at this point is what can be done to fight these overreaches in power. Especially when the SCOTUS, who are supposed to be the guardians of the Constitution, are a group of cronies for whatever authoritarian appointed them and have little grasp or concern for the words of the Bill of Rights.

 

[Omnis]

Droppin knowledge http://econospeak.blogspot.com/2013/06/from-big-ear-to-universal-ear.html

 

[TheBook]

I'm mildly surprised that Congress hasn't yet (to my knowledge) compared what they're doing to Abraham Lincoln suspending the writ of habeas corpus during the American Civil War. The major difference here that I see (feel free to correct me and add more information) is that we aren't in a declared war with our own citizens. I fear that this is one step closer to another civil war though, except it'll be the people vs. the government.

 

[USARMYCOMBATVET]

US CYBERCOM NSA Director to testifyhttp://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57588830/nsa-director-to-get-a-public-grilling-in-the-senate/

 

[FoolKiller]

A class-action lawsuit has been filed. Obama, Holder, and NSA chief named along with complicit companies.
http://www.usnews.com/news/newsgram...ght-against-complicit-companies-and-officials

I'm curious if the companies can argue their way out of any guilt by pointing out the nature of how the requests work and then sign on as a plaintiff.

 

[hogger129]

Isn't it just a ton of fun to watch all the people who (rightfully) ruthlessly attacked the Bush administration for domestic spying now defend the Obama administration for taking the same exact policy even further? And all the people who so staunchly defended the Bush Administration now ruthlessly attack the Obama administration for the same thing?

It's like they think we can't remember anything that happened a few years ago.

What about those of us who thought it wrong from the get go?

 

[Keef]

So when do we start offing people because they won't stop committing rights violations?

 

[Grayfox]

I find it funny that the alphabet group of the US is saying the guy that exposed the monitoring but US security at risk.

They have themselves to blame.

What did they think would happen when this got out?

People go on their merry way and not complain?

Don't they also see that they open themselves up to domestic attacks from unbalanced people are fed up with the dictatorship like government because of the monitoring?

 

[Touring Mars]

I'm still curious about why it is that every time we catch the government doing stuff like this most of Congress is more upset about leaks than the policy.

It's not all that surprising given the support for PRISM among politicians...

In fact, those Americans whom Rasmussen categorizes as the “political class”--that is, those connected to DC and governance--support PRISM by a 71 percent to 18 percent ratio. Meanwhile, the rest of the country opposes PRISM by a more than three-to-one ratio, 69 percent to 21 percent.

(from here)

It is nteresting to note the huge difference between the opinions of politicians and the public - it could be due to any number of reasons - being cynical one might say that politicians are inherently interested in gaining and maintaining the reigns of power and that they lose their objectivity over time... or it could be that they are privy to real/credible information that we are not and hence they understand the nature of the threats being faced by the nation better, which may go at least some way to explaining why otherwise intelligent and freedom-loving people are prepared to support things like PRISM when it clearly goes against public opinion and the Constitution. The fact is that the nature of the threats posed to US people and interests are changing constantly and at a frightening pace, and it is the duty of the government to protect its people - it may well be that the average politician in Congress believes that the threats posed to the nation are so great that trampling long-held Constitutionally-protected rights is the lesser of two evils.

 

[Keef]

New poll: 46% of Americans don't know if the man is a traitor or a patriot because they're dumb and don't know the definition of either word.

 

[Famine]

The fact is that the nature of the threats posed to US people and interests are changing constantly

Indeed. PRISM being just one of those threats.

Some drivelling sycophant or other - possibly a politician, but maybe a senior federal agent - remarked that PRISM is good because it stopped lots of terrorism. The fact that PRISM is terrorism - an attack on the freedoms of civilians - seems to have escaped him...