From the Privacy Professor.
Former NSA contractor and whistleblower Edward Snowden was interviewed for the German television network ARD. It was big news in Germany, but it appears as if it was blocked intentionally in the United States.
It has been removed several time from YouTube.
Whistleblower Edward Snowden leaked the documents about US mass surveillance. He spoke about his disclosures and his life to NDR investigative journalist Hubert Seipel in Moscow.
This video was posted on ARD's youtube channel, but it's not available for the rest of the world.. This video belongs to the NDR. I do not claim any rights to this video.
It might be wise to download it at the Vimeo link while you can.
You can read the transcript here.
Also of note is the Guardian’s How Edward Snowden went from loyal NSA contractor to whistleblower.
More security theater for the masses to enjoy.
TSA officers also will be using radiological detection devices.
“We did a drill a couple weeks ago. Most of the passengers transitioning the station didn’t even realize it,” TSA Special Agent John Durkin said. “There’s not going to be pat-downs. There’s not going to be magnetometers or gas imaging technology like you see at an airport.”
Bomb-sniffing dogs, radiation detection devices and dozens of cops will be stationed at Secaucus Junction on Sunday.
To enhance the fear, Black Hawk helicopters will be flying around the area as well.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents will be eyes in the sky come Sunday. They will be in Black Hawk helicopters, enforcing the 10-mile no-fly zone around the stadium.
Why is CBP enforcing a no-fly zone?
“Most of the cases of people breaching the zone, obviously, in the past, have been a mistake,” said Phil Petro Customs and Border Protection.
The media trotted out people who agree with the massive ramp up of security at the Super Bowl, despite the fact that law enforcement admits that those who have breached security were making simple mistakes. And here they are telling us that this is a good thing.
“I’m not surprised to see it,” said Amtrak rider Pauline Jones. “It doesn’t freak me out at all, no. I’d rather see it. I think it’s good.”
“It’s comforting to know they’re there,” added Amtrak rider Pat Clifton. “I was here on 9/11, so I’m glad to see them here.”
So were a lot of other people who don’t see the need for a police state in action just to go to a sporting event.
The latest Snowden document reveals that individuals’ information was captured from their wireless devices by the airport’s free Wi-Fi system. This continued for two weeks and the individuals were then tracked throughout Canada and parts of the United States whenever they used a hot-spot.
After reviewing the document, one of Canada’s foremost authorities on cyber-security says the clandestine operation by the Communications Security Establishment Canada (CSEC) was almost certainly illegal.
Ronald Deibert told CBC News: “I can’t see any circumstance in which this would not be unlawful, under current Canadian law, under our Charter, under CSEC’s mandates.”
The Canadian government says they are not collecting this information on Canadian citizens.
You can read the pdf below.
On Saturday 20 July 2013, in the basement of the Guardian’s office in Kings Cross, London, watched by two GCHQ technicians, Guardian editors destroyed hard drives and memory cards on which encrypted files leaked by Edward Snowden had been stored. This is the first time footage of the event has been released.
The idiocy of this is astounding and shows just how much authorities have no idea how technology works.
The Prime Minister of a country sends a cabinet secretary to personally intimidate a newspaper editor. The Prime Minister’s Deputy National Security Adviser threatens to shut down the newspaper. Government agents get sent over to supervise the physical destruction of source material.
It’s what you’d expect from some kind of tin-pot dictatorship without any regards for freedom of speech or freedom of the press – but no, this is Great Britain in the 21st century.
There is a delusion among politicians that, by destroying a computer, you destroy the information. They did not think that 1) the information had already been published online and other people made copies or 2) that the newspaper likely had copies and the originals were safe somewhere else and could be copied and published again.