FEAR GRIPS KAASE

Mohammed Alhassan, IGP

By Christian Kpesese

The people of Kaase Traditional Area, a suburb of Kumasi have been gripped by fear for their lives and property ever since the installation of a new chief for the area by the Asantehene, Otumfuo Osei Tutu.

The installation took place inspite of a pending writ of certiorari before the High Court.

The fears of the people were triggered following two separate incidents that happened in the community within two days.

The first was a failed attack by some armed men on the Abusuapanin of the royal family, Owusu Afram that was foiled by the prompt response of the police following a tip-off.

Narrating the incident to The Insight, Abusuapanin Owusu Afram said he was fast asleep with his family at the ground floor of a one storey building on the night of Tuesday, 16th July, 2013 when he heard some unusual voices from his window discussing among others things where actually he was laying in the room and frantic efforts by the assailants to climb through his window.

 Sensing danger; `` I quickly alerted my neighbors who live at the first floor if they could identify the people, but they could not because it was very dark,  I also called my brother who was not home then, he brought the police from Asokwa to effect the arrest of the six men, the rest managed to run away”. He said.

According to Owusu Afram, one suspect who gave his name only as Owuraku during interrogation by the police was head as saying that his brother who is the new chief Kaase sent them to guard the premises of the old palace.

ASP Yusif Tanko the Public Relations Officer of the Police for the Ashanti Region confirmed the incident to the Insight in an interview.

According to him the police have arrested the six men in connection with a chieftaincy dispute in the area.

He revealed that one locally manufactured pistol, two cartridges and a machete were retrieved from the suspects who have subsequently been charged with illegal possession of arms.

The suspects, ASP Tanko said have been granted police enquiry bails and would soon be arraign before court.

The second incident which occurred under bizarre circumstances has also deepened the fear of the people.

According to an elder of the royal family, Mr Akwasi Boakye, the newly installed Kaasehene, Nana Mensah Bonsu allegedly led a group of people to ransack the Palace and property of the late Kaasehene. The team was made up of kingmakers of the area including the Adontihene, Gyeakyehene- Nana Kwaku Amoateng, Kontihene, the Queen mother- Nana Abena Kwachu the secretary to the Kumasi Traditional Council and the Abodomhene.

 The team which he noted was guarded by the striking force of the Ashanti Regional police invaded the premises of the late Kaasehene, Nana Owusu Yao Ababio and took away properties belonging to him just a day after the failed attack on the heard of the family.

The team, Mr Boakye alleged broke doors of both sitting and bedrooms of the late chief when all had left home for their usual routines and took away with items including, traditional stools, an arm- chair, traditional drums and regalia.

 Other items include personal belongings of the late chief. They also took away registered guns, documents and other valuables all belonging to the late chief.

The release of the suspects just few hours after their arrest did not go down well with the Aduana family which believes something murky was at play.

The Abusuapanin, Mr Owusu Afram, expressed fear that, the released of the suspects who were found with weapons without trial and the subsequent ransacking of the late chief’s palace poses a serious threat to him and the rest of the family members.

He has therefore appealed to the police to bring the perpetrators of the offenses to book as early as possible to enable them go about their lawful duties.

However, ASP Tanko said, the police reserved the right to grant bail to any suspect(s) depending on the circumstances surrounding the arrest and assured the Kaase community of their safety and urged them to be law abiding and endeavor to report any unusual occurrence to the police for quick response.

Editorial

ARTHUR KENNEDY’S TWISTS AND TURNS

No one can fault Dr Kobina Arthur Kennedy, a leading member of the New Patriotic Party (NPP) for desperately struggling to find something for which Professor Kofi Abrefa Busia can be praised.

After all Dr Busia is the political inspiration for Arthur-Kenedy’s political party which has lost two general elections on a trot and needs to build up its image under a certificate of urgency. 

The problem however is that in the desperation to find something good to say about Busia, Dr Arthur Kenedy is twisting the facts of history and belittling the efforts of those who waged a war of liberation against the apartheid regime.

Who told Dr Arthur-Kenedy that it was Busia’s ridiculous policy of dialogue with apartheid which eventually led to the dismantling of that obnoxious system of government?

Perhaps, Dr Arthur-Kenedy has not heard or read about the battle of Cuito Cuanavale in which Cuban internationalist forces dealt a decisive blow to the apartheid army compelling South African leaders to make concessions leading up to the end of apartheid.

Indeed Captain Kojo Tsikata, a distinguished international took part in that decisive battle.

Busia’s policy of collaboration with apartheid could not be and was not the framework for achieving victory over apartheid.

It was nothing more than a betrayal of the African people.

GM FOODS ARE DANGEROUS

Dr David Suzuki

The debate on the safety of genetically modified foods in Ghana has received a shot in the arm by the intervention of Dr. David T. Suzuki, an award winning scientist.

He says that science is not in a position today to anticipate the full cost of introducing genetically modified foods.

Dr Suzuki doubles as an environmentalist and broadcaster and has written extensively on the subject.

In an article headed, “Experimenting With Life” and posted on the internet, Dr Suzuki writes, “However, history informs us that though we love technology, there are always costs, and since our knowledge of how nature works is so limited, we can’t anticipate how these costs will manifest.”

The full text of Dr Suzuki’s article is published below;

Experimenting With Life

By David Suzuki

I am a geneticist by training. At one time, I had one of the largest research grants and genetics labs in Canada. The time I spent in this lab was one of the happiest periods of my life and I am proud of the contribution we made to science. My introductory book is still the most widely used genetics text in the world.

When I graduated as a geneticist in 1961, I was full of enthusiasm and determined to make a mark. Back then we knew about DNA, genes, chromosomes, and genetic regulation. But today when I tell students what our hot ideas were in '61, they choke with laughter. Viewed in 2013, ideas from 1961 seem hilarious. But when those students become professors years from now and tell their students what was hot in 2013, their students will be just as amused.

At the cutting edge of scientific research, most of our ideas are far from the mark - wrong, in need of revision, or irrelevant. That's not a derogation of science; it's the way science advances. We take a set of observations or data, set up a hypothesis that makes sense of them, and then we test the hypothesis. The new insights and techniques we gain from this process are interpreted tentatively and liable to change, so any rush to apply them strikes me as downright dangerous.

No group of experts should be more aware of the hazards of unwarranted claims than geneticists. After all, it was the exuberance of geneticists early in this century that led to the creation of a discipline called eugenics, which aimed to improve the quality of human genes.

 These scientists were every bit as clever, competent, and well-meaning as today's genetic engineers; they just got carried away with their discoveries. Outlandish claims were made by eminent geneticists about the hereditary nature of traits such as drunkenness, nomadism, and criminality, as well as those judged "inferior" or "superior." Those claims provided scientific respectability to legislation in the US prohibiting interracial marriage and immigration from countries judged inferior, and allowed sterilization of inmates of mental institutions on genetic grounds. In Nazi Germany, geneticist Josef Mengele held peer-reviewed research grants for his work at Auschwitz. The grand claims of geneticists led to "race purification" laws and the Holocaust.

Today, the leading-edge of genetics is in the field of biotechnology. The basis of this new area is the ability to take DNA (genetic material) from one organism and insert it into a different species. This is truly revolutionary. Human beings can't normally exchange genes with a carrot or a mouse, but with DNA technology it can happen.

However, history informs us that though we love technology, there are always costs, and since our knowledge of how nature works is so limited, we can't anticipate how those costs will manifest. We only have to reflect on DDT, nuclear power, and CFCs, which were hailed as wonderful creations but whose long-term detrimental effects were only found decades after their widespread use.

Now, with a more wise and balanced perspective, we are cutting back on the use of these technologies. But with genetically modified (GM) foods, this option may not be available. The difference with GM food is that once the genie is out of the bottle, it will be difficult or impossible to stuff it back. If we stop using DDT and CFCs, nature may be able to undo most of the damage - even nuclear waste decays over time. But GM plants are living organisms. Once these new life forms have become established in our surroundings, they can replicate, change, and spread; there may be no turning back. Many ecologists are concerned about what this means to the balance of life on Earth that has evolved over millions of years through the natural reproduction of species.

Genomes are selected in the entirety of their expression. In ways we barely comprehend, the genes within a species are interconnected and interact as an integrated whole. When a gene from an unrelated species is introduced, the context within which it finds itself is completely changed. If a taiko drum is plunked in the middle of a symphony orchestra and plays along, it is highly probable the resultant music will be pretty discordant. Yet based on studies of gene behavior derived from studies within a species, biotechnologists assume that those rules will also apply to genes transferred between species. This is totally unwarranted.

As we learned from experience with DDT, nuclear power and CFCs, we only discover the costs of new technologies after they are extensively used. We should apply the Precautionary Principle with any new technology, asking whether it is needed and then demanding proof that it is not harmful. Nowhere is this more important than in biotechnology because it enables us to tamper with the very blueprint of life.

Since GM foods are now in our diet, we have become experimental subjects without any choice. (Europeans say if they want to know whether GMOs are hazardous, they should just study North Americans.) I would have preferred far more experimentation with GMOs under controlled lab conditions before their release into the open, but it's too late.

We have learned from painful experience that anyone entering an experiment should give informed consent. That means at the very least food should be labeled if it contains GMOs so we each can make that choice.

David T Suzuki PhD is an award-winning scientist, environmentalist and broadcaster. Web:www.davidsuzuki.org

NKRUMAH; AN EXTRAORDINARY AND UNIQUE LEADER

Speech By Mr. Kwesi Quartey, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs At Launch of The Nkrumah website

Ambassador Kwesi Quartey

Rt. Hon. Speaker of Parliament,

The Chairman, Kwame Nkrumah Centenary Planning Committee, Honourable Minister of Information

Honourable Members of Parliament,

Your Excellency, the Dean of the Diplomatic Corps, Pierre Sanou
Your Excellencies, Members of the Diplomatic Corps,

Religious and Traditional Leaders,

Educational Leaders

Distinguished Guests,

Members of the Press,

Prof. Francis Nkrumah and Mrs. Nkrumah,

Ladies and Gentlemen,

It is with profound sense of honour and gratitude that I join you today for the launch of a website and archives in memory of our beloved Founder and Father of the nation, Ghana, Osagyefo Dr. Kwame Nkrumah. I am delighted to welcome all of you to this momentous occasion taking place at the appropriately named Kwame Nkrumah Institute of African Studies.

Let me also use this opportunity to commend the Kwame Nkrumah Centenary Planning Committee for their insight and vision to digitally disseminate the ideas, life and achievements of our late President.

Your Excellencies,

It's been a little over four decades since Osagyefo Dr. Kwame Nkrumah passed on but his legacy still lives on.

I am certain many of us are already caught up in retrospection about the golden age of African liberation ignited by our revered hero. There is no question that it was his selflessness and exemplary courage with his compatriots at the time which inspired the faith and optimism that gave birth to the Organization of African Unity (OAU) in May, 1963.

Kwame Nkrumah, was, with the benefit of hindsight an extraordinary and unique leader. He was unique in the modern history of Ghana. History, we are told, brings such people, and they do not come often. In many ways, we are lucky as a people to have had such a leader.

He was the first African to build a mass-anti-colonial political organization. He was a firm believer, in the value of organization.

Organization decides everything, he once said.

He mobilized the English language effectively against British Colonization. His political legacy is complex, substantial and tangible.

His real value was in the power of his ideas. So much so that even though there was an assault of the most sophisticated kind on his person and his ideas, his ideas continue to live on, vindicated with the effluxion of time. He forged close links, not only between Africans, but between continental Africans and Africans of the diaspora.

Ghanaians take pride in the special honour recently conferred on Dr. Kwame Nkrumah, whose statue stands prominently in front of the African Union Commission's imposing Office Complex. At the same time, we recognize that even if Ghana was his birth place, Kwame Nkrumah's vision for Africa and his unshakeable commitment to its unity made him virtually a citizen of the continent, or indeed of the whole developing world.

Indeed, in a few days' time the African Union will celebrate the 50^thAnniversary of its formation. It is our hope that the Jubilee Celebrations will usher in a new chapter of the African Renaissance, which call on us to rededicate ourselves to the progress and wellbeing of the African people.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Let me underscore that, Kwame Nkrumah happens to be the first proponent of Pan Africanism in the latter half of the 20^th century.

Indeed Nkrumah stands out not only among the famous Big Six including William Ofori Atta, Aka Adjei, Jake Obetsebi Lamptey, Dr. J.B. Danquah and Edward Akuffo-Addo who risked their lives to make sure Ghana attained Independence but also amongst the greatest statesmen of history. With the struggle for independence beckoning, Nkrumah channeled the discontent of the people of the Gold Coast colony into a highly organized political movement for protest against British rule, and within a short period won political independence for Ghana on 6^th March, 1957.

Your Excellencies,

After Gold Coast attained its independence and was now called Ghana, Nkrumah did not end his pursuit for political freedom, but continued in his work toward the liberation of the entire African Continent as quoted in his famous Independence Declaration on 6^th March, 1957.

"The Independence of Ghana is meaningless unless it is linked up with the total liberation of the African Continent". He said here I wish I could quote Marcus Garvey.

He went on to mention Marcus Garvey whose writing he said influenced him most when he was a student in the United States. 

He said Marcus Garvey looked everywhere for a government of the black people. Marcus Garvey did not succeed. But here in Ghana today, the ideas of Kweigyir Aggrey, of Toursaint L'Overture, of Caseley Hayford, of Paa Grant had come into reality today. He did not see Ghana's independence simply as an end in itself. To him, Ghana's independence was part of the process of liberating the African from centuries of subjugation and mental slavery. In his own words, he said Pan-Africanism has its beginnings in the Liberation struggle of African-Americans expressing the aspirations of African and people of African descent.

From the first Pan-Africanist conference held in London in 1900, until the 5^th in Manchester in 1945, African Americans provided the main driving power of the movement. It was the independence of ' Ghana in 1957 that brought Pan-Africanism here to Africa, its true home. Kwame Nkrumah immediately organized the Conference of Independent African States in April, 1958, and the all African Peoples Conference in December of the same year, all in Accra.

Osagyefo Dr Kwame Nkrumah

Ladies and Gentlemen,

The theme for the Golden Jubilee Anniversary Celebration of the then Organization of African Unity, (OAU), now African Union (AU) is Pan-Africanism and the African Renaissance. This theme offers us all a unique opportunity to pay special tribute to the generation of the Pan Africanists and the Founding Fathers of the OAU which include our own Dr. Kwame Nkrumah, Haile Selassie I, Sekou Toure, Modibo Keita and Leopold Senghor et al.

As we celebrate the launch of his archives we must not forget that Kwame Nkrumah was a keen student of history. He was interested in historical records and would certainly have approved of this motive behind the setting up of these archives.

Documents from the British Foreign Office on Nkrumah, now declassified provide an idea of the value of archives in our understanding of today's political issues. A few extracts from these archives should suffice to demonstrate the forces aligned against Osagyefo Kwame.

In a dispatch from the British High Commissioner in Accra, H.E. G.G. Collins on 22 May 1964 to C.E. Wool-Lewis OBE of the host Africa Dept, Commonwealth Relations Officer SW 1 (with a cover note saying: "I enclose a paper which attempts to answer the question" what did Kwame Nkrumah gain or lose at the OAU Founding Conference at Addis Ababa?

"Even before he went to Addis Ababa, it was clear that Dr. Nkrumah would not get all he wanted.

Nevertheless he did not lower his sights. He delivered a speech to the other African Heads of State containing proposals which he knew would be rejected. When they were, he neither walked out nor sought a compromise; he signed a charter which falls short of what he had advocated.

"The Addis Ababa meeting of 30 Heads of Government and the representatives of two other independent African countries - certainly the largest meeting of Heads of Government ever held in Africa, if not in the world - was in itself a triumph."

On 12 Sept, 1961 this despatch was sent to the Prime Minister Edward Heath

"Nobody who has not had to live in Accra can appreciate to the full the naiveté and arrogance of many leading Ghanaians, or the hostility of the reactions which close proximity to them provokes. 

The capacity of Nkrumah for infuriating non-Ghanaians, whether African or European by his public utterances can only be equaled by his ability to charm almost everyone he meets in private .....

To us, it is particularly galling to have this egotist shouting at us to take off the brakes in the Rhodesias, Nyasaland and Kenya, and drive faster down the road to independence, which we knew better than him.

"And his knack of giving expression to the feelings of so many Africans, who are all the time becoming more politically conscious is exasperating."

So ladies and gentlemen, let us not forget that the forces that found African liberation exasperating have not simply faded away. We need to be on our guard constantly.

Fifty years after the formation of the OAU, Africa is still divided. There are conflicts and violence. This time, not between Africans and their colonial masters; but between fellow Africans. This is certainly not a perfect picture of African Renaissance. Africans must unite as we strive to develop our continent In terms of infrastructure, both physical and psychosocial. It is only when we unite that we can address our challenges for as the old adage goes 'United we stand; divided we fall'.

On this momentous occasion, may we reflect on the past, present and future of the OAU / AU which our dear Father, Nkrumah stood for. May we also forge ahead in our efforts in promoting African unity by holding dear to things that unite us rather than what divide us.

I thank you for your attention.

Long Live Kwame Nkrumah!!Long Live Ghana!!Long Live AU!!

Corporate Carve-Up

Under the pretext of preventing hunger, the rich nations are engineering a new scramble for Africa.

Map of Africa

By George Monbiot

One of the stated purposes of the Conference of Berlin in 1884 was to save the people of Africa from the slave trade. To discharge this grave responsibility, the European powers discovered, to their undoubted distress, that they would have to extend their control and ownership of large parts of Africa.

In doing so, they accidentally encountered the vast riches of that continent, which had not in any way figured in their calculations, and found themselves in astonished possession of land, gold, diamonds and ivory. They also discovered that they were able to enlist the labour of a large number of Africans, who, for humanitarian reasons, were best treated as slaves.

One of the stated purposes of the G8 conference, hosted by David Cameron in June 2013, is to save the people of Africa from starvation. To discharge this grave responsibility, the global powers have discovered, to their undoubted distress, that their corporations must extend their control and ownership of large parts of Africa. As a result, they will find themselves in astonished possession of Africa’s land, seed and markets.

David Cameron’s purpose at the G8, as he put it last month, is to advance “the good of people around the world”. Or, as Rudyard Kipling expressed it during the previous scramble for Africa, “To seek another’s profit, / And work another’s gain … / Fill full the mouth of Famine / And bid the sickness cease”. Who could doubt that the best means of doing this is to cajole African countries into a new set of agreements, which allow foreign companies to grab their land, patent their seeds and monopolise their food markets?

The New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition, which bears only a passing relationship to the agreements arising from the Conference of Berlin, will, according to the US agency promoting it, “lift 50 million people out of poverty over the next 10 years through inclusive and sustained agricultural growth.” This “inclusive and sustained agricultural growth” will no longer be in the hands of the people who are meant to be lifted out of poverty. How you can have one without the other is a mystery that has yet to be decoded. But I’m sure the alliance’s corporate partners – Monsanto, Cargill, Dupont, Syngenta, Nestlé, Unilever, Itochu, Yara International and others – could produce some interesting explanations.

The New Alliance offers African countries public and private money (the UK has pledged £395m of foreign aid) if they strike agreements with G8 countries and the private sector (which means, in many cases, multinational companies). Six countries have signed up so far.

That African farming needs investment and support is indisputable. But does it need land grabbing? Yes, according to the deals these countries have signed. Mozambique, where local farmers have already been evicted from large tracts of land, is now obliged to write new laws promoting what its agreement calls “partnerships” of this kind. Cote d’Ivoire must “facilitate access to land for smallholder farmers and private enterprises”. 

This, in practice, means evicting smallholder farmers for the benefit of private enterprises. Already French, Algerian, Swiss and Singaporean companies have lined up deals across 600,000 hectares or more of this country’s prime arable land. These deals, according to the development group GRAIN, “will displace tens of thousands of peasant rice farmers and destroy the livelihoods of thousands of small traders.” Ethiopia, where land grabbing has been accompanied by appalling human rights abuses, must assist “agriculture investors (domestic and foreign; small, medium and larger enterprises) to … secure access to land.

Kofi Annan, Agent of the West in Land Grab

And how about seed grabbing? Yes, that too is essential to the well-being of Africa’s people. Mozambique is now obliged to “systematically cease distribution of free and unimproved seeds”, while drawing up new laws granting intellectual property rights in seeds which will “promote private sector investment”. Similar regulations must also be approved in Ghana, Tanzania and Cote d’Ivoire.

The countries which have joined the New Alliance will have to remove any market barriers which favour their own farmers. Where farmers comprise between 50 and 90% of the population, and where their livelihoods are dependent on the non-cash economy, these policies – which make perfect sense in the air-conditioned lecture rooms of the Chicago Business School – can be lethal.

Strangely missing from the New Alliance agreements is any commitment on the part of the G8 nations to change their own domestic policies. These could have included farm subsidies in Europe and the US, which undermine the markets for African produce, or biofuel quotas, which promote world hunger by turning food into fuel. Any constraints on the behaviour of corporate investors in Africa (such as the Committee on World Food Security’s guidelines on land tenure remain voluntary, while the constraints on their host nations become compulsory. As in 1884, the powerful nations make the rules and the weak ones abide by them. For their own good, of course.

The West, as usual, is able to find leaders in Africa who have more in common with the global elite than they do with their own people. In some of the countries which have joined the New Alliance, there were wide-ranging consultations on land and farming, whose results have been now ignored in the agreements with the G8. The deals between African governments and private companies were facilitated by the World Economic Forum, and took place behind closed doors.

But that’s what you have to do when you’re dealing with “new-caught, sullen peoples, / Half-devil and half-child”(14), who perversely try to hang on to their own land, their own seeds and their own markets. Even though David Cameron, Barack Obama and the other G8 leaders know it isn’t good for them.

US sanctions spying on the world

By Dariush Bavar

In the wake of two separate and back-to-back revelations that the US National Security Agency (NSA) and the Federal Bureaus of Investigation (FBI) are spying on millions of Americans, officials are now engaged in a damage control campaign.

They are seeking to determine how the lid has been blown off two super-secret telephone and the Internet spying programs of the American government.

To quell the uproar over spying, government officials launched an aggressive justification of the previously undisclosed programs shortly after the disclosures.

The US spy chief said the programs are legal. Director of National Intelligence James Clapper has stressed that the Congress had “fully debated” it and that it was recently reauthorized under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

A day before Clapper's comments, US President Barack Obama rushed to the defense of the top-secret programs saying, “They help us prevent terrorist attacks” despite their “modest encroachments on privacy.”

He condemned the “hype” over the massive NSA and FBI spying on Americans’ phone records and internet communications. Moreover, in order to ease concerns over the erosion of civil liberties, he said, “Nobody is listening to your telephone calls” or “reading the e-mails” of American people.

The first disclosure came on Thursday when the British newspaper The Guardian published a top secret court document, issued in April, under which the US government has been furtively collecting phone records of millions of Americans who are customers of Verizon, one of America's largest telecommunications provider companies. The program is called Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act or FISA.

The order compels Verizon to give the NSA “all call detail records or ‘telephony metadata’ created by Verizon for communications (i) between the United States and abroad; or (ii) wholly within the United States, including local telephone calls.”

But what is metadata? Washington Times provides further details about the term. “Such metadata include the calling and receiving phone numbers, the time of day and length of the call, and the whereabouts of the two parties.”

The paper quotes Stephen B. Wicker, a professor of electrical and computer engineering at Cornell University as saying, “The metadata available is now so fine-grained that it reveals where we’re going, what we’re doing, what our preferences and beliefs might be and who our friends are.”

The man behind the disclosures, the 29-year old Edward Snowden, is a former CIA employee working at the NSA. He said he leaked documents because he felt the US is building an unaccountable and secret espionage machine that spied on every American.

Despite Obama’s reassurance that nobody is reading the e-mails of American people, Mr. Wicker depicts a very different picture. He said using analytical software, the NSA could use mobile phones' metadata over time to paint a picture of where their users went, who they talked to and what their habits were.

Hours later after the revelation on FISA, came the second leak, this time by The Washington Post. It divulged the Internet spying program or “PRISM”. It’s a 6-year-old program designed to rake in vast amounts of data, from emails to chat records.

The program allowed the NSA and FBI to gain access as much as possible to the servers of major U.S. Internet companies such as Google, Apple, Microsoft, Facebook and AOL.

Like the phone-records program, PRISM was approved by a judge in a secret court order. Unlike that program and contrary to Obama’s assertion that “nobody is reading the e-mails of American people,” PRISM allowed the government to seize actual conversations: emails, video chats, instant messages and more.

Scope of phone and Internet surveillance has caused alarm among privacy advocates with some observers suggesting that it is only the tip of the iceberg. A former NSA official has staggering figures.

William Binney estimates that the agency has data on as many as 20 trillion phone calls and emails by US citizens. According to Washington Times, Binney says the collection dates back to when the super-secret agency began domestic surveillance after the Sept. 11 attacks.

In July 2008, Larry Chin wrote an article for the Global Research website predicting the events of past few days. “It gives the US government unprecedented new spying powers and sweeping new legal cover for spying that goes well beyond even the original FISA law - which itself was an abomination that already permitted the US president broad surveillance powers.”

PRISM was initially established under former US President George W. Bush in 2007. The program however has grown exponentially during Barack Obama's administration, just as other similar programs have including the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) which gives the government the power to arrest indefinitely American citizens to without habeas corpus for mere suspicions of ties to terrorism.

Michel Chossudovsky of Global Research says Obama “justifies the signing of the NDAA as a means to combating terrorism, as part of a counter-terrorism agenda. But in substance, any American opposed to the policies of the US government can - under the provisions of the NDAA - be labeled a “suspected terrorist” and arrested under military detention.”

Chossudovsky adds: “The signing of NDAA (HR 1540) into law is tantamount to the militarization of law enforcement, the repeal of the Posse Comitatus Act and the Inauguration in 2012 of Police State USA.”