Fight The System

[Buster's Uncle]

No, no reason for anyone to be offended, and no need to apologize.  Don't sweat it.

1d. Politics is never a honest business or profession.

I disagree.  Politics is almost never a honest business or profession.

There are a lot of temptations built into our corrupt system.  I suspect that most politicians go in sincerely wanting to save the world, but few have the strength of character to swim against the tide forever - and the system is set up to deny advancement to men who won't play the (dirty) game.

[Geo]

1h. That a lot people are unwise with their personal finances.

This.

[Buster's Uncle]

Ain't no doubt about that one.

[Geo]

It's a pit I was in the proces of sliding in: too many jaunts into the world.

[Buster's Uncle]

Daddy, who was naturally my guru in the wonderful world of being a tight-fisted sob, was actually pretty generous during our annual vacation; that was one of the things he'd nickel and dimed all year to be able to afford.  But obviously, we weren't globe-trotting as you do.  More a four hour drive and a week in a cheap cabin at a touristy lake.

[JarlWolf]

You know, on terms of money I've came from a rollercoaster of experiences as you well know, and at one point I was in debt that nearly killed me. But the thing I look at now is my daughters and their families, and the thing I worry as, as a parent is that they'll get screwed over when I am gone. My daughters aren't stupid by any means, I taught them the best I could of things, but I do fear for the future of them to a great regard. I don't like the way things are heading with financial systems, and I don't trust them one bit, and for most of my life, never have.

I don't know. Whats your thoughts on how things are going to go? I have a feeling that the world is eventually going to go into a phase where the have nots are going to increase severely in number, grind their axes and start swinging at the haves. I think that society is going to enter a rapturing moment with economic and socioeconomic tensions, and it's going to be ugly.

And I have a few reasons for thinking that... but im too tired to explain it at the moment. 

[Buster's Uncle]

NSA Spying Isn't Just an Illegal Invasion of Privacy—It Doesn't Stop Terror Attacks
By Sarah Parvini | Takepart.com | 22 hours ago


     
The National Security Agency surveillance program that keeps tabs on almost every phone call in the U.S. is illegal and should be shut down—especially considering no terrorist threats have been discovered through the massive data collection, according to a new report released by a federal privacy watchdog.

The five-member Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board—an independent agency created by Congress in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks—came out with its scathing review of the NSA's “bulk telephony metadata collection program” (the fancy name for collecting your phone records) on Thursday, claiming the program has essentially been useless in the battle against terrorism.

"We have not identified a single instance involving a threat to the United States in which the program made a concrete difference in the outcome of a counterterrorism investigation," writes the board, which reviews actions taken by the government to protect the country from terrorism.

The report credits the NSA with thwarting just one potential supporter of terrorists: San Diego cab driver Basaaly Moalin, a Somali immigrant who was convicted of sending $8,500 to the Islamist group al-Shabaab last year.

The board notes that while there was "critical value" in stopping the funds, Moalin's case was the only instance in seven years of NSA surveillance in which the program helped tip off authorities. Even then, the board suggests, the FBI could have found Moalin without the NSA's help. The NSA also could have received the same information without invasive bulk data collection, according to the report.

The findings, laid out in a 238-page document, will inevitably spark greater debate in an arena already rife with friction over the merits and legality of the program. Federal judges are currently sparring over the massive phone record collections and debating whether such surveillance is necessary or "Orwellian."

The report hinges on Section 215 of the Patriot Act, which allows federal investigators to request records relevant to an authorized national security investigation, but not the bulk collection of information that "cannot be regarded as 'relevant.' "

The panel argues the NSA's tracking program "bears almost no resemblance" to the descriptions listed in the law and concluded that it “lacks a viable legal foundation under Section 215, implicates constitutional concerns under the First and Fourth Amendments, raises serious threats to privacy and civil liberties as a policy matter, and has shown only limited value.”

The program has “contributed only minimal value in combating terrorism beyond what the government already achieves through these and other alternative means,” according to the report.

Yet despite its damning review, the panel was not unanimous on the issue of ending this type of data collection. Two members—Rachel L. Brand and Elisebeth Collins Cook, who served in the Justice Department during George W. Bush’s administration—argued the program should continue, if modified, to address greater privacy protections.

Brand writes:

"...[T]he government does not collect the content of any communication under this program. It does not collect any personally identifying information associated with the calls. And it does not collect cell site information that could closely pinpoint the location from which a cell phone call was made. The program is literally a system of numbers with no names attached to any of them. As such, it does not sweep in the most sensitive and revealing information about telephone communications. This seems to have gotten lost in the public debate."

Supporters of the NSA program agree with Brand and Cook, arguing that the board should not participate in “unwarranted legal analysis.”

“As those of us with law enforcement experience know, successful investigations use all available tools—there often is ‘no silver bullet’ that alone thwarts a plot,” Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich., chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, told The Washington Post.

The power of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board lies in its recommendations—the agency holds no legal power and can only advise the government on the best ways to put policies and regulations into practice without trampling on civil liberties and privacy.

“Cessation of the program would eliminate the privacy and civil liberties concerns associated with bulk collection without unduly hampering the government’s efforts,” the board writes, “while ensuring that any governmental requests for telephone calling records are tailored to the needs of specific investigations.”

The board's landmark statements coincide with President Barack Obama's recent speech calling for modest changes to the NSA's call tracking program, as well as a separate set of harsh recommendations from a White House–appointed review panel in December.

While the new report staunchly opposes third-party involvement with the database, the panels agreed that the government would still have the capability to obtain phone records through traditional court orders.

The panel’s recommendation to end the program takes things a step further than the president-appointed review panel, which suggested NSA data be taken out of government hands while still preserving the agency's power.

The government is reviewing whether telephone companies should hold the NSA data or if a third-party agency should be created to collect the information.

Though the board’s analysis can only urge the government to make changes, its report provides the information required for the NSA to explore its options while setting the tone for debates on NSA reform.

http://news.yahoo.com/nsa-spying-isn-39-t-just-illegal-invasion-193439815.html

[Buster's Uncle]

Finland No. 1, US sinks to 46th in global press freedom rankings
By Olivier Knox, Yahoo News  4 hours ago



In this image made from video released by WikiLeaks on Friday, Oct. 11, 2013, former National Security Agency systems analyst Edward Snowden speaks during a presentation ceremony for the Sam Adams Award in Moscow, Russia. Should Snowden ever return to the U.S., he would face criminal charges for leaking information about NSA surveillance programs. But legal experts say a trial could expose more classified information as his lawyers try to build a case in an open court that the operations he exposed were illegal. (AP Photo)



The United States did not live up to the promise of the First Amendment last year, “far from it,” sinking to 46th in global press freedom rankings, a respected international nonprofit group said Wednesday.

The U.S. plummeted 13 slots to 46th overall “amid increased efforts to track down whistle-blowers and the sources of leaks,” Reporters Without Borders warned in an annual report.

“The trial and conviction of Private Bradley Manning and the pursuit of NSA analyst Edward Snowden were warnings to all those thinking of assisting in the disclosure of sensitive information that would clearly be in the public interest,” the organization said.

The group, known by its French initials, RSF, also cited the Department of Justice’s seizure of Associated Press telephone records and a court’s pressure on New York Times reporter James Risen to testify against a CIA staffer accused of leaking classified information.

“The whistle-blower is clearly the enemy in the U.S.,” Delphine Halgand, who heads the RSF outpost in Washington, told Yahoo News. “Eight whistle-blowers have been charged under the Obama administration, the highest number of any administration, of all other administrations combined.”

It’s “a clear strategy of the administration” to “avoid any other version than the official version on what the administration is doing,” Halgand said.

Overall, RSF said in its report, “countries that pride themselves on being democracies and respecting the rule of law have not set an example, far from it.”

“Freedom of information is too often sacrificed to an overly broad and abusive interpretation of national security needs, marking a disturbing retreat from democratic practices. Investigative journalism often suffers as a result,” the group said.

So who does a better job than the U.S. of protecting press freedoms?

Here, in order of rank, starting with No. 1 Finland: Finland, the Netherlands, Norway, Luxembourg, Andorra, Liechtenstein, Denmark, Iceland, New Zealand, Sweden, Estonia, Austria, Czech Republic, Germany, Switzerland, Ireland, Jamaica, Canada, Poland, Slovakia, Costa Rica, Namibia, Belgium, Cape Verde, Cyprus, Uruguay, Ghana, Australia, Belize, Portugal, Suriname, Lithuania, Britain, Slovenia, Spain, Antigua and Barbuda, Latvia, El Salvador, France, Samoa, Botswana, South Africa, Trinidad and Tobago, Papua New Guinea and Romania.

Italy was 49th. Israel was 96th. Afghanistan was 128th. Russia was 148th. China was 175th.

http://news.yahoo.com/finland--1--us-sinks-to-46th-in-global-press-freedom-rankings-145044630.html

[gwillybj]

These I find intriguing as to how high they placed: those of the former USSR, from the former Czechoslovakia, and from central Africa. But I don't find them as a big surprise in the list. Of course, quite a few years have passed since major social and political changes were made in those countries.

[Geo]

I'm a bit surprised to see four former Soviet republics before my country on the list as well.
OTOH, I'm surprised as well for a large country (population wise) as Germay reach a whopping 14 on the list.