Slashdot Mirror
Interview with National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell
Schneier is reporting that Mike McConnell, U.S. National Intelligence Director, recently gave an interesting interview to the El Paso Times. "I don't think he's ever been so candid before. For example, he admitted that the nation's telcos assisted the NSA in their massive eavesdropping efforts. We already knew this, of course, but the government has steadfastly maintained that either confirming or denying this would compromise national security."
Dupe.
It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
Be yourself no matter what they say
Last week, he also said that, if the US Congress debates spy laws, "some Americans are going to die".
Here's a quote from the interview with El Paso Times:
Q. So you're saying that the reporting and the debate in Congress means that some Americans are going to die?A. That's what I mean. Because we have made it so public. We used to do these things very differently, but for whatever reason, you know, it's a democratic process and sunshine's a good thing.
What's this guy smoking? Or maybe it is a threat to the members of congress à la the film, Enemy of the State.
Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
[This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]
"U.S. National Intelligence" -- Hmm, isn't that like an oxymoron?
You know, I'm really glad we have these government agencies so eager to set up this net and catch information exclusively about terrorist activities overseas that threaten our interests. The problem is they do not seem to understand (or want to) the implications of their actions.
Setting up a tap into the wires that carry ANY American's communication without some sort of check on their power to thwart abuse is unacceptable. As in, 'in direct violation of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America.' They have to put some kind of oversight in place and it can't be Albert Gonzales. It has to be judicial branch.
They could have amended the FISA law to remain legal (ie, concordant with the Constitution), but instead they passed a law that does indeed violate the Constitution. And that's pretty scary, that these agencies and our President and our Congress are not sensitive to protecting the law.
There's some strong arguments against the whole program. Slashdot covered the issue of 'well what if someone hacks the tap?' and that's a big problem. There's huge potential for abuse of power, as well. And there's always the prospect of the erosion of trust within a society which leads to totalitarian-style culture. There's enough doubt about the value of this thing that it should be forced through the courts.
There's still no evidence having the exact specifications of a pending attack on the USA would enable our government to do anything to prevent it. On September 11, 2001 attacks happened despite sufficient warning. They lacked the will to properly defend the country then. Now is no different.
-HobophobE
Nothing laughs forever.
You have a few factual problems with your statement. Fist, the FISA court (not courts seeing how there is only one) hasn't told Bush this was illegal. The only court to do so had their ruling over turned and that isn't getting into the fact of accusations of conflict in interest that could have influence the overturned ruling.
Now the judges of the secrete "FISA court" have expressed their outrage but none of them have put it into a ruling or anything legal. I also don't see this as anyone with their backs against the wall. It is just another round of going on the offense. Unfortunately, for this administration, it seems like that is something new so I can understand your misinterpreting it.
Well, the real reason is that OBL went way over his satphone minutes. Too many text messages. He was real pissed at Cingular (and his son). The whole monitoring thing was just an elaborate way for him to get out of his bill.
Yeah? Well I think you're overrated too.