Nsa Contractor Identifies Himself As Source

[JDGRUEN]

It is not just a question of whether the law is unconstitutional - it is as much more of a question whether the NSA officials and the obama Administration are using the law to conduct surveillance in an illegal and unconstitutional fashion.

Snowden was not just complaining about the law - Snoweden was complaining about how the NSA conducted the surveillance without complying with the law.

There seems to be a willful attempt by some on this thread and the other Snowden thread to not acknowledge this significant difference and just conflated the issues into one issue - when it is not.

The thrust of Snownden's allegations are that the NSA was exceeding authority under the law ... ignoring constitutional compliance provisions of the law...

The Democrats controlled Congress - both Houses from January 2009 until January 2011 (the 111th. Congreass). The Patriot Act and the laws surrounding the FISA courts could have been amended and obama could have signed it into law. Thus restricting the NSA to Constitutional compliance standards or doing away with the law all together ... but that did not happen.

Snowden took off and made public what he did to reveal the actions of the NSA as the primary issue- not complain about the laws.

And I believe Snowden wants a stable existence in Ecuador or somewhere else so that he can reveal more about the unlawful actions of the NSA.

Example - U.S. Senators have now asked in a letter to NSA officials if they are collecting information on gun ownership in America...

The senators noted that the federal government’s authority under Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act is broad and rife with potential for abuse. Among the senators’ concerns was whether the NSA’s bulk data harvesting program could be used to construct a gun registry or violate other privacy laws.

beacon.com/senators-ask-if-nsa-collected-gun-data/

So - what else will Snowden reveal - if he can gain sanctuary.?

[Credo]

And there seems to be a willful attempt by some to make this about Obama and the democrats. It's not.

[kotsak]

That was quick

[lannarebirth]

And there seems to be a willful attempt by some to make this about Obama and the democrats. It's not.

That's because it is Obama that has been the Executive in Chief of the USA for these past 4 1/2 years. Plenty of time to make good on his promises to bring transparency into government. Plenty of time to make good on his promises to root out unconstitutional (his words) methods of surveillance. Instead he has signed legislation into law that would have otherwise gone away, that continues the most terrible practices a government can engage in. Instead he has introduced new laws that are even more draconian.

I don't know. I don't think the average Obama voter thought they were voting for (Bush/Cheney)², do you? Say what you will about Cheney, and I can't think of a single nice thing to say about him, save this; he never pretended to be something other than what he was. Can anyone say the same about Obama?

[F430murci]

And there seems to be a willful attempt by some to make this about Obama and the democrats. It's not.

That's because it is Obama that has been the Executive in Chief of the USA for these past 4 1/2 years. Plenty of time to make good on his promises to bring transparency into government. Plenty of time to make good on his promises to root out unconstitutional (his words) methods of surveillance. Instead he has signed legislation into law that would have otherwise gone away, that continues the most terrible practices a government can engage in. Instead he has introduced new laws that are even more draconian.

I don't know. I don't think the average Obama voter thought they were voting for (Bush/Cheney)², do you? Say what you will about Cheney, and I can't think of a single nice thing to say about him, save this; he never pretended to be something other than what he was. Can anyone say the same about Obama?

Transparency? In matters of national security and spying? Never has been and never will be.

Your argument is Obama should not do it even if it is legal.

Roberts is Chief Justice thanks to Bush. Those 2007 and 2008 cases I quoted yesterday were FISA review courts on constitutionality of warrant less wire taps when necessary to preserve national security.

Roberts as Chief Justice appoints 3 judge FISA panels to review FISA decisions. Guess what kind of judges he selects?

Roberts does not believe in civil rights, privacy or fourth amendment protections. Check his record.

Roberts dissented in an 06 case saying cops can search a residence WITHOUT a warrant when both spouses are home, one spouse says no you cannot come in and search, but other said okay before they understood what was going on.

This our guy in control of FISA review panels. He will be around a LONG time.

Everything disclosed by Snowden that Obama or US is currently doing was deemed legal in 2007 and 2008. Supreme Court 5-4 conservatives and NISA panels appointed by Roberts.

Bush conducted warrant less domestic wire tapping. Obama's domestic taps have apparently been by warrant. Maybe that is what Obama meant by transparency.

No warrant is needed for any foreign wire tap based on cases I quoted yesterday.

Edited June 30, 2013 by F430murci

[lannarebirth]

And there seems to be a willful attempt by some to make this about Obama and the democrats. It's not.

That's because it is Obama that has been the Executive in Chief of the USA for these past 4 1/2 years. Plenty of time to make good on his promises to bring transparency into government. Plenty of time to make good on his promises to root out unconstitutional (his words) methods of surveillance. Instead he has signed legislation into law that would have otherwise gone away, that continues the most terrible practices a government can engage in. Instead he has introduced new laws that are even more draconian.

I don't know. I don't think the average Obama voter thought they were voting for (Bush/Cheney)², do you? Say what you will about Cheney, and I can't think of a single nice thing to say about him, save this; he never pretended to be something other than what he was. Can anyone say the same about Obama?

Transparency? In matters of national security and spying? Never has been and never will be.

Your argument is Obama should not do it even if it is legal.

Roberts is Chief Justice thanks to Bush. Those 2007 and 2008 cases I quoted yesterday were FISA review courts on constitutionality of warrant less wire taps when necessary to preserve national security.

Roberts as Chief Justice appoints 3 judge FISA panels to review FISA decisions. Guess what kind of judges he selects?

Roberts does not believe in civil rights, privacy or fourth amendment protections. Check his record.

Roberts dissented in an 06 case saying cops can search a residence WITHOUT a warrant when both spouses are home, one spouse says no you cannot come in and search, but other said okay before they understood what was going on.

This our guy in control of FISA review panels. He will be around a LONG time.

Everything disclosed by Snowden that Obama or US is currently doing was deemed legal in 2007 and 2008. Supreme Court 5-4 conservatives and NISA panels appointed by Roberts.

Bush conducted warrant less domestic wire tapping. Obama's domestic taps have apparently been by warrant. Maybe that is what Obama meant by transparency.

No warrant is needed for any foreign wire tap based on cases I quoted yesterday.

You know, you're an attorney. I have a pretty good idea you have an ability to cite case law better than me. I'll bet I can command a ship better than you though, but that's not useful here.. Unfortunately, there's so much case law, that a lawyer, particularly one with partisan views vs. others, who are non partisan, is greatly advantaged. Not unlike the secret intelligence courts where there is only one side presenting an argument.

Regardless, you've made some invalid points. The transparency that Obama was talking about with regard to spying was that spying that was taking place against Americans, not foreign interests. He promised transparency which he has not delivered.

My argument is not that Obama should not do it, even if it is legal. My argument is that Obama once said that it was illegal and he would put an end to it, but now he's doing it too, only more so.

I know you want to put this all of on Right Wing judges, but that's not accurate. Let's take a look at one of the only court cases to address 4th Amendment issues in the Internet/Big Brother/ era:

United States vs. Jones:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Jones_%282012%29

The judges don't like the surveillance state. Only the uncontested lies of the state, in secret courts, and the impediments put in place to impede the discovery of wrongdoing by the state have allowed this to go on.

If you and the moderator will allow me a personal note; I can't believe that someone who fancies himself a progressive could buy into such a fascistic idea. It can only be blind partisanship that could allow for it.

Edited June 30, 2013 by lannarebirth

[chuckd]

And there seems to be a willful attempt by some to make this about Obama and the democrats. It's not.

That's because it is Obama that has been the Executive in Chief of the USA for these past 4 1/2 years. Plenty of time to make good on his promises to bring transparency into government. Plenty of time to make good on his promises to root out unconstitutional (his words) methods of surveillance. Instead he has signed legislation into law that would have otherwise gone away, that continues the most terrible practices a government can engage in. Instead he has introduced new laws that are even more draconian.

I don't know. I don't think the average Obama voter thought they were voting for (Bush/Cheney)², do you? Say what you will about Cheney, and I can't think of a single nice thing to say about him, save this; he never pretended to be something other than what he was. Can anyone say the same about Obama?

Transparency? In matters of national security and spying? Never has been and never will be.

Your argument is Obama should not do it even if it is legal.

Roberts is Chief Justice thanks to Bush. Those 2007 and 2008 cases I quoted yesterday were FISA review courts on constitutionality of warrant less wire taps when necessary to preserve national security.

Roberts as Chief Justice appoints 3 judge FISA panels to review FISA decisions. Guess what kind of judges he selects?

Roberts does not believe in civil rights, privacy or fourth amendment protections. Check his record.

Roberts dissented in an 06 case saying cops can search a residence WITHOUT a warrant when both spouses are home, one spouse says no you cannot come in and search, but other said okay before they understood what was going on.

This our guy in control of FISA review panels. He will be around a LONG time.

Everything disclosed by Snowden that Obama or US is currently doing was deemed legal in 2007 and 2008. Supreme Court 5-4 conservatives and NISA panels appointed by Roberts.

Bush conducted warrant less domestic wire tapping. Obama's domestic taps have apparently been by warrant. Maybe that is what Obama meant by transparency.

No warrant is needed for any foreign wire tap based on cases I quoted yesterday.

Let me pose one question.

Does Obama have the authority under Executive Order to close down completely or alter any guidelines being followed by the NSA or any other federal agency operating under his direction?

[wealth]

now the EU-USA free trade pact will be most likely canceled.

Bugs have been installed by the NSA in the office of EU representatives in Washington.

The whole scandal is expanding.

Every day new revelations ...

http://www.zdnet.com/eu-assessing-u-s-relationship-amid-prism-spying-claims-7000016794/

http://www.eubusiness.com/news-eu/us-security.p47

http://forum.sbrforum.com/saloon/2403540-nsa-spying-blow-us-eu-trade-deal.html

One of the most damaging revelation here allies as "location targets"

http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/nsa-spied-on-european-union-offices-a-908590.html

Edited June 30, 2013 by wealth

[lannarebirth]

Apologies to all our European "friends", but you know, we've got an empire to run.

http://www.businessinsider.com/us-bugged-eu-offices-and-spied-internal-networks-2013-6

[mania]

Apologies to all our European "friends", but you know, we've got an empire to run.

http://www.businessinsider.com/us-bugged-eu-offices-and-spied-internal-networks-2013-6

Amazing isn't it?

And this from that article....

"""The document explicitly called the EU a "target"."""

That is really all they need say these days to term it a legit reason to do as they please.

Edited June 30, 2013 by mania

[Publicus]

but who was he to break his contract and to betray the trust of the US general public.

Just who has betrayed the trust of the US general public here? There must be 250 Million Americans that welcome this revelation who don't think their trust is betrayed at all. that really remains firmly in the realms of the peoples EMPLOYEES on Capitol Hill and some of the anti-patriots in the CIA.

Many members of Congress do not seem to think that in passing the respective laws that they authorized such an extraordinarily broad scope of communications interception. The general understanding was that the NSA would focus on intercepting and analyzing communications suspected of being tied to threats to the USA. And in this process permission would be gained by court review and authorization. Seems this has been totally ignored and thrown out.. Mr. Snowden says he felt Democracy was being threatened (with such broad scale sifting of totally information on innocent people done without due process - my addition). What the NSA has done - because it technologically can do it is scoop up all the sand on the beaches of the USA - sift through to see if a stray diamond or pearl of intelligence might be hiding there... Instead of focusing on genuine leads and going through due process to perform fine tuned pin pointed interception. The big problem with this process - aside from trampling of the privacy of American citizens is that such 'scooping up' gives the obama Administration access to contact information done by political opponents, members of the SCOTUS, Members of Congress and other information it should not have. Having such information leads to the temptation to blackmail opposition and shut it down. IMO this is part of what Snowden was objecting to and rightly so.

So where are the Congressional oversight hearings to investigate all of the long train of horrors many have alleged in the matter? Why hasn't the Republican party majority in the House, for instance, conducted hearings that specifically, precisely, investigate the particulars you allege? Why aren't the Republican party majority in the House, or the Democratic party majority in the Senate, quoting Benjamin Franklin or Thomas Jefferson and others in citing the malicious evils we supposedly are inflicting on our constitution?

Because there aren't any such evils or sinister purposes or intent. There are only the overactive imaginings of the tea party far right.

The American people support these programs, as many scientific polling surveys clearly state. The vast center-middle of the US body politic are not up in arms carrying on about the long train of possible horrors, or actual horrors that allegedly have already occurred, to investigate, charge, indict and try all the evil culprits, the sinister types such as myself, who are supposedly and cheerfully undermining the constitution.

(I hope the quote function isn't too messed up)

Edited June 30, 2013 by Scott

[lannarebirth]

Just who has betrayed the trust of the US general public here? There must be 250 Million Americans that welcome this revelation who don't think their trust is betrayed at all. that really remains firmly in the realms of the peoples EMPLOYEES on Capitol Hill and some of the anti-patriots in the CIA.

Many members of Congress do not seem to think that in passing the respective laws that they authorized such an extraordinarily broad scope of communications interception. The general understanding was that the NSA would focus on intercepting and analyzing communications suspected of being tied to threats to the USA. And in this process permission would be gained by court review and authorization. Seems this has been totally ignored and thrown out.. Mr. Snowden says he felt Democracy was being threatened (with such broad scale sifting of totally information on innocent people done without due process - my addition). What the NSA has done - because it technologically can do it is scoop up all the sand on the beaches of the USA - sift through to see if a stray diamond or pearl of intelligence might be hiding there... Instead of focusing on genuine leads and going through due process to perform fine tuned pin pointed interception. The big problem with this process - aside from trampling of the privacy of American citizens is that such 'scooping up' gives the obama Administration access to contact information done by political opponents, members of the SCOTUS, Members of Congress and other information it should not have. Having such information leads to the temptation to blackmail opposition and shut it down. IMO this is part of what Snowden was objecting to and rightly so.

So where are the Congressional oversight hearings to investigate all of the long train of horrors many have alleged in the matter? Why hasn't the Republican party majority in the House, for instance, conducted hearings that specifically, precisely, investigate the particulars you allege? Why aren't the Republican party majority in the House, or the Democratic party majority in the Senate, quoting Benjamin Franklin or Thomas Jefferson and others in citing the malicious evils we supposedly are inflicting on our constitution?

Because there aren't any such evils or sinister purposes or intent. There are only the overactive imaginings of the tea party far right.

The American people support these programs, as many scientific polling surveys clearly state. The vast center-middle of the US body politic are not up in arms carrying on about the long train of possible horrors, or actual horrors that allegedly have already occurred, to investigate, charge, indict and try all the evil culprits, the sinister types such as myself, who are supposedly and cheerfully undermining the constitution.

(I hope the quote function isn't too messed up)

Last time you asked this question your post was removed as well as my response to it. But I'll repost my response yet again anyhow.

http://www.nationalmemo.com/bipartisan-group-of-senators-wants-answers-on-nsa-surveillance/

[mania]

So where are the Congressional oversight hearings to investigate all of the long train of horrors many have alleged in the matter? Why hasn't the Republican party majority in the House,

Because there aren't any such evils or sinister purposes or intent. There are only the overactive imaginings of the tea party far right.

The American people support these programs, as many scientific polling surveys clearly state.

Seems the Democrats are working hard at looking into it which is a good thing IMO As it is not a party argument as much as you would like to make it

Also the polls I have seen show clearly the majority of Americans Do Not in fact support these programs nor were they aware of their overreach

Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) is leading a group of

26 senators — 22 Democrats, three Republicans and one Independent —

in demanding answers from Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.

Edited June 30, 2013 by mania

[Publicus]

So where are the Congressional oversight hearings to investigate all of the long train of horrors many have alleged in the matter? Why hasn't the Republican party majority in the House,

Because there aren't any such evils or sinister purposes or intent. There are only the overactive imaginings of the tea party far right.

The American people support these programs, as many scientific polling surveys clearly state.

Seems the Democrats are working hard at looking into it which is a good thing IMO As it is not a party argument as much as you would like to make it

Also the polls I have seen show clearly the majority of Americans Do Not in fact support these programs nor were they aware of their overreach

Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) is leading a group of

26 senators — 22 Democrats, three Republicans and one Independent —

in demanding answers from Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.

I referred in my post to both the Republican party majority in the House and to the Democratic party majority in the Senate. YOU are trying to make me appear to be partisan by presenting quotes in your post you selectively took from my earlier post to serve your own purposes.

So, as to my original question, where are oversight hearings in either or both the Republican party controlled House and/or the Democratic party controlled Senate? Why aren't they looking into all that you right wingnuts allege, claim, assert, insinuate about myself and other posters, i.e., that we are Obama leftist robots - mindless machines - cheerfully going about tearing up the constitution and joyfully trampling on the liberties of every American and anyone else abroad we can harm?

You are also wrong concerning the scientific public opinion polling in this matter. I've twice posted the most recent polling results only to have them deleted, so I won't try again. All I can do is to say you misrepresent me, the polling, everyone who you disagree with, and you misrepresent us without shame or reservation - I mean all of you. Your own post above, containing statements by me that you selected from my post, is yet another example of this.

Where are the oversight hearings into all that you allege, the long train of possible horrors you say already is speeding along?

Edited June 30, 2013 by Publicus

[lannarebirth]

So where are the Congressional oversight hearings to investigate all of the long train of horrors many have alleged in the matter? Why hasn't the Republican party majority in the House,

Because there aren't any such evils or sinister purposes or intent. There are only the overactive imaginings of the tea party far right.

The American people support these programs, as many scientific polling surveys clearly state.

Seems the Democrats are working hard at looking into it which is a good thing IMO As it is not a party argument as much as you would like to make it

Also the polls I have seen show clearly the majority of Americans Do Not in fact support these programs nor were they aware of their overreach

Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) is leading a group of

26 senators — 22 Democrats, three Republicans and one Independent —

in demanding answers from Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.

I referred in my post to both the Republican party majority in the House and to the Democratic party majority in the Senate. YOU are trying to make me appear to be partisan by presenting quotes in your poste you selectively took from my earlier post.

So, as to my original question, where are oversight hearings in either or both the Republican party controlled House and/or the Democratic party controlled Senate? Why aren't they looking into all that you right wingnuts allege, claim, assert, insinuate about myself and other posters, i.e., that we are Obama leftist robots -mindless machines - cheerfully going about tearing up the constitution and joyfully trampling on the liberties of every American and anyone else abroad we can harm?

You are also wrong concerning the scientific public opinion polling in this matter. I've twice posted the most recent polling results only to have them deleted, so I won't try again. All I can do is to say you misrepresent me, the polling, everyone who you disagree with, and you misrepresent us without shame or reservation - I mean all of you. Your own post above, containing statements by me that you selected from my post, is yet another example of this.

There have been several oversight hearings this very month. In one, the director of the CIA was caught lying. In another, the director of the NSA was caught lying. In yet another, the director of the FBI was caught lying. I see from all the links you post you know how to use a search engine so I'll let you Goggle the YouTube/C-SPAN videos yourself.

Really, the better question, and the one you should be asking is; how come there are no consequences for these administration flunkies for lying to Congress?

Edited June 30, 2013 by lannarebirth

[wealth]

now they are figuring out to what media they are giving it in Thailand, about Thailand being spied on extensive.

I have an idea or better got a hint, but won't say it here. Will come soon. Their puppet in Dubai, another control freak, will lose it too, even under the new defense minister if needed

To our American and British friends, it's going to be tough on you from within, and chose your side wisely now for your own sake and destiny.

[Publicus]

Congressional oversight hearings into the long train of gross government abuses of our constitution - where are they?

Why are the posters here the only ones quoting Benjamin Franklin and other founders? And I don't mean people at right wing publications, I'm talking about the majority of the Members of Congress, the mainstream of US political opinion and belief.

Where are the hearings into all that you people allege and fear?

Why does the Congress not see the urgency and the horrors and fears you people so plainly see?

Because they are only in the minds of a small extremist group of beholders.

Edited June 30, 2013 by Publicus

[Publicus]

now they are figuring out to what media they are giving it in Thailand, about Thailand being spied on extensive.

I have an idea or better got a hint, but won't say it here. Will come soon. Their puppet in Dubai, another control freak, will lose it too, even under the new defense minister if needed

To our American and British friends, it's going to be tough on you from within, and chose your side wisely now for your own sake and destiny.

[wealth]

Congressional oversight hearings into the long train of gross government abuses of our constitution - where are they?

Why are the posters here the only ones quoting Benjamin Franklin and other founders? And I don't mean people at right wing publications, I'm talking about the majority of the Members of Congress, the mainstream of US political opinion and belief.

Where are the hearings into all that you people allege and fear?

Why does the Congress not see the urgency and the horrors fears you people so plainly see?

Because they are only in the minds of a small extremist groups of beholders.

postponed 2 weeks ago, probably on order.

[lomatopo]

U.S. taps half-billion German phone, internet links in month: report

BERLIN | Sun Jun 30, 2013 5:40am EDT

(Reuters) - The United States taps half a billion phone calls, emails and text messages in Germany in a typical month and has classed its biggest European ally as a target similar to China, according to secret U.S. documents quoted by a German newsmagazine.

The revelations of alleged U.S. surveillance programs based on documents taken by fugitive former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden have raised a political furor in the United States and abroad over the balance between privacy rights and national security.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/30/us-usa-germany-spying-idUSBRE95T04B20130630

[Publicus]

Congressional oversight hearings into the long train of gross government abuses of our constitution - where are they?

Why are the posters here the only ones quoting Benjamin Franklin and other founders? And I don't mean people at right wing publications, I'm talking about the majority of the Members of Congress, the mainstream of US political opinion and belief.

Where are the hearings into all that you people allege and fear?

Why does the Congress not see the urgency and the horrors fears you people so plainly see?

Because they are only in the minds of a small extremist groups of beholders.

postponed 2 weeks ago, probably on order.

I can't seem to find the order.

[lomatopo]

There won't be any Congressional hearings, other than to figure out how incompetent the security clearance vetting processes are - based on some of the transgressions which have surfaced, there are probably a lot of people much less patriotic than Mr. Snowden, listening to our phone calls.

Other than Rand Paul no Congresspersons want to open this can of worms.

Even a trial, of Mr. Snowden, assuming that right would be extended to him, would probably reveal more illegal surveillance of U.S. citizens, and keep this topic in the public domain, so maybe better to make a deal with him, and let this extremely ugly activity fade from view. Until the next patriotic whistle-blower reveals even more scandalous activities? I suspect there will be a lot more leaks,

[mania]

Until the next patriotic whistle-blower reveals even more scandalous activities? I suspect there will be a lot more leaks,

This is something that has crossed my mind also.

Surely there are others who have seen this same problem & sat on it out of fear.

Perhaps now they too will step forward. Hard to say & a lot depends on Snowdens ultimate fate

Edited June 30, 2013 by mania

[wealth]

It's obvious!

Only some commonwealth countries are spared from being spied on? Lucky bastards, or maybe not. Is it a trick to hold on with their spying in an emergency like we witness now? I guess so.

Germany, France and others are classified as third class allies and they are extensively spied on. Is it because they are more critical to the fact to realize that America/UK is not the bacon of the world? Losers!

Maybe the French should take back the "Statue of Liberty" once given to the USA, or replace it with ... fill in the blank ... oh wait a moment. It could be the pyramid on the $ notes. But what happens if someone sticks a finger into the eye on the top of the pyramid? Right so, - they are getting blind and already are ...

Can Commonwealth countries jump the sinking ship? Guess Australia will do that soon, maybe Canada too.

Edited June 30, 2013 by wealth

[wealth]

There have been several oversight hearings this very month. In one, the director of the CIA was caught lying. In another, the director of the NSA was caught lying. In yet another, the director of the FBI was caught lying. I see from all the links you post you know how to use a search engine so I'll let you Goggle the YouTube/C-SPAN videos yourself.

Really, the better question, and the one you should be asking is; how come there are no consequences for these administration flunkies for lying to Congress?

These can be considered as the "Mickey Mouse" hearings.

They have to focus on the Dagoberts in Wallstreet and London to get to the meat of the problems.

Edited June 30, 2013 by wealth

[wealth]

The Guardian Revealed An NSA 'Scoop' Then Deleted It From The Website

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/the-guardian-wayne-madsen-nsa-scoop-2013-6#ixzz2XhawQ71B

[F430murci]

Congressional oversight hearings into the long train of gross government abuses of our constitution - where are they?

Why are the posters here the only ones quoting Benjamin Franklin and other founders? And I don't mean people at right wing publications, I'm talking about the majority of the Members of Congress, the mainstream of US political opinion and belief.

Where are the hearings into all that you people allege and fear?

Why does the Congress not see the urgency and the horrors fears you people so plainly see?

Because they are only in the minds of a small extremist groups of beholders.

postponed 2 weeks ago, probably on order.

Talk about speculation. Perhaps base opinion on facts and not speculation if going to criticize.

[F430murci]

There won't be any Congressional hearings, other than to figure out how incompetent the security clearance vetting processes are - based on some of the transgressions which have surfaced, there are probably a lot of people much less patriotic than Mr. Snowden, listening to our phone calls.

Other than Rand Paul no Congresspersons want to open this can of worms.

Even a trial, of Mr. Snowden, assuming that right would be extended to him, would probably reveal more illegal surveillance of U.S. citizens, and keep this topic in the public domain, so maybe better to make a deal with him, and let this extremely ugly activity fade from view. Until the next patriotic whistle-blower reveals even more scandalous activities? I suspect there will be a lot more leaks,

Not about opening a can of worms. Congress wanted, passed and knew about this. Republicans cannot criticize as they were at the forefront of passage of the laws and amendments in 2007 and 2008.

I don't like the implications of the domestic surveillance, but the foreign surveillance should not be surprising to anyone except the Monday morning quarterbacks on here with heads in sand and so easily manipulated by media.

Many publicly available court cases, congressional debate records, public hearings and laws accessible to any one interested. Caveat, there was a behind close door Congressional hearing in 2008 about the Bush push to grant immunity to private companies for turning over records, but everything was in place at that time.

Everyone of any import knew or should have known this was happening. Any shock and awe from officials from Europe is grandstanding.

Nothing will change, especially because everyone is spying on everyone. Modern technology makes this too easy. US won't stop in part because China won't stop and Russia won't stop. No one wants to be placed at a disadvantage.

[manarak]

PRISM is just one arm of the giant data collection octopus:

http://reflets.info/prism-lets-have-a-look-at-the-big-picture/

[F430murci]

PRISM is just one arm of the giant data collection octopus:

http://reflets.info/prism-lets-have-a-look-at-the-big-picture/

Does anyone really need for Facebook to know exactly where you anytime you post. I stopped using Facebook for these and other reasons. Why is it okay for Facebook to monitor every aspect of your life such as websites visited, search history, likes, dislikes, friends, where you are at and etc., but bad for government to do when they are charged with national security.