researchnotesuk:

Source - Deutsche Welle

Extracts

DW: So that’s what it’s all about, expanding the budget for the intelligence community?

Binney : If you have a problem, you need money to solve it. But if you solve that problem, you no longer have the justification to get money. That’s the way they view it - keep the problem going, so the money keeps flowing. Once you build up this big empire, you have to sustain it. … Look at the influence and power the intelligence community has over the government. They [the government] are giving them everything they want, they’re trying to cover up all their tracks and their crimes. Look at the influence and power they’re gaining.

DW: As someone who was instrumental in designing the NSA’s programs, do you sometimes feel like the man who invented the atom bomb?

Binney : No, because I designed it to do a proper job. These people subverted it. They corrupted it to violate the law and the constitution. The design I did followed all that … and I was open with Congress about what I was doing. … These cowards downtown in DC are changing our constitution - they’re scrapping the First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments primarily. If you want to change the constitution, there’s a process to do that. That process means putting a proposal in Congress, get Congress to pass it and then you pass it around all the states, and if 75 percent of the states ratify it, then it’s a Constitutional Amendment. That’s the process. These cowards are doing it all in secret.

Capitalism is all about power and money: naturally all its trappings & tentacles are too.

varlysbowtie:

troyeller:

yestermorning:

image

image

image

image

image

image

image

image

•••

Wait, wait, wait, I have an amazing new idea. How about we fix the American school system.

The American School System is shit and it needs to be fixed.

Sadly, this is America and social/education issues will ever be fixed.

This sexism, racism, anti-special needs, hyper-micromanagement, and conform-or-we-crush-you-ism is nauseating.

Hunt for two suspects as tension runs high in Missouri city after shooting of teenager Michael Brown in August

Bold. Landmark. Sweeping. Those were the words experts on all sides used Wednesday to describe the U.S. Supreme Court’s unanimous ruling that police must obtain a warrant before searching a cellphone at the time of an arrest.

The decision came in two cases where law enforcement used information obtained from a cellphone without a warrant to win a conviction.

Writing for the unanimous court, Chief Justice John Roberts said that the answer to the question of what police must do before searching a cellphone at the time of an arrest is “simple — get a warrant.”

One of the seeds of the American Revolution, he noted, was the “general warrant” used by the British to rummage through colonists’ papers and belongings. To ensure that such searches would not happen in the new republic, the founders adopted the Fourth Amendment ban on unreasonable searches, and the general rule adopted by the courts has been that a search is not reasonable unless police obtain a warrant. …

… It is also not certain what the decision’s implications are for the government’s collection of other data for national security purposes. The court’s opinion has hints both ways. Eckenwiler pointed to a footnote that seems to exclude such information from the reach of Wednesday’s opinion.

But Marc Rotenberg, president of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, has a different view. “The opinion will have some bearing in the cases that are being litigated around the NSA’s bulk record collection program,” he anticipated.

The Wednesday opinion in two cases coupled with a 2012 decision, however, sent a strong message about how the Supreme Court is interpreting the 1789 Constitution in the modern digital world.

In that 2012 decision, the court — again unanimously — ruled that police cannot put a GPS tracking device on a suspect’s car without a warrant. Looking at this trio of cases, George Washington’s Kerr notes that makes “27 votes for the defense and zero for the government when the court is applying the Fourth Amendment to new technology.” That trend, Kerr said, is “very surprising.”

The Secrecy of the Legal Justifications for NSA Surveillance Violates International Human Rights Law

One of the many ways that the NSA’s mass surveillance violates the human rights of both Americans and others around the world is that it teeters on a huge pile of secret law.

Let’s be clear. Under international human rights law, secret “law” doesn’t even qualify as “law” at all.

This is a basic and old legal requirement: it can be found in all of the founding human rights documents. It allows people the fundamental fairness of understanding when they can expect privacy from the government and when they cannot. It avoids the Kafkaesque situations in which people, like Joseph K in The Trial and the thousands of people on the secret No Fly Lists, cannot figure out what they did that resulted in government scrutiny, much less clear their names. And it ensures that government officials have actual limits to their discretion and that when those limits are crossed, redress is possible.

betamuffin:

It is time to save the internet from those who want to control it for profit.  

Join the Fight!

zukorama:

You know, with all of the horribly racist comments I’ve seen about the ferguson situation by white men and women, and many of them likely conservative christians, I just have one question

Which side would Jesus be defending? The white, over-armed militarized police force using violence to assert their authority? or the low income black community fed up with how they are treated by society?

That is all

retroluminati:

The surveillance tapes supposedly shows Michael Brown “robbing” a Ferguson convenience store market. But in spite of the fact that the “robbery” was carried out without the brandishing of a weapon, and in spite of the fact that this was really more a case of petty theft shoplifting, this Friday, for the first time, the owners of the store have said that they never said they believed Michael Brown was the individual who stole the item from their store.
In fact, while the owners are speaking out through an attorney about the surveillance video, the mainstream, corporate media are largely ignoring everything they said, pretending that this video definitively identifies Michael Brown as the strong arm shoplifter.
The owners claim that this is a claim the police have come up with on their own. For his part, Dorian Johnson, a witness to the shooting of Michael Brown, has reportedly confessed to being with Brown in the convenient store. But for now, that has not been corroborated by the store owner, employees or eye witnesses. As well, we are not hearing this from Johnson himself, so a number of questions remain.
Through their attorney, the owner of the store also even dispute the claim that they or an employee called 911. They say that a customer inside the store made the call. This is pretty strange if this was indeed a “robbery”.
As well, in addition to clarifying that they never said they believed, nor identified the suspect with Michael Brown, they claimed that the St. Louis County issued the warrants for the hard drive of surveillance video Friday, based on the police claiming that Brown fit the description of the person in the video… the person who the owners and employees of the store were not even going to call the police on. Again, the owner clarifies that neither the management, nor any employee ever identified Brown as the suspect in that video.
They simply never said they believed that, this was a claim made by the police alone. So the real question is why the media has been taking the word of the police on this matter, even over the word of the eye witnesses and the store owner?
countercurrentnews.com

retroluminati:

The surveillance tapes supposedly shows Michael Brown “robbing” a Ferguson convenience store market. But in spite of the fact that the “robbery” was carried out without the brandishing of a weapon, and in spite of the fact that this was really more a case of petty theft shoplifting, this Friday, for the first time, the owners of the store have said that they never said they believed Michael Brown was the individual who stole the item from their store.

In fact, while the owners are speaking out through an attorney about the surveillance video, the mainstream, corporate media are largely ignoring everything they said, pretending that this video definitively identifies Michael Brown as the strong arm shoplifter.

The owners claim that this is a claim the police have come up with on their own. For his part, Dorian Johnson, a witness to the shooting of Michael Brown, has reportedly confessed to being with Brown in the convenient store. But for now, that has not been corroborated by the store owner, employees or eye witnesses. As well, we are not hearing this from Johnson himself, so a number of questions remain.

Through their attorney, the owner of the store also even dispute the claim that they or an employee called 911. They say that a customer inside the store made the call. This is pretty strange if this was indeed a “robbery”.

As well, in addition to clarifying that they never said they believed, nor identified the suspect with Michael Brown, they claimed that the St. Louis County issued the warrants for the hard drive of surveillance video Friday, based on the police claiming that Brown fit the description of the person in the video… the person who the owners and employees of the store were not even going to call the police on. Again, the owner clarifies that neither the management, nor any employee ever identified Brown as the suspect in that video.

They simply never said they believed that, this was a claim made by the police alone. So the real question is why the media has been taking the word of the police on this matter, even over the word of the eye witnesses and the store owner?

countercurrentnews.com

undeadthug:

I actually feel sick reading this TIME article. I would never think that an esteemed source of media like TIME would actually publish an article that comments on how ”Negrophobia” and the “fear of black people” could be “lethal”.

It’s like nooooo he didn’t shoot an 18yo unarmed boy multiple times because he was racist! He shot him because he had….NEGROPHOBIA!!

This is so surreal.

We’ve reached a point where white people are making up medical terms to dismiss their racism. I’m in disbelief right now.

#Pseudo Journalism

Police Threaten Al Jazeera Journalists Near Ferguson: ‘I’ll Bust Your Head’

susanpfeit:

Police Threaten Al Jazeera Journalists Near Ferguson: ‘I’ll Bust Your Head’

Al Jazeera America producer Aaron Ernst and his team were confronted by two police officers last Thursday ..

Read More

THEY HAVE HIRED MERCS TO DEPLOY IN FERGUSON

ehentalix:

MERCENARIES FROM ASYMMETRIC SOLUTIONS HAVE BEEN CONTRACTED TO DEPLOY A HIGH-THREAT TEAM IN FERGUSON, MISSOURI.

lucithoughts:

If you can’t see why Ferguson is the way it is right now, or the shit that’s been causing the shit that you see plastered across Tumblr and Twitter for…what it is, at least a week, then you’ve got problems.

And are most likely part of the problem

bent-edge-represent:

I don’t see the cops doing shit about KKK members attacking civilians in Ferguson. I don’t care what race you are. If you live near Ferguson, go help your fellow humans right now. The police have turned against us, its up to us to save each other now.

philosophy-in-blue:

What I don’t understand is why some force above Ferguson’s police force (feds? Surely the President is aware of the chaos by now) doesn’t come in and stop all this bullshit. Like can someone just tell everybody to stop and then sort this out without tear gas.order these wreckless officers to drop their weapons and handle this more maturely, ..it’s all so awful and I fear for everybody caught up in it, I’m disgusted by the levels of discrimination that still exist in my country. Whatever happened to words,whatever happened to logic and verbal arguments that weren’t bloody and were calm.