In a very powerful exclusive interview, I recently had the privilege of speaking to an American hero, William Binney, NSA whistleblower.
When speaking out means sacrificing privacy, we lose points of view, and the quality of our democracy suffers. That should give all of us something to truly fear.
The "security vs. liberty" strawman argument remains the rhetorical weapon of choice for National Security State officials terrified by the spread of public encryption technologies. They argue that, absent some form of technological "back door" to break into private encrypted communications, federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies will be blinded, unable to fend off potential terrorist attacks here at home.
For almost a month, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) has been engaged in damage control after publicly disclosing that it was the victim of a massive data breach of government employee data.
Despite the revelations provided by Edward Snowden about the scope and illegality of the U.S. government's mass surveillance programs, the Intelligence Community's power to fight back remains potent -- especially when its ostensible watchdogs are its biggest supporters and apologists.
Too many candidates are endorsing the conventional political wisdom that more military invasion, occupation, droning and Pentagon spending will somehow make us more secure. That's why we think that now is a more important time than ever to challenge the status quo.
The progressive left may not pack a great deal of power in our two-party, war-oriented and Wall Street-dominated political culture. But progressives do have the wherewithal to make a Snowden pardon an issue in the upcoming election.
The hack that resulted in the theft of information on 4 million government employees didn't need to happen. We had plenty of warning and next to nothing was done.
Hastert shocking... but Alter recalls how he sleazily pocketed millions when legislation enhanced his private property. Alter-Matalin debate how Pope wants to phase out fossil fuels while many Catholic Republicans are in big oil's pockets. Then: Is O'Malley Hart and Hillary Mondale? Is Obama Jew-ish?
I'm not a big fan of libertarians or libertarian Republicans, but Kentucky Senator Rand Paul deserves tremendous credit for his brinksmanship on the Patriot Act in forcing the U.S. Senate leadership to bend on the issue of the federal government's massive, once very secret, monitoring of our private communications.
Many Americans have been heard to mimic the media's disdain for partisan gridlock in Washington, but because Congress and the president often do the wrong thing, it's often better when nothing is done.
We're going to begin today with a rather loaded question: How much attention do you think the media should be paying towards a presidential nominee who is right now getting 13 to 15 percent support in public opinion polls of their party's voters?
The Senate's pro-surveillance wing is scrambling to advance new legislation to restore the NSA's unchecked ability to spy on all of us. And they're in a rush. Authorization for the federal government's bulk collection of phone records is set to expire on June 1.
Convergence and divergence, centralization and fragmentation: it's a vision of a planet that's not exactly Orwellian, but certainly represents a nightmare worthy of some still-to-be-discovered Orwell of our moment.
In the days ahead, as we reappraise Edward Snowden's complicated legacy, now two years old -- and as Congress considers a package of sensible NSA reforms -- what's called for is a dose of clear-eyed realism, an appetite for nuance, and a high tolerance for uncertainty.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) is playing "beat the clock" when it comes to the continued authorization of the NSA accumulation of phone data of US citizens. June 1 is the deadline and there is no consensus on how to go forward.