Snowden's Revelations Have Strengthened the NSA

[Occam's Banana]

h/t LRC: http://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/05/gary-north/the-mob-is-sickening
/

How Snowden's Revelations Have Strengthened the NSA
http://www.garynorth.com/public/12446.cfm
Gary North (14 May 2014)

It has been a year since Edward Snowden blew the whistle on the NSA.

I appreciate what Snowden did. His decision to leak the stolen documents has done the conservative movement an enormous favor. It has blown to smithereens the greatest single myth of conservatism: "If the American people knew about this, there would be an uprising." No, there wouldn't.

Here is a variation: "If the voters knew what is being done to them by the Conspiracy, they would throw out the conspirators at the next election." No, they wouldn't.

I have heard variants of these arguments for 50 years. Conservatives don't learn. They think that by exposing the Bad Guys, they will defeat the Bad Guys. They're wrong.

Snowden has proven, as no one in my era has better proved, that exposure of the Bad Guys in government has no negative effect on them.

If exposure does come, and the public does nothing to thwart the hidden Bad Guys, then the Bad Guys no longer have to worry about further exposure. It will be old news. At this point, they can do even more to secure their position of power. The pressure blows over. There may be a time of bad publicity, but this does not change anything fundamental.

Before Snowden, the best examples were the big bankers, who were bailed out a taxpayers' expense in 2009. They got richer. The public knows. The public groused a little. Did this hurt the bankers? No. They got bonuses for their failures. Congress bailed out the big banks, and there were no negative public sanctions on either Congress or the big banks. It's business as usual.

The voters know. The voters have done nothing. It's old news.

But Snowden's revelations have gone far beyond the big bank bailouts of 2009. They have thrown light on a power grab by the government that is perpetual. It was generally hidden. James Bamford's book, The Puzzle Palace (1983), did good work. It had no negative effect on the NSA. But he did not have incontrovertible evidence. Snowden did, and he released it. He got worldwide publicity.

The NSA is more powerful than ever. From now on, any further exposure is old news. No harm, no foul.

THE NSA NOW HAS CARTE BLANCHE

[... more at link: http://www.garynorth.com/public/12446.cfm ...]

[T]he NSA is not going to be in any way hampered by Edward Snowdon, except in terms of bad publicity. But bad publicity does not lead to a change of congressional policy, especially with respect to the budget of the NSA. So, the NSA is going to get away with it, just as it has always gotten away with it.

If anything, Snowden has helped the NSA. Why is that? Because now it is clear that the public really doesn't care. The NSA has been able to weather the storm with no problem in terms of its budget, which means that the NSA now has carte blanche, and Congress knows it. The public knows it to the extent that the public cares, but really the public doesn't care.

The NSA now has full rein over every aspect of our privacy. A year has gone by, and nothing has changed. This is a grant of legitimacy to the NSA that it did not have before Snowden's revelations. Before, the NSA worked in secrecy from the public. Now the NSA knows that the worst possible light can be thrown on the NSA's activities, and nothing is done to roll back the NSA. It has survived Snowdon's revelations, and now it can continue without any major threat to its operations.

I'm glad that Snowden did what he did, because I wanted to hear evidence that backed up what James Bamford wrote about the NSA over two decades ago. It was nice to see that Bamford's warning was validated by Snowden's relations. But nobody cared about Bamford's book, and nobody really cares about Snowden's revelations -- not enough to cut the NSA's budget.

Snowden's revelations serve as a mirror. We looked into the mirror, and we saw what manner of people we are. We just don't care. We didn't care in 1913, so why should we care today?

[... more at link: http://www.garynorth.com/public/12446.cfm ...]

 

[AuH20]

Gary North also wrote another piece condemning the militia's actions at Bunkerville. There are many people who do care, much to his chagrin.

 

[Occam's Banana]

Gary North also wrote another piece condemning the militia's actions at Bunkerville.

And this would have what to do with the OP?

There are many people who do care, much to his chagrin.

North's use of "nobody cares" is hyperbole. It is an intensifying rhetorical device and is not intended to be taken literally.

And you do know what "chagrin" means, don't you? I ask because North has no apparent reason to be chagrinned unless & until the NSA's domestic surveillance programs are ended by some means other than that which he describes. (Or have you just been waiting for an excuse to trot out that clichéd "much to his chagrin" line?)

 

[AuH20]

And this would have what to do with the OP?



North's use of "nobody cares" is hyperbole. It is an intensifying rhetorical device and is not intended to be taken literally.

And you do know what "chagrin" means, don't you? I ask because North has no apparent reason to be chagrinned unless & until the NSA's domestic surveillance programs are ended by some means other than that which he describes. (Or have you just been waiting for an excuse to trot out that clichéd "much to his chagrin" line?)

I may be biased, but I have developed a distaste for defeatists like Gary North and Lew Rockwell. I think the Bunkerville op ed(http://americanvision.org/10806/gar...ed-bundy-ranch-hotheads/#sthash.cZJrr667.dpbs) may have sent me over the proverbial edge with it's sheer arrogance. And it's very revealing that we have Postmillenial Christians and others of a subservient nature that have been circulating North's treatise on the proper expressions of civil unrest.

 

[MRK]

If anything, Snowden has helped the NSA. Why is that? Because now it is clear that the public really doesn't care. The NSA has been able to weather the storm with no problem in terms of its budget, which means that the NSA now has carte blanche, and Congress knows it. The public knows it to the extent that the public cares, but really the public doesn't care.

This is similar to the outcome of the effects that a limited hangout has in mitigating scandal fallouts[0]. The scandal's been aired, but the problems nevertheless persist.

[0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited_hangout

 

[Cutlerzzz]

I developed a much greater distaste for North when I found out he advocated stoning gays, cheaters, disobedient children, and athiests to death, but that ultimately doesn't have much to do with his view on the NSA.

 

[AuH20]

I developed a much greater distaste for North when I found out he advocated stoning gays, cheaters, disobedient children, and athiests to death, but that ultimately doesn't have much to do with his view on the NSA.

But his rhetoric is always tinged with so much condescension and associated dread, as if future events cannot be avoided. It should be noted that this article never brought up the incredible personal scrutiny that NSA employees have experienced since Snowden's revelations. Or the intense spotlight that the Bluffdale facility has attracted. Gary North strike me too much as a commentator on the sidelines with no real desire to get his hands dirty.

 

[liberty2897]

They've adapted.

 

[Occam's Banana]

I may be biased, but I have developed a distaste for defeatists like Gary North and Lew Rockwell.

Oh, so now we're pissing on Lew Rockwell, too? You know - that "defeatist" who founded the LvMI when Austro-libertarianism was at near ebb-tide? That Lew Rockwell? Who's next? Tom Woods? Ron Paul? Yosemite Sam?

Please, let us know - because this thread is all about who's on your personal shit list (and not at all about whether or how the NSA has been made more or less vulnerable to significant reform as an ironic consequence of Edward Snowden's revelations).

I think the Bunkerville op ed(http://americanvision.org/10806/gar...ed-bundy-ranch-hotheads/#sthash.cZJrr667.dpbs) may have sent me over the proverbial edge with it's sheer arrogance. And it's very revealing that we have Postmillenial Christians and others of a subservient nature that have been circulating North's treatise on the proper expressions of civil unrest.

That's nice. But perhaps you could reserve the expression of such sentiments regarding the Bunkerville op-ed for, oh, I don't know ... say, a thread that actually has something remotely to do with the Bunkerville op-ed? Maybe? Just a thought ...

[blarg blarg blarg] It should be noted that this article never brought up [...] the intense spotlight that the Bluffdale facility has attracted. [blarg blarg blarg]

Did you even bother to read the article - or try to understand the point being made?

North explicitly addressed the Bluffdale facility. FTA:

Has the spying center in Utah been shut down? No. It is going to come online as promised. It has all kinds of snafus associated with it, as any government bureaucracy does. But Congress has in no way reined it in. The public has not demanded that Congress rein it in.

Whether you agree with his thesis or not, not only is it NOT the case that he "never brought it up," but he explicitly cited it to the effect that Bluffdale is going forward unchecked & unimpeded - despite the "intense spotlight" it has attracted (this context was, in fact, the whole point of his having mentioned it).

Gary North strike me too much as a commentator on the sidelines with no real desire to get his hands dirty.

As opposed, of course, to your own non-sideline-commentating and dirty-handed self ...

 

[Lucille]

You actually beat me to posting that, OB. Arthur Silber called it a year ago.

A year! But just wait (some more) for the big fireworks finale! And did you hear about the movie?! Then he predicts Clinton will win in '16, which tells us how much The Greenwald Show will accomplish.

It's really too bad Snowden didn't give it all to wikileaks.

But the very purpose of Wikileaks is to challenge any and every authority of this kind. For Wikileaks, the only authority that matters -- the only person who is ultimately entitled to all available information and who properly should judge it -- is you. In this sense, which I submit is the highest and best sense of the term, Wikileaks is a genuine "leveller." It seeks to make each and every individual the ultimate judge of the truth, just as it seeks to empower all people to make the determination as to what course of action is indicated, if any. This, dear reader, is what a real revolution looks like.

If you wish to challenge authority in any serious manner, you must be prepared to provoke an unholy, chaotic, extremely messy scene, one punctuated with howls of outrage by those in power, where everyone is mortified, humiliated and riven with panic -- including you. Anything short of that is merely a very small speed bump on power's journey to ever-increasing destruction and death.

The manner of disclosure adopted by Lord Greenwald & Friends, a model of a polite, rules-abiding challenge to authority, has stopped exactly nothing. To the contrary, the primary effect of the disclosures has been to normalize increasingly pervasive, all-encompassing surveillance, and even to make it "legal."

 

[muh_roads]

Gary North is wrong. A lot more people have taken an interest in encryption from what I've seen. And the community is now thinking more about this as they develop their new protocols.

 

[AuH20]

Gary North is wrong. A lot more people have taken an interest in encryption from what I've seen. And the community is now thinking more about this as they develop their new protocols.

Not to mention the push to deny cooling water to the Bluffdale facility. People are keenly aware of the Achilles heel of this facility.

 

[DFF]

As far as no one caring, that's bull. A LOT of people care, but their representatives in Congress don't.

Once again, these revelations about the NSA spying demonstrates the attitude and position of our politicians.

They are acting collectively as a (bad) King. Who only listens to themselves and a few rich people in their court.

 

[DamianTV]

Art of War: When you are weak, appear strong.

 

[osan]

If anything, Snowden has helped the NSA. Why is that? Because now it is clear that the public really doesn't care.

We have become the UK. After 9/11, BBC produced "The Power Of Nightmares", which I believe did NOT air in the USA. It is a most enlightening documentary on 9/11, and the new role to which terrorism has been assigned. When I saw it, I was in a sense shocked that such revelations would be disclosed publicly in such manner. I asked my friend Michael, who at the time lived in London. Michael was involved in the capture of a once notorious hacker... I believe Kevin Mitnick. He's a bright guy, and so I asked him about it - why would they make such disclosures? His answer was that nobody in the UK gave a damn. Everyone is so depressed and so pilled up that they just don't care what you might admit, regardless of how outrageously criminal.

That is where we are now. We just don't care and that is why reason and protest will avail us nothing. I cannot say whether armed insurrection against Themme would succeed, but I can guarantee you that anything less is basically guaranteed to fail. The patterns are the same no matter where you look, regardless of agency. They're not listening anymore because they do not have to. "Government" has take on an existence of its own, separately from the rest of us in effective terms because of the way people now think. Between the psychology of the rulers and that of the ruled, the effect is no different than if government actually existed in sé.

Rallye all you want. Elect every liberty candidate. I hope it succeeds, but I don't see it happening. These people, Themme, have worked tirelessly on an intergenerational time scale to position themselves for despotic rule. Theye own "everything" in practical terms and want to have utter control over the rest of us. Do not fool yourself into believing that if we elected liberty-oriented majorities in both houses that Theye are going to lie down and give up. We are a tiny fraction of a hair's breadth away from martial law and it could be declared in response to a national emergency, which itself could be anything, including a flare-up of Obama's hemorrhoids. Nobody holding that much mojo is going to meekly walk away, especially when it's well in their power to covertly initiate events to provide the pretexts for despotic rule.

A year has gone by, and nothing has changed. This is a grant of legitimacy to the NSA that it did not have before Snowden's revelations.

And that, my friends, is as true as anything anyone has ever uttered. The lines are drawn. "Government" has basically thrown down the gauntlet and we have meekly demurred. Theye are now de-facto kings and we, serfs. There is no other realistic way to slice it. We, the people, should have risen up 100 + years ago and slaughtered the raft of them and any that presumed to impress their poisons upon us. But we didn't. And now we are lost, barring armed revolt. While I still hold out some hope for it, I doubt it will amount to much of anything - the revelations of some of the goings-on at the Bundy Ranch should be enough to convince people that this is the case. We are outclassed in nearly every respect and Theye know it. The problem is, most of us do not and that is greatly helping to seal our fates.

 

[RickyJ]

The NSA is not stronger because of Snowden's revelations. The NSA has been offcially exposed as liars and that is never a good thing. Now more people than ever know that they should start encrypting everything they want to remain private, that doesn't make the NSA stronger at all.

 

[green73]

Oh, so now we're pissing on Lew Rockwell, too? You know - that "defeatist" who founded the LvMI when Austro-libertarianism was at near ebb-tide? That Lew Rockwell? Who's next? Tom Woods? Ron Paul? Yosemite Sam?

Please, let us know - because this thread is all about who's on your personal shit list (and not at all about whether or how the NSA has been made more or less vulnerable to significant reform as an ironic consequence of Edward Snowden's revelations).



That's nice. But perhaps you could reserve the expression of such sentiments regarding the Bunkerville op-ed for, oh, I don't know ... say, a thread that actually has something remotely to do with the Bunkerville op-ed? Maybe? Just a thought ...



Did you even bother to read the article - or try to understand the point being made?

North explicitly addressed the Bluffdale facility. FTA:


Whether you agree with his thesis or not, not only is it NOT the case that he "never brought it up," but he explicitly cited it to the effect that Bluffdale is going forward unchecked & unimpeded - despite the "intense spotlight" it has attracted (this context was, in fact, the whole point of his having mentioned it).



As opposed, of course, to your own non-sideline-commentating and dirty-handed self ...

Epic response, and of course the coward doesn't respond. I wish I wasn't out of rep for you. Someone hit me up.

 

[Theocrat]

"Truth is Treason in an Empire of Lies"

Not only that, Snowden's revelations have strengthened our Congress because they provide Congress the justification it seeks to kill American citizens overseas for acts which they deem as "endangering American lives." As Gary North cites at the end of his article, just look at Lindsey Graham.

 

[AuH20]

Epic response, and of course the coward doesn't respond. I wish I wasn't out of rep for you. Someone hit me up.

Coward? Am I going to play insult table tennis with Occam all night when he and I clearly don't see eye to eye on the subject? I already laid out my case why North is wrong. North's word choice is highly transparent from one piece to the next. It is obvious where he stands and I'm not a fan of his 'logic.'

 

[green73]

Coward? Am I going to play insult table tennis with Occam all night when he and I clearly don't see eye to eye on the subject? I already laid out my case why North is wrong. North's word choice is highly transparent from one piece to the next. It is obvious where he stands and I'm not a fan of his 'logic.'

Weaksauce dude. And LOL on your comment on logic.