Happy Face

This week I've praised Mumford and Sons and been to see Joe Satriani and Bon Jovi live. Not doing your cred any good hailing my taste I'll give just about anything a listen that's hoyed up and I've not heard before though....and tend to follow up on them if it's any good. Found quite a bit from you and the other music buffs on here. On this note, All Songs Considered just included Disclosure in their "best of the year so far" show, as recommended by your good self... Great stuff.

Cheers folks I'd like to say I'm living it large, but I'm just at work

For those that trust the PRISM tool will not be abused, remember poor old General Patreuas. One of his bitches on the side asked a mate at the FBI to trace some anonymous emails she had received, turns out they came from another Patreus bitch, so they looked at all her different email accounts...and then all the mails of Patreus. You're wondering how Patreus could be so daft if he knew they had the tools to trace his mails? He wasn't....he would never send any emails....they both had access to the same account where they only saved draft versions of emails for the other to pick up....but the FBI could still abuse their power and technology to read them. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Petraeus#Extramarital_affair_and_resignation Only used to stop terror though, aye,right.

My buddy David Simon has done a follow up to his last "pro-surveillance" post.... http://davidsimon.com/counter-arguments-gathered-and-answered/?utm_source=feedly&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+DavidSimon+%28David+Simon%29 I tell everyone he's my friend now. We were chatting away in his comments section on the last one

Clapper can't even claim he was caught unaware, he was given a days notice of the question and a chance to change his answer later... Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) issued the following statement regarding statements made by the Director of National Intelligence James Clapper about collection on Americans. Wyden is a senior member of the Senate Intelligence Committee. “One of the most important responsibilities a Senator has is oversight of the intelligence community. This job cannot be done responsibly if Senators aren’t getting straight answers to direct questions. When NSA Director Alexander failed to clarify previous public statements about domestic surveillance, it was necessary to put the question to the Director of National Intelligence. So that he would be prepared to answer, I sent the question to Director Clapper’s office a day in advance. After the hearing was over my staff and I gave his office a chance to amend his answer. Now public hearings are needed to address the recent disclosures and the American people have the right to expect straight answers from the intelligence leadership to the questions asked by their representatives.” http://www.wyden.senate.gov/news/press-releases/wyden-statement-responding-to-director-clappers-statements-about-collection-on-americans They're above the law of course so his criminal act won't see him charged, but I wonder if we'll see a resignation.

Jeff Merkley, supported by 8 senators (Dem & Rep), is proposing a bill to declassify govt interpretations of surveillance law. -Spencer Ackerman Co-author of the leaked stories this week. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/11/us-senators-government-secret-court-surveillance

http://www.theverge.com/2013/6/8/4409766/vine-surpasses-instagram-sharing-over-twitter

His old xbox and his little socks

Mumford and Sons first album. I know they're as frowned upon as Coldplay, but this one was mint to be fair.....like Coldplay's first. ...that cover of The Boxer on album 2 though?

They're onto us!!!

http://www.salon.com/2013/06/10/qa_with_laura_poitras_the_woman_behind_the_nsa_scoops/

Wondered why Joe Satriani only had quarter of the City Hall sold out last night. Neil Young obviously a bigger draw.

Whoever pointed me at Dan Carlin (think it was on here), many thanks. This weeks 90 minute show on how historic this is giving me shivers again... http://ec.libsyn.com/p/f/9/0/f9005b1565c00713/cswdcc55.mp3?d13a76d516d9dec20c3d276ce028ed5089ab1ce3dae902ea1d01cf873ed5cb5ad09c&c_id=5761094

Not one word from Hague on the US accessing the private data of UK citizens.

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/3036789/ns/msnbc-morning_joe/vp/52154665#52154665 Greenwald gets angry at a dumb blonde

Simon Waldman ‏@simonmwaldman 2m @David_Cameron insists that UK's intelligence services operate "within the law". "The law is actually quite clear. If the British intelligence agencies are seeking to know the content of emails about people living in the UK then they actually have to get lawful authority. Normally that means ministerial authority. That applies equally whether they are going to do the intercept themselves or whether they are going to ask somebody else to do it on their behalf." Malcolm Rifkind in The Guardian The Leaked documents suggested that GCHQ had generated 197 intelligence reports from the NSA-run Prism last year. The system would appear to allow GCHQ to bypass formal legal processes to access personal material, such as emails and photographs, from the world's biggest internet companies. The Guardian These 3 seperate statements leave 3 options... 1. Ministers approved the use of PRISM, to keep intelligence service within the law...but didn't inform the public as to the level of privacy erosion. 2. The detailed leaks that have not been denied by anyone in power at any point, got that bit about the UK wrong. 3. Cameron is lying

http://obamaischeckingyouremail.tumblr.com/

He answers that contradiction himself... "I think it is really tragic that an American has to move to a place that has a reputation for less freedom. Still, Hong Kong has a reputation for freedom in spite of the People's Republic of China. It has a strong tradition of free speech."

Very interesting read in New Scientist. http://www.newscient...ple.html?page=1

I don't think he expects to stop monitoring going on, or to stop governments having secrets. In my view...from what he says in the interview, he wants to protect the fourth amendment. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. Like "the right to bear arms", times have changed since this was written. There is a question of scalability. The constitution protected an American's right to own a musket back in those days ...does it then apply to better weapons for killing? A revolver, a semi automatic, a fully automatic, a rocket launcher, cluster bombs...nukes? Lawmakers make that decision in the open, and the public continue to have a vibrant debate. The right to privacy has no such clear definitions of what remains legal or not. We have scaled up from personal papers in our office, to electronic data held on the servers of companies around the globe without any discussion. The government have seized carte blanche and will not allow debate to happen on the grounds of national security, which is preposterous. It may well be, that when all is said and done, people prefer security over liberty... In April.. Only 20 percent of people said they believed the government had gone too far in restricting civil liberties in the fight against terrorism, while 26 percent said it had not gone far enough and 49 percent said the balance was about right. In 2011, the share of those worried about losing civil liberties (25 percent) was larger than that favoring more intrusive government approach (17 percent). http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/01/us/poll-finds-strong-acceptance-for-public-surveillance.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 So, the views of Holden are some way from the outrage of the majority. The people being polled didn't know how far surveillance had gone though. Holden does. Those numbers might change if people are properly informed....and they are better informed today than they were last week.

I assumed the reveal of who the leaker was would have been the finale. Wonder what's coming next.

The administration are running around chasing their tails and all they can do is erect straw men like that to knock down themselves. Similarly... Obama - "look, we aren't recording your telephone calls"....well no-one said you were. Clapper - "Nothing illegal going on, a judge signed off on all of it" ....again, not the issue. The awful truth of the matter is that the really big issue is that they ARE legal. James Fallows put it the best I have read so far... That these programs are legal -- unlike the Nixon "Plumbers" operation, unlike various CIA assassination programs, unlike other objects of whistle-blower revelations over the years -- is the most important fact about them. They're being carried out in "our" name, ours as Americans, even though most of us have had no idea of what they entailed. The debate on the limits of the security-state is long overdue, and Edward Snowden has played an important role in hastening its onset. Secret laws (and interpretation of laws) are no way to run a free society. Bush legalised torture...it's still torture.

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_judicial_lynching_of_bradley_manning_20130609/?utm_source=feedly&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Truthdig%2FChrisHedges+Chris+Hedges+on+Truthdig How far we've fallen.

Related to all this... http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_judicial_lynching_of_bradley_manning_20130609/?utm_source=feedly&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Truthdig%2FChrisHedges+Chris+Hedges+on+Truthdig