ex CIA Whistleblower Edward Snowden Reveals PRISM Program to Press; Mass Worldwide Rollback Against the NSA

[Exarch]

In the same manner as Bradley Manning and Daniel Ellsberg, a former CIA and NSA systems administrator has gone public and divulged the incredibly illegal and extensive level of spying conducted by the US Government against the American people.
In recent years, there's also been a disturbing trend where whistleblowers have been persecuted and targeted by this administration. Here's the original interview conducted by the Guardian:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

analysis and Obama Admin. officials outright lying to Congressional Oversight Committees

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

original article by The Guardian:

Boundless Informant: the NSA's secret tool to track global surveillance data

Revealed: The NSA's powerful tool for cataloguing global surveillance data – including figures on US collection

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The National Security Agency has developed a powerful tool for recording and analysing where its intelligence comes from, raising questions about its repeated assurances to Congress that it cannot keep track of all the surveillance it performs on American communications.The Guardian has acquired top-secret documents about the NSAdatamining tool, called Boundless Informant, that details and even maps by country the voluminous amount of information it collects from computer and telephone networks.
The focus of the internal NSA tool is on counting and categorizing the records of communications, known as metadata, rather than the content of an email or instant message.
The Boundless Informant documents show the agency collecting almost 3 billion pieces of intelligence from US computer networks over a 30-day period ending in March 2013. One document says it is designed to give NSA officials answers to questions like, "What type of coverage do we have on country X" in "near real-time by asking the SIGINT [signals intelligence] infrastructure."
An NSA factsheet about the program, acquired by the Guardian, says: "The tool allows users to select a country on a map and view the metadata volume and select details about the collections against that country."
Under the heading "Sample use cases", the factsheet also states the tool shows information including: "How many records (and what type) are collected against a particular country."
A snapshot of the Boundless Informant data, contained in a top secret NSA "global heat map" seen by the Guardian, shows that in March 2013 the agency collected 97bn pieces of intelligence from computer networks worldwide.
The heat map reveals how much data is being collected from around the world. Note the '2007' date in the image relates to the document from which the interactive map derives its top secret classification, not to the map itself.Iran was the country where the largest amount of intelligence was gathered, with more than 14bn reports in that period, followed by 13.5bn from Pakistan. Jordan, one of America's closest Arab allies, came third with 12.7bn, Egypt fourth with 7.6bn and India fifth with 6.3bn.
The heatmap gives each nation a color code based on how extensively it is subjected to NSA surveillance. The color scheme ranges from green (least subjected to surveillance) through yellow and orange to red (most surveillance).
The disclosure of the internal Boundless Informant system comes amid a struggle between the NSA and its overseers in the Senate over whether it can track the intelligence it collects on American communications. The NSA's position is that it is not technologically feasible to do so.
At a hearing of the Senate intelligence committee In March this year, Democratic senator Ron Wyden asked James Clapper, the director of national intelligence: "Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?"
"No sir," replied Clapper.
Judith Emmel, an NSA spokeswoman, told the Guardian in a response to the latest disclosures: "NSA has consistently reported – including to Congress – that we do not have the ability to determine with certainty the identity or location of all communicants within a given communication. That remains the case."
Other documents seen by the Guardian further demonstrate that the NSA does in fact break down its surveillance intercepts which could allow the agency to determine how many of them are from the US. The level of detail includes individual IP addresses.
IP address is not a perfect proxy for someone's physical location but it is rather close, said Chris Soghoian, the principal technologist with the Speech Privacy and Technology Project of the American Civil Liberties Union. "If you don't take steps to hide it, the IP address provided by yourinternet provider will certainly tell you what country, state and, typically, city you are in," Soghoian said.
That approximation has implications for the ongoing oversight battle between the intelligence agencies and Congress.
On Friday, in his first public response to the Guardian's disclosures this week on NSA surveillance, Barack Obama said that that congressional oversight was the American peoples' best guarantee that they were not being spied on.
"These are the folks you all vote for as your representatives in Congress and they are being fully briefed on these programs," he said. Obama also insisted that any surveillance was "very narrowly circumscribed".
Senators have expressed their frustration at the NSA's refusal to supply statistics. In a letter to NSA director General Keith Alexander in October last year, senator Wyden and his Democratic colleague on the Senate intelligence committee, Mark Udall, noted that "the intelligence community has stated repeatedly that it is not possible to provide even a rough estimate of how many American communications have been collected under the Fisa Amendments Act, and has even declined to estimate the scale of this collection."
At a congressional hearing in March last year, Alexander denied point-blank that the agency had the figures on how many Americans had their electronic communications collected or reviewed. Asked if he had the capability to get them, Alexander said: "No. No. We do not have the technical insights in the United States." He added that "nor do we do have the equipment in the United States to actually collect that kind of information".
Soon after, the NSA, through the inspector general of the overall US intelligence community, told the senators that making such a determination would jeopardize US intelligence operations – and might itself violate Americans' privacy.
"All that senator Udall and I are asking for is a ballpark estimate of how many Americans have been monitored under this law, and it is disappointing that the inspectors general cannot provide it," Wyden toldWired magazine at the time.
The documents show that the team responsible for Boundless Informant assured its bosses that the tool is on track for upgrades.
The team will "accept user requests for additional functionality or enhancements," according to the FAQ acquired by the Guardian. "Users are also allowed to vote on which functionality or enhancements are most important to them (as well as add comments). The BOUNDLESSINFORMANT team will periodically review all requests and triage according to level of effort (Easy, Medium, Hard) and mission impact (High, Medium, Low)."
Emmel, the NSA spokeswoman, told the Guardian: "Current technology simply does not permit us to positively identify all of the persons or locations associated with a given communication (for example, it may be possible to say with certainty that a communication traversed a particular path within the internet. It is harder to know the ultimate source or destination, or more particularly the identity of the person represented by the TO:, FROM: or CC: field of an e-mail address or the abstraction of an IP address).
"Thus, we apply rigorous training and technological advancements to combine both our automated and manual (human) processes to characterize communications – ensuring protection of the privacy rights of the American people. This is not just our judgment, but that of the relevant inspectors general, who have also reported this."
She added: "The continued publication of these allegations about highly classified issues, and other information taken out of context, makes it impossible to conduct a reasonable discussion on the merits of these programs."
Additional reporting: James Ball in New York and Spencer Ackerman in Washington

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013...bal-datamining
As Jon Stewart puts it

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

but it's heartening to see that there are Americans who are coming out in full force to support him, thanks to reddit and other likeminded forums.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

funny how you have George Tenet actively giving operational and classified information to make a hollywood propaganda film, but when Snowden does it to prevent the violation of Constitutional and civil rights of Americnans, he gets pilloried and character assassinated.
Yep, character assassination, prepare for shocking new revelations about how Snowden is a KKK, baby eating, genocidal homosexual paedophile who leaves the toilet seat up!

Anyhoo, as latest updates shows, the US Government has moved swiftly to do just that:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

kinda reminds me of how you had certain US pundits advocating the assassination of Julian Assange, speaking of which:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

no matter which way you cut it, this looks bad for the US Government and is a major political embarrassment for President Obama who'd previously been pressuring the Chinese to 'come clean on cyberspying'. Just for you, Caelius, check out Xi Jinping's smug smile of satisfaction during the Sunnylands retreat

[Exarch]

as an update, the European Union (which has stricker privacy laws) has condemned the spying and it's thought that this could even impact the joint US/EU Free Trade Agreement:
In Light of PRISM, Furious European Politicians to Fight Back Against U.S. Surveillance Overreach

When details emerged last week about the National Security Agency’s Internet surveillance system PRISM, President Obama attempted to reassure Americans that it was not being used to target them. Instead, he implied, it is aimed at the other 95 percent of the world’s population.The PRISM system, according to a set of leaked top-secret PowerPoint slides, enables the NSA to obtain private emails and other user data directly from the central servers of major Internet companies such as Google, Microsoft, Facebook, and Yahoo. The companies named as part of the program initially denied involvement, but some anonymous executives have since acknowledged the system’s existence, saying it is used to share information about foreign customers with the NSA and other parts of the U.S. intelligence community. At the heart of the PRISM story is a scandal that is not domestic but global.

The existence of PRISM provides vindication for privacy advocates worldwide who have been voicing alarm about the U.S. government’s ability to conduct mass surveillance of foreigners’ communications sent and received using services like Google’s Gmail and Microsoft’s Hotmail and Skype. Earlier this year, a prescient report produced for the European Parliament warnedthat the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act had authorized “purely political surveillance on foreigners' data” and could be used to secretly force U.S. cloud providers like Google to provide a live “wiretap” of European users’ communications.

That appears to be precisely what PRISM enables. NSA agents can reportedly use the system to enter search terms into a “Web interface” that allows them to request and receive data—some of it in real time—from one or all of the participating companies. Director of National Intelligence James Clapper has confirmed that it operates under a controversial section of FISA that authorizes broad surveillance of non-U.S. persons—from foreign government agents, to suspected terrorists, and “foreign-based political organizations,” a vaguely defined category that could feasibly be used to target journalists and human rights groups.

The system may also sweep up Americans’ communications incidentally, because dragnet surveillance is not an exact science. The NSA only has to have “51 percent confidence” that it is targeting a non-U.S. citizen in an attempt to prevent violations of the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unreasonable searches. But for foreigners there does not appear to be any protection at all.

Before the disclosure of PRISM, a handful of European politicians were trying to amend data protection regulations to shield against suspected sweeping secret U.S. surveillance programs. The politicians’ concerns seemed to fall on deaf ears. However, the disclosure of PRISM has provided a level of confirmation that the suspicions were not rooted in paranoia, and the importance of this cannot be overstated. It has finally jolted senior European officials into action. Viviane Reding, vice president of the European Commission, the EU’s executive body, said in a statement Friday that “a clear legal framework for the protection of personal data is not a luxury or constraint but a fundamental right," suggesting that the commission may support the introduction of more stringent privacy safeguards Europe-wide in response to PRISM.

Sophia in ‘t Veld, a Dutch member of the European Parliament, has been attempting to draw attention to the ability of U.S. powers to monitor European citizens for several years. In a phone interview Sunday, int ‘ Veld told me she was shocked about the PRISM revelations and said that she thought it would “change the context” of data privacy reforms across Europe. “We really need to wake up,” she said. “This is serious stuff. The government knowing everything, literally everything about us, and we are unable to exercise any meaningful democratic scrutiny? That is not a democracy.”

In ‘t Veld, who is also vice-chair of the European Parliament’s committee on Civil Liberties, Justice, and Home Affairs, said that part of the problem is that the European Union has been “passive” and unwilling to stand up to the U.S. government on national security issues in recent years. She said she was not comforted by the Obama administration’s claims in the aftermath of the PRISM revelations that the NSA’s spy powers are overseen by Congress. The Dutch MEP described meeting U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee chairwoman Dianne Feinstein a couple of years ago: “She did not strike me as somebody who was particularly concerned with civil liberties—quite the contrary. We were actually quite shocked by her attitude. So if democratic oversight is taking place under her lead, it doesn’t really reassure me.”

Politicians in Germany, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Belgium, and Romania are among those to have called for an investigation into PRISM at a European level. German privacy chief Peter Schaar has demanded that the U.S. government “provide clarity” regarding what he described as “monstrous allegations of total monitoring of various telecommunications and Internet services.” And Schaar has been backed up by German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who plans to raise the issue when she meets in Berlin with President Obama next week. Further afield, Canadian and Australian officials have also been voicing their concerns—with Ontario privacy chief Ann Cavoukian calling the disclosures about PRISM “breathtaking” and “staggering.”

For decades, spy agencies have conducted surveillance of overseas communications as part of their intelligence-gathering mission. But as the U.N. special envoy on free speech noted in an unprecedented report published last week, new technologies have changed the game. Tools available to governments today enable a more ubiquitous form of surveillance than ever before—all happening under a veil of intense secrecy and beyond public oversight—and that is precisely the danger with PRISM. U.S. companies have been strong-armed into complying with U.S. espionage, undermining the civil liberties of everyone who uses these services. No longer is foreign surveillance targeted at specific channels of diplomatic communication or aimed at particular suspects—it is much broader than that, capable of sweeping up data onmillions or even billions of citizens’ communications. Edward Snowden, the NSA whistle-blower behind the disclosure of PRISM, has alleged that the agency “specifically targets the communications of everyone.”

Clapper, the U.S. director of national intelligence, said Thursday that the intelligence community was “committed to respecting the civil liberties and privacy of all American citizens.” But the U.S. government claims to endorse the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which makes it clear that all citizens—not just American citizens—have a right not to be subjected to “arbitrary interference” with “privacy, family, home or correspondence.” And that is exactly the problem with the NSA’s PRISM: it puts the universal right to privacy through the shredder, and encourages other governments to do the same.

Source: http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_te...veillance.html

[Sphere]

[justicar5]

And now the 'hero or traitor' debate will start.

If it goes anything like Bradley Mannings did, Snowden will end up in jail, and the people exposed breaking the law will get off scot free.

[Vanoi]

Lol what traitor or hero debate? You just told Americans something they knew since the 1930s. Government spying is not new. Ask J. Edgar Hoover.

[Slydessertfox]

Lol what traitor or hero debate? You just told Americans something they knew since the 1930s. Government spying is not new. Ask J. Edgar Hoover.

Shhh. Facts are not welcome in this thread.

[Sphere]

Lol what traitor or hero debate? You just told Americans something they knew since the 1930s. Government spying is not new. Ask J. Edgar Hoover.

I think you miss the point.

Neither Hoover, nor Nixon for that matter, inherited a system which would allow them to sit at their desk and have at their finger tips access to phone records and digital communications for everyone in the US. They at least had to do the grunt work of getting a group of slimy guys together and carrying out a few break-ins.

Pause and think for a second what happens when the next Nixon or Hoover comes along and this elaborate and legalized infrastructure is already in place.

[Phier]

Pause and think for a second what happens when the next Nixon or Hoover comes along and this elaborate and legalized infrastructure is already in place.

This is the real issue, but most can't quite see it. Everything here may be completely for "our benefit" now, but it allows for someone to abuse such power in the future. It wouldn't require much imagination to do so either.

[Ciciro]

This is the real issue, but most can't quite see it. Everything here may be completely for "our benefit" now, but it allows for someone to abuse such power in the future. It wouldn't require much imagination to do so either.

Humans really aren't good at long term planning.

[YukonTrooper]

Lol what traitor or hero debate? You just told Americans something they knew since the 1930s. Government spying is not new. Ask J. Edgar Hoover.

Classic case of denial about the scope and magnitude of the American surveillance state in 2013 compared to almost a century ago.

*Slow golf clap*

[Boyar Son]

Lol what traitor or hero debate? You just told Americans something they knew since the 1930s. Government spying is not new. Ask J. Edgar Hoover.

Yea, he should've kept the Gov't spying program to himself, that Cpt. Obvious loudmouth.

[Gaidin]

I find the comparison to Bradley Manning frakking hilarious.

[athanaric]

I find the comparison to Bradley Manning frakking hilarious.

You're right, it's rather nonsensical.

[Facupay]

I'm sure this Edward guy raped some girl in Sweden and is going to get extradited sooner or later.

[NotYetRegistered]

This is going to be forgotten in three months.

[Condottiere 40K]

No, this one is really more serious, because there will be a movement to keep this more inhouse, and that will directly affect the bottomline of any number of IT defense contractors.

[sleepyx732]

The American Government spy's on us? Oh that's just begging to be called a conspiracy theory. The government should be happy though! We'll get use to the idea of this and it will pave the way for new methods of control and intimidation. We are a very obedient race, and this will not stop until the bread stops following. Even then though.. it'll probably still continue.

Ahh yes.. the "resistance is futile" routine does one think, and blah blah blah blah blah.

And now for a song!
I have a dog named Pete and he likes to eat meat.
He has tiny feet and never ever gets beat.
but.. never say never, cause he doesn't like wheat!
Yes my dog is a cheat and will bow to greet
and he likes to tweet and suck on a teat.
And now to repeat..

I have a dog named Pete and he likes to eat meat.
He has tiny feet and never ever gets beat.
but.. never say never, cause he doesn't like wheat!
Yes my dog is a cheat and will bow to greet
and he likes to tweet and suck on a teat.

[Slydessertfox]

The American Government spy's on us? Oh that's just begging to be called a conspiracy theory. The government should be happy though! We'll get use to the idea of this and it will pave the way for new methods of control and intimidation. We are a very obedient race, and this will not stop until the bread stops following. Even then though.. it'll probably still continue.

Ahh yes.. the "resistance is futile" routine does one think, and blah blah blah blah blah.

And now for a song!
I have a dog named Pete and he likes to eat meat.
He has tiny feet and never ever gets beat.
but.. never say never, cause he doesn't like wheat!
Yes my dog is a cheat and will bow to greet
and he likes to tweet and suck on a teat.
And now to repeat..

I have a dog named Pete and he likes to eat meat.
He has tiny feet and never ever gets beat.
but.. never say never, cause he doesn't like wheat!
Yes my dog is a cheat and will bow to greet
and he likes to tweet and suck on a teat.

I'm still waiting for them to be spying on us any more than they were back in Hoover's days.

[Exarch]

the difference between Hoover and PRISM is that Hoover only ever targeted those the FBI deemed to be a threat to the government or a member of government, from Martin Luther King Jr to John Lennon and JFK. The raging homosexual loved to blackmail people. PRISM targets EVERYONE. Imagine some NSA office worker fapping off to you and your wife having cyber/phone sex.

Looking at this mornings papers and it's clear that the mainstream media have commenced their character assassination program with zeal.

[Slydessertfox]

the difference between Hoover and PRISM is that Hoover only ever targeted those the FBI deemed to be a threat to the government or a member of government, from Martin Luther King Jr to John Lennon and JFK. The raging homosexual loved to blackmail people. PRISM targets EVERYONE. Imagine some NSA office worker fapping off to you and your wife having cyber/phone sex.

Looking at this mornings papers and it's clear that the mainstream media have commenced their character assassination program with zeal.

So wait, you seriously don't think the government is not just targeting people who they deem a threat? I mean really, yes they are gathering information on just about everyone (but in the age of social networking, most of that information is public anyway), but they aren't actually using it on anyone who's not a national security threat (or I guess any Hoover like figure can use it to blackmail). People always complain that the government doesn't connect the dots for terrorist attacks before they happen: This is them connecting the dots.

Regardless, we were closer to a police state during the red scare and McCarthyism than we ever are today.