The answer is "Faith", not in the
government, but in Jesus Christ.
Read and be assured:
The Day of the Lord
1 Thessalonians 5:1-10
1 But of the times and the seasons, brothers,
you have no need that I write to you.
2 For yourselves know perfectly that the day of
the Lord so comes as a thief in the night.
3 For when they shall say, Peace and safety;
then sudden destruction comes on them, as
travail on a woman with child; and they shall
4 But you, brothers, are not in darkness, that
that day should overtake you as a thief.
5 You are all the children of light, and the
children of the day: we are not of the night,
nor of darkness.
6 Therefore let us not sleep, as do others; but
let us watch and be sober.
7 For they that sleep sleep in the night; and
they that be drunken are drunken in the night.
8 But let us, who are of the day, be sober,
putting on the breastplate of faith and love;
and for an helmet, the hope of salvation.
9 For God has not appointed us to wrath, but to
obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ,
10 Who died for us, that, whether we wake or
sleep, we should live together with him.
With the introduction of the USA Patriot Act of 2001
the people of the United States are being spied
on in ways that are intrusive, invasive and
evasive in their technologies. All done for "our
own good" in the name of "National Security".
How do you argue with your "Big Brother" when
he's watching you in order to protect you? This
is the evil genius of the design to eradicate
our civil rights and liberties, and "We The People"
are happy to give them up for our peace and
security. But who's design is it?
ringleader is Satan. He is soon to bring his
Antichrist / False Prophet, the ultimate "Peace Maker" to the
world stage. But first the stage must be set.
The world is being made ready through fear and
technology to gladly surrender all power to a
world leader that brings peace, economical
stability, and security to the planet. Of course
that peace will be a smoke and mirrors ploy
leading up to all Hell unleashed on Earth.
What's the escape from these
intrusions of our Civil Liberties? What can we
do to protect ourselves?
Ron Paul, a former republican member of Congress and prominent
libertarian, thanked Snowden and Greenwald and denounced the mass
surveillance as unuseful and damaging, urging instead more transparency
in the US government actions.[ He called Congress "derelict in giving
that much power to the government," and said that had he been elected
president, he would have ordered searches only when there was probable
cause of a crime having been committed, which he said was not how the
PRISM program was being operated.
In a blog post, David Simon, the creator of The Wire, compared the NSA's
programs, including PRISM, to a 1980s effort by the City of Baltimore to
add dialed number recorders to all pay phones to know which individuals
were being called by the callers; the city believed that drug
traffickers were using pay phones and pagers, and a municipal judge
allowed the city to place the recorders. The placement of the dialers
formed the basis of the show's first season. Simon argued that the media
attention regarding the NSA programs is a "faux scandal." Political
critic Noam Chomsky argued, "Governments should not have this capacity.
But governments will use whatever technology is available to them to
combat their primary enemy – which is their own population" In regards
to PRISM and other NSA surveillance programs, Steve Wozniak, a
co-founder of Apple Computers, said to FayerWayer, a Spanish technology
website, "All these things about the constitution, that made us so good
as people – they are kind of nothing." Valerie Plame Wilson and Joseph
C. "Joe" Wilson said that "Prism and other NSA data-mining programs
might indeed be very effective in hunting and capturing actual
terrorists, but we don't have enough information as a society to make
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), an international non-profit
digital-rights group based in the U.S., is hosting a tool, by which an
American resident can write to their government representatives
regarding their opposition to mass spying.
According to an interview released by Snowden in a Q&A on The Guardian,
using Strong encryption for communication is an effective countermeasure
for citizens to protect themselves from the PRISM snooping, but notes
that endpoint security is still a weak point.
Response from companies
The original Washington Post and Guardian articles reporting on PRISM
noted that one of the leaked briefing documents said PRISM involves
collection of data "directly from the servers" of several major internet
Corporate executives of several companies identified in the leaked
documents told The Guardian that they had no knowledge of the PRISM
program in particular and also denied making information available to
the government on the scale alleged by news reports. Statements of
several of the companies named in the leaked documents were reported by
TechCrunch and The Washington Post as follows:
Microsoft: "We provide customer data only when we receive a legally
binding order or subpoena to do so, and never on a voluntary basis. In
addition we only ever comply with orders for requests about specific
accounts or identifiers. If the government has a broader voluntary
national security program to gather customer data we don't participate
Yahoo!: "Yahoo! takes users' privacy very seriously. We do not provide
the government with direct access to our servers, systems, or network."
"Of the hundreds of millions of users we serve, an infinitesimal
percentage will ever be the subject of a government data collection
Facebook: "We do not provide any government organization with direct
access to Facebook servers. When Facebook is asked for data or
information about specific individuals, we carefully scrutinize any such
request for compliance with all applicable laws, and provide information
only to the extent required by law."
Google: "Google cares deeply about the security of our users' data. We
disclose user data to government in accordance with the law, and we
review all such requests carefully. From time to time, people allege
that we have created a government ‘back door' into our systems, but
Google does not have a backdoor for the government to access private
user data." "Any suggestion that Google is disclosing information about
our users' Internet activity on such a scale is completely false."
Apple: "We have never heard of PRISM. We do not provide any government
agency with direct access to our servers, and any government agency
requesting customer data must get a court order."
Dropbox: "We've seen reports that Dropbox might be asked to participate
in a government program called PRISM. We are not part of any such
program and remain committed to protecting our users' privacy."
In response to the technology companies' denials of the NSA being able
to directly access the companies' servers, The New York Times reported
that sources had stated the NSA was gathering the surveillance data from
the companies using other technical means in response to court orders
for specific sets of data. The Washington Post suggested, "It is
possible that the conflict between the PRISM slides and the company
spokesmen is the result of imprecision on the part of the NSA author. In
another classified report obtained by The Post, the arrangement is
described as allowing 'collection managers [to send] content tasking
instructions directly to equipment installed at company-controlled
locations,' rather than directly to company servers." "[I]n context,
'direct' is more likely to mean that the NSA is receiving data sent to
them deliberately by the tech companies, as opposed to intercepting
communications as they're transmitted to some other destination.
"If these companies received an order under the FISA amendments act,
they are forbidden by law from disclosing having received the order and
disclosing any information about the order at all," Mark Rumold, staff
attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, told ABC News.
On May 28, 2013, Google was ordered by United States District Court
Judge Susan Illston to comply with a National Security Letter issued by
the FBI to provide user data without a warrant. Kurt Opsahl, a senior
staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, in an interview
with VentureBeat said, "I certainly appreciate that Google put out a
transparency report, but it appears that the transparency didn't include
this. I wouldn't be surprised if they were subject to a gag order."
The New York Times reported on June 7, 2013, that "Twitter declined to
make it easier for the government. But other companies were more
compliant, according to people briefed on the negotiations." The other
companies held discussions with national security personnel on how to
make data available more efficiently and securely. In some cases, these
companies made modifications to their systems in support of the
intelligence collection effort. The dialogues have continued in recent
months, as General Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff, has met with executives including those at Facebook, Microsoft,
Google and Intel. These details on the discussions provide insight into
the disparity between initial descriptions of the government program
including a training slide which states, "Collection directly from the
servers" and the companies' denials.
While providing data in response to a legitimate FISA request approved
by FISC is a legal requirement, modifying systems to make it easier for
the government to collect the data is not. This is why Twitter could
legally decline to provide an enhanced mechanism for data transmission.
Other than Twitter, the companies were effectively asked to construct a
locked mailbox and provide the key to the government, people briefed on
the negotiations said. Facebook, for instance, built such a system for
requesting and sharing the information. Google does not provide a
lockbox system, but instead transmits required data by hand delivery or
is a clandestine
national security electronic surveillance program operated by the United
States National Security Agency (NSA) since 2007. PRISM is a government
codename for a data collection effort known officially as US-984XN. It is a SIGAD operated under the
supervision of the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court
pursuant to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). The
existence of the program was leaked by NSA contractor Edward Snowden and
published by The Guardian and The Washington Post on June 6, 2013.
A document included in the leak indicated that PRISM was "the number one
source of raw intelligence used for NSA analytic reports." The
President's Daily Brief, an all-source intelligence product, cited PRISM
data as a source in 1,477 items in 2012. The leaked information came
to light one day after the revelation that the United States Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Court had been requiring the
telecommunications company Verizon to turn over to the NSA logs tracking
all of its customers' telephone calls on an ongoing daily basis.
U.S. government officials have disputed some aspects of the Guardian and
Washington Post stories and have defended the program by asserting it
cannot be used on domestic targets without a warrant, and that the
program receives independent oversight from the executive, judicial, and
legislative branches. According to NSA Director General Keith Alexander,
communications surveillance helped prevent more than 50 potential
terrorist attacks worldwide (at least 10 of them in the United States)
between 2001 and 2013, and the PRISM web traffic surveillance program
contributed in over 90 percent of those cases.
President Barack Obama stated that "this is not a situation in which we
are rifling through, you know, the ordinary emails of German citizens or
American citizens or French citizens or anybody else" and that the NSA's
data gathering practices constitute "a circumscribed, narrow system
directed at us being able to protect our people."
Details of information collected via PRISM
PRISM is a "Special Source Operation" in the tradition of NSA's
intelligence alliances with as many as 100 trusted U.S. companies since
the 1970s. A prior program, the Terrorist Surveillance Program, was
implemented in the wake of the September 11 attacks under the George W.
Bush Administration but was widely criticized and challenged as illegal,
because it was conducted without approval of the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Court. PRISM was authorized by the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Court. PRISM's creation was enabled under President Bush by
the Protect America Act of 2007 and by the FISA Amendments Act of 2008,
which legally immunizes private companies that cooperate with U.S.
government agencies in intelligence collection, and which in 2012 was
renewed by Congress under President Obama for an additional five years,
through December 2017. According to The Register, the FISA Amendments
Act of 2008 "specifically authorizes intelligence agencies to monitor
the phone, email, and other communications of U.S. citizens for up to a
week without obtaining a warrant" when one of the parties is outside the
PRISM was first publicly revealed on June 6, 2013, after classified
documents about the program were leaked to The Washington Post and The
Guardian by American Edward Snowden. The leaked documents included 41
PowerPoint slides, four of which were published in news articles. The
documents identified several technology companies as participants in the
PRISM program, including (date of joining PRISM in parentheses)
Microsoft (2007), Yahoo! (2008), Google (2009), Facebook (2009), Paltalk
(2009), YouTube (2010), AOL (2011), Skype (2011), and Apple (2012). The
speaker's notes in the briefing document reviewed by The Washington Post
indicated that "98 percent of PRISM production is based on Yahoo, Google
The slide presentation stated that much of the world's electronic
communications pass through the United States, because electronic
communications data tend to follow the least expensive route rather than
the most physically direct route, and the bulk of the world's internet
infrastructure is based in the United States. The presentation noted
that these facts provide United States intelligence analysts with
opportunities for intercepting the communications of foreign targets as
their electronic data pass into or through the United States.
According to The Washington Post, the intelligence analysts search PRISM
data using terms intended to identify suspicious communications of
targets whom the analysts suspect with at least 51 percent confidence to
not be United States citizens, but in the process, communication data of
some United States citizens are also collected unintentionally. Training
materials for analysts tell them that while they should periodically
report such accidental collection of non-foreign United States data,
"it's nothing to worry about."
The New York Times editorial board charged that the Obama administration
"has now lost all credibility on this issue," and lamented that "for
years, members of Congress ignored evidence that domestic
intelligence-gathering had grown beyond their control, and, even now,
few seem disturbed to learn that every detail about the public's calling
and texting habits now reside in a N.S.A. database."
In response to Obama administration arguments that it could stop
terrorism in the cases of Najibullah Zazi and David Headley, Ed
Pilkington and Nicholas Watt of The Guardian said in regards to the role
of PRISM and Boundless Informant interviews with parties involved in the
Zazi scheme and court documents lodged in the United States and the
United Kingdom indicated that "conventional" surveillance methods such
as "old-fashioned tip-offs" of the British intelligence services
initiated the investigation into the Zazi case. An anonymous former CIA
agent said that in regards to the Headley case, "That's nonsense. It
played no role at all in the Headley case. That's not the way it
happened at all." Pilkington and Watt concluded that the data-mining
programs "played a relatively minor role in the interception of the two
plots." Michael Daly of The Daily Beast stated that even though
Tamerlan Tsarnaev had visited Inspire and even though Russian
intelligence officials alerted U.S. intelligence officials about
Tsarnaev, PRISM did not prevent him from carrying out the Boston
bombings, and that the initial evidence implicating him came from his
brother Dzhokhar Tsarnaev and not from federal intelligence. In
addition, Daly pointed to the fact that Faisal Shahzad visited Inspire
but that federal authorities did not stop his attempted terrorist plot.
Daly concluded, "The problem is not just what the National Security
Agency is gathering at the risk of our privacy but what it is apparently
unable to monitor at the risk of our safety."
Looking for a
good morning prayer?
Try this one.
To Shop Our
Exclusive & Patriotic