If ever there was a living example of the corrupting power of money, then the divide between those who think Edward Snowden a hero and a patriot and those who think him a villain and a traitor is that example.

My own view is that Snowden is the former. He has more guts than I have ever demonstrated in a life twice the years in span of Snowden’s. In an email to Tim Russo this morning I wrote:

Snowden is a hero and a patriot of the finest stripe. This man has sacrificed everything he knows for a country he clearly loves. If only more of us had his cojones.

The email was prompted by Russo’s post earlier this week at Medium where he wrote:

Nothing in the US in the last century or more has been more lucrative for its barons than the defense industry, and nothing more so than the security state created after 9/11 from which Edward Snowden emerges with a flamethrower. The farther you are away from that big pile of security money, the more you defend Edward Snowden.

And the closer you are to the boiling sun gravitational pull of contractors, sources, pundits, congressmen who can vote to put money in your pockets, agents or hedge funders, or just nice people who answer your call, the more you dismiss and even loathe Edward Snowden.

I judge no person who does not follow Snowden’s example and choses instead to remain silent. Hell, I couldn’t do what he has done. I was unwilling to take a comparatively minor step in comparison and risk arrest in the cause of Occupy last year because I feared the loss of my ability to pay my bills and eat on a regular basis. I do however, have nothing but contempt for those who pile on in obsequious devotion to their capitalist bosses.

That members of Congress are feeling pressure from their constituents to not toe the party line on Snowden’s actions encourages me. That our president continues to attack Snowden disturbs me.

Could President Barack Hussein Obama be acting in good faith? Yes. Do I think money and concerns for his legacy beyond the mid-term elections are not behind his actions? No.

Glenn Greenwald writes:

This morning, Silent Circle, a US-based secure online communication service, followed suit by shutting its own encrypted email service. Although it said it had not yet been served with any court order, the company, in a statement by its founder, internet security guru Phil Zimmerman, said:

We see the writing on the wall, and we have decided that it is best for us to shut down Silent Mail now.

What is particularly creepy about the Lavabit self-shutdown is that the company is gagged by law even from discussing the legal challenges it has mounted and the court proceeding it has engaged. In other words, the American owner of the company believes his Constitutional rights and those of his customers are being violated by the US Government, but he is not allowed to talk about it.

Edward Snowden, who was a Lavabit user, commented, through Greenwald:

Ladar Levison and his team suspended the operations of their 10 year old business rather than violate the Constitutional rights of their roughly 400,000 users. The President, Congress, and the Courts have forgotten that the costs of bad policy are always borne by ordinary citizens, and it is our job to remind them that there are limits to what we will pay.

America cannot succeed as a country where individuals like Mr. Levison have to relocate their businesses abroad to be successful. Employees and leaders at Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Yahoo, Apple, and the rest of our internet titans must ask themselves why they aren’t fighting for our interests the same way small businesses are. The defense they have offered to this point is that they were compelled by laws they do not agree with, but one day of downtime for the coalition of their services could achieve what a hundred Lavabits could not.

When Congress returns to session in September, let us take note of whether the internet industry’s statements and lobbyists – which were invisible in the lead-up to the Conyers-Amash vote – emerge on the side of the Free Internet or the NSA and its Intelligence Committees in Congress.

Yes, let us take note.

Via Boing Boing:

My Fellow Users,

I have been forced to make a difficult decision: to become complicit in crimes against the American people or walk away from nearly ten years of hard work by shutting down Lavabit. After significant soul searching, I have decided to suspend operations. I wish that I could legally share with you the events that led to my decision. I cannot. I feel you deserve to know what’s going on–the first amendment is supposed to guarantee me the freedom to speak out in situations like this. Unfortunately, Congress has passed laws that say otherwise. As things currently stand, I cannot share my experiences over the last six weeks, even though I have twice made the appropriate requests.

What’s going to happen now? We’ve already started preparing the paperwork needed to continue to fight for the Constitution in the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. A favorable decision would allow me resurrect Lavabit as an American company.

This experience has taught me one very important lesson: without congressional action or a strong judicial precedent, I would _strongly_ recommend against anyone trusting their private data to a company with physical ties to the United States.

Sincerely,
Ladar Levison
Owner and Operator, Lavabit LLC

Commenting on the news that the U.S. Department of Justice may be investigating J.P. Morgan Chase and Bank Of America for criminal charges involving subprime mortgage fraud, Matt Taibbi writes.

[T]hese investigations will be meaningless unless one of two things happens, once they reach the inevitable stage of concluding painstakingly-crafted settlements with the inevitable teams of high-priced lawyers for the offending firms:

1) Someone goes to jail.

2) The company is ordered to break itself up into smaller pieces.

As to point one, here’s the thing. If criminal laws were violated, then the government certainly has discretion to exercise mercy and seek non-criminal sanctions against the individuals responsible. But they can really only do that and not be total hypocrites if they also simultaneously implement leniency programs for ordinary street criminals at the same time.

Continuing on to his second point, Taibbi writes:

As to point two – if we’re not putting people in jail, we at least have to insist the companies break themselves up – this is in response to the argument made by the likes of Attorney General Eric Holder and former Department of Justice criminal division chief Lanny Breuer last winter after settlements involving HSBC (for money laundering) and UBS (for mass rate-fixing in the LIBOR scandal). The justification in those cases for deferred and or non-prosecution agreements coupled with huge fines as punishments for sweepingly destructive offenses was that the companies in question were too large and too systemically important to risk indicting criminally.

I’m not holding my breath, but President Obama sure could use some cover from all the attention now focused on the Whitehouse in the Edward Snowden affair. This could be his ticket.

We can have a strategy of mindful compassion so that what we read, watch and listen to doesn’t cause more suffering for ourselves and others. p. 38

From Good Citizens: Creating Enlightened Society by Thich Nhat Hanh

Previously…

Found in my electronic chapbook.

This is exactly how I feel about Browns/Cavaliers/Indians fans…

Robert Reich writes:

Lie #1: U.S. corporate tax rates are higher than the tax rates of other big economies. Wrong.

Lie #2: U.S. corporations need lower taxes in order to make investments in new jobs. Wrong again.

Lie #3: U.S. corporations need a tax break in order to be globally competitive. Baloney.

Greed, and only greed, is causing American Corporations to not hire more employees.

The rest is all a capitalist scam.

Is it possible that the “shut up and vote the way we tell you to” message delivered to members of Congress by the Bush-Obama Security Scheme will bite the BOSS on the ass?

Hmmm… Could be…

Glenn Greenwald writes:

Finally, all members of Congress – not just those on the Intelligence Committees – are responsible for making choices about the NSA and for protecting the privacy rights and other Constitutional guarantees of Americans. “I did not take an oath to defer to the Intelligence Committee,” Rep. Griffith told me. “My oath is to make informed decisions, and I can’t do my job when I can’t get even the most basic information about these programs.”

In early July, Grayson had staffers distribute to House members several slides published by the Guardian about NSA programs as part of Grayson’s efforts to trigger debate in Congress. But, according to one staff member, Grayson’s office was quickly told by the House Intelligence Committee that those slides were still classified, despite having been published and discussed in the media, and directed Grayson to cease distribution or discussion of those materials in the House, warning that he could face sanctions if he continued.

It has been widely noted that the supremely rubber-stamping FISA court constitutes NSA “oversight” in name only, and that the Intelligence Committees are captured by the agency and constrained to act even if they were inclined to. Whatever else is true, members of Congress in general clearly know next to nothing about the NSA and the FISA court beyond what they read in the media, and those who try to rectify that are being actively blocked from finding out.

Roldo Bartimole writes:

In a modern version of “let them eat cake” the town’s civic/business/media handlers are pushing Opportunity Corridor down the community’s collective throat. With an assist from Gov. John Kasich looking for love in the wrong place.

This is a $350 million answer to a non-existing need.

Anything to help the Institutions – and Cleveland is a big institutional city. From the Cleveland, Gund and other foundations to their instrument the Greater Cleveland Partnership they do the heavy lifting for the Corporates. Never doubt that.

The need for this opportunity is in the minds of people like “Mr. Sunshine” Steve Litt, his boss publisher Terry Egger (who should be going soon; his job as executioner at the PD is about over), and the promoters of every deal in Cleveland but its people and where the live.

Egger is “spear-heading its promotion,” said the PD. No doubt. The PD is a virtual sales drive. It’s certainly not a newspaper anymore. Just check its articles on the subject. A Plain Dealer editorial (noted for shallow thinking) said that the corridor would be “a means of curing blight, boosting neighborhood prospects and contributing to economic growth.” And tomorrow we’ll all live happy, prosperous lives.

Ironically, the first “public meeting” about the road took place with Egger. Where? At the Plain Dealer, of course. You come Continue Reading »

President Barack Hussein Obama probably won’t be impeached and I seriously doubt that he will resign, but Edward Snowden has sealed the president’s legacy.

Glenn Greenwald writes:

The latest revelations will add to the intense public and congressional debate around the extent of NSA surveillance programs. They come as senior intelligence officials testify to the Senate judiciary committee on Wednesday, releasing classified documents in response to the Guardian’s earlier stories on bulk collection of phone records and Fisa surveillance court oversight.

The files shed light on one of Snowden’s most controversial statements, made in his first video interview published by the Guardian on June 10.

“I, sitting at my desk,” said Snowden, could “wiretap anyone, from you or your accountant, to a federal judge or even the president, if I had a personal email”.

US officials vehemently denied this specific claim. Mike Rogers, the Republican chairman of the House intelligence committee, said of Snowden’s assertion: “He’s lying. It’s impossible for him to do what he was saying he could do.”

But training materials for XKeyscore detail how analysts can use it and other systems to mine enormous agency databases by filling in a simple on-screen form giving only a broad justification for the search. The request is not reviewed by a court or any NSA personnel before it is processed.

Every time the president’s men open their mouths to attack Snowden, he presents the documentation to disprove their attempts to get ahead of the story. Since they seemingly have no idea just how much information Snowden has been able to liberate, President Obama has no way to safely respond. In this case, silence must indicate agreement.

Thank you Edward Snowden, for exposing the criminal acts and political lies of the Bush-Obama Security Scheme.

What ever will the trolls do now?

Concerning former member of Congress, New York mayoral candidate and known sexting flasher Anthony Weiner:

I don’t mean to sound like a prude, but what the hell do you have to do to be disqualified from high-level politics in this country? When someone told me a while back that Weiner was running for Mayor, I thought it was a joke. This married politician sent unsolicited pictures of his penis to female strangers on the Internet! It’s not a crime, I guess because indecent exposure laws haven’t been updated for the cyber age, but basically, he’s a 21st-century flasher who used the U.S. Congress as a raincoat. Then he got caught, had to resign from Congress in what normally would be shame and disgrace, only to turn around and start doing it all over again pretty much immediately.

Glenn Greenwald writes:

One of the worst myths Democratic partisans love to tell themselves – and everyone else – is that the GOP refuses to support President Obama no matter what he does. Like its close cousin – the massively deceitful inside-DC grievance that the two parties refuse to cooperate on anything – it’s hard to overstate how false this Democratic myth is. When it comes to foreign policy, war, assassinations, drones, surveillance, secrecy, and civil liberties, President Obama’s most stalwart, enthusiastic defenders are often found among the most radical precincts of the Republican Party.

Greenwald continues:

The extraordinary events that took place in the House of Representatives yesterday are perhaps the most vivid illustration yet of this dynamic, and it independently reveals several other important trends. The House voted on an amendment sponsored by Justin Amash, the young Michigan lawyer elected in 2010 as a Tea Party candidate, and co-sponsored by John Conyers, the 24-term senior Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee. The amendment was simple. It would de-fund one single NSA program: the agency’s bulk collection of the telephone records of all Americans that we first revealed in this space, back on June 6. It accomplished this “by requiring the FISA court under Sec. 215 [of the Patriot Act] to order the production of records that pertain only to a person under investigation”.

The amendment yesterday was defeated. But it lost by only 12 votes: 205-217. Given that the amendment sought to de-fund a major domestic surveillance program of the NSA, the very close vote was nothing short of shocking. In fact, in the post-9/11 world, amendments like this, which directly challenge the Surveillance and National Security States, almost never get votes at all. That the GOP House Leadership was forced to allow it to reach the floor was a sign of how much things have changed over the last seven weeks.

Even a primary author of the Patriot Act voted for the amendment:

Perhaps the most amazing moment came when GOP Rep. James Sensenbrenner – the prime author of the Patriot Act back in 2001 and a long-time defender of War on Terror policies under both Bush and Obama – stood up to say that the NSA’s domestic bulk spying far exceeds the bounds of the law he wrote as well as his belief in the proper limits of domestic surveillance, and announced his support for Amash/Conyers. Sensenbrenner was then joined in voting to de-fund the NSA program by House liberals such as Barbara Lee, Rush Holt, James Clyburn, Nydia Velázquez, Alan Grayson, and Keith Ellison.

Privacy may be the Bush-Obama Security Scheme’s bridge too far.

How Ohio voted…

Ayes: Steve Chabot (R-1), Jim Jordan (R-4), Bill Johnson (R-6), Marcia Fudge (D-11) and James Renacci (R-16);

Noes: Brad Wenstrup (R-2), Robert Latta (R-5), Bob Gibbs (R-7), John Boehner (R-8), Marcy Kaptur (D-9), 10th — Rep. Michael Turner (R-10), Patrick “Pat” Tiberi (R-12), Tim Ryan (D-13), Rep. David Joyce (R-14) and Steve Stivers (R-15); and

Did not vote: Joyce Beatty (D-3),

I would very much like to hear what prompted Ryan and Kaptur to stand with Boehner and the Dark Side.

Spencer Ackerman writes:

The first major legislative challenge to the National Security Agency’s bulk collection of phone records from millions of Americans was defeated by only a narrow margin on Wednesday, sending a clear signal to the Obama administration that congressional anger about the extent of domestic surveillance is growing.

Despite a concerted lobbying effort by the White House and senior intelligence figures, the attempt to rein in the NSA failed by only 12 votes. The final vote was 205 in favor and 217 against, exposing deep restiveness in Congress over the wisdom and constitutionality of the bulk surveillance on Americans less than two months after the Guardian exposed it, thanks to leaks from whistleblower Edward Snowden. A shift of seven votes would have changed the outcome.

This may be the first glimpse of non-partisan support for turning back, and perhaps ending, the excesses fostered by the Bush-Obama Security Scheme.

The raucous and passionate debate exposed deep divisions in Congress over the propriety of the surveillance, contrary to assertions by the Obama administration and its allies that Congress had already granted its approval for the effort before it became public.

Campaigners said the narrow margin of defeat sent a clear signal about the strength of opposition to the measures. Michelle Richardson, the surveillance lobbyist at the American Civil Liberties Union, described the vote as a “sea change” in how Congress views bulk surveillance. “This is a great first step. It’s the best vote we’ve ever had on the Patriot Act,” said the ACLU’s surveillance lobbyist.

Richardson cited a pledge made during the debate by Rogers, the intelligence committee chairman, to add privacy protections on the program into the forthcoming intelligence authorization bill. “I think he has to do that now,” she said. “It also puts pressure on the administration to release more information on the program, because Congress isn’t buying what they’re selling.”

David Segal, executive director of Demand Progress, which helped organize an online campaign to support the amendment, said: “Today’s vote shows that the tide is turning, that the American people, when they are aware of these programs, overwhelmingly reject them, and the expiration date on these programs is coming due.”

Could it be that Americans aren’t all fluffy bunny rabbits frightened by their own shadows?

Robert Reich writes:

Republican discipline and Democratic lack of discipline isn’t a new phenomenon. As Will Rogers once said, “I’m not a member of any organized political party. I’m a Democrat.”

The difference has to do with the kind of personalities the two parties attract. People who respect authority, follow orders, want clear answers, obey commands, and prefer precise organization and control, tend to gravitate toward Republicans.

On the other hand, people who don’t much like authority, recoil from orders, don’t believe in clear answers, often disobey commands, and prefer things a bit undefined, tend to gravitate to the Democrats.

In short, the Republican Party is the party of the authoritarian personality; the Democratic Party is the party of the anti-authoritarian personality.

Spencer Ackerman writes:

The White House, Congress and the National Security Agency were bracing for a pivotal and unpredictable vote on Wednesday on the future of domestic mass surveillance in the US.

Debate was due to begin on Wednesday afternoon on an amendment tabled by congressman Justin Amash, a two-term libertarian Republican from Michigan, that would prevent the NSA from collecting bulk phone records on millions of Americans.

The vote on the amendment provides the first test of congressional opinion about the widespread NSA surveillance revealed by the whistleblower Edward Snowden and reported in the Guardian.

“This is the moment,” said Michelle Richardson, a surveillance lobbyist for the ACLU.

Let us eat in such a way that we keep our compassion alive, reduce suffering of living beings, preserve our planet and reverse the process of global climate change. p. 37

From Good Citizens: Creating Enlightened Society by Thich Nhat Hanh

Previously…

Found in my electronic chapbook.