Barack Obama said it recently:

Barack Obama quote: I think it’s important to recognize that you can’t have 100 percent security and also then have 100 percent privacy and zero inconvenience. We're going to have to make some choices as a society.

Barack Obama discussed the idea of that choice in pledges he made in 2007 and then in 2008. As a candidate, many years closer to the attacks of September 11 2001, Barack Obama told us that we should reject the urge to choose between security and liberty:

Barack Obama speech in 2007: This Administration also puts forward a false choice between the liberties we cherish and the security we demand. I will provide our intelligence and law enforcement agencies with the tools they need to track and take out the terrorists without undermining our Constitution and our freedom. That means no more illegal wire-tapping of American citizens. No more national security letters to spy on citizens who are not suspected of a crime. No more tracking citizens who do nothing more than protest a misguided war.

As President, Barack Obama chose security over liberty, doing exactly what he said he wouldn’t do, without consulting us and without telling us. Wire-tapping citizens. National security letters to spy on citizens who are not suspected of a crime. Tracking citizens who have done nothing more than protest.

Another American leader had something to say about that choice:

Benjamin Franklin quote: They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

What do you choose?

Today, President Barack Obama is giving us a new reason that we should all just forget about his use of George W. Bush’s Homeland Security electronic dragnet to take our private communications and make them available to be read at will by military spies.

“It is transparent,”Obama says of his military spy network targeting tens of millions of Americans. “That’s why we set up the FISA court.”

File this story in the folder entitled How Stupid Does He Think We Are?

obama nsa transparencyThe Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, what Obama refers to as the FISA court, is not transparent. It’s a court that acts in secret. Its judges aren’t identified. Its location is not identified. The cases that are brought before the it are secret. Its process is secret. Even the legal theories the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court are kept secret from the American people.

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court has been kept so secret that, until this month, the American people didn’t have any concrete evidence that the court was rubber stamping a military surveillance system so huge that it has been spying on practically every human being within the borders of the USA for at least six years. The Obama Administration had been telling everyone that the court was only approving spying against foreigners outside the United States. We were being lied to, but we had no way of knowing it.

That’s not what transparency looks like.

The FISA court is the opposite of transparent.

Barack Obama’s excuses for his massive violation of Americans’ constitutional rights are transparently dishonest.

The Fourth Amendment is exceptionally clear. It reads: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

In order to seize “papers” – that is, people’s private information – the government is required by the highest law in the land to target particularly named people, searching only particular places, and naming before search and seizure takes place the things that will be seized.

There’s no exemption to this for security, or for the sake of criminal investigations. Nowhere in the Constitution is there a provision that the Fourth Amendment can be ignored if the Executive Branch claims (using supposedly secret information) that ignoring the Fourth Amendment helps stop criminal conspiracy. The whole point of the Fourth Amendment, and much of the rest of the Bill of Rights, is that, in order to protect the liberty of the American people, the Executive Branch must be strongly limited in its security and police powers.

nsa spying must stopHowever, we’ve learned this month that the National Security Agency, which is not even a domestic law enforcement agency, but a part of the U.S. military, has been engaging in massive violations of the Fourth Amendment rights of tens of millions, and perhaps hundreds of millions, of Americans every day. They’ve been seizing private phone records, spying on who talks to who. They’ve been seizing private social media data. They’ve been grabbing private emails, and information about who visits what web sites, when, and what for.

The U.S. military, through its PRISM and telephone surveillance program, has been spying on practically the entire population of the United States of America.

Still, Democrats in the media like Stephanie Miller have been rushing to the defense of Barack Obama. It doesn’t matter that Obama continued George W. Bush’s programs to violate the Constitution, they’re saying now. All that matters is that Americans are safe.

Besides, they’ve argued, spying on millions of people’s private activities doesn’t matter so long as the spying is only on people’s metadata. Sure, the government is watching who talks to who, and watches where they go, and what they buy, but what matters is that Americans feel secure, knowing that Big Brother is watching.

Can you believe it, that the Democratic Party has sunk so low that they’re now clapping loudly for the values of Big Brother and Homeland Security? They’ll approve of anything, it seems, just so long as it’s a Democrat who’s doing it.

Today, in the aftermath of the mental fog of a relaxing father’s day weekend, we’re learning that NO, THE NSA WAS NOT JUST SPYING ON OUR METADATA. U.S. military spies have been listening in on the content of our telephone calls as well – at will.

What’s more, Edward Snowden has revealed that the Obama Administration has been circumventing even the rubber stamp of the Judiciary Branch’s Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, and has been allowing low-level analysts to listen to phone calls and read emails without any search warrant being issued to do so. Electronic privacy experts are backing up his description of what’s been going on, pointing out that data from companies like Google, Facebook and Apple has been grabbed at “listening posts”, regardless of the limitations that those companies, now desperate to stop the stampede of customers leaving their systems, have described.

There are no judges issuing warrants for these searches – just the spies themselves, approving their own surveillance operations against Americans.

Every excuse that the Democratic Party establishment has offered for this Orwellian Obama surveillance against Americans has turned out to be a sham.

I’m saying this as a liberal: No person who sincerely believes in the integrity of the Bill of Rights can stay with the thoroughly corrupt Democratic Party. Oh, yes, the Republican Party is thoroughly corrupt as well, but this isn’t a partisan issue any more. The stain of authoritarianism is heavy upon both the Democrats and the Republicans, and it is time for politicians and voters of conscience to walk away from both. They deserve nothing but our firm opposition.

If you care about warrantless surveillance by the United States Government, it’s worth periodically checking this Federal Register page to find out what the long-overdue, finally-formed Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board is up to. By law, the PCLOB has independent power unsquelchable by Congress or the President to subpoena classified or unclassified information regarding possible abuses of Americans’ civil liberties by the United States government. Even better, the PCLOB has a mandate to publish twice-yearly reports that are available to the public.

Given that independent power, it’s no wonder Barack Obama stalled the board’s formation for four and a half years, but now that the board is finally in place it has announced its first all-member meeting, Wednesday June 19. The announcement reads:

PRIVACY AND CIVIL LIBERTIES OVERSIGHT BOARD

[Notice-PCLOB-2013-03; Docket No 2013-0004; Sequence No. 3]
Sunshine Act Meeting

TIME AND DATE: 1:00 p.m. – 3:00 p.m. on Wednesday, June 19, 2013.
PLACE: The meeting will be held at 2100 K Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20427.
STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:
The Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board will meet in closed session to discuss classified information pertaining to the PRISM-related activities and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

The Government in the Sunshine Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552b, normally requires that agencies provide at least one week prior notice to the public of the time, date, and location of meetings. As permitted by section 552b(e)(1), the Board determined, by recorded vote, that agency business requires that this meeting be called at an earlier date.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Susan Reingold, Chief Administrative Officer, 202-331-1986.

Dated: June 12, 2013.
Claire McKenna,
Legal Counsel [FR Doc. 2013-14431 Filed 06/13/2013 at 11:15 am; Publication Date: 06/17/2013]

PRISM? They’ve got a lot to talk about. Do you think 2 hours will cover it?

Yesterday, I wrote of a petition in the official White House system that demands the resignation of Barack Obama over his continuation and expansion of a massive military electronic surveillance dragnet that is targeted against the American people. There are now over 20,000 signatures on that petition. When the number of signatures reaches 100,000, Barack Obama will be forced to officially respond to the demand for his resignation from office.

obama debate edward snowdenAn even more delicious petition in the White House system has come to my attention in the meantime. This petition demands that Barack Obama engage in a public, one-hour debate with Edward Snowden, the man who heroically exposed the unconstitutional Big Brother spying program, and who is now on the run from the feds.

The petition reads, “President Obama, you have said that the NSA’s blanket tracking of Americans’ phone calls and collaboration with tech giants “struck the right balance” and that you “welcome this debate”. You must agree that this issue is worthy of your time, and as our president you are the best qualified person to make the case in favor of broad surveillance. To make the opposing case, we can think of no one better than whistleblower Edward Snowden. Like you, he has access to the data showing the tradeoff between securing America and damaging democracy (which at this point the public does not). He speaks with breathtaking clarity, and has left behind a comfortable life, facing death for the strength of his convictions. If you are as strong in yours, you owe him (and us) 1 hour of your time for this.”

Until Barack Obama can summon the courage to face Edward Snowden, here’s another debate: This one is the debate over extreme government surveillance programs between Barack Obama the presidential candidate and Barack Obama the President.

(Warning: If your stomach is sensitive to extreme hypocrisy in the morning, you might not want to play this video)

On the surface, America’s telecommunications companies are trying to project an appearance of calm. Beneath that superficial appearance, they are scrambling. I spoke this morning to the manager of a Verizon store, and he told me stories of huge numbers of angry customers, panicked conference calls with people from headquarters, and a rash of new phone thefts. “There is a crisis in confidence in the system,” he said.

Yesterday morning, I referred to another crisis of confidence in the system created by the revelations that America’s military is spying against Americans, seizing records of who they call, and tracking online activity on giant networks operated by companies such as Google, Facebook and Apple as well. As part of an article listing some opportunities for activism in protest of government surveillance, I pointed to a petition in the White House petitioning system that demands the resignation of Barack Obama over his decision to continue George W. Bush’s policy of creating an immense electronic surveillance dragnet used to spy on the private activities of the American people.

At the time I wrote that article, there were only 3,000 signatures on that petition. Now, just 24 hours later, the number of signatures on that petition has surged to over 17,000.

That’s within just 8,000 signatures of the old threshold of 25,000 signatures that Barack Obama set that would require an official response to a petition. President Obama didn’t like responding to citizen petitions so much, it seems, and so, not too long ago, he raised that threshold to 100,000 signatures.

Still, if just 83,000 or so Americans will sign this petition demanding that Barack Obama resigns, Obama will have to release an official response to the idea. Wouldn’t that be interesting?

The Supreme Court just ruled that police can collect the DNA of people who are never charged with a crime.

The actions of your government in seizing the phone records of all Americans have just been exposed.

The same government has been sweeping up wide swaths of data on the activities of innocent people from the servers of Google, Microsoft, Apple, Yahoo, Facebook, YouTube, Skype and AOL.

All this in the month after the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board was finally activated after more than half a decade of delay. Under the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 Section 801, the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board is directed by law to:

  • “Analyze and review actions the executive branch takes… ensuring that the need for such actions is balanced with the need to protect privacy and civil liberties”.
  • “Ensure that liberty concerns are appropriately considered in the development and implementation of laws, regulations, and policies”.
  • “Review proposed legislation, regulations, and policies related to efforts to protect the Nation from terrorism,”
  • “Review the implementation of new and existing legislation, regulations, and policies related to efforts to protect the Nation from terrorism,”
  • “Advise the President and the departments, agencies, and elements of the executive branch to ensure that privacy and civil liberties are appropriately considered in the development and implementation of such legislation, regulations, policies, and guidelines,”
  • “Receive and review reports and other information from privacy officers and civil liberties officers under section 1062; when appropriate, make recommendations to such privacy officers and civil liberties officers regarding their activities; and when appropriate, coordinate the activities of such privacy officers and civil liberties officers on relevant interagency matters.”
  • “Periodically submit, not less than semiannually, reports—
    1. to the appropriate committees of Congress, including the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate, the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives, the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate, the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of Representatives, the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of the House of Representatives, the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate, and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives; and
    2. to the President; and
    3. which shall be in unclassified form to the greatest extent possible,”
  • “Not less than 2 reports submitted each year under paragraph (1)(B) shall include a description of the major activities of the Board during the preceding period; information on the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the Board resulting from its advice and oversight functions under subsection (d); the minority views on any findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the Board resulting from its advice and oversight functions under subsection (d); each proposal reviewed by the Board under subsection (d)(1) that the Board advised against implementation; and notwithstanding such advice, actions were taken to implement; and for the preceding period, any requests submitted under subsection (g)(1)(D) for the issuance of subpoenas that were modified or denied by the Attorney General.”
  • “INFORMING THE PUBLIC. The Board shall make its reports, including its reports to Congress, available to the public to the greatest extent that is consistent with the protection of classified information and applicable law; and hold public hearings and otherwise inform the public of its activities, as appropriate and in a manner consistent with the protection of classified information and applicable law.”

If the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board had actually carried out these activities — if President Barack Obama had not blocked its creation during the years of 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2012 — then the liberties of the American people would have had effective representative in government (did I mention that under law the PCLOB has complete subpoena power for any member of the executive branch?).

Unfortunately, the formation of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board was stymied by the Obama administration for four straight years. That history cannot be changed. Fortunately, as of last month a Chairman of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board was finally confirmed and so the Board can finally begin to act.

The question is, will the Board act?

In its only substantive action since its activation last month, the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board last week published a rule in the Federal Register that asserts its powers and duties. The rule describes the PCLOB’s functions as follows:

(a) The Board provides advice and counsel to the President and executive departments and agencies to ensure that privacy and civil liberties are appropriately considered in proposed legislation, regulations, and policies, and in the implementation of new and existing legislation, regulations, and policies, related to efforts to protect the Nation from terrorism;
(b) The Board oversees actions by the executive branch relating to efforts to protect the Nation from terrorism to determine whether such actions appropriately protect privacy and civil liberties and are consistent with governing laws, regulations, and policies regarding privacy and civil liberties; and
(c) The Board receives and reviews reports and other information from privacy and civil liberties officers under 42 U.S.C. 2000ee-1 and, when appropriate, makes recommendations to and coordinates the activities of privacy and civil liberties officers on relevant interagency matters.

That’s it. What’s missing from the functions described in the PCLOB’s self-written rule?

Reports to Congress are missing.
Reports to the public are missing.

Of course, these reports have been missing for years. With 2013 half gone, there are 9 semi-annual reports of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board that should have been issued but have not been issued by the Obama administration.

Is this omission by the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board simply an oversight of a function so obvious that it need not be stated? Or does the PCLOB intend to continue the lack of civil liberties reports so far under the administration of Barack Obama?

Wait, watch this space in the Federal Register and see.

Did you vote for Obama? If so, you voted for the monstrous military spying network that has been targeted against America’s civilian population.

Let’s be honest about this: Since 2008, it’s been quite clear, to those who cared enough to pay attention, that Barack Obama never had any intention of dismantling George W. Bush’s electronic surveillance operations. In 2008, Senator Obama broke his previous promises and voted in favor of the FISA Amendments Act. We protested it. Voters ignored it.

In 2009, independent progressives did their best to hold Obama to his promise that he would reform the Patriot Act and the FISA Amendments Act. But, we pointed out that Barack Obama kept the NSA spying going. A talking toilet from Irregular Times spread the warning that, under Barack Obama, the military’s National Security Agency was spying on Americans. Yes, we were so desperate to get the word out that we animated a talking toilet.

Democrats pretended it wasn’t happening. Obama got re-elected.

All the while, the Green Party has been paying attention, and speaking out against the Homeland Security surveillance state. In 2012, Jill Stein solidly criticized Obama for continuing George W. Bush’s old anti-liberty policies.

Now, in 2013, the presidential campaign is over, but the Green Party has not grown silent. The Green Shadow Cabinet is speaking out in protest against the National Security Agency’s spying against the American people.

Shahid Buttar, the Director of Civil Rights Enforcement, has responded to the revelations of Barack Obama’s unconstitutional seizure of millions of Verizon telephone records by pointing out the a larger context to the problem: When extraordinary powers are wielded by the government, we can’t trust secret courts to protect our constitutional rights. Buttar writes, “Courts exist to enforce our rights in the face of government abuses. That’s one of the central geniuses of the founding fathers and the system of checks and balances they constructed. But when the decisions are secret, they stop being judicial in character. Law is built on mutual references among courts. When the law can’t reference itself, it stops being law, and emerges as something very different: in this case, a rubber stamp allowing any manner of dragnet violations impacting law-abiding Americans and our fundamental rights.”