Everyone is under surveillance now, says whistleblower Edward Snowden

[Vattel]

140. I apologize for being unclear. What I should said is that Obama didn't mention the NSA by name.

(Although, now that you mention it, he was talking about law enforcement having the authorities it needs to intercept more American communications. FBI is a law enforcement agency, but NSA is not.)

Let's review what Obama said:

"Thwarting homegrown plots presents particular challenges in part because of our proud commitment to civil liberties for all who call America home. That’s why, in the years to come, we will have to keep working hard to strike the appropriate balance between our need for security and preserving those freedoms that make us who we are. That means reviewing the authorities of law enforcement, so we can intercept new types of communication, but also build in privacy protections to prevent abuse."

Somehow you convince yourself (but I hope no one else) that these remarks mean that the "President was already publicly talking about the necessity for a national discussion about the surveillance program in place, and whether it infringed too much on privacy." Of course, that is false. Obama never mentioned the necessity for a national discussion about surveillance in that speech.

Furthermore, you are clearly mistaken to suppose that Obama's brief mention of the need to intercept more communications (while preserving privacy) in this speech is evidence that Snowden's revelations did not lead to Obama's proposals for NSA reform. Call me a crazy Snowdenista, but when I consider that Obama said nothing about the need for NSA reform until Snowden's leaks sparked an intense national conversation about the NSA, and only then did Obama appoint a panel to make reform recommendations, it seems rather likely that Snowden's leaks led to Obama's proposed reforms. The evidence is not conclusive, but if it looks like a duck . . .