Edward Snowden, as everyone knows by now, is the 29-year-old man who leaked secrets about our government’s surveillance of phone calls and emails. I don’t know if he is a traitor or hero or something else, but I do think that his revelations raise concerns for all of us.
As we realize by now, government and private-sector activities are dedicated to the amassing of Big Data that includes everything we do. Government is doing this, its defenders say, to protect us against terrorism. Business is mining Big Data to sell things to us. The more they know about us, the better they can develop and market their products to us.
All of this becomes relevant to educators and parents because efforts are underway to assemble a national database called inBloom. It was funded by the Gates Foundation to the tune of $100 million and developed by Rupert Murdoch’s Wireless Generation. Should strangers have access to the confidential information of children and teachers? I don’t think so. The time to stop it is now.
As I read about the events in the New York Times on Monday, certain facts and statements were especially salient.
Think of it. Edward Snowden was a high school dropout who was hired as a security guard but soon rose to become an IT consultant for Booz Allen and Hamilton, a mammoth company that collected over $1 billion for intelligence work in the past year. The New York Times writes: “As evidence of the company’s close relationship with government, the Obama administration’s chief intelligence official, James R. Clapper, Jr., is a former Booz executive. The official who held that post in the Bush administration, John M. McConnell, now works for Booz.”
The story goes on to say, “The national security apparatus has been more and more privatized and turned over to contractors,” said Danielle Brian, the executive director of the Project on Government Oversight, a nonprofit group that studies government contracting. “This is something the public is largely unaware of, how more than a million private contractors are cleared to handle highly sensitive matters.”
In another article in the business section, spokesmen for the high-tech industry in Silicon Valley insisted that they had to be free of any government regulation, because it would “snuff out innovation..Bureaucrats should keep their hands off things they do not understand, which is just about everything we do out here.”
“So the first mystifying thing for some here is how the leading companies–including Microsoft, Google, Yahoo, Apple, and Facebook–apparently made it easier for the National Security Agency to gain access. Only Twitter seems to have declined.”
The government data mining program is called Prism. It collects emails, video, voice and stored data on the Internet.
And one more chilling thought: “In 1999, Scott McNealy, the chief executive of Sun Microsystems, summed up the valley’s attitude toward personal data in what became a defining comment of the dot-com boom, “You have zero privacy,” he said, “get used to it.”
Edward Snowden will go down in history as a great hero! He has basically given up his life to let the public know what our government has become. It is going to take many more acts of courage like this to create a “government of the people, by the people, and for the people”! This includes the fight against corporate education reform.
Hell, we even have to fight the public school systems whic WILL collaborate with the data collection inherent in the CCSS assessments.
Anyone who has not seen it should view this initial interview with Edward Snowden to understand what he has done and why.
http://tinyurl.com/puu4l3f
Reblogged this on 21st Century Theater and commented:
This is not corporate creep. This is corporate takeover.
“A great hero” to whom?
He has put us all in jeopardy. I’ll be right over to sell you the bridge…in Brooklyn…cheap!
“He has put us all in jeopardy.”
How so?
“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” – Benjamin Franklin
He didn’t give any names or locations. He was very specific about that. Unlike what the Bush admin did to Plame. He’s put nobody in jeopardy.
What he’s done is try to warn us of a very, very large surveillance network that can be turned against us at the drop of a hat. Does it benefit us? Yes. But why is it above regulation? Why is it so beholden to private interest?
And, as Diane points out: it’s like brother and sister to inBloom. I’m amazed at how FEW people even knows of that system’s existence and it’s implications. I’m curious, though, Diane: I thought inBloom was developed by Gates and that Murdoch/Wireless Generation were the ones hawking and delivering the system…?
“Does it benefit us? Yes.” Ha Ha he eh, ha ha! Yep them’s a bunch of turrerrristss out thar tryin to a keell us becausin we’s amurikans, yessirree!
There’s nothing funny or imaginary about terrorists when you’ve known and loved people who have died at their hands.
My class and I watched the Towers burn and go down. There was nothing imaginary about that.
I agree that there’s a LOT more that we, as a nation, can do other than wage war. Our foreign policy is largely dictated by the private interests that the terrorists are fighting against. To call this an unending war is chilling and revolting. And, yes: we are creating even more terrorists using the methods we’re seeing, at this time.
I don’t like what’s happening with this any more than you do. But, for me, the stark reality is that we ARE at risk. A very present and physical reality. The problem is that the people who are selling and controlling the surveillance (and “educational”) technology seem to see themselves as being above the law. I don’t like the private sector’s heavy hand in this area.
We are at risk because of our policies and perceptions of privilege. We seem to think that crimes perpetrated on “Americans” are so horrendous that it requires our vigilance to a point that we must strip ourselves of even the semblance of democracy in order to “protect” ourselves. Unclear is against what or for what? “Bad” people? We create those every day with every drone, by whom I mean those handling the video game consoles that send them and which invite predictable resistance. “For democracy”? We haven’t had that since the first framers of the constitution decided slaves were 3/5 of a person and only allowed male land holders to vote; we’ve been fighting for democracy ever since and, to date, losing.
Deciding whether some young man with a conscience is a hero is yet another smokescreen that obscures what a government of the 1% has been doing to decimate even further the democratic rights we still so tentatively have. It’s so much easier to suppress rights when the majority are inculcated (what some think is “teaching”) into accepting the premises of fear and hierarchical privilege.
So, yes this new set of revelations about the technological advancement of the surveillance state is relevant to education in this country. But it is far beyond the development of Gates’ In Bloom database. These revelations are more the product of “educated” Americans” in the culture of privilege than whether a young “high school dropout” developed a conscience when given the “toys” to ruin people’s lives. Personally, I wonder if Edward Snowden had “learned” to generate a proper education and perhaps gained an MBA? Would he have become more “illuminated” in the democracy of fear and gone on his merry highly-paid way?
Mr. Snowden is no traitor, but, in truth, as he is more likely to say, he really shouldn’t be considered a hero simply for doing what any educated person ought to do; stand up for democracy and rectitude. We honor Snowden and others like Manning by our outrage that should lead us to register our protest at a government that kills with impunity using the tools of innovation. We render these citizen-heroes with dismay and our own moral corruption every time we make excuses for the destruction of our basic democratic rights.
I agree with you. Think you’re spot on. My point is that, regardless of the reasons for the hatred against us; we are at risk. So what do we do? Totally dismantle the surveillance system that’s in use now? What would we replace it with? Honest diplomacy and a change of foreign policy would be a good start. But how do we kickstart a campaign like that?
Let’s not rewrite history ala Orwell’s 1984, gitapik. The Bush administration did nothing to Valerie Plame. The Democrats just liked to lie (as always) so they could try to beat up on the Bush administration.
Don’t know what to say about that one, Harlan. I’m just going by what I read at the time. If I’m wrong, please direct me to a different news source that will give me the true scoop.
Yes, High tech gets taxpayer funded tech given to them (like the internet for instance), then they turn around and say “hands off!” Then they turn that very tech on citizens (while charging them for it) – excuse me, I mean consumers; you know, like parents, and teachers, and students…
This whole push is not just privatization, it is a full on corporate takeover using, cooperating with, (and appropriating) the state. In a word: Fascism. Time to wake up people.
Great editorial in the Times explaining big data aggregating and how it plays out in our society. The first thing I thought of was inBloom and was so proud of parents and teachers fighting this big free data give-away.
He is a hero. They do not need this data. All they have to do is old time police work and they win. Taking away our rights is a side issue to total domination and the War on Terror is their excuse to make it happen. We are creating more terrorists than we are stopping by our insane policies and drone attacks. If someone did this to us we would be in a tizzy and all firing every gun we have all at once. The joke is that we are doing it to ourselves.
YEP!!
you mention the NY Times– still to this day that newspaper of record has still not covered InBloom– not a mention. Isn’t that strange!? Here’s my letter to the Public Editor:
With all the coverage the InBloom Big Data story is getting all over the country– Information Age, Bloomberg, Reuters, Washinbton Post, Boston Globe and all the others highlighted below, it seems very strange to me that the Times still seems to think InBloom only pertains to gardening stories
What gives? With all the education, business, political, philantropy, celebrity reformers and technology coverage in the NY Times, this story is NOT newsworthy?
Really?
Bertis Downs, Arhens GA
http://reut.rs/18z00dB
School database loses backers as parents balk over privacy
By Stephanie Simon
Here is an article about data mining our schools
http://www.nationofchange.org/exposed-how-murdoch-bill-gates-and-big-corporations-are-data-mining-our-schools-1367331290
Click to access gahname3.pdf
3 2013 شماره 3
مبارزات اجتماعی که اَهمّ آ ن را مبارز ه ی طبقاتی ه م پوشانی م ی کند و جنبش طبقاتی کارگران نيز
به واسطه عمدگی تضاد ميان کار و سرمايه در رأس آن قرار دارد، در کليت خويش ب ه عنوان
گزاره جهان شمول و نقش خويش در مبارز ه ی طبقاتی جامعه ی ايران مرحله ی معين خود را
می گذراند. گرچه تاثيرگذاری و ماديت شرايط تاريخی طبق ه ی کارگر و وسعت اجتماعی
رشديابنده ی آن و نقشی که در معادلات سياسی اجتماعی رقم م ی زند غيرقابل کتمان م ی باشد، اما،
پتانسيل و فعليت عمل طبقاتی کارگران نسبت به رکود و به تناسب نزول سطح مبارزاتی آن طبقه
تأثيرات چشمگيری در فرارَوی و يا فروکاهشی کلی سطح مبارزات اجتماعی می گذارد. از آن جا
که حرکت اجتماعی جنبش طبقه ی کارگر از خاستگاه و شرايط مادی و روابط توليدی مناسبات
حاکم اقتصادی بنيان می گيرد که از بنياد متضاد کار در برابر سرمايه ماهيت م ی يابد، بنابراين،
مبارزات اين طبقه نسبت به ديگر اقشار و جناح های ميانی و فوقانی طبق ه ی سرمايه دار
ماهيت گرا می باشد.
بعد از پايان جنگ ارتجاعی ايران و عراق، جامعه ی ايران مراحلی را پشت سرنهاد که آغازگر
آن “خيزش”های طغيا ن گرا از مناطق تهيدس ت نشين و کارگری بود . دهه ی ٧٠ شمسی و قبل از
آن که مبارزات طبق ه ی کارگر به صورت يک جنبش اجتماعی اعتراضی فرابرويد، متغيرهای
درونی رژيم ب ه صورت اپوزيسيون حکومتی به مثابه آلترناتيو استحاله و در شمايل پرد ه ی
اصلاحات در رأس اعتراضات قرار گرفت . حاصل آن، فعاليت جناح های مغلوب حکومتی نظير
“حزب ملت ايران ” و نهضت آزادی، انشقاق در “خيزش” دانشجويی و ورود نسل جديدی از
فعاليت های روشنفکری اعتراضی به عرصه های اجتماعی بود . در ادامه، تلاش کانون مستقل
نويسندگان برای شروع مجدد فعاليت خود و در پی آن ماجراهايی که به سرکوب و کشتار
دانشجويی و قت ل های زنجير ه ای انجاميد، اين حرک ت ها، دو ره ای از صدر اعتراضات اجتماعی را
پيش بردند . اگرچه در ميان اين وقايع، حرک ت های کارگری شکل گرفته و کارگران ب ه صورت
پراکنده و بدون هيچ ساختاری از تشک ل يابی دست به مطالبات اعتراضی م ی زنند، اما هنوز سخن
از عروج جنبش کارگری در برابر “خيزش”های غيرکارگری عمدگی نيافته است.
پايان مرحله ی خيزش های نخستين، آغاز اعتراضات گسترد ه ی کارگری در برابر سياست های
خصوصی سازی (شبه دولتی سازی)، تعديل نيروی کار (اخراج و بی کارسازی)، ناامن سازی امنيت
شغلی و تجديد نظر در قانون کار م ی باشد. نقطه ی اوج آن حرکتی بود که با سازماندهی خان ه ی
کارگر در مقابل “سازمان تأمين اجتماعی ” توسط کارگران برعليه برگزارکنند ه ی آن يعنی خان ه ی
کارگر تبديل شد.
Easy for you to say.
Two points:
1 – Privatization is a by-product of the anti-government mania that spread as a result of the “Reagan Revolution” (“Government is the problem, not the solution”) and its reach into the military was accelerated when the draft ended.
2 – To quote from a blog post I wrote yesterday in response to a column by David Brooks: “…how did someone “terrifically bright” with no HS degree and an inability to “navigate his way through community college” get a high paying job with maximum security clearance? Why he passed a test! Government agencies have more faith in tests than they do in degrees, especially when they are looking for individuals with narrow technical skills. The saga of Edward Snowden should be a cautionary tale for those who believe that passing tests is the best means of measuring preparedness for the work force or for higher education. If schooling is reduced to passing tests, we’ll see a lot more loners like Snowden.”
What does not having a degree have to do with a decision to follow one’s conscience? Nothing. Daniel Ellsberg, also a whistleblower, had a Harvard degree and sounded the alarm on NIxon by releasing the Pentagon papers.
You’d have to ask David Brooks, who I was quoting… and with whom I almost always disagree and who is a big advocate of using tests to measure quality of teachers… tests don’t measure a person’s character… If there WAS a test for the kind of character needed to be “successful” at NSA Snowden would have flunked it and we’d still be in the dark about all the information the government is collecting on us…
Unequivocally, hero.
Definitely a hero.
Let’s chuck technology and go back to using smoke signals.
Snowden can be seen as a revolutionary as PRISM = the governments modern day Writs of Assistance!
Edward Snowden stood up alone against a global totalitarian state. Whether he gets a fair trial, or is simply murdered like so many others, will determine if he is a traitor or a hero. How many of you (talkin’ to you, Harlan) would have had that kind of courage at his age?
I agree with you. What’s your point impugning my courage? At least I didn’t vote for the current president, ever. You did, though, right? How much courage did THAT take?
Only a choice between the lesser of two evils. The problems we face today will not be solved by political ideology. Or technology, or higher education for that matter. What we need more than ever is to find our common ground.
That was Diane’s lame answer too. If you can’t tell the difference between a true ideologically driven tyrant like Barak Hussein Obama, and now we are discovering, someone incompetent and corrupt at the same time, and an ethical, pragmatic, problem solver like Mitt Romney, you can’t be trusted. Pity though.
Romney was the only other horse in the race, really. Saw that from the start. For me it was the less of two evils. Which isn’t much of a choice, in the long run. Is it…? It’s been hard watching the show. I’ll have lost complete faith if Obama lets Keystone roll through.
You’re a psychological bully, Harlan. Your points will never be considered and taken seriously, no matter how valid, until you decide to take a different approach.
At the same time: why would you want to call him out like that, Michael? It just diverts attention from the issue being discussed.
Yes, Gitapik, Harlan is a Tea Party bully who harbors a lot of resentment towards those with whom he disagrees. He particularly likes to express his sour grapes over Obama’s win and blame people here for Romney’s loss.
Good old, “ethical” Romney, who says that he plays an inactive role in Bain Capital when it’s expedient for him, but at tax time, he claims he is active in Bain Capital because that is to his financial advantage: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/26/romney-bain-taxes_n_1828816.html Not a problem for Harlan. He relates to the wealthy.
Another one who hates (envies?) rich people so much you can’t even assess truth from falsehood. When did Tea Party patriots become bullies? You and giitapik just go ahead and keep denying that when you had a real choice you chose the utter worser of the two choices. The worst has not yet come to light about the people who perpetrated the coup of the US government. You’ll eventually see the error of your ways but whether you’ll have the guts to admit it, even though in our field, education, everything Obama cum Duncan is doing is as bad as you know it is. It’s the same for all the policies of the administration. And, gitapik, YOU want to make me the issue? We like to say, “Speak truth to power.” YOU are the power to whom I am speaking, and you want me to speak sweetly in a nicey nicey tone? If you have the courage, you’ll respond to the truth not the tone. Oh, I forgot, you are professional teachers who demand respect from everyone who talks to you. Please don’t tag the Tea Party with my poor attempts to write sulfuric acid flame thrower posts. They are much nicer than I am. It’s all of a piece what Obama is doing to education and what he’s doing to the country as a whole. You liberals used to be against lying, deceptive, feckless, authoritarian tyrants who would knife even their strongest supporters in the back, as he has done to you public school teachers. He WILL destroy public education around you. By buying him you helped break the country. Now the rest of us are going to have to try to limit the damage by depriving you Democrats of power. And you want to make ME the issue, my tone, my purported insults to teachers and posters on this blog??? Sure. Blame the messenger.
I actually agree with some of your expressed ideas, Harlan. Not just here, but in other posts as well. What I’m saying is that your message gets buried beneath the way in which you, the messenger, deliver it. Not looking for sweet talk. At all. Just a degree of respect, regardless of differences.
My best friend since I was four is a disillusioned Republican, now calling himself Libertarian, for lack of a better term, as he would say. We have lots of discussions. He’s brilliant. I’ve learned quite a bit from him. He shows me different slants based on news he’s been exposed to (that I haven’t) and his own personal experience in the world. I will often relay that info to my friends and associates, in turn.
He also listens to and examines what my experience and news exposure have taught me. We compare notes and sources. He, too, will relay info that he deems important to his friends. We respect each other and, as a result, learn from each other. And the information gets passed on to others who, in turn…(etc)
It might surprise you that I actually considered voting for Romney. Predictably; I liked his stance on education (why is the Fed getting so involved?). All of my thoughts of voting for him vanished, however, with his uncompromising support of the Keystone Pipeline. And his declaration of support for similar projects. It didn’t seem right that someone with such solid support of state’s rights would be so on board with a project that would trample on those very principles. And I’m solidly against the project, anyway. So I said “no” to Mitt.
Now it looks like Obama might rubber stamp it, anyway. I’ve lost a lot of respect for the man, to this point. If he caves on this one, he’ll have totally lost me.
I agree with Robert Rendo: we’re all appalled and very, very angry. But pointing fingers at each other is only going to divide us at a time when unity is most important. If you’re interested in really instituting change, you have to inform the people who you feel are uninformed. Doing this in a disrespectful manner will often (not always) lead to failure, in my experience.
Sensible and collegial. From what I have read, the Keystone pipeline in not an ecological threat and Nebraska has approved the alternate route. What’s not to like?
1) Nebraska isn’t the only state effected by the pipeline. And there’s a great deal of resistance in states that have approved it’s transit, as well. Similar to our “education reform” movement, the populace isn’t necessarily behind the measure. Money talks and that’s what’s driven the existing pipeline and is driving this second phase.
2) The extraction of the oil is extremely damaging to the environment in terms of the carbon footprint. The cleanup in the event of a spill or leakage from the pipeline is much more difficult than with conventional crude oil.
3) The oil won’t be used to ease our reliance on overseas oil, but rather be shipped to other countries.
4) At a time when we’re concerned about the state of our environment and touting the development of alternative energy supply development, this is a massive step backwards.
I see it totally differently. We won’t ever agree on this. Pity though.
Why is it a pity? Do you have a source that would convince me otherwise? I understand that’s a lot to ask. I’m not being sarcastic when I say that we’re all very busy and it’s not always a priority to satisfy the curiosity of someone you don’t know.
I agree that the Constitution (USC) is the supreme law of the land and that our Supreme Court is the ultimate resort of justice.
But who does not agree to the notion that the appointees to the SC are chosen in a highly politicized process and that the Constitution is not subject to interpretation?
Certainly, the government is violating the USC by electronically spying on us. Obama demanded that we “trust” the Senate, Congress, and judicial branches. . . . I DON’T think so!!!!
This is a period in which we have had more BAD government intrusion than ever, and what exactly are we getting in return for it?
We the middle class are being destroyed.
Yet I permanently believe in social safety nets, such as medicare and social security and a one payer healthcare system. Those are values I will only fight for.
At the rate our government is disconnecting itself from the average person here and servicing more corporations as clients than Jane Fonda did in “Klute”, I don’t, as much as I am appalled by gun ownership except for hunting, blame people for wanting to keep onto their guns. I dont’ own any, nor will I ever.
But people do fear that government is going to swallow the whole of middle and wroking class America in the granular gradualsim of fascism and a police state that they perceive they might have to or should have to hold onto their guns out of self defense.
While I don’t thinnk this is going to evolve as such, it is not unreasonable for people at all to perceive that.
I’m getting off on a tangent, Harlan, but it is all relevant.
You are a mean spirited dragon who shoots his mouth off and you are really inappropriate etiquette wise on the blog scene. But I will not deny you your notion that government no longer represents the interests of oridinary people, and that elected officials are perverting the Constitution left and right.
I agree with most of your commentary, Robert. Even the personal name calling has a certain truthfulness. I like the thought of being a fire breathing dragon, but who ever looks at things from the dragon’s point of view? Even if the nomination and confirmation of justices is political, the Supreme Court is what we’ve got. So, with your natural and realistic caveats, let us take as our common ground that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land and ought to be determinative. Next step. The Supreme Court CAN obviously rule wrongly, as it did in the Dred Scott decision, and that eventually had to be reversed. But even leaving that aside are we agreed on the premise that the purpose of the constitution is protect the intrinsic rights of the citizen against the over reaching power of the administrative branch and of the legislative branch of the government? Is there any higher or more important purpose of government to be served which might trump the constitution’s aim of protecting the intrinsic rights and freedoms of citizens against depredations by the government?
In theory, there really is no higher calling. I worry about the Supreme Court’s ability to stay objective in it’s interpretation of the Constitution. My concern is that they can be bought, just like the rest of the politicians. I still don’t understand how Citizens United is in the best interest of the United States. But maybe I’m missing something. I’ve been wrong before. Maybe I just don’t understand the nuances.
An excellent example, gitapik, of a decision that some argue is as wrong as Dred Scott. Rendo and I haven’t yet gotten into collaborative exploration of any particular issue, just agreed that the Constitution (as interpreted) is the law of the land. Among many it is simply a given that a corporation is not a person and that the protections to free speech of the 1st Amendment should not be extended to that entity which a corporation is. Since Citizens United includes unions in its free speech provisions as well as corporations, it would seem to be fair, but is it really? For the purposes of political speech should a corporate entity be treated as an individual person?
My personal opinion is, “no”…a corporation is not a single person entity.
If, however, the law of the land has decided that a corporation is the same as a person, then that corporation should be subject to all of the laws and penalties that the individual stiff (such as myself) have to abide by.
It galls me to no end that the Apple execs would say that they don’t see themselves beholden to the interests of the USA.
As usual, Harlan simplifies all issues down to whether or not we voted for Obama as a panacea for fixing what is wrong or preventing the same wrongs from happening.
Harlan: wake up.
Both parties, for the most part, are detached and disconnected from the needs and interests of the average person.
Obama is indeed rotten to the core, but most of the GOP and Democrats are also.
Try some common ground, Harlan. If your social skills were as sharp as your articulateness, think of how much better the outcome could be for all of us.
Unless, of course, you prefer to think about the “me” in this more than the “us” . . . .
Thank you for the lesson in manners. Make me the issue because you can’t defend the policy. I might consider common ground if any one here is really ready for it. The common ground I would propose is the Constitution. Any takers?
I personally apologize to you, Harlan, for not being as superior as you. Us lower dumber folks are still catching up to the better stock such as yourself, and we’re just too lacking in critical thinking and reflection to come up to your hign and mighty level. I for one am launching a “Let’s all be like Harlan” campaign, complete with a Harlan pride parade, where, you, Harlan, are solicited to be its haughty grand marshall.
Your fan base hopes you will consider. If you can’t avail yourself, we hope you will at least decline our request graciously.
On a not so sarcastic note:
” . . . It’s all of a piece what Obama is doing to education and what he’s doing to the country as a whole. You liberals used to be against lying, deceptive, feckless, authoritarian tyrants who would knife even their strongest supporters in the back, as he has done to you public school teachers. He WILL destroy public education around you. By buying him you helped break the country.”
Harlan, I hate Obama for all the reasons you just state. I actually have serious common ground here. Obama is depraved. But he does not and mostly cannot act alone. He is acting in concert with the Congress and Senate.
And THEY – most of the three branches – are perverting the Constitution like never before in the name of “security”.
From a public teacher’s view, we have education without representation. . .. the same goes for taxation.
I just don’t understand how you think Mitt and Paul Ryan were any better, and how you can possibly defend GWB after his and the Congress’s hegemonious and unilateral multi-billion dollar invasion of Iraq, all based on a false premise.
BOTH parties are rotten. BOTH lie. BOTH say they help the average person while they go behind that person’s back, stab him/her, grab his wallet, all while tongue kissing and fondling their corporate sponsors who financed their campaigns. They are partners in crime:
http://thetruthoneducationreform.blogspot.com/2013/01/partners-in-crime.html?view=snapshot
I would be a lot more comfortable and happy living in your mindset.
I would also be a lot more uninformed.
You must be in despair, Robert. I am not. You are, however, I think wrong in saying effectively “a plague on both your houses.” The Republicans are, at the moment, weak and craven, but they would like to be constitutionalists if they had the guts. If we were to seek common ground on the basis of expecting constitutional government, would you be on board?
Yes, we should abide by the Constitution, but to an extent that can be controverted, the Constitution is subject to interpretation. If it were not, we would not have a realm in the legal field known as “Constitutional Law”.
If you don’t belueve that both parties are vastly corrupt and rotten, then you are uninformed or too trusting, Harlan.
So, how are your social security checks going? Are they coming to you in the mail on time?
You seem to be qualifying your acceptance. I’m not talking about politicians or anyone else than you. Someone here suggested that I look for common ground rather than flaming about like a grouchy dragon on LSD. Do you think that the Constitution is a good common ground from which to start when we are debating policy issues? We know that we have a Supreme Court to make interpretations, and I include their decisions in my proposal to use the constitution as common ground. If we agree that the constitution is the law of the land, that would at least be something. I probably am optimistically naive. If I thought corruption were absolute and that there is not public space for rational discussion, I would simply drop out of the political process. But, I think people are still capable of rationality and hope to appeal to it in connection with the constitution to perhaps change some minds, perhaps if yours if you are willing to consider the issue with an eye to educating your partner in debate or discussion. In a way, I don’t look to persuade you, but rather to be enlightened, but I prefer for that to happen step by step.
I’ve been thinking about InBloom and data collection, since the Snowden story broke. I am glad you wrote about this Diane. Maybe Prism will wake the public up. Collecting data on American children needs the same examination and exposure.
What an EXCELLENT point!
Bravo to you, WordsMatter.
Ron Suskind said this on Rachel Maddow’s show:
“Dick Cheney way back said, if you haven`t done anything wrong, you
have nothing to worry about.
Well, that`s a kind of a reversal of the way our systems of laws work,
of innocent until proven guilty.
And ultimately the accuser here is not so much an individual as a
computer algorithm that says you made a phone call or a phone call seems to
be attached to you, a server, a community of calls that you`re a part of.
And thereby, it`s almost like, you know, you start with the lottery subset
and next thing you know you`re at the 7-Eleven where they bought the
tickets.
Well, you`re at the 7-Eleven where that lottery ticket was bought and
you may be in that group, and all the while you don`t know that you`re in
the last cut of 20 people that the U.S. government`s interested in. All
this happens invisibly.
Now, the FISA court has a role. We`ve talked about that. But on
balance, much of this is operated by a kind of a vast activated matrix to
say this is interesting to us, whether it`s a keyword search, you`ve said
something in a phone call, whether it`s a type of phone call that`s being
made. Whether it`s a connection between a charge, an American Express
charge, where a phone call`s made in a particular place. Or overseas,
connected to America.
I think what`s interesting, though, is that people don`t care nearly
as much as I think most folks thought they would. ”
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/52168312/ns/msnbc-rachel_maddow_show/#.UbhrWUokWyU
And that is the crux of the problem. Americans are asleep at the wheel.
I’m firmly on the side of General Buck Turgidson – we can’t let them see the Big Board.
Snowden is absolutely a hero in my book. He just confirmed what I’d long suspected, particularly after Facebook started requiring that people use their real names –and then other online services switched to using Facebook for signing in and making comments.
BTW, those FISA judges that the president would have us believe have our backs have approved EVERY surveillance request in the past four years: http://www.salon.com/2013/06/07/despite_obamas_claim_fisa_court_rarely_much_of_a_check/
Let’s think about this from a fiscal point of view. At what point would we consider the cost of these programs to outweigh the decreasing marginal utility of the programs? According to a 2011 report by the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Reponses to Terrorism, “Excluding 9/11, nearly 500 people have died in terrorist attacks in the United States” between 1970 and 2010. For comparison, “Globally, over 65000 people have died in terrorist attacks since 2001, with an average of 7258 deaths in terrorist attacks per year.” They also found that “The frequency of terrorist attacks in the United States has decreased since 2001.”
Click to access backgroundreport_10yearssince9_11.pdf
“The United States has spent more than $7.6 trillion on defense and homeland security since the attacks of September 11, 2001.”
“Total homeland security spending since September 11, 2001 is $635.9 billion.”
http://nationalpriorities.org/analysis/2011/us-security-spending-since-911/
According to the chart on the first report I posted, 25 people died by terrorists in the U.S. between 2002 and 2010. Let’s play conservative for a second and assume that Homeland Security did incredibly well at preventing terrorist attacks during that time. The Heritage Foundation, by and far one of the most conservative groups I know of, places the number of prevented attacks at 50, from 9/11 to 2012. They’ve even listed the ones they counted.
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/04/fifty-terror-plots-foiled-since-9-11-the-homegrown-threat-and-the-long-war-on-terrorism
So using the estimated number of prevented attacks from the Heritage Foundation and the average number of deaths per attack from the first report I posted, Homeland Security successfully prevented approximately 21 extra deaths. The total of prevented and unprevented deaths by terrorist acts is 46.
Now divide the amount we spend on counter-terrorism through Homeland Security ($635.9 billion through 2011) by the total number of prevented and unprevented deaths (46), and we get approximately $13.8 billion spent per person. I don’t know about y’all, but I don’t think that the average person in the U.S. will produce or be worth $13.8 billion.
You are more likely to die in a car crash (33,000 in 2009) or by a cop (587 in 2012) than you are by a terrorist.
Click to access 12s1105.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_killings_by_law_enforcement_officers_in_the_United_States_2012
So, if the cost is exorbitant compared to the number of prevented attacks, who is really benefitting from us spending so much on “defense” and “security?” Can we really justify the expansion of these programs in the face of massive budget cuts to important social programs like public education, welfare and emergency services? Is it outside the realm of justifiable theory that the information gathered via this massive dragnet might be used against us later when the people attempt to elect a Congress to legislate AGAINST the military-industrial complex?
“Think of it. Edward Snowden was a high school dropout who was hired as a security guard but soon rose to become an IT consultant for Booz Allen and Hamilton, a mammoth company that collected over $1 billion for intelligence work in the past year”. Interesting observation. I wonder what you mean by it.
High school dropout yes, but he was “College OR CAREER ready”
Someone posted this on one of Diane’s previous blog entries. Short 5 minute clip. I think it pertains to both education AND what we’re talking about here. There’s a lot of very big money in the areas of education and national security. Why should the sellers be held accountable (said with a great deal of sarcasm)?
Thank you for re -posting this truthful explaination of what is occuring in education. Outstanding!
I wish David Sirota could go on MSNBC with Chris Hays and talk about this.
The network probably would not allow this level of honesty.
———————–
For more info on Databases In schools :
EXPOSED: HOW MURDOCH, BILL GATES, AND BIG CORPORATIONS ARE DATA MINING OUR SCHOOLS.
http://www.nationofchange.org/exposed-how-murdoch-bill-gates-and-big-corporations-are-data-mining-our-schools-1367331290
I asked myself this question after reading about Mr. Snowden and all of this high tech security issues…am i willing to put away my phone, the internet, my credit card etc. to keep others from knowing where i am, what I buy, what I do? I would like to think that I could. We have all contributed, knowingly or unknowingly to this access. The question is the age old one. Now that we know better , do we do better? Hmmm…
Snowden is a hero, as is Julian Assange . . .
What a fascination this young whistle-blower is as he yells the King isn’t wearing any clothes. A real life children’s story awakened in real time! The politicians have sheepish looks on their faces as they have to face the public knowing they lied and manipulated the very public they are responsible to protect and respect. Instead, the coffers are robbed, the laws defied, the use of power becomes overlord and master, they strut like peacocks but convienately put their heads in the sand. The individuals on both sides of the isle who have tried to speak up have been drowned out by those who continued to believe there was a never ending pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. Well, wake up Dorothy and friends as there never was a Wizard or Land of Oz.
Have we been living in a fool’s paradise? Is it all about the love of money or the aphrodisiac of power? What part have the organizations such as unions, agencies, For Profit businesses, non-profits, universities/think tanks, schools, in their naive
grab for dollars and change, rubbing elbows and knees with power players over the last thirty years and have contributed to their own demise? Do they still have the Power or the Will to bring themselves together and accept their part in this charade and miss handling of their committment to the children and those they represent? In concert yell and act on behalf of sanity and equity, rein in the excess and live in balance with need instead of the expectations that all of the want list will be filled.
It is not just the King who isn’t wearing any clothes…….the entire Kingdom have been fools!!!!
Welcome to the Panopticon.
“He sees you when you’re sleeping.
He knows when you’re awake.
He knows if you’ve been bad or good.
So be good for goodness’s sake.”
When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty
The vast amount of data-mining here will be used in many cases to exploit markets such as the “disposable income” of youths…This isn’t conspiracy, it’s collusion by highly sophisticated coporatists who see “gold in them hills.” It’s just how corporatists operate, as we can seen in this essay: http://www.scribd.com/doc/106337306/THE-CHICAGO-PUBLIC-SCHOOLS-ALLERGIC-TO-ACTIVISM
Right on Luis.