Confessed Liar To Congress, James Clapper, Gets To Set Up The 'Independent' Review Over NSA Surveillance
from the uh,-that's-not-independent dept
Well, this is rather incredible. Remember on Friday how one of President Obama's efforts to get people to trust the government more concerning the NSA's surveillance efforts was to create an "outside" and "independent" board to review it all? Specifically, he said:Fourth, we're forming a high-level group of outside experts to review our entire intelligence and communications technologies. We need new thinking for a new era. We now have to unravel terrorist plots by finding a needle in the haystack of global telecommunications. And meanwhile, technology has given governments — including our own — unprecedented capability to monitor communications.Okay. Outside, independent. Sure, that might help. Except, that was Friday. Today is Monday. And, on Monday we learn that "outside" and "independent" actually means setup by Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper -- the same guy who has already admitted to lying to Congress about the program, and has received no punishment for doing so. This is independent? From this we're supposed to expect real oversight?!? This is from the letter sent to Clapper:
So I am tasking this independent group to step back and review our capabilities — particularly our surveillance technologies. And they'll consider how we can maintain the trust of the people, how we can make sure that there absolutely is no abuse in terms of how these surveillance technologies are used, ask how surveillance impacts our foreign policy — particularly in an age when more and more information is becoming public. And they will provide an interim report in 60 days and a final report by the end of this year, so that we can move forward with a better understanding of how these programs impact our security, our privacy, and our foreign policy.
I believe it is important to take stock of how these technological advances alter the environment in which we conduct our intelligence mission. To this end, by the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, I am directing you to establish a Review Group on Intelligence and Communications Technologies (Review Group).In case you didn't catch that, he's asking Clapper to first create and set up this "outside" and "independent" review group... and then to have the group report its findings back to Clapper. The same strong defender of the program who flat out lied to Congress about it. If this was about "restoring the trust" of the American people that the government isn't pulling a fast one over on them, President Obama sure has a funny way of trying to rebuild that trust. This seems a lot more like giving the concerns of the American public a giant middle finger.
The Review Group will assess whether, in light of advancements in communications technologies, the United States employs its technical collection capabilities in a manner that optimally protects our national security and advances our foreign policy while appropriately accounting for other policy considerations, such as the risk of unauthorized disclosure and our need to maintain the public trust. Within 60 days of its establishment, the Review Group will brief their interim findings to me through the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), and the Review Group will provide a final report and recommendations to me through the DNI no later than December 15, 2013.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: barack obama, congress, director of national intelligence, independent, james clapper, nsa, nsa surveillance, review committee
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: change
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
That being said, he is still a pile of horseshit as a president.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
It really is that Kang and Kodos situation. We should use Obama's presidency to bring home the point that no, a Democrat in the White House is not so much different - yes, more acceptable in style, yes a few pet issues here and there, but on the really important issues, the constitutional ones and on the relationship between government and citizen it just doesn't make a difference. If any major party candidate in the past two decades stood for a different approach it was Obama, yet it is still business-as-usual.
Do not waste your vote on red team or blue team. Use it to make 3rd parties viable. Deprive the lying, gerrymandering and corrupt beast of your vote, otherwise it will not be tamed. Do not feed it just because one of its two schizophrenic personalities disgusts you a little less than the other.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Maybe even electoral reform towards a proportional system might become a serious possibility once third parties and their voters cannot be dismissed as some fringe loonies anymore.
It is about showing that your vote is, in principle, available (unlike non-voters which are assumed (not by me) to be either unpolitical or lazy), but that you have a few clear requirements for it. "Slightly less evil than the other team" really doesn't cut it anymore. Government within the confines of the constitution is not too much to ask.
Voting with the 95% just confirms the status quo, which is, unfortunately, not a steady state, but a slow crawl towards dystopia.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the whole, Jill Stein does seem like a better choice than the candidates the Dems & Reps run.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Simply the fact that I disagree with his position on many issues that are important to me. On the whole, he is no better fit for me than any random Republican or Democrat.
Perhaps so, but I'm not going to vote for a candidate on the basis of any single issue.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
these are pet issues????
- war on women
- school to privatized prison
- immigration
- health care
- minimum wage
please - you do yourself no favors by making excuses for the total idiocy which has consumed the GOP. I'm not saying their opponents are angels by any means, but ffs - there some things which are simply not trivial "pet" issues
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
It is like accepting a 1000$ in exchange for unlimited access to your bank account.
Of course the GOP are loonies. I am not saying you should vote for them. Nobody should vote for the party that wants to march towards tyranny 3 steps a month. That doesn't mean the party that wants to march towards tyranny 2 steps a month is a justifiable alternative, though.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
- womens rights
- right to a fair trial
- rights of citizenship
Health care and minimum wage are not specifically addressed, however they are addressed within laws passed by the legislative and executive branches whose authority to do so is derived from the constitution, which also makes them pet issues I suppose.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
School to prison is not. There's no appreciable difference between the two parties on this front.
Immigration is a fair point to an extent by which I mean what have the democrats accomplished in that regard so far? Nothing of which I'm aware
Health care is a laughable addition to the list as there's significant difference between Romney and Obama over it.
Minimum wage is a pet issue. It's a meaningless number that's trotted out every once in a while to gin up sympathy from the economic illiterate.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
- There is a lot more support for privatizing prisons from the GOP & friends than their opponents.
"Immigration is a fair point to an extent by which I mean what have the democrats accomplished in that regard so far? Nothing of which I'm aware"
- Blaming one party for the obstructionism of the other party is hardly a valid argument.
"Health care is a laughable addition to the list as there's significant difference between Romney and Obama over it."
- I thought the OP argument was there is no difference, here you are making my point for me.
"Minimum wage is a pet issue. It's a meaningless number that's trotted out every once in a while to gin up sympathy from the economic illiterate."
- It is a well known fact the majority of the economy in this country is driven by consumer spending. Another well known fact is that the majority of consumers are middle class. One does not even need to have taken Econ 101 in order to understand that when the middle class is not spending, the economy is not thriving. Many good paying jobs have been lost and many of the "new" jobs (quantity is much less than that lost) do not pay near as well as before. This is to be expected when the economy is intentionally depressed for political gain. This is simple evidence based theory, I am surprised at the number of people who do not or refuse to understand it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Who said anything about blaming Democrats for immigration? I know it's not his fault nothing has happened but the point being made was that if nothing happens his stance is irrelevant because the results are identical.
Cute, ignore the point being made, that Obama and Romney have identical platforms on health care, in favor of a snide remark about an obvious omission. You got me, I didn't proof my internet comment and posted something without a negative. What does that accomplish exactly? It certainly doesn't make your point.
What does any of that have to do with the minimum wage? Not a damn thing. Please stay on topic.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Typically, if one were to give a millionaire++ extra money they would put it in savings, if one were to instead give that money to a middle to lower class person, they would spend it, not because they are frivolous but because they lack common things others take for granted - like food shelter and health care (not insurance - but health care). The above is based upon statistical fact, reported in many studies, reports, etc.
Minimum wage is not enough today, it was barely enough in the past and has not kept up with inflation. If adjusted for inflation, (assuming the CPI is accurate which is debatable) the minimum wage would be a little more than ten dollars an hour. If it were increased, the economy would improve, more jobs would be created ... profit. Economic strife is not a pet issue when you are suffering because of it and it is especially despicable when its sole purpose is for political gain, revenge, or other sicko mental problem.
Stay on topic? How is this not on topic. The economy is not a pet issue, it is part of the whole which constitutes the "problem" - which has always been there and is not going away with some magic wave of the hand.
Everyone has their opinions and many spout them routinely without a hint of rational, data or evidence to back them up. How is the school to prison highway not influenced by for profit prisons? Recently a judge was sentenced to 28 years for taking bribes in return for sentencing juveniles to a private prison. States enter into contracts with private prisons which guarantee a certain level of inmates - backed by the tax payers of course. This is not a good idea for obvious reasons and certainly not within the realm of constitutional.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
The rest of your post seems to wander about and does not make much sense, perhaps you could elucidate.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Response to: Anonymous Coward on Aug 12th, 2013 @ 2:28pm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The mass media build up for the US prostitute ex-secretary of state Clinton, the leading reason seems likely to be the NSA as a tonne of criminal evidence against her guaranteed to keep her in line.
So the corporate marketing bullshit just keeps flowing out of the US government. Want change than finally start paying attention to the primaries and stop corporations from stacking the elections before they start.
In the interim, take them down a peg, mock, deride, and abuse them at every opportunity, do everything you can to 'annoy' them and make their life a misery.
Uncle Tom Obama, the choom gang coward, should be something to haunt him for the rest of his life.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Fighting within the system
I would be interested to see how the administration would tap dance around 100,000 plus citizens demanding to know why a known liar gets this kind of job.
Who knows, maybe they'd change their tune once they realized that the American people are actually watching.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Something's missing
I keep re-reading that last part, looking for the word "privacy". Or "constitutional".
Instead, all I see is "Trust us" and "DESTROY ALL WHISTLEBLOWERS."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Something's missing
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Something's missing
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Something's missing
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Response to: Anonymous Coward on Aug 12th, 2013 @ 2:42pm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Also, has no one in this administration heard of foxes, henhouses, and at least looking ashamed while pulling feathers out of their teeth?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: approved ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
/Sarc
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Oooh look a dog and pony show. I guess we should give up any hope that there would be change in the corrupt system. It is transparent that we the people are the last thing they are concerned with.
Just admit your not going to stop, that the rights of the people don't matter, and we should all get used to being spied on all the time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Response to: That Anonymous Coward on Aug 12th, 2013 @ 2:54pm
I will never lie to myself and say that my rights don't matter, because they do. Mr. coward, you are wrong to encourage (even sarcastically) the points you present above.
Change has already begun. You can attempt its arrest, but once the ball of truth starts rolling, it will not stop. Our goal is to make the Golden Rule true again: Treat others as you would have the, treat you.
We, "The People," hold far more power collectively than the silly wo/men that make our complex governing rules. Simplification is is the key to effective change. If you care enough to identify yourself with the Anon movement, at least have the gumption to be brave.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
True security theater!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Isn't the order wrong?
I, personally, don't see how the NSA has the job to "advance our foreign policy," but I'll give it to them if they want it (I thought that was the job of the CIA).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Next time, be more sincere looking.
Who else is going to head a review of the NSA? Can't have anyone without an adequate security clearance you know..and so it limits that role to 2 people: Keith Alexander or James Clapper.
What a bit of make work program this will be.
I wonder how much it will cost us to tell us "the program works fine, we're good, and everyone's safe. There's nothing to see here, move along..."
Any ballpark figure? I'd say 10 million to start.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Next time, be more sincere looking.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Could somebody show me ....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Could somebody show me ....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That helps the NSA (uninterrupted surveillance programs) and congress (plausible deniability -- especially if everyone would shut up and stop asking incriminating questions -- "I'M LOOKING AT YOU WYDEN!!")
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Start at the top
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Start at the top
This is not to say Obama isn't being a bad actor on this as well -- he is -- but that in the end, it's Congress who allows it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Start at the top
Ultimately, most members of Congress probably learned more from the leaked documents than they ever did from working within the system. Congress bears responsibility for passing and renewing those laws, but it's ultimately the executive branch who's using those laws in fashions that Congress never knew or intended.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Start at the top
That doesn't excuse them. They knew they were being lied to (or, if they didn't know, they're idiots -- which doesn't excuse them either).
Just because a congressperson failed to do their job does not mean that they aren't the responsible party.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Start at the top
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Start at the top
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tin foil hats
That being said; terrorists and child abductors/pornographers can't wait to get this privacy issue resolved so they can get back to regularly scheduled lives.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Tin foil hats
There's no trick there at all. All he had to say was "I can't answer that because I'd be revealing classified information".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Tin foil hats (because nothing is private)
As for the "syping"; How much intercontinental communication are you doing these days? Are you a multinational corporation (still a person) who's achieved self-awareness who's been unwittingly spied on while being completely innocent? I fail to see why you're diving head first into this red-herring, because nothing is private.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Tin foil hats (because nothing is private)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Tin foil hats (because nothing is private)
Wait... lol, you don't truly believe that congress was ignorant of this do you? hahahaha. Well, welcome to the dog and pony (phony) show.
btw, the outrage IS fake because lying is part of the political game; as a matter of fact, they don't even call it lying anymore it's "spin" and tons of people make a great living as PR folk "spinning" the truth like stats on the back of your baseball cards.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Tin foil hats (because nothing is private)
Perhaps so -- but that' doesn't mean that Clapper isn't a liar. There are lots of bad actors in this farce. Clapper is one of them, and it's correct and proper to say so.
Clapper's lies are fully on par with the others you mentioned (except for Lewinsky -- that was pretty insignificant). He lied to the body that is supposed to be overseeing these actions because he knows full well that the actions are unsupportable.
Quite a lot, but that has nothing to do with anything. We're all being spied on, whether we engage in any such communications or not, and whether we're US citizens or not.
Because the US government is engaging in wholesale surveillance. That's the problem. It's a little odd to say "why complain about governmental spying, when you know the government is spying on you?"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Tin foil hats (because nothing is private)
We, as a populace, are being data mined constantly when we interact with any place of biz.
Is it any surprise that the governments would use a known effective method to create a safety program to combat crime using/developing technology that governments can't hope to fully understand?
As slimy as it feels to know we're being watched by, not just Big Brother, but by Big Sister, Older Cousin, and the pervert with the hidden camera in the public pool bathrooms; it's a necessary slime unless you're going to let technology become a purely criminal domain.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Tin foil hats (because nothing is private)
Nope, never said that. That others are spying as well isn't very relevant to this issue, though.
You'll have to explain your argument here, because on the face of it, what you're saying makes no sense.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Tin foil hats (because nothing is private)
I went into this a bit already with the other reply; but I will focus on this idea further.
The growth of technology has created several parallel spaces of existence. This space has to be policed by someone, but just like the Wild West, the criminals find the soft spots first and we have to learn how to tame it so that it can be useful in more and better ways.
We can't pull the plug on new spaces; and we can't simply choose not to interact with it or these spaces will become, not just unsafe, but a instantaneous conduit for criminals to plan, conduct, manipulate, and destroy as they see fit.
Call it "spying" if you like, but these spaces must be policed.
The government didn't collect the data you're so quick to blame the NSA for requesting and backing-up.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Tin foil hats (because nothing is private)
Policing and spying are two different things. I'm talking about spying.
Well, ignoring the fact that the government actually is collecting such data, my response to this is: so? Why is that relevant to what the government does?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Tin foil hats (because nothing is private)
I agree with you on most of this. We need to find the appropriate and/or acceptable level of surveillance.
I disagree that the internet isn't different from physical space and that it can somehow be policed in the same ways. The policing tactics will have to be improved because the smartest guys in the IRC are working to destabilize the system in ways our government can't hope to figure out.
Perhaps if you thought of the internet the same way you do a mini-mart/gas station with it's umpteen video cameras at several angles you could understand my point. If the only way to keep people in line is to watch them, then that's what you must do to stay in business; or the biz can shut down/move on. This is one example of my point was that we are being constantly watched by employers and businesses; the government has simply made it legal to review this previously viewed meta data.
It is wrong to lie, but criminals rely on the transparency of government as much as it's law-abiding citizens do. I believe you had it right that he should have said he can't answer the question, rather than trying protect, placate, or dissemble. That being said, if he'd chosen not to answer the questions, we'd be in the exact same boat.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Tin foil hats (because nothing is private)
the internet isn't like a single store. The internet is more like an entire city. What's being done is the equivalent of putting GPS transponders on everyone in the city and cameras in every house.
Should there be some servers (stores) that heavily monitor everyone who uses them? Perhaps. But that surveillance is done voluntarily by the people who are running the stores, and people who don't like the surveillance can avoid entering the stores. That's far less objectionable than what's being done on the internet.
Except that we'd have some indication that Clapper (and the NSA) was at least capable of honesty. Right now, we know the opposite.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Tin foil hats (because nothing is private)
This idea of mine didn't get fully fleshed out.
My idea is that the government doesn't understand technology (perhaps due to the dinosaurs we keep electing) and crime fighting agencies don't either, which means we're playing catch-up. The worst part is we don't have qualified professionals with a goal or plan of action; we're just contracting companies to do it for us and hoping it works. However, nobody is going to approve ANOTHER tax to pay for the security the public so badly proclaims they need.
Who knows, maybe we'll decide that safety isn't worth the price in money OR privacy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
America's right to defend itself
American citizens, it seems, are a threat to the security of the United States. Whose interests, then, does the government serve when it engages in large-scale, indiscriminate, non-stop surveillance of its own citizens?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
When asked he will just talk about his authority and how its classified. These guys do not trust the rest of us its that simple. They don't trust their own countrymen unless you have something to lose or security clearance.
Afraid American is afraid.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I disagree. yes, technically is was for lying, but really it was for the double-whammy of being a Democrat and having extramarital sex. Nobody in congress actually cared about the lying part.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Of course, I already assumed as much after the President's speech on Friday.
All defenders of this unconstitutional domestic spy program have already lied to the American people multiple times over the last few weeks. Including the President of the United States.
All their credibility is already permanently damaged. The American people will never be able to trust anything being told to them, from these lying individuals, ever again.
I am simply stunned at what the leadership in this country has come to. A bunch of unconstitutional liars misleading and betraying the American people and violating the Constitution.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This is why the American people are upset over this spying. It's not just spying but the transparent attempted coverups to make it all go away so they can get back to business as usual.
I for one don't want to see anymore business as usual. I'm inclined to agree with #22 Paul,in his answer. Start at the top bouncing politicians till we find one that actually likes his job well enough to do what the people want. That only takes care of 1/2 the problem as it wasn't just the Dems that put this mess into being. The GOP is so busy self destructing that it might not be an issue much longer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Another useless poll
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Another useless poll
It is a poll, not an election.
Never read a book about statistics have you.
I assume you have never heard of Nate Silver either.
"Don't buy intyo this drivel."
And I should listen to you because why?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Whats funny is that all this stuff was just written off as tin foil hat conspiracies. Now that it is fact, "meh, whatever." -American Public
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
you could replace each and every person in the whitehouse with a better person you like better and it wouldn't change anything...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
None of that matters
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
the answer to that question says it a lot.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Technically incorrect.
Nixon resigned prior to a most certain impeachment and was later pardoned by his successor.
And whom would you impeach for what?
I have read about people shouting for impeachment proceedings to begin, but when pressed for details they fall silent. I assume this is due to a lack of facts, evidence or a clear understanding of exactly what they are talking about.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Only two presidents were ever impeached: A. Johnson and B. Clinton. After trial in the Senate, they were acquitted, lacking the 2/3rd majority for conviction.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ignorance
I don't think we, the technologically literate, will be able to move the needle enough on public outrage to get real change done.
I'm not sure what to do anymore. I voted for Jill Stein last round, and now vote straight Green Party ticket, I donate to causes like EFF and I talk to my friends and family. It doesn't seem to be enough to counter the billions of dollars working to keep people misinformed, complacent, and docile.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Ignorance
SOPA was a done deal, something that was going to pass with minimal effort, unopposed by pretty much everyone in congress and the senate, but once the internet got wind of it, it was brought to it's knees, leaving the supporters stumbling about in a daze, desperately trying to pin the blame on a big company like Google to avoid having to face the fact that when the public is motivated enough, they can make their voices heard over the sound of 'campaign contribution' checks being cashed.
Now it does take a whopping big push to get the internet, and the citizens to pull off something like that off, but it can be done, never forget that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
When did these programs also become about advancing our foreign policy? This "scope creep" is part of the reason the American people are concerned about these programs.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Least untruthful?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]