national security

In 3 Months, Do We Want to Entrust  U.S. "National Security" and Perhaps Even "Human Survival” In the Northern Hemisphere to THESE Guys?

Yesterday I thought that Barack Obama was probably the worst President in the entire history of the USA given his record on unemployment and Gross Domestic Product since he has been in office. But, then again, on second thoughts...

Favoring “Friends” ... Harassing “Enemies” ... Propaganda ... Cyber-Warfare ... Track ‘Em and Whack ‘Em

A question arises: how does one know they are living in an unmitigated disaster of a banana republic where not even an attempt at hiding the crime and corruption takes place? Well, we are not absolutely certain, but we have a distinct feeling that when the president appoints as his impartial "reviewer" of the ultra top secret NSA's policies and capabilities the one man who was caught and exposed and subsequently apologized for lying to Congress, that may be a pretty damn good sign. Sadly, that is precisely what just happened.

In what is as close to saying 'trust us, we're from the government,' as it gets; President Obama's traitor-identifying, blame-pointing, cover-your-assing speech on Friday has done nothing to end the supposedly "critical NSA counter-terrorism tool," from being used on American citizens. People of America should be relieved, as the President stated unequivocally that he is "comfortable that the program is not being abused." If only American citizens were able to see all the moving pieces, Obama implied, they would say "you know what? These [government] folks are following the law," but because the program remains classified, it remains impossible to know what is really going on. Reassuring rhetoric aside, as the AP notes, Obama offered these inspiring words regarding the ongoing concerns that law-abiding citizens may still have beyond his assurances: "I would be worried too, if I weren't inside the government." Another teleprompter-less glimpse of what he really thinks? Perhaps; but for now, the NSA will continue to sweep phone records of all Americans with the possibility of creating similar databases of credit card transactions, hotel records, and Internet searches.

“Who You Are Speaks So Loudly I Can’t Hear What You’re Saying”

A shroud of mystery has surrounded American whistleblower Edward Snowden's whereabouts since he received temporary asylum in Russia last week, but migration authorities have let slip that he is not in Moscow... "We don't have these records. I don't have any such information. He's not in Moscow."

D'Oh!

Japan’s Nuclear Accident Response Director Warns that Tepco’s Actions Might Cause Reactor BuIldings to Collapse

Obama cancels meeting with Putin in Moscow amid tensions over NSA leaker Edward Snowden. http://t.co/Wdy2SYXvSt

— WSJ Breaking News (@WSJbreakingnews) August 7, 2013

"No passion so effectually robs the mind of all its powers of acting and reasoning as fear."

- Edmund Burke

Some analysts and Congressional officials suggested Friday that emphasizing a terrorist threat now was a good way to divert attention from the uproar over the N.S.A.’s data-collection programs, and that if it showed the intercepts had uncovered a possible plot, even better.

- NY Times article from August 2, 2013: Qaeda Messages Prompt U.S. Terror Warning

Jeffrey P. Bezos to purchase Washington Post, Express, Gazette, other Greater Washington, DC papers -- deal valued at $250 million #breaking

— Reuters Business (@ReutersBiz) August 5, 2013

Undated documents discovered by Reuters show that federal agents are trained to "recreate" the investigative trail to effectively cover up where the information originated, a practice that some experts say violates a defendant's Constitutional right to a fair trial. "I have never heard of anything like this at all," is one law professor's response to the fact that a secretive DEA unit is funneling wiretap, informant, and telephone database information to authorities across the nation in order to launch investigations of Americans (targeting common criminals, primarily drug dealers), "It is one thing to create special rules for national security, ordinary crime is entirely different. It sounds like they are phonying up investigations." One recently retired federal gent noted, "It was an amazing tool; our big fear was that it wouldn't stay secret."

The latest subjunctive paraphrase, just released by the US State Department: "Please don't panic... well, actually panic just a little bit, but thanks to the NSA's pervasive snooping activity, in retrospect there will have been no need to panic, as any terror threats will have been promptly eliminated (except for those that sneak through the NSA's dragnet like the Boston bombing of course). So all is well... but not really, which is why we are extending embassy closures for a little more, due to highly specific unspecified threats which we can't reveal. Just know the threats are there. But thanks to the NSA, there is nothing to worry about. Unless there is."

The time has come to remind Americans that "you can't have 100-percent security and also have 100-percent privacy and zero inconvenience" or, in other words, why only the government can provide a veil of impenetrable protection, and why such things as personal privacy in an age of murderous Al Qaeda (the non-US funded variety, supposedly) terrorists lurking behind corners, are not only unnecessary but unpatriotic. According to CBS, the "terrorist threat prompting the U.S. government to close nearly two dozen embassies and consulates Sunday is the most specific, credible threat information in years" (even more credible than the Boston marathon bombers?) Specific but lacking the actual date, or timing, of an alleged "terrorist attack." Information which, however, can not be shared with the general public for obvious reasons - just trust the government and ignore that spy drone peeking into your window to see if you are dutifully spending your daily quota of "confident consumer" fiat on Amazon.com.