Showing posts with label NSA Leaks. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NSA Leaks. Show all posts

Sunday, July 7, 2013

Trust Us

Well, Greta Van Susteren says she knows the guy, so it must be all right.
Granted, I didn’t know Greta Van Susteren, so I had to do a little checking around to see if I could trust Greta enough for her to tell me that Reggie B. Walton is OK.
Don’t know Reggie B. Walton?
Join the club, but I can now tell you that he is the presiding judge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. And he came out in a rare statement bristling at the idea that the court—which had 1856 petitions last year and approved all 1856 of them—is a rubber stamp. Here, with the impartiality for which this family of wordsmiths is famous, is what the guy said:
“The perception that the court is a rubberstamp is absolutely false. There is a rigorous review process of applications submitted by the Executive Branch, spearheaded initially by five judicial branch lawyers who are national security experts, and then by the judges to ensure that the court’s authorizations comport with what the applicable statutes authorize.”
Here’s the deal with the FISA courts—they only hear one side of the story. In every other court in the United States, the opposition gets a chance to come forward, state his defense, and have a judge or jury weigh in. But FISA listens to the government’s case, and then decides.
So that means, that you and I never had a say in the question of whether Verizon turned over your call history to the government. Oh, and not just your call history but your Internet history and also your snail mail, which is photographed—every single last piece of it. All of which can be accessed by the government by petitioning the “rigorous” FISA court, so famously not a rubber stamp.
OK—here’s the dope on Walton: he grew up in Donora, Pennsylvania, a steel town, and was dabbling in gangs when he saw a friend nearly get killed. So that sobered him up, and he went to West Virginia State College on a football scholarship and then to The American University, Washington College of Law for his law degree. Here’s Wikipedia on Walton:
Walton served as an Associate Judge of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia from 1981 to 1989 and from 1991 to 2001. He also served as associate director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy. In 2001, he was nominated to the federal bench by President George W. Bush, and subsequently confirmed by the U.S. Senate. In 2004, Bush appointed him to chair the National Prison Rape Elimination Commission, investigating ways to curb prison rape. In May 2007, Chief Justice of the United States John G. Roberts Jr. appointed him to a seat on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.[3]
The Washington Post reported, "fellow judges and lawyers who appear before him say Walton's decisions do not appear to be guided by politics but by a tough-on-crime mentality." Walton is known by local defense attorneys as a "long ball hitter" - a judge willing to impose long sentences in order to deter future crimes.[3] In fall 2005, the judge was driving his wife and daughter to the airport for a vacation when he came across an assailant attacking a cab driver on the side of the road. Walton tackled the assailant and subdued him until police arrived. The D.C. police spokesperson noted in response, "God bless Judge Walton. I surely wouldn't want to mess with him."[3]
OK—that’s a good story. Sounds like the kind of guy you could trust to make the right decision, right? And I like it that Walton was the guy who sent Cheney’s chief of staff, Scooter Libby, to jail.
Now then, what about Roger Vinson.
Having another “who he” moment?
He’s the Florida judge who authorized the government to demand that Verizon turn over your telephone history (assuming you’re a Verizon customer—but don’t worry, because all of the wireless providers have done so).
OK—Walton may be OK, this guy is questionable. Good news—he’s moderate on drug sentencing. Bad news, he’s a Tea Party conservative who even he acknowledges gives out draconian sentences. He also is the author of the famous broccoli quote:  “If they decided that everybody needs to eat broccoli because broccoli is healthy they could mandate that everybody has to buy a certain amount of broccoli each week.”
One piece of good news, via Huffington Post: “Vinson is known for his love of the flowering camellia tree. He is a longtime member of the Pensacola Camellia Club and is a former president of the American Camellia Society.”
Well, it’s a thing to know….
Here’s something else to know—Vinson’s order to Verizon expires on 19 July—in twelve days. Presumably, someone will walk into the E. Barrett Prettyman United States Courthouse and ask Vinson or another judge to approve the petition for another three months.
Will we know? Will anyone be around to argue the case for NOT collecting the data?
Don’t think so.
Earlier this week, I was watching Rachel Maddow explain—as only she could—how the FBI has killed 70 people and shot another 80. Here’s the New York Times quoting the FBI:
“The F.B.I. takes very seriously any shooting incidents involving our agents, and as such we have an effective, time-tested process for addressing them internally,” a bureau spokesman said.
It may be that the FBI takes shooting incidents seriously, but guess how many of 150 shootings have been found to be justified? That’s right—all 150 of them. And, like the FISA courts, this is wholly internal—no district attorney can declare that the death of, for example, a young Chechen was a homicide committed by agents of the Federal government. A young Chechen whose family retrieved the body, and discovered it with six bullet holes, including one fired point blank to the temple.
More than ever, I am mistrusting my government. We have got to find a way of putting advocates for civil liberties to argue the case for privacy in every FISA petition.
And we gotta do it quick.

Monday, July 1, 2013

Chris Hayes

OK, here—direct from Wikipedia—is the timeline of the Edward Snowden revelations:
    On June 5, The Guardian released a top secret order of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) that ordered a business division of Verizon Communications to provide "on an ongoing daily basis" metadata for all telephone calls "wholly within the United States, including local telephone calls" and all calls made "between the United States and abroad."[23]
    On June 6, The Guardian and The Washington Post revealed the existence of PRISM, a clandestine electronic surveillance program that allegedly allows the NSA to access e-mail, web searches, and other Internet traffic in realtime.[24][25]
    On June 9, The Guardian revealed Boundless Informant, a system that "details and even maps by country the voluminous amount of information [the NSA] collects from computer and telephone networks."
    On June 12, the South China Morning Post disclosed that the NSA has been hacking into computers in China and Hong Kong since 2009.[26]
    On June 17, The Guardian reported that the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), a British intelligence agency, had intercepted foreign politicians' communications at the 2009 G-20 London Summit.[27]
    On June 20, The Guardian revealed two secret documents, signed by Attorney General Eric Holder, describing the rules by which the NSA determines whether targets of investigations are foreign or domestic.[28]
    On June 21, The Guardian made further disclosures about 'Tempora,' an 18-month-old British operation by GCHQ to intercept and store mass quantities of fiber-optic traffic.[29]
    On June 23, the South China Morning Post reported that Snowden had said the NSA had hacked Chinese mobile-phone companies to collect millions of text messages and had also hacked Tsinghua University in Beijing and the Asian fiber-optic network operator Pacnet. The newspaper said Snowden provided documents that listed details of specific episodes during a four-year period.[30][31] According to Glenn Greenwald, "What motivated that leak though was a need to ingratiate himself to the people of Hong Kong and China."[32]
    On June 25, Greenwald reported Snowden claims that he had sent files with NSA secrets to associates for his personal insurance, and that their contents would be revealed should something untoward happen to him.[32]
    On June 29, Der Spiegel reported that the NSA had planted bugs in EU offices in Washington, New York, and Brussels, and had infiltrated their computer networks, according to documents provided by Snowden.[33][34]
Damaging stuff, right?
Or is it? As Chris Hayes points out in the video below, Osama bin Laden knew perfectly well that the US was tracking him—that’s why he never used cell phones and communicated through couriers. True, some of his associates used them, and also true, that helped us catch bin Laden. But let’s face it, any serious terrorist would have to be pretty stupid not to assume that cell phones, emails and internet use are being monitored.
I ask all this for a simple reason: I’m trying to figure out what damage, if any, Edward Snowden has caused. What has he said that terrorists didn’t know? Has he really put lives in jeopardy? Did the Chinese really not know, or suspect or assume, that the US hacked their systems? Does any diplomat of any country think that a hotel room is un-bugged?
And Hayes makes an interesting point. Barbara Starr, the veteran CNN reporter on the Pentagon, came out with leaked information that indicated that the government is able to observe the terrorist organizations frantically trying to change providers. And Hayes wonders—isn’t that information just as dangerous as anything Snowden revealed? Oh, and he points out that nobody is slamming Starr, but Greenwald, the Guardian reporter who is revealing information from Snowden, got tarred a couple days ago by the news that he had been involved in the porn industry (as a lawyer, not a participant…).
Hayes’s point? A leak in favor of surveillance is OK; a leak against surveillance is not.
Snowden has stripped the United States of its ability to be a hypocrite. We can no longer pretend that we are not snooping on everyone: friends, foes, and our own people. But is there really, as Hayes says at the end of the clip, a secret government?
Well, in 1987, Bill Moyers said there was, pissing the conservatives off so much that they threatened to cut off PBS funding for years. Moyers makes the point: the National Security Act of 1947 created something that we had never had in this country before. Never before had we worried full time about our security. Never before had we had the concept of enemies at work against us.
Enemies for very good reasons—an Iranian points out in the documentary that there is no Iranian family without at least one member tortured or killed by the Shah’s secret police. The police the CIA trained after they had overthrown an elected leader and installed the Shah. And how many other nations has the CIA messed with? How much blood is on their hands?
Correction…
…our hands.
Of course the world is pissed at us, of course they’re laughing at us. Guess what?
They’re right, we’re wrong.