U.S. Government spying on entire U.S., to nobody's surprise

[bentom187]

GOP leaders pushed to allow House vote on defunding the NSA

Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hil...efund-nsa-surveillance-programs#ixzz2ZEMVDJGL
Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook

Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.) is mounting a push this week to defund the surveillance programs at the National Security Agency.


Amash said Monday that the defense appropriations bill, which could come to the House floor this week, was a chance to stop the NSA’s “unconstitutional spying on Americans.”


“Most important bill this week: DoD Approps. We can defund #NSA's unconstitutional spying on Americans--if House leaders allow amendments, Amash tweeted Monday.

House Republican leaders are considering limiting amendments to the defense bill out of concern for proposals that Amash and other lawmakers might bring forward.


Rules Committee Chairman Pete Sessions (R-Texas) wrote to his colleagues last week that the panel might limit amendments, a departure from the open amendment process that’s been used on the defense bill since Republicans took over in 2011.

“While this is not the traditional process for this bill, there are a number of sensitive and ongoing issues related to national security that are more appropriately handled through an orderly amendment process ensuring timely consideration of this important measure,” Sessions wrote.

In addition to amendments on the NSA, there are concerns about amendments tying President Obama’s hands in Syria and Egypt, according to defense sources.

Amash, a libertarian-leaning Republican considering a Senate run in Michigan, has been among the most vocal critics of the NSA’s programs in the House. He called on Director of National Intelligence James Clapper to resign last month for lying to Congress about NSA collecting Americans’ records.

Amash spokesman Will Adams told the Grand Rapids Press that his office was still tailoring the language of the amendment to try to boost its chances of getting on the House floor.

"At the end of the day, it's going to be a political decision by our leadership if they want to give it a floor vote," Adams said.


Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hil...efund-nsa-surveillance-programs#ixzz2ZENmhAn0
Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook

 

[Pinball Wizard]

I've been entombed in the U.S. Federal system womb since the day I was born in 1949.

I'm now a official U.S. Government derelict.

 

[Hank Hemp]

Fug you Pinball, I resemble that remark.

 

[mexcurandero420]

Coup d’etat

Keep on growing

 

[bentom187]

Glenn Greenwald, Guardian Reporter, Blasts Media, MSBNC Over Edward Snowden Stories

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/16/glen-greenwald-media-edward-snowden-stories_n_3600016.html

Glenn Greenwald, the Guardian journalist who first published the leaks of National Security Agency (NSA) whistleblower Edward Snowden, blasted the American media on Monday and said a recent Reuters story on Snowden was a "fabrication." Speaking in a radio interview, Greenwald also accused MSNBC talk show hosts of bias and said they were "desperate to distract attention away from [the NSA] disclosures."

Greenwald made the heated statements during a conversation with me on SiriusXM. He said a recent Reuters article -- which quotes him as saying that it would be the U.S. government's "worst nightmare" if certain details Snowden possesses are leaked -- is "extremely inaccurate." The story was based on an interview Greenwald offered to the Spanish-language Argentine daily La Nacion.

The Reuters story was followed by an an Associated Press story on Monday, which quotes Greenwald in La Nacion saying Snowden holds NSA "blueprints." Greenwald also addressed the AP story on the radio show, and said the media reports imply that both he and Snowden are making reckless threats and attempting to blackmail the U.S. government.

Greenwald insisted the various quotes were taken out of context to mean the "opposite" of what he intended to stress in the La Nacion interview -- he meant to underscore how Snowden has been and will continue to be responsible with all the information in his possession, Greenwald said.

"I knew when I began reporting the [NSA] story, that the technique that the U.S. government uses -- and its media allies use -- against anybody who discloses what they're doing in the dark is to distract attention away from the contents of the revelations," Greenwald said. "[But] this weekend was probably the most extreme and obvious distortion, really a fabrication on the part of Reuters, that I’ve seen yet."

Reuters did not respond to a request for a comment.

Greenwald also took aim at MSNBC on the radio show. He quoted one of the network's former producers, Jeff Cohen, who recently charged that the network and several of its talk show hosts are protecting the Obama administration in coverage of the NSA story. Cohen is the founder of the media watchdog group FAIR.

"If you’re a loyalist of the Obama administration, as most of MSNBC is," Greenwald said, "you are desperate to distract attention away from these disclosures."

In particular, Greenwald criticized MSNBC host Melissa Harris-Perry, who penned an open letter to Snowden:


“We could be talking about whether accessing and monitoring citizen information and communications is constitutional, or whether we should continue to allow a secret court to authorize secret warrants using secret legal opinions. But we’re not. We’re talking about you! And flight paths between Moscow and Venezuela, and how much of a jerk Glenn Greenwald is.”


Noting that Harris-Perry is free to talk about whatever she wants on her show, Greenwald accused the host of being part of a media outlet dedicated to defending the Obama agenda.

Greenwald said that while he received a positive reception from MSNBC when he was reporting on civil liberties abuses during the Bush administration, "the fact that I’ve spent the last three years reporting about the civil liberties abuses of the Obama administration changes the universe for partisan hacks who are on MSNBC, whose role is to defend the president and the White House.”

During the show, Greenwald also called a recent New York Daily News story reporting on his prior business involvement with a gay porn company "homophobia." The report was meant to "smear" his image, Greenwald charged.

“Adult video and pornography standing alone isn’t enough of a smear to even be worth doing,” Greenwald said. “It absolutely was the fact that it was gay adult video that made it --in the eyes of the New York Daily News and whoever fed it to them -- something that they thought was worth effectively trying to attack me with. And I think there was unquestionably an element of homophobia, to be talking about the specific titles, highlighting the homoerotic aspects of it.”

As for Greenwald's plans for the future, the U.S. Supreme Court decision striking down the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) last month may mean he'll return to live in the U.S. with his partner. Greenwald has lived in Rio de Janeiro with his Brazilian partner for the past several years because DOMA prevented them, as a bi-national couple, from living together in the country.

‘It’s certainly something that we’re discussing,” he said. “Living in the United States is something we’ve both wanted to have the option to have. And it’s definitely something we’d like to do at some point.”

Listen to the full interview below:
https://soundcloud.com/siriusxmentertainment/signorile-speak-with-glenn

 

[Harry Gypsna]

thats bs, i researched it and read the actual documented from obama care, it just doesn't say what is claimed here.

Thank you. It was talking about implantable devices, as in plastic heart vales, pacemakers and metal hip joints.

They don't need to put a chip in you, you carry your chip around in your pocket voluntarily, and most people in the West now say they don't know how they would ever manage without it.

 

[PoopyTeaBags]

thats bs, i researched it and read the actual documented from obama care, it just doesn't say what is claimed here.

'
it is took out as of now from the legislation but obama still supports it and says it could be added in the future. Last i looked it up which was about 6 months ago.

 

[RetroGrow]

People are marching in the streets and the media is in a frenzy over the George Zimmerman case, yet they are ignoring the truly important and dangerous things that are being done to us all by the government. It's truly mind boggling. The media is complicit in this as shills for the government and the average person seems to be intoxicated by the media. Things are spinning out of control so rapidly that it's difficult to keep up with them. This can't end well. We are becoming prisoners of the state, and seem to be walking willingly towards our demise, like sheep to the slaughter. Our President is a criminal and a traitor, yet I don't see impeachment coming. They roasted Nixon for much less.

 

[CannaBunkerMan]

What we need are better protections against unconstitutional laws being passed. It still boggles my mind that the Patriot Act was passed. How is it even remotely constitutional? Without that horrible piece of legislation, the current (and past) administrations wouldn't have a leg to stand on in the courts when it came to justifying their actions against their citizens. Yet they call it legal. What protections do we have against this type of constitutional side-step? Seriously though, are there any?

edit: Other than the obvious, I have no faith in the Supreme Court.

 

[devilgoob]

Because 9/11 man.

 

[Eighths-n-Aces]

They roasted Nixon for much less.

They did?

I must have a different definition of roasting than you do Retro. It seems to me that politicians never get as roasted for the shit they do as any of us would for doing the same shit.

Nixon was allowed to resign and live the rest of his life in comfort. Taking his power away from him probably hurt the cocksucker but i would not consider that "roasting" him ........ not even close

IMHO people in power should be held to a higher standard because what they do and how they act effects us all. But since the people in power make the rules they get off with a slap on the hand when they fuck us and i don't think that just happens in the US.

 

[SpasticGramps]

Driving somewhere? There's a gov't record of that AP

WASHINGTON (AP) — Chances are, your local or state police departments have photographs of your car in their files, noting where you were driving on a particular day, even if you never did anything wrong.

Using automated scanners, law enforcement agencies across the country have amassed millions of digital records on the location and movement of every vehicle with a license plate, according to a study published Wednesday by the American Civil Liberties Union. Affixed to police cars, bridges or buildings, the scanners capture images of passing or parked vehicles and note their location, uploading that information into police databases. Departments keep the records for weeks or years, sometimes indefinitely.

As the technology becomes cheaper and more ubiquitous, and federal grants focus on aiding local terrorist detection, even small police agencies are able to deploy more sophisticated surveillance systems. While the Supreme Court ruled in 2012 that a judge's approval is needed to track a car with GPS, networks of plate scanners allow police effectively to track a driver's location, sometimes several times every day, with few legal restrictions. The ACLU says the scanners assemble what it calls a "single, high-resolution image of our lives."

"There's just a fundamental question of whether we're going to live in a society where these dragnet surveillance systems become routine," said Catherine Crump, a staff attorney with the ACLU. The civil rights group is proposing that police departments immediately delete any records of cars not linked to a crime.

Law enforcement officials said the scanners can be crucial to tracking suspicious cars, aiding drug busts and finding abducted children. License plate scanners also can be efficient. The state of Maryland told the ACLU that troopers could "maintain a normal patrol stance" while capturing up to 7,000 license plate images in a single eight hour shift.

 

[OLDproLg]

roasted nixon huh,they shoulda HUNG HIM IN PUBLIC!!!

i got 1 word for this country"parranoia"................

and here we are again,just like when Black Sabbath made the song.
Parranoid mutha fuckas.....
Lg

 

[Harry Gypsna]

Driving somewhere? There's a gov't record of that AP

What we need, throughout the west, and particularly the Anglophone world, is masses of people going out and smashing these things. Speed cameras, ANPR cams, all these things, need to be trashed.

And when the ****s read this, my message to them is COME AND GET ME FUCKERS.

 

[gaiusmarius]

would be really cool to see something like an anti surveilance day where people just go out and tie or duct tape hoods over the cameras. then announce it was a warning if they don't start taking them down we will, lol. also a good way to break peoples fear if they don't damage them the first time, it would further be a trail run for the smashing if our servants don't listen. specially the ones pointing at the public space, what folks do on their property is their business. but cameras watching everyone all the time is fascist police state policy.

 

[bentom187]

a step in the right direction.

Anti-drone protests hit New York
[YOUTUBEIF]y8diQyIKjh0[/YOUTUBEIF]

Colorado town considers licensing bounty hunters to shoot down drones

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/16/c...y-hunters-to-shoot-down-drones/#ixzz2ZJwdgB5e

“State and local governments throughout the country are talking about the fantastic possibilities using unmanned aerial vehicles,” he’s quoted as telling the town board when he introduced the idea July 2. “It’s time to take a stand against becoming a surveillance society.”

Town Clerk Kim Oldfield wrote in an email to The Daily Caller News Foundation that Steel collected “way more” than the signatures needed to bring the idea to a vote in a special election, but said that the town board was considering adopting it outright “from an economic standpoint.”

Because the ordinance doesn’t limit the licenses to only Deer Creek residents, the town could raise money from people in other states who want the novelty of having an official drone-hunting license.

Arapahoe County Sheriff Grayson Robinson, whose jurisdiction covers Deer Trail and whose agency would be “prohibited from enforcing any law, edict or regulatory determination that is in conflict with this ordinance,” under the wording of the measure being considered, did not immediately return a phone call seeking comment.


The tiny town of Deer Trail, Colo. — barely more than a wide spot on Interstate 70 about 55 miles east of Denver, population 546 — is considering an ordinance that would authorize licensed bounty hunters to shoot down unmanned aircraft violating its “sovereign airspace.”

A six-page petition circulated by a resident says that the threat of surveillance from drones — regardless of who is piloting them — is a threat to “traditional American ideas of Liberty and Freedom” enjoyed by Deer Trail’s “ranchers, farmers, cowboys and Indians, as well as contemporary citizens.”

Therefore, drone incursions are to be seen as acts of war.

According to the proposed ordinance, which will be considered by the town council at its next meeting on Aug. 6, prospective bounty hunters can get a one-year drone-hunting license for $25.

Proposed bounties will be $25 for those turning in the wings or fuselage of downed aircraft and $100 for mostly intact vehicles. To collect the bounty, the wreckage must have “markings, and configuration … consistent with those used by the United States federal government.”

Such “trophies” then become the property of Deer Trail.

The ordinance spells out the rules of engagement. Shooters must use shotguns, 12-gauge or smaller, firing lead, steel or depleted uranium ammunition and they can’t fire on aircraft flying higher than 1,000 (a determination made using a range finder or a best guess). No weapons with rifled barrels allowed, and no tracer rounds.

An “engagement” is limited to three shots at an aircraft every two hours. Being unable to bring down the drone within those guidelines, the petition notes, “demonstrates a lack of proficiency with the weapon.”

Drones can become targets if the bounty hunter feels the aircraft is stalking them, if they maneuver as if they’re following someone, or if they display any weaponry.

But if anyone accidentally shoots down a remote-controlled toy airplane, the proposed ordinance warns, “the owner of the toy remote control aerial vehicle shall be reimbursed for its full cost by the shooter.”

Unless, that is, the toy aircraft was flying over the shooter’s property.

“Throughout its history, the Town of Deer Trail has maintained its independence from all other political entities,” the ordinance reads. “Therefore, the Town of Deer Trail declares its supremacy over its territorial boundaries and, with respect to this ordinance, the supremacy and sovereignty of its airspace and its citizen’s right to defend the airspace of the town, their homes, businesses and related properties from unwanted incursions by unmanned aerial vehicles.”

Phillip Steel, the citizen who circulated the petition, did not return an email from The Daily Caller News Foundation seeking comment, but in an article in the local I-70 Scout newspaper (posted on a town history Facebook page), he says he was motivated by recent revelations about domestic spying by the National Security Agency.


Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/16/c...y-hunters-to-shoot-down-drones/#ixzz2ZJwSBuiq

 

[PoopyTeaBags]

a step in the right direction.

Anti-drone protests hit New York
[youtubeif]y8diQyIKjh0[/youtubeif]

Colorado town considers licensing bounty hunters to shoot down drones

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/16/c...y-hunters-to-shoot-down-drones/#ixzz2ZJwdgB5e

“State and local governments throughout the country are talking about the fantastic possibilities using unmanned aerial vehicles,” he’s quoted as telling the town board when he introduced the idea July 2. “It’s time to take a stand against becoming a surveillance society.”

Town Clerk Kim Oldfield wrote in an email to The Daily Caller News Foundation that Steel collected “way more” than the signatures needed to bring the idea to a vote in a special election, but said that the town board was considering adopting it outright “from an economic standpoint.”

Because the ordinance doesn’t limit the licenses to only Deer Creek residents, the town could raise money from people in other states who want the novelty of having an official drone-hunting license.

Arapahoe County Sheriff Grayson Robinson, whose jurisdiction covers Deer Trail and whose agency would be “prohibited from enforcing any law, edict or regulatory determination that is in conflict with this ordinance,” under the wording of the measure being considered, did not immediately return a phone call seeking comment.


The tiny town of Deer Trail, Colo. — barely more than a wide spot on Interstate 70 about 55 miles east of Denver, population 546 — is considering an ordinance that would authorize licensed bounty hunters to shoot down unmanned aircraft violating its “sovereign airspace.”

A six-page petition circulated by a resident says that the threat of surveillance from drones — regardless of who is piloting them — is a threat to “traditional American ideas of Liberty and Freedom” enjoyed by Deer Trail’s “ranchers, farmers, cowboys and Indians, as well as contemporary citizens.”

Therefore, drone incursions are to be seen as acts of war.

According to the proposed ordinance, which will be considered by the town council at its next meeting on Aug. 6, prospective bounty hunters can get a one-year drone-hunting license for $25.

Proposed bounties will be $25 for those turning in the wings or fuselage of downed aircraft and $100 for mostly intact vehicles. To collect the bounty, the wreckage must have “markings, and configuration … consistent with those used by the United States federal government.”

Such “trophies” then become the property of Deer Trail.

The ordinance spells out the rules of engagement. Shooters must use shotguns, 12-gauge or smaller, firing lead, steel or depleted uranium ammunition and they can’t fire on aircraft flying higher than 1,000 (a determination made using a range finder or a best guess). No weapons with rifled barrels allowed, and no tracer rounds.

An “engagement” is limited to three shots at an aircraft every two hours. Being unable to bring down the drone within those guidelines, the petition notes, “demonstrates a lack of proficiency with the weapon.”

Drones can become targets if the bounty hunter feels the aircraft is stalking them, if they maneuver as if they’re following someone, or if they display any weaponry.

But if anyone accidentally shoots down a remote-controlled toy airplane, the proposed ordinance warns, “the owner of the toy remote control aerial vehicle shall be reimbursed for its full cost by the shooter.”

Unless, that is, the toy aircraft was flying over the shooter’s property.

“Throughout its history, the Town of Deer Trail has maintained its independence from all other political entities,” the ordinance reads. “Therefore, the Town of Deer Trail declares its supremacy over its territorial boundaries and, with respect to this ordinance, the supremacy and sovereignty of its airspace and its citizen’s right to defend the airspace of the town, their homes, businesses and related properties from unwanted incursions by unmanned aerial vehicles.”

Phillip Steel, the citizen who circulated the petition, did not return an email from The Daily Caller News Foundation seeking comment, but in an article in the local I-70 Scout newspaper (posted on a town history Facebook page), he says he was motivated by recent revelations about domestic spying by the National Security Agency.


Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/16/c...y-hunters-to-shoot-down-drones/#ixzz2ZJwSBuiq

Holy shit there a place in america thats still is america. This is what we need. Wish we had towns across america with a back bone.

 

[bentom187]

Holy shit there a place in america thats still is america. This is what we need. Wish we had towns across america with a back bone.

my state is horrible as well, just too many people who don't even know what they are voting for or against, similar to the people in the mark dice video's.
I vote locally and nationally and donate what I can, but Its a up hill battle.

 

[RetroGrow]

a step in the right direction.

Anti-drone protests hit New York
[YOUTUBEIF]y8diQyIKjh0[/YOUTUBEIF]

Colorado town considers licensing bounty hunters to shoot down drones

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/16/c...y-hunters-to-shoot-down-drones/#ixzz2ZJwdgB5e

“State and local governments throughout the country are talking about the fantastic possibilities using unmanned aerial vehicles,” he’s quoted as telling the town board when he introduced the idea July 2. “It’s time to take a stand against becoming a surveillance society.”

Town Clerk Kim Oldfield wrote in an email to The Daily Caller News Foundation that Steel collected “way more” than the signatures needed to bring the idea to a vote in a special election, but said that the town board was considering adopting it outright “from an economic standpoint.”

Because the ordinance doesn’t limit the licenses to only Deer Creek residents, the town could raise money from people in other states who want the novelty of having an official drone-hunting license.

Arapahoe County Sheriff Grayson Robinson, whose jurisdiction covers Deer Trail and whose agency would be “prohibited from enforcing any law, edict or regulatory determination that is in conflict with this ordinance,” under the wording of the measure being considered, did not immediately return a phone call seeking comment.


The tiny town of Deer Trail, Colo. — barely more than a wide spot on Interstate 70 about 55 miles east of Denver, population 546 — is considering an ordinance that would authorize licensed bounty hunters to shoot down unmanned aircraft violating its “sovereign airspace.”

A six-page petition circulated by a resident says that the threat of surveillance from drones — regardless of who is piloting them — is a threat to “traditional American ideas of Liberty and Freedom” enjoyed by Deer Trail’s “ranchers, farmers, cowboys and Indians, as well as contemporary citizens.”

Therefore, drone incursions are to be seen as acts of war.

According to the proposed ordinance, which will be considered by the town council at its next meeting on Aug. 6, prospective bounty hunters can get a one-year drone-hunting license for $25.

Proposed bounties will be $25 for those turning in the wings or fuselage of downed aircraft and $100 for mostly intact vehicles. To collect the bounty, the wreckage must have “markings, and configuration … consistent with those used by the United States federal government.”

Such “trophies” then become the property of Deer Trail.

The ordinance spells out the rules of engagement. Shooters must use shotguns, 12-gauge or smaller, firing lead, steel or depleted uranium ammunition and they can’t fire on aircraft flying higher than 1,000 (a determination made using a range finder or a best guess). No weapons with rifled barrels allowed, and no tracer rounds.

An “engagement” is limited to three shots at an aircraft every two hours. Being unable to bring down the drone within those guidelines, the petition notes, “demonstrates a lack of proficiency with the weapon.”

Drones can become targets if the bounty hunter feels the aircraft is stalking them, if they maneuver as if they’re following someone, or if they display any weaponry.

But if anyone accidentally shoots down a remote-controlled toy airplane, the proposed ordinance warns, “the owner of the toy remote control aerial vehicle shall be reimbursed for its full cost by the shooter.”

Unless, that is, the toy aircraft was flying over the shooter’s property.

“Throughout its history, the Town of Deer Trail has maintained its independence from all other political entities,” the ordinance reads. “Therefore, the Town of Deer Trail declares its supremacy over its territorial boundaries and, with respect to this ordinance, the supremacy and sovereignty of its airspace and its citizen’s right to defend the airspace of the town, their homes, businesses and related properties from unwanted incursions by unmanned aerial vehicles.”

Phillip Steel, the citizen who circulated the petition, did not return an email from The Daily Caller News Foundation seeking comment, but in an article in the local I-70 Scout newspaper (posted on a town history Facebook page), he says he was motivated by recent revelations about domestic spying by the National Security Agency.


Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/16/c...y-hunters-to-shoot-down-drones/#ixzz2ZJwSBuiq

I volunteer for that job. Skeet shooting for drones. Kudos to those free thinking people in Colorado.

 

[Harry Gypsna]

The ordinance spells out the rules of engagement. Shooters must use shotguns, 12-gauge or smaller, firing lead, steel or depleted uranium ammunition and they can’t fire on aircraft flying higher than 1,000 (a determination made using a range finder or a best guess). No weapons with rifled barrels allowed, and no tracer rounds.

Lip service. You think those drones fly below 1000 feet or even 1000 metres.