RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Lizza writes: "It's reasonable to suspect that the modifications to the N.S.A.'s telephone-metadata program that Obama announced on Friday are simply cosmetic changes meant to short-circuit the pressure for substantive reform."

Edward Snowden. (artwork: Robert Shetterly)
Edward Snowden. (artwork: Robert Shetterly)


A Major Victory for Snowden

By Ryan Lizza, The New Yorker

19 January 14

 

t’s reasonable to suspect that the modifications to the N.S.A.’s telephone-metadata program that Obama announced on Friday are simply cosmetic changes meant to short-circuit the pressure for substantive reform. For example, Obama made it clear that he wanted the “capability” of the telephone metadata “preserved.” But Obama’s speech was undoubtedly a victory for the reform side of this debate. He not only adopted the critique of those who are most troubled by the metadata program—he also adopted their central policy recommendation. The N.S.A.’s bulk collection of telephone metadata is dead, or it will be soon.

Until now, the government has defended the program as essential, and it has been dismissive—and sometimes contemptuous—of those who charged that it was never properly debated in public, is not under rigorous oversight, and is ripe for potential abuse.

Indeed, in my conversations with intelligence officials this past year, their general attitude was that smart, well-meaning, Ivy League-educated lawyers were on the front lines at the intelligence agencies making sure that the privacy rights of Americans were protected, and, therefore, the concerns about abuse were not only unfounded but also bordered on paranoia. In his speech today, Obama reversed the intelligence-community paternalism that has dominated the government’s rhetoric about the metadata program. “Given the unique power of the state, it is not enough for leaders to say, Trust us, we won’t abuse the data we collect,” he said, unironically critiquing the very argument that he and his top officials have been making for months. “For history has too many examples when that trust has been breached. Our system of government is built on the premise that our liberty cannot depend on the good intentions of those in power; it depends on the law to constrain those in power.”

Before today, when skeptics made this same argument about needing a new law to constrain the government, they were met with puzzled expressions and condescending explanations of the ways in which law already constrained the government. Look no further than the Obama Administration’s official white paper, released last August, which defended the phone-metadata program as a model of democratic governance, saying that the program had been endorsed by Congress, which repeatedly reauthorized the Patriot Act, and reviewed by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which routinely extends the program’s judicial mandate. In recent months, numerous government officials have told the public that the program meets, in the word of the former N.S.A. director Michael Hayden, the “Madisonian” test of being created and reviewed by all three branches of government.

Today, Obama reversed course, acknowledging that all of that wasn’t enough. He has now adopted the language of the reformers: “I believe critics are right to point out that without proper safeguards, this type of program could be used to yield more information about our private lives, and open the door to more intrusive bulk collection programs in the future,” he said. “They’re also right to point out that although the telephone bulk collection program was subject to oversight by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and has been reauthorized repeatedly by Congress, it has never been subject to vigorous public debate.”

So where did this newfound skepticism about government secrecy and the frightening implications of collecting an enormous amount of data abut private citizens lead the President? To the same conclusion as the civil libertarians—Rand Paul, Ron Wyden, James Sensenbrenner, Edward Snowden—who have been the most concerned about the Section 215 program: the N.S.A. should no longer collect our phone records. That is a major policy change for this President and his Administration, and it’s an incredible victory for the often maligned community of whistle-blowers, journalists, news organizations, and members of Congress who have called on Obama to end this policy.

What about the fine print? Obama’s speech was filled with caveats, calls for further study, and pained sympathizing with each side of the debate. He was insistent that some entity should continue to collect this information, so that it is available it a search-ready format. There are enormous privacy implications to such a database existing anywhere—whether inside or outside the government—and the details of how such a system is set up will be crucial. Many critics of the metadata program insist that the government shouldn’t create the database at all, arguing that if it wants telephone records, it should go get a warrant and ask the telecom communities for the information. As with his intelligence-review panel, Obama has tried to find a middle ground: the data will still be consolidated in one place, but searches will require judicial approval or “a true emergency.”

But these caveats should not overshadow the fact that Obama has sided with his fiercest critics on two of the most important reforms that have been demanded since Snowden’s first revelations: the N.S.A. should no longer collect this data and the spy agency should generally be required to have court approval when it wants to search Americans’ phone records.

Politically, this speech was a major boost for people like Pat Leahy and James Sensenbrenner, who have written the leading reform bills in their respective chambers, and a rebuke to intelligence officials like the N.S.A. director Keith Alexander and politicians like Diane Feinstein, who have fought to preserve the status quo. (Indeed, Feinstein’s own legislation, which passed the Senate Intelligence Committee last year, does not meet the criteria for reform set out in the President's speech.)

Obama’s cautious, infuriating speech won’t reform the system in all the ways that N.S.A. critics want, but it just might help Congress do so.


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments   

A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

 
-18 # John S. Browne 2014-01-19 13:54
ObamaCON has been lying since he first started campaigning to be president. If his lips were moving, he was lying; and, to this day, when his lips are moving, he is lying. He's been lying, and almost everything that he's said has been a lie, since 2006 or 2007 (not including all of his undoubted lies while he was a Senator, and before he started running to become president). So, how many years total is that since he's been lying? Let's count from just 2007 in particular, which makes it at least seven years, more like eight (since 2006), that he's been lying. And he'll lie right up to the day that he leaves office, and beyond.

ObamaFRAUD(!) should be self-humiliated by himself and his lies, but these consummate liars and power abusers don't feel the least bit of humiliation over their lying. They believe that it is their job to keep the American people in the dark, and to lie to them in order to preserve the status quo of their running the government contrary to the will of The People, while lying at the same time and claiming that they supposedly "carry out" the will of The People. Thus, balderdash continuously spews out of all their mouths, and anyone and everyone who believes a single word they say, or trusts a single thing that they claim and/or promise, is quite deluded.

(Continued)
 
 
+29 # John S. Browne 2014-01-19 13:55
These people make it a Machiavellian "art form" to lie to and deceive the American people and the world, as they act as the totalitarian global "police", and as an imperialistic state, while they work overtime to seek to convince us that they're supposedly "not" an imperialistic state and the world's military police, oppressing, repressing and mass-murdering millions of innocent people globally, much of it through their proxy governments. And most "Amerikans" are fooled by it all, or at least most of it. The whole thing is a disgusting display that NO ONE can trust or believe WHATSOEVER.
 
 
+40 # unitedwestand 2014-01-19 22:34
Your disbelief should have started when GW Bush opened his mouth. He and his administration profited greatly by their incessant lying and propaganda and additional were responsible for the deaths of thousands of people unnecessarily. They committed major crimes and none are in jail as they should be.

We do have a broken system for sure, politicians, bankers, Pentagon, CIA, FBI, deceive us and are not held accountable when they are caught.

We can start correcting things by annulling Citizens United decision, bring back Glass-Steagall Act and Sherman Anti Trust Act and fixing the media which shill for the corporatocracy.
 
 
+26 # Kootenay Coyote 2014-01-19 23:05
And Nixon; & Reagan.
 
 
+2 # John S. Browne 2014-01-20 15:36
And you too!! (See below.)
 
 
+17 # kochadoodledoo 2014-01-20 08:52
Repeal or greatly modify The Patriot Act.
 
 
+1 # John S. Browne 2014-01-20 15:35
Oh, would you idiot "Bush's-evil(s) -excuse(s)-ever ything-'Odrona' -does-people" please stop!! My "disbelief" DID start LONG before, but particularly with, Bush!! I am so ex- tremely tired of being illegally libeled and slandered here with completely unsubstanti- ated false accusations against me and what I believe and/or don't believe; and totally un- provable false accusations, too; BECAUSE I AM NOT GUILTY OF ANY OF THEM AT ALL!!
 
 
+15 # Eldon J. Bloedorn 2014-01-19 23:38
Sorry John S. Browne. Think I remember you believing that you said D U was harmless when used as an ammo in Iraq. You know D U a nuclear ccomponent of uranium which is removed to make the balance of uranium "enriched" and therefor usable as a nuclear fuel for weapons, power plants. Your premise was "D U is almost harmless." You spread terrible lies. D U is approximately 60-70 % as deadly as naturally occurring uranium. Much heavier than lead. Therefore an excellent method to kill soldiers, knock out tanks especially those tanks equipped with armor plate. Several people responded to your lies, called you a lier and you responded to their truth with more lies. International doctors have stated that since America and allies invaded Iraq, based on records kept before and after the war, incidence of cancer, particularly in Southern Iraq have increased multi-fold 6-7 times what it was before the invasion. Iraqi's are dying horrible deaths due to cancer. American soldiers who were exposed to D U, returning home, marrying, having children born with horrible birth defects. One armed babies. Others, no eyes.
 
 
0 # John S. Browne 2014-01-20 15:28
Excuse me?! I *NEVER* SAID *ANY* SUCH THING!! I have ALWAYS consistently spoken out AGAINST depleted uranium and how extremely harmful it is!! So, you are either intentionally and illegally libeling and slandering me, or you are definitely confus- ing me with someone else!! And you better be darn SURE before you start throwing around accusations like that!! I am VERY WELL AWARE of ALL of the facts that you stated on D.U., and I am in COMPLETE agreement with those facts; so, please IMMEDIATELY totally retract and apologize for all of your libel and slander against me, inadvertent or not!!
 
 
+37 # WestWinds 2014-01-19 18:52
Obama is one grain of sand on a very large beach head these days, #John S. Browne. Far too many on both sides of the isle are indulging in this. It's just that Obama has the microphone on this one.

Tell me we also don't site Karl Rove, George W. Bush, Condolezza Rice, Cheney, Rush Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly and all the rest of the NeoCON artists including Chuck Schumer, Max Baucus and the other DINO's as lying creeps that have taken their position of public trust and turned it into a self-serving grab for themselves at our expense and the expense of the global community at large.

Continued
 
 
+43 # WestWinds 2014-01-19 19:00
Obama is just a symptom of the disease. And the disease is vermin in OUR political system. We pay for our government system; and all of the lands and buildings pertaining thereto, and he who pays the pipers calls the tunes. WE are the employers and it is up to US to pink slip the wrongful performers and return ourselves to the kind of America that we want for ourselves and our kids: That's an America which cares about people over material possessions, an America that can be trusted, that keeps its word (Indian Treaties), and that reaches out a helping hand to the less fortunate everywhere not expecting tribute in return.

I think the all but forgotten Statue of Liberty is crying in the night to get back to
"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
(1883)

THIS is OUR America!
 
 
+2 # dquandle 2014-01-19 20:59
Just like massive lethal hemorrhage is a symptom of ebola…
 
 
+5 # kochadoodledoo 2014-01-20 08:56
Yes, it is, and THEY take OUR RESOURCES (water, trees, fish, coal, oil, minerals, etc.)and use them to reap huge profits. OUR America?
 
 
+11 # Diane_Wilkinson_Trefethen_aka_tref 2014-01-19 21:05
@WestWinds
"Tell me we also don't site [sic] Karl Rove, George W. Bush, Condolezza Rice, Cheney..." et al

Because "we" all knew that those people were liars but "we" had didn't expect Obama to turn his back on us so callously.
 
 
+6 # WestWinds 2014-01-20 09:40
Quoting tref:
@WestWinds

Because "we" all knew that those people were liars but "we" had didn't expect Obama to turn his back on us so callously.


--- The very first thing I ever wrote about Obama, when he went on The David Letterman Show, when he first announced his candidacy was that I thought he was "slick, very slick" and I didn't trust him then. I even wrote him and told him we didn't need another liar (like GWB) in the WH and if he intended on being this kind of president, not to run. If I could see it, why not others?

Cont'd
 
 
+7 # WestWinds 2014-01-20 09:48
In some respects, he was the only choice we were allowed. I wanted Kucinich but he was thoroughly marginalized by the media and the public followed suit. I left the Democratic Party in protest and joined the Green Party but every one else stayed. Why? Just to get a person of color into the WH, just like they want to put Shillary Clinton in just bc she's a female?

Obama was on the campaign trail and a black grandmother broke into his speech begging for assistance having been left with grandchildren to raise. The look of annoyance, anger and disgust on his face was unmistakeable. He told her to give her name to one of his aides and they would take care of her. He never did.

Some white woman, whose mother had died, suddenly had an extra house she didn't need gave the grandmother and her grandchildren the house to live in rent free. This was during Obama's run for first term, yet this country put him back in office again to pursue "austerity" and things like Keystone XL and TPP.

Hey, don't blame me. I've been paying attention, trying to dig my way though all of the mis-information and subterfuge to fight the urge to just go along. I think about what it would be like if we had had Kucinich or even Gore for president... it's painful.
 
 
+5 # indian weaver 2014-01-20 11:58
I wanted Dennis Kucinich too. Since Obama turned out to be a traitor / coward, I've switched to The Peace and Freedom Party of Rocky Anderson's. I may not vote anymore but, if I do, it'll be Green or Peace and Freedom. Sadly, I think my vote is useless, like everyone else's. Sadly, I think this government has to be _____ (fill in the blank, my thoughts are too violent for this or any other forum).
 
 
0 # John S. Browne 2014-01-20 15:48
EXACKANACKALY!! (Sp.?) I completely saw through him, too; and I didn't vote for him either time!! NOBODY has any excuse(s) for not seeing through him and for voting for the extremely evil, mass-murderous globalist POS!! (Now, watch, I'll also be attacked for stating that REAL FACT, too!!) Got anymore illegal libel and slander for me, folks?! No?? Then you'll just "redline" my com- ments instead, right?! ALL of the people who supported and still support that mass-murderous "Odrona" POS, are also POS themselves!! (That's a COM- PLETELY accurate and/or non-false accusation, so it is NOT libel or slander, WHATSOEVER!!)
 
 
+1 # kochadoodledoo 2014-01-20 08:54
The Kochs.
 
 
+13 # robcarter.vn 2014-01-19 20:40
sure right, Meta data still gives them your email site name and password. Then they need no "JUDICIAL WARRANT OVERSIGHT" AT ALL they are you when they use your address and password to open your private box and read all your saved conversation, contact addresses and whatever else you thought was private. then they share sell or divide all with all state agencies and privateers who pay for such info to do the same. You have zero privacy even with Obama bluff, and even less oversight than you had before which was near zero FISA and Court Judges warrant examination. Now they are you. Even your service provider can't distinguish them from you in your account.
 
 
+2 # Alexis Fecteau 2014-01-20 04:07
Dude - you sound like a right wing ranting lunatic.

Give some examples or don't write. We know Obama has done deceitful things and posses no "principle" he isn't willing to trade to republitards (i.e. tearing down Social Security), however, specifics are necessary or you're ignored.
 
 
+1 # John S. Browne 2014-01-20 15:56
First of all, I am NOTHING BUT a constitutionali st, and neither right-wing nor left-wing!! Second of all, you should be more than well aware of the specifics; and, if people are truly educating themselves about what's really going on as it is their DUTY, AND EVERYONE'S DUTY, to do, the specifics are also OBVIOUS!! So, all of you POS entirely stop illegally libeling and slandering me!!
 
 
0 # Bourbaki 2014-01-20 17:32
dude you are on a strange trip
 
 
-1 # John S. Browne 2014-01-20 19:15
...(A)nd "...what a long strange trip it's been..."! (Greatful Dead.) Especially in the midst of all you fantasy-world, deep-in-avoidan ce-and-denial (not a river in Egypt), "'Odrona'-bot", excusers-of-evi l, and libelers and slanderers! You are willfully-blind hallucinaters, not I!
 
 
-1 # randrjwr 2014-01-22 10:29
So, Mr. Browne, would you rather have had McCain-Palin or Romney-Ryan? I am sure I am not alone in being sick of having to choose the lesser of two evils, but after being saddled with the greater of two evils for 8 years, what else to do? That is, until we can get the overwhelming influence of money out of politics and begin to take people like Dennis Kucinich (my favorite also for many years) seriously. Since the 2 major parties we have now can't seem to get the job done, it must be time for a third, built on grass roots from the bottom up.
 
 
0 # John S. Browne 2014-01-25 01:00
Typical straw-man argument to try and deflect away from the truth. Either or. Supposedly can't not have either way. It's allegedly got to be one or the other, or your argument is supposedly FOS. We choose "Odrona", or we allegedly want the "worse of the two evils", even though we don't want either. So, if one doesn't choose the "lesser of the two evils", that supposedly means they're responsible for the worse of the two evils even though they didn't vote for either of them. No, someone who doesn't vote for either the worse or the lesser of two evils, means that they're not complicit in EITHER of their evils; where as, the ones who voted for the lesser's evil ARE complicit in that lesser's evils.
 
 
+1 # ArleneJohnson 2014-01-21 11:27
Dear John,

You are mainly right. Obama did tell one truth, though, when he said on a YouTube BEFORE the 2008 election that he is related to Dick Cheney. And then, Lynne Cheney stated on another YouTube before that election that Obama is related to Bush and Cheney, and how they are related, first cousins 8 and 11 times removed.

So Obama is just carrying on Bush's schemes. Obama never rescinded the Military Commissions Act of 2006, an act that made Bush dictator. So Obama, imho, is a dictator too as a result.

Moreover, Obama is CIA, just as George H.W. Bush was before he became head of CIA in the 1970s.
 
 
+41 # oprichniki 2014-01-19 18:17
The just reported comments by President Putin offering continued support for Ed Snowden are encouraging and commendable.
 
 
-4 # ishmael 2014-01-19 22:12
The Russian president continuing Russia's well-known, longstanding tradition of openness and acceptance, particularly of gays, so people like Mr Greenwald should feel particularly at home there. Provided he refrains from speaking to children.

Thank goodness the Russians no longer spy on anyone. ^/^

And of course its Mafia is also another paragon of virtue.
 
 
+27 # DaveM 2014-01-19 18:25
Okay....tomorro w the NSA announces: "in accordance with (whatever) we are stopping (insert name of program)".

How many will believe them? I will not.
 
 
+1 # ArleneJohnson 2014-01-21 11:43
Right Dave, and you should not because the NSA is a shadow government agency. I have that in my third edition along with every other shadow government agency and organization exposed there.
 
 
+19 # Anonymot 2014-01-19 18:37
All of those bubbley words then he announces who to "fix" the problem? Clapper and Holder! I think he may be on one of his now-approved drugs if he thinks the public will swallow that.
 
 
+22 # WestWinds 2014-01-19 18:38
"Obama made it clear that he wanted the “capability” of the telephone metadata “preserved.” But Obama’s speech was undoubtedly a victory for the reform side of this debate. He not only adopted the critique of those who are most troubled by the metadata program—he also adopted their central policy recommendation. The N.S.A.’s bulk collection of telephone metadata is dead, or it will be soon."

--- This is SO vintage BHO; six of one and a half dozen of another. Meanwhile, he does what he bloody well had in mind all the time. Blah, blah, blah.

I'll believe it when I see it is a fait accompli. Until then, it's just BHO bloviating to mollify the angry masses.
 
 
+13 # dquandle 2014-01-19 21:06
Yes indeed. He demonstrated his unwavering support of the criminal NSA and the criminal liars who are at its helm, for the past 5 years, and even now, he is trying his damnedest to hold onto the most outrageously unconstitutiona l "abilities" the surveillance agencies have exhibited. These flat out obliterate the 4th amendment, but "constitutional scholar" Obama doesn't seem to give a flying f$%k. Then again, when you've arrogated to yourself the right and ability to kill anyone you goddamned please, anywhere, for any reason, I guess stomping on constitutional guarantees constitutes extremely small potatoes...
 
 
+10 # curmudgeon 2014-01-19 20:19
Lyzza is just a mouthpiece for the Oligarchy...try ing to calm the ones rightly determine that Obama's speec was nothing but pure chicanery.

Why didn't he mention the front row sea of Clapper - known liar?

Lyzza is just trying to plant a seed of hope...but it is really just as false as the the promises made yesterday.
 
 
+6 # dquandle 2014-01-19 21:10
Sure sounds that way. And the NSA/CIAs hounds, not to mention Obama's own filthy "Democratic" party brethren, are still baying for Snowden's blood, with Obama/Feinstein galloping hard in the vanguard.
 
 
+3 # robcarter.vn 2014-01-19 20:44
sure right, Meta data still gives them your email site name and password. Then they need no "JUDICIAL WARRANT OVERSIGHT" AT ALL they are you when they use your address and password to open your private box and read all your saved conversation, contact addresses and whatever else you thought was private. then they share sell or divide all with all state agencies and privateers who pay for such info to do the same. You have zero privacy even with Obama bluff, and even less oversight than you had before which was near zero FISA and Court Judges warrant examination. Now they are you. Even your service provider can't distinguish them from you in your account.
 
 
+2 # ArleneJohnson 2014-01-21 11:49
Right on. Indeed, over here where I live (England) Edward Snowden did a short speech after the Queen's Christmas day address to the nation in which he stated that children born today won't know what privacy is. Sad but true. Did Americans in the United States get to hear that short speech that Edward Snowden made on Christmas day 2013?
 
 
+9 # LML 2014-01-19 21:21
"It’s reasonable to suspect that the modifications to the N.S.A.’s telephone-metad ata program that Obama announced on Friday are simply cosmetic changes meant to short-circuit the pressure for substantive reform."

....Doesn't sound like a major victory to me....
Who wrote this headline?
 
 
+1 # Sheila 2014-01-20 18:36
Whatever Obama says, there will be no changes or restrictions on NSA. We knew nothing about the NSA until SNowdon told us about it. As easy as it was to conceal it in the first place, that is how easy it is to hide the fact that the spying has and will not change in the future, no matter what we are told.
Anyone who believes otherwise is delusional.
Sadly, I think we are beyond the point of no return.
 
 
+1 # ArleneJohnson 2014-01-21 11:51
Yes, Sheila. That's why Edward Snowden is a hero to me. He put into the mainstream what I published in 2001, the day before 9/11 was carried out.
 
 
+8 # ganymede 2014-01-19 22:07
The horse escaped from the barn a long time ago, and the wonderful electronic age has made all our info public - there are no more secrets, everything gets to be found out. Fortunately, there will be more Snowdens and Assuanges. I don't think we can stop our downward slide towards 'friendly fascism' , the best we can do is to get rid of the most murderous of these politicians, like the ones who have been lying, plundering and bullying our country and the world for a long time now. The most egregious of these warmongering, hypocritical louts are all the people associated with the Republican Party. Obama is more conservative than many of us had originally made him out to be, but he is capable of bringing some small degree of reform. Judging from the thumbs down I've been getting recently, I'm sure I'm saying things that a lot of left/progressiv e people don't want to hear, but I think totally condemning Obama is a mistake.
 
 
+2 # John S. Browne 2014-01-20 16:13
No, the willfully blind "DemoCONS" and/or "Odrono-bots" love you for saying that, as evidenced by your comment being wrongly "green-lighted" . I on the other hand tell nothing but the truth about him, and my comments doing so get "red-lighted" into oblivion. Makes one have to think that perhaps True Justice is completely dead now, because there's no recognition for truthtellers in "the land of the (slaves) and the home of the (cowards)"; or, as a great quote says, "A man is not without honor, except in his own country and among his own people".

"Odrona" is a totally irredeemable POS, brainwashed, "Manchurianized ", mass-murderous globalist war criminal, who is completely soldout to (the) globalism(/ists ); and he will no more save this country than the tooth fairy would, for if he attempted to do so, he would not at all be long for this world, as the powers-that-be would assassinate him in a heartbeat. So, enough of all of you apologists for evil and your doing so!! "Odrona" should be IMPEACHED, no ifs, ands or buts about it; and no amount of excusing his evil(s) will redeem him WHATSOEVER!!
 
 
+1 # Sheila 2014-01-20 18:38
Agreed. Obama should be impeached. He has proven himself a traitor to the country.
 
 
0 # John S. Browne 2014-01-20 19:18
Thank you, Sheila [ and you're a great "Sheila" (Aussie for female, and the female version of "Mate" that they use as a term of endearment to their fellow Aussies {or like we call people "Brother" and/or "Sister" "up-over", or in the States}, even if you're not Aussie), too! :) In other words, a female "Mate" "down-under, or in Australia, is called a "Sheila", and male form is simply called "Mate"; for those who didn't already know it]!
 
 
+1 # dascher 2014-01-21 16:46
And which Congress is going to impeach him? Get real. Impeachment is NOT an option.
 
 
0 # John S. Browne 2014-01-21 22:02
Even if that's so, we still have the duty to try. We must not let mass-criminals like "Odrona" get away with their crimes, particularly mass-murder, including of American citizens, and other "High Crimes", without seeking to hold them accountable. He must not be allowed to "skate" free like the BushCONs did; and, if as a result of our fulfilling our duty(ies) to seek "Odrona's" impeachment, we are unsuccessful and he isn't impeached, at least we fulfilled our duty to try. It is not in any way fulfilling our duty, to throw in the towel on impeachment just because it would be an uphill, possibly or likely failure of a, battle.
 
 
+1 # ArleneJohnson 2014-01-21 11:53
Obama is a satanist. And he is a puppet of other satanists. What's to not condemn?
 
 
+1 # ganymede 2014-01-19 22:07
The horse escaped from the barn a long time ago, and the wonderful electronic age has made all our info public - there are no more secrets, everything gets to be found out. Fortunately, there will be more Snowdens and Assuanges. I don't think we can stop our downward slide towards 'friendly fascism' , the best we can do is to get rid of the most murderous of these politicians, like the ones who have been lying, plundering and bullying our country and the world for a long time now. The most egregious of these warmongering, hypocritical louts are all the people associated with the Republican Party. Obama is more conservative than many of us had originally made him out to be, but he is capable of bringing some small degree of reform. Judging from the thumbs down I've been getting recently, I'm sure I'm saying things that a lot of left/progressiv e people don't want to hear, but I think totally condemning Obama is a mistake.
 
 
+2 # Johnny 2014-01-20 13:32
If you think condemning Obomber is a mistake, you obviously don't live in Afghanistan, Yemen, or any other place where else where he is slaughtering famies with his drones and missiles. He has murdered more people, and increased military aggression against other countries far more than Bush did.
 
 
+1 # John S. Browne 2014-01-20 16:49
Right-on, Johnny, except for the part about, "Odrona" allegedly having "...murdered more people... than Bush did..."; and I'm VERY glad that it isn't true, for obvious reasons [to spell it out for some (the dense) here, because obviously far fewer innocent non-combatants have died than if it were true). I don't think "Odrona" can top the million and half innocent civil- ians in Iraq, hundreds of thousands more, if not over a million as well, in Afghanistan, and thousands in Pakistan, etc., who were mass-murdered by and in the BushCON/FRAUD administration, yet anyway (give him two more years---I know, sorry, not funny). Yes, "Odrona" is no doubt responsible for thousands of more deaths of innocent people in Iraq (we're not really out of there; and with the Green Zone and the several billion dollar "jumping-off-po int" U.S. military bases in Iraq, probably never will be, entirely anyway---they'r e not about to close and/or give up those bases), Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, etc.; but not in the millions yet as far as I know (correct me and prove it if I'm wrong). [Although, if the U.S. government and military, and their NATO allies, attack Iran, millions of innocent deaths will be part of "Odrona's" extremely-evil legacy, without any doubt.]
 
 
+7 # Kootenay Coyote 2014-01-19 23:10
‘Major Victory’ is a major exaggeration. The proof of the pudding will be in the eating. So far, it looks like ongoing indigestion.
 
 
+3 # geraldom 2014-01-20 00:01
It appears that the House Republicans have not only gone into "Discredit Mode" when it comes to Edward Snowden, they're wanting to start a war with Russia. Once again our government is making statements and accusations out of the blue without presenting any evidence to back these accusations up. This is pure BS and rhetoric and lies in order to make Edward Snowden look bad and to distract naive and stupid American citizens from the fact that our government has violated our Constitution and our Bill of Rights in almost every way.

I give you the following article that just came out today:

http://news.yahoo.com/video/russians-may-helped-snowden-rep-195658142.html

Enjoy.
 
 
+1 # geraldom 2014-01-20 00:08
The following is a much more detailed article concerning this topic where Senator Dianne Feinstein even puts her two-cents in.

http://news.yahoo.com/snowden-help-from-russians-193641893.html
 
 
+5 # Anonymot 2014-01-20 04:40
It tallies perfectly with Hillary's claws permanently dug into Julian Assange. It's a style. Fascists perfect it. Accuse. Hang in like a bulldog. Eventually they'll go down.
 
 
+1 # Sweet Pea 2014-01-20 11:25
What really surprises me is the fact that so many people are outraged "NOW". Our government has been gathering information on us for many years. If you really need to tell someone some private information-don 't write it on paper-don't say it in a public place-don't say it on the telephone-and above all-----don't say it on the Internet.
 
 
+4 # MsAnnaNOLA 2014-01-21 09:35
Wake up guys. This is only doing one thing. Distracting from the obvious law breaking of our government and institutionaliz ing it. Now that we have all talked about it and accepted it, it becomes permanent.

The author of this article is doing no one a favor by insisting that Obama has "adopted the language of his fiercest critics". This type of thinking is meant to obfuscate from the facts on the ground. The fact that bulk collection of this data is patently unconstitutiona l and should be stopped immediately.

The war on terror is a farce meant to strip us of our constitutional rights. This to me is patently obvious.
 
 
0 # John S. Browne 2014-01-21 22:11
Right fracking and/or frelling on, "MsAnnaNOLA"!
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN