In the past week, reports from Britain's Guardian and CBS' 60 Minutes separately have added to the growing perception that the president is incompetent, perhaps dangerously so.
Lara Logan's segment on Benghazi last night showed in stunning and chilling detail many of the failures that led to the Benghazi disaster. Higher ups ignored months of reports by those whose job it was to warn of trouble. Al Qaeda flags flying over local government buildings, a warning that a planned attack was imminent, and other red flags were blissfully ignored by the State Department and intelligence services.
After the attack started, locally based CIA teams ignored orders to wait. Had they not acted on their own initiative, five more Americans would have died.
Repeatedly, Logan used interviews and computer generated maps to demonstrate the ineptness of leadership that makes decisions thousands of miles away.
While Obama is politically untouchable, the segment puts a broadside into the possible presidential plans of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
Even as US intelligence broke down in Benghazi, it remained vigilant in keeping tabs on 35 world leaders. Some, such as Robert Mugabe, may warrant such treatment. Allied nations, however, were targeted. Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany has made her outrage plain.
The Guardian reported this morning, saying the NSA fl denied a German report that it briefed Obama on its monitoring of world leaders' phone calls.
These reports stem from documentation provided to Guardian by former intelligence contract worker Edward Snowden.
While this (on the surface) exonerates Obama, it does lead to the question of his lack of attention. Either Obama agreed to spy on allied heads of state and government, or his intelligence services were running operations without a presidential approval that they sorely needed.
Public perception of Obama as a president often engaged by vacations and tee times certainly do not help his image. The deterioration of administrations common in second terms seems to have set in early for Obama.
Last week, Gallup reported that Obama's approval rating fell below 45 percent.
Update: The hat trick of incompetence. Atlantic magazine writer says that Obamacare problems were predictable, but ignored.
Showing posts with label Edward Snowden. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Edward Snowden. Show all posts
Monday, October 28, 2013
Tuesday, July 30, 2013
Is PRISM Harming America's Foreign Trade? And also, what exactly is PRISM?
Last month, Britain's The Guardian and the Washington Post, via the famous/infamous Edward Snowden, reported on a mysterious government information collection program called PRISM.
PRISM is an ongoing government effort to collect information from the internet about both foreign and domestic targets. Concerns about the collection and use of this data have produced a backlash from people and businesses around the world. Many fear the effects, use, and possible misuse of information.
The National Security Agency somehow (it is not known how) obtains information about certain targets (it is not known who or why or how they are selected) from major internet entities, such as Facebook, Google, Yahoo, and others. All three of these companies, among others, strongly deny that they have granted access to the federal government for any information collection.
According to a Washington Post summary of known information:
We know that PRISM is a system the NSA uses to gain access to the private communications of users of nine popular Internet services. We know that access is governed by Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which was enacted in 2008. Director of National Intelligence James Clapper tacitly admitted PRISM’s existence in a blog post last Thursday. A classified PowerPoint presentation leaked by Edward Snowden states that PRISM enables “collection directly from the servers” of Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook and other online companies.
It goes on to say that
The (New York) Times says that major tech companies have systems that “involve access to data under individual FISA requests. And in some cases, the data is transmitted to the government electronically, using a company’s servers.”
Data is “shared after company lawyers have reviewed the FISA request according to company practice. It is not sent automatically or in bulk,” the Times reports. The scheme is “a more secure and efficient way to hand over the data.”
A source told CNet’s Declan McCullagh that PRISM is “a very formalized legal process that companies are obliged to do.” A source — perhaps the same one — says that “you can’t say everyone in Pakistan who searched for ‘X’ … It still has to be particularized.”
Additional reporting by Cato Institute writer Julian Sanchez raises more concerns. The law which pertains to PRISM removed the constitutionally necessary provision that a warrant must be obtained if the main target was a non citizen. However, information collected about a US citizen in the process is allowed to be stored until someone proves that it is worthless.
The NSA itself makes the determination on the worthiness of the information.
Furthermore, information under some circumstances can be obtained and kept even if the only people involved are US citizens.
The knowns, unknowns, and what is unknown that is unknown have introduced uncertainty into the equation. As US and foreign media scurry to gain further insight on the scope and target of the program, other countries may be setting up what defenses they can.
Companies involved in data collection and security, along with their home countries, fear intrusion by American intelligence services. At a recent panel held by the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, a guest speaker pointed out that some countries may follow Brazil in passing laws to protect digital information and commerce. This measure passed by countries fearful of surveillance could backfire in restricting information to places with archaic security.
Furthermore, it is difficult to estimate how many foreign nationals may try to avoid doing business with American firms because of PRISM and the lack of understanding about it.
Most agree that speculation about PRISM is driven in part by fear of the unknown, as well as the potential for abuse. It remains to be seen what the world's reaction will be, as well as what the full scope of the program actually is.
PRISM is an ongoing government effort to collect information from the internet about both foreign and domestic targets. Concerns about the collection and use of this data have produced a backlash from people and businesses around the world. Many fear the effects, use, and possible misuse of information.
The National Security Agency somehow (it is not known how) obtains information about certain targets (it is not known who or why or how they are selected) from major internet entities, such as Facebook, Google, Yahoo, and others. All three of these companies, among others, strongly deny that they have granted access to the federal government for any information collection.
According to a Washington Post summary of known information:
We know that PRISM is a system the NSA uses to gain access to the private communications of users of nine popular Internet services. We know that access is governed by Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which was enacted in 2008. Director of National Intelligence James Clapper tacitly admitted PRISM’s existence in a blog post last Thursday. A classified PowerPoint presentation leaked by Edward Snowden states that PRISM enables “collection directly from the servers” of Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook and other online companies.
It goes on to say that
The (New York) Times says that major tech companies have systems that “involve access to data under individual FISA requests. And in some cases, the data is transmitted to the government electronically, using a company’s servers.”
Data is “shared after company lawyers have reviewed the FISA request according to company practice. It is not sent automatically or in bulk,” the Times reports. The scheme is “a more secure and efficient way to hand over the data.”
A source told CNet’s Declan McCullagh that PRISM is “a very formalized legal process that companies are obliged to do.” A source — perhaps the same one — says that “you can’t say everyone in Pakistan who searched for ‘X’ … It still has to be particularized.”
Additional reporting by Cato Institute writer Julian Sanchez raises more concerns. The law which pertains to PRISM removed the constitutionally necessary provision that a warrant must be obtained if the main target was a non citizen. However, information collected about a US citizen in the process is allowed to be stored until someone proves that it is worthless.
The NSA itself makes the determination on the worthiness of the information.
Furthermore, information under some circumstances can be obtained and kept even if the only people involved are US citizens.
The knowns, unknowns, and what is unknown that is unknown have introduced uncertainty into the equation. As US and foreign media scurry to gain further insight on the scope and target of the program, other countries may be setting up what defenses they can.
Companies involved in data collection and security, along with their home countries, fear intrusion by American intelligence services. At a recent panel held by the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, a guest speaker pointed out that some countries may follow Brazil in passing laws to protect digital information and commerce. This measure passed by countries fearful of surveillance could backfire in restricting information to places with archaic security.
Furthermore, it is difficult to estimate how many foreign nationals may try to avoid doing business with American firms because of PRISM and the lack of understanding about it.
Most agree that speculation about PRISM is driven in part by fear of the unknown, as well as the potential for abuse. It remains to be seen what the world's reaction will be, as well as what the full scope of the program actually is.
Tuesday, June 25, 2013
Vladimir Putin's Winning Streak
At this point, 2:34 PM Monday June 24, Russia Today's website is almost entirely devoted to the Edward Snowden debacle.
Fox News's site leads with Snowden, but also lists a variety of other stories. CNN didn't have Snowden covered in any prominent spot.
But Russia Today revels in the twists and turns of Snowden's ability to elude American surveillance.
Putin has been on a winning streak of sorts lately. His ally, Syria, now receives arms and other support that may push the regime to bloody victory. The Russian leader put his thumb directly in the eye of Obama by facilitating Snowden's escape. He managed to split from his wife without much public fuss. Putin even somehow managed to score a Super Bowl ring without ever suiting up. The only mark against him is the viral picture of Steven Seagall giving him bunny ears in a photo.
This presidency has never played the diplomatic game well, but now the world has become the Harlem Globetrotters to Obama's Generals.
From the beginning, Obama wanted to organize the world community. He failed to realize that diplomacy at its core is a relationship of power and interest. Choices made for the office of Secretary of State reflect domestic political priorities rather than wise selections. Former Senator Hillary Clinton turned out to be a non entity (although Obama rarely put his trust in her.) John Kerry will not do much better. Diplomats, military officers, and even academics seem to understand the abstract and the reality of power better than legislators.
Obama also does not seem to understand the limits of power. One never makes threats or demands that can be easily flaunted. The US government warned Western Hemisphere nations to not allow a plane carrying Snowden into their airspace. Fair enough. But what will we do if one does? More bluster? Any tin pot who wants to make the US look bad without consequences can bring this guy to their country, at least in the short term.
The government should have said nothing and just kept quiet tabs, waiting for the pressure to get to him. He would either turn himself in, or make a mistake. Snowden has already brought his own judgment into question. American officials making themselves look like fools will not bring him to account.
Strangely enough, Obama has the ability to embarrass and even harm Putin if he chooses. Should the United States ever remove its export restrictions on natural gas, the price will plummet even further. Gas revenues are most of the foundation of Russia's recent prosperity. The impact of American shale gas on the global marketplace has seriously weakened Russia's economic position. Why not turn on the taps full blast and watch American energy might push Putin (and a few oil states in the Middle East) toward irrelevance? Why not build the pipeline that would bring even more US made energy to market? This would put even more Americans to work in gas and its byproducts.
Putin may be on a winning streak, but it lies within Obama's power to prevail in the game, if he so chooses.
Fox News's site leads with Snowden, but also lists a variety of other stories. CNN didn't have Snowden covered in any prominent spot.
But Russia Today revels in the twists and turns of Snowden's ability to elude American surveillance.
Putin has been on a winning streak of sorts lately. His ally, Syria, now receives arms and other support that may push the regime to bloody victory. The Russian leader put his thumb directly in the eye of Obama by facilitating Snowden's escape. He managed to split from his wife without much public fuss. Putin even somehow managed to score a Super Bowl ring without ever suiting up. The only mark against him is the viral picture of Steven Seagall giving him bunny ears in a photo.
This presidency has never played the diplomatic game well, but now the world has become the Harlem Globetrotters to Obama's Generals.
From the beginning, Obama wanted to organize the world community. He failed to realize that diplomacy at its core is a relationship of power and interest. Choices made for the office of Secretary of State reflect domestic political priorities rather than wise selections. Former Senator Hillary Clinton turned out to be a non entity (although Obama rarely put his trust in her.) John Kerry will not do much better. Diplomats, military officers, and even academics seem to understand the abstract and the reality of power better than legislators.
Obama also does not seem to understand the limits of power. One never makes threats or demands that can be easily flaunted. The US government warned Western Hemisphere nations to not allow a plane carrying Snowden into their airspace. Fair enough. But what will we do if one does? More bluster? Any tin pot who wants to make the US look bad without consequences can bring this guy to their country, at least in the short term.
The government should have said nothing and just kept quiet tabs, waiting for the pressure to get to him. He would either turn himself in, or make a mistake. Snowden has already brought his own judgment into question. American officials making themselves look like fools will not bring him to account.
Strangely enough, Obama has the ability to embarrass and even harm Putin if he chooses. Should the United States ever remove its export restrictions on natural gas, the price will plummet even further. Gas revenues are most of the foundation of Russia's recent prosperity. The impact of American shale gas on the global marketplace has seriously weakened Russia's economic position. Why not turn on the taps full blast and watch American energy might push Putin (and a few oil states in the Middle East) toward irrelevance? Why not build the pipeline that would bring even more US made energy to market? This would put even more Americans to work in gas and its byproducts.
Putin may be on a winning streak, but it lies within Obama's power to prevail in the game, if he so chooses.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)