You Are, In Fact, Being Watched

[WilliamPitt]

(Image: James Montgomery Flagg; Edited: JR / TO)

You Are, In Fact, Being Watched
By William Rivers Pitt
Truthout | Op-Ed

Wednesday 07 August 2013

(snip)

The cat has fled the bag, folks. The American government is spying on you comprehensively, is using the information they gather on you to jail you if they choose to, and is doing so by laundering secretly-gathered information from one alphabet-soup agency through another and another, to make that information nice and clean for the courts.

Harken to the vacillators: "But it's just terrorists and drug dealers, and it's been going on for 20 years. Why do you care about terrorists and drug dealers, and why are you surprised?"

Sure, yeah, terrorists suck and drug dealers suck, and I'm sure this massive thing that has been unleashed upon the American system of law, and the American people, is totally benign and awesome and only doing good things and stuff.

Let's pretend for a second that we even believe that.

What about tomorrow?

And next year?

And four years from now?

And ten years from now?

How much do you trust the future?

The poet Yeats told us that the best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity. I pray his judgment of the best is wrong, but I know for a stone fact that his understanding of the worst is ruthlessly correct...which means, sure as sunrise, another Dick Cheney will someday hold a seat of power that allows him to direct the incredible weapon of our massive national surveillance state against anyone not properly bathed in the blood of the Lamb.

If they can jail someone based on surveillance-gathered data forwarded surreptitiously to the DEA, why not you? Who knows what "crime" will come to mean in the world our American Taliban Christians would like to create? They already control a third of the federal government, and are gunning - pardon the pun - for the rest, from the counties to the states and on up the line. Imagine if they got another one of their candidates into the White House, or took over the Senate, or managed both in one fell swoop.

If you think it can't happen, you're a damned fool.

So forgive me for being leery of this latest ZOMG ANY MINUTE NOW terror alert. I've been badly used by the people tasked to "keep us safe," as have you. The Reuters report submarined any argument that claims we aren't being comprehensively watched and recorded for the express purpose of punishing us. They are building a future I want no part of, and I would not put it past them to puff up a threat to distract us.

...and, P.S., if by dark chance a bomb does go off somewhere, it begs the question: would the American surveillance state be better able to thwart bombers if it didn't spend its resources surveilling the American people?

The rest: http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/18022-you-are-in-fact-being-watched

[Vinnie From Indy]

1. We are privatizing freedom.

Cheers!

[phantom power]

2. Who knows what "crime" will come to mean?

One day, you wake up and realize you do have something to hide.

[Javaman]

75. Minority report.

"You have been arrested for a future crime".

[Scuba]

3. But, but, there's absolutely no evidence of any spying on Americans. Read that right here on DU.

[Mojorabbit]

29. So did I. It is the meme of the day. nt

[Zorra]

4. Excellent article. Good enough to elevate you to traitor journalist status among

Third Way shills.

Congratulations.

You have succeeded in alarming me, and have made it clear that this issue is, in fact, more serious then I had deduced.

Thanks for the reality check.

[Socal31]

5. Ceiling cat?

[WilliamPitt]

7. Look up.

[HappyMe]

11. Smelly cat

[leftstreet]

6. But Obama said the NSA isn't spying on Americans

Obama To Leno: 'There Is No Spying On Americans'

by Greg Henderson
August 07, 201312:44 AM


President Obama defended the , telling NBC's Jay Leno on Tuesday that: "There is no spying on Americans."

"We don't have a domestic spying program," Obama said on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno. "What we do have is some mechanisms that can track a phone number or an email address that is connected to a terrorist attack. ... That information is useful."

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/08/06/209692380/obama-to-leno-there-is-no-spying-on-americans

DURec

[WillyT]

8. HUGE K & R !!! - Thank You !!!

The Cat... is DEFINITELY out of the bag!

[KoKo]

9. I understand that some have held back...not wanting to get scammed...or

be considered a "CT, Teabagger, Paultard, Cato Libertarian, Scumbag Beck/Jones Advocate, denier of Terra Threats that are Real, Promoter of Torture for all (including Americans) who need to be "Taken Out" because American Security Pre-Empts All, EMO PROG, PACIFIST SCUM, SOCIALIST, COMMUNIST....Anti-American, RACIST/Obama Hater...ANTI GLBT..FUCKING PACIFIST.....and the SHOUTING GET's LOUDER as the EPITHETS GROW!

[KG]

10. of course. and anybody that thinks the security apparatus feels bound by laws, warrants, and

congressional 'oversight' are merely kidding themsleves.

[randome]

12. The Reuters report did not address the question of whether or not data came from foreign sources.

Since that's the NSA's primary responsibility, to monitor foreign communications, it seems like it would be good journalism to ask that simple question.

And if the question was not answered by deadline time, that should be reported.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[KoKo]

13. No matter how many links to articles your fellow DU'ers give you....

the "Persona of the Clueless" dogs you endlessly.

Have you ever thought that your "Counterpoint" actually give folks a good REASON to get Message Across that you never seem to understand.

You are an incredibly useful source for many of us to get "OUR POINT" across in discussion because of your "seeming" cluelessness.

I've Decided you are a DU Treasure...and so I have refrained from using the "Ignore Button" on you...because you are such a delight.

[WilliamPitt]

14. To be fair,

it is an excellent question.

I'd like to know the answer myself.

[randome]

16. Because I think that was an important question to ask?

I'm asking why the question was not asked. Maybe you should ask yourself why you feel unsettled by someone asking a question about a question.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[KoKo]

21. Rhetorical Point...Counter Point.. It's what you do....

's...

Hey...go for it!

[WilliamPitt]

15. +1

Very good question.

[randome]

18. Maybe your credentials would give you enough weight to ask for a follow-up?

Although I'm sure the usual 'cannot comment on any ongoing or past investigations' would be the response.

Too much secrecy, we are all agreed on that.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[Bluenorthwest]

74. My friend Ron Wyden has some very strong credentials and he gets lied to in

the chamber by appointees, by unelected servants. If credentials mattered this entire discussion would not be happening.

[ProSense]

28. Reuters appears to be pulling its information from

outdated documents:

A 350-word entry in the Internal Revenue Manual instructed agents of the U.S. tax agency to omit any reference to tips supplied by the DEA's Special Operations Division, especially from affidavits, court proceedings or investigative files. The entry was published and posted online in 2005 and 2006, and was removed in early 2007. The IRS is among two dozen arms of the government working with the Special Operations Division, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the National Security Agency and the Central Intelligence Agency.

An IRS spokesman had no comment on the entry or on why it was removed from the manual. Reuters recovered the previous editions from the archives of the Westlaw legal database, which is owned by Thomson Reuters Corp, the parent of this news agency.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014559769

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

36. Would that be data laundering?

[99Forever]

17. Thank you Mr Pitt.

Last edited Wed Aug 7, 2013, 09:31 PM - Edit history (1)

Sadly, teh tools that really should listen to this, won't. They are completely and utterly vested into their It's Good If Team Blue Does It and Bad If Team Red Does It partisan crapola to know shit when their guy does it.

[frylock]

19. k to the r

[99th_Monkey]

20. Great post. K & R eom

[Solly Mack]

22. K&R

[KoKo]

23. K&R...!

[cvoogt]

24. but....

TERRA!

[ProSense]

25. U.S. Spy Program Lifts Veil in Court

U.S. Spy Program Lifts Veil in Court

Justice Department Says Prosecution in Terrorist Cases Must Tell Defendants When Surveillance Program Was Used

By DEVLIN BARRETT

The Justice Department acknowledged for the first time in a terrorism prosecution that it needs to tell defendants when sweeping government surveillance is used to build a criminal case against them.

The about-face, contained in a Tuesday court filing, marks another way in which the Obama administration is adjusting to revelations by former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden about phone and Internet surveillance by the NSA. The revelations forced the government to acknowledge publicly aspects of its widespread collection of Internet and phone records, giving critics of such surveillance more legal ammunition to challenge the programs.

The filing suggests a new potential avenue for legal challenges to the surveillance programs.

<...>

Patrick Toomey, a lawyer at the American Civil Liberties Union, called the filing "a very important first step, because it's the government finally owning up to some of its obligations in a way that it hasn't really grappled with up to this point.'' The Justice Department didn't immediately comment.

The change in legal direction also brings government prosecutors in line with statements Solicitor General Donald Verrilli made to the Supreme Court last year...that in cases where a bulk surveillance program led to evidence against criminal defendants in court, those suspects must be notified that the evidence was derived from the surveillance program.

His assertion was an important one, because the high court ultimately adopted his characterization of when notification was required.

- more -

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323854904578638363001746552.html

Note this article appeared a week before the Reuters piece. It also indicates that this is a position that Solicitor General Donald Verrilli took last year.

[ProSense]

30. .

[WilliamPitt]

33. Exactly.

Enjoy your alert. Hope it works out.

[Gravitycollapse]

53. Your post was hidden...but I think it might have been worth it.

[ProSense]

83. It should have been. n/t

[chimpymustgo]

72. Fucking THANK YOU - for SAYING IT!! Great OP, Will.

[ProSense]

82. Figures you would condone such a post. n/t

[Duval]

96. Don't think it will, WRP.

You have championed our Democrats' cause since 2003, that I personally know of. You were spot on when you warned us about "W"'s agenda, and advised us all to be careful of what we say in meetings, on line, etc. I have read your excellent books and I always read your posts. Thank you so much for "being there" for Democracy.

[LondonReign2]

32. +1

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

35. Edward Snowden is a modern day Paul Revere with a thumb drive full of news that Tyranny is coming!

Edward Snowden's Dad Calls Him 'Modern Day Paul Revere'
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/edward-snowdens-dad-calls-modern-day-paul-revere/story?id=19554337

Hmmm... who knew how influential a DU meme could be

[SidDithers]

37. Oh FFS...

Sid

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

39. Edward Snowden is a modern day Paul Revere with a thumb drive full of news that Tyranny is coming!

Edward Snowden's Dad Calls Him 'Modern Day Paul Revere'
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/edward-snowdens-dad-calls-modern-day-paul-revere/story?id=19554337

Hmmm... who knew how influential a DU meme could be

[SidDithers]

42. Oh FFS...

Sid

[Bonobo]

60. You know, you don't need to sign your posts.

That's why there are user names.

[Warren DeMontague]

64. That's why there's the NSA.

They know if you've been sleeping, etc.

They're like Santa... if Santa was going to send a heavily armed SWAT team to Granny's house over that pot brownie in her fridge.

[flpoljunkie]

84. Important to point out this change very likely due to Snowden's whistleblowing.

[Cha]

95. Thanks for the aritlce, ProSense.. my someone's awfully touchy about

their OP. Can't have a whiff of a different opinion. Reminds me a certain agent of snowden's who has a book coming out in March of 2014.

[dkf]

27. Big k&r.

[Faryn Balyncd]

31. Thank you, William Pitt.

[Zorra]

34. KICK

[cherokeeprogressive]

38. K & R

Thank you, Mr. Pitt.

[Warren Stupidity]

40. Kick. Plus the usual memo-whisperers show up, needle Will, and get their desired results.

[Amonester]

43. Uh... drugs are illegal (fortunately, for many, unfortunately for some)

And the President is not a dictator who can wave a magic wand and make the unfortunate 'some' drugs suddenly legal.

The congre$$ can, and won't.

[Waiting For Everyman]

54. Fraud is illegal too, yet the President chose not to prosecute the banksters.

He is the Dept. of Justice's, and the DEA's, and the NSA's, and all the other agencies' direct boss. His helplessness is very selective.

[Waiting For Everyman]

58. It's a-ok to persecute the little people, but the 1% can break laws at will.

Until that is corrected, the law means zip in this country. It is bought and sold, and secret to boot.

Hysterical drug propaganda has been going on since "Reefer Madness" days, and that attitude should've been relegated to the junk heap of history decades ago. To continue criminalizing people and ruining lives over it is absurd. But it's a big money maker for government and its contractors, and so it goes on. To me, that is just (among the many examples of) institutionalized crime.

[Warren Stupidity]

71. Actually the executive could end the stupid war on drugs tomorrow.

The executive branch can't spend money not authorized but it also can not spend authorized money.

[Divernan]

73. Given how the War on Drugs turned out; time for a War on Jobs!

[HardTimes99]

76. Wish there were a DU Irony Award - Well played indeed! - nt

[Amonester]

44. How much can you trust the future?

Remember 1999?

Who would have predicted that a USSC's selected pretzeldent would think his job was to say "You've covered yer ass" to an employee who went as far as disturbing him on his other vacation to his fake ranch just to inform him that bin laden was determined to strike the US?

Who would have predicted that selected pretzeldent's puppetmaster would instruct the AG that torture is NOW legal?

Who could predict NOW that destroying all (hypothetical until proven) domestic spying systems would never come back forever?

A: Nobody.

[gulliver]

45. It is, in fact, all about you.

You knew you were being watched all along, at least you hoped so. And now everyone says it's true. It's awful to have so much...attention. Not only are they paying attention to you, but they are writing it down and recording it. Awful...awful.

And your epidermis is showing and everyone can see it.

[Hydra]

46. Good article Will

And appreciated your response to the Blue Lynx

[Autumn]

47. Thank you Will. You laid it all out.

Rec.

[Oilwellian]

48. Great piece, Will

Privacy is a fundamental necessity if one wants to lead a life with dignity.

[Newest Reality]

49. Well then we have a duty

to practice and participate in preventative, pre-crime.

Perhaps it is best for all of us to simply turn ourselves in ASAP with the understanding that we have no idea what we are doing now that may someday be an offense? This will save time and any future efforts and expenses to process us and prosecution will not really be necessary since it will probably not be available at the time that our current activities and behaviors are legislated into law as criminal acts.

Since we can also safely assume that certain thoughts will also be considered criminal offenses, (thought crimes) those of us who feel we will potentially think in that manner can voluntarily submit to physical/chemical lobotomies and shock treatment in order to nullify any potential threat we may now or may someday present to corporate society and the monoculture of truth and justice in its utmost purity.

[blkmusclmachine]

50. 9/11 was nothing more than an excuse to initiate their preconceived agenda.

Citizen, Inc.

[Fire Walk With Me]

51. TransCanada were caught with a slideshow of peaceful activists, teaching cops they're terrorists.

http://ecowatch.com/2013/transcanada-caught-training-police-nonviolent-keystone-xl-protesters-terrorists/

"In the midst of recent national controversy surrounding government surveillance of the public, a recent Freedom of Information Act request to the Nebraska State Patrol has exposed evidence that TransCanada provided training to federal agents and local Nebraska police to suppress nonviolent activists protesting the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline by arresting them on 'anti-terrorism statutes.' The presentation slides, obtained by grassroots landowner advocacy group Bold Nebraska, target Tar Sands Blockade activists by name."

Occupy, being enemies of The Precious ill-gotten "economy", are considered terrorists:

Cop strongly implies Occupy presence means increased terrorism threat; Federal agents at parade
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022137604

"There will be an increased law enforcement presence, including federal agents, at the 2013 parade because of the Occupy demonstration, Sanchez said.

'The big thing we'd like to get out there is that if someone sees something, they should say something,' Sanchez said. 'It's the best way we can prevent something from occurring.'"

Obviously, the government believes, despite Obama's early words (honeytrap?) regarding honoring and protecting whistle-blowers, that such are scum to be destroyed. Journalists report a chilling effect as sources lose interest in being trackable through NSA metadata sweeps. The Constitution is vanishing. Under a "democrat" in name only.

Armed patrols are not swarming our streets but it would appear that the message is still very clear. "Do what we say or else." Not that they'd ever use all that stored data against anyone for whom they didn't care.

[silvershadow]

52. How long until Minority Report, USA?...nt

[cantbeserious]

57. Kick And Recommended

eom

[Waiting For Everyman]

59. Good one, Will.

And double-good on your reply to the Blue Lynx.

[Ichingcarpenter]

61. Obama: NSA Surveillance Was Necessary To Make Sure Boston Bombings Weren't Part Of Bigger Plot

He calls it surveillance I call it spying.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023386489

[Warren DeMontague]

63. Necessary for them to help the DEA monitor and arrest medical marijuana users?

...right.

[Ichingcarpenter]

65. Spying vs Surveillance are synonyms

for basically the same action

He's a wordsmith and lawyer


http://thesaurus.com/browse/surveillance

http://thesaurus.babylon.com/spying

[Warren DeMontague]

68. I know. What's astounding is that anyone here is even trying to polish this turd.

Our prisons are full of non-violent drug offenders. Every 5 minutes someone is arrested for possession - personal use - of pot.

Even leaving aside the moral implications of the fact that we give rapists and murderers early release so we can make room for people like Richard Paey, How many of those prosecutions were constructed on this sort of dubious legal foundation? How many people had cases built upon outright lies not just to the Defense, but to the Prosecution and The Judge?

Seems to me a massive wholesale miscarriage of justice, if we are to even retain the semblance of rule of law in the courts.

[Waiting For Everyman]

66. Right, we need the NSA because we're too stupid to simply follow up a direct Russian tip off.

It's hard to believe that Obama has stooped to using arguments this lame. He must seriously have nothing plausible left to say.

If there were/is a bigger plot, we can be sure that even with all this mega-surveillance, NSA won't find it. That isn't what they're looking for.

[Ichingcarpenter]

67. Yes, but my point is his use of the words

spying vs surveillance in which he denied one but admitted the other.

[Waiting For Everyman]

69. I agree with you

was just venting on a tangent (and not directed at you, just in general). The verbal hair-splitting is silly -- as in they're not collecting info, they're accessing it. Or as you said, surveillance vs. spying. Of course the activity is the exact same thing, no matter what it's called.

[Ichingcarpenter]

70. I just wanted to show he was splitting hairs

and yes that other story pissed me off too. I didn't think you were going off on me, just going off of my point which I wanted readers to pay attention to.

The Stasi said they were not spying they were just doing surveillance.on a national scale for the protection of the people's state.

[laundry_queen]

62. K&R

Proud to be #100 R

[Bluenorthwest]

77. Great post Will.

nt

[treestar]

78. Spying comprehensively? There's no proof of that. nt

[bigtree]

79. fuck you

Last edited Thu Aug 8, 2013, 09:54 AM - Edit history (1)

. . . just funnin' . . . pretty good essay.

Though, unrec for going off on the one poster with a 'fuck you.'

I'll admit I've had a blind side to several trolls here (and I'm certainly not saying PS is a troll), but I think that's a really horrible way to converse, even if you strongly disagree with someone. I don't know what history you're looking at with this poster, but I don't think the posting of an article like that deserves a 'fuck you.' and I don't think it deserved the taunt about alerting. NO ONE should be encouraged to engage in that type of discourse (I understand that we're often provoked into those types of reactions) and I think longtime posters (especially ones who have benefited from the comity that makes this place special) need to set a better example.

I also think that there's mo0re than enough posts here with your pov that its a bit heavy-handed to act as if you can't tolerate one article which might disagree with your own pov. Not a big WP fan today.

[DontTreadOnMe]

80. The spying paranoia on DU has jumped the shark

Google and Facebook have more "data" on Americans than the NSA... and you signed up and agreed to to it when you joined either one.

DU is spying on you, they use Google AdWords!

[Fuddnik]

87. No, they have all that data, and a lot more.

[cherokeeprogressive]

92. Facebook knows me as a John Q. Public.

Who lives at

12345
Easy Street
Uptown, CA

[Cha]

94. Thank you, Don'tTreadOnMe. that is all.

[A Simple Game]

99. You put it into words and you still don't see the difference?

and you signed up and agreed to to it

Maybe you signed up and agreed to the NSA spying, but I didn't.

There is a difference between voluntary and openly (well if you read the I Agree thing) giving information by filling in the blanks on a form, and taking something surreptitiously. Nor do you have to be particularly honest, if at all, with Google and Facebook.

Besides, Google and Facebook are just looking for warm bodies to sell stuff to, the NSA is looking to put people in prison or worse.

[OnyxCollie]

81. K&R. nt

[JDPriestly]

85. K&R

[blackspade]

86. Excellent OP!

Summed up very nicely.

[Lifelong Protester]

88. K & R

[glinda]

89. Thanks Will. K&R

[ecstatic]

90. The DEA connection is very troubling, and it's not just the government,

unfortunately. I mostly shrugged off the NSA data collection, but the recent revelations about the DEA, if true, are more concerning. I don't do drugs, but I've made casual reference to the habits of friends online.

Also troubling is the fact that private companies are collecting way more data on us than the government. Can you imagine what google (or apple) can do to people who use their search engine, email, OS, and navigation apps? Especially if collaborating with Facebook?

[FlyByNight]

91. Power corrupts...

...etc., etc., etc.

Thanks Will!

K & R!

[indepat]

93. Spending its resources to spy on the American people thwarts those would express dissent over

our governmental officials' abuse of their sworn duties to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States by curtailing liberty and freedom through shredding much of the Bill of Rights under the guise of keeping us safe from terra. That's a mouthful but drives home the point of vast dichotomy and chicanery by our officials.

[Vietnameravet]

97. you ask

Sure, yeah, terrorists suck and drug dealers suck, and I'm sure this massive thing that has been unleashed upon the American system of law, and the American people, is totally benign and awesome and only doing good things and stuff.

Let's pretend for a second that we even believe that.

What about tomorrow?

And next year?

And four years from now?

And ten years from now?

How much do you trust the future?




that reminds me of those that were against fluoride in the water,..."What if someday they decide we all need to calm down..then they will put tranquilizers in the water" This is a really paranoid post with a deep cynicism which is the MIRROR image of those that defend unlimited gun purchases with no background checks..."What if we need those weapons someday to fight the fascists?"

As I type this my son and his wife are on a plane and if collecting data on Americans prevents a terrorist attack then I say "Do it!"

As for your concerns about a Dick Cheney , I can only tell you that so far there has been no abuse of this spying...deal with abuse when we see it..