Thursday, July 3, 2014

The Ominous NSA...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Purveyor of Truth


Many, but far from enough, resisted the Patriot Act and warned us of the potential and likely infringement on our civil liberties and privacy rights by the NSA. Perhaps Professor Leonard Piekoff in his book "The Ominous Parallels" was prophetic when he outlined similarities between Nazi Germany and modern America in its slow march towards fascism. Present day American conservatism is perhaps the greatest threat to our freedoms and personal liberties the nation has faced at any time in our history, although the Obama administration and many liberals have been supportive of the NSA.

Deutsche Welle - A former NSA technical chief has told Germany's parliament that the US agency has become a "totalitarian" mass collector of data. German public broadcasters say the NSA targets individuals who use encryption services.

Former NSA technical head William Binney described the US National Security Agency in Berlin on Thursday as an entity that had abandoned every rule-of-law principle and breached the democratic freedoms of citizens.

Binney was the first American insider to testify to the German Bundestag's newly formed NSA inquiry committee, which is pursuing three questions, including whether German intelligence services had worked with the NSA.

Testifying, Binney accused the NSA of having a "totalitarian mentality" and wanting "total information control" over citizens in breach of the US constitution. It was an approach that until now the public had only seen among dictators, he added.

Mass collection was "senseless" and did not help in counterterrorism, and actually hindered the agency's capabilities, Binney said.

The NSA represented the "greatest threat" to American society since the US Civil War of the 19th century, Binney added.

Binney left the NSA as its technical chief in 2001 shortly it began mass scanning in the wake of 9/11 hijack attacks by al Qaeda terrorists on New York and Washington.

Another former NSA staffer, Thomas Drake, who left the NSA after trying to use official complaint channels, told the inquiry that almost all data that transited Germany was accessed by the NSA and Germany's BND foreign intelligence service -- or the NSA alone.

The US government was exercising the ultimate form of control, Drake said, adding that the German BND's silence on the issue was "terrible."

"The public has a right to know what the NSA does," he said, according to a quote from the hearing delivered by the German DPA news agency in German.

Drake said the United States would soon become a "real surveillance" nation in which the private lives of individuals were becoming more and more the property of the state.

On Wednesday, the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board (PCLOB), a panel appointed by US President Barack Obama, defended the NSA's vast foreign intelligence data sweeps.

Read more BELOW THE FOLD.

Via: Memeorandum

21 comments:

  1. The only Senator who was brave enough to oppose the Patriot Act (and what a shameless name for a piece of legislation) was Russ Feingold and look what happened to him. What does that tell us, Les?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Feingold has a lot of statist, anti-liberty views, including his support of abortionists killing already-born US citizens without any due process. But his stance on PATRIOT is commendable. The man who defeated him supports it, and even made a specific statement in which he said we need to give up our freedoms.

      Delete
    2. Feingold was part of a dying breed: voted his conscience. What's the matter with Wisconsin?

      Delete
    3. I think of it as more of a stopped clock being correct every once in a while. :) But regardless, Feingold has/had the better, and more consistent stand on PATRIOT than his successor.

      Delete
    4. With respect the Feingold, yes dmarks he is a statist, a firm believer in a strong powerful federal (central) governmen. I suspect he may be of the mind that individual rights are derived from the state, although I can not say he does with any degree certitude. As you know I reject, completely that line of thought out of hand.

      In regard to Feingold supporting a women's right to abortion, he does, as do I within the framework of time I have previously discussed on many occasions.

      Your allegation that Feingold supports " ... abortionists killing already-born US citizens without any due process" I have not seen any evidence of that. Perhaps I missed it? If so I would be most appreciative if you could provide a link to a reputable source confirming the allegation.

      A lot of hot air floats around hot button issues that merely amounts to hyperbole that is meant to damage a person's character.

      Delete
    5. http://theshinbone.com/congtran.1.htm

      Here is a transcript where Feingold says killing a born child is up to the "doctor".

      Yes, Santorum has out of the mainstream views on this issue, to say the least. But so does Feingold.

      Delete
    6. From the transcript linked to above...

      Russ Feingold: Once a child has been born, there is no conceivable argument that would suggest a woman's life or health would any longer be at risk or an issue. This distortion of our exchange is the kind of tactic which undermines efforts to reach an agreement that would ban late-term abortions, except for the most narrow circumstances where a woman's life or health was at stake...

      As I said in my previous (as yet) unpublished comment: the statement (now two statements) regarding Senator Feingold and the killing of "born children" are inaccurate.

      Delete
    7. As I understand the linked transcript, Feingold stated the woman patient and her doctor
      be free to decide gyno/obstretric matters, not the US government. Santorum follows the
      dictates of the ultra Catholic Opus Dei, of which is a practioner, and believes that government should decide the matter. As the medieval church decided guilt and made the
      medieval government burn the heretic at the state. It seems simply a matter of what we
      want government to do or not, doesn't it?

      Delete
    8. BB: The situation involved a born child (a legal US citizen under the constitution). This is the extreme, and unpopular one, of the abortion debate.

      "It seems simply a matter of what we want government to do or not"

      If the government wants to appoint abortionists as ad-hoc executioners of American citizens, lets see legislative action and the appropriate judicial review in relevance to due process, etc.

      Delete
    9. Dervish Sanders: My statements are correct, in reference to Feingold specifically saying that the "right" to kill these US citizens (an action which is not medically or legally an abortion, even) belongs to the "doctor"

      Delete
    10. The excerpt I included in my comment says your statements are incorrect. Pretty clearly, too. Really makes me wonder why you persist with this fiction. I guess you have the right to believe whatever falsehoods you wish to, however. So, "carry on", as RN might say.

      Delete
  2. It tells me that the American people, especially the right are gullible, fearful, and willing to by any snake oil that the powerful righting of the republican party and its power hungry politicians try to sell them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ... or that Feingold's overall agenda favoring the interests of the State (Obamacare being one major example) over those of the people caused him to be rejected. Despite this stance.

      Delete
    2. The ACA is an example of Feingold voting in the interest of The People, although I suppose it is also in the best interest of the State for American citizens to be healthy. Has the commenter above got something against people receiving affordable health care? He thinks "the voters" said "affordable health care? no way! we don't want that!"...???

      Delete
  3. ...many liberals have been supportive of the NSA.

    I am not. The NSA is violating the 4th amendment rights of American citizens and should cease and desist.

    Also, I could say something about the untruths regarding Senator Feingold that were contained within a comment above (with the timestamp of 07:38:00 PM EDT), but this line of discussion surely is "old bones". But not "old bones" unless someone disagrees, apparently (and says so). And also not "old bones" for the person who brought up these untruths YET AGAIN to do so.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Only Wisconsin could elect a Ron Johnson and a Tammy Baldwin.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I hear the sound of old bones being knawed, and.... this time, turn away.

    BB: Only Wisconsin? Hmmm. how might they fare in Gohmert's district?

    By the way, looking up Feingold, I see he opposed TARP. Whether or not he voted his conscience, I strongly support this stance of his.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're the one who dug up the old bones! Now, having been called on doing so, you're running away. Also, that is a picture of rawhide you linked to. Rawhide in the shape of a bone, but not an actual bone. No "knawing" in that picture either.

      Delete
  6. Could Feingold properly be called a maverick?

    ReplyDelete
  7. I found the TARP info in an article that did call him one, in fact.

    ReplyDelete
  8. WI made a big mistake in not sending Feingold back to the Senate. We need more like him, not less.

    ReplyDelete

As this site encourages free speech and expression any and all honest political commentary is acceptable. Comments with cursing or vulgar language will not be posted.

Effective 8/12/13 Anonymous commenting has been disabled. This unfortunate action was made necessary due to the volume of Anonymous comments that are either off topic or serve only to disrupt honest discourse..

I apologizes for any inconvenience this necessary action may cause the honest Anonymous who would comment here, respect proper decorum and leave comments of value. However, The multitude of trollish attack comments from both the left and right has necessitated this action.

Thank you for your understanding... The management.