California Can Cripple the NSA By Passing This One Law A team of California state senators from both sides of the aisle introduced a bill on Monday that would ban the state and its localities from providing "material support" — access to water and electricity — to National Security Agency (NSA) facilities in a symbolic effort to thwart the agency's surveillance activities. "State-funded public resources should not be going toward aiding the NSA or any other federal agency from indiscriminate spying on its own citizens and gathering electronic or metadata that violates the Fourth Amendment," the bill's co-author California state Sen. Ted Lieu, said in a statement. If the bill becomes law, private companies will be sanctioned to provide the NSA with these essential utility services. Lieu added that the NSA's surveillance programs pose "a clear and present danger to our liberties." Republican state Sen. Sen. Source: Facebook Sen. Source: Facebook Offnow activists are also working to turn off the NSA's "Achilles heel." Victoria Kim
Here’s why Obama trade negotiators push the interests of Hollywood and drug companies At least a dozen officials have moved from USTR to industry groups since the turn of the century. (Elliott Brown) Earlier this month, the transparency organization WikiLeaks leaked the "intellectual property" chapter of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a trade agreement that is being negotiated in secret by Pacific Rim nations. The draft text showed that the positions taken by U.S. negotiators largely mirrored the provisions of U.S. law, but the U.S. negotiating position also had an unmistakeable bias toward expanding the rights of copyright and patent holders. Those positions are great for Hollywood and the pharmaceutical industry, but it's not obvious that they are in the interests of the broader U.S. economy. Two major factors contribute to the USTR's strong pro-rightsholder slant. A more subtle factor is the structure and culture of USTR itself. USTR's enthusiasm for stronger copyright and patent protections could become a liability for the Obama administration's broader trade agenda.
NSA Bombshell Shocks Former Spooks: "Why in The World Would We Burn Google?" Former intelligence officials and technology industry executives reacted with anger and anxiety over the latest revelations that the National Security Agency is reportedly infiltrating some of the world's biggest technology companies and making off with the private communications of millions of their customers. And if the reports are accurate, it could be very bad news for U.S. technology companies, who have been complaining for months that their government's secretive intelligence operations are threatening their business and driving customers towards their foreign competitors. "I think they're in an almost impossible situation," Rep. Adam Schiff, a senior member of the Intelligence Committee, told The Cable. Speaking of Silicon Valley firms who are obligated to cooperate with the NSA, Schiff said recent leak revelations threatened to negatively impact their bottom lines. "Why in the world would we burn a relationship with Google by breaking into a data center?"
Unitarian Church, Gun Groups Join EFF to Sue NSA Over Illegal Surveillance San Francisco - Nineteen organizations including Unitarian church groups, gun ownership advocates, and a broad coalition of membership and political advocacy organizations filed suit against the National Security Agency (NSA) today for violating their First Amendment right of association by illegally collecting their call records. The coalition is represented by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a group with years of experience fighting illegal government surveillance in the courts. "The First Amendment protects the freedom to associate and express political views as a group, but the NSA's mass, untargeted collection of Americans' phone records violates that right by giving the government a dramatically detailed picture into our associational ties," said EFF Legal Director Cindy Cohn. "Who we call, how often we call them, and how long we speak shows the government what groups we belong to or associate with, which political issues concern us, and our religious affiliation.
Eric Holder Pressed On DEA, NSA By John Shiffman WASHINGTON, Aug 26 (Reuters) - Eight Democratic U.S. senators and congressmen have asked Attorney General Eric Holder to answer questions about a Reuters report that the National Security Agency supplies the Drug Enforcement Administration with intelligence information used to make non-terrorism cases against American citizens. The August report revealed that a secretive DEA unit passes the NSA information to agents in the field, including those from the Internal Revenue Service, the FBI and Homeland Security, with instructions to never disclose the original source, even in court. In most cases, the NSA tips involve drugs, money laundering and organized crime, not terrorism. Five Democrats in the Senate and three senior Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee submitted questions to Holder about the NSA-DEA relationship, joining two prominent Republicans who have expressed concerns. Holder, an appointee of U.S. Also on HuffPost:
The Consequences of CISPA's Broad Legal Immunity CISPA, the cyberspying bill, is back in Congress and plagued with many of the same problems as last year—vague definitions and the grim government access loophole to name just a few. The bill also grants broad immunity to companies as long as a company acts in "good faith." One section of the immunity clause even grants immunity for any "decision made" based on information about a perceived threat. The clause opens up a wide door for abuse and is yet another reason why we urge users to stop CISPA. Immunity Should Not Cover Any Decisions Made The most dangerous section grants immunity for any "decision" a company makes based on information it learns about a perceived network threat. The requirement that companies act in good faith is an ineffective check on CISPA power grant. It also opens the door for government abuse. This was precisely the problem with the FISA Amendment Act (FAA), which granted retroactive immunity to telecoms for the NSA warrantless wiretapping program.
There's a Secret Patriot Act, Senator Says | Danger Room You think you understand how the Patriot Act allows the government to spy on its citizens. Sen. Ron Wyden says it’s worse than you know. Congress is set to reauthorize three controversial provisions of the surveillance law as early as Thursday. Wyden (D-Oregon) says that powers they grant the government on their face, the government applies a far broader legal interpretation — an interpretation that the government has conveniently classified, so it cannot be publicly assessed or challenged. But one prominent Patriot-watcher asserts that the secret interpretation empowers the government to deploy “dragnets” for massive amounts of information on private citizens; the government portrays its data-collection efforts much differently. “We’re getting to a gap between what the public thinks the law says and what the American government secretly thinks the law says,” Wyden told Danger Room in an interview in his Senate office. What exactly does Wyden mean by that? Site: Oregon.gov See Also:
New Bill Helps Expand Public Access to Scientific Knowledge Internet users around the world got a Valentine's Day present yesterday in the form of new legislation that requires U.S. government agencies to improve public access to federally funded research. The proposed mandate, called the Fair Access to Science & Technology Research Act, or FASTR (PDF), is simple. Agencies like the National Science Foundation, which invests millions of taxpayer dollars in scientific research every year, must design and implement a plan to facilitate public access to—and robust reuse of—the results of that investment. The contours of the plans are equally simple: researchers who receive funding from most federal agencies must submit a copy of any resulting journal articles to the funding agency, which will then make that research freely available to the world within six months. The proposed changes reflect but also improve upon National Institutes of Health’s public access policy. The bill isn't perfect.
Is Edward Snowden a Hero? A Debate with Journalist Chris Hedges & Law Scholar Geoffrey Stone This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form. NERMEEN SHAIKH: We turn now to a debate on Edward Snowden’s decision to leak a trove of secret documents outlining the NSA’s surveillance program. In an interview with The Guardian newspaper, Snowden described why he risked his career to leak the documents. EDWARD SNOWDEN: I think that the public is owed an explanation of the motivations behind the people who make these disclosures that are outside of the democratic model. NERMEEN SHAIKH: Edward Snowden’s actions have elicited a range of reactions. AMY GOODMAN: Meanwhile, Douglas Rushkoff wrote on CNN, quote, "Snowden is a hero because he realized [that] our very humanity was being compromised by the blind implementation of machines in the name of making us safe," unquote. For more, we host a debate on Edward Snowden. And in Chicago, Illinois, we’re joined by Geoffrey Stone, a professor at the University of Chicago Law School. AMY GOODMAN: Chris Hedges, your response? REP.
Are They Allowed to Do That? A Breakdown of Selected Government Surveillance Programs Gen. Keith Alexander, center, head of the National Security Agency, before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on Capitol Hill, in Washington, June 18, 2013. (Photo: Christopher Gregory / The New York Times)As news of the government's broad surveillance programs develops, a host of unanswered questions arise. This fact sheet answers many of those questions, examining the legal and practical steps the government may have taken to secretly collect data. Q: What is the National Security Agency doing? A: Two major surveillance programs have been revealed: Since 2006, the National Security Agency (NSA) has been secretly collecting the phone records of millions of Americans from some of the largest telecommunications providers in the United States, via a series of regularly renewed requests by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Q: What are the legal justifications for the programs? Q: Is there any oversight? Q: Do communications providers have a say?
FBI Admits That Obeying The Constitution Just Takes Too Much Time While much of the news coverage of FBI Director Robert Mueller's Congressional hearing this week focused on his admission that the FBI has used drones domestically, there were some other points raised, including his "defense" of the broad surveillance techniques that appears to amount to the idea that it just takes too long to obey the Constitution and go through the proper procedures before getting information: Testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Mr. Mueller addressed a proposal to require telephone companies to retain calling logs for five years — the period the N.S.A. is keeping them — for investigators to consult, rather than allowing the government to collect and store them all. He cautioned that it would take time to subpoena the companies for numbers of interest and get the answers back. “The point being that it will take an awful long time,” Mr. Well, shucks. Yes, I'm sure it's more convenient for the government to not have to wait an hour or so to get this info.
Lawrence Lessig on Government Spying BILL MOYERS: This week on Moyers & Company… LAWRENCE LESSIG: In a world of terrorism the government's going to be out there trying to protect us. But let's make sure that they're using tools or technology that also protects the privacy side of what they should be protecting. ANNOUNCER: Funding is provided by: Carnegie Corporation of New York, celebrating 100 years of philanthropy, and committed to doing real and permanent good in the world. The Kohlberg Foundation. Independent Production Fund, with support from The Partridge Foundation, a John and Polly Guth Charitable Fund. The Clements Foundation. Park Foundation, dedicated to heightening public awareness of critical issues. The Herb Alpert Foundation, supporting organizations whose mission is to promote compassion and creativity in our society. The Bernard and Audre Rapoport Foundation. The John D. Anne Gumowitz. The Betsy And Jesse Fink Foundation. The HKH Foundation. Barbara G. BILL MOYERS: Welcome. Lawrence Lessig also warned us.
Pentagon bracing for public dissent over climate and energy shocks| Nafeez Ahmed | Environment Top secret US National Security Agency (NSA) documents disclosed by the Guardian have shocked the world with revelations of a comprehensive US-based surveillance system with direct access to Facebook, Apple, Google, Microsoft and other tech giants. New Zealand court records suggest that data harvested by the NSA's Prism system has been fed into the Five Eyes intelligence alliance whose members also include the UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. But why have Western security agencies developed such an unprecedented capacity to spy on their own domestic populations? Since the 2008 economic crash, security agencies have increasingly spied on political activists, especially environmental groups, on behalf of corporate interests. This activity is linked to the last decade of US defence planning, which has been increasingly concerned by the risk of civil unrest at home triggered by catastrophic events linked to climate change, energy shocks or economic crisis - or all three.