Some lame denials of the US's involvement in David Miranda's ordeal:

"There was a heads up that was provided by the British government, so this was something we had an indication was likely to occur."

The White House declined to comment on whether Mr Miranda's name was on a "watch list" maintained by the US Transportation Security Administration.

It also declined to comment on whether the US was given access to Mr Miranda's laptop or anything on the laptop.

The US can't go after Snowden, so now it goes after anyone connected to the Snowden affair. This seems to suggest that a) there are still some very sensitive data in Greenwald's possession that they would prefer he didn't publish, or b) they know that the cat is out of the bag but the bureaucracy needs to go through the motions to set a deterrant to future whistleblowers and meet out 'justice,' or c) both of the above.

But it needs to be some incredibly important material if the UK government was ready to risk being labelled anti-free press and engage in the kind of intimidation of journalists for which they usually lambast Russia and other less 'democratic' nations...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/19/glenn-greenwald-uk-secrets-britain-detains-partner_n_3779667.html

"I will be far more aggressive in my reporting from now. I am going to publish many more documents. I am going to publish things on England too. I have many documents on England's spy system. I think they will be sorry for what they did," Greenwald, speaking in Portuguese, told reporters at Rio's airport where he met Miranda upon his return to Brazil.

"They wanted to intimidate our journalism, to show that they have power and will not remain passive but will attack us more intensely if we continue publishing their secrets," he said.

It seems unfortunate that he said "they'll be sorry". That will be used to attack Grenwald constantly.

Though I am wondering just how long before he joins other journalists/reporters/investigators like Andrew Breitbart, Michael Hastings, and Barnaby Jack, all of whom were about to release findings or were on a "big story".

Glen has painted an even bigger target on his back.

Any bets on how he dies? Car crash? Suddenly drops dead on his front steps? "Absolutely no foul-play here. Coroner's office has nothing to report. Nope. Nothing at all. This is not the murder you are looking for. Move along."

Some commentary in art on the Grenwald/Miranda/Guardian issue:

http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2013-08-20/information-not-free

PM 'told Heywood to warn Guardian'

Holy deluded special ed classes, Batman!

That the Home Secretary is informed about a possible police action to begin with shows that there is something WRONG going on.

Should the MPs be informed if you take an axe to a telephone pole and then get arrested for vandalism? How about if you speed too fast? Beat your dog? Beat your spouse? Beat your PM? Well, you'd be a hero if you beat your PM, but that's another story.

She went on: "We have a very clear divide in this country, and I think that's absolutely right, between the operational independence of the police and the policy work of politicians. I as Home Secretary do not tell the police who they should or should not stop at ports or who they should or should not arrest. I think it's absolutely right that that is the case, that the police decide who they should stop or not and whether they should arrest somebody or not. That's their operational independence. I'm pleased that we live in a country where there is that separation."

That is so incredibly disingenuous. Holy crap. Unreal.

Haha!

We have the next move (sorta) from Snowden's side in this game!

"EFF Victory Results in Release of Secret Court Opinion Finding NSA Surveillance Unconstitutional

Update: In response to EFF's FOIA lawsuit, the government has released the 2011 FISA court opinion ruling some NSA surveillance unconstitutional."
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/08/eff-victory-results-expected-release-secret-court-opinion-finding-nsa-surveillance

So then the "U Word" is among the highest in the land. It's all blah-blah, then appeal-blah, then another-appeal-blah, and then when the U-Word shows up the Judiciary goes all sudo-don't-do-that.

Stating the obvious, one reason this is big news, (and a nice move - is this a Discovered Knight Fork?), is that not only is
A: the action (some of it) U-Word, but
B: the court actually had a shred of decency, but then the exec branch's secrecy tried to hide it.
C. your choice here

See, they've been wiggling around (hiding the opinion), but it's *reeeeaaaallly* hard to *overturn* the U-Word. (It DOES happen, but far from easily, and never this quick.)

So now we're at the dangerous part, of "So, the U-Word is here. But Nat-Sec blah blah, we'll ignore the ruling".

Comments? Countermoves from Gov?

Update: In response to EFF's FOIA lawsuit, the government has released the 2011 FISA court opinion ruling some NSA surveillance unconstitutional.

...So...isn't that the same FISA court that was giving - Instead of Just Saying No.. - them the warrants to do the sneaky unconstitutional stuff in the first place?

Quote from: Stoic Joker on August 22, 2013, 11:43 AM

Quote from: TaoPhoenix on August 22, 2013, 07:09 AM

Update: In response to EFF's FOIA lawsuit, the government has released the 2011 FISA court opinion ruling some NSA surveillance unconstitutional.

...So...isn't that the same FISA court that was giving - Instead of Just Saying No.. - them the warrants to do the sneaky unconstitutional stuff in the first place?

It's still better than a kick in the balls, which is all we've been getting so far...

Bummer ... I was hoping I had/was missing something. But it does at least imply a glimmer of a conscience on FISA's part.

Quote from: Stoic Joker on August 22, 2013, 01:01 PM

Quote from: Renegade on August 22, 2013, 12:10 PM

Quote from: Stoic Joker on August 22, 2013, 11:43 AM

Quote from: TaoPhoenix on August 22, 2013, 07:09 AM

Update: In response to EFF's FOIA lawsuit, the government has released the 2011 FISA court opinion ruling some NSA surveillance unconstitutional.

...So...isn't that the same FISA court that was giving - Instead of Just Saying No.. - them the warrants to do the sneaky unconstitutional stuff in the first place?

It's still better than a kick in the balls, which is all we've been getting so far...

Bummer ... I was hoping I had/was missing something. But it does at least imply a glimmer of a conscience on FISA's part.

Well, as it was all done in secret, we don't know just how bad things are. The FISA court might not be as complicity in the criminality as we're guessing. Who knows? They've not released any of what they've done yet, and we're only getting a tiny glimpse into the crimes they've committed. It might not be all that bad on the court's part... (Perhaps I'm just being naive and hopeful... dunno - we'll see [or we won't].)

Quid Pro Quo - Since the constitution is out the window and "We the People" are faced with proving our innocence at gun point ... It's only "fair" that they be given the same treatment. Our evidence? Their Guilt by Association with Zero Degrees of separation with those that are systematically destroying the American way of life ... No trial is necessary.

The benefit of a doubt that was wasted a decade ago in trusting them to actually lookout for the wellbeing of the American people was obviously foolishly unfounded. So it is now time for assholes and elbows to be seen headed out of town because the lynching needed to be started promptly at friggin' yesterday.

The NSA (and friends) should be disbanded and then publically disemboweled as an example to any other "well intended" secret agency that might be thinking on making a bid for world domination. Then a statue of its fetid carcass should be raised in the center of any town that is large enough to have an MLK street, road, avenue, lane, park or boulevard ... To make god damn sure nobody EVER forgets and decides to try that shit again.

...Since the constitution is out the window...

See, that's another finesse I was trying to grasp at. It's like we're wandering around Dante's 7 circles of hell. To be sure, the constitution was made into a paper airplane and sent sailing into the rotunda pit in the middle of the circles of hell, but had not in fact landed. (My kingdom for an art work representation editorial cartoon!! Artists?)

See, "Da C Document" was being *ignored*. Pretty badly. But I really am emphasizing that uttering the actual word of "Unconstitutional" brings it out of "Pshaw & hand waving wink-nudge space" into "Dialog space". The first is maybe a 4th circle of hell. Pretty bad. But once the U-Word shows up in an official ruling, only top level courts can use that, and *that* is *very hard* to hand wave away. (They did it last month with the Voting Rights thing, but you see how long that takes). To forcibly override a legit ruling that uses the word "Unconstitutional" is like holding a gun to a mathematician and asking him to divide by zero.

And yes, the Internet is on Snowden's side. Look how fast a random fella like me found this news through one typical news aggregator system. Before even about 2009 this wouldn't have been possible zeitgeist-wise because the Main Media could have squashed it. But the Internet doesn't *quite* get squashed, not at this level.

So now that "We know that they know that we know that they know that we know" etc, the U-Word is here, so they could still be nasty enough to nuts-kick it like Renny likes to say, but they *can't un-do it*.

Hmm. If this (below) is true, then what are the implications?
(Copied below sans embedded hyperlinks/images.)

12 year-old NSA spying system revealed that catches 75 percent of US Internet traffic
August 21st, 2013 by Sarah A. Downey

NSA companiesLooks like the NSA lied.

The Wall Street Journal’s Siobhan Gorman and Jennifer Valentino-Devries broke the story this morning that the NSA’s systems can access about 75% of all Internet traffic in the US. Not only that, but it can save the content of emails and Internet phone calls sent from one US citizen to another.

The revelation contradicts previous NSA statements, including some by NSA Director James Clapper, that the NSA doesn’t intercept the actual contents of emails and other communications, and that the NSA doesn’t intercept purely domestic (US to US) traffic.

The surveillance programs, with whimsical code names including “Blarney, Fairview, Oakstar, Lithium and Stormbrew,” collect and filter information directly from US telecommunications companies, including AT&T and Verizon. Major companies like Cisco, Boeing, and Juniper provide the gear to build the systems. 

Similar to PRISM, the spying program Edward Snowden revealed that lets government analysts access data from web companies like Google and Facebook, these programs only work because they integrate directly with wireless and Internet providers. Once again, private companies are demonstrated to power the surveillance that feeds the government.

Clapper NSA memeThe government can spy on people “reasonably believed” to be outside the US, which is a low legal bar and easy standard to meet. But NSA officials admit that many of the communications they intercept and store are actually between US citizens, and thousands of other serious surveillance errors happen each year.

The program is largely secret and regulates itself. Civil rights and privacy activists argue that the NSA should have better, more public oversight.

The fallout from 2013′s “Summer of Snowden” has been widespread. Analysts estimate that newfound distrust in US data companies will cost $180 billion, although privacy companies like us and DuckDuckGo have seen major growth in the number of people using our tools. President Obama’s approval rating has dropped, especially among young voters between 18 and 29. Last week, the President announced plans to reform NSA programs to better protect privacy.

On a final note, you can’t stop the NSA from tracking you, but you can make it harder. Here’s how.

New ODNI press release:

http://www.odni.gov/index.php/newsroom/press-releases/191-press-releases-2013/917-joint-statement-nsa-and-office-of-the-director-of-national-intelligence

Press reports based on an article published in today’s Wall Street Journal mischaracterize aspects of NSA’s data collection activities conducted under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. The NSA does not sift through and have unfettered access to 75% of the United States’ online communications.

The following are the facts:

--Media reports based upon the recent Wall Street Journal (WSJ) article regarding NSA’s foreign intelligence activities provide an inaccurate and misleading picture of NSA’s collection programs, but especially with respect to NSA’s use of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).

--The reports leave readers with the impression that NSA is sifting through as much as 75% of the United States’ online communications, which is simply not true.

--In its foreign intelligence mission, and using all its authorities, NSA "touches" about 1.6%, and analysts only look at 0.00004%, of the world’s internet traffic.

etc. etc.

The interesting part is:

--In its foreign intelligence mission, and using all its authorities, NSA "touches" about 1.6%, and analysts only look at 0.00004%, of the world’s internet traffic.

My guess is that is a statement about just how understaffed they are and how they need more funding to make up for the slack.

Oh, and they have a new blog site:

http://icontherecord.tumblr.com/

Oooooh! It's on tumblr! They must be cool now!

New ODNI press release:

http://www.odni.gov/index.php/newsroom/press-releases/191-press-releases-2013/917-joint-statement-nsa-and-office-of-the-director-of-national-intelligence

Quote

Press reports based on an article published in today’s Wall Street Journal mischaracterize aspects of NSA’s data collection activities conducted under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. The NSA does not sift through and have unfettered access to 75% of the United States’ online communications.

The following are the facts:

--Media reports based upon the recent Wall Street Journal (WSJ) article regarding NSA’s foreign intelligence activities provide an inaccurate and misleading picture of NSA’s collection programs, but especially with respect to NSA’s use of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).

--The reports leave readers with the impression that NSA is sifting through as much as 75% of the United States’ online communications, which is simply not true.

--In its foreign intelligence mission, and using all its authorities, NSA "touches" about 1.6%, and analysts only look at 0.00004%, of the world’s internet traffic.

...
My guess is that is a statement about just how understaffed they are and how they need more funding to make up for the slack.
...

Hehe! Renny, you're so sweet! You believed their "facts"!

However, in response to that "damage control move" in this game, I reply with:

"NZ police affidavits show use of PRISM for surveillance
Live traffic capture.

Police affidavits related to the raid on Kim Dotcom's Mega mansion appear to show that New Zealand police and spy agencies are able to tap directly into United States surveillance systems such as PRISM to capture email and other traffic.

The discovery was made by blogger Keith Ng who wrote on his On Point blog that the Organised and Financial Crime Agency New Zealand (OFCANZ) requested assistance from the Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB), the country's signals intelligence unit, which is charge of surveilling the Pacific region under the Five-Eyes agreement."
http://www.itnews.com.au/News/354407,nz-police-affidavits-show-use-of-prism-for-surveillance.aspx

So see? 75% might be closer to the mark! Otherwise they would have "wasted" their 1.6% & 0.00004% on Kim Dotcom, and none of the 400 other more important topics!

This is a collection of people lying about all this stuff. It starts with James Clapper and only gets better!