The destructive power of state snooping is on display for all to see. The press must not yield to this intimidation

You've had your fun: now we want the stuff back. With these words the British government embarked on the most bizarre act of state censorship of the internet age. In a Guardian basement, officials from GCHQ gazed with satisfaction on a pile of mangled hard drives like so many book burners sent by the Spanish Inquisition. They were unmoved by the fact that copies of the drives were lodged round the globe. They wanted their symbolic auto-da-fe. Had the Guardian refused this ritual they said they would have obtained a search and destroy order from a compliant British court.

Two great forces are now in fierce but unresolved contention. The material revealed by Edward Snowden through the Guardian and the Washington Post is of a wholly different order from WikiLeaks and other recent whistle-blowing incidents. It indicates not just that the modern state is gathering, storing and processing for its own ends electronic communication from around the world; far more serious, it reveals that this power has so corrupted those wielding it as to put them beyond effective democratic control. It was not the scope of NSA surveillance that led to Snowden's defection. It was hearing his boss lie to Congress about it for hours on end.

The scariest explanation of all? That the NSA and GCHQ are just showing they don't want to be messed with.

Last Sunday, David Miranda was detained while changing planes at London Heathrow Airport by British authorities for nine hours under a controversial British law -- the maximum time allowable without making an arrest. There has been much made of the fact that he's the partner of Glenn Greenwald, the Guardian reporter whom Edward Snowden trusted with many of his NSA documents and the most prolific reporter of the surveillance abuses disclosed in those documents. There's less discussion of what I feel was the real reason for Miranda's detention. He was ferrying documents between Greenwald and Laura Poitras, a filmmaker and his co-reporter on Snowden and his information. These document were on several USB memory sticks he had with him. He had already carried documents from Greenwald in Rio de Janeiro to Poitras in Berlin, and was on his way back with different documents when he was detained.

The NSA's state surveillance programs are anti-democratic and unconstitutional. They could be the most serious attacks on free speech we've ever seen.

On Sunday, U.K. intelligence officers held Guardian journalist Glenn Greenwald's partner David Miranda for nine hours at Heathrow Airport, confiscating his laptop, phone and documents and even forcing him to reveal his passwords to online accounts.

And on Monday, we learned that the British intelligence unit GCHQ demanded that the Guardian return all of the data related to Edward Snowden's leaks. The agents stormed the Guardian's London headquarters--even though the NSA reporting is flowing from the paper's New York office--and oversaw the destruction of journalists' computers and hard drives.

These were not just overly aggressive police actions. They were political moves designed to intimidate journalists and silence dissent.

A coroner's report that found traces of narcotics in the remains of journalist Michael Hastings has helped frame the prevailing story of his death as a tragic, troubled-soul narrative.

He apparently had relapsed into drug use, and just hours before the muckraker was killed in a car crash in Los Angeles, a sibling had arrived to urge him into rehab.

But in the broadest post-mortem profile to date, Gene Maddaus writes in the LA Weekly that Hastings told a neighbor he feared that the rental Mercedes sedan he died in had been tampered with. Maddaus writes:

"One night in June, he came to (neighbor Jordanna) Thigpen's apartment after midnight and urgently asked to borrow her Volvo. He said he was afraid to drive his own car. She declined, telling him her car was having mechanical problems.

Chief of the International Human Rights Commission (IHRC) Muhammad Shahid Amin Khan stressed that the Syrian army doesn't use any chemical weapons in facing the terrorists, "but those who exploit the mottoes of democracy, freedom and human rights are the ones who use these weapons against all Syrians".

Khan told al-Mayadeen TV Channel on Friday that the Syrian government is well cooperating with the UN investigation mission on the use of chemical weapons, therefore an independent objective investigation based on clear evidence should be conducted.

He pointed out that the armed terrorist groups are using the chemical weapons against the Syrians and accuse the Syrian government, in cooperation with some media.

The Syrian government expressed readiness for dialogue in the interest of the Syrian people, but the opposition rejects dialogue and continues the killing of the Syrian people supported by some foreign countries, he asserted.

CBS News reports that the U.S. is finalizing plans for war against Syria - and positioning ships to launch cruise missiles against the Syrian government - based on the claim that the Syrian government used chemical weapons against its people.

The last time the U.S. blamed the Syrian government for a chemical weapons attack, that claim was was debunked.

But is the claim that the Syrian government used chemical weapons against its people true this time?

It's not surprising that Syria's close ally - Russia - is expressing doubt. Agence France-Presse (AFP) notes:

Russia, which has previously said it has proof of chemical weapons use by the rebels, expressed deep skepticism about the opposition's claims.

The foreign ministry said the timing of the allegations as UN inspectors began their work "makes us think that we are once again dealing with a premeditated provocation."

Syrian army soldiers have found chemical agents when they entered rebel tunnels in Damascus suburb of Jobar, Syrian TV reports, adding that some of them started suffocating. The US Navy's expanding its presence in the Mediterranean with a 4th cruise-missile armed warship. The move's a response to the escalating conflict in Syria.

Hundreds of videos showing apparent victims of a chemical weapons attack in Syria were uploaded to YouTube on August 20, a day before media reports say the attack actually happened, prompting Russia's Foreign Ministry spokesman to assert the incident was a "pre-planned" provocation staged by rebels.

As PBS reports, "At around 3 a.m. (on August 21st) , patients started streaming in from neighborhoods in suburban Damascus like Zamalka and Ain Terma," following the alleged chemical weapons attack.

However, a playlist of videos entitled 'Alleged Chemical Attack in Eastern Ghouta August 21st 2013' contains 159 videos - every one of which was uploaded to YouTube on August 20th.

While no one is denying that some kind of attack did indeed take place, the fact that hundreds of videos showing victims of the attack were uploaded to YouTube a day before the incident is supposed to have actually happened remains unexplained.

Outgoing deputy Mossad chief Yossi Cohen may be a brilliant spy but he has very little experience with the issues on the national security adviser's agenda, from the peace process to Iran.

It's not clear what Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had in mind with his perplexing appointment of outgoing deputy Mossad chief Yossi Cohen to the complex and sensitive post of national security adviser. Senior officials who have worked with Cohen in the last few years praised his human relations and organizational skills, but were puzzled by the appointment.

Cohen is an experienced intelligence officer and a gifted handler of agents, who was marked as a star early in his career. However, he spent most of his years at the clandestine organization in recruiting and managing agents. He is a brilliant spy and operations manager, but is not a strategist, a diplomat or an expert in foreign relations.

If there should happen to be an al-Qaeda attack in Calhoun County Alabama, Sheriff Larry Amerson will presumably know what to do. That is because he and a number of colleagues in law enforcement have received paid trips to Israel to learn how to deal with the terrorist threat.

The Washington-based Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA) sponsors a Law Enforcement Exchange Program "in order to learn how to better protect the U.S. communities from terrorist attacks." The program takes law enforcement officials from the United States and sends them to Israel for training in the "strategies and techniques perfected by Israeli law enforcement." Amerson, past president of the National Sheriff's Association, made his trip in 2012. Along the way, he reportedly benefited from a "greater understanding of the situation in Israel as it relates to terrorist threats." JINSA also hosts conferences in the U.S. where Israeli officers are brought over to brief American law enforcement officials.

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) is also involved in the effort to indoctrinate the U.S. law enforcement community. Its website's Homeland Security Monitor chronicles numerous meetings between Israeli intelligence and police officials and their U.S. counterparts, to include numerous trips to Israel to learn from the masters of the craft about various aspects of security, including controlling borders and airports. Even firemen have made the journey, presumably to learn how a fire in Israel differs from a fire in the United States.

Ironically, American law enforcement and emergency services are every bit as capable as those in Israel and really have nothing to learn. The difference in practice is that Israel uses extensive profiling to identify threats, which means Arabs are regularly stopped and questioned. Exposure to that dubious technique is often paid for by the U.S. taxpayer as much of the travel to Israel is funded by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which provides billions of dollars in training grants to cover the expenses. Marc Kahlberg of International Security Consulting offers a package that is called "Eye of the Storm." He promises "an exclusive learning tour into the heart of Hebron. You will have the opportunity to see first-hand how the police there are dealing with a daily volatile situation. You will feel the adrenalin, but be completely safe and will be the guests of the Israeli Police Commander." As Hebron is the largest Arab city on the West Bank with a population of 250,000 that against its will hosts an illegal Israeli settlement of 1,000 protected by the police and army, it promises to be an interesting experience.

It has been reported that when the United States was attacked on 9/11 Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was pleased because he understood that Washington and Tel Aviv would now be joined at the hip in their mutual response to what Israel has been defining as terrorism. When Netanyahu spoke before congress shortly afterwards he said "We are all targets" before engaging in a number of meetings instructing Washington regarding what must be done. Netanyahu's Israel succeeded beyond its wildest dreams, exploiting the incident to such an extent that the United States has adopted wholesale Israeli perceptions of Middle Eastern politics. As Scott McConnell has observed, there exists "a transmission belt, conveying Israeli ideas on how the United States should conduct itself in a contested and volatile part of the world. To a great extent, a receptive American political class now views the Middle East and their country's role in it through Israel's eyes."