NWS Nieuws & Achtergronden
Discussieer hier diepgaander over de actualiteiten.
quote:Edward Snowden: the whistleblower answers the essential questions on the biggest leak in NSA history
Source for the Guardian's NSA files on why he carried out the biggest intelligence leak in a generation – and what comes next
Edward Snowden was interviewed over several days in Hong Kong by Glenn Greenwald and Ewen MacAskill.
Q: Why did you decide to become a whistleblower?
A: "The NSA has built an infrastructure that allows it to intercept almost everything. With this capability, the vast majority of human communications are automatically ingested without targeting. If I wanted to see your emails or your wife's phone, all I have to do is use intercepts. I can get your emails, passwords, phone records, credit cards.
"I don't want to live in a society that does these sort of things … I do not want to live in a world where everything I do and say is recorded. That is not something I am willing to support or live under."
Q: But isn't there a need for surveillance to try to reduce the chances of terrorist attacks such as Boston?
A: "We have to decide why terrorism is a new threat. There has always been terrorism. Boston was a criminal act. It was not about surveillance but good, old-fashioned police work. The police are very good at what they do."
Q: Do you see yourself as another Bradley Manning?
A: "Manning was a classic whistleblower. He was inspired by the public good."
Q: Do you think what you have done is a crime?
A: "We have seen enough criminality on the part of government. It is hypocritical to make this allegation against me. They have narrowed the public sphere of influence."
Q: What do you think is going to happen to you?
A: "Nothing good."
Q: Why Hong Kong?
A: "I think it is really tragic that an American has to move to a place that has a reputation for less freedom. Still, Hong Kong has a reputation for freedom in spite of the People's Republic of China. It has a strong tradition of free speech."
Q: What do the leaked documents reveal?
A: "That the NSA routinely lies in response to congressional inquiries about the scope of surveillance in America. I believe that when [senator Ron] Wyden and [senator Mark] Udall asked about the scale of this, they [the NSA] said it did not have the tools to provide an answer. We do have the tools and I have maps showing where people have been scrutinised most. We collect more digital communications from America than we do from the Russians."
nsa whistleblower Snowden is a 29-year-old former technical assistant for the CIA
Q: What about the Obama administration's protests about hacking by China?
A: "We hack everyone everywhere. We like to make a distinction between us and the others. But we are in almost every country in the world. We are not at war with these countries."
Q: Is it possible to put security in place to protect against state surveillance?
A: "You are not even aware of what is possible. The extent of their capabilities is horrifying. We can plant bugs in machines. Once you go on the network, I can identify your machine. You will never be safe whatever protections you put in place."
Q: Does your family know you are planning this?
A: "No. My family does not know what is happening … My primary fear is that they will come after my family, my friends, my partner. Anyone I have a relationship with …
I will have to live with that for the rest of my life. I am not going to be able to communicate with them. They [the authorities] will act aggressively against anyone who has known me. That keeps me up at night."
Q: When did you decide to leak the documents?
A: "You see things that may be disturbing. When you see everything you realise that some of these things are abusive. The awareness of wrong-doing builds up. There was not one morning when I woke up [and decided this is it]. It was a natural process.
"A lot of people in 2008 voted for Obama. I did not vote for him. I voted for a third party. But I believed in Obama's promises. I was going to disclose it [but waited because of his election]. He continued with the policies of his predecessor."
Q: What is your reaction to Obama denouncing the leaks on Friday while welcoming a debate on the balance between security and openness?
A: "My immediate reaction was he was having difficulty in defending it himself. He was trying to defend the unjustifiable and he knew it."
Q: What about the response in general to the disclosures?
A: "I have been surprised and pleased to see the public has reacted so strongly in defence of these rights that are being suppressed in the name of security. It is not like Occupy Wall Street but there is a grassroots movement to take to the streets on July 4 in defence of the Fourth Amendment called Restore The Fourth Amendment and it grew out of Reddit. The response over the internet has been huge and supportive."
Q: Washington-based foreign affairs analyst Steve Clemons said he overheard at the capital's Dulles airport four men discussing an intelligence conference they had just attended. Speaking about the leaks, one of them said, according to Clemons, that both the reporter and leaker should be "disappeared". How do you feel about that?
A: "Someone responding to the story said 'real spies do not speak like that'. Well, I am a spy and that is how they talk. Whenever we had a debate in the office on how to handle crimes, they do not defend due process – they defend decisive action. They say it is better to kick someone out of a plane than let these people have a day in court. It is an authoritarian mindset in general."
Q: Do you have a plan in place?
A: "The only thing I can do is sit here and hope the Hong Kong government does not deport me … My predisposition is to seek asylum in a country with shared values. The nation that most encompasses this is Iceland. They stood up for people over internet freedom. I have no idea what my future is going to be.
"They could put out an Interpol note. But I don't think I have committed a crime outside the domain of the US. I think it will be clearly shown to be political in nature."
Q: Do you think you are probably going to end up in prison?
A: "I could not do this without accepting the risk of prison. You can't come up against the world's most powerful intelligence agencies and not accept the risk. If they want to get you, over time they will."
Q: How to you feel now, almost a week after the first leak?
A: "I think the sense of outrage that has been expressed is justified. It has given me hope that, no matter what happens to me, the outcome will be positive for America. I do not expect to see home again, though that is what I want."
Ik hoor er nog te weinig over en waar blijven die oorlog of sancties?
Het verschil tussen de regering en de maffia is dat de maffia georganiseerd is.
- Wiet van Broeckhoven
- Wiet van Broeckhoven
As the officer took her away, she recalled that she asked,
"Why do you push us around?"
And she remembered him saying,
"I don't know, but the law's the law, and you're under arrest."
"Why do you push us around?"
And she remembered him saying,
"I don't know, but the law's the law, and you're under arrest."
welke oorlog?quote:Op dinsdag 23 juli 2013 22:39 schreef Greyson het volgende:
Ik hoor er nog te weinig over en waar blijven die oorlog of sancties?
Op zondag 8 december 2013 00:01 schreef Karina het volgende:
Dat gaat me te diep sp3c, daar is het te laat voor.
Dat gaat me te diep sp3c, daar is het te laat voor.
Zoals te verwachten was lieten politici enkel en alleen even voor de bühne van zich horen om vervolgens weer terug te kruipen in hun schulp.quote:
Ik hoor er nog te weinig over en waar blijven die oorlog of sancties?
Op zich niet vreemd. De halve wereld doet immers min of meer het zelfde. Politici kunnen dus niet al te moeilijk gaan doen over dit soort zaken.
As the officer took her away, she recalled that she asked,
"Why do you push us around?"
And she remembered him saying,
"I don't know, but the law's the law, and you're under arrest."
"Why do you push us around?"
And she remembered him saying,
"I don't know, but the law's the law, and you're under arrest."
Jammer dat Stefan Molyneux eindigt met een hoop libertarisch gezever vanaf 32:25quote:
The view from nowhere.
Nee, dat is juist belangrijk.quote:Op woensdag 24 juli 2013 12:21 schreef deelnemer het volgende:
[..]
Jammer dat Stefan Molyneux eindigt met een hoop libertarisch gezever vanaf 32:25
As the officer took her away, she recalled that she asked,
"Why do you push us around?"
And she remembered him saying,
"I don't know, but the law's the law, and you're under arrest."
"Why do you push us around?"
And she remembered him saying,
"I don't know, but the law's the law, and you're under arrest."
Germany seeks EU support for online privacy charter after NSA revelations
Protesters against NSA surveillance in Griesheim, Germany. The revelations have become a key election issue in the country. (Photograph: Boris Roessler/DPA/Corbis)
Data protection watchdogs in Germany call for suspension of agreement with US amid concern about surveillance
Senior German officials are seeking European support for a new global charter safeguarding personal privacy online, as the country's data protection watchdogs called for the suspension of a key agreement with the United States over revelations about US intelligence-gathering on the internet.
The moves reflect concerns in Germany that the US National Security Agency (NSA) may have collected personal information on millions of web users in breach of national and international rules. The claim, made by the NSA leaker Edward Snowden, has become an election issue in Germany two months before the country goes to the polls.
A letter sent by Germany's foreign and justice ministers to their European Union counterparts proposes expanding a 1966 UN human rights treaty to cover modern forms of communication such as email, instant messaging and social media.
"We want to use the current debate to launch an initiative that would outline the inalienable privacy rights under current conditions," the two ministers wrote. The letter, sent last week but released only on Wednesday, suggests convening a meeting of all 167 parties to the international covenant on civil and political rights. The United States ratified the treaty in 1992.
US officials have defended the NSA programmes as necessary to prevent terrorist attacks.But Germany's independent privacy watchdogs said the surveillance programmes breached an EU-US pact meant to ensure cross-border data protection.
The 2000 "safe harbour" agreement requires US companies to grant European customers the same level of data protection they could expect in Europe – even if their data is processed or stored elsewhere. But according to Snowden, one NSA programme known as Prism gives the agency comprehensive access to customer data from companies such as Google and Facebook.
The data protection commissioners said the practice in effect made interception of personal data routine, rather than the exception, and urged European officials to consider suspending the agreement "in view of the excessive surveillance activities of foreign intelligence agencies".
Guardian
Protesters against NSA surveillance in Griesheim, Germany. The revelations have become a key election issue in the country. (Photograph: Boris Roessler/DPA/Corbis)
Data protection watchdogs in Germany call for suspension of agreement with US amid concern about surveillance
Senior German officials are seeking European support for a new global charter safeguarding personal privacy online, as the country's data protection watchdogs called for the suspension of a key agreement with the United States over revelations about US intelligence-gathering on the internet.
The moves reflect concerns in Germany that the US National Security Agency (NSA) may have collected personal information on millions of web users in breach of national and international rules. The claim, made by the NSA leaker Edward Snowden, has become an election issue in Germany two months before the country goes to the polls.
A letter sent by Germany's foreign and justice ministers to their European Union counterparts proposes expanding a 1966 UN human rights treaty to cover modern forms of communication such as email, instant messaging and social media.
"We want to use the current debate to launch an initiative that would outline the inalienable privacy rights under current conditions," the two ministers wrote. The letter, sent last week but released only on Wednesday, suggests convening a meeting of all 167 parties to the international covenant on civil and political rights. The United States ratified the treaty in 1992.
US officials have defended the NSA programmes as necessary to prevent terrorist attacks.But Germany's independent privacy watchdogs said the surveillance programmes breached an EU-US pact meant to ensure cross-border data protection.
The 2000 "safe harbour" agreement requires US companies to grant European customers the same level of data protection they could expect in Europe – even if their data is processed or stored elsewhere. But according to Snowden, one NSA programme known as Prism gives the agency comprehensive access to customer data from companies such as Google and Facebook.
The data protection commissioners said the practice in effect made interception of personal data routine, rather than the exception, and urged European officials to consider suspending the agreement "in view of the excessive surveillance activities of foreign intelligence agencies".
Guardian
"The 2000 "safe harbour" agreement requires US companies to grant European customers the same level of data protection they could expect in Europe – even if their data is processed or stored elsewhere."
Hier kunnen we wat mee.
Hier kunnen we wat mee.
House vote reflects growing revolt over NSA surveillance
Justin Amash has added his voice to the chorus of criticism over the NSA's bulk collection of metadata. (Photograph: J Scott Applewhite/AP)
Six weeks ago, only a few in Congress were ready to challenge the government on surveillance – but opposition has grown
The House vote to block NSA funding for one of its data collection programmes is the biggest manifestation yet of a revolt that has steadily grown over the last two months.
When the Guardian and Washington Post first revealed the documents leaked by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden, there were relatively few in Congress prepared openly to challenge the government over intrusions into privacy.
The challenge was largely restricted to the two long-term sceptics, senators Ron Wyden and Mark Udall. This left Barack Obama able to claim that the surveillance was not secret because every member of Congress had been briefed about it, and that every piece of legislation since 2006 related to it had been passed with large bipartisan majorities.
Towards the end of June, opposition to the surveillance programme began to grow. Wyden and Udall were joined by 24 other senators to send a joint letter to to intelligence chiefs complaining about a secret body of laws and misleading statements by officials.
At a House judiciary hearing last week, member after member said that while they had little sympathy for Snowden, they were glad about the revelations and repeatedly challenged the NSA and justice department officials at the hearing.
The scheduled House vote brings together a potent combination of progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans. Such is the strength of feeling that they are prepared to defy not only pleas from the White House and personal appearances on the Hill by intelligence chiefs, but their own congressional leaders.
The very fact that the vote was to be held enraged the Wall Street Journal, which, in an editorial, wrote: "Few things are more dangerous than Congress in heat, and so it is this week as a libertarian-left wing coalition in the House of Representatives is rushing to neuter one of the National Security Agency's anti- terror surveillance programs."
It added: "The last thing Congress should do is kill a program in a rush to honor the reckless claims of Mr Snowden and his apologists."
Congress is due to begin a five-week recess at the start of August, and much of the momentum will go out off the issue, at least on the Hill. But there will be more hearings in in the autumn, and more votes. Proposed reform of the Patriot Act, which authorises much of the surveillance, has already been introduced. One of the changes would require the government to demonstrate a clear link to terrorism or spying before being allowed to collect Americans' private information.
Changes are also proposed to reform the ultra-secret Fisa court, which issues warrants for surveillance. Many members of Congress vote because they regard such issues as a matter of principle but others are also motivated by pressure from voters.
Wyden mentioned this on Tuesday in speech in Washington, saying Americans were stunned by the scale of the surveillance. "And, boy, are they angry. You hear it in the lunchrooms, town hall meetings and senior citizen centres," Wyden said.
And the public will almost certainly be still engaged in that debate when Congress returns in September. A Washington Post/ABC News poll published Wednesday showed concerns about personal privacy have grown. The poll suggested about three-quarters of Americans see the NSA programmes as infringing on their rights to privacy.
In the aftermath of 9/11, when there was overwhelming concern over security, the balance has gradually shifted, with the poll finding 57% in favour of unfettered investigations and 39% seeing protection of privacy as the more important.
There will likely be more disclosures in the media that will keep the debate alive. And legal actions are pending. A preliminary court hearing is scheduled for Thursday in New York at which the American Civil Liberties Union is challenging the constitutionality of the NSA's mass collection of phone records. The ACLU said it will be the first time that the government has been forced to address NSA surveillance in court.
All this puts pressure on the White House to act. The Obama administration responds that it has already made gestures but these are so minor and modest they have made little impact on public consciousness. Big concessions will be required to allay public concerns.
The growing revolt helps Snowden. The Washington Post/ABC News poll shows a drop in public support for him, with 53% saying he should be charged with a crime for his leaks against 43% less than a month ago. But the debate he started can only help him if he is ever arrives back on US soil. Given the debate he has started, it makes it harder for the justice department to argue that he is not a whistleblower,
For the moment, Snowden is at the mercy of the Russian authorities, possibly doomed to a life of exile there unless they relent and allow him to leave for Latin America – assuming a way can be found for him to get there avoiding US attempts to intercept him.
But he can at least have the satisfaction of feeling that the revolt has vindicated the disclosures he made in Hong Kong
Guardian
Justin Amash has added his voice to the chorus of criticism over the NSA's bulk collection of metadata. (Photograph: J Scott Applewhite/AP)
Six weeks ago, only a few in Congress were ready to challenge the government on surveillance – but opposition has grown
The House vote to block NSA funding for one of its data collection programmes is the biggest manifestation yet of a revolt that has steadily grown over the last two months.
When the Guardian and Washington Post first revealed the documents leaked by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden, there were relatively few in Congress prepared openly to challenge the government over intrusions into privacy.
The challenge was largely restricted to the two long-term sceptics, senators Ron Wyden and Mark Udall. This left Barack Obama able to claim that the surveillance was not secret because every member of Congress had been briefed about it, and that every piece of legislation since 2006 related to it had been passed with large bipartisan majorities.
Towards the end of June, opposition to the surveillance programme began to grow. Wyden and Udall were joined by 24 other senators to send a joint letter to to intelligence chiefs complaining about a secret body of laws and misleading statements by officials.
At a House judiciary hearing last week, member after member said that while they had little sympathy for Snowden, they were glad about the revelations and repeatedly challenged the NSA and justice department officials at the hearing.
The scheduled House vote brings together a potent combination of progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans. Such is the strength of feeling that they are prepared to defy not only pleas from the White House and personal appearances on the Hill by intelligence chiefs, but their own congressional leaders.
The very fact that the vote was to be held enraged the Wall Street Journal, which, in an editorial, wrote: "Few things are more dangerous than Congress in heat, and so it is this week as a libertarian-left wing coalition in the House of Representatives is rushing to neuter one of the National Security Agency's anti- terror surveillance programs."
It added: "The last thing Congress should do is kill a program in a rush to honor the reckless claims of Mr Snowden and his apologists."
Congress is due to begin a five-week recess at the start of August, and much of the momentum will go out off the issue, at least on the Hill. But there will be more hearings in in the autumn, and more votes. Proposed reform of the Patriot Act, which authorises much of the surveillance, has already been introduced. One of the changes would require the government to demonstrate a clear link to terrorism or spying before being allowed to collect Americans' private information.
Changes are also proposed to reform the ultra-secret Fisa court, which issues warrants for surveillance. Many members of Congress vote because they regard such issues as a matter of principle but others are also motivated by pressure from voters.
Wyden mentioned this on Tuesday in speech in Washington, saying Americans were stunned by the scale of the surveillance. "And, boy, are they angry. You hear it in the lunchrooms, town hall meetings and senior citizen centres," Wyden said.
And the public will almost certainly be still engaged in that debate when Congress returns in September. A Washington Post/ABC News poll published Wednesday showed concerns about personal privacy have grown. The poll suggested about three-quarters of Americans see the NSA programmes as infringing on their rights to privacy.
In the aftermath of 9/11, when there was overwhelming concern over security, the balance has gradually shifted, with the poll finding 57% in favour of unfettered investigations and 39% seeing protection of privacy as the more important.
There will likely be more disclosures in the media that will keep the debate alive. And legal actions are pending. A preliminary court hearing is scheduled for Thursday in New York at which the American Civil Liberties Union is challenging the constitutionality of the NSA's mass collection of phone records. The ACLU said it will be the first time that the government has been forced to address NSA surveillance in court.
All this puts pressure on the White House to act. The Obama administration responds that it has already made gestures but these are so minor and modest they have made little impact on public consciousness. Big concessions will be required to allay public concerns.
The growing revolt helps Snowden. The Washington Post/ABC News poll shows a drop in public support for him, with 53% saying he should be charged with a crime for his leaks against 43% less than a month ago. But the debate he started can only help him if he is ever arrives back on US soil. Given the debate he has started, it makes it harder for the justice department to argue that he is not a whistleblower,
For the moment, Snowden is at the mercy of the Russian authorities, possibly doomed to a life of exile there unless they relent and allow him to leave for Latin America – assuming a way can be found for him to get there avoiding US attempts to intercept him.
But he can at least have the satisfaction of feeling that the revolt has vindicated the disclosures he made in Hong Kong
Guardian
De stemming over het amendement waarover het artikel in de post van Misty_eyes gaat is zojuist geweest, 205-217...quote:Op woensdag 24 juli 2013 23:27 schreef Misty_eyes het volgende:
House vote reflects growing revolt over NSA surveillance
...
Voor de mensen die beweerden dat het nieuwe NSA datacenter yottabytes of zettabytes zou kunnen opslaan:
http://www.forbes.com/sit(...)essive-than-thought/
http://www.forbes.com/sit(...)essive-than-thought/
quote:If Kahles estimations and assumptions are correct, the facility could hold up to 12,000 petabytes, or 12 exabytes which is a lot of information(!) but is not of the scale previously reported.
WEB / [HaxBall #64] Jos is God
Arguing on the Internet is like running in the Special Olympics.
Arguing on the Internet is like running in the Special Olympics.
As the officer took her away, she recalled that she asked,
"Why do you push us around?"
And she remembered him saying,
"I don't know, but the law's the law, and you're under arrest."
"Why do you push us around?"
And she remembered him saying,
"I don't know, but the law's the law, and you're under arrest."
As the officer took her away, she recalled that she asked,
"Why do you push us around?"
And she remembered him saying,
"I don't know, but the law's the law, and you're under arrest."
"Why do you push us around?"
And she remembered him saying,
"I don't know, but the law's the law, and you're under arrest."
De vraag stellen is hem beantwoorden.quote:
As the officer took her away, she recalled that she asked,
"Why do you push us around?"
And she remembered him saying,
"I don't know, but the law's the law, and you're under arrest."
"Why do you push us around?"
And she remembered him saying,
"I don't know, but the law's the law, and you're under arrest."
De eerste helft van de video is samenvatting van de laatste ontwikkelingen.quote:
[..]
De vraag stellen is hem beantwoorden.
The view from nowhere.
Had hem al gezien.quote:
De vraag stellen is hem beantwoorden.
De eerste helft van de video is samenvatting van de laatste ontwikkelingen.
As the officer took her away, she recalled that she asked,
"Why do you push us around?"
And she remembered him saying,
"I don't know, but the law's the law, and you're under arrest."
"Why do you push us around?"
And she remembered him saying,
"I don't know, but the law's the law, and you're under arrest."
As the officer took her away, she recalled that she asked,
"Why do you push us around?"
And she remembered him saying,
"I don't know, but the law's the law, and you're under arrest."
"Why do you push us around?"
And she remembered him saying,
"I don't know, but the law's the law, and you're under arrest."
Dat er in Nederland veel wordt getapt was wel bekend. Ik vraag me alleen af: grijpt de AIVD eerder naar deze methode van inlichtingenverzameling dan andere, buitenlandse, diensten of is er in Nederland ook daadwerkelijk noodzaak voor?quote:
Voormalig NSA-chef: in Nederland wordt veel meer afgeluisterd
Noodzaak?quote:
[..]
Dat er in Nederland veel wordt getapt was wel bekend. Ik vraag me alleen af: grijpt de AIVD eerder naar deze methode van inlichtingenverzameling dan andere, buitenlandse, diensten of is er in Nederland ook daadwerkelijk noodzaak voor?
As the officer took her away, she recalled that she asked,
"Why do you push us around?"
And she remembered him saying,
"I don't know, but the law's the law, and you're under arrest."
"Why do you push us around?"
And she remembered him saying,
"I don't know, but the law's the law, and you're under arrest."
Ik zie dat niet terug in de hoeveelheid opgeloste misdrijven iig
In Baden-Badener Badeseen kann man Baden-Badener baden sehen.
As the officer took her away, she recalled that she asked,
"Why do you push us around?"
And she remembered him saying,
"I don't know, but the law's the law, and you're under arrest."
"Why do you push us around?"
And she remembered him saying,
"I don't know, but the law's the law, and you're under arrest."
