"Russia cannot be understood with the mind alone." Fyodor Tyutchev
Edward Snowden submitted his request for asylum today and I point out on my other blog Wired State that two can play at dead man's switch.
It sure seemed like yesterday from the Wall Street Journal that basically, Russian intelligence was grilling Snowden and finally he cracked.
‘Sure seemed’ ha! You have less evidence of that than I do of the NSA getting caught spying on Doug Hagmann for his anti-Obama thoughtcrimes.
Here’s my reply to you and Pir-wrong:
http://www.backwoodshome.com/articles2/silveira142lw.html
ssue #142 • July/August, 2013
“I’m tired of hearing how we should honor our veterans because they’re defending our freedoms. They’re not. No one in any of the Islamic countries is trying to take away our freedoms. No one in Russia, China, or North Korea gives a damn about them, either.”
“In reality, the only people taking away our freedoms are in Washington, DC, our statehouses, and our city halls. It is our own politicians, our own bureaucrats, and special interest groups from the Sierra Club to Monsanto, all of which are made up almost exclusively of fellow Americans and who are pressing to have laws, rules, and regulations passed that restrict our speech, our opinions, and our travel; they want to grab our guns, snatch our property, and determine what we can and cannot do with our own bodies.”
“It is The PATRIOT Act, the RICO Act, and a myriad of other laws and regulations that are stealing our freedoms, and not a one of them was enacted or passed by a foreign government or terrorist group. It’s not al-Qaeda that’s creating “free speech” zones in this country or removing people wearing political T-shirts from parade routes the President might take. It’s not the Taliban that’s going after the records of reporters at AP. The North Koreans aren’t behind the IRS’s targeting of conservative political groups.”
“And here’s some irony for you: You know these freedoms our military is supposed to be protecting for us? Well, those of us who steadfastly demand to be able to practice those freedoms and who demand government at all levels adhere to the Constitution, are now labeled as potential domestic terrorists. Demand your freedoms and rights and you’re lumped with al-Qaeda!”
If I were a decent patriot in NSA, I’d get the hell out now rather than try to make a break for it 5 years from now when they may be worried about incoming from Patriot Arc Light F-16s against their Data Centers.
Again Cathy you’re going to end up defending an American Stasi of political hacks, sadists, and drunks that can’t keep actual Russian or Chinese spies from stealing the keys and laughing about it all the way back to Moscow and Beijing. Because the highest priority of NSA is spying on Americans and dissidents at home and abroad, not fighting our ‘enemies’.
Who ya gonna believe Catherine and Pir-wrong, some hack who writes for the Washington Post saying the Stasi comparison to NSA is offensive, or someone who actually…worked for the Stasi?
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/edward-snowden-finds-an-unlikely-admirer-in-former-stasi-agent-1.1453161
Silent? Yeah, thought so. You people have no shame. What the hell did we defeat the Commies for to copy them in this country?
Text of sworn affidavit by Erie, PA based private investigator Douglas J. Hagmann regarding unlawful domestic surveillance of his person by the National Security Agency:
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/55649
Voluntary Statement
Date: 30 May 2013
I Douglas J. Hagmann, your affiant, makes the following free and voluntary statement to publicly memorialize an event that occurred at 1206 hours on Thursday, 30 May, 2013 relating to a domestic, interstate landline telephone conversation between [Name and telephone number REDACTED], and myself, (814)-[REDACTED]. I make this statement of my own free will without any threats or promises extended to me.
The purpose of this written statement is to officially memorialize an event and make publicly known what appears to be either (1) an accidental exposure by an official agency of the United States government of active surveillance and data collection on two private U.S. citizens without the consent of either party; or (2) harassment by an official agency of the United States government of law-abiding citizen journalists, or (3) a combination thereof, or (4) purposes unknown.
I fully understand that this statement is given concerning my knowledge of the following:
A landline telephone conversation concerning your affiant’s sources within the United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS), following contact with other domestic and international intelligence agencies, and also multiple telephone communications with certain reporters from Fox News.
At 1150 hours on Thursday, 30 May 2013, your affiant, a United States citizen having no prior criminal record history, received a telephone call (landline to landline) from [REDACTED], also a citizen of the United States. As documented by your affiant’s telephone system, this unscheduled conversation lasted exactly 16 minutes and 17 seconds, from 11:50:05 hours ET to 12:06:22 ET, and included but was not limited to information obtained from a high level source within the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (hereafter referred to as DHS) known publicly under the pseudonym “Rosebud,” and another intelligence source with a separate intelligence agency. Both sources previously provided concise and accurate information about the inner workings of the DHS as well as the activities and agendas of various individuals in that agency. The intelligence source provided whistleblower information pertaining to the events in Benghazi on multiple occasions. It was during this conversation that your affiant shared specific information about the latest contacts with these sources that is in the process of being transcribed for future publication.
It is important to note that the DHS source has expressed concern about the security and confidentiality of any telephone or e-mail communications, and previously requested your affiant to use alternate methods of contact. This source also stated that the DHS is actively and aggressively searching for “leaks” within the top levels of DHS, or those with access to certain inter-agency information. This source confirmed that certain individuals, under suspicion of talking to journalists, have been reassigned or otherwise cut-off from access to agency departments. This source also stated his belief that the landlines, cellular telephones, and all electronic communications of your affiant and contacts are being monitored by ‘several’ agencies within the U.S. government, including but not limited to the NSA, the FBI, and others for the purpose of identification of this source. Additionally, it is known to this source that your affiant, Douglas J. Hagmann, has been in contact with [REDACTED], a reported with Fox News by telephone concerning certain information that has yet to be made public.
Subsequent to the telephone conversation that concluded at 12:06:17, your affiant replaced the receiver on the telephone. At that moment, the telephone emitted a short ring, perhaps best described as a muffled ring or a “chirp.“Initially, your affiant believed it to be a simple ring-back, much like those occasionally experienced during the course of otherwise normal telephone use. It is important to note, however, that the sound made by the telephone did not have that same characteristics as a ring back.
Curious because of the ring tone, your affiant looked at the caller ID displayed and was startled to see the following on the telephone caller ID screen:“UT NSA DATA REC CTR.”Your affiant immediate muted the telephone and picked up the receiver, hearing the following message in a male voice:
”…your notification that the Utah NSA Data Recording Center successfully captured this landline communication under file # [I was unable to copy the numbers as they were spoken quickly]. Refer to senior duty officer for access code under file #[this appeared to be a different alpha-numeric sequence].”
It should be noted that your affiant copied the wording of the verbal message by hand onto a stenographer’s notebook kept by the telephone. No mechanical recording devices were accessible at this time. After the final number was spoken, your affiant heard a distinct “click” on the line, followed by silence. Interestingly, the caller ID information completely disappeared from the telephone at the instant of the “click.” Accordingly, your affiant has no photographic documentation to illustrate or verify the information provided herein. Additionally, the re-dial capabilities of your affiant’s telephone were rendered non-functional following this event.
I have read the statement consisting of one-(1) page and affirm that the facts contained herein are true and correct.
Leave a Reply