

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.

When it came to the question of neoliberal capitalism it was former British PM Margaret Thatcher who famously declared, "There is no alternative."
Now--in the face of growing concern and criticism over the global dragnet surveillance programs run by the NSA and other U.S. intelligence agencies determined to "collect it all"--it is the Obama White House saying, in effect, the same thing.
As the New York Times reports Tuesday, after six months of one revelation after another regarding the far-reaching nature of the nation's spy apparatus, "President Obama and his top advisers have concluded that there is no workable alternative to the bulk collection of huge quantities of 'metadata,' including records of all telephone calls made inside the United States."
Though they admit to putting current NSA programs and procedures under review, there is little to indicate the president is willing to publicly push back against the agency's continued demand that it be allowed access to huge swaths of the digital and telephonic communication networks both inside and outside of the U.S.
As the Times reports:
The administration's reviews are being conducted in secrecy in part because of the secret nature of the N.S.A.'s operations. Initially, the reviews focused on domestic "bulk collection" programs begun after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, which eventually led to the N.S.A. program to collect the billing records of all calls, and, for a while, to collect a large volume of emails as well. (The email program ended, the N.S.A. says, in 2011.) In an interview last month, General Alexander said he was "open" to any alternative to having the government maintain that database of calls.
But General Alexander's deputy, John C. Inglis, who has spent nearly three decades at the N.S.A. focused on the technology of intercepting and decoding foreign communications, told Congress last week that so far there was no satisfying alternative to a government library of calls and, seemingly by extension, text messages and many Internet searches.
"It needs to be the whole haystack," Mr. Inglis said. If the United States was looking for the communications of a terrorism suspect, he said, "it needs to be such that when you make a query you come away confident that you have the whole answer."
Movement for tough reforms in Congress is little better, with some of the proposals that have been offered greeted as non-reform "reforms" by those most critical of NSA overreach.
Responding to a recently introduced bill by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a longtime defender of the NSA and head of the powerful Senate Intelligence Committee, the Electronic Frontier Foundation's Trevor Timm said that the proposal, instead of putting a check on the NSA, would actually codify "some of the agency's worst practices."
"Don't be fooled," Timm argued. Feinstein's bill "would be a huge setback for everyone's privacy, and it would permanently entrench the NSA's collection of every phone record held by U.S. telecoms. We urge members of Congress to oppose it."
The Times reports that a "senior administration official" (unnamed, of course) said Obama "has already made some decisions" of his own about possible "reforms" but the details of those have not been announced and the reporting makes clear that there is no movement inside the White House to push further than the milquetoast changes offered by Feinstein.
More hope is being put into a bill introduced by Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt) in the Senate and Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner in the House, called the USA Freedom Act, which has received a more welcome backing from civil liberty groups and privacy advocates.
So far, however, the president has chosen not to endorse the contours of that package and its future in Congress remains, like so much else when it comes to the NSA, a mystery.
________________________________________
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |

When it came to the question of neoliberal capitalism it was former British PM Margaret Thatcher who famously declared, "There is no alternative."
Now--in the face of growing concern and criticism over the global dragnet surveillance programs run by the NSA and other U.S. intelligence agencies determined to "collect it all"--it is the Obama White House saying, in effect, the same thing.
As the New York Times reports Tuesday, after six months of one revelation after another regarding the far-reaching nature of the nation's spy apparatus, "President Obama and his top advisers have concluded that there is no workable alternative to the bulk collection of huge quantities of 'metadata,' including records of all telephone calls made inside the United States."
Though they admit to putting current NSA programs and procedures under review, there is little to indicate the president is willing to publicly push back against the agency's continued demand that it be allowed access to huge swaths of the digital and telephonic communication networks both inside and outside of the U.S.
As the Times reports:
The administration's reviews are being conducted in secrecy in part because of the secret nature of the N.S.A.'s operations. Initially, the reviews focused on domestic "bulk collection" programs begun after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, which eventually led to the N.S.A. program to collect the billing records of all calls, and, for a while, to collect a large volume of emails as well. (The email program ended, the N.S.A. says, in 2011.) In an interview last month, General Alexander said he was "open" to any alternative to having the government maintain that database of calls.
But General Alexander's deputy, John C. Inglis, who has spent nearly three decades at the N.S.A. focused on the technology of intercepting and decoding foreign communications, told Congress last week that so far there was no satisfying alternative to a government library of calls and, seemingly by extension, text messages and many Internet searches.
"It needs to be the whole haystack," Mr. Inglis said. If the United States was looking for the communications of a terrorism suspect, he said, "it needs to be such that when you make a query you come away confident that you have the whole answer."
Movement for tough reforms in Congress is little better, with some of the proposals that have been offered greeted as non-reform "reforms" by those most critical of NSA overreach.
Responding to a recently introduced bill by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a longtime defender of the NSA and head of the powerful Senate Intelligence Committee, the Electronic Frontier Foundation's Trevor Timm said that the proposal, instead of putting a check on the NSA, would actually codify "some of the agency's worst practices."
"Don't be fooled," Timm argued. Feinstein's bill "would be a huge setback for everyone's privacy, and it would permanently entrench the NSA's collection of every phone record held by U.S. telecoms. We urge members of Congress to oppose it."
The Times reports that a "senior administration official" (unnamed, of course) said Obama "has already made some decisions" of his own about possible "reforms" but the details of those have not been announced and the reporting makes clear that there is no movement inside the White House to push further than the milquetoast changes offered by Feinstein.
More hope is being put into a bill introduced by Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt) in the Senate and Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner in the House, called the USA Freedom Act, which has received a more welcome backing from civil liberty groups and privacy advocates.
So far, however, the president has chosen not to endorse the contours of that package and its future in Congress remains, like so much else when it comes to the NSA, a mystery.
________________________________________

When it came to the question of neoliberal capitalism it was former British PM Margaret Thatcher who famously declared, "There is no alternative."
Now--in the face of growing concern and criticism over the global dragnet surveillance programs run by the NSA and other U.S. intelligence agencies determined to "collect it all"--it is the Obama White House saying, in effect, the same thing.
As the New York Times reports Tuesday, after six months of one revelation after another regarding the far-reaching nature of the nation's spy apparatus, "President Obama and his top advisers have concluded that there is no workable alternative to the bulk collection of huge quantities of 'metadata,' including records of all telephone calls made inside the United States."
Though they admit to putting current NSA programs and procedures under review, there is little to indicate the president is willing to publicly push back against the agency's continued demand that it be allowed access to huge swaths of the digital and telephonic communication networks both inside and outside of the U.S.
As the Times reports:
The administration's reviews are being conducted in secrecy in part because of the secret nature of the N.S.A.'s operations. Initially, the reviews focused on domestic "bulk collection" programs begun after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, which eventually led to the N.S.A. program to collect the billing records of all calls, and, for a while, to collect a large volume of emails as well. (The email program ended, the N.S.A. says, in 2011.) In an interview last month, General Alexander said he was "open" to any alternative to having the government maintain that database of calls.
But General Alexander's deputy, John C. Inglis, who has spent nearly three decades at the N.S.A. focused on the technology of intercepting and decoding foreign communications, told Congress last week that so far there was no satisfying alternative to a government library of calls and, seemingly by extension, text messages and many Internet searches.
"It needs to be the whole haystack," Mr. Inglis said. If the United States was looking for the communications of a terrorism suspect, he said, "it needs to be such that when you make a query you come away confident that you have the whole answer."
Movement for tough reforms in Congress is little better, with some of the proposals that have been offered greeted as non-reform "reforms" by those most critical of NSA overreach.
Responding to a recently introduced bill by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a longtime defender of the NSA and head of the powerful Senate Intelligence Committee, the Electronic Frontier Foundation's Trevor Timm said that the proposal, instead of putting a check on the NSA, would actually codify "some of the agency's worst practices."
"Don't be fooled," Timm argued. Feinstein's bill "would be a huge setback for everyone's privacy, and it would permanently entrench the NSA's collection of every phone record held by U.S. telecoms. We urge members of Congress to oppose it."
The Times reports that a "senior administration official" (unnamed, of course) said Obama "has already made some decisions" of his own about possible "reforms" but the details of those have not been announced and the reporting makes clear that there is no movement inside the White House to push further than the milquetoast changes offered by Feinstein.
More hope is being put into a bill introduced by Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt) in the Senate and Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner in the House, called the USA Freedom Act, which has received a more welcome backing from civil liberty groups and privacy advocates.
So far, however, the president has chosen not to endorse the contours of that package and its future in Congress remains, like so much else when it comes to the NSA, a mystery.
________________________________________