As the world joins in opposition to the U.S. attack on privacy worldwide, President Barack Obama has to face awkward meetings with world leaders of allied countries who were subjects of his surveillance. Some reports have stated that Obama personally approved the monitoring of Angela Merkel’s telephone three years ago. Now, the National Security Agency (NSA) is insisting that Obama did not order the monitoring personally. I am not sure what is worse: that Obama ordered interceptions of allied leaders like Merkel or that the surveillance state is so large that functionaries now have the discretion to order such surveillance. Merkel may not find it as more assuring that Obama didn’t order her monitoring than the notion such she is just another target delegated to discretion of lower level officials. It is also not clear if Mike Rogers is going to suggest that Merkel should also thank us for the monitoring.
NSA and the White House will only say that it is not currently monitoring Merkel’s phone calls as opposed to prior surveillance of our ally. The most chilling aspect of the response is the suggestion that this is just another delegated act from Obama. After all, he delegated the decision of which citizens should be killed on his unilateral authority under his Kill List policy. It is all part of our new Security State. Killing citizens, surveilling allied leaders, seizing the records of Americans from email and phone systems . . . it is all the new normal of delegated presidential authority. I have previously written about the dangers of the Imperial Presidency established by Obama. However, what is even more chilling is how absolute presidential powers become delegated absolute presidential powers. Such delegation not only gives presidents like Obama some deniability in scandals like this but allow for the expansion of such programs under a thousand faceless functionaries. Of course, the Administration is also pursuing a scorched earth policy against reporters and whistleblowers in the hopes of avoiding any future need to explain itself to anyone.
Even in the face of global condemnation, the cult of personality surrounding Obama continues to silence any significant opposition from Democrats. We have allowed the creation of a security state employing hundreds of thousands with hundreds of billions of invested public funds and giant annual budgets. It is a system that is designed to be used, not to remain dormant. We are not just the protected class but the targeted class of such surveillance. It is a system that runs on any source that could be a threat or reveal information of a threat — a standard that allows monitoring of friends and foes alike.
The Germans are of course upset because such surveillance happens to violate German law, but that has hardly proven a barrier in the United States. In expanding these programs, we appear to have transcended the rule of law to embrace a new model of a security state. We have gotten to the point that we not only treat our own laws as increasing discretionary but treat the laws of other nations as equally discretionary. Diplomatic principles are no more inviolate as civil liberties in the new world being fashioned around counter-terrorism. Once transparency has been achieved in the United States, it is inevitable that the world will then look unacceptably opaque to our security forces.
What is most striking from comments like those of Rogers is that we appear completely clueless or willfully blind to the view of our actions by other nations. Since we do not doubt our motivations, we cannot understand why anyone would be uncomfortable with our actions. As with drone strikes and assassination units, our view might change if other countries engaged in the same actions by ordering special forces to kill targets in the United States or unleashing drone attacks or seizing all of our phone records. As we break down legal walls and limits, we are returning the world to a diplomatic version of the state of nature. At that point, we will be left with the simple rule of “might is right.” It is the original law of the jungle and it is perfectly sustainable for the strongest amongst us. Having realized Nixon’s dream of an Imperial Presidency, Obama seems to have moved on to extending Teddy Roosevelt’s Big Stick policy to cover the world and the world leaders.
Source: National Post
The president was unaware that former terrorist Bill Ayers lived in his neighborhood and that he was in the same living room until he read about it in a magazine.
“This is an engineered failing.” (lotta)
Obama’s excuses sound just like what a candidate says when one of his/her aides are caught in a dirty tricks operation … “I had no idea he was doing that and certainly didn’t give my permission … it was just an over zealous underling who has been dismissed from the campaign.”
If Merkel believes Obama, she’s a fool.
From the AFP source:
“The Social Democrats’ chief whip Thomas Oppermann told Bild that German MPs would now like to question Snowden in a new parliamentary probe of the affair.
‘Snowden’s accounts seem credible while the US government apparently lied to us about this matter,’ he said.”
Apparently Bush started spying on Merkel before she was even chancellor … I wonder if they caught her plotting with Saudi terrorists or just plotting with Bush’s Saudi friends.
Well, this summer she got a new secure phone which NSA cracked and monitored … some overzealous functionary, who shall remain nameless, run amuck and thus embarrassing poor, innocent, gosh-gee-whiz Obama. Why do we keep electing these naive fools who are so easily misused by their courtiers?
Good afternoon Mr. Spindle the difference is none of those whom you have mentioned currently retain the title as The President of the United States.
This is certainly not change we can believe in. But he was right, he was 5 days away from fundamentally transforming the Divided States of America.
The president was shocked to learn that the Justice Department confiscated phone records of the Associated Press in reference to a terrorist attack and then scheduled a luncheon with Attorney Eric Holder and a round of Put Put Golf near the White House sources said.
I doubt that this President, or even George W. Bush controls the U.S. Intelligence apparatus. This is of course speculation but one thing comes to mind. Why did Dick Cheney, who was supposed to be in charge under Bush, set up his own intelligence operation working out of his Vice President’s office? Going back in time why did Richard Nixon need the “plumbers” when he had the FBI and CIA? Once answer is at least that the FBI, under J. Edgar Hoover, was not under any President’s control because of the dirt Hoover had in his private files.
The president new nothing about spying on Fox News Journalist James Rosen and his family. He only learned about this after the presidential debate with Candy Crowley of CNN. She informed the president and who he should target next.
He also was unaware that his insurance plan is changing. He really likes his doctor but will not be able to keep his doctor.
The doctor is Happy about this because the president is in good health because he is a basketball player..
He also was unaware that the IRS was targeting conservative T-Party activist. He was told by his top agent on the back 9 it was a localized thing and to not worry. The president finished + 1 on the back 9
He knew about Fast and Furious but only after someone sent him a message to his blackberry while he was on his way to the 19th Hole.
He also was unaware that Ambassador Stevens needed help in Benghazi and was unaware until he saw it on a blog.
The president was unaware that any of this was going on.
He learned about this just the same as the American people by reading about it in news papers.
And so it goes. These are the important questions of the day. Who is really in charge? One of the reasons why Jesse Ventura only did one term as MN Governor is because he could not figure out why the CIA is embedded with state governments. Folks do not believe for a minute that the village idiots: Bush and Obama make foreign or domestic policy.
> is governing the military NSA if the Commander In Chief is not
The NSA is peculiar. It was created by executive order, but Congress has never passed a single law defining the Agency’s scope.
According to the New York Times:
“The power of the N.S.A., whose annual budget and staff are believed to exceed those of either the F.B.I. or the C.I.A., is enhanced by its unique legal status within the Federal Government. Unlike the Agriculture Department, the Postal Service or even the C.I.A., the N.S.A. has no specific Congressional law defining its responsibilities and obligations. Instead, the agency, based at Fort George Meade, about 20 miles northeast of Washington, has operated under a series of Presidential directives. Because of Congress’s failure to draft a law for the agency, because of the tremendous secrecy surrounding the N.S.A.’s work and because of the highly technical and thus thwarting character of its equipment, the N.S.A. is free to define and pursue its own goals”
http://www.nytimes.com/1983/03/27/magazine/the-silent-power-of-the-nsa.html
There have been acts of congress with respect to the NSA, but these acts are just as curious as the lack of interest in oversight.
For example, the National Security Agency Act of 1959 deals almost exclusively with employee compensation, and includes strange caveats like:
“Sec. 2. (a) The Secretary of Defense (or his designee) is
authorized to establish such positions, and to appoint thereto,
without regard to the civil service laws, such officers and
employees, in the National Security Agency, as may be necessary to
carry out the functions of such agency”
and
“(b)(1) In order to maintain necessary capability in foreign
language skills and related abilities needed by the National
Security Agency, the Director, without regard to subchapter IV of
chapter 55 of title 5, United States Code, may provide special
monetary or other incentives to encourage civilian cryptologic
personnel of the Agency to acquire or retain proficiency in foreign
languages or special related abilities needed by the Agency.”
Maybe Obama has lost control.
Magginkat (@Magginkat) 1, October 28, 2013 at 11:28 am
While I am continually ticked off with Obama this may not be his fault. What I have read from several sources this morning is that as usual this crap was started under Bush. What I don’t understand is why Obama continues so much of the garbage dished out by Bush/Cheney.
Then there is the problem that so many people expect Obama to know everything that is going on with every agency in the government. Brings back those old visualizations/cartoons of Obama walking on water.
=======================
Where does the buck stop now?
While I am continually ticked off with Obama this may not be his fault. What I have read from several sources this morning is that as usual this crap was started under Bush. What I don’t understand is why Obama continues so much of the garbage dished out by Bush/Cheney.
Then there is the problem that so many people expect Obama to know everything that is going on with every agency in the government. Brings back those old visualizations/cartoons of Obama walking on water.
lottakatz 1, October 28, 2013 at 11:12 am
Authority is always delegated …
===================
Or usurped.
When the “authority” can’t be granted it also can’t be delegated as a matter of law.
It becomes rogue and ultra vires.
As an example, think of “delegating authority” to launch nuclear weapons.
I take it that example shows that, as a matter of law, certain things cannot be delegated.
This military NSA invasion of the privacy of governments and citizens of friendly nations is so over the top it is not easily grasped.
It is as serious as a heart attack.
“In expanding these programs, we appear to have transcended the rule of law to embrace a new model of a security state.” -Jonathan Turley
We have. And the worst of it is yet to come.
Authority is always delegated, this has been a looming problem since these programs were set up. It also works to the benefit of the principles because the authority can then be diffused to the point that there is little or no accountability. As if we weren’t predicting this on this blawg years ago. This is an engineered failing.
Reblogged this on Brittius.com.
“I am not sure what is worse: that Obama ordered interceptions of allied leaders like Merkel or that the surveillance state is so large that functionaries now have the discretion to order such surveillance.” – JT
Bingo.
The epigovernment hypothesis grows a bit further away from the military NSA “conspiracy theorists” database.
Who is governing the military NSA if the Commander In Chief is not?