SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Over at The Intercept, Greenwald and Fishman did a great job of thoroughly discrediting blatant (effectively) CIA funded propaganda that somehow passed unquestioned as journalism on National Public Radio (NPR). The propaganda itself was merely the usual run of the mill bit trying to smear Snowden or anyone who talks about real cybersecurity (tor/pgp/ssh/etc) as an enabler of terrorists. About as logical as arguing that agricultural professors are helping enable terrorists by teaching everyone, including the terrorists about how to manufacturer their own sustenance for long term survival. What made this bit of propaganda extra slimey, especially for the otherwise generally well regarded NPR, was how the CIA ties were not mentioned.
... Temple-Raston knows all of this. Back in 2012, NPR’s Morning Edition broadcast her profile of Recorded Future and its claimed ability to predict the future by gathering internet data. At the end of her report, she noted that the firm has “at least two very important financial backers: the CIA’s investment arm, called In-Q-Tel, and Google Ventures. They have reportedly poured millions into the company.”
That is the company she's now featuring as some sort of independent source that can credibly vindicate the claims of U.S. officials about how Snowden reporting helps terrorists.
I felt compelled to rebroadcast this to SN because I think it is actually helpful to see the CIA propaganda machine at work, and never forget that it is there, far better funded and at least as relentlessly vigilant as its opposition. And despite a full disclosure that a few years back I myself was effectively getting paid straight from the CIA via In-Q-Tel, and felt thoroughly guilty for it, I have to say I just ADORE the fact that Dan Geer gave up trackable smart phones for the privacy enhanced security of old school pagers.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 19 2014, @06:51PM
Examples please. Copy-and-paste 4th Amendment text gets you zero points unless you can also explain it within the context of how it is interpreted by the courts (just like those who justify assault rifles with armor-piercing shells by reciting that one sentence out of the 2nd Amendment).
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Rune of Doom on Tuesday August 19 2014, @10:11PM
How about the Director of the CIA lying to Congress about spying on Congress?
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/31/cia-director-john-brennan-lied-senate [theguardian.com]
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Wednesday August 20 2014, @03:27PM
What we have experienced is an Executive Branch soft coup. There really is no other word to describe the way the Executive Branch has usurped legislative and judicial powers.
As for the Courts, you are talking about an Executive branch "interpretation" of the third party doctrine exception to the right to privacy which evolved out of a case involving the warrantless placing of a pen register (collects phone numbers, early meta-data technique) on a SPECIFIC individual for whom there was AMPLE probable cause of criminal behavior (should the cops have not been so lazy as to skip the warrant requirement, they would assuredly have gotten one), for a SHORT period of time. How that applies to every random person in the world, with zero probable cause to suspect of criminal behavior, forever -- is an amazingly twisted and self-serving interpretation by the Executive branch. It has clearly confounded you because you apparently believe it is "the law" when in actuality, it is nothing but an argument made by Executive branch attorneys in legal memos that were entirely secret for a long time, and still largely secret now. That's not "law." Secret laws==despotism.
But it isn't just the 4th Amendment. There's the 5th Amendment:
Due process free detention (aka gulag aka gitmo).
Due process free execution (aka political assassination).
Arguably the First Amendment -- Al Awlaki seems to have been politically assassinated because of what he said in various youtube videos. His son assassinated for the sins of his father ( http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/24/robert-gibbs-anwar-al-awlaki_n_2012438.html [huffingtonpost.com] ) -- cruel and unusual punishment? 8th Amendment.
Or Article 1, Section 8, Clause 11 regarding war making. War in Libya based solely on executive decision sets a terrifying precedent (only Congress can make war -- Libya ignored even the weak tea War Powers Act which was supposed to put at least some of that power back with Congress by requiring approval within 60 days -- approval 2 months after the fact is far different from a declaration, but even that is too onerous for the executive anymore).