Tag Archives: national security state
It wasn’t just Republicans, Democrats also voted to shut down debate on Trump administration’s surveillance powers
Restriction aside, critics have said the bill does more harm than good because it codifies a legally questionable practice into law.
“It’s truly an Orwellian moment.”
DN! “Philando Can Be Any of Us”: Black Lives Matter Protests Acquittal of Officer in Minnesota Killing
When the justice system does not work. Police accountability.
A program that he exposed was later confirmed by the NSA to have been a waste of over a billion dollars.
Surveys for the last five years have shown that the American public would prefer to see a cut in defense spending. In 2016, people responded that they do not want funding for nuclear weapons increased.
With the advent of the National Security State many articles related to surveillance, freedom of speech, and civil liberties appear routinely. Links provided.
John Kiriakou | Hillary Clinton Email Investigation Shows Inherent Unfairness in U.S. Justice System
First, I want to be clear that I’m not angry at Hillary Clinton personally. I don’t like Hillary. I don’t support her. I don’t trust her. I don’t think she would be a good or trustworthy president. But that’s not the issue here. The issue is the inherent unfairness in the system.
The FBI’s ongoing, long-term incompetence has led to the deaths of far too many Americans. San Bernardino and Orlando are only the beginning. If the FBI can’t do its job, if its only counterterrorism successes are when it entraps hapless idiots who don’t know any better and who never had any intention of committing a terrorist act, it should be scrapped.
O’Brien: less than 100 people have degrees in Middle Eastern studies. Further to that, less than 1 percent identify themselves as Arab linguists. So this whole prevalent, common notion that after 9/11 the national security community had a boots-on-the-ground about-face and was interested in human intelligence, in human collection of intelligence, as well as language and cultural studies, is absolutely false.
As the American people were demobilized from war and left, in the post-9/11 era, with the single duty of eternally thanking and praising our “warriors” (or our “wounded warriors”), war itself was being transformed into a new kind of American entertainment spectacle. In the 1980s, in response to the Vietnam experience, the Pentagon began to take responsibility not just for making war but for producing it.
Feffer: in basement offices in Washington, DC, secure locations in northern Virginia, and listening posts in suburban Maryland, the high priests and priestesses of a secretive cult are quietly toasting the president for a very different legacy: his fierce defense of a lawless and destructive fraternity that has only grown more powerful on his watch.
Greenberg: Given the staggering array of tools granted to the national security state domestically since 9/11, it’s a wonder (not to say a tragic embarrassment) that such killings occur again and again. They are clearly not being prevented and at least part of the reason may lie in the national security state’s ongoing focus on “counterterrorism,” that is, on Islamic extremism.
The NSA began in absolute secrecy and has remained that way most of it’s life. How does an institution like exist within the framework of an open society and is it a threat to the very values it claims to be protecting?
From the article: Around the world, when a person gets online to do anything — write an email, post to a social network, browse the web or play a video game — there’s a decent chance that the Internet traffic her device sends and receives is getting collected and processed by one of XKEYSCORE’s hundreds of servers scattered across the globe.
Boardman: The mindless rush to reinstate government police powers undreamed of in the Constitution was a bitterly comic charade of American democracy. Some now celebrate the USA Freedom Act as “a cultural turning point for the nation.” Others condemn the USA Freedom Act as “a significant weakening of the tools” to protect the country. People on all sides claim to “welcome the debate” on national security.
Levinson: Fear can be a useful political tool because people who believe they’re surrounded by enemies are primed to accept almost anything. When you feel you’re losing control, the response is often to try to get more control, which is part of the appeal of the BDSP crew, with their exaltation of swarms of people in uniforms equipped with tanks and guns.
Engelhardt: don’t for a second think that the American political system isn’t being rewritten on the run by interested parties in Congress, our present crop of billionaires, corporate interests, lobbyists, the Pentagon, and the officials of the national security state.