06/11/2013Font:
-
+
US Prism Scandal
'Security Is Not an End in Itself'
A Commentary by German Justice Minister Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger
Shortly before US President Barack Obama's visit to Berlin, Germans are troubled by questions regarding the extent to which the United States monitors Internet traffic worldwide. Is it true, as the media claim, that the United States can access and track virtually every form of communication on the Internet at the source? The Guardian and the Washington Post reported that the National Security Agency (NSA) could gain direct access to and read user data with the so-called "Prism" program. An unnamed intelligence officer was quoted by the Washington Post as saying that the NSA could "quite literally … watch your ideas form as you type."
Internet giants like Facebook and Google were quick to issue denials, saying that they do not release any information without a court order. But doubts remain.
These reports are deeply disconcerting. When viewed in its entirety, this massive effort to acquire information, if it is true, would be dangerous.
On the weekend, President Obama reacted by saying that it is impossible to have 100 percent security and 100 percent privacy and zero inconvenience.
I don't share this view. The more a society monitors, controls and observes its citizens, the less free it is. In a democratic constitutional state, security is not an end in itself, but serves to secure freedom.
A Reasonable Balance
America has been a different country since the horrible terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. The country's security architecture was drastically restructured. One goal was to link all institutions and create a broad flow of information among the different security agencies. The relationship between freedom and security has shifted, to the detriment of freedom, especially as a result of the Patriot Act, which was introduced only a few days after 9/11. The Patriot Act is essentially a number of legislative packages passed in rapid succession. They expanded the opportunities for surveillance, just as they created the possibility of imprisonment for the purpose of preventing acts of terror.
To summarize: As much as we want counterterrorism efforts to be effective, there has to be a reasonable balance between security and the freedom of citizens. The Patriot Act significantly limited the civil rights of Americans.
The development was repeatedly criticized internationally. President Obama, a lawyer specializing in US constitutional law, was also critical of this development in the past. But the restrictions on civil rights and liberties enacted in connection with President George W. Bush's "War on Terror" have not been reversed since Obama became president.
Alarming and Cannot Be Ignored
We should remember that the strength of the liberal constitutional state lies in the trust of its citizens. Constitutional guarantees protect this trust and pursue two objectives: to punish the guilty and to protect the innocent or those who are unjustly suspected of a crime against wrongful actions by the government. These are precisely the tenets Germany adopted in 1949 from the tradition of the American Constitution of 1776 -- namely that in a free and open democratic process, it is important to avoid the impression that the protection of basic rights is not being taken seriously enough.
The American politician and author Benjamin Franklin once wrote: "Those who give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
The suspicion of excessive surveillance of communication is so alarming that it cannot be ignored. For that reason, openness and clarification by the US administration itself should be paramount at this point. All facts must be put on the table.
The global Internet has become indispensible for a competitive economy, the sharing of information and the strengthening of human rights in authoritarian countries. But our trust in these technologies threatens to be lost in the face of comprehensive surveillance activities.
-
+
US Prism Scandal
'Security Is Not an End in Itself'
A Commentary by German Justice Minister Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger
Shortly before US President Barack Obama's visit to Berlin, Germans are troubled by questions regarding the extent to which the United States monitors Internet traffic worldwide. Is it true, as the media claim, that the United States can access and track virtually every form of communication on the Internet at the source? The Guardian and the Washington Post reported that the National Security Agency (NSA) could gain direct access to and read user data with the so-called "Prism" program. An unnamed intelligence officer was quoted by the Washington Post as saying that the NSA could "quite literally … watch your ideas form as you type."
Internet giants like Facebook and Google were quick to issue denials, saying that they do not release any information without a court order. But doubts remain.
These reports are deeply disconcerting. When viewed in its entirety, this massive effort to acquire information, if it is true, would be dangerous.
On the weekend, President Obama reacted by saying that it is impossible to have 100 percent security and 100 percent privacy and zero inconvenience.
I don't share this view. The more a society monitors, controls and observes its citizens, the less free it is. In a democratic constitutional state, security is not an end in itself, but serves to secure freedom.
A Reasonable Balance
America has been a different country since the horrible terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. The country's security architecture was drastically restructured. One goal was to link all institutions and create a broad flow of information among the different security agencies. The relationship between freedom and security has shifted, to the detriment of freedom, especially as a result of the Patriot Act, which was introduced only a few days after 9/11. The Patriot Act is essentially a number of legislative packages passed in rapid succession. They expanded the opportunities for surveillance, just as they created the possibility of imprisonment for the purpose of preventing acts of terror.
To summarize: As much as we want counterterrorism efforts to be effective, there has to be a reasonable balance between security and the freedom of citizens. The Patriot Act significantly limited the civil rights of Americans.
The development was repeatedly criticized internationally. President Obama, a lawyer specializing in US constitutional law, was also critical of this development in the past. But the restrictions on civil rights and liberties enacted in connection with President George W. Bush's "War on Terror" have not been reversed since Obama became president.
Alarming and Cannot Be Ignored
We should remember that the strength of the liberal constitutional state lies in the trust of its citizens. Constitutional guarantees protect this trust and pursue two objectives: to punish the guilty and to protect the innocent or those who are unjustly suspected of a crime against wrongful actions by the government. These are precisely the tenets Germany adopted in 1949 from the tradition of the American Constitution of 1776 -- namely that in a free and open democratic process, it is important to avoid the impression that the protection of basic rights is not being taken seriously enough.
The American politician and author Benjamin Franklin once wrote: "Those who give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
The suspicion of excessive surveillance of communication is so alarming that it cannot be ignored. For that reason, openness and clarification by the US administration itself should be paramount at this point. All facts must be put on the table.
The global Internet has become indispensible for a competitive economy, the sharing of information and the strengthening of human rights in authoritarian countries. But our trust in these technologies threatens to be lost in the face of comprehensive surveillance activities.
No worries just a dip to buy I'm sure ... Just like no worries that US corporations can continue to use their cash to buy back stock as revenues flat, real growth nil, real economy in the dumps, and job market flounders ...
printing will solve all our problems forever!! Hoorah!!!
printing will solve all our problems forever!! Hoorah!!!
Shortly before US President Barack Obama's visit to Berlin, Germans are troubled by questions regarding the extent to which the United States monitors Internet traffic worldwide etc
There's a program called Tor now you can use for browsing which makes it almost impossible for anyone to figure out where you've been or what you did
US Government people use it when they're abroad, lol
https://www.torproject.org/
I've tried it out and it's ok, a bit slower than a normal connection because of rerouting etc but it's very stable
There's a program called Tor now you can use for browsing which makes it almost impossible for anyone to figure out where you've been or what you did
US Government people use it when they're abroad, lol
https://www.torproject.org/
I've tried it out and it's ok, a bit slower than a normal connection because of rerouting etc but it's very stable
Bernanke On Soaring Interest Rates: "We Were A Little Puzzled By That"
Almost exactly 8 years after Greenspan's now infamous "conundrum" comments about the unprecedented persistence of low, long-term interest rates, Bernanke is now "puzzled" at the dramatic rise in interest rates following his recent Taper remarks. Have no fear though, just as Greenspan noted, "I'm reasonably certain we would not automatically assume that it would mean what it meant in the past, " Bernanke said today that the "sharp rise in rates", was not about the Taper but "due to other factors, including optimism about the economy."
Perhaps more importantly, today for the first time someone, not Hilsenrath of course, had the guts to ask Bernanke the hardest question: is the Fed's "Stock not Flow" worldview broken, and was it wrong all along (as we have been alleging all along)? Of course, the implications of the Fed being wrong on this most critical aspect of monetary theory opens up a hornet's next of Pandora's boxes: just what else is the Fed wrong about, and how much will Bernanke be "puzzled" when one by one all of his flawed theories are revealed to be nothing but religious dogma.
And finally what happens to the BOJ when it too has to "taper" and it too realizes that it is all about the flow (in a country where the central bank is monetizing at a relative pace which is more than double the Fed's), and the second sentiment shifts, the entire liquidity bubble comes crashing down, taking not only Japan, but Europe - which is funded courtesy of the Japan carry trade - down with it?
To summarize: bonds collapsing - no worries... it's still the Stock... although not really... and optimism.
From today's press conference:
QUESTION: Mr. Chairman, you've always argued that it's the stock of assets that the Federal Reserve holds which affects long-term interest rates.
How do you reconcile that with the very sharp rise in real interest rates that we've seen in recent weeks? And do you think the market is correctly interpreting what you think is most likely to be the future path of the Federal Reserve's stock of assets? Thank you.
BERNANKE: Well, we -- we were a little puzzled by that. It was -- it was bigger than can be explained, I think, by changes in the ultimate stock of asset purchases within reasonable ranges, so I think we have to conclude that there are other factors at work, as well, including, again, some optimism about the economy, maybe some uncertainty arising. So I'm agreeing with you that -- that it seems larger than can be explained by a changing view of monetary policy.
It's difficult to judge whether the markets are in sync or not. Generally speaking, though, I think that what I've seen from analysts and market participants is -- is not wildly different from what, you know, the committee is thinking and trying -- as I tried today to communicate, I think the most important thing that I just want to convey again is -- is that it's important not to say this date, that date, this time.
It's important to understand that our policies are economic-dependent, and in particular, if financial conditions move in a way that make this economic scenario unlikely, for example, then that would be a reason for us to adjust our policy.
It's really the stock, stupid... (right?)
BERNANKE: And by the same token, as long as we're buying assets, we're adding to our holdings.
We do believe -- although, you know, there's room for debate -- we do believe that the primary effect of our -- of our purchases is through the stock that we hold, because that stock has been withdrawn from markets, and the prices of those assets have to adjust to balance supply and demand, and we've taken out some of the supply, and so the prices go up, the yields go down. So that seems to me consistent with the -- with the idea that we're still adding liquidity, we're still adding accommodation to the system.
Almost exactly 8 years after Greenspan's now infamous "conundrum" comments about the unprecedented persistence of low, long-term interest rates, Bernanke is now "puzzled" at the dramatic rise in interest rates following his recent Taper remarks. Have no fear though, just as Greenspan noted, "I'm reasonably certain we would not automatically assume that it would mean what it meant in the past, " Bernanke said today that the "sharp rise in rates", was not about the Taper but "due to other factors, including optimism about the economy."
Perhaps more importantly, today for the first time someone, not Hilsenrath of course, had the guts to ask Bernanke the hardest question: is the Fed's "Stock not Flow" worldview broken, and was it wrong all along (as we have been alleging all along)? Of course, the implications of the Fed being wrong on this most critical aspect of monetary theory opens up a hornet's next of Pandora's boxes: just what else is the Fed wrong about, and how much will Bernanke be "puzzled" when one by one all of his flawed theories are revealed to be nothing but religious dogma.
And finally what happens to the BOJ when it too has to "taper" and it too realizes that it is all about the flow (in a country where the central bank is monetizing at a relative pace which is more than double the Fed's), and the second sentiment shifts, the entire liquidity bubble comes crashing down, taking not only Japan, but Europe - which is funded courtesy of the Japan carry trade - down with it?
To summarize: bonds collapsing - no worries... it's still the Stock... although not really... and optimism.
From today's press conference:
QUESTION: Mr. Chairman, you've always argued that it's the stock of assets that the Federal Reserve holds which affects long-term interest rates.
How do you reconcile that with the very sharp rise in real interest rates that we've seen in recent weeks? And do you think the market is correctly interpreting what you think is most likely to be the future path of the Federal Reserve's stock of assets? Thank you.
BERNANKE: Well, we -- we were a little puzzled by that. It was -- it was bigger than can be explained, I think, by changes in the ultimate stock of asset purchases within reasonable ranges, so I think we have to conclude that there are other factors at work, as well, including, again, some optimism about the economy, maybe some uncertainty arising. So I'm agreeing with you that -- that it seems larger than can be explained by a changing view of monetary policy.
It's difficult to judge whether the markets are in sync or not. Generally speaking, though, I think that what I've seen from analysts and market participants is -- is not wildly different from what, you know, the committee is thinking and trying -- as I tried today to communicate, I think the most important thing that I just want to convey again is -- is that it's important not to say this date, that date, this time.
It's important to understand that our policies are economic-dependent, and in particular, if financial conditions move in a way that make this economic scenario unlikely, for example, then that would be a reason for us to adjust our policy.
It's really the stock, stupid... (right?)
BERNANKE: And by the same token, as long as we're buying assets, we're adding to our holdings.
We do believe -- although, you know, there's room for debate -- we do believe that the primary effect of our -- of our purchases is through the stock that we hold, because that stock has been withdrawn from markets, and the prices of those assets have to adjust to balance supply and demand, and we've taken out some of the supply, and so the prices go up, the yields go down. So that seems to me consistent with the -- with the idea that we're still adding liquidity, we're still adding accommodation to the system.
Seems like main question is Ben gonna be able to get out the exit before shit really hits the fan ... These guys have a history of passing a mess on to the next inline ... 1987 crash soon after Greenspan got in ... 2007 crash soon after Ben came in ... And now 2014? Crash soon after Yellen or whoever in ...
credit markets in china starting to lock up too ... Anyway yawn I'm sure our money masters globally are making all the the right moves and everything will work out just fine
credit markets in china starting to lock up too ... Anyway yawn I'm sure our money masters globally are making all the the right moves and everything will work out just fine
Ben err Yellen ain't raising rates for a loooooooong time (turning japanese) at best they will stop the presses but like we are seeing now just the threat of stopping the press starts deflating the bubble ... Plus we now have one the worlds only true growth engine for last however long hitting the skids (china) ..... In the end the western printers have just bought time but created more problems long term
Gold will be fine eek ... Lotsa problems and issues to come ... It had gone from 300 to 1900 without a losing year for like a decade ... The china liquidity crunch is compounding the problem ...
Salivating over prospect of gold near 1k on this potential extended risk off phase
Salivating over prospect of gold near 1k on this potential extended risk off phase
Submitted by James Howard Kunstler via Kunstler.com,
Wondering why the money world got its knickers in a twist last week? The answer is simple: the global economy is breaking apart and its constituent major players are doing face-plants on the downhill slope of a no-longer-cheap-oil way of life. Let’s look at them case by case.
The USA slogs deeper into paralysis and decay in a collective mental fog of disbelief that its own exceptionalism can’t overcome the laws of thermodynamics. This general malaise precipitates into a range of specific quandaries. The so-called economy depends on financialization, since it is no longer based on manufacturing things of value. The financialization depends on housing, that is, a particular kind of housing: suburban sprawl housing (and its commercial accessories, the strip malls, the box stores, the burger shacks, etc.). Gasoline is now too expensive to run the suburban living arrangement. It will remain marginally unaffordable. Even if the price of oil goes down, it will be because citizens of the USA will not have enough money to buy it. Lesson: the suburban project is over, along with the economy it drove in on.
But so is the mega-city project, the giant metroplex of skyscrapers. So, don’t suppose that we can transform the production house-building industry into an apartment-building industry. The end of cheap oil also means we can’t run cities at the 20th century scale. That includes the scale of the buildings as well as the aggregate scale of the whole urban organism. Nobody gets this. For one thing, there will be far fewer jobs in anything connected to financialization because that “industry” is imploding. The recent action around the Federal Reserve illustrates this. When chairman Bernanke’s lips quivered last week, the financial markets had a grand mal seizure. He floated the notion that his organization might “taper” their purchases of US government issued debt and mortgage-backed securities — the latter being mostly bundled debt originated by government-sponsored entities and agencies. That’s the “money” that supports the suburban sprawl industry.
If the Fed were to reduce its purchases of this debt paper, nobody else would buy it. The reason the Fed buys the quantity it does in the first place ($85 billion-a-month) is that nobody else would touch it at the offered zero interest rates. The US Treasury and the mortgage bundlers could only sell the stuff if they paid higher interest rates. But the US government would choke to death on higher interest rates because its aggregate debt is so huge and the scheduled interest payments so gigantic that a one percent increase would destroy even the fantasy of economic equilibrium.
Apart from that unhappy equation, entropy never sleeps. Everything in America except the Apple stores and a handful of big banks is falling apart — especially the human habitat and households. Suburbia will only lose value and utility. Big cities will have to get smaller (ouch!). Tar sands, shale oil and shale gas will not ride to the rescue (they cost too much to get out of the ground). The entire declension of government from federal to state to local will be too broke to fix the roads and make “transfer payments” to idle, indigent citizens. This populace will lose faith in their institutions… and disorder will eventually resolve in a new and very different disposition of things on-the-ground. If we’re lucky, this will not include cruel despotic leadership and war.
If the “taper” talk is empty rhetoric, and the Fed continues sopping up issued debt, it will eventually destroy the credibility of its issued money. That is just another way of going broke, though it might beat a shorter path to the general loss of legitimacy of governments and other institutions.
Young people, harken: prepare for careers in agriculture and activities that support it. Consider moving to small towns in parts of the country where farming is possible and get ready to rebuild a very different economy. Also, consider repudiating your college debt en masse, since the fantasy of repayment is but another mental shackle holding you back from your future.
As for the other parts of the global economy, a digest:
Europe doesn’t have enough oil and gas to run itself. Its suppliers (Russia, various Islamic states) are all basically hostile to it. As the late, great Tony Soprano might say, “end of story.” Europe has been playing financial pocket pool with itself for five years with credibility ebbing. Soon Europe will descend into painful economic re-set. Its era as the go-to theme park of advanced civilization is ending. Go there while it’s still possible and take some snapshots of what comfort and artistry used to look like.
China is imploding under the weight of its half-assed crony command economy and banking system. Nice try. Cookie fortune says, “Industrial era entered too late in game.” All else there is desperation: e.g. the idea of moving hundreds of millions of peasants into new cities. As Tony would say, “Fuggeddabowdit.” They’re better off growing bok choy en situ. Anyway, no one should assume that China can remain politically stable. Let’s hope that its economic and political crack-up doesn’t transmute into war.
Russia’s oil production is in permanent decline. It has a lot, but it gets most of its income from selling it to other people. Hence, Vlad Putin’s notion of finding something else to base Russia’s economy on. Like…what? I don’t think they’re going to replace China in making salad shooters. Farming would be the way to go, and Vlad’s government is hoping that global warming improves Russia’s prospects for doing more of that. In any case, Russia might benefit in the long term by not selling off all of its oil and gas — though Western Europe would surely suffer from that decision. On the plus side, Russia’s government is not crippled by idiot squabbles over abortion, gay marriage, and the Bible in schools.
Japan. Sorry to repeat myself. Going medieval. They have no oil and gas. (Cue Tony Soprano again.) In the event, Japan’s financial hara-kiri will drag down the rest of the world’s banking system — or at least hasten the damage already self-inflicted elsewhere around the globe. I’m also informed that much of the essential computer chip fabrication in the world still happens in Japan, and that will go away, too, as the Japanese engine seizes, smokes, and expels its final belch of CO2.
What else is there? South America? Think: spreading jungle (or desert, take your pick). Canada? There’s an idea. Maybe Labrador becomes the new Hamptons? Second biggest national land mass… 30 million people (2 percent of China’s population). Only one drawback: the view to the south.
Average:
4.22222
Your rating: None Average: 4.2 (9 votes)
Wondering why the money world got its knickers in a twist last week? The answer is simple: the global economy is breaking apart and its constituent major players are doing face-plants on the downhill slope of a no-longer-cheap-oil way of life. Let’s look at them case by case.
The USA slogs deeper into paralysis and decay in a collective mental fog of disbelief that its own exceptionalism can’t overcome the laws of thermodynamics. This general malaise precipitates into a range of specific quandaries. The so-called economy depends on financialization, since it is no longer based on manufacturing things of value. The financialization depends on housing, that is, a particular kind of housing: suburban sprawl housing (and its commercial accessories, the strip malls, the box stores, the burger shacks, etc.). Gasoline is now too expensive to run the suburban living arrangement. It will remain marginally unaffordable. Even if the price of oil goes down, it will be because citizens of the USA will not have enough money to buy it. Lesson: the suburban project is over, along with the economy it drove in on.
But so is the mega-city project, the giant metroplex of skyscrapers. So, don’t suppose that we can transform the production house-building industry into an apartment-building industry. The end of cheap oil also means we can’t run cities at the 20th century scale. That includes the scale of the buildings as well as the aggregate scale of the whole urban organism. Nobody gets this. For one thing, there will be far fewer jobs in anything connected to financialization because that “industry” is imploding. The recent action around the Federal Reserve illustrates this. When chairman Bernanke’s lips quivered last week, the financial markets had a grand mal seizure. He floated the notion that his organization might “taper” their purchases of US government issued debt and mortgage-backed securities — the latter being mostly bundled debt originated by government-sponsored entities and agencies. That’s the “money” that supports the suburban sprawl industry.
If the Fed were to reduce its purchases of this debt paper, nobody else would buy it. The reason the Fed buys the quantity it does in the first place ($85 billion-a-month) is that nobody else would touch it at the offered zero interest rates. The US Treasury and the mortgage bundlers could only sell the stuff if they paid higher interest rates. But the US government would choke to death on higher interest rates because its aggregate debt is so huge and the scheduled interest payments so gigantic that a one percent increase would destroy even the fantasy of economic equilibrium.
Apart from that unhappy equation, entropy never sleeps. Everything in America except the Apple stores and a handful of big banks is falling apart — especially the human habitat and households. Suburbia will only lose value and utility. Big cities will have to get smaller (ouch!). Tar sands, shale oil and shale gas will not ride to the rescue (they cost too much to get out of the ground). The entire declension of government from federal to state to local will be too broke to fix the roads and make “transfer payments” to idle, indigent citizens. This populace will lose faith in their institutions… and disorder will eventually resolve in a new and very different disposition of things on-the-ground. If we’re lucky, this will not include cruel despotic leadership and war.
If the “taper” talk is empty rhetoric, and the Fed continues sopping up issued debt, it will eventually destroy the credibility of its issued money. That is just another way of going broke, though it might beat a shorter path to the general loss of legitimacy of governments and other institutions.
Young people, harken: prepare for careers in agriculture and activities that support it. Consider moving to small towns in parts of the country where farming is possible and get ready to rebuild a very different economy. Also, consider repudiating your college debt en masse, since the fantasy of repayment is but another mental shackle holding you back from your future.
As for the other parts of the global economy, a digest:
Europe doesn’t have enough oil and gas to run itself. Its suppliers (Russia, various Islamic states) are all basically hostile to it. As the late, great Tony Soprano might say, “end of story.” Europe has been playing financial pocket pool with itself for five years with credibility ebbing. Soon Europe will descend into painful economic re-set. Its era as the go-to theme park of advanced civilization is ending. Go there while it’s still possible and take some snapshots of what comfort and artistry used to look like.
China is imploding under the weight of its half-assed crony command economy and banking system. Nice try. Cookie fortune says, “Industrial era entered too late in game.” All else there is desperation: e.g. the idea of moving hundreds of millions of peasants into new cities. As Tony would say, “Fuggeddabowdit.” They’re better off growing bok choy en situ. Anyway, no one should assume that China can remain politically stable. Let’s hope that its economic and political crack-up doesn’t transmute into war.
Russia’s oil production is in permanent decline. It has a lot, but it gets most of its income from selling it to other people. Hence, Vlad Putin’s notion of finding something else to base Russia’s economy on. Like…what? I don’t think they’re going to replace China in making salad shooters. Farming would be the way to go, and Vlad’s government is hoping that global warming improves Russia’s prospects for doing more of that. In any case, Russia might benefit in the long term by not selling off all of its oil and gas — though Western Europe would surely suffer from that decision. On the plus side, Russia’s government is not crippled by idiot squabbles over abortion, gay marriage, and the Bible in schools.
Japan. Sorry to repeat myself. Going medieval. They have no oil and gas. (Cue Tony Soprano again.) In the event, Japan’s financial hara-kiri will drag down the rest of the world’s banking system — or at least hasten the damage already self-inflicted elsewhere around the globe. I’m also informed that much of the essential computer chip fabrication in the world still happens in Japan, and that will go away, too, as the Japanese engine seizes, smokes, and expels its final belch of CO2.
What else is there? South America? Think: spreading jungle (or desert, take your pick). Canada? There’s an idea. Maybe Labrador becomes the new Hamptons? Second biggest national land mass… 30 million people (2 percent of China’s population). Only one drawback: the view to the south.
Average:
4.22222
Your rating: None Average: 4.2 (9 votes)
