risking his life to tell you about NSA surveillance [ot]

Some of what Snowden is leaking has nothing to do with "protect".

we lived with another world power with atomics and icbms who KNEW we were planning to launch a first strike against them for decades!

we didnt cash in any of our rights and freedoms under that threat


we had a REAL and SUBSTANTIAL enemy,
and we let him pour rubles into underground printing presses and union organization and support of civil rights and american women getting to vote and indians getting a day in court after we violated the treaties we signed with them

we did all that

and now we got to close down freedom and the press because rogues with no nation or airforce or day jobs are the greatest threat we have ever faced???

Is Israel spying on all its citizens?
They experience terrorism on a continuos basis.

To hold an opinion you will need knowledge. Where will you get that knowledge from? Propaganda? Good luck with that.

Add up all the leaks and whistle blowers over the course of the decades stack them with the declassified files and allow yourself a peak behind the veil ... the only relevant information you will ever see. If you hope to hold a position of any relevance, you have the likes of Snowden to thank.

If you want to participate within a even marginally functional democracy, get on board.
If you want to help create the most militarized empire in the history of the world, then stick your head up your a$$ and try to live happily within your delusions.

Care About the Environment? Beware, the NSA is Watching

by s.e. smith June 27, 2013 2:30 pm


Rising sea levels, super storms, and droughts, oh my! Everyone on Earth seems to think that climate change is the most significant threat to global security — except people in the United States. We’re so committed to burying our heads in the sand that our own government has chosen to focus not on the problems associated with climate change, but on environmentalists. That’s right. The people fighting to protect the environment are the ones viewed as the potential security risk.

As the NSA’s PRISM scandal has unfolded and released scores of documents that the government would just as soon rather hide under the rug, some important information about the handling of environmentalists has emerged. While activists have always suspected they’ve been unfairly profiled, and have noted on numerous occasions that they seem to attract more attention than actual domestic terrorists, the PRISM documents confirm that environmentalists and eco groups were singled out for surveillance and close monitoring, as if their activities posed a legitimate threat to national security. After all, that’s the defense the government has used in discussions of PRISM and other infringements on civil liberties, arguing that the privacy of some must be sacrificed for the safety of many. Meanwhile, right-wing groups have been allowed to engage in actual acts of domestic terror and incitements to violence without such scrutiny.

What gives? The PRISM documents reveal that the Pentagon was putting plans in place to deal with major civil unrest in the wake of disasters, including potential environmental disasters, but that it had a special focus on environmental protest and activism. Millions of dollars are spent annually on pursuing environmental groups, many of whom are harmless — unless, of course, you think lobbying the government to take action on environmental issues is somehow causing harm, or you believe that educating the public about climate change poses a risk to national security.

The environment itself can become a security risk, but the people pushing to protect it certainly aren’t. While their express goal is to focus on environmental health and the protection of the planet, many are also concerned about the stability of nations and states as well as other political actors, because with global unrest tends to come environmental abuses. For example, in the Balkans and Iraq, depleted uranium was left behind after bitter wars, one of which had a lot to do with oil resources and control. Environmentalists are well aware that climate change will cause unrest which could lead to political instability, and they’re trying to prevent these problems, not cause them.

Policy-wise, the government should be promoting environmental protection as a sound national security practice. And while the government needs to remain separate from private organizations and can’t support environmental groups, it certainly doesn’t need to persecute them, either. Redirecting the resources currently used to spy on environmental advocates to actual concrete environmental protection and policy would do far more for national security in the long term, but that would require the government to admit that its decades-long policy of harassing environmental activists was wrong.

Read more: http://www.care2.com/causes/care-about-the-environment-beware-the-nsa-is-watching.html#ixzz2XXBD74eu

Rafael Correa, President of Ecuador, addresses the U.S. and their choice to take in Edward Snowden: "Don't come lecturing us about liberty. You need a reality check. Don't act like a spoiled rude child. Here you will only find dignity and sovereignty. Here we haven't invaded anyone. Here we don't torture like in Guantanamo. Here we don't have drones killing alleged terrorist without any due trial, killing also the women and children of those supposed terrorists. So don't come lecturing us about life, law, dignity, or liberty. You don't have the moral right to do so."

From Dave Michael regarding the filibuster in TX which I missed but heard bits and pieces of here and there. It didn't pass with the after midnight vote taken, but will from my understanding, vote on it again either today or tomorrow (Friday). This will essentially close down every abortion clinic in the backward, oppressive state of TX.
Instead of the Lone Star State just refer to it as The Dumb Ass State,

Karsten School
Last night something very important happened down in Texas, something that if you weren't following as it happened, you're probably not going to hear the whole truth about. I was one of the people who was in the right place to watch, and so I'm now going to try to pass on the word as best I can. I'm tagging some of you at the bottom, people who I think should read this. Apologies for anyone who finds this disruptive.

The Texas senate voted yesterday on an bill that essentially would have closed nearly every abortion clinic in the state. To try to counter the bill (which was heavily supported by the Republican majority, senator Wendy Davis attempted a one-woman day-long filibuster, during which time she spoke on the subject while going without food, water, bathroom breaks or being allowed to sit down or even lean on her table for support. She lasted nearly eleven hours before being ruled off topic on a technicality. A second female senator then stepped up and tried to continue the filibuster by asking for salient points to be repeated to her, as she missed part of the session that day to attend her father's funeral.

But here's where things get interesting. With fifteen minutes before the midnight deadline, the lieutenant governor ordered the senate to proceed, and actually had the democrats' microphones cut off. The spectators in the assembly responded by cheering, chanting and generally causing a ruckus, in order to drown out attempts at a vote. The midnight deadline passed without a vote being taken, but the chair held a vote after midnight, as the spectators were forced out of the assembly. During all of this, there was no coverage on MSNBC, CNN or any other major news network, with the only coverage coming from a livestream set up by the Teas Tribune.

At 12:15, the Associated Press ran a story saying the bill had passed, which CBS picked up. This was based on a sole source, which the AP later admitted was a republican senator. Meanwhile in the chambers, the senators stood around, both sides confused if the vote had even happened, if they had even voted on the correct issue. The chair had left with the lieutenant governor without ending the session. The Tribune's feed was cut at 12:20 with 70,000 people watching. CNN at this point was talking about the deliciousness of muffins.

Outside in the halls of the senate building, thousands of people were packed wall to wall, chanting "shame, shame", while thousands more were outside. State police had formed a barricade around the entrance hall, and were making sporadic arrests (50 or so by night's end) and confiscating cameras. In the thick of it was a guy named Christopher Dido, who used his cell phone and a live stream to report on what was happening. He was the only journalist in America who was filming at the senate, with as many as 30,000 people watching the stream at one time, and over 200,000 viewers by night's end. He did this while the state police surrounded the protesters in the building, some of them with nightsticks drawn. The police at this time refused to let through food or water that people tried to send in, instead eating and drinking it themselves. They also barricaded access to vending machines and water fountains within the building, and were said to have blocked off access to the washrooms for at least a period of time. Meanwhile, journalists still inside the chambers tweeted out news updates, which were disseminated and retweeted by people like Matt Fraction, Felicia Day and Will Wheaton, reaching an audience that would otherwise have probably not seen or heard what happened next.

The senate was recalled 90 minutes after its midnight end point, to determine whether or not the vote was valid- behind closed doors with no microphones, and only the Senate's own muted camera. Then something disturbing happened. The senate website carries the official record of the caucus. It listed the vote as happening past midnight, on June 26th. Until suddenly it didn't. The date was quietly manually changed to 6/25, the minutes altered to say the vote happened at 11:59, despite almost 200,000 people watching live who saw differently. Suddenly twitter and other social media sites blew up with before-and-after screen shots. Inside the closed sessions, the democrats were made aware of the alterations and brought them up- without social media, almost no one would have known, and never in time. Ultimately, based on the fraudulent alterations, the GOP conceded defeat, admitting the vote had taken place at 12:03, and declaring the bill to be dead. When this happened, the AP and CBS said the vote was overturned, never admitting to shoddy journalism. CNN ignored the story until this morning, because muffins take priority.

Yesterday, I witnessed women's rights under fire, a crippled legal system that didn't represent its people, a corrupt government body attempting to commit a crime in front of hundreds of thousands of witnesses, and the complete failure of the main stream media. I also witnessed a woman performing a nearly superhuman act to do what was right, the power of the people making themselves heard both in person and online, and the extraordinary value of one young man with a cellphone making sure people saw and heard the truth about what was going on.

Anyone reading the papers or watching network news today won't get the full story. Hopefully enough people saw it unfold live, that the lessons from last night won't be forgotten.

The facts", though, involve cabinet-level terrorist counter-intel, which you'll never get access to, nor should you.

strong opinion on something you admit you know nothing about,

Why aren't they trying to nail him on this?

Yesterday, I witnessed women's rights under fire, a crippled legal system that didn't represent its people, a corrupt government body attempting to commit a crime in front of hundreds of thousands of witnesses, and the complete failure of the main stream media. I also witnessed a woman performing a nearly superhuman act to do what was right, the power of the people making themselves heard both in person and online, and the extraordinary value of one young man with a cellphone making sure people saw and heard the truth about what was going on.

The very people you'd think would be all over this, both for constitutional and partisan reasons, are silent. No repub witch-hunt for something that people are hysterically claiming is subverting the constitution at a fundamental level.

Surely those who are critical of NSA data mining think it's a more important issue than Benghazi or the IRS, right? Then where are the investigations?