The name of the program is PRISM. This is something that has been implemented by the NSA (National Security Agency). It goes well bey0nd what is required with regard to terrorist threats and according to at least one source, the use of PRISM affects your 6th Amendment rights.
When it comes to surveillance on possible terrorists, I have no problem with measures being taken to “eavesdrop” on their activities. However, under the Soetoro Administration, the eavesdropping has spread and involves snooping on individuals who have no proclivity towards terrorism. Under the Soetoro Administration the terrorists are the ones who are being protected, and in the meantime ordinary citizens are being treated like mushroom fodder.
I think that there is good reason to look upon this revelation about PRISM as something that is another step towards tyranny.
Interestingly enough, the CEOs of the HiTech companies such as Apple, Facebook and Microsoft have stated that they have not heard of PRISM. Facebook went one step further and stated that all requests for information by governmnet for whatever reason are scrutinized to assure that such requests do not contravene any laws.
It looks like the security laws need to be tightened so that there is no government snooping against law abiding citizens.
Is PRISM the next shoe to drop?
The author of the Patriot Act says that this form of surveillance is not covered:
http://content.bitsontherun.com/previews/ypm1h5d8-dh3Zgtip
Did Maxine Waters give the game away prior to the news report from Glen Greenwald? If you recall, it was Maxine Waters who was crowing about Soetoro have a big database. If PRISM is that big data base then Maxine Waters, and Soetoro need to do some explaining.
As it stands, and as an outsider, I disagree with the individuals who are downplaying the importance of PRISM and this form of data collection. I repeat: I have no problem with surveillance if the intention is to catch terrorists. However, the FBI etc have been cooling their heels with regard to the real risk in our individual societies i.e. the risk that is posed by the adherents of Islam. For the record, I accept that there are Muslims who are not terrorists, nor are they likely to become terrorists unless they are sorely provoked (it can happen as was proved in Libya). However, there are other Muslims who should be on surveillance 24/7 because of the deadly potential of their activity. I would start with the surveillance on any of the Muslims who wear the white garments of the shaheed. If they are wearing those white garments then they need to be watched!!
It should be noted here that Nidal Hassan wore the white garments of the shaheed. It defeats me as to why this was not commented upon by anyone who knew the man. Those white garments are the biggest sign the person is a “radical” or as I would phrase it “a pure Islamist”. My meaning of “Islamist” here is that the person is an adherent to the literal meaning of the Koran, as opposed to those like the Ismailists (followers of the Agca Khan) who do in fact subvert the meaning of jihad. Sunni Muslims and Shia Muslims tend to be more purist than the others.
On top of that if PRISM was being used properly, why was it that the NSA did not know about either the Tsarnaev brothers or Nidal Hassan who was in contact with Anwar al-Awlaki? Why did the army top brass do nothing about Nidal Hassan when there were warning signs that he was a “pure follower of Islam”?
The USA, the UK, Germany, France, Australia, Austria, Sweden, Denmark, Norway etc are all being slack when it comes to the adherents of Islam. Those in authority have failed to understand the real meaning of Islam is SUBMISSION. Islam does not mean peace, at least not in the way that Christians and Jews understand that word. I do not want to get into anything else here regarding Islam because it is a very contentious subject. (I have other blogs to take care of the subject).
Whilst there might be a few other potential terrorists out there, I also point out that even Timothy McVeigh was tainted by someone associated with Islam, aka John Doe #3 who is most likely an Iraqi associate of the late Saddam Hussein. In other words the bombing of the Murrah building was not a simple act of domestic terrorism and there are in fact ties to Islam that the US Government has kept hidden.
The current US government is totally dishonest and it is especially dishonest where its own people are concerned.
I agree with the people who are pointing out that this surveillance is indicating more and more that the USA is lunging towards Fascism. (Fascists are in fact on the Left, but they are to the extreme right of left of centre.)
UPDATE:
I will once again state here that I am not against surveillance of terrorist suspects. At the same time I have to admit that I am not totally against the surveillance of those involved in criminal activity including Kim dotcom. From this angle I am commenting upon this angle because this “scandal” is the one that has the Left very upset.
One of the sites that I regularly visit is TalkLeft because Jeralyn does an excellent job of commentary in the Zimmerman case. Her site is also a mine of information with regard to how some leftists are thinking, especially with regard to this particular scandal. Needless to say the Left are starting to ramp up the rhetoric about the “snooping” even though most of them would never be the subject of such snooping in the first place (unless they were members of the Weather Underground).
Hence I have learned from TalkLeft that the ACLU are in a fighting mood. Yes, it looks like this is the one scandal where a constitutional challenge is on the way. Whose civil liberties are they protecting anyway? Since there will be a constitutional challenge, it means that this scandal is not going to die a quick death, but it will be around for some time to come. (BTW I am willing to bet that the Supreme Court is ok with most of the surveillance, but it might strike down anything that relates to domestic surveillance going too far).
Legal Insurrection is also covering this story about the ACLU constitutional challenge, and in a lot more detail. It is worth a read.
There is another excellent post from Legal Insurrection and it is well worth a read because it highlights the mythology of Edward Snowden. It also mentions that it could be that Snowden was fed information from someone else. It is worth noting that Snowden lied about his salary package.
A world at war 
The NSA has always been at the extreme end of snooping. That is the very core and purpose of the agency. This has been widely known since at least the mid ’80s. Nobody should be surprised at what they are doing. Anybody who thought there was any privacy in their electronic traffic is severely misguided. The NSA is not only collecting ‘metadata’ but as much of the conversations as they can. Numerous government contractors have provided specialized electronic devices to quickly scan documents and conversations looking for key words and phrases.
Land line telephone ‘tapping’ has also been wide open for decades. The public is confused because it is supposedly illegal. All that means is that it is generally true that in a US Court of Law, evidence gathered ‘illegally’ is inadmissible. This provides a level of checks and balances as regards civil and criminal trials. It does NOTHING to protect people from government snooping.
In fact, this level of government snooping is so widely understood, one must necessarily come to the following conclusion.
This ‘revelation’, the Greatest Leak of All Time, is nothing but a diversion. It was specifically orchestrated, at this particular time, to clog up the news media, distract the outrage of We The People, and prevent people remembering or following up on THE REAL CRISES!
Bowing to Foreign Potentates? Did that really happen?
Crypto Muslim in White House? Damn paranoid truthers/birthers/whatever.
Fraudulence and Intimidation for votes? Whoa, that is really forgotten.
Fast and Furious? What was that?
Politicization of IRS? Old news, quickly forgotten!
Bhenghazi?? “WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE???????”
Susan Rice and Samantha Power – – –
Sotomayor and Kagen – – –
Who is Valerie Jarrett??????????????????
LikeLike
Thank you for this response. It provides a lot of clarity.
LikeLike
Every day the drama over this “non issue” is building. The MSM are slavering over this – asking their listeners and readers to weigh in on rather Snowden is a Hero or a Traitor. They are fomenting a war of opinions as to which is worse, the deed or the ‘whistleblower’.
Even worse, this practice has been in top gear all during the W administration and can be traced all the way back to Reagan or before. So, seriously, no way is this an Obama Problem.
All this is a tempest in a teapot, something to occupy us for many months – escalate, escalate, escalate. Soon we will ALL be “wee we’ed up” over this and will think and talk of nothing else.
In the meantime “ROME BURNS” out of control!
You will never convince me this is not a purposeful deliberate diversion.
LikeLike
Carlisle, Snowden is not a hero, and I take note of the comments by John Bolton about whether or not he is a traitor. I agree with John Bolton because the man took an oath not to reveal secret material.
There is a difference between the way it was handled in the Bush Administration and how it is being handled now. That difference rests upon mining for information between foreign sources and U.S. citizens as opposed to mining data of U.S. citizens. There is a very big difference.
Yesterday I heard that Australia has been doing something similar and is monitoring about 40,000 citizens. How do I feel about that? If it stops a terrorist attack then I have no problem at all. So long as they are sticking to the brief and monitoring those most likely to cause an attack, then I am in agreement.
The same is true with regard to PRISM. So long as it is used to monitor individuals who are likely to cause a terrorist attack then I have no problem with the program. However, that is not what has been happening for more than one year under the program, or at least that is what we are being led to believe.
Some surveillance is necessary because of the fact that so many Muslims have been allowed into our respective countries. The problem is that with our current “administrations”, they are siding with the Muslims and turning against the rest of us.
I do think that the other scandals are bigger, yet this is the one that is the most likely to cheese off the leftists in our society, because they do not like the idea of being watched, even though they are not upset when the conservatives are being mistreated.
LikeLike
I cannot emphasize enough how this is a ‘perfect scandal’ for Obama. There is no way it’s his fault and he is not doing anything but what many other presidents, of both flavors, have done. So he is now, and will remain, squeaky clean.
This scandal is SO BIG that it can fully occupy everybody for many months, if not years.
In the meantime, all the actual Obama scandals (i.e. the ones that are his fault) are pushed way on the back burner.
Benghazi is the biggest scandal ever in US history (based simply on what is known, already). Once we find out the whole truth, I can only imagine how depravedly bad it will be. And yet it is already fading fast in the rear view mirror.
LikeLike
As the Commander-in-Chief, he has the last say regarding this form of snooping. Apparently he was aware of the surveillance.
The cover-up of the facts about the attack in Benghazi is the biggest scandal. However, it has to compete with a number of other scandals including the one involving the IRS. The small potatoes in my view are the scandals involving the EPA.
Except for Benghazi, all of the other scandals have a common thread…. and it is that common thread that keeps bringing it back to the White House.
On the other hand, I think that the cover-up regarding what happened in Benghazi directly involves the White House. It was the White House Administration that demanded the talking points about the c-grade movie.
The IRS scandal is humming along. On top of that Congress is waiting for the SoS to turn over more documents. We have not heard if Petreus has given more testimony. Neither have we heard about the others who want to testify.
LikeLike