Google
 
Web Osi Speaks!

Monday, July 18, 2016

Why France Has A More Fraught Relationship With Its Muslim Communities Than The U.S. .



News that the attacker who killed at least 84 people in France was a Tunisian citizen and a Muslim legally working in the country quickly became ammunition for American politicians suggesting that the United States also faces a serious threat from within.

Donald Trump, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, reiterated his call to ban Muslims from entering the country. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich recommended that Muslims be deported if they believe in Islamic law.

But France and the United States are markedly different in their relationships with their Muslim immigrant populations, with several factors making the threat of organized Islamist extremism — as opposed to attacks by individuals who were simply inspired by the ideology — more likely in France. They include the country’s colonial history in North Africa, its insistence on assimilation and the greater isolation of its Muslim communities.

In addition, France's proximity to the Middle East increases the chances that young men may have traveled to Syria to join Islamic State militants and then returned to France with the intent to carry out attacks like the ones that took place in Paris last year. However, no evidence has emerged to suggest that was the case in the deadly assault Thursday in Nice, in which the assailant drove a truck through a crowd celebrating Bastille Day.

After the Nice attack, an angry public wants to know: Why doesn't the violence stop?
After the Nice attack, an angry public wants to know: Why doesn't the violence stop?
France does not collect census data on religious affiliation, but it estimates that Muslims make up 5% to 10% of its 65 million people, which would give it the largest Muslim population in Western Europe.

Many trace their roots to Algeria and Tunisia, both former French colonies. Their parents and grandparents arrived as immigrant laborers to help rebuild France after World War II — with more than 470,000 coming from Algeria alone by 1968. Over the next dozen years, that number reached 800,000.

Their arrival, however, had an ugly backdrop: For more than a century, the colonies were locked in a vicious fight with France for independence. Battling brutal repression by the French, the insurgents latched on to Islam as a organizing tool.

Algeria and Tunisia became the birthplace of some of the earliest militant Islamist groups. It is little surprise to experts that today Tunisia is the largest supplier per capita of Islamic State recruits to Syria.

By the time Algerian independence came in 1962 — six years after Tunisian independence — France’s relationship with its Muslim immigrants from North Africa was showing signs of trouble.

As their construction and manufacturing jobs began to dry up, many recommitted to their religion as a way of restoring their sense of dignity, said Gilles Kepel, a French political scientist and Islam specialist. Ever since, social mobility has been severely limited.

Nice's Promenade des Anglais reopens, drawing throngs of mourners
Nice's Promenade des Anglais reopens, drawing throngs of mourners
France struggles much more than the U.S. to absorb its immigrants.

Muslims in France today — even second and third generation — are concentrated in their own enclaves, suburbs known as banlieues that are usually little more than a cement jungle of decrepit high-rises where frustration is the dominant feeling.

Clichy-sous-Bois was the epicenter of race riots in 2005, when two teenagers, the children of African immigrants, were electrocuted while hiding from the police in a power station. Though the suburb is only 10 miles from central Paris, it takes more than an hour to reach due to the absence of a rail link. Its cafes are more likely to serve Moroccan mint tea and merguez sausages than French cafe and croissants.

Children of immigrants identify as French and bristle at questions about their origin. But they also complain of not enjoying the same opportunities as other French citizens.

“Muslims or people perceived as such do not have equal access to education, jobs, housing or even healthcare,” Yasser Louati, a spokesman for the Collective Against Islamophobia in France, said in an interview via social media on Friday.

“You can't tell generations of kids ‘You don't belong here’ and be surprised they grow up like they don't belong here.”

The divisions appear to be worsening. In 2011, a government-sponsored study found that the children of immigrants were twice as likely as their parents to report a sense of discrimination linked to origin, even though they speak French fluently.

Nice truck rampage
Nice truck rampage
The ideal of diversity espoused in the United States has not been embraced in France, where being seen as French means giving up the culture where you came from.

Kepel, the political scientist, has written that the French government sees Islam as an impediment to Muslims becoming fully integrated citizens.

It has discouraged — and in some cases banned —  certain forms of religious expression in an attempt to promote assimilation and unity.

In 2004, the French Assembly passed a law prohibiting the wearing of conspicuous religious symbols in public schools. The controversy dates back to at least 1989, when a high school principal barred three girls from wearing the hijab on school grounds because it violated France's tradition of secular education.

But critics say those policies have had the opposite effect, deepening a feeling among some Muslims that the government is anti-Islam and they will never be fully accepted.

The relationship between French Muslims and their countrymen has only become more fraught amid terrorist attacks claimed by Islamic State.

Bulos is a special correspondent. Read more here.

Labels:

Wednesday, September 24, 2014

In Case You Missed Barack Obama's Address To United Nations Assembly, Like I Did, Watch It Here Below.

Thursday, September 11, 2014

Did You Miss #BarackObama's Speech Last Night On #Isis (Or #Isil As He Called It)? I Did Too, So Let's Watch It Here.

Friday, August 01, 2014

POTUS Barack Obama: "In The Aftermath Of 9/11, W Tortured Some Folks .... We Did Some Things That Were Wrong"! Watch Video.

Wednesday, June 04, 2014

"Don't Come Back To Afghanistan"!: Army Sgt. Bowe #Bergdahl's Prisoner Exchange. Watch Video.

Thursday, May 08, 2014

Who Is Boko Haram's Leader? Watch Video.

Tuesday, December 17, 2013

Kentucky Federal Court Of Appeals Upholds Life Sentence For Bowling Green Iraqi Born Terrorist, Mohanad Shareef Hammadi.



Appeals court upholds life sentence in terror case

An Iraqi man who pleaded guilty to terrorism charges wasn't entrapped into assisting in a plot to ship cash and weapons to al-Qaida in Iraq in 2010 and 2011 and the government did not take part in any misconduct, a federal appeals court ruled Tuesday.

The U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the life sentence of 26-year-old Mohanad Shareef Hammadi, who pleaded guilty in 2012 to taking part in the plot, which was actually being run by a confidential informant for the FBI in Bowling Green.
 
"The government provided Hammadi with an opportunity to commit a crime, and he took it," Judge Karen Nelson Moore wrote for the three-judge panel in the case.

Hammadi and 32-year-old Waad Ramadan Alwan pleaded guilty in 2011 and 2012 to working with a man they thought was an insurgent in the United States to ship thousands of dollars in cash, machine guns, rifles, grenades and shoulder-fired missiles to al-Qaida in Iraq from 2010 through 2011.

Prosecutors said the two were actually working with a confidential informant who recorded the pair's activities and no money or weapons ever left the United States.
The two were arrested in May 2011 in Bowling Green, Kentucky, after a federal sting operation.

Hammadi is in a maximum-security prison in Colorado. Alwan is being held at the federal penitentiary in Terre Haute, Ind.
Hammadi alleged that the federal government resorted to entrapment in pursuing the case against him and sought to enhance any possible prison sentence by including certain types of weapons in the scheme.

Moore, joined by judges Julia Smith Gibbons and Jeffrey S. Sutton, noted that Hammadi willingly took part in the plot.
"The government's conduct in this case is not irregular, and Hammadi offers no evidence that the government acted purposefully to trigger a twenty-five-year mandatory minimum (sentence)," Moore wrote.

Hammadi and Alwan admitted to working and planting explosives near Bayji, Iraq, where multiple U.S. units were working.

Prosecutors described Alwan as a seasoned terrorist in Iraq. They said he worked with the Mujahidin Shura Council, a violent group that claimed responsibility for the kidnapping, torture and deaths of two soldiers with the Fort Campbell-based 101st Airborne Division and the death of a third soldier from the same unit while they were patrolling about 60 miles south of Baghdad in June 2006.

Prosecutors linked Hammadi to Jaish al Mujahidin, also known as the Mujahidin Army, a group that claimed responsibility for shooting down American helicopters in Iraq in 2006 and 2007.
Alwan and Hammadi arrived in the United States in 2009. Both admitted to taking part in insurgent activities in Iraq in 2005 and 2006. Prosecutors said federal authorities became aware of Alwan when they found out he had been held in an Iraqi prison in June 2006 for insurgent activities.

It is unclear how or why Alwan was released from prison. Later, federal authorities found his fingerprint on an unexploded bomb in Iraq and launched an investigation.
Alwan recruited Hammadi into the plot in January 2011 and the pair spent five months working with the informant, prosecutors said.

Labels: , , ,

Wednesday, November 13, 2013

It Is Way Past Time!

US Names 2 Nigerian-Based Groups Terrorist Organizations

FILE - A poster announcing a reward for the capture of Boko Haram leader Abubakar Shekau is seen on a wall in Baga village on the outskirts of Maiduguri in the north-eastern Nigerian state of Borno.FILE - A poster announcing a reward for the capture of Boko Haram leader Abubakar Shekau is seen on a wall in Baga village on the outskirts of Maiduguri in the north-eastern Nigerian state of Borno.


Labels: , ,

Monday, October 28, 2013

What Happened In Benghazi, Libya? Watch Video.

Do you want more? Go here.

Labels: , ,

Sunday, September 15, 2013

Wanna Know Where The Jobs Are Going? Well, Don't Blame Barack Obama. Watch That And Ground Zero News.

I Watched Syrian President Bashar al-Assad On 60 Minutes Today. He Does Not Appear To Be The Madman He Is Made Out To Be. Instead, He Appears Very Intelligent. Watch Video.


do you want to catch a brief history, consisting og Assad's dad,Hafez al-Assad: do you wanna know what a veteran, well placed CIA operative thinks about all of this Syrian stuff? well, watch video below:

Labels: , , ,

Sunday, September 01, 2013

Choice Of An Ally In The Syrian Conflict: Which Side To Support!

to me, trying to decide who to help in the #syrian conflict is akin to decide on a choice of pet between the #african crocodile and the hyena.

it is true they both smile, but i wouldn't wanna invite either inside my home or pet either one of them!!

Labels: , , ,

Wednesday, August 21, 2013

Surprise, Surprise (In My Gomer Pyle Voice)!: NSA Surveillance Reach Broader Than Publicly Acknowledged!!

 

NSA surveillance reach broader than publicly acknowledged

The National Security Agency's surveillance network has the capacity to spy on 75 percent of all U.S. Internet traffic, The Wall Street Journal reports.

Citing current and former NSA officials for the 75 percent figure, the paper reported that the agency can observe more of Americans' online communications than officials have publicly acknowledged.

The NSA's system of programs that filter communications, achieved with the help of telecommunications companies, is designed to look for communications that either start or end abroad, or happen to pass through the U.S. between foreign countries. However, the officials told the Journal that the system's reach is so broad, that it is more likely that purely domestic communications will be intercepted as a byproduct of the hunt for foreign ones.

The system works by using algorithms that act as filters, designed to let high-value information through amid more benign chatter. However, after the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks, a former to intelligence official told the Journal that the government changed its definition of "reasonable" intelligence collection, enabling the NSA to widen the holes in the "filtering" system.

The details are the latest to emerge about the NSA's operations and capabilities, as authorities in the U.S. and other countries try to stop the release of more information about the elaborate surveillance network. Members of Congress on the intelligence committees, as well as past intelligence officials, recently have spoken up in defense of the agency, particularly after a report showing the agency had broken privacy rules and overstepped its authority thousands of times.

The NSA programs described by the Journal differ from the programs described by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden in a series of leaks earlier this summer. Snowden described a program to acquire Americans' phone records, as well as another program, known as PRISM, that made requests from Internet companies for stored data. By contrast, the Internet monitoring systems have the capability to track almost any online activity, so long as it is covered by a broad court order.

The NSA programs are overseen and approved by the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. An NSA spokeswoman told the Journal that its actions were both legal and respectful of Americans' privacy. In a statement made to Reuters, the NSA repeated the assertion, saying, "We defend the United States from such threats while fiercely working to protect the privacy rights of U.S. persons.
''It's not either/or. It's both."

Labels: , ,

Thursday, August 15, 2013

While The NSA Does Admirable Work Designed To Protect Us From AlQaeda And Its Ilk, One Has To Wonder If Destroying Our Privacy Is Worth The Price We Pay To Establish Our Own GESTAPO Here!

NSA broke privacy rules thousands of times per year, audit finds


The National Security Agency has broken privacy rules or overstepped its legal authority thousands of times each year since Congress granted the agency broad new powers in 2008, according to an internal audit and other top-secret documents.
 
Most of the infractions involve unauthorized surveillance of Americans or foreign intelligence targets in the United States, both of which are restricted by law and executive order. They range from significant violations of law to typographical errors that resulted in unintended interception of U.S. e-mails and telephone calls.

Read the documents

NSA report on privacy violations

Read the full report with key sections highlighted and annotated by the reporter.

FISA court finds illegal surveillance

The only known details of a 2011 ruling that found the NSA was using illegal methods to collect and handle the communications of American citizens.

What's a 'violation'?

View a slide used in a training course for NSA intelligence collectors and analysts.

What to say (and what not to say)

How NSA analysts explain their targeting decisions without giving "extraneous information" to overseers.
More on this story:

FISA Court judge: Ability to police U.S. spying program limited

FISA Court judge: Ability to police U.S. spying program limited
Spy court chief judge says it must rely on government to say when it improperly spies on Americans

NSA statements to The Post

NSA statements to The Post
The National Security Agency offered these comments on The Post’s story on privacy violations.


The documents, provided earlier this summer to The Washington Post by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden, include a level of detail and analysis that is not routinely shared with Congress or the special court that oversees surveillance. In one of the documents, agency personnel are instructed to remove details and substitute more generic language in reports to the Justice Department and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.
 
In one instance, the NSA decided that it need not report the unintended surveillance of Americans. A notable example in 2008 was the interception of a “large number” of calls placed from Washington when a programming error confused U.S. area code 202 for 20, the international dialing code for Egypt, according to a “quality assurance” review that was not distributed to the NSA’s oversight staff.
 
In another case, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which has authority over some NSA operations, did not learn about a new collection method until it had been in operation for many months. The court ruled it unconstitutional.
 
The Obama administration has provided almost no public information about the NSA’s compliance record. In June, after promising to explain the NSA’s record in “as transparent a way as we possibly can,” Deputy Attorney General James Cole described extensive safeguards and oversight that keep the agency in check. “Every now and then, there may be a mistake,” Cole said in congressional testimony.
 
The NSA audit obtained by The Post, dated May 2012, counted 2,776 incidents in the preceding 12 months of unauthorized collection, storage, access to or distribution of legally protected communications. Most were unintended. Many involved failures of due diligence or violations of standard operating procedure. The most serious incidents included a violation of a court order and unauthorized use of data about more than 3,000 Americans and green-card holders.
 
In a statement in response to questions for this article, the NSA said it attempts to identify problems “at the earliest possible moment, implement mitigation measures wherever possible, and drive the numbers down.” The government was made aware of The Post’s intention to publish the documents that accompany this article online.
“We’re a human-run agency operating in a complex environment with a number of different regulatory regimes, so at times we find ourselves on the wrong side of the line,” a senior NSA official said in an interview, speaking with White House permission on the condition of anonymity.
 

The causes and severity of NSA infractions vary widely. One in 10 incidents is attributed to a typographical error in which an analyst enters an incorrect query and retrieves data about U.S phone calls or e-mails.
 
But the more serious lapses include unauthorized access to intercepted communications, the distribution of protected content and the use of automated systems without built-in safeguards to prevent unlawful surveillance.
 
The May 2012 audit, intended for the agency’s top leaders, counts only incidents at the NSA’s Fort Meade headquarters and other ­facilities in the Washington area. Three government officials, speak­ing on the condition of anonymity to discuss classified matters, said the number would be substantially higher if it included other NSA operating units and regional collection centers.
 
Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who did not receive a copy of the 2012 audit until The Post asked her staff about it, said in a statement late Thursday that the committee “can and should do more to independently verify that NSA’s operations are appropriate, and its reports of compliance incidents are accurate.”
 
Despite the quadrupling of the NSA’s oversight staff after a series of significant violations in 2009, the rate of infractions increased throughout 2011 and early 2012. An NSA spokesman declined to disclose whether the trend has continued since last year.
 
One major problem is largely unpreventable, the audit says, because current operations rely on technology that cannot quickly determine whether a foreign mobile phone has entered the United States.
 
In what appears to be one of the most serious violations, the NSA diverted large volumes of international data passing through fiber-optic cables in the United States into a repository where the material could be stored temporarily for processing and selection.
The operation to obtain what the agency called “multiple communications transactions” collected and commingled U.S. and foreign e-mails, according to an article in SSO News, a top-secret internal newsletter of the NSA’s Special Source Operations unit. NSA lawyers told the court that the agency could not practicably filter out the communications of Americans.
 
In October 2011, months after the program got underway, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court ruled that the collection effort was unconstitutional. The court said that the methods used were “deficient on statutory and constitutional grounds,” according to a top-secret summary of the opinion, and it ordered the NSA to comply with standard privacy protections or stop the program.

James R. Clapper Jr., the director of national intelligence, has acknowledged that the court found the NSA in breach of the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures, but the Obama administration has fought a Freedom of Information lawsuit that seeks the opinion.
Generally, the NSA reveals nothing in public about its errors and infractions. The unclassified versions of the administration’s semiannual reports to Congress feature blacked-out pages under the headline “Statistical Data Relating to Compliance Incidents.”

Members of Congress may read the unredacted documents, but only in a special secure room, and they are not allowed to take notes. Fewer than 10 percent of lawmakers employ a staff member who has the security clearance to read the reports and provide advice about their meaning and significance.
 
The limited portions of the reports that can be read by the public acknowledge “a small number of compliance incidents.”
Under NSA auditing guidelines, the incident count does not usually disclose the number of Americans affected.
“What you really want to know, I would think, is how many innocent U.S. person communications are, one, collected at all, and two, subject to scrutiny,” said Julian Sanchez, a research scholar and close student of the NSA at the Cato Institute.
 
The documents provided by Snowden offer only glimpses of those questions. Some reports make clear that an unauthorized search produced no records. But a single “incident” in February 2012 involved the unlawful retention of 3,032 files that the surveillance court had ordered the NSA to destroy, according to the May 2012 audit. Each file contained an undisclosed number of telephone call records.
 
One of the documents sheds new light on a statement by NSA Director Keith B. Alexander last year that “we don’t hold data on U.S. citizens.”
Some Obama administration officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity, have defended Alexander with assertions that the agency’s internal definition of “data” does not cover “metadata” such as the trillions of American call records that the NSA is now known to have collected and stored since 2006. Those records include the telephone numbers of the parties and the times and durations of conversations, among other details, but not their content or the names of callers.
 
The NSA’s authoritative def­inition of data includes those call records. “Signals Intelligence Management Directive 421,” which is quoted in secret oversight and auditing guidelines, states that “raw SIGINT data . . . includes, but is not limited to, unevaluated and/or unminimized transcripts, gists, facsimiles, telex, voice, and some forms of computer-generated data, such as call event records and other Digital Network Intelligence (DNI) metadata as well as DNI message text.”
 
In the case of the collection effort that confused calls placed from Washington with those placed from Egypt, it is unclear what the NSA meant by a “large number” of intercepted calls. A spokesman declined to discuss the matter.
 
The NSA has different reporting requirements for each branch of government and each of its legal authorities. The “202” collection was deemed irrelevant to any of them. “The issue pertained to Metadata ONLY so there were no defects to report,” according to the author of the secret memo from March 2013.
The large number of database query incidents, which involve previously collected communications, confirms long-standing suspicions that the NSA’s vast data banks — with code names such as MARINA, PINWALE and XKEYSCORE — house a considerable volume of information about Americans. Ordinarily the identities of people in the United States are masked, but intelligence “customers” may request unmasking, either one case at a time or in standing orders.

In dozens of cases, NSA personnel made careless use of the agency’s extraordinary powers, according to individual auditing reports. One team of analysts in Hawaii, for example, asked a system called DISHFIRE to find any communications that mentioned both the Swedish manufacturer Ericsson and “radio” or “radar” — a query that could just as easily have collected on people in the United States as on their Pakistani military target.
 
The NSA uses the term “incidental” when it sweeps up the records of an American while targeting a foreigner or a U.S. person who is believed to be involved in terrorism. Official guidelines for NSA personnel say that kind of incident, pervasive under current practices, “does not constitute a . . . violation” and “does not have to be reported” to the NSA inspector general for inclusion in quarterly reports to Congress. Once added to its databases, absent other restrictions, the communications of Americans may be searched freely.
 
In one required tutorial, NSA collectors and analysts are taught to fill out oversight forms without giving “extraneous information” to “our FAA overseers.” FAA is a reference to the FISA Amendments Act of 2008, which granted broad new authorities to the NSA in exchange for regular audits from the Justice Department and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and periodic reports to Congress and the surveillance court.
 
Using real-world examples, the “Target Analyst Rationale Instructions” explain how NSA employees should strip out details and substitute generic descriptions of the evidence and analysis behind their targeting choices.
“I realize you can read those words a certain way,” said the high-ranking NSA official who spoke with White House authority, but the instructions were not intended to withhold information from auditors. “Think of a book of individual recipes,” he said. Each target “has a short, concise description,” but that is “not a substitute for the full recipe that follows, which our overseers also have access to.”

Labels: , ,

Barack Obama’s Surveillance Revisions Intentionally Omit Limits On Warrantless Email Searches! Surprised?

Obama’s surveillance revisions omit limits on warrantless email searches

The flags at the National Security Agency's Threat Operations Center in Ft. Meade, Maryland.

In pledging to make changes that could curtail the federal government’s ability to spy on Americans, President Barack Obama failed to address calls by lawmakers and experts to overhaul a law that allows the National Security Agency to search vast databases of individual Americans’ emails without court warrants.

Some lawmakers, technology organizations and civil liberty groups had urged Obama and his top aides to end – or at least limit – those searches at two meetings at the White House last week as the president prepared proposals to dispel criticism of the NSA surveillance programs, according to several people familiar with the sessions.
“There are a lot of questions that the government has to answer about that particular program, and it was disappointing and surprising that Obama failed to mention it” at a news conference Friday, said Jameel Jaffer, the deputy legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union, which was represented at the meetings.

Instead, Obama called on Congress to change the USA Patriot Act, which increased the government’s ability to gather intelligence after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, and the secret court that oversees NSA surveillance programs.

Lawmakers and advocates applauded the president’s first significant comments on altering the programs, but they criticized his actions as being short on specifics and ignoring Section 702 of the 2008 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Amendments.
Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., who’s proposed changes to the programs, praised Obama but said he hoped the president would provide specific ideas to Congress or at least offer input on existing legislation. “My hope is there will be more,” he said.
Obama’s remarks came amid rising public consternation over the NSA’s programs after leaks of top-secret documents by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden. The documents showed the NSA is collecting the telephone records of tens of millions of Verizon customers under Section 215 of the Patriot Act, as well as emails through nine companies, including tech giants Microsoft, Yahoo, Google and Facebook, under Section 702 of the FISA Amendments.

Trevor Timm, a digital rights activist with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a privacy advocacy group, said Obama had no choice but to launch a “public relations campaign” in light of the widespread criticism. “He had to do something,” he said. “He was trying to get out of it the easiest way he can.”

Obama’s proposals came after Chief of Staff Denis McDonough and general counsel Kathy Ruemmler met Aug. 6 with a host of groups, including the Electronic Privacy Information Center and organizations that represent Internet companies, according to people familiar with the meetings. Two days later, Obama met with the CEOs of major communications firms, including Apple, AT&T and Google, they said.

Obama and his staff also spoke to or heard from members of Congress on 35 occasions, including a meeting Aug. 1 between the president and nearly a dozen lawmakers. The White House declined to name those the administration consulted.

Many groups declined to comment on what the White House had asked to be private meetings, but others said administration officials had listened to their concerns about the Patriot Act, FISA Amendments and the secret court.
Gregory Nojeim, the director of the Project on Freedom, Security and Technology at the Center for Democracy and Technology, which was represented at the Aug. 6 meeting, said Obama’s remarks should have addressed Section 702. “His talk was a good start,” he said, “but it does not address bulk collection overseas.”
“It’s not nearly enough,” said Sherwin Siy, the vice president of legal affairs at Public Knowledge, which promotes Internet openness and also was represented at the meeting.
At his news conference, Obama said he still backed the surveillance programs but was trying to strike a balance between protecting Americans and guarding against potential abuse.
“I don’t have an interest . . . in doing anything other than making sure that where we can prevent a terrorist attack, where we can get information ahead of time, that we’re able to carry out that critical task,” he said.

He said he’d declassify documents about NSA programs, create a website to release information, name an NSA civil liberties and privacy officer and appoint a task force of outside experts to review policies. Civil liberties groups criticized the task force because it will report to James Clapper, the director of national intelligence, who’s been accused of lying to Congress about the programs.

The White House declined this week to release specific changes Obama supports in the laws. “He did not make clear the reforms he wants to see, but wants to engage with the Congress,” said Caitlin Hayden, a spokeswoman for the National Security Council.

Hayden said that most of what Obama referred to in his remarks, including the review group, would apply to both Sections 215 and 702, even though the president asked Congress to change only the former.

But among the greatest concerns of privacy groups and lawmakers is Section 702, which Congress passed after revelations that the George W. Bush administration had eavesdropped on Americans’ communications without court warrants in a bid to unearth al Qaida members and sympathizers in the United States.

Section 702 allows the director of national intelligence and the attorney general to issue yearlong blanket authorizations to the NSA to obtain “foreign intelligence information” by targeting the communications of foreigners “reasonably believed” to be outside the country.

The law cannot be used to “intentionally” target U.S. citizens or “any person known to be in the United States,” according to a June 8 fact sheet issued by Clapper’s office. But a secret document that Snowden leaked to The Guardian newspaper showed that the NSA may search – without court warrants – the emails of individual Americans “incidentally” swept up in the monitoring of foreign targets.
Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., has expressed alarm over what he calls Section 702’s “back-door searches loophole,” and he criticized Obama for failing to address it.
The loophole “potentially allows for the warrantless searches of Americans’ phone calls and emails,” he said in a statement. “I believe that this provision requires significant reforms.”
While welcoming Obama’s proposed changes, Wyden upbraided the administration for “not fully” acknowledging the extent to which the NSA has violated secret court orders “and the spirit of the law.”

The Justice Department, in a motion filed last week in a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, said it would release a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court order and another document outlining those violations next week.
"I am still concerned that the DNI has been less than forthcoming about the degree to which the government has collected data on innocent American citizens," Sen. Tom Udall, D-N.M., said Wednesday in a statement.
"I have been calling for an independent investigation by the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board on the impact the dragnet programs have had on Americans' constitutional rights. I want to see the report on the board's findings."

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/08/14/199404/obamas-surveillance-revisions.html#storylink=cpy

Labels: ,

Friday, August 09, 2013

POTUS Barack Obama Calls For Changes To Patriot Act, Surveillance Procedures. But Do You Trust The Man On It? Watch.

Tuesday, August 06, 2013

Tell Congress to rein in NSA, Otherwise We Are Growing Our Own GESTAPO In America. Adolph Hitler Will Be Envious!

Tell Congress to rein in NSA

Digital dragnet not making us safer

The disclosures began exactly two months ago. Whistle blower Edward Snowden revealed the National Security Agency's excesses: warrantless collection of American phone calls, collusion with major Internet companies for online data and extensive cyberwarfare and hacking operations. But while Snowden recently received temporary asylum in Russia, ordinary Americans have little respite.

With Congress in recess and at home this month, citizens should urge their lawmakers to act on Snowden's revelations by restoring congressional oversight of domestic spying, if not abolishing it altogether.

There simply is no justification for the NSA's infringement.
We are not blanket opponents of all electronic surveillance; there is a place for specified surveillance of foreign targets and even Americans, if individual warrants, as constitutionally guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment, are issued. In addition to the serious constitutional questions, another glaring problem with spying on Americans without warrants is that it has not netted significant results.

NSA Deputy Director John Inglis admitted to Congress last Wednesday that "at most one plot might have been disrupted by the bulk records collection alone."

And Sen. Patrick Leahy, chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, reviewed a classified list of the terrorist plots uncovered and remarked that he was "not convinced" by the results of the domestic spying programs. "If this program is not effective, it must end," he said.

Staunch supporters will point to this weekend's embassy closings — the result of intercepted messages between senior al-Qaida leaders — as somehow justification for granting the NSA a blank check. But a lawful intelligence program working as intended does not justify all intelligence programs, especially those that stomp on constitutional rights without yielding useful information.

More troubling is the fact that members of Congress were deliberately left in the dark about the programs. Contrary to the administration's laughable claims of congressional oversight, these programs were not debated or discussed publicly. Instead, President Barack Obama invoked a wildly out of context provision of the Patriot Act to enact programs that most members of Congress know nothing about. Members of the intelligence committees, the few members of Congress who are actually briefed fully on the programs, are barred from discussing abuses with the public.

The courts are no better. The Federal Intelligence Surveillance Court, often referred to as the FISA Court, rubber stamps nearly every request made by the government — denying only 11 of the 33,949 requests made from 1979 to 2012. Until recently, the Department of Justice served as the headquarters for the court.
Of the current 11 justices, appointed by the chief justice of the Supreme Court, 10 were appointed by Republican presidents. The judges hear no opposing arguments. The court was intended to only sign off on specific warrants but granted itself the authority to issue opinions, all classified, to allow the NSA to collect data on every American.
Intelligence agencies should not be run by executive fiat. The disastrous Bush legacy of Guantanamo Bay, extrajudicial renditions and torture is a testament to that. Many Democrats who criticized President George W. Bush's extreme policies seem hesitant to criticize Obama, who has only expanded the policies to include targeted assassinations of American citizens and troubling pursuits of journalists.
Unconstitutional executive powers, especially when oversight by the other branches of government is nonexistent, ought to be condemned, no matter which party holds the White House.

Read more here: http://www.kentucky.com/2013/08/06/2751179/tell-congress-to-rein-in-nsa.html#storylink=cpy

Labels: , , ,

Thursday, August 01, 2013

9/11 Caused Us To Create An American Gestapo, The NSA. But Those Who Give Up Freedom For A Little Security Deserve Neither!

Labels: , ,

Thursday, July 25, 2013

We Congratulate The U. S. House Of Representives For Limiting Military Involvement In Egypt And Syria, Consiatent With War Powers Act.

With little argument, House limits U.S. military involvement in Syria, Egypt


With little argument, the House of Representatives approved measures Wednesday that would prevent the Obama administration from spending money on U.S. military operations in Syria without consulting Congress and would forbid funding U.S. military or paramilitary operations in Egypt.

The measures, part of the House’s $598 billion defense bill, were supposed to be contentious issues exposing bipartisan rifts between interventionists who want to give Obama a free hand in dealing with the civil war in Syria and unrest in Egypt and war-weary lawmakers concerned that U.S. troops will be dragged into more military actions.

But both amendments were approved on voice votes with only scant dissent.

On Syria, lawmakers passed an amendment by Rep. Trey Radel, R-Fla., that would forbid any military action in Syria if it violates the War Powers Resolution – which requires the president to consult Congress before committing U.S. forces to battle or placing them in situations where hostilities are imminent.

The Radel amendment does not address the contentious issue of providing weapons to the Syrian rebels, whose campaign to topple President Bashar Assad is made up of as many as 1,200 largely independent groups, including some that are openly affiliated with al Qaida. Congressional intelligence committees recently signed off on an Obama administration proposal to have the CIA funnel unspecified arms and training to rebels aligned with the moderate Supreme Military Council, led by a defected Syrian general, Salim Idriss.

But the wording of the amendment would apply to setting up a no-fly zone or using U.S. ships to launch attacks on sites in Syria, and the debate showed that deeper military involvement in Syria is opposed by an unusual House coalition of conservative Republicans and liberal Democrats.
“I believe without a shadow of a doubt this is one of the most insane policies that borders on madness – the United States to give funding, training and arms most likely to al Qaida in Syria doesn’t make any sense,” said Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn. “This is absolute madness.”
Rep. Peter Welch, D-Vt., agreed, calling the situation in Syria “chaotic.”
“Distinguishing between the good rebels and the bad rebels is impossible,” Welch said on the House floor. “The notion that we can have a micromanaged approach and pick the good guys, and arm them, and not have any reasonable . . . expectation that the arms will get into bad hands I think is naive.”
Welch added that Congress has the responsibility to weigh in before U.S. troops are sent into harm’s way.

“We have a job to do under the Constitution,” he said.

The Obama administration last month notified Congress under the War Powers Resolution that a detachment of 700 U.S. troops who’d been participating in war games in Jordan would remain in that country “until the security situation becomes such that it is no longer needed.” The detachment includes Patriot anti-missile systems and fighter aircraft, the White House notification said.

The Egypt amendment by Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., would prohibit the Department of Defense from using money authorized in the defense bill to fund military operations in Egypt or to fund individuals, groups or organizations engaged in paramilitary activity.
“Since our national security interests in Syria and Egypt are unclear, we risk giving money and military assistance to our enemies,” Massie said when he introduced his measure last week. “The Constitution prohibits the president from unilaterally spending American taxpayer dollars on military operations without congressional approval.”

The Egypt vote occurred as the Obama administration suspended delivery of four F-16 fighter jets to Egypt this week. A Pentagon spokesman said that the United States values its relationship with Egypt but that the delay was necessary as Egypt remains divided over the military’s removal from office of Mohammed Morsi, the country’s first democratically elected president.
Pentagon spokesman George Little told reporters Wednesday that the United States no longer believes it is “appropriate to move forward with the delivery.”

At the State Department, spokeswoman Jen Psaki used nearly the exact same wording to explain the decision. “Given the current situation in Egypt, we do not believe it is appropriate to move forward with the delivery of the F-16s at this time,” she said.

Labels: , , ,

Wednesday, July 24, 2013

Meeting Fire With Fire: Vigilantes Target Boko Haram In Nigeria.

Nigeria's vigilantes take on Boko Haram

Nigeria under attack

Vigilante groups have formed in the northern Nigerian city of Maiduguri to fight the militant Islamist group Boko Haram, a move welcomed by the military as it battles to quell the insurgency, as the BBC's Will Ross reports.
Military checkpoints have been a common sight in the northern Nigerian city of Maiduguri - the birthplace of the militant Islamist group Boko Haram - for several years.

But these days the people asking the questions at the ubiquitous roadblocks are often not in uniform.

They are civilians who are adding their muscle to the fight against Boko Haram, which is waging a military campaign to create an Islamic state across Nigeria.
More than 2,000 people have been killed since it launched an insurgency in 2009.
"When the situation became too bad to endure, we decided to find the Boko Haram members ourselves," said Mohammed, who was stopping and searching cars at one of the checkpoints.
Map locator
"Whenever we see them we arrest them and hand them over to the army. Some of us know these people," he said, adding that he and his colleagues are not paid for the work.

The vigilantes started appearing on the streets in early June, after a state of emergency was declared in May and thousands of extra troops sent to the area to wipe out the militants.
The civilian-run checkpoints have since spread across almost every district of the mainly Muslim town. They are mostly manned by teenage boys and young men in their twenties but there are also some women searching female passengers.

Mohammed said that when they detain a suspected militant, "we bring the holy Koran and then ask him to swear on it. If he's lying we are sure he will die".
'Idiotic thieves' The vigilantes all carry crude weapons; sticks, machetes, knives and metal pipes.

Considering the

"It is thanks to the protection of God - God is our guide whenever you do something with good intention you will definitely succeed," said Mohammed, who normally works as a lorry driver.
"If we are allowed to operate without any interference, definitely we will bring an end to this problem," he said.

His colleague Salisu, normally a bricklayer, said that the vigilantes, and not Boko Haram, are carrying out the work of Allah.
"It is a mission for the sake of Allah.
"If we refuse to expose these irresponsible archaic hypocritical idiotic thieves, then we will face the wrath of the Koran."

The Nigerian military Joint Task Force (JTF) has welcomed the presence of the vigilantes on the streets of Maiduguri.
"These gestures are commendable as it underscores the desired positive civil-military collaboration necessary for the success of the ongoing internal security operation," said Brig-Gen Chris Olukolade just after civilians had started appearing at the roadblocks.

It is not clear if the vigilantes, also known as the civilian JTF, will later be armed with guns by the government.
Many of the soldiers deployed in northern Nigeria are from other parts of the country and do not know the Kanuri language, the most common used in Maiduguri.
'Guns in coffins' "Without knowing the environment and the people, building confidence and establishing a presence is very difficult," said Kole Shettima, chairman of the Centre of Democracy and Development in Abuja.

Boko Haram at a glance

Boko Haram leader Abubakar Shekau
  • Founded in 2002
  • Official Arabic name, Jama'atu Ahlis Sunna Lidda'awati wal-Jihad, means "People Committed to the Propagation of the Prophet's Teachings and Jihad"
  • Initially focused on opposing Western education
  • Nicknamed Boko Haram, a phrase in the local Hausa language meaning, "Western education is forbidden"
  • Launches military operations in 2009 to create an Islamic state across Nigeria
  • Founding leader Mohammed Yusuf killed in same year in police custody
  • Succeeded by Abubakar Shekau, who is said to be well-versed in theology
  • Suspected to have split into rival factions in 2012
"The vigilantes know the local population and can help fish out the insurgents."
"But increased conflict between the vigilantes and Boko Haram is possible and this would further militarise the society and make it extremely difficult to see and end to the violence," he said.
"A new group of young people who may get armed could then try to get what they can out of the situation. They may themselves become a danger and mete out their own form of justice."
There are already some reports from Maiduguri of vigilantes killing people, rather than handing suspects over to the army.

In order to sidestep the tighter security presence in Maiduguri, the Islamist militants have diversified their tactics.
Earlier this month several suspected Boko Haram members disguised themselves as women.
They hid their faces behind veils and their guns beneath full-length robes.
Local reports from Maiduguri said their mission was thwarted and soldiers shot several of them dead.
In June eyewitnesses said Islamist insurgents shot dead 13 people in an apparent reprisal attack on members of a vigilante group.
They had sneaked their weapons into the area by pretending to be on their way to a burial, hiding their weapons in the coffin.

The recent attacks on schools have also proved how vulnerable the local population is. Over the past month 48 students and seven teachers have been killed in four attacks in northern Nigeria.
In a video on the internet, Boko Haram leader Abubakar Shekau said his group supported the recent attacks on schools, although he denied being behind the attack on Mamudo in Yobe State where at least 29 students were killed.

There are dangers associated with relying on vigilante groups to offer security for the population.
But as Islamist militants seem determined to attack softer targets, the vigilantes could play a vital role in trying to thwart attacks and save lives, some analysts say.

Labels: ,