President Obama Proposes Reforms To Surveillance Programs

http://npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/08/09/210539942/live-blog-president-obamas-press-conference

by jacquesm • 13 years ago

56 49 13 years ago

wavesounds• 13 years ago

"Obama added that he was directing the Justice Department to make public the legal rational for the bulk collection of Americans' electronic data."

This would never have happened without Snowden, It's absurd to claim he is not a whistleblower. I have lost so much respect for this president in the last few months.

incongruity2• 13 years ago

Exactly. The utter lack of commitment to principle (i.e.: defend whistleblowers) is absolutely disheartening. It's made worse by the mental gymnastics to claim that Snowden is not a whistleblower.

Hope and change? Where and when do we get those?

VladRussian22• 13 years ago

http://treeofmamre.wordpress.com/2013/06/12/obamas-new-sloga...

VladRussian22• 13 years ago

would making public the legal rational for an illegal thing make the thing legal?

On the other side, they had legal rational for torture, and it did made the torture legal for some period of time - nobody was prosecuted for doing it, so de-facto it was legal at the time, despite later declarations.

incongruity2• 13 years ago

Too little, too late.

It's not just whether or not the President believes the programs are being abused now, it should be about whether or not they are ripe for abuse now or in the future (which they clearly are).

drewblaisdell3• 13 years ago

"I don't think Mr. Snowden is a patriot," Obama said, adding that Snowden had legal means to bring his concerns to light.
Even without the leaks, he added, the U.S. government would have made the reforms he was proposing, except it would have done so without sacrificing national security.

Complete and utter bullshit.

loceng• 13 years ago

Yeah. It would have been valid if this was said publicly, that this was being done - that they knew reforms were needed and were in the process of the change.

temphn• 13 years ago

Re: "Reforms" and "change"...it might be time to become a bit more cynical about what Obama means by these things. He was never going to reduce his power, or the government's power, voluntarily.

msvan• 13 years ago

Obama has to say this stuff. Does he even believe it himself? Most people don't care as much as the HN crowd. Taking this stance is probably the best way to avoid a PR scandal with the masses. Which doesn't make it right, of course.

ihsw• 13 years ago

He can blow it out of his ass. Nothing they say has a grain of truth anymore, and nothing of value will be accomplished by his latest chest-thumping.

Data mining and data manipulation are the air superiority of the 21st century -- it's going to the form the bottom line of every major power in the world. They're going to bare their largest fangs and growl with impudence at anybody that gets in their way.

He says there are safeguards, but the most important -- whistleblowing and accountability -- are getting a backseat.

The NSA has vast swaths of information on everything and on everybody, and the related Federal agencies (Department of Treasury (IRS), Department of Justice (DEA)) can smell blood. Unless he puts very large walls and many beartraps around the NSA's data, we will be slaughtered.

They're recording everything passing through their part of the internet, and now they're in charge of guarding their recordings. They're doing a piss-poor job so far.

rayiner• 13 years ago

The fact that he's saying the word patriot is really significant.

dllthomas3• 13 years ago

I don't understand what you're getting at, here. Could you elaborate?

mpyne4• 13 years ago

What's funny is that I think he's right in the first case and wrong in the second.

I don't seriously believe that these reforms would have been proposed without external pressure, and Snowden provided that pressure in a forum unlike Drake, who had done the right thing.

With that said I don't think Snowden is a "patriot". He may be anti-surveillance, which may extend benefit to the American people, but his actions are not consistent with someone who is focused more-or-less solely on benefit to the American people, but rather someone who is opposed to government in general and the NSA in particular.

For instance, leaking details of Chinese hacking does not help the American people. It hurts the NSA and makes the American government look bad, but it doesn't help the American people. Likewise with all the drama about asylum with regard to Russia. He put Obama in the position of being forced to cancel a summit with Putin to avoid looking politically weak at home.

But Russia and the U.S. have real issues they need to work together on, which will have an impact on the world at large. That drama didn't help the American people either (and we'll see what happens with the crisis in Syria as well). But it did help make the American government look bad, along with Snowden personally.

drewblaisdell3• 13 years ago

For instance, leaking details of Chinese hacking does not help the American people. It hurts the NSA and makes the American government look bad, but it doesn't help the American people.

Assuming that this is true, the net effect of Snowden's leaks (including revealing the extent to which we live in a surveillance state) is way in the positive.

Likewise with all the drama about asylum with regard to Russia. He put Obama in the position of being forced to cancel a summit with Putin to avoid looking politically weak at home.

Well, a) he can't just avoid seeking asylum because it is inconvenient for the figurehead of the state pursuing him (what?), and b) the "drama" is a product of the United State's sensationalist news.

unclebucknasty3• 13 years ago

No kidding. First he comes out defending it. Now it needs reform. Which is it? because if he is asking us to believe that they happened to be juuuusst about to reform it when Snowden leaked, then we're now entering the self-parody zone.

Vivtek• 13 years ago

Even without the leaks, [Obama] added, the U.S. government would have made the reforms he was proposing,

Pull the other one, Mr. President.

shill• 13 years ago

He is making a fool of himself.

dictum• 13 years ago

I don't think Mr. Snowden is a patriot," Obama said, adding that Snowden had legal means to bring his concerns to light.

Such as voicing his concerns to a superior, getting his clearance revoked just because, and then ranting in a blog, just to have his accusations denied with weasel words by the administration? [EDIT] Or just dismissed in a press conference as paranoia from a lunatic?

Even without the leaks, he added, the U.S. government would have made the reforms he was proposing, except it would have done so without sacrificing national security.

How did Snowden sacrifice national security?

Gormo• 13 years ago

Snowden improved national security by informing the American public about the activities of its most dangerous enemy.

McPants• 13 years ago

He said that because most people are not technically literate or have enough time to understand exactly what Snowden did. Considering the way he is portrayed in mass media I would bet that many people think what he did was along the lines of releasing the secret passwords to our spy computers of which then Al Qaeda can access and disrupt our job in killing and detaining terrorists.

OGC• 13 years ago

I, too, propose reforms to surveillance programs. My proposal will have about as much impact as his.

dllthomas3• 13 years ago

These actually sound like good measures. I'm not convinced they will be sufficient, however; in particular, many of Americans (myself included) are now highly skeptical that the government will actually be following its own rules instead of abusive, secret reinterpretations thereof. These reforms coupled with something that addresses that, I might accept (but don't hold me to that...).

chmars2• 13 years ago

The cryptographic announcement to president Obama's announcement is snake oil.

OK, snake oil is probably not recognizable as such for a politician …

chmars2• 13 years ago

Sorry for the typo, 'announcement' should of course be 'equivalent'.

It would be interesting to see whether the down vote resulted from English language nazis or Obama fanboys … ;)

ajays• 13 years ago

The reason Obama Administration is pissed at Snowden is not because he leaked so-called "secrets", but because he exposed the "man behind the curtain". That is to say: Obama is no different than any mainstream Republican would have been.

I voted for Obama twice; and in 2008, when the race against McCain was tight, I spent many weekends in Reno and Northern NV, campaigning, pounding the pavement, going door-to-door in the heat.

And I will be cancelling my Democratic membership. I urge all of you to do so too (Democrat or Republican). It is clear that neither of the two parties are interested in our rights. Democrats like Feinstein and Pelosi are war mongers; and Republicans are merely a shadow of their so-called ideals. Republicans are also to blame, because they go out of their way to push for such things. Look at the Republican braying after Benghazi; they will take even the slightest setback to go after Democrats as weak on terror. And the Democrats are more than happy to oblige by bringing in a police state.

Please: the only way to bring about change is to stop voting for either party, and to actively campaign against them. We are lucky: we have 15 months to go before the next election. Let's get some third-party candidates in the House!

unclebucknasty3• 13 years ago

Man, I wish I could bonus upvote this. One vote just isn't enough.

If it's not clear by now that these two parties are two sides of the same coin, controlled by the same interests, and driven to the same goals, I don't know what will make it clear.

quadrangle• 13 years ago

For reference, the BEST solution to the two-party system is RANGE VOTING: http://rangevoting.org/ Don't waste your time trying to do anything against the two parties until we get that in place.

kaonashi• 13 years ago

So don't do anything to unseat the two major parties until the two major parties pass a constitutional amendment making unseating them possible?

spoiledtechie• 13 years ago

I think it was Judge Judy who said it.

If a person has lied to you once, you can be sure that the person will be capable of lying to you again.

dasil003• 13 years ago

Despite the disappointment that a lot of us felt over the accomplishments of Obama throughout his presidency, he really had plenty of chance to get out in front of this one. However, what we got instead was the perfect illustration of just how much of a politician's politican he really is, and how nothing that comes out of his mouth reflect anything other than whichever way the wind happens to be blowing today. I'm sorry Obama, but your greatest legacy will be nothing more than the illustration of just how impotent democracy is in the media age.

AnthonyMouse• 13 years ago

What a sham. "Oversight and transparency" is not good enough. The government kicks you in the teeth and then lies about it, now they promise next time not to lie about it. Anyone else feel underwhelmed?

Oversight and transparency are a big pile of nothing if all it means in practice is that government officials engaged in unjustifiable surveillance have to work in pairs to "oversee" each other. The government should not be engaged in mass surveillance. How about you identify a specific suspect and get a warrant, Mr. President.

"America is not interested in spying on ordinary people," Obama said.

"America" is not interested in spying on ordinary people, the trouble is the NSA seems quite keen on it.

Obama said his administration and the NSA is only interested in preventing another terror attack.
"We do not have an interest in doing anything other than that," Obama said.

For example, no interest in providing exculpatory evidence to those they falsely accused. That seems fair, right?

anigbrowl2• 13 years ago

Goodness, that's hard to read. I don't think much of 'live blogging.'

The wSJ also has a report on this: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142412788732452250457900... As I've predicted before, even the mention of reform was met with swift condemnation from both junior and senior Republicans.

As a matter of pure realpolitik, I don't expect any significant progress on reform before fall of 2014, when the US has finished withdrawing military forces from Afghanistan. As C-in-C, the President has to pay as much attention to the safety of troops in the field as to the (often inchoate) concerns of the domestic electorate.

jared314• 13 years ago

Just like when I see a CEO start taking away the free soda, I believe he saw this coming. With the amount of money, people, and secrecy put into these programs, eventual scandal was the only possible outcome. Now he has enough political capitol to change things, for better or worse.

I expect to be down voted for my opinion, but what are fake internet points worth if you don't spend them on something you believe in.

blueprint• 13 years ago

If they're going to actually reform the surveillance programs they're going to have to declassify ALL of them first. otherwise this is just a propagandic, empty gesture.

unclebucknasty3• 13 years ago

Snowden cannot be guilty of treason AND the program needs reform. Obama needs to choose one.

michaelwww• 13 years ago

As I listened to him speak today I realized that he may not understand the technology the NSA is using or how it could be surreptitiously abused. No man can be an expert in everything and his background as a law professor probably didn't include the necessary study. So he relies on the experts in his circle who are telling him what he is repeating to us; that no Americans are being spied on. Of course he believes all his people are honest and have the highest integrity so why shouldn't he believe them? It's not the first time and not the last the a President has been duped by his own people.

shmerl• 13 years ago

Pure PR move. He will lose next elections anyway.

President Obama Proposes Reforms To Surveillance Programs

Related Stories