CitizenTID
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 9 Feb 2013
- Messages
- 5,053
Having searched the forum, besides early reactions, I can't see a discussion on the implications of the revelations from the Snowden case. Since then, CitizenFour (a codename he used, he must be a blue?), a docu-film by one of the journalists he reached out to and who documented the process, has been released. It's quite relevant to the context of the current US election too.
The film itself (won an Oscar last year) more than deserves it's own thread - I can't recommend watching it (below) enough. Despite knowing about the case and having watched previous stuff on it, I was completely astounded watching this; it includes more than the initial revelations, providing a summary and context instead of having to piece together a picture of the case from various sources. Your watching real footage of an intelligence agent on the run, so no need to rely on a filmmaker's later interpretation.
I believe this case will prove to be one of the most important points in modern history. Not to take away from the experience watching it, I've included the highlights/implications of the revelations in a spoiler below - they do not confine themselves to "the individual" a.k.a. your porn habits; they are actually very serious on multiple fronts.
For further context as to how Snowden found himself in Russia on asylum, the extent to which the U.S. went to catch him and the foreign relations surrounding the case, the hour long Terminal F is also a good watch.
The film itself (won an Oscar last year) more than deserves it's own thread - I can't recommend watching it (below) enough. Despite knowing about the case and having watched previous stuff on it, I was completely astounded watching this; it includes more than the initial revelations, providing a summary and context instead of having to piece together a picture of the case from various sources. Your watching real footage of an intelligence agent on the run, so no need to rely on a filmmaker's later interpretation.
I believe this case will prove to be one of the most important points in modern history. Not to take away from the experience watching it, I've included the highlights/implications of the revelations in a spoiler below - they do not confine themselves to "the individual" a.k.a. your porn habits; they are actually very serious on multiple fronts.
The following is what I picked up from the film:
- The NSA, has an all access stream of user data/activity from many web applications including Facebook, Yahoo, Google services, WhatsApp etc. as well as phone communications and other sources. They run this through intelligence systems from which they can query searches (e.g. names) which bring up all associated data. If on a watchlist, it can bring it up in real-time; there are 1.2m people on the NSA watchlist at various levels. They have big internationally located facilities, inc. in the U.K. and Germany. They helped build surveillance systems for (at least) the U.K. (probably other NATO countries too), and in return get a feed of all that data. To act on data of U.S. citizens, they need court permission but get it every time, for people outside the U.S. they don't have to ask anyone permission. Oh, and they have a whole list of surveillance drones on people that employees can live stream at anytime. Without it being officially acknowledged what is meant to be an American defence agency, has all access to the digital communications of citizens across the globe, allowing them the capability to spy specifically on you without any kind of warrant or your government's specific consent. Even with metadata (e.g. who you called and where rather than the content), they can piece together the story over time.
- Motions to allow this programme were made within a few days-a week after 9/11 in the name of national defence. So not only did 9/11 justify an invasion of Iraq/Afghanistan and subsequent endeavours in the middle east, it allowed the USA to build a mass surveillance system across the world. I'll leave this one for the 9/11 truthers.
- Snowden mentions they can hot-mic VoIP phones (phones that use network technology, commonly used in hotels or places of work), meaning they can listen in as long as the device is turned on/plugged-in - you don't have to be on a call). No doubt they can hot-mic your mobile phone.
- They spied on Angela Merkel's private mobile device. They've already used it to spy on even their closest allies. This enables them (ironically) to interfere in foreign elections. Another country, one which corporations hold a lot of sway over, with a lot of capability to interfere in your country's election and other political or even defence matters. Ironically, they charged Snowden with espionage (despite the fact he wasn't spying for another nation).
- It's not entirely clear, but what i took from it, was that the chain of command to order a drone strike goes such as Employee -> Senior -> Senior's Senior -> President - or something similar. What I got from this was that, the President can order a drone strike without any checks and balances; I presume, legally, he has to agree with someone such as congress or military advisors in this, but the law is being ignored. Much, in the same way laws have been ignored to allow the NSA to collect customer data without their knowledge (there have been court cases that kept/keep getting stalled). Sounds very much like part of the US governmental system has gone rogue from accountability to US/international law and to the people.
So why should you care your being watched? Well, it's clear the USA is in a preliminary economic battle with the China/India/Brazil/Russia spheres. TTIP, the proposed deal with the EU they have forcefully been trying to get through, is all about opening the EU to being firmly within the US economic sphere of influence. It very much seems we're entering a period of economic warfare. Now, say your an international business with American competitors (bearing in mind the influence of corporations in US govt. that is there for all to see) and you use mainstream communications, your chances don't look good when it's in US govt. interests that US businesses succeed (especially if they paid for certain political campaigns). Or, say your an investigative journalist looking into human rights violations by the US (e.g. Guantanamo) or reporting on things against their agenda... as documented in CitizenFour, she herself has been targeted by the NSA for reporting on the Iraq War; I saw the other day, a journalist reporting on a protest against running a pipeline through sacred native land was facing 45 years for rioting she didn't partake in and had her footage confiscated and not given back. Say you organise Black Lives Matter? You start to see, censorship becomes very easy for them; when you don't have privacy, your ability to organise demonstrations and the like are under threat.
Bearing in mind this alongside their constant warring and meddling, destabilising other countries to install US puppets, you start to very quickly get the impression the US govt. is trying to take over the world. When they have the potential to blackmail UK politicians and influence our elections, laws/policies through cyber subterfuge, they are taking away power from the UK to rule itself and the voice of the UK population - this is not from an inside source, this is a foreign power! So, why would UK intelligence services, or those that give the ok (e.g. Prime Minister) be prepared to compromise all of this? I can only think they have sold out their country further down the line in a time they will not be alive to face the consequences, for personal benefits - relations/wealth (indirect bribery?) whilst they are alive, and they don't necessarily realise it.
Yes, you may see security and defence benefits if an "allied" power takes over the world, including if they managed to install a Russian puppet at some point, the threat of a nuclear war extinguishes, but would you trust a country that has a terrible nuclear/chemical warfare record with that task? One that gave you no voice in the matter. Once their corporate, greed fuelled system would have taken control of every nation - there is only the population to turn their attention to and no competetive nation to defend your rights. Additionally, if you are a 9/11 truther, do you think they'd commit one atrocity on home soil to gain the necessary legislation and public opinion to enable the path to achieving everything I've just pointed out? It makes you wonder.
- The NSA, has an all access stream of user data/activity from many web applications including Facebook, Yahoo, Google services, WhatsApp etc. as well as phone communications and other sources. They run this through intelligence systems from which they can query searches (e.g. names) which bring up all associated data. If on a watchlist, it can bring it up in real-time; there are 1.2m people on the NSA watchlist at various levels. They have big internationally located facilities, inc. in the U.K. and Germany. They helped build surveillance systems for (at least) the U.K. (probably other NATO countries too), and in return get a feed of all that data. To act on data of U.S. citizens, they need court permission but get it every time, for people outside the U.S. they don't have to ask anyone permission. Oh, and they have a whole list of surveillance drones on people that employees can live stream at anytime. Without it being officially acknowledged what is meant to be an American defence agency, has all access to the digital communications of citizens across the globe, allowing them the capability to spy specifically on you without any kind of warrant or your government's specific consent. Even with metadata (e.g. who you called and where rather than the content), they can piece together the story over time.
- Motions to allow this programme were made within a few days-a week after 9/11 in the name of national defence. So not only did 9/11 justify an invasion of Iraq/Afghanistan and subsequent endeavours in the middle east, it allowed the USA to build a mass surveillance system across the world. I'll leave this one for the 9/11 truthers.
- Snowden mentions they can hot-mic VoIP phones (phones that use network technology, commonly used in hotels or places of work), meaning they can listen in as long as the device is turned on/plugged-in - you don't have to be on a call). No doubt they can hot-mic your mobile phone.
- They spied on Angela Merkel's private mobile device. They've already used it to spy on even their closest allies. This enables them (ironically) to interfere in foreign elections. Another country, one which corporations hold a lot of sway over, with a lot of capability to interfere in your country's election and other political or even defence matters. Ironically, they charged Snowden with espionage (despite the fact he wasn't spying for another nation).
- It's not entirely clear, but what i took from it, was that the chain of command to order a drone strike goes such as Employee -> Senior -> Senior's Senior -> President - or something similar. What I got from this was that, the President can order a drone strike without any checks and balances; I presume, legally, he has to agree with someone such as congress or military advisors in this, but the law is being ignored. Much, in the same way laws have been ignored to allow the NSA to collect customer data without their knowledge (there have been court cases that kept/keep getting stalled). Sounds very much like part of the US governmental system has gone rogue from accountability to US/international law and to the people.
So why should you care your being watched? Well, it's clear the USA is in a preliminary economic battle with the China/India/Brazil/Russia spheres. TTIP, the proposed deal with the EU they have forcefully been trying to get through, is all about opening the EU to being firmly within the US economic sphere of influence. It very much seems we're entering a period of economic warfare. Now, say your an international business with American competitors (bearing in mind the influence of corporations in US govt. that is there for all to see) and you use mainstream communications, your chances don't look good when it's in US govt. interests that US businesses succeed (especially if they paid for certain political campaigns). Or, say your an investigative journalist looking into human rights violations by the US (e.g. Guantanamo) or reporting on things against their agenda... as documented in CitizenFour, she herself has been targeted by the NSA for reporting on the Iraq War; I saw the other day, a journalist reporting on a protest against running a pipeline through sacred native land was facing 45 years for rioting she didn't partake in and had her footage confiscated and not given back. Say you organise Black Lives Matter? You start to see, censorship becomes very easy for them; when you don't have privacy, your ability to organise demonstrations and the like are under threat.
Bearing in mind this alongside their constant warring and meddling, destabilising other countries to install US puppets, you start to very quickly get the impression the US govt. is trying to take over the world. When they have the potential to blackmail UK politicians and influence our elections, laws/policies through cyber subterfuge, they are taking away power from the UK to rule itself and the voice of the UK population - this is not from an inside source, this is a foreign power! So, why would UK intelligence services, or those that give the ok (e.g. Prime Minister) be prepared to compromise all of this? I can only think they have sold out their country further down the line in a time they will not be alive to face the consequences, for personal benefits - relations/wealth (indirect bribery?) whilst they are alive, and they don't necessarily realise it.
Yes, you may see security and defence benefits if an "allied" power takes over the world, including if they managed to install a Russian puppet at some point, the threat of a nuclear war extinguishes, but would you trust a country that has a terrible nuclear/chemical warfare record with that task? One that gave you no voice in the matter. Once their corporate, greed fuelled system would have taken control of every nation - there is only the population to turn their attention to and no competetive nation to defend your rights. Additionally, if you are a 9/11 truther, do you think they'd commit one atrocity on home soil to gain the necessary legislation and public opinion to enable the path to achieving everything I've just pointed out? It makes you wonder.
For further context as to how Snowden found himself in Russia on asylum, the extent to which the U.S. went to catch him and the foreign relations surrounding the case, the hour long Terminal F is also a good watch.
Last edited: