American police state closes down email service.

[Indofred]

BBC News - Snowden link to Lavabit encrypted email service closure

A

n encrypted email service thought to have been used by fugitive US intelligence leaker Edward Snowden has abruptly shut down.

Ladar Levison, owner of the Texas-based Lavabit service, said legal reasons prevented him explaining his decision....

....He said he had decided to "suspend operations" but was barred from discussing the events over the past six weeks that led to his decision.

"This experience has taught me one very important lesson: without congressional action or a strong judicial precedent, I would strongly recommend against anyone trusting their private data to a company with physical ties to the United States," he wrote.

A new low from the American stasi thought police.
Their new victim isn't even allowed to tell the world what really happened.
I wonder if he'd be put in a re-education camp if he tried.

Lavabit

This is exactly what Snowden is fighting against.
It proves your government, if they can't snoop on your emails, will simply shut down the service and gag the owner with threats if he tells the truth about your thought police.

I wonder how long before the NSA Geheime Staatspolizei close down forums such as this...you can't have subversive talk against the state as it would endanger ze people.

It really is time you lot took to the streets in large, peaceful demonstrations and demanded the truth and a large pile of sackings.
That includes senior government figures if they are complicit in this, right to the top.

America has done some shit lately but this is really scary stuff.
A rogue, paranoid government in charge of the greatest military power on the planet is concern for the whole world.

 

[Indofred]

Note.
If anyone doesn't believe this government will take over forums, delete 'subversive' threads or simply close them down, would you have believed your lot would close down an email service because they couldn't spy on their own people until today?

This is extremely dangerous and requires the resignation of the whole government, possibly with criminal actions taken against the people who decided upon this action.

America is now a police state.

 

[Indofred]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L5cI2xGs3Fo]Lavabit; NSA/USA "capable" with an undesirable outcome(s) - YouTube[/ame]

 

[theHawk]

What else should we expect from the Hussein?

The First Amendment is his greatest enemy, you think he'll hesitate to trample on our Constitutional rights?


To be clear, the complany shut itself down in protest of what the government is doing.

 

[Ame®icano]

It used to be "the truth shall set you free"...

Nowdays, the truth gets you killed or locked behind bars.

 

[depotoo]

I'm pretty sure they could be charged with aiding and abetting, if indeed Snowden was using their service.

 

[R.C. Christian]

Anyone still not agree that they live in a police state?

 

[Indofred]

I'm pretty sure they could be charged with aiding and abetting, if indeed Snowden was using their service.

A dangerous situation.
A man is thought (not known) to be using a service.
The owner of that service has no evidence except rumour.
The government tries to force him to give up information on uses, using rumour as evidence.

No court would ever allow a search based on that but your government can do it anyway.

Isn't anyone concerned or are you happy as long as you can afford a big mac?

 

[Toronado3800]

What else should we expect from the Hussein?

The First Amendment is his greatest enemy, you think he'll hesitate to trample on our Constitutional rights?


To be clear, the complany shut itself down in protest of what the government is doing.

Obama: New oversight, but no change to spying power : Stltoday

You are a smart man who has read up on the OP so I picked you to engage.

Obama to me seems more of the same. "meet the new boss - same as the old boss" the same in security matters. If you liked Bush's foreign policy or Patriot Act, then you like Obama's or......I just don't know what the differences are.

Notice the link, Obama and mainstream Repubs lined up defending wire tapping against the libertarians and hippies.

Perhaps we are due for another realligning of the parties. I just can not imagine any coalition coming together to fight the "Archie Bunkie" types who figure if you have done nothing wrong surveliance is great.

 

[Indofred]

Toronado has got this one pegged.

Obama is clearly a little concerned by the negative reaction but does little to suggest there will be any real change; just promises of reform, clouded by bullshit.

BBC News - Barack Obama pledges greater surveillance transparency

He said he would work with Congress to reform Section 215 of the Bush-era Patriot Act, which governs the programme that collects telephone records
He made public directed justice officials to declassify the legal rationale for the government's phone-data collection activities, and said National Security Agency would put in place a "civil liberties and privacy officer"
He proposed appointing a lawyer to argue against the government at the secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which is accused of essentially rubber-stamping official requests to scour electronic records
He announced the formation of a group of external experts to review all US government intelligence and communications technologies

There is absolutely nothing in there to suggest they'll stop reading anyone's mail they happen to fancy.

I fully understand the need to hack at specific targets email, tap phones and so on.
There clearly are terrorists and criminals out there that would easily justify targeted use of such things but general opening of mail, possibly based on key word searches or simply on the whim of some guy in an office is way wrong.
Sling in the government forcing providers to hand over data and gag those providers from talking about it - that's police state stuff and we all need to be very worried.

Snowden, I'm assured by Obama, is not a "patriot" but I believe a man should be a patriot to his people; not his government so I have to respectively disagree with Mr. Obama on this issue.

The Bush government betrayed America by smashing it's way through the constitution and Obama has done nothing about it except use those powers even more than Bush did.

I fully believe these acts are against the spirit and word of the constitution and both governments are guilty of crimes. These laws need testing in court and, if found to be illegal, ALL involved should be brought to trial.

 

[Indofred]

As a matter of interest..........

We know various email companies, social networking sites and so on have been forced to hand over information.
I wonder if this and/or other forums are in a similar situation, where admin are forced to hand over PMs and are gagged from talking about it.

Are we being watched by some NSi spook, hiding behind threats of banging Intense in prison if he allows us to know about it?

No, that can't be ..................or could it?

Before June 5, we would probably have told someone who informed us out emails were being read by spooks, some sort of tin foil hat job.

The three journalists' meeting with the man carrying a Rubik's cube, changed the way we see things.

 

[Indofred]

I've just watched the Obama speech on TV - He's a liar.
Take a look at his body language, he's way away from the truth.

Mark my words - there's a lot more we don't know about yet.

 

[Toronado3800]

I wonder how anonymous you can actually be on the internet. I can divert all the traffic I want through a proxy (often in China lol) and maybe fool Facebook or Craigslist. Still it is a little more difficult to fool google and I bet Uncle Sam catches everything coming out of my pc.

 

[Zoom-boing]

And then there's this:

CNET has learned the FBI has developed custom "port reader" software to intercept Internet metadata in real time. And, in some cases, it wants to force Internet providers to use the software.

Story at link.

FBI pressures Internet providers to install surveillance software | Politics and Law - CNET News

 

[OnePercenter]

 

[OnePercenter]

Why is it that the Republicans/conservatives are making it harder for the police to find terrorists?

 

[depotoo]

I'm pretty sure they could be charged with aiding and abetting, if indeed Snowden was using their service.

A dangerous situation.
A man is thought (not known) to be using a service.
The owner of that service has no evidence except rumour.
The government tries to force him to give up information on uses, using rumour as evidence.

No court would ever allow a search based on that but your government can do it anyway.

Isn't anyone concerned or are you happy as long as you can afford a big mac?

I didn't comment on whether I thought it was right or not, just on the premise of what they probably used to get them to shut down.

 

[Indofred]

I'm pretty sure they could be charged with aiding and abetting, if indeed Snowden was using their service.

A dangerous situation.
A man is thought (not known) to be using a service.
The owner of that service has no evidence except rumour.
The government tries to force him to give up information on uses, using rumour as evidence.

No court would ever allow a search based on that but your government can do it anyway.

Isn't anyone concerned or are you happy as long as you can afford a big mac?

I didn't comment on whether I thought it was right or not, just on the premise of what they probably used to get them to shut down.

Your opinion makes little difference; the danger of these powers leading to a police state is just as evident.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

American police state closes down email service.

Pity. You’re otherwise an intelligent and thoughtful contributor to this forum.

Unfortunately you only succeed in exhibiting your ignorance as to what a ‘police state’ actually is.

A ‘police state’ lacks an independent judiciary, it lacks a republican form of government where citizens are subject only to the rule of law, it lacks due process of the law afforded its citizens, and it lacks a Constitution designed to protect the civil liberties of its citizens.

The United States possesses all of the above, consequently it is not a ‘police state.’

The surveillance programs are both legal and Constitutional, authorized by the American people as expressed through their elected representatives in Congress, and administered by the courts in accordance with the Constitution. No citizen has been subject to arrest or prosecution as a result of any of the information gathered by the surveillance programs; indeed, if the government wishes to prosecute any person as a result of the information gathered, a separate warrant must be obtained justifying such an investigation.

And the American people can demand the surveillance programs be ended by compelling their elected representatives in Congress to repeal the laws authorizing them.

The surveillance programs exist at the behest of the American people, something else not possible in a ‘police state.’

 

[Indofred]

Unfortunately you only succeed in exhibiting your ignorance as to what a ‘police state’ actually is.

A ‘police state’ lacks an independent judiciary, it lacks a republican form of government where citizens are subject only to the rule of law, it lacks due process of the law afforded its citizens, and it lacks a Constitution designed to protect the civil liberties of its citizens.

’

or a country with a constitution that is ignored in favour of opening your mail and threatening to put people behind bars if they tell the public about it.