The Nation

US National Security Agency hacked into Pak mobile networking system, claims Wikileaks The Indian Express This is not the first time that reports of NSA spying on other countries has surfaced. It was reported that the NSA authorised to spy on foreign-based political organizations including the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) from India and the Pakistan ... American NSA hacking into Pakistan's mobile system: WikiLeaksThe Nation Top US spy agency hacked Pakistan's most popular mobile network, claims WikiLeaksDaily Pakistan all 5 news articles »

See more here:
US National Security Agency hacked into Pak mobile networking system, claims Wikileaks - The Indian Express

Takeaway: This question doesn't have an easy answer, which is a big part of the problem.

Actually, that isn't such an easy question to answer. Since 2001 - shortly after the September 11th attacks - the NSA has been running a program called the "Presidents Surveillance Program," or simply "The Program."

If it sounds secretive, that's because it is: "The Program" is technically still classified. However, recent reports from various whistle blowers have brought awareness of this surveillance to the public. And that has people wondering just exactly what the NSA is doing, and what it means for the rest of us. Here we look at some of the answers. (Follow the privacy debate in real time on Twitter. Check out The Online Privacy Debate: Top Twitter Influencers to Follow.)

But here's where things get iffy: The Program gathers data on millions of Americans, most of whom have never been and never will be connected to terrorism in any way. And, it says that it may collect those records and hold them for up to five years. It won't, however, be able to use that data unless there is a reason, such as a tip. In theory, it's one that would have to be certified by an attorney general before the NSA could dig into the data. Even so, according to an article by Marc Armbinder for TheWeek, this certification can come after the data has been used, which doesn't provide much assurance for those who are concerned their data may be mined without cause. (Read more about online privacy in Don't Look Now But Online Privacy May Be Gone for Good.)

With emails, its generally believed that the agency is not reading them all. Instead, theyre data mining, or using analytical software that searches for possible terrorist activity patterns in keywords, financial transactions and travel records. Should I Be Worried? On the one hand, it's easy to say that the average American doesnt have anything to worry about in terms of the data the NSA is collecting. And yes, its highly unlikely that the NSA cares about the everyday secrets of ordinary U.S. citizens.

On the other hand, a Bloomberg investigation did find that a few NSA contractors and employees had deliberately spied on Americans, overstepping the authority of The Program. These incidences have been very few and far between - about one per year over the past decade. It was later found to be cases of personal spying on the employees lovers. Even so, it is one strong example of why collecting personal data is problematic: It creates the potential for misuse.

On a more general level, legality of the Program itself and the role of private communication in a free, democratic society is worth thinking about too. If a future administration comes to be led by a less scrupulous president, this mass surveillance could be used as a weapon. For example, it could be used to blackmail members of Congress or provide illicit political intelligence.

So is the NSA spying on you? The answer is maybe. But then again, one of the biggest problems around the NSA debate is the lack of information about what the NSA's doing, and even what it's allowed to do. That because much of what the organization does is classified. Looks like someone still has a right to privacy after all.

Read more:
Is the NSA Spying on Me? - Techopedia.com

No doubt, You must be aware that Google tracks you, but what you probably did not realize is how precisely and till what extent it tracks you.

Well, Google knows which movies I watched where, when, at what time and with how many of my friends, and knows it so well even my eyebrows raised slightly in surprise!

Yes, you heard right.

If you are using your Gmail account like I do, receiving all movie booking and tickets, Google can easily track your movie flavors and frequent hangout places without access to GPS.

I was feeling bored last night, so I decided to watch a movie and moved towards Google to search newly released films. As I googled "Movies 2015"... Holy Crap! What I saw on the monitor was unbelievable.

In Google search results, I was able to see the list of all my past movie booking event activities and even my future bookings (shown below), and it was so, so accurate.

If you have Google account logged in into your browser, then just Google "Movies 2015" and youll have all your personal data on the computer screen, as shown.

Google knows I had seen Fast and Furious 7 twice; first time on April 2nd in New Delhi with my office colleague and the second time on April 3rd in Chandigarh with my family friends.

The Google Search Engine not just knows when, which and how many times I watched a movie, but it also collects all the data related to film, including number of tickets I had booked and location of movie hall with complete address on Google map.

This absolutely scared me for a while, as in this scenario, neither I had used any GPS enabled device nor I had any intention to reveal my hangout plans to social media check-in.

If you see the above screenshot carefully, you will notice that I have seen some movies twice or thrice. Guess what...??? Sometimes I watch the same movie with my girlfriend as well as my family on different days 😛

My family is not aware of it, but Google knows.

So be careful with your laptop if you watch the same movie with different girlfriends, because, in case, one of your girlfriend see your laptop, you could be in tremendous relationship trouble.

Ha! Just scaring you a bit, but this does not mean it could not be happened to you.

No doubt, this private information is only visible to me as it is linked to my Gmail account, but the fact here is that out of thousands of official, personal, spam and promotional emails, Google is smartly and continuously listing out every piece of information related to my activities.

This actually remind me of a statement made by the famous Media tycoon Rupert Murdoch who labeled Google worse than the NSA, when it comes to tracking, saying "NSA privacy invasion bad, but nothing compared to Google."

However, the question is

How is Google able to track your activities so accurately without GPS?

Well, Gmail does scan and read all your emails, clearly defined in its terms as their, "automated systems analyze your content."

However, Google has faced criticism from privacy action groups and lawsuits from the education sector for these terms.

Structured Data Markup allows website developers or email senders to add special tags to their existing HTML code, which in turn allow search engines to understand better what information is contained in emails or web pages.

For Example, If you are booking rooms from Hotels.com or flights from makemytrip.com or movie tickets from Bookmyshow.com, these sites will send you e-tickets formatted with email markup so that Google can easily scan and index them quickly for giving your alerts via Google Now service.

So, just make sure you don't hand over your laptop to any of your friends with your gmail account logged-in. Now as you guys know that I have booked tickets for Sunburn 2015, Goa, so catch you there. Stay Tuned, Stay Safe.

Originally posted here:
NSA Spying - The Hacker News

Why it matters to you

Are you curious to know just how many Americans are affected by the NSA's mass-surveillance programs. Well, the agency still isn't talking.

With the legislation that effectively legalizes the National Security Agency mass surveillance programs Prism and Upstream set to expire at the end of 2017, Congress is once again asking for numbers on how many Americans have been surveilled. Just as it has for the past six years, though, the NSA isnt playing ball.

Although most Americans only learned of the countrys large-scale spying operations after NSA whistleblowerEdward Snowden revealed them, Congress has been aware a little longer. Since 2011, several key members have been trying to find out how many Americans the NSA has collected personal information from, but theyvealways been denied, according to Ars Technica.

More:The NSA and GCHQ can see data from your phone when youre 10,000 feet in the air

The reason Congress is making a big case to have those numbers revealed this year is because, as during the Obama administration, Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) will expire on December 31. While the Trump administration is keen to see this legislation remain in place, according toThe Intercept, Congress wants the numbers to know just how effective it is and how much useless information is potentially collected from regular citizens.

The NSA says that it cant reveal them, even in top-secret briefings. Just as it did whenSen. Ron Wyden (D-Oregon) requested them in 2011, 2012 and 2014, it claims that by revealing how many Americans were affected, it would require identifying them. That, it claims, would mean destroying their anonymity as part of the data, thereby making their information more vulnerable.

That sort of circular logic isnt sitting well with senators, norwith privacy champion the Electronic Frontier Foundation. It is urging Congress to allow FISA to expire, thereby making the mass spying conducted by the NSA and other intelligence agencies illegal in the future.

As it stands, the NSA uses Prism to siphon mass data from popular online services like Facebook, Google, Microsoft, and Yahoo, while Upstream lets it tap into the fiber cables that transmit the internet across the country and around the world.

Although the NSA and others argue that such technologies are vital in helping protect Americans, many have argued that mass surveillance breaches the Constitution and undermines the idea of a free and democratic society.

Continue reading here:
NSA Spying: We Still Don't Know How Many Americans Are Affected ... - Digital Trends

BOSTON, Mass. (March 10, 2017) A Massachusetts bill would generally prohibit the warrantless use of stingray devices and the collection of electronic data stored by service providers. Final passage of the bill would not only protect privacy in Massachusetts, but would also hinder at least two aspects of the federal surveillance state.

More than 100 representatives and senators have signed on to cosponsor House Bill 2332 (H2332), The legislation would help block the use of cell site simulators, known as stingrays. These devices essentially spoof cell phone towers, tricking any device within range into connecting to the stingray instead of the tower, allowing law enforcement to sweep up communications content, as well as locate and track the person in possession of a specific phone or other electronic device.

H2332 would only allow law enforcement agencies to use a stingray device pursuant to a warrant based on probable cause, a persons informed consent, or in accordance with a judicially recognized exception to the warrant requirement. The proposed law would apply the same requirements to collecting electronic data held by a service provider. The bill covers metadata, communications content and location information. It does include exceptions to the warrant requirement for certain emergency situations.

The legislation also includes protection to limit the retention of data. It requires that police must take all steps necessary to permanently delete any information or metadata collected from any person or persons not specified in the warrant immediately following such collection and ensure that such information or metadata is not used, retained, or transmitted for any purpose whatsoever; and delete any information or metadata collected from the person or persons specified in the warrant authorization within thirty days if there is no longer probable cause to support the belief that such information or metadata is evidence of a crime.

Evidence obtained in violation of the law would be inadmissible in court.

No information obtained in violation of this section and no information provided beyond the scope of the materials authorized to be obtained shall be admissible in any criminal, civil, administrative or other proceeding.

IMPACT ON FEDERAL SURVEILLANCEPROGRAMS

The federal government funds the vast majority of state and local stingray programs, attaching one important condition. The feds require agencies acquiring the technology to sign non-disclosure agreements. This throws a giant shroud over the program, even preventing judges, prosecutors and defense attorneys from getting information about the use of stingrays in court. The feds actually instruct prosecutors to withdraw evidence if judges or legislators press for information. As the Baltimore Sun reported in April 2015, a Baltimore detective refused to answer questions on the stand during a trial, citing a federal non-disclosure agreement.

Defense attorney Joshua Insley asked Cabreja about the agreement.

Does this document instruct you to withhold evidence from the states attorney and Circuit Court, even upon court order to produce? he asked.

Yes, Cabreja said.

As privacysos.org put it, The FBI would rather police officers and prosecutors let criminals go than face a possible scenario where a defendant brings a Fourth Amendment challenge to warrantless stingray spying.

The feds sell the technology in the name of anti-terrorism efforts. With non-disclosure agreements in place, most police departments refuse to release any information on the use of stingrays. But information obtained from the Tacoma Police Department revealed that it uses the technology primarily for routine criminal investigations.

Some privacy advocates argue that stingray use can never happen within the parameters of the Fourth Amendment because the technology necessarily connects to every electronic device within range, not just the one held by the target. And the information collected by these devices undoubtedly ends up in federal databases.

The feds can share and tap into vast amounts of information gathered at the state and local level through a system known as the information sharing environment or ISE. In other words, stingrays create the potential for the federal government to track the movement of millions of Americans with no warrant, no probable cause, and without the people even knowing it.

According to its website, the ISE provides analysts, operators, and investigators with information needed to enhance national security. These analysts, operators, and investigators have mission needs to collaborate and share information with each other and with private sector partners and our foreign allies. In other words, ISE serves as a conduit for the sharing of information gathered without a warrant.

The federal government encourages and funds stingrays at the state and local level across the U.S., thereby undoubtedly gaining access to a massive data pool on Americans without having to expend the resources to collect the information itself. By placing restrictions on stingray use, state and local governments limit the data available that the feds can access.

In a nutshell, without state and local cooperation, the feds have a much more difficult time gathering information. Passage H2332 would representa major blow to the surveillance state and a win for privacy.

PARALLEL CONSTRUCTION

By prohibiting the use of information obtained outside the scope of the law, H2332 would hinder one practical effect of NSA spying in Massachusetts.

Reuters revealed the extent of such NSA data sharing with state and local law enforcement in an August 2013 article. According to documents obtained by the news agency, the NSA passes information to police through a formerly secret DEA unit known Special Operations Divisions and the cases rarely involve national security issues. Almost all of the information involves regular criminal investigations, not terror-related investigations.

In other words, not only does the NSA collect and store this data, using it to build profiles, the agency encourages state and local law enforcement to violate the Fourth Amendment by making use of this information in their day-to-day investigations.

This is the most threatening situation to our constitutional republic since the Civil War, Binney said.

NEXT STEPS

H2332 was referred to the Joint Judiciary Committee where it must pass by a majority vote before moving forward in the legislative process.

See the original post:
Massachusetts Bill Would Ban Warrantless Stingray Spying - Tenth Amendment Center (blog)

LISTEN TO TLRS LATEST PODCAST:

By: Paul Meekin

Kotaku brought the gameOrwellto my attention today. Its a game about spying on peoples personal data in order to ascertain potential terrorist activity. Your end goal is to thwart that activity. The point of the game, in addition to being an entertaining pot boiler, is the fundamental question of when, and if, its okay to violate the privacy of human beings in order to prevent acts of terror. This is a wonderful concept and one I support fundamentally as a gamer and fan of thinking critically while playing them.

The point of the article was the question if people today even careabout privacy.The most popularcomment on the article?

I dont care. I mean first off what can we do to stop them from spying on us? Nothing. Even if we did complain they could say they stopped but keep on spying anyways.

Outside of that who cares. Let them see my life. My boring facebook posts. My boring emails once and awhile. My youtube watching. Going to Kotaku. Even any porn Ive looked at.

Actually why would you worry about what people see anyways? Unless your hiding something you have no reason to worry. Do you look at child porn? Do you hire hitmen? If not then who cares.

Sorry, I just threw up in my mouth a little.In 2013 we learned the NSA was in our business. Directly or indirectly, the fact of the matter was the NSA was gathering massive amounts of data on Americans, foreigners, and scorned lovers.

Its possible youre much like the commenter above and didnt care. You had nothing to hide and are perfectly okay with invasions of personal privacy and personal data in the name of security.

But its also possible youre a principled individual and dont think the constitution should be violated just in case youre up to no good.

The beauty of Orwellis that it could change your mind one way or another.Unfortunately, as a Mac user, I am unable to play Orwell, but I support it on principle.

A game I did play, that didchange my mind, was Tom ClancysSplinter Cell: Blacklist. Released in August 2013, a few months after the scale and scope of the NSAs activities were revealed.

The backlash to these activities was massive. But along comes Splinter Cell. Without trying and without foreknowledge of this event, it made quite a case in favor of a bit of privacy invasion. Of course the reviewer of the game disregarded the plot as Right Wing mumbo jumbo on a podcast.

But it was mumbo jumbo with a point. Splinter Cell: Blacklist is a game that demonstrates the awesome force of the Military Industrial Complex. From wire tapping to drone strikes to covert operations to warrantless searches and seizures it demonstrated what a single team of highly qualified individuals were capable of when they *werent* restrained by thebureaucracy of the federal government and the morelimiting aspects of the Constitution (and The Bill of Rights in particular).

Obviously it was just a game, and not based on fact although some of the technology is quite believable in hindsight. But the point it makes has real world applications; Just how many times have lives been saved by illegal wire tapping and covert operations we never hear about?Well never know.

How many lives make that violation of privacy worth it? Batman seems to think its about two boatloads.

The Libertarian in me says no lives are worth it. That the fundamental cost of liberty is that the federal government shouldnt be in the business of convicting people for crimes before theyre committed and spying on them, again just in case.

If were willing to violate the privacy of lives to save lives, those lives arent worth as much as we initially thought, are they?

In playing Splinter Cell, you realize America is embroiled in a war with a stacked deck. The enemy doesnt obey the laws of combat. They fight dirty and they fight mean and they behead journalists, use children as suicide bombers, and drag bodies through the street. As a result, if we fight the war as governed by the Geneva convention, were essentially playing checkers while the enemy is playing tackle football.

Games have an amazing capacity to educate while entertaining. Unlike a movie you watch, or a book you read, you participate in a game. And the best of them, from Oregon Trail to Splinter Cell to even Madden Football, can enlighten you on a subject in a way no other media can.

Regarding the NSA? I still dont know how I feel. Theres valid arguments on both sides. I lean toward getting the government out of my computer.

Then again, I have nothing to hide.

-

gamingGeorge OrwellkotakuSplinter CellSpyingvideo games

Here is the original post:
Gaming, NSA Spying, and You: Two Games That Could Change Your Mind - The Libertarian Republic

Trump claims that the Obama administration bugged Trump Tower before the election.

Sound nutty?

Perhaps but former Attorney General Michael Mukasey said that Trump isprobably rightthat Trump Tower was bugged (by the Justice Department, not Obama personally).

And chief Fox News Washington correspondent James Rosen who Obamas Attorney General Eric Holder ordered be bugged likemany other reportersfor well over a decade said he thought Trump might be right:

Binney is the NSA executive whocreatedthe agencys mass surveillance program for digital information, who served as theseniortechnical director within the agency, who managedsix thousandNSA employees.

He was a 36-year NSA veteran widely regarded as a legend within the agency and the NSAsbest-everanalyst and code-breaker.

Binney also mapped out the Soviet command-and-control structure before anyone else knew how, and so predicted Soviet invasions before they happened (in the 1970s, he decrypted the Soviet Unions command system, which provided the US and its allies with real-time surveillance of all Soviet troop movements and Russian atomic weapons).

Binney told Washingtons Blog:

NSA has all the data through the Upstream programs (Fairview/Stormbrew/Blarney) [background] and backed up by second and some third party country collection.

Plus the FBI and CIA plus others, as of the last month of the Obama administration, have direct access to all the NSA collection (metadata and content on phones,email and banking/credit cards etc.) with no attempt at oversight by anybody [background]. This is all done under Executive Order 12333 [the order whichallows unlimited spyingno matter what intelligence officials claim] .

FBI would only ask for a warrant if they wanted to be able to take it into court at some point given they have something meaningful as evidence. This is clearly true given the fact the President Trumps phone conversations with other country leaders were leaked to the mainstream media.

In other words, Binney is saying that Trumps phoneswerebugged by the NSA without a warrant remember, top NSA whistleblowers have previously explained that the NSA is spying onvirtuallyallof the digital communications of Americans. and the NSA shared the raw data with the CIA, FBI and other agencies.

If the FBI obtained a warrant to tap Trumps phone, it was a parallel construction to launder improperly-gained evidence through acceptable channels.

As weve previouslyexplained:

The government islaundering information gained through mass surveillancethrough other agencies, with an agreement that the agencies willrecreate the evidence in a parallel construction so they dont have to admit that the evidence came from unconstitutional spying. This data laundering is gettingworseandworse.

So does it mean that the NSA spying on Trump Tower actually turned up some dirt?

Maybe

But history shows that mass surveillance has long beenused toblackmail opponents includinghigh-level officials. Andsee this.

And the former NSA directoradmittedthat the mass surveillance is apower grab.

So we wont know until the intelligence agencies actually show their cards andrevealwhat evidence theyve gathered.

Read the original post:
Top NSA Whistleblower: Intelligence Agencies DID Spy On Trump - Center for Research on Globalization

A former top intelligence official-turned-whistleblowerat the National Security Agency says surveillance programs by the NSA could have been keeping tabs on the Trump campaign and that their intelligence could have been shared with other agencies.

William Binney, a legend at the NSA, laid out the case for warrantless wiretapping of Trump Tower and how other intel agencies like the CIA could have had access to the wiretaps.

Fox News national security correspondent James Rosen himself bugged by the Obama administration says Trump may be right:

ZeroHedge Blog:

Washington's Blog asked the highest-level NSA whistleblower in history - Bill Binney - whether he thought Trump had been bugged.

Binney is the NSA executive whocreatedthe agencys mass surveillance program for digital information, who served as theseniortechnical director within the agency, who managedsix thousandNSA employees.

He was a 36-year NSA veteran widely regarded as a legend within the agency and the NSAsbest-everanalyst and code-breaker.

Binney also mapped out the Soviet command-and-control structure before anyone else knew how, and so predicted Soviet invasions before they happened (in the 1970s, he decrypted the Soviet Unions command system, which provided the US and its allies with real-time surveillance of all Soviet troop movements and Russian atomic weapons).

Binney told Washington's Blog:

NSA has all the data through the Upstream programs (Fairview/Stormbrew/Blarney) [background] and backed up by second and some third party country collection.

Plus the FBI and CIA plus others, as of the last month of the Obama administration, have direct access to all the NSA collection (metadata and content on phones,email and banking/credit cards etc.) with no attempt at oversight by anybody [background]. This is all done under Executive Order 12333 [the order whichallows unlimited spyingno matter what intelligence officials claim] ....

FBI would only ask for a warrant if they wanted to be able to take it into court at some point given they have something meaningful as evidence. This is clearly true given the fact the President Trump's phone conversations with other country leaders were leaked to the mainstream media.

In other words, Binney is saying that Trumps phoneswerebugged by the NSA without a warrant - remember, top NSA whistleblowers have previously explained that the NSA is spying onvirtuallyallof the digital communications of Americans. - and the NSA shared the raw data with the CIA, FBI and other agencies.

If the FBI obtained a warrant to tap Trump's phone, it was a "parallel construction" to "launder" improperly-gained evidence through acceptable channels.

As we've previouslyexplained:

The government islaundering information gained through mass surveillancethrough other agencies, with an agreement that the agencies willrecreate the evidence in a parallel construction so they dont have to admit that the evidence came from unconstitutional spying. This data laundering is gettingworseandworse.

So does it mean that the NSA spying on Trump Tower actually turned up some dirt?

Maybe ...

Binney has no direct knowledge of any surveillance of Trump Tower. What he has is a roadmap for how it could have been done. He also shows the likelihood that agencies could have used whatever information was captured by the NSA's information dragnet.

A couple of caveats. First, Obama's executive order allowing other intel agencies access to the NSA's raw data was signed after the campaign was over. That doesn't mean that any wiretapped information from the Trump campaign wasn't gathered or even shared by NSA. It means that it is less likely thatintelligence agencies hadaccess to Trump campaign phone and email records before the election.

Secondly, from what we know so far, the FBI was not operating under any warrants, nor were there any FISA warrants issued to spy on the Trump campaign. Again, this doesn't mean that it didn't happen. In fact, Binney's roadmap shows it's more likely that if surveillance occurred, it was done without a warrant. But if we're looking for hard evidence or a paper trail proving Trump's charge, we may never find it.

Astronomer Carl Sagan popularized the adage, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." Sagan was talking about alien visitation of Earth and the fact that to date, solid "evidence" has been lacking. The same should hold true in politics. Accusing the former president of the United States of conducting a secret wiretapping program against an oppositionpresidential candidateis just about as extraordinary as it gets. So far, those who claim that the charges are true including the president are lacking solid evidence that the bugging occurred. What is offered as "proof" is more opinion and supposition than substantiation of facts.

But Binney's roadmap, along with what we know of surveillance during the Obama years, points to extremely troubling questions that Democrats cannot dismiss as "conspiracy-mongering." In this case, there were a will and a way. For the sake of the country, Congress needs to get to the bottom of the matter.

A former top intelligence official-turned-whistleblowerat the National Security Agency says surveillance programs by the NSA could have been keeping tabs on the Trump campaign and that their intelligence could have been shared with other agencies.

William Binney, a legend at the NSA, laid out the case for warrantless wiretapping of Trump Tower and how other intel agencies like the CIA could have had access to the wiretaps.

Fox News national security correspondent James Rosen himself bugged by the Obama administration says Trump may be right:

ZeroHedge Blog:

Washington's Blog asked the highest-level NSA whistleblower in history - Bill Binney - whether he thought Trump had been bugged.

Binney is the NSA executive whocreatedthe agencys mass surveillance program for digital information, who served as theseniortechnical director within the agency, who managedsix thousandNSA employees.

He was a 36-year NSA veteran widely regarded as a legend within the agency and the NSAsbest-everanalyst and code-breaker.

Binney also mapped out the Soviet command-and-control structure before anyone else knew how, and so predicted Soviet invasions before they happened (in the 1970s, he decrypted the Soviet Unions command system, which provided the US and its allies with real-time surveillance of all Soviet troop movements and Russian atomic weapons).

Binney told Washington's Blog:

NSA has all the data through the Upstream programs (Fairview/Stormbrew/Blarney) [background] and backed up by second and some third party country collection.

Plus the FBI and CIA plus others, as of the last month of the Obama administration, have direct access to all the NSA collection (metadata and content on phones,email and banking/credit cards etc.) with no attempt at oversight by anybody [background]. This is all done under Executive Order 12333 [the order whichallows unlimited spyingno matter what intelligence officials claim] ....

FBI would only ask for a warrant if they wanted to be able to take it into court at some point given they have something meaningful as evidence. This is clearly true given the fact the President Trump's phone conversations with other country leaders were leaked to the mainstream media.

In other words, Binney is saying that Trumps phoneswerebugged by the NSA without a warrant - remember, top NSA whistleblowers have previously explained that the NSA is spying onvirtuallyallof the digital communications of Americans. - and the NSA shared the raw data with the CIA, FBI and other agencies.

If the FBI obtained a warrant to tap Trump's phone, it was a "parallel construction" to "launder" improperly-gained evidence through acceptable channels.

As we've previouslyexplained:

The government islaundering information gained through mass surveillancethrough other agencies, with an agreement that the agencies willrecreate the evidence in a parallel construction so they dont have to admit that the evidence came from unconstitutional spying. This data laundering is gettingworseandworse.

So does it mean that the NSA spying on Trump Tower actually turned up some dirt?

Maybe ...

Binney has no direct knowledge of any surveillance of Trump Tower. What he has is a roadmap for how it could have been done. He also shows the likelihood that agencies could have used whatever information was captured by the NSA's information dragnet.

A couple of caveats. First, Obama's executive order allowing other intel agencies access to the NSA's raw data was signed after the campaign was over. That doesn't mean that any wiretapped information from the Trump campaign wasn't gathered or even shared by NSA. It means that it is less likely thatintelligence agencies hadaccess to Trump campaign phone and email records before the election.

Secondly, from what we know so far, the FBI was not operating under any warrants, nor were there any FISA warrants issued to spy on the Trump campaign. Again, this doesn't mean that it didn't happen. In fact, Binney's roadmap shows it's more likely that if surveillance occurred, it was done without a warrant. But if we're looking for hard evidence or a paper trail proving Trump's charge, we may never find it.

Astronomer Carl Sagan popularized the adage, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." Sagan was talking about alien visitation of Earth and the fact that to date, solid "evidence" has been lacking. The same should hold true in politics. Accusing the former president of the United States of conducting a secret wiretapping program against an oppositionpresidential candidateis just about as extraordinary as it gets. So far, those who claim that the charges are true including the president are lacking solid evidence that the bugging occurred. What is offered as "proof" is more opinion and supposition than substantiation of facts.

But Binney's roadmap, along with what we know of surveillance during the Obama years, points to extremely troubling questions that Democrats cannot dismiss as "conspiracy-mongering." In this case, there were a will and a way. For the sake of the country, Congress needs to get to the bottom of the matter.

Here is the original post:
Blog: NSA whistleblower shows how candidate Trump could have ... - American Thinker (blog)

President Donald Trump shattered Saturday mornings news cycle with a series of tweets accusing former-President Obama with tapping his phones in Trump Tower prior to the election.

Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my wires tapped in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism, Trump tweeted.

Is it legal for a sitting President to be wire tapping a race for president prior to an election? Turned down by court earlier. A NEW LOW! he said later.

Trump tweeted that a good lawyer could make a great case of the fact that President Obama was tapping my phones in October, just prior to Election!

How low has President Obama gone to tap (sic) my phones during the very sacred election process. This is Nixon/Watergage. Bad (or sick) guy! Trump charged.

While Trump did not provide a source for his claim, Fox News pointed to a Friday Breitbart story that said the Obama administration made two Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA) requests in 2016 to monitor Trump communications and a computer server in Trump Tower in connection with claims of the Republican candidates links to Russia and Russian banks, in particular.

In January, the New York Times reportedU.S. law enforcement and intelligence agencies were examining intercepted communications and financial transactions as part of a broad investigation into possible links between Russian officials and associates of President-elect Donald J. Trump, including his former campaign chairman Paul Manafort, current and former senior American officials said.

Despite having found no conclusive evidence of wrongdoing, an officials said intelligence reports based on some of the wiretapped communications had been provided to the White House.

Spokesmen for Obama were quick to respond to Trumps charge.

Neither President Obama nor any White House official ever ordered surveillance on any U.S. citizen. Any suggestion otherwise is simply false, said Kevin Lewis, a spokesman for Obama.

A cardinal rule of the Obama administration was that no White House official ever interfered with any independent investigation led by the Department of Justice, he added.

Ben Rhodes, a former foreign-policy adviser for Obama, also took issue with Trumps charge, tweeting, No president can order a wiretap. Those restrictions were put in place to protect citizens from people like you.

However, earlier evidence of NSA spying on American citizens calls into question the Obama spokesmens protestations, even if technically correct.

Like the reporting you see here? Sign up for free news alerts from WND.com, Americas independent news network.

WND reported in 2013 on congressional hearings where then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper apologized for lying to Congress over his agencys surveillance of American citizens.

Technically, a FISA warrant is required to intentionally target the communications of American citizens or people inside the U.S.

When the NSA does get a warrant from the FISA court it can resemble a blank check.

In the case of a 2010 warrant obtained by the London Guardian, the warrant was only one-paragraph long and did not contain detailed legal rulings or explanations.

Signed by a FISA judge, it simply declared the procedures submitted by the attorney general on behalf of the NSA are consistent with U.S. law and the fourth amendment.

The procedures let analysts decide for themselves if a person is located overseas, if the agency has no specific information on the targets location.

The NSA is supposed to use a variety of resources including IP addresses, public information and information from other agencies to determine if the potential target is located outside the U.S.

But, even if it later turns out the target was located in the U.S., analysts are still permitted to listen to calls and look at messages to verify the location.

And warrants arent even used to obtain the bulk of the data collected.

ONE NATION UNDER SURVEILLANCE: Big Brother is watching in ways Orwell never dreamed

The reason the discretion of the NSA analysts is so broad seems to stem from Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act (FAA), which was renewed for five years last December.

It allows the NSA to collect large scale data from any country, as long as the target is believed to be overseas.

Former NSA contractor James Snowden, who revealed the data-collection program, claims even low-level analysts at the NSA can access the content of Americans phone calls and emails whenever they want without a warrant.

His claims appear to be backed up by documents obtained by the London Guardian and the Washington Post.

The papers reported two documents submitted to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA) court by Attorney General Eric Holder on July 29, 2009, detailed the procedures the NSA is to follow to minimize the collection of data on U.S. citizens.

But it showed loopholes so broad the NSA could still collect domestic communications and use them for any number of reasons.

What do YOU think? Sound off on WND Poll on Trump claim Obama wiretapped his phones.

The documents reportedly show the NSAs own analysts have the power to decide who to target for surveillance without going to the courts or even their superiors.

The guidelines are supposed to provide procedures for guarding Americans privacy but they also give the NSA the latitude to keep information obtained by surveillance under certain conditions.

That includes when the information contains significant foreign intelligence, evidence of a crime, a threat to harm people or property or is believed be relevant to cybersecurity.

The classified documents also show the NSAs own guidelines allow analysts to collect and keep the contents of phone calls and emails of American citizens and legal residents under a wide range of circumstances, according to theWashington Post.

President Obama has also claimed the NSA does not look at the contents of emails and phone calls unless it goes to a FISA judge and obtains a warrant.

He said the NSA activities do not involve listening to peoples phone calls, do not involve reading the emails of U.S. citizens or U.S. residents, absent further action by a federal court, that is entirely consistent with what we would do, for example, in a criminal investigation.

But, asWND reported in June 2013, a key Democrat revealed the presidents account is not accurate.

Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., said he was startled to learn NSA analysts can decide for themselves whether to access the content of a domestic phone call.

Nadler emerged from a secret briefing for members of Congress and said the NSA allows analysts to listen to calls without court authorization.

He said the NSA accesses the contents of phone calls simply based on an analyst deciding that.

The legal standards for monitoring phone calls also apply to emails, text messages and instant messages, which means the NSA also may be accessing the content of those communications without court authorization.

Declan McCullagh of CNETbroke the story and observed, [I]t also suggests the Justice Department has secretly interpreted federal surveillance law to permit thousands of low-ranking analysts to eavesdrop on phone calls.

Additionally, thePost disclosed the existence of NUCLEON, a top-secret NSA program which intercepts telephone calls and routes the spoken words to a database.

The paper reported top intelligence officials in Obama administration have resolutely refused to offer an estimate of the number of Americans whose calls or e-mails have thus made their way into content databases such as NUCLEON.

Read the original post:
Trump: 'Sick' Obama had my 'phones tapped in Trump Tower' - WND.com

MAKE HEALTH CARE AFFORDABLE

I am writing in response to Real health-care reform: Weve begun in the House (Feb. 9) by Rep. Jason Lewis and the response from Angie Craig, Republican reform should not repeal protections for consumers (Feb 15). It is evident that both Lewis and Craig have correctly identified what the majority of Americans already know: The cost of health care is too high. Of course, neither of them is making any proposal to reduce the cost. Americans do not need affordable insurance; they need affordable health care.

The Affordable Care Act and the Republican proposal address the problem in much the same way by using taxpayer dollars to subsidize corporate profits for insurance companies, health maintenance organizations and pharmaceutical companies. In large part, they remain focused on protecting their campaign donor base. Minnesota has recently awarded another $300 million to insurance companies to minimize the impact of huge rate increases impacting small businesses and rural farm communities.

Attempting to reduce health care costs by restricting access through increasing deductibles and co-pays and narrowing provider networks has simply exacerbated the health care crises. This is a failed business model and taxpayers cannot continue paying the cost. Minnesota has introduced several proposals that apply directly to the issue of cost.

The Fair Care Act improves the competitiveness of the market and empowers consumers with greater control of their health care expenditures by:

Gov. Dayton also proposed a public option that would allow individuals to buy into Minnesota Care. The state already has the resources to administer such proven payer options as fee-for-service and county-based purchasing. Returning to local control eliminates the excessive profit overhead introduced by HMOs. Public management also brings rural Minnesotans closer to local providers and hospitals that might previously have been out-of-network. No one should be forced to drive a hundred miles for health care. It is for some a nearly impossible journey. It is not a public option if HMOs control the access.

Finally, there is a proposal that represents what most Americans really want: The Minnesota Health Plan, commonly referred to as single-payer, favored by the Minnesota Nurses Association, farmers and small business. Not only does this plan reduce cost by eliminating middle-man expenses; it also reduces costly medical care through public health, education, prevention and early intervention.

Similar advantages could be realized at the national level by simply allowing more Americans to buy into the existing Medicare program. I dont expect to see any meaningful solution from a Congress in Washington dominated by health care lobbyists and campaign donors. States like Minnesota are starting to recognize that reality and taking the initiative for true health care reform.

Paula Overby

The writer was a 2016 candidate for Congress in Minnesotas Second District.

Former President Obama has lied to the American people about many things over the past eight years. Benghazi, NSA spying on the American people, the Justice Department investigating conservative journalists, Fast and Furious, the Veterans Administration scandals, Obamacare, etc.

He also endorsed partial-birth abortion, transgender bathroom use, sanctuary cities, 11 million illegal immigrants to stay, gun control, same-sex marriage, overturned the dont ask, dont tell policy in the military. He didnt back up his red line in the sand. and that cost 300,000 lives.

National debt went from $10.6 trillion to $19.3 trillion under his watch. His welfare programs werent cheap, and there was no shortage of handouts.

Obamas hometown of Chicago, with its strict gun-control laws and his associate Rahm Emanuel as mayor, had 4,412 killings during Obamas eight years as president, including 762 killings in 2016. And did nothing, along with ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, the Washington Post and New York Times. It was always, hand-off Obamas presidency. He lives in his own little world of contempt and arrogance.

With that he wants us to think he left a legacy to the American people. In reality his presidential terms were a pathetic failure, and he will go down as Americas worst.

Jack Schmidt, Pequot Lakes

Family physicians are the bedrock of the Minnesota health care system. We take great pride in honoring and treating our patients in St. Paul and beyond regardless of their socioeconomic circumstances, ethnic or cultural backgrounds. We work to offer continuity of care and respect to aging parents, newborn babies and all stages of life in-between. The University of Minnesota Department of Family Medicine Residency programs have trained more than 1,300 family doctors who now live and work in Minnesota. More than 80 percent of counties in Minnesota have a graduate of these programs and 70 percent of all graduates from U of M Family Medicine residencies stay in Minnesota to practice medicine. Ninety percent of graduates of the U of M North Memorial program, in particular, stay within our state borders.

Unfortunately, funding has decreased to train family physicians in Minnesota, and our program has had to cut trainee spots by 20 percent. If this trend continues, the overall health of the state may suffer and our health care system costs are likely to rise.

Two bills under consideration in the Legislature could ensure that these training programs continue. HF 889 and SF 715 would provide continued financial support to train the next generation of family doctors. Our patients in St. Paul and beyond deserve family physicians who have received high-quality, culturally sensitive training right here in Minnesota.

Together, we can ensure Minnesotas legacy of excellent primary care continues for all our residents. We encourage readers to contact their local representatives and senators to support these crucial bills.

Drs. Alex Gits, Jodi Blustin and Renee Crichlow

The writers are members of the University of Minnesota North Memorial Family Medicine Residency program.

See the article here:
Pioneer Press Letters to the Editor for March 5, 2017 - TwinCities.com-Pioneer Press