SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
However-- though some are calling for it--nothing suggests Edward Snowden is likely to receive credit for her shift or an apology from the senator anytime soon.
"If Feinstein is 'totally opposed' to the surveillance of foreign leaders, why has she given a blank check for such surveillance of most Americans, violating their rights under the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that she has taken an oath to defend?" -Robert Scheer, TruthDig
Feinstein, chair of the powerful Senate Intelligence Committee and one of the NSA's staunchest supporters in the months since leaks by the whistleblower gave the U.S. and global public a look at the agency's vast domestic and international surveillance dragnet, is now saying she thinks a "total review" of their operations may, in fact, be warranted.
Following the most recent revelations over the last several days showing the NSA has spied on world leaders from over thirty countries--including close allies like France, Germany, and Spain--Feinstein claims that her committee was not "satisfactorily" briefed on these kinds of programs and, like President Obama, she was unaware of their scale and depth.
In a statement to the press on Monday, Feinstein said:
"It is abundantly clear that a total review of all intelligence programs is necessary so that members of the Senate Intelligence Committee are fully informed as to what is actually being carried out by the intelligence community."
"Unlike NSA's collection of phone records under a court order, it is clear to me that certain surveillance activities have been in effect for more than a decade and that the Senate Intelligence Committee was not satisfactorily informed."
"With respect to NSA collection of intelligence on leaders of US allies - including France, Spain, Mexico and Germany - let me state unequivocally: I am totally opposed."
However, as journalist Glenn Greenwald, one of the key journalists involved with reporting on the NSA documents and a longtime critic of Feinstein's stance on this and other matters, doesn't think Feinstein deserves much applause for these new statements. Putting Feinstein's statement in context, Greenwald tweeted:
As Greenwald and other critics have continually and repeatedly stated, the Senate Intelligence Committee under Feinstein's leadership has acted as a greenlight for the NSA, not a check on their vast surveillance powers. And despite a steady flow of information that began early in the year showing how the agency has spied on millions upon millions of everyday citizens in the U.S. and around the world, none of that was met with objection or shock by the committee chair.
Following Monday's statement by Feinstein, Foreign Policy cited one "unnamed" NSA offical who responded to the senator's call for an agency-wide review by saying, "We're really screwed now." According to the FP reporting:
The former official added that the "bottom line question is where was the Senate Intelligence Committee when it came to their oversight of these programs? And what were they being told by the NSA, because if they didn't know about this surveillance, that would imply they were being lied to."
A spokesperson for Feinstein did not respond to a request for more details in time for publication. And a spokesperson for Sen. Saxby Chambliss, the intelligence committee's vice chairman, said the senator had no comment at this time.
To the extent all of this flows from Snowden, who Feinstein has labeled as a traitor to his country, TruthDig editor Robert Scheer, in a Tuesday column titled "Obama, Congress Owe Snowden Thanks, and a Pardon," explores whether or not the Intelligence Committee chair and President Obama, who now admit how little they knew about certain NSA conduct, will change their accusatory approach towards the 30-year-old whistleblower.
Scheer writes:
... the fact of the matter is that [Feinstein] was clued in only thanks to the public service performed by Snowden in exposing the NSA's despicable behavior. In June, Feinstein rushed to condemn Snowden as a traitor, saying, "I don't look at this as being a whistle-blower. I think it's an act of treason. ... He violated the oath. He violated the law. It's treason." She should now apologize to Snowden for honoring his oath to protect the Constitution.
But what of Feinstein's dishonoring the Constitution? If Feinstein is "totally opposed" to the surveillance of foreign leaders, why has she given a blank check for such surveillance of most Americans, violating their rights under the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that she has taken an oath to defend? That's a question that also ought to be answered by the president, who should welcome Snowden back to his country and give him the Medal of Freedom for his public service.
___________________________________________
Donald Trump’s attacks on democracy, justice, and a free press are escalating — putting everything we stand for at risk. We believe a better world is possible, but we can’t get there without your support. Common Dreams stands apart. We answer only to you — our readers, activists, and changemakers — not to billionaires or corporations. Our independence allows us to cover the vital stories that others won’t, spotlighting movements for peace, equality, and human rights. Right now, our work faces unprecedented challenges. Misinformation is spreading, journalists are under attack, and financial pressures are mounting. As a reader-supported, nonprofit newsroom, your support is crucial to keep this journalism alive. Whatever you can give — $10, $25, or $100 — helps us stay strong and responsive when the world needs us most. Together, we’ll continue to build the independent, courageous journalism our movement relies on. Thank you for being part of this community. |
However-- though some are calling for it--nothing suggests Edward Snowden is likely to receive credit for her shift or an apology from the senator anytime soon.
"If Feinstein is 'totally opposed' to the surveillance of foreign leaders, why has she given a blank check for such surveillance of most Americans, violating their rights under the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that she has taken an oath to defend?" -Robert Scheer, TruthDig
Feinstein, chair of the powerful Senate Intelligence Committee and one of the NSA's staunchest supporters in the months since leaks by the whistleblower gave the U.S. and global public a look at the agency's vast domestic and international surveillance dragnet, is now saying she thinks a "total review" of their operations may, in fact, be warranted.
Following the most recent revelations over the last several days showing the NSA has spied on world leaders from over thirty countries--including close allies like France, Germany, and Spain--Feinstein claims that her committee was not "satisfactorily" briefed on these kinds of programs and, like President Obama, she was unaware of their scale and depth.
In a statement to the press on Monday, Feinstein said:
"It is abundantly clear that a total review of all intelligence programs is necessary so that members of the Senate Intelligence Committee are fully informed as to what is actually being carried out by the intelligence community."
"Unlike NSA's collection of phone records under a court order, it is clear to me that certain surveillance activities have been in effect for more than a decade and that the Senate Intelligence Committee was not satisfactorily informed."
"With respect to NSA collection of intelligence on leaders of US allies - including France, Spain, Mexico and Germany - let me state unequivocally: I am totally opposed."
However, as journalist Glenn Greenwald, one of the key journalists involved with reporting on the NSA documents and a longtime critic of Feinstein's stance on this and other matters, doesn't think Feinstein deserves much applause for these new statements. Putting Feinstein's statement in context, Greenwald tweeted:
As Greenwald and other critics have continually and repeatedly stated, the Senate Intelligence Committee under Feinstein's leadership has acted as a greenlight for the NSA, not a check on their vast surveillance powers. And despite a steady flow of information that began early in the year showing how the agency has spied on millions upon millions of everyday citizens in the U.S. and around the world, none of that was met with objection or shock by the committee chair.
Following Monday's statement by Feinstein, Foreign Policy cited one "unnamed" NSA offical who responded to the senator's call for an agency-wide review by saying, "We're really screwed now." According to the FP reporting:
The former official added that the "bottom line question is where was the Senate Intelligence Committee when it came to their oversight of these programs? And what were they being told by the NSA, because if they didn't know about this surveillance, that would imply they were being lied to."
A spokesperson for Feinstein did not respond to a request for more details in time for publication. And a spokesperson for Sen. Saxby Chambliss, the intelligence committee's vice chairman, said the senator had no comment at this time.
To the extent all of this flows from Snowden, who Feinstein has labeled as a traitor to his country, TruthDig editor Robert Scheer, in a Tuesday column titled "Obama, Congress Owe Snowden Thanks, and a Pardon," explores whether or not the Intelligence Committee chair and President Obama, who now admit how little they knew about certain NSA conduct, will change their accusatory approach towards the 30-year-old whistleblower.
Scheer writes:
... the fact of the matter is that [Feinstein] was clued in only thanks to the public service performed by Snowden in exposing the NSA's despicable behavior. In June, Feinstein rushed to condemn Snowden as a traitor, saying, "I don't look at this as being a whistle-blower. I think it's an act of treason. ... He violated the oath. He violated the law. It's treason." She should now apologize to Snowden for honoring his oath to protect the Constitution.
But what of Feinstein's dishonoring the Constitution? If Feinstein is "totally opposed" to the surveillance of foreign leaders, why has she given a blank check for such surveillance of most Americans, violating their rights under the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that she has taken an oath to defend? That's a question that also ought to be answered by the president, who should welcome Snowden back to his country and give him the Medal of Freedom for his public service.
___________________________________________
However-- though some are calling for it--nothing suggests Edward Snowden is likely to receive credit for her shift or an apology from the senator anytime soon.
"If Feinstein is 'totally opposed' to the surveillance of foreign leaders, why has she given a blank check for such surveillance of most Americans, violating their rights under the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that she has taken an oath to defend?" -Robert Scheer, TruthDig
Feinstein, chair of the powerful Senate Intelligence Committee and one of the NSA's staunchest supporters in the months since leaks by the whistleblower gave the U.S. and global public a look at the agency's vast domestic and international surveillance dragnet, is now saying she thinks a "total review" of their operations may, in fact, be warranted.
Following the most recent revelations over the last several days showing the NSA has spied on world leaders from over thirty countries--including close allies like France, Germany, and Spain--Feinstein claims that her committee was not "satisfactorily" briefed on these kinds of programs and, like President Obama, she was unaware of their scale and depth.
In a statement to the press on Monday, Feinstein said:
"It is abundantly clear that a total review of all intelligence programs is necessary so that members of the Senate Intelligence Committee are fully informed as to what is actually being carried out by the intelligence community."
"Unlike NSA's collection of phone records under a court order, it is clear to me that certain surveillance activities have been in effect for more than a decade and that the Senate Intelligence Committee was not satisfactorily informed."
"With respect to NSA collection of intelligence on leaders of US allies - including France, Spain, Mexico and Germany - let me state unequivocally: I am totally opposed."
However, as journalist Glenn Greenwald, one of the key journalists involved with reporting on the NSA documents and a longtime critic of Feinstein's stance on this and other matters, doesn't think Feinstein deserves much applause for these new statements. Putting Feinstein's statement in context, Greenwald tweeted:
As Greenwald and other critics have continually and repeatedly stated, the Senate Intelligence Committee under Feinstein's leadership has acted as a greenlight for the NSA, not a check on their vast surveillance powers. And despite a steady flow of information that began early in the year showing how the agency has spied on millions upon millions of everyday citizens in the U.S. and around the world, none of that was met with objection or shock by the committee chair.
Following Monday's statement by Feinstein, Foreign Policy cited one "unnamed" NSA offical who responded to the senator's call for an agency-wide review by saying, "We're really screwed now." According to the FP reporting:
The former official added that the "bottom line question is where was the Senate Intelligence Committee when it came to their oversight of these programs? And what were they being told by the NSA, because if they didn't know about this surveillance, that would imply they were being lied to."
A spokesperson for Feinstein did not respond to a request for more details in time for publication. And a spokesperson for Sen. Saxby Chambliss, the intelligence committee's vice chairman, said the senator had no comment at this time.
To the extent all of this flows from Snowden, who Feinstein has labeled as a traitor to his country, TruthDig editor Robert Scheer, in a Tuesday column titled "Obama, Congress Owe Snowden Thanks, and a Pardon," explores whether or not the Intelligence Committee chair and President Obama, who now admit how little they knew about certain NSA conduct, will change their accusatory approach towards the 30-year-old whistleblower.
Scheer writes:
... the fact of the matter is that [Feinstein] was clued in only thanks to the public service performed by Snowden in exposing the NSA's despicable behavior. In June, Feinstein rushed to condemn Snowden as a traitor, saying, "I don't look at this as being a whistle-blower. I think it's an act of treason. ... He violated the oath. He violated the law. It's treason." She should now apologize to Snowden for honoring his oath to protect the Constitution.
But what of Feinstein's dishonoring the Constitution? If Feinstein is "totally opposed" to the surveillance of foreign leaders, why has she given a blank check for such surveillance of most Americans, violating their rights under the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that she has taken an oath to defend? That's a question that also ought to be answered by the president, who should welcome Snowden back to his country and give him the Medal of Freedom for his public service.
___________________________________________
"On the 90th anniversary of Social Security, our job must be to reverse these disastrous cuts, expand Social Security, and make it easier, not harder, for Americans to receive the benefits they have earned and deserve."
U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders on Wednesday introduced the Keep Billionaires Out of Social Security Act, legislation intended to thwart President Donald Trump's attacks on the agency that administers benefits for millions of seniors and other Americans.
In a statement introducing his bill, Sanders (I-Vt.) called out not only Trump but also Elon Musk, who is the richest person on Earth and led the president's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) until he left the administration in May.
"Since Trump has been in office, he has been working overtime with the wealthiest man in the world, Elon Musk, to dismantle Social Security and undermine the faith that the American people have in this vitally important program," Sanders said. "Thousands of Social Security staff have lost their jobs, seniors and people with disabilities are having a much harder time receiving the benefits they have earned, field offices have been shut down, and the 1-800 number is a mess."
"That is beyond unacceptable," the senator declared, just days before a key milestone for the law that led to the Social Security Administration (SSA). "On the 90th anniversary of Social Security, our job must be to reverse these disastrous cuts, expand Social Security, and make it easier, not harder, for Americans to receive the benefits they have earned and deserve. That's precisely what this legislation will do."
As Sanders' office summarized, the bill aims to defend Americans and their benefits by:
The bill is backed by 20 other members of the Senate Democratic Caucus, including Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), and several organizations, including Social Security Works, Alliance for Retired Americans, National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, and the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees.
Sanders introduced the bill on the same day that he joined former Social Security Commissioner Martin O'Malley, U.S. Reps. Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.) and John Larson (D-Conn.), and Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)—a co-sponsor of the new legislation—for a Protect Our Checks town hall, hosted by Unrig Our Economy, Social Security Works, and the Center for American Progress Action Fund.
Late last month, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent "openly bragged about plans to use a back door to privatize Social Security and hand the benefits of working families over to those folks on Wall Street," Wyden pointed out. "Trump's so-called promise to protect Social Security, in my view, is about as real as his promise to protect Medicaid—no substance, big consequences for American seniors and families walking on an economic tightrope."
The so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act that Republicans passed and the president signed in July is expected to strip Medicaid and other key assistance, including food stamps, from millions of Americans in the next decade.
Wednesday's town hall also featured testimony from Social Security recipients, including Judith Brown, who explained that "at 37, I became disabled. It was devastating, because I was a young mother to two sons [that] are on the autism spectrum."
"When my sons needed additional medical support, I was able to get care for them because of their Social Security benefits. Without those benefits, we would have been homeless on the street," Brown continued. "Social Security has always been there for us over all these years. Right now, this administration is bent on stripping us of our benefits that we paid into during our working years... We cannot allow this to happen. Social Security must be protected and expanded. Our entire existence is on the line, and we must fight to protect Social Security."
Unrig Our Economy spokesperson Saryn Francis said that "Republican tariffs are driving up prices at the grocery store, their bills are raising the cost of healthcare and electricity, and they've even found time to hand out more tax breaks to billionaires, and now they want to mess with Social Security, and we are not going to let them take that away from us."
Francis noted that "this weekend, with over 50 events across the country, Americans are rallying in a massive effort to support Social Security and calling on congressional Republicans to stop threatening what hardworking people have earned and need to survive."
"Children dying first in a famine Israel caused by restricting food aid also had comorbidities and preexisting conditions," said one jourtnalist. "Of course they did. That is who dies first, as any child can tell you."
Using terminology that's all too familiar to the U.S. public—and treated by the for-profit health system as synonymous with those who are entitled to less care—the Israel Defense Forces on Tuesday released an "in-depth review" of widespread reports that Israel has killed hundreds of people in Gaza so far through its deliberate starvation policy.
The military claimed the analysis found that many Palestinians who have died of malnutrition so far had previous illnesses.
"Most 'malnutrition' deaths were due to severe preexisting conditions," said the IDF in a post on social media. "The expert review concluded that there are no signs of a widespread malnutrition phenomenon among the population in Gaza."
The fact that a number of people who have died had health conditions before Israel began bombarding Gaza in October 2023—decimating its healthcare system, among other civilian infrastructure—is hardly a surprise, said journalist Ryan Grim of Drop Site News.
"Children dying first in a famine Israel caused by restricting food aid also had comorbidities and preexisting conditions," said Grim. "Of course they did. That is who dies first, as any child can tell you."
The IDF and its top military funder, the U.S. government, have persistently denied that Israel is intentionally starving Palestinian civilians with its near-total blockade on humanitarian aid.
"It took an 'in-depth IDF review' abto determine that children with preexisting conditions will be the first victims of a man-made famine?"
As the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) has warned that famine is now unfolding in Gaza, experts have called the starvation crisis that's killed at least 235 people "entirely man-made," and Amnesty International has gathered extensive testimony from healthcare workers and civilians describing how Israel is using starvation as a "weapon of war," the Trump administration has continued to claim that any malnutrition in Gaza is the result of Hamas "stealing aid."
Last month, even IDF officials were forced to admit previous claims that Hamas was stealing humanitarian aid deliveries could not be verified.
With that claim debunked, the "in-depth review" focused instead on dismissing the starvation victims themselves.
The IDF presented the case of 4-year-old Abdullah Hanu Muhammad Abu Zarqa, who had a genetic disease that caused "deficiencies, osteoporosis, and bone thinning."
It also posted on the social media platform X the medical records of a 2-year-old named Abed Allah Hany Muhamad Abu Zarka, which showed the toddler had hair loss and rickets—a bone disease caused by vitamin D deficiency. The document showed he had a "positive family history of similar cases" and was shared in the apparent hope that disclosing the information would tamp down outrage over Israel's blockade on humanitarian aid.
"I can't understand how anyone thinks 'We're only starving the SICK kids to death' is any kind of justification, even if it were true?!" said New York Times columnist Megan K. Stack.
The in-depth review, which Israel said verified "only a few cases" of starvation, came weeks after the Times appeared to bow to pressure from the Israeli government and media after it reported on Mohammed Zakaria al-Mutawaq, an 18-month-old who was born with cerebral palsy and had also been suffering from starvation. Israel claimed the use of photos of the toddler in media coverage was misleading because outlets like the Times didn't disclose al-Mutawaq's previous medical condition, and the Times issued an editorial note pointing out his diagnosis soon after.
The editors' move provoked outcry from progressive observers, who called the addendum "ghoulish" and "depraved."
One noted that an institution that took pains to "clarify" that "some portion of Nazi death camp victims had preexisting conditions" would rightly be accused of denying the impact of the Holocaust.
"It took an 'in-depth IDF review,'" one critic asked Wednesday, "to determine that children with preexisting conditions will be the first victims of a man-made famine?"
"If implemented, the plans would amount to transferring people from one war-ravaged land at risk of famine to another," the Associated Press said.
Israel has reportedly discussed pushing the Palestinian population of Gaza to another war zone in South Sudan.
The Associated Press reported Tuesday that Israeli leaders had been engaged in talks with the African nation and that an Israeli delegation would soon visit the country to look into the possibility of setting up "makeshift camps" for Palestinians to be herded into.
"It's unclear how far the talks have advanced, but if implemented, the plans would amount to transferring people from one war-ravaged land at risk of famine to another," the AP said.
Like Gaza, South Sudan is in the midst of a massive humanitarian crisis caused by an ongoing violence and instability. In June, Human Rights Watch reported that more than half of South Sudan's population, 7.7 million people, faced acute food insecurity. The nation is also home to one of the world's largest refugee crises, with more than 2 million people internally displaced.
On Wednesday, the South Sudanese foreign ministry said it "firmly refutes" the reports that it discussed the transfer of Palestinians with Israel, adding that they are "baseless and do not reflect the official position or policy."
However, six sources that spoke to the AP—including the founder of a U.S.-based lobbying firm and the leader of a South Sudanese civil society group, as well as four who maintained anonymity—said the government briefed them on the talks.
Sharren Haskel, Israel's deputy foreign minister, also arrived in South Sudan on Tuesday to hold a series of talks with the president and other government officials.
While the content of these talks is unclear for the moment, the Israeli government is quite open about its goal of seeking the permanent transfer of Palestinians from the Gaza Strip to other countries.
In addition to South Sudan, it has been reported that Israeli officials have also approached Sudan, Somalia, and the breakaway state of Somaliland, all of which have suffered from chronic war, poverty, and instability.
On Tuesday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in an interview with the Israeli TV station i24 that "the right thing to do, even according to the laws of war as I know them, is to allow the population to leave, and then you go in with all your might against the enemy who remains there."
Though Netanyahu has described this as "voluntary migration," Israeli officials have in the past indicated that their goal is to make conditions in Gaza so intolerable that its people see no choice but to leave.
Finance minister and war cabinet member Bezalel Smotrich, who has openly discussed the objective of forcing 2 million Palestinians out to make way for Israeli settlers, said in May: "Within a few months, we will be able to declare that we have won. Gaza will be totally destroyed."
Speaking of its people, he said: "They will be totally despairing, understanding that there is no hope and nothing to look for in Gaza, and will be looking for relocation to begin a new life in other places."
Contrary to Netanyahu's assertion, international bodies, governments, and human rights groups have denounced the so-called "voluntary migration" plan as a policy of forcible transfer that is illegal under international law.
"To impose inhumane conditions of life to push Palestinians out of Gaza would amount to the war crime of unlawful transfer or deportation," said Amnesty International in May.
Israeli human rights organizations, led by the group Gisha, explained in June in a letter to Israel's Defense Minister, Israel Katz, that there is no such thing as "voluntary migration" under the circumstances that the Israeli war campaign has imposed.
"Genuine 'consent' under these conditions simply does not exist," the groups said. "Therefore, the decision in question constitutes explicit planning for mass transfer of civilians and ethnic cleansing, while violating international law, amounting to war crimes and crimes against humanity."
The plan to permanently remove Palestinians from the Gaza Strip has received the backing of U.S. President Donald Trump, who has said he wants to turn the strip into the "Riviera of the Middle East."
The U.S. State Department currently advises travelers not to visit Sudan or Somaliland due to the risk of armed conflict, civil unrest, crime, terrorism, and kidnapping. However, the United States has reportedly been involved in talks pushing these countries to take in the Palestinians forced out by Israel.
After Israel announced its plans to fully "conquer" Gaza, U.N. official Miroslav Jenča said during an emergency Security Council session on Sunday that the occupation push is "yet another dangerous escalation of the conflict."
"If these plans are implemented," he said, "they will likely trigger another calamity in Gaza, reverberating across the region and causing further forced displacement, killings, and destruction—compounding the unbearable suffering of the population."