Obama: PRISM Doesn’t Apply To U.S. Citizens

[ProSense]

Obama: PRISM Doesn’t Apply To U.S. Citizens

President Barack Obama on Friday reassured Americans that a sweeping new program revealed by the Washington Post and the Guardian yesterday that allows the government to sift through phone logs and Internet data is subject to Congressional oversight and is in the interest of national security.

"This does not apply to U.S. citizens, and this does not apply to people living in the United States," Obama said in California.

"I came in with healthy skepticism about these programs," he added. "I can say that evaluating these programs they make a difference to anticipate and prevent possible terrorist activity."

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/obama-prism-doesnt-apply-to-us-citizens

http://twitpic.com/cvozy8

[NYC_SKP]

1. I predict that this post will be met with obstinate disapproval and outright dismissal, or worse.

How dare you get chocolate in my peanut butter outrage!

[krawhitham]

15. So the normal

[boilerbabe]

33. i would hope so. anybody who thinks we should be exempt

but think it's ok to do it to other countries is kind of a BIGOT! i expect right wingers to like this shit.

[pnwmom]

2. K & R

[Tarheel_Dem]

3. K&R

[indepat]

4. How much is big brother doing to prevent possible terrorist activity by domestic right-wing

extremist groups and/or those having access to assault weapons of mass carnage? Do these groups get as much oversight by big brother as has been given those who lawfully protested Wall Street fraud and abuse?

[uponit7771]

5. FCUK FACTS!!! We hate them, better to listen to the M$M...they never steer us wrong dangit!!!

[FLyellowdog]

6. I am so confused.

Doesn't this statement and the referenced article clearly show us that the government is NOT spying on its citizens, i.e. you and me and the majority of people living in the US?

If that is a factual truth, what's all the outrage about?

I am an American citizen. Are my phone records/internet use/etc. being monitored or not?
It doesn't seem so from the information about FISA.

Can it be just that simple?

[cali]

7. and I have a bridge to sell you. oh never mind. you buy it daily

if not hourly.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/06/us-tech-giants-nsa-data

[ProSense]

9. Keep your "bridge" You'll need it to cross over into reality. Hell

Maybe you'll even find happiness and a better attitude. LOL!

[cali]

13. You're the one that lives in a sycophant's fantasy world.

living proof that blind partisanship leads to loss of critical thinking.

[ProSense]

14. Please, hurry and get a personality. You're clearly pissed off about something. n/t

[Autumn]

17. I must post this cali.

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service

At Fri Jun 7, 2013, 02:17 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

You're the one that lives in a sycophant's fantasy world.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2965741

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

No comments added by alerter

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Jun 7, 2013, 02:23 PM, and the Jury voted 0-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No comments by the alerter? The posters are both being rude, but I'm going to vote to leave this one
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No comments were provided by the juror.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: cali has a point.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: i dont' think this post is offensive. I might disgree with it but it's not hideable. it's a stupid alert, frankly.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[ProSense]

22. "The posters are both being rude, but I'm going to vote to leave this one"

Oh, you wouldn't want to see me be "rude," but the other poster is definitely rude.

Thanks for posting this.

[Autumn]

24. I wasn't juror #2. And you're welcome

[LeftyMom]

19. Aaaand the jury results are in: whoever alerted should get a hobby.

At Fri Jun 7, 2013, 02:17 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

You're the one that lives in a sycophant's fantasy world. http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2965741

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

No comments added by alerter

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Jun 7, 2013, 02:23 PM, and the Jury voted 0-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No comments by the alerter? The posters are both being rude, but I'm going to vote to leave this one
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No comments were provided by the juror.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: cali has a point.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: i dont' think this post is offensive. I might disgree with it but it's not hideable. it's a stupid alert, frankly.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[uponit7771]

20. is this called for?!

[MindPilot]

11. It OK when a Democrat does it.

please try to keep up.

[ProSense]

18. No,

"It OK when a Democrat does it."

...it's isn't. There was a reason (if you overlook the illegal war and torture) to be pissed off at Bush for spying.

For the Republican opportunists, Bush actually spied on people.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022959557


"please try to keep up."

[MjolnirTime]

28. This isn't the poutrage you were looking for!

[LondonReign2]

46. Buy it?

She doesn't buy it, she builds it

[MindPilot]

8. So doing to other countries makes it OK?

Because Americans are just BETTER than anyone else.

Fuck this pathetic authoritarian rationale.

[Sheepshank]

16. This is about US Constitutional Rights

your question is either naive, super silly, deliberately stupid or designed to mislead.

[MindPilot]

21. No, my question stands.

How does the fact that they are supposedly only doing it in other countries make it OK?

This has gone from "No-one is actually LISTENING to your calls" to "no one is listening to AMERICANS' calls. It is starting to sound like the Bush administration making excuses to invade Iraq.

[Sheepshank]

25. You are questioning whether the USA can spy internationally........

....because the US Constitution addresses the protections afforded US Citizens?

you are beyond help.

[L0oniX]

39. As long as it is Canada ...yes.

[michigandem58]

10. Wish I owned the fire extinguisher concession on DU

I'd be purty rich.

[rug]

12. Which is it? A modest invasion of privacy or no invasion of privacy?

Obama: Spying programs only ‘modest’ invasion of privacy

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014503082

[Aerows]

23. And Obama

is thrilled that the leak happened so that now the public can debate it.

[DesMoinesDem]

31. Obama seems to be confused.

I think he thinks the job he was running for was debate moderator, not President.

[Bobbie Jo]

26. As usual, FACTS will be summarily dismissed,

completely ignored, or twisted beyond recognition.

K&R

[MjolnirTime]

27. Oh, dear. You mean all the poutragers were full of shit again? Again?!?

[SidDithers]

29. What? Greenwald got it wrong?...

Why, that hardly ever happens.

Sid

[forestpath]

30. Suuuuuure it doesn't. I don't believe a word he says anymore - except when

he's calling himself a Republican. That I believe.

[Jamaal510]

42. Throwing the baby out with the bath water...

Just because of a few measly stances that you may disagree with Obama on, you think he is a Republican? Even after the unemployment and the deficit have both been lowering? Even after he signed the Fair Pay Act and was the 1st president to endorse same-sex marriage? Doing the auto bailout? Drawing down both wars? Even after accomplishing what past Democrats have wanted in health care reform? Can you honestly say with a straight face that a President McCain or Romney would do any of that stuff? Hell, only 1 Senate Republican has endorsed marriage equality, and that was mainly because his own son was gay.

I am so sick of all the purity tests and the short-sightedness on here.

[forestpath]

44. Oh goodie, talking points.

[Purveyor]

32. Bullshit! eom

[ProSense]

54. Clearly, the President is lying. n/t

[boilerbabe]

34. so people outside the USA are a "lesser" people?

and many of you DON"T have a problem with this? WOW :O talk about the stereotypical UGLY AMERICAN.

[L0oniX]

36. Well they are not exceptional like we are.

[L0oniX]

35. Go back to sleep now ...we have it all under control.

[Historic NY]

37. Abbottabad, it how we got it.....

cell phone calls........while not US companies most are not stand alone either.

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2011-05-06/world/35232344_1_lines-or-internet-service-abbottabad-osama-bin-laden

[L0oniX]

38. So they have some way of knowing who to spy on without a broad sweep of everyone?

Wow ...tech has come a long way ...or they hired Miss Cleo

[Junkdrawer]

41. Miss Cleo may have a better idea of what the NEXT leak will be....

someone is playing chess....

[SomethingFishy]

40. Well I feel so much better...

Safe too. Because that's what this is all about safety. And how are we expected to be safe when our military is indiscriminately killing brown people? Spy on everyone.

You want to feel safe? Create a society that no one wants to attack.

[B2G]

43. How do they know?

How can they tell what data belongs to US citizens? It's not called the world wide web for the hell of it.

[Cha]

45. Oh, it doesn't matter.. the Hate Cauldron is Hot and

the stirrers are stirring. They don't need no stinkin' facts.



http://theobamadiary.com/2013/06/07/rise-and-shine-522/

But, I do appreciate this, ProSense

[ProSense]

52. The misinformation is still being churned out. n/t

[Cha]

53. Oh yeah, and now we got

Edward Snowden in the mix.. the latest "hero" since Bradley Manning and Julian Assange. One's in prison, one fled to Ecuador, and another thought China was a good idea.

Snowden is now holed up in Hong Kong, in a hotel room where, according to the Guardian, he stuffs pillows against the doors and “puts a large red hood over his head and laptop when entering his passwords.”

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/closeread/2013/06/edward-snowden-the-nsa-leaker-comes-forward.html

Hit and run.. and poor Bradley left holding his own bag.

[sheshe2]

47. Hmmmm,

The timing of all this...it just has to make you think,

Something is rotten in the State of Denmark~

[ProSense]

48. Here's what's fascinating:

The WaPo story that sparked this outrage has been changed to reflect that this program's targets are foreign.

The National Security Agency and the FBI are tapping directly into the central servers of nine leading U.S. Internet companies, extracting audio and video chats, photographs, e-mails, documents, and connection logs that enable analysts to track foreign targets, according to a top-secret document obtained by The Washington Post.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/us-intelligence-mining-data-from-nine-us-internet-companies-in-broad-secret-program/2013/06/06/3a0c0da8-cebf-11e2-8845-d970ccb04497_print.html

WaPo "hedged its stunning claim" about companies giving "Government direct access to their servers"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022967870

[sheshe2]

49. Its like,

WaPo is tossing in "flashbangs" to stir the pot and hell it created an immediate uproar.

The question still remains, did they jump on story knowing it wasn't verified, for shock value or from stupidity.

They caused the uproar, then quietly change the text.

Did they do it for the headlines or was there a more nefarious reasons.

[ucrdem]

50. It's an old trick, widely used.

Call the wikipedia ploy, where really nasty dirt is "removed" once it's safely launched into the blogosphere and repeated in every news story.

Very hard to believe it's a mistake.

[ucrdem]

51. Good catch.