The State of Our Surveillance State

Friday, June 07, 2013

Transcript

This week saw several revelations about US government surveillance of both Americans and foreigners. Brooke and Bob talk to Washingtonian writer Shane Harris and co-director of the Liberty and National Security Program at the Brennan Center for Justice, Elizabeth Goitein, about the what we can glean from the information that became public this week.

Guests:

Elizabeth Goitein and Shane Harris

Hosted by:

Bob Garfield and Brooke Gladstone

Comments [13]

ashad hossain from USA

. Brooke and Bob talk to Washingtonian writer Shane Harris and co-director of the Liberty and National Security Program

Nov. 23 2013 08:39 PM
ashad hossain from USA

Washingtonian writer Shane Harris and co-director of the Liberty and National Security Program at the Brennan Center for Justice, Elizabeth

Nov. 23 2013 08:32 PM
ashad hossain from USA

Twitter or Facebook account or texting has become normal tools of communication (including NPR), why? Why do I need twitter account or any other social

Nov. 20 2013 09:38 PM
ashad hossain from USA

“reach and touch someone”??!!!If we have selected those means of communications, then there should be no surprise by government intrusion to our

Nov. 20 2013 09:25 PM
gps trackers from USA

a retired NSA director. (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/23/opinion/the-national-security-agencys-domestic-spying-program.html) He describes the NSA
<a href="http://www.allprolegal.com/">surveillance</a>

Oct. 03 2013 02:04 AM
Alan from NJ from New Jersey

I don't understand why this recent disclosure, based on the leaks from Edward Snowden, has received so much attention when a similar, but more detailed, disclosure from William Binney received almost no attention. An "Op-Doc" by Laura Poitras published on 8/22/2012 in the New York Times, describes her interview with, and presents an excerpt from her documentary film about Binney, a retired NSA director. (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/23/opinion/the-national-security-agencys-domestic-spying-program.html) He describes the NSA program that acquires data from the internet (phone calls, bank transactions, emails, etc.) and makes profiles for each individual in some detail. This "Op-Doc" presents a far more cogent picture of the NSA domestic spy operation than we've heard this week. This story was disclosed 10 months ago in the New York Times and there was no reaction in the general media. Why all the fuss now? Why did Poitras' story about Binney, provoke no response ?

Jun. 12 2013 08:28 AM
John M. Giannone from New York City

I cannot help but think that while we ask our troops to "give their last full measure of devotion" to protect our
rights and our freedoms, some of us here at home cannot run fast enough to shed the vey rights ad freedoms
we ask them, if it comes down to it, to die for. I cannot help but think of President Eisenhower's farewell
warning about the pervasiveness of the military industrial complex. There in that address while warning us
that the complex would actually get into our heads, into the way we are likely to think when we think about
our nation: how it would cast issues as too complex for us to figure out, how it would cast actions as in need
of secrecy, how it would put us into a permanent state of worry and fear, how it would get us to be a party in
the giving up of rights, all while Eisenhower was laying that out, he himself, in that very speech, fell victim to
logic of those emerging complexities.

I

Jun. 10 2013 10:55 AM
Paul from PCB, FL

The problem here lies in the fact that we've confused what we're supposed to be protecting.

The bill of rights was not written so I can hunt, write, or have privacy. It was written to PROTECT CITIZENS FROM THE GOVT.

Jun. 09 2013 07:14 PM
listener from usa

Bob Garfield made an ad hominem attack on Hugo Chavez by including him in a list of autocratic tyrants. The recently deceased Chavez was the democratically elected leader of Venezuela who attempted to improve the lot of the poor in his country, sometimes at the expense of the rich.

I find Mr. Garfield's bias unacceptable, since 'On The Media' accepts funds from among other affluent entities, Wells Fargo Bank, an institution that has foreclosed mostly on poor homeowners, some of whose properties the bank does not even own.

Jun. 09 2013 07:07 PM
REZA Bamdad from NYC

Justice O. W. Holmes wrote that "Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech or the press” in early 20th century. Also Senator Albert Gore (Father of V.P. Gore) stated that one great purpose of openness in public life is to expose policy arguments to the clear light of public discussion (He regretted that when he was a member of Foreign Relation Committee during Vietnam War, he did not expose fake intelligent reports”. Government Secrecy is nothing new in our society. Founding Fathers kept the preparation of constitution from public for many years and later discussed in federalist papers. The issue these days is not that the government has right to secrecy rather than usage of such power.

Our government has always had some type of justification for monitoring its citizens. War on Terror (nobody had defined really what TERROR!!!??) has become a justification tool for government secrecy these days. Our generation including media outlets have become a silent generations. Twitter or Facebook account or texting has become normal tools of communication (including NPR), why? Why do I need twitter account or any other social network means to reach or communicate or simply I call it “digital footprint”? Then, no ordinary individual should expect any privacy:: What really happened to old slogan of AT& T “reach and touch someone”??!!!If we have selected those means of communications, then there should be no surprise by government intrusion to our private life. NSA or many intra-secret agencies that common American has no knowledge of them (remember that NSA was acknowledged during 1970’s when a brave congressman question $4B budget for the agency at that time; unfortunately we do not have any of those individuals in our Congress anymore). This story will be very soon buried and we forget about it due to the fact nobody wants to investigate who authorize it? and why? The government sources are being squashed and nobody in Media including NPR do not want to keep the “heat-on” getting the fact. Last time I checked, we have still had in our country “Freedom of Information Act” that I know, it has been diluted in recent years. Why do we as American and Press use it to obtain “the facts”? We all know that we would never know the Truth”.

Jun. 09 2013 01:25 PM
RUCB_Alum from Central New Jersey

@listener

Your post reveals who is the real partisan here.

The privacy violations were sanctioned by act of Congress. If you don't feel that these options are needed to protect the citizenry from a terrorist menace, why did you agree to their passage in the first place?

Your conflation of the IRS scrutiny of Tea Party groups with this situation is an overreach in two ways.

1. Please name a TP group that had their request for exempt status denied. You can't.
2. There was no direction from the White House of any of the IRS activity. None.

You don't need to go to British media (most of it owned by Rupert Murdoch, btw) for revelations about your government. Both of these stories are being covered quite completely. However, you need look no further than the mirror for an example of mendacity and hypocrisy.

Jun. 08 2013 09:04 AM
another listener from USA

Just wish to offer major props to Brooke, Bob and the whole OTM team on this week's show in particular, which was powerful from start to finish. Great story selections, incredible interviews, everything so well edited. Your guests from Iran nearly brought tears to my eyes. I could almost hear Brooke's quiet nod to Nariman Gharib when he answered her "why are you doing it?" question by saying he loved his people and did not want them to feel alone. Editorially it was meaningful to include these voices speaking to us from the other side of overbearing state power during an hour starting off with the revelations of our own surveillance state. This is the kind of smart and sensitive broadcasting we need more of. Awesome job, you guys. I need to re-up my WNYC contribution on the basis of this hour alone.

Jun. 08 2013 07:14 AM
listener

The "inglorious history" as stated gives a few examples but naturally leaves out the most recent abuses which were the apparent targeting of conservative groups and individual by this administration.
No wonder Americans for the last five years must increasing rely on Fleet Street and British media to learn what is going on in our own country.

"How can he say he wants to have a conversation when the government did everything in its power to prevent this conversation from happening"

He can say that because he thinks the feckless and partisan news media will not call him out on his mendacity and hypocrisy..... and so far he is right.

Jun. 07 2013 10:38 PM

Leave a Comment

Email addresses are required but never displayed.