Happy Face

Jeff Merkley, supported by 8 senators (Dem & Rep), is proposing a bill to declassify govt interpretations of surveillance law. -Spencer Ackerman Co-author of the leaked stories this week. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/11/us-senators-government-secret-court-surveillance

http://www.theverge.com/2013/6/8/4409766/vine-surpasses-instagram-sharing-over-twitter

His old xbox and his little socks

Mumford and Sons first album. I know they're as frowned upon as Coldplay, but this one was mint to be fair.....like Coldplay's first. ...that cover of The Boxer on album 2 though?

They're onto us!!!

http://www.salon.com/2013/06/10/qa_with_laura_poitras_the_woman_behind_the_nsa_scoops/

Wondered why Joe Satriani only had quarter of the City Hall sold out last night. Neil Young obviously a bigger draw.

Whoever pointed me at Dan Carlin (think it was on here), many thanks. This weeks 90 minute show on how historic this is giving me shivers again... http://ec.libsyn.com/p/f/9/0/f9005b1565c00713/cswdcc55.mp3?d13a76d516d9dec20c3d276ce028ed5089ab1ce3dae902ea1d01cf873ed5cb5ad09c&c_id=5761094

Not one word from Hague on the US accessing the private data of UK citizens.

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/3036789/ns/msnbc-morning_joe/vp/52154665#52154665 Greenwald gets angry at a dumb blonde

Simon Waldman ‏@simonmwaldman 2m @David_Cameron insists that UK's intelligence services operate "within the law". "The law is actually quite clear. If the British intelligence agencies are seeking to know the content of emails about people living in the UK then they actually have to get lawful authority. Normally that means ministerial authority. That applies equally whether they are going to do the intercept themselves or whether they are going to ask somebody else to do it on their behalf." Malcolm Rifkind in The Guardian The Leaked documents suggested that GCHQ had generated 197 intelligence reports from the NSA-run Prism last year. The system would appear to allow GCHQ to bypass formal legal processes to access personal material, such as emails and photographs, from the world's biggest internet companies. The Guardian These 3 seperate statements leave 3 options... 1. Ministers approved the use of PRISM, to keep intelligence service within the law...but didn't inform the public as to the level of privacy erosion. 2. The detailed leaks that have not been denied by anyone in power at any point, got that bit about the UK wrong. 3. Cameron is lying

http://obamaischeckingyouremail.tumblr.com/

He answers that contradiction himself... "I think it is really tragic that an American has to move to a place that has a reputation for less freedom. Still, Hong Kong has a reputation for freedom in spite of the People's Republic of China. It has a strong tradition of free speech."

Very interesting read in New Scientist. http://www.newscient...ple.html?page=1

I don't think he expects to stop monitoring going on, or to stop governments having secrets. In my view...from what he says in the interview, he wants to protect the fourth amendment. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. Like "the right to bear arms", times have changed since this was written. There is a question of scalability. The constitution protected an American's right to own a musket back in those days ...does it then apply to better weapons for killing? A revolver, a semi automatic, a fully automatic, a rocket launcher, cluster bombs...nukes? Lawmakers make that decision in the open, and the public continue to have a vibrant debate. The right to privacy has no such clear definitions of what remains legal or not. We have scaled up from personal papers in our office, to electronic data held on the servers of companies around the globe without any discussion. The government have seized carte blanche and will not allow debate to happen on the grounds of national security, which is preposterous. It may well be, that when all is said and done, people prefer security over liberty... In April.. Only 20 percent of people said they believed the government had gone too far in restricting civil liberties in the fight against terrorism, while 26 percent said it had not gone far enough and 49 percent said the balance was about right. In 2011, the share of those worried about losing civil liberties (25 percent) was larger than that favoring more intrusive government approach (17 percent). http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/01/us/poll-finds-strong-acceptance-for-public-surveillance.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 So, the views of Holden are some way from the outrage of the majority. The people being polled didn't know how far surveillance had gone though. Holden does. Those numbers might change if people are properly informed....and they are better informed today than they were last week.

I assumed the reveal of who the leaker was would have been the finale. Wonder what's coming next.

The administration are running around chasing their tails and all they can do is erect straw men like that to knock down themselves. Similarly... Obama - "look, we aren't recording your telephone calls"....well no-one said you were. Clapper - "Nothing illegal going on, a judge signed off on all of it" ....again, not the issue. The awful truth of the matter is that the really big issue is that they ARE legal. James Fallows put it the best I have read so far... That these programs are legal -- unlike the Nixon "Plumbers" operation, unlike various CIA assassination programs, unlike other objects of whistle-blower revelations over the years -- is the most important fact about them. They're being carried out in "our" name, ours as Americans, even though most of us have had no idea of what they entailed. The debate on the limits of the security-state is long overdue, and Edward Snowden has played an important role in hastening its onset. Secret laws (and interpretation of laws) are no way to run a free society. Bush legalised torture...it's still torture.

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_judicial_lynching_of_bradley_manning_20130609/?utm_source=feedly&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Truthdig%2FChrisHedges+Chris+Hedges+on+Truthdig How far we've fallen.

Related to all this... http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_judicial_lynching_of_bradley_manning_20130609/?utm_source=feedly&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Truthdig%2FChrisHedges+Chris+Hedges+on+Truthdig

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPd4EZKMggU

..but trust them.

I am stunned. The man that leaked all this information is Ed Snowden. He has given a full interview here.... http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/09/edward-snowden-nsa-whistleblower-surveillance Bradley manning faces the death penalty for his leaks. The courage of this bloke is incredible. Gave me shivers reading his story.

Following on from the very carefully worded denials of top bosses at Facebook and Google..... http://www.washingto...87_story_1.html Again, I recommend the whole article, which details government (NSA) equipment installed at the premises of the companies, which don't allow the companies themselves access to the queries being made on their data by intelligence officers. Incredible stuff. Most often used for e-mails, but it handles chat, video, images, documents and other files as well. No denials from government at all. They have confirmed this happens and the only regret being expressed by Clapper, Obama et al is that we know about it now.

I've not done much. It doesn't need a revolution though. It just needs an adversarial press to shine a light on wrong doing. Rather than the corporate owned stenographers printing the official line only. We've all suspected this has been going on for years. Senators like Wyden have been telling anyone who will listen that the patriot act is being implemented in far broader ways than anyone was being told, but the main news agencies have largely ignored that. The story has only been broken by an independent journalist....like wikileaks broke the last story as big as this. I have donated to both Greenwald (who relies on reader donations) and wikileaks. I recommend everyone else do the same... http://m.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/04/reader-funded-journalism http://shop.wikileaks.org/donate