US court rules that surveillance program exposed by Snowden was illegal

[Stevicus]

U.S. court: Mass surveillance program exposed by Snowden was illegal

(Reuters) - Seven years after former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden blew the whistle on the mass surveillance of Americans’ telephone records, an appeals court has found the program was unlawful - and that the U.S. intelligence leaders who publicly defended it were not telling the truth.

In a ruling handed down on Wednesday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit said the warrantless telephone dragnet that secretly collected millions of Americans’ telephone records violated the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and may well have been unconstitutional.

Snowden, who fled to Russia in the aftermath of the 2013 disclosures and still faces U.S. espionage charges, said on Twitter that the ruling was a vindication of his decision to go public with evidence of the National Security Agency’s domestic eavesdropping operation.

“I never imagined that I would live to see our courts condemn the NSA’s activities as unlawful and in the same ruling credit me for exposing them,” Snowden said in a message posted to Twitter.

Evidence that the NSA was secretly building a vast database of U.S. telephone records - the who, the how, the when, and the where of millions of mobile calls - was the first and arguably the most explosive of the Snowden revelations published by the Guardian newspaper in 2013.

This is the part I find interesting:

Up until that moment, top intelligence officials publicly insisted the NSA never knowingly collected information on Americans at all. After the program’s exposure, U.S. officials fell back on the argument that the spying had played a crucial role in fighting domestic extremism, citing in particular the case of four San Diego residents who were accused of providing aid to religious fanatics in Somalia.

So, for the longest time, the government had been lying by saying that the NSA wasn't doing this at all, but then, once they were exposed, they argue that it was necessary and played a crucial role in fighting terrorism. But if that's the case, why wouldn't they just go through proper channels in order to make these surveillance operations legal?

Is the government secretly ashamed of what it does? Is that why they conceal and deny what they do? Is it really beneficial for US national security, and if so, why wouldn't they proudly shout about it from every rooftop and proclaim "Yes, we are doing this for America"?

I think this cuts to the core of something that appears to be a serious contradiction in how Americans see their own government and country.

On the one hand, there are those who see America as an "empire" with imperialistic and malignant aspirations - and this is seen as something bad. It's a more cynical view of America.

On the other side, there are those who view America as a "shining city on the hill," a beacon of hope, a paragon of virtue which wants nothing more than to bring freedom and democracy to all the oppressed peoples of the world.

We can be one or the other, but we can't be both - and this is an internal dilemma and conflict which has created a pall over the political culture for generations.

Are we like Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde?

Snowden exposed a side of America few Americans really get to see, and most apparently would prefer not to see that side of America. They don't want to know that it's there.

A lot of Americans would prefer to believe that we're such a paragon of virtue, a bastion of freedom and democracy, an island of goodness in a world full of scum and villainy. But connected to that is an intense feeling of wanting to protect and secure America at all costs, which is the common justification for doing some of the things which Snowden revealed.

 

[Heyo]

After only seven years they found that the NSA did illegal spying. Now there's hope that in another seven years they might find that Snowden was justified in blowing the whistle on them.

 

[pearl]

Was this form of intelligence gathering post 9,11?
There are proper channels for exposing what may be illegal, choosing to do so through a foreign government is treason. I have no sympathy for Snowden, he is a traitor.

 

[Revoltingest]

Was this form of intelligence gathering post 9,11?
There are proper channels for exposing what may be illegal, choosing to do so through a foreign government is treason. I have no sympathy for Snowden, he is a traitor.

What is the proper channel for exposing secret illegal government programs?
Complaining to the spooks & black bag types who run it? Telling Obama?

Btw, what did Obama know, & when did he not (allegedly) know it?
Edward Snowden says Barack Obama made surveillance state 'worse'

Note also that Obama was the biggest boot on the necks of whistleblowers.
https://www.americanthinker.com/art..._clinton_and_obama_abused_whistleblowers.html

 

[Heyo]

Was this form of intelligence gathering post 9,11?
There are proper channels for exposing what may be illegal, choosing to do so through a foreign government is treason. I have no sympathy for Snowden, he is a traitor.

You may want to read up on the facts of the case. E.g. Snowden didn't go through any foreign government to expose it, he worked together with US journalists to do so.

 

[Lyndon]

supposedly the programme was ended in 2015, if we are to believe the liars at the NSA

 

[Stevicus]

Was this form of intelligence gathering post 9,11?

I've heard similar allegations about the NSA for a lot longer, at least as far back as the 1970s.

There are proper channels for exposing what may be illegal, choosing to do so through a foreign government is treason. I have no sympathy for Snowden, he is a traitor.

It's been said that "treason is only a matter of dates." One could just as easily argue that those in government engaging in unconstitutional activities are themselves traitors. If they violate their oath to the Constitution, that makes them traitors.

As for Snowden, he did not levy war against the United States, nor did he adhere to our enemies. At least according to the definition found in the Constitution, Snowden would not be a traitor.

 

[BSM1]

What is the proper channel for exposing secret illegal government programs?
Complaining to the spooks & black bag types who run it? Telling Obama?

Btw, what did Obama know, & when did he not (allegedly) know it?
Edward Snowden says Barack Obama made surveillance state 'worse'

Note also that Obama was the biggest boot on the necks of whistleblowers.
https://www.americanthinker.com/art..._clinton_and_obama_abused_whistleblowers.html

Uh-oh...

 

[Revoltingest]

Uh-oh...

I'll add that Trump isn't the friendliest to whistleblowers either.

 

[joe1776]

...On the one hand, there are those who see America as an "empire" with imperialistic and malignant aspirations - and this is seen as something bad. It's a more cynical view of America.

On the other side, there are those who view America as a "shining city on the hill," a beacon of hope, a paragon of virtue which wants nothing more than to bring freedom and democracy to all the oppressed peoples of the world.

We can be one or the other, but we can't be both - and this is an internal dilemma and conflict which has created a pall over the political culture for generations.

I think you're probably right that most Americans fall into one category or another. However, those are both foolish positions, in my opinion. I think we Americans are typical humans. We are flawed, and we want to be better than we are, but we have no right to be preaching to others. If we do it right, we will lead not with words but by example.

 

[BSM1]

I'll add that Trump isn't the friendliest to whistleblowers either.

True. But you jabbed with He Who Must Never Be Mentioned...

 

[Revoltingest]

True. But you jabbed with He Who Must Never Be Mentioned...

HWMNBM was the President who enabled the program
Snowden exposed. So he's essential to the discussion.
I know there'll be pavlovian plaintive protests of "False
equivalency!" & "Whataboutism!" But those are like
the rain....gonna happen regardless.

 

[BSM1]

HWMNBM was the President who enabled the program
Snowden exposed. So he's essential to the discussion.
I know there'll be pavlovian plaintive protests of "False
equivalency!" & "Whataboutism!" But those are like
the rain....gonna happen regardless.

I know...

 

[Stevicus]

I think you're probably right that most Americans fall into one category or another. However, those are both foolish positions, in my opinion. I think we Americans are typical humans. We are flawed, and we want to be better than we are, but we have no right to be preaching to others. If we do it right, we will lead not with words but by example.

I agree. I think that's what I find most interesting about the way our culture tends to portray America and what we do. If we had portrayed ourselves as just typical humans doing typically human things, then that would be one thing. But some of us like to spread it on so thick with the American exceptionalism, the shining city on the hill, the defenders of freedom around the world and all that stuff.

That's one of the things that struck me about Snowden, since he was (like most Americans) raised with the idea that Americans were the good guys, the white knights and defenders of truth, justice, and the American Way. But once he got a top security job and found out the ugly truth, he was terribly disillusioned and felt honor bound to do something about it.

Christopher Boyce (whose story was portrayed in The Falcon and the Snowman) also appeared to be guided by his conscience and also expressed disillusionment with the uglier side of America which so many are desperate to conceal and hide behind flag-waving and the American mythos.

Why do we do this? Why can't we just admit to it and get on with our lives? Why does the whole country have to stop and stand still just because some pseudo-patriots insist that we all believe these lies and falsehoods about our country?

 

[Left Coast]

U.S. court: Mass surveillance program exposed by Snowden was illegal



This is the part I find interesting:



So, for the longest time, the government had been lying by saying that the NSA wasn't doing this at all, but then, once they were exposed, they argue that it was necessary and played a crucial role in fighting terrorism. But if that's the case, why wouldn't they just go through proper channels in order to make these surveillance operations legal?

Is the government secretly ashamed of what it does? Is that why they conceal and deny what they do? Is it really beneficial for US national security, and if so, why wouldn't they proudly shout about it from every rooftop and proclaim "Yes, we are doing this for America"?

I think this cuts to the core of something that appears to be a serious contradiction in how Americans see their own government and country.

On the one hand, there are those who see America as an "empire" with imperialistic and malignant aspirations - and this is seen as something bad. It's a more cynical view of America.

On the other side, there are those who view America as a "shining city on the hill," a beacon of hope, a paragon of virtue which wants nothing more than to bring freedom and democracy to all the oppressed peoples of the world.

We can be one or the other, but we can't be both - and this is an internal dilemma and conflict which has created a pall over the political culture for generations.

Are we like Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde?

Snowden exposed a side of America few Americans really get to see, and most apparently would prefer not to see that side of America. They don't want to know that it's there.

A lot of Americans would prefer to believe that we're such a paragon of virtue, a bastion of freedom and democracy, an island of goodness in a world full of scum and villainy. But connected to that is an intense feeling of wanting to protect and secure America at all costs, which is the common justification for doing some of the things which Snowden revealed.

You highlight a poignant contradiction here. The whole concept of "American exceptionalism" - that we are somehow special among the world's nations and a cut above of the rest - flies in the face of how our country has actually functioned. Yes, we do represent some lofty goals, and yes, we have achieved some laudable things. But we've also done atrocious things, from giving the green light to extrajudicial black sites and torture, to deposing democratically elected world leaders, to being the only nation in history that's ever actually used a nuclear weapon on another country. Not to mention slavery, segregation, and the fact that to this day we still have "territories" whose residents (US citizens) don't have the same voting and congressional representation rights that the rest of us do. Our hyper-patriotism blinds us, I think.

Snowden should be pardoned and welcomed back with his own holiday at this point.

 

[joe1776]

I agree. I think that's what I find most interesting about the way our culture tends to portray America and what we do. If we had portrayed ourselves as just typical humans doing typically human things, then that would be one thing. But some of us like to spread it on so thick with the American exceptionalism, the shining city on the hill, the defenders of freedom around the world and all that stuff.

That's one of the things that struck me about Snowden, since he was (like most Americans) raised with the idea that Americans were the good guys, the white knights and defenders of truth, justice, and the American Way. But once he got a top security job and found out the ugly truth, he was terribly disillusioned and felt honor bound to do something about it.

Christopher Boyce (whose story was portrayed in The Falcon and the Snowman) also appeared to be guided by his conscience and also expressed disillusionment with the uglier side of America which so many are desperate to conceal and hide behind flag-waving and the American mythos.

Why do we do this? Why can't we just admit to it and get on with our lives? Why does the whole country have to stop and stand still just because some pseudo-patriots insist that we all believe these lies and falsehoods about our country?

In answer to your question, I suggest you try to explain all human misbehavior as an attempt to satisfy an unconscious need to feel superior to other humans. Philosophers call it egocentrism. Psychiatrists call it a superiority complex. Psychologists call it narcissism. I prefer the common label arrogance. It's hard to find a human failing that arrogance can't credibly explain.

It's not simply an American problem. It's a human problem.

 

[stvdv]

So, for the longest time, the government had been lying by saying that the NSA wasn't doing this at all, but then, once they were exposed, they argue that it was necessary and played a crucial role in fighting terrorism.

I always liked Snowden for what he did. Brave and smart man.
Glad to read government was so wrong here. Understandable they want Snowden "dead"

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Was this form of intelligence gathering post 9,11?
There are proper channels for exposing what may be illegal, choosing to do so through a foreign government is treason. I have no sympathy for Snowden, he is a traitor.

He informed the press of the mass and illegal data mining going on. For his exposing a severe infringement on our rights and is a hero.
BTW, there are no real official channels ( no real effective channels, really) when it comes to Uncle Sam and many others.

 

[Heyo]

He informed the press of the mass and illegal data mining going on. For his exposing a severe infringement on our rights and is a hero.
BTW, there are no real official channels ( no real effective channels, really) when it comes to Uncle Sam and many others.

Snowden claims to have used the official channels that were available to him without getting an adequate reaction.

 

[sun rise]

Obama was no saint and did things I disagree with. That sets me and others like me apart from the current regime because it's impossible to disagree with the current POTUS without being almost called a traitor.

Yes, our ideals don't match our actions. (sarcasm) What a shocking development when the rest of the world is much better than we are. (/sarcasm)

The "city on the hill" to me is an inspirational and aspirational goal to work toward while admitting that we're far from it but also noting that we've made progress toward that goal.