Other Agencies Clamor For Data NSA Compiles

schwit1 writes "The National Security Agency's dominant role as the nation's spy warehouse has spurred frequent tensions and turf fights with other federal intelligence agencies that want to use its surveillance tools for their own investigations, officials say. Agencies working to curb drug trafficking, cyberattacks, money laundering, counterfeiting and even copyright infringement complain that their attempts to exploit the security agency's vast resources have often been turned down because their own investigations are not considered a high enough priority, current and former government officials say. Intelligence officials say they have been careful to limit the use ... for fear they could be misused in ways that violate Americans' privacy rights."

Comments

No Catfood

[hawkinspeter]

So, it has come to this.

Re:No Catfood

[Anonymous Coward]

I remember when paranoid fantasies were just fantasies.

Re:No Catfood

[jameshofo]

Surely they won't abuse it after this!

Re:No Catfood

[Culture20]

Of course! Political parties won't clamor for the data ever.

Re:No Catfood

[Anonymous Coward]

The scary part is that it turned out that the insane conspiracy nutjobs had a more realistic view of the world than you.

Re:No Catfood

[Anonymous Coward]

We would have been okay with being wrong.

Re:No Catfood

[Anonymous Coward]

What's next? Going to tell us the 9/11 attacks were a false flag op carried out by defense contractors as an excuse to get this party started?

No one at any three-letter agency or defense contracting agency would ever lie to US people.

Re:No Catfood

[SuperTechnoNerd]

I predicted we would arrive here from nearly the first time I got on the internet with my modem way back. Even back then, I knew this free, open, powerful network was too good to be true - and It will become a threat to a lot of people and organizations and governments. I was laughed at; told the sky is not falling and there is no need for tinfoil hats.. "Nobody cares what us geeks do!" I was told. My friend always chided me for reading slashdot. He called slashdot a web page full of chicken littles and I am way too paranoid.
Well, their not laughing any more..

Re: No Catfood

[Anonymous Coward]

Collect it and they will come.

Re:No Catfood

[Luckyo]

The scariest part is that most of "insane conspiracy nutjobs" thought the reality was better than it actually was.

Re:No Catfood

[Anonymous Coward]

What's next? Going to tell us the 9/11 attacks were a false flag op carried out by defense contractors as an excuse to get this party started?

The evidence would seem to suggest that's exactly what happened.

Fine

[Anonymous Coward]

Give them all the data they want, with the single condition that any and all wrongdoing found must be prosecuted. Part of me just wants to watch the chaos.

Re:Fine

[DarkOx]

Sort of a sheep guarding the hen house problem there don't you think? You really thing "internal affairs" is all that objective at any of these three letters?

Do the IA guys get the clearances to look at the information needed to do a truly effective audit of anyone working sensitive case?

Assuming you want more than IA, are you going to give the GAO guys all the clearances they need.

Tough to keep secrets when so many get access.

Re:Fine

[Anonymous Coward]

What about the wrongdoing of collecting that data and passing it on?

That deserves *at least* a lifetime of prison for at least 10000 people in there.

Re:Fine

[bfandreas]

If they do insist on gathering this data they should
a) make all gathered data available by request for each individual citizen
b) disclose who made use of that data and also discolse the reason for it

This level of transparency would be required to make this anywhere near OK. But their underhanded tactics they use make this very unlikely. They don't spy on US citizens(except by accident) but they do get data from the Brits who it turns out have the legal framework to spy on everyone. NSA financed the GCHQ site in Bude and has lots of staff "liaising" with the GCHQ. Which all is perfectly legal.

I wonder why there is no bigger outcry in the UK that the main selling point of the GCHQ to the NSA is the relatively lax legal framework in the UK. It is perfeclty legal, yes. But if questions have been asked about if the laws powering this festering dungheap are ok I have totally missed that. And I'm subscribed to The Guardian which would totally pick this one up.

It seems that the main discussion is happening in Germany and the US. While the biggest culprit, namely the GCHQ, has very little to fear. As always with these leaks, the US reputation isn't as damaged as everybody else's. And I totally buy into the NSA not sharing any data. But I do not buy that FISA courts are actually doing their jobs as this would require blind trust. How should I trust the integrity of secret courts? Their mere existence is a travesty in a democracy.

This is all so wrong on so many levels...

Alas, the geeks in the cubicles of the NSA/GCHQ propably don't even understand this outrage. And when you think about it, it is no mean technological feat. They managed to acquire lots of data, store it and search it. On a massive scale. That's cool and scary at the same time.

Re:Fine

[AHuxley]

yes dark its getting interesting http://rt.com/usa/probe-company-cleared-snowden-022/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Office_of_Personnel_Management
Re so many get access. - seems there was a real rush in the past 10 years.

Re:Fine

[Anonymous Coward]

The idiom is "fox guarding the henhouse." What the fuck is a sheep going to do to hens?

Re:Fine

[Anonymous Coward]

That was his point.

Re:Fine

[Anonymous Coward]

They don't spy on US citizens(except by accident) but they do get data from the Brits who it turns out have the legal framework to spy on everyone.

It is no more legal for a government to use a third party agent to violate fundamental rights than it is to do so directly. If this was not the case, any right could be violated, and hence there would be no rights. However, the Bill of Rights provides for the existence of rights, and is open-ended with respect to what rights exist. Hence, the assumption that the government could do this is shown to be invalid (proof by contradiction).

Also, as with any other employer, the government becomes liable for the actions of third party agents working on its behalf (law of agency).

IRS is next

[Coward Anonymous]

It's only natural.

Other Agencies Clamor For Data *That* NSA Compiles

[korbulon]

Otherwise it's just this:

http://xkcd.com/303/

2 points

[MrLogic17]

1) " for fear they could be misused in ways that violate Americans' privacy rights"
The act of spying & collecting this data didn't already pass this threashold?

2) Every government agency takes the permitted rules and pushes them to the limit & a bit beyond. In no time at all, the Smallville dog catcher's dept will have access to NSA data. "Think of the children - we need to know which houses have mean dogs, and which ones have small children! For their own good!"
This should be no surprise.

Re:2 points

[Anonymous Coward]

You got there first. I had the same thought. And now for even more Bread and Circus we have elevated "terrorist threats" which will be followed by reports how the Government has thwarted plots using this data so how can you ask us to stop now...think of the unborn children, for we do, and we want to watch what they do as they grow up. Guilty till proven...naaa, just guilty till arrested.

Re:2 points

[Anonymous Coward]

In spite of all the news, everybody I've worked with at the NSA has been very concerned about privacy and focused on preserving privacy, and generally unhappy about a legislative change that put drug trafficers in the list of people they were allowed to collect against, breaking that (to them) sacred bubble aroudn American citizens.

Re:2 points

[boorack]

So, they don't use this data to curb drug trafficking, money laundering, cyberattacks. And it turned out that only one terrorist plot was POSSIBLY curbed with all this giant spying operation. This is enough to convince me that governments, banksters and corporations around it are using this surveillance to keep themselves in power and control US population regardless of how much fraud and outright crimes will the government do. From the beginning this had nothing to do with safety of ordinary americans and has everything to do with protecting corrupt, criminal US elites from US population. They don't give a crap about our safety or well being - should they care, they wouldn't defund and dismantle local police and fire departments just to ensure their fellow banksters have bigger profits (thanks to bailouts). They built this monster for the same exact reason STASI built its apparatus. Everything this surveillance would do to benefit citizens is regarded as unnecessary cost and we know what corporate aparatchics and their government cronies do with such "excess costs".

Re:2 points

[richlv]

well, they do gain a minor credit for turning down "counterfeiting and even copyright infringement" requests :)

Re:2 points

[somersault]

Can't tell if troll, or you forgot to take your pills this month.

Re:2 points

[postbigbang]

As much as I'd like to see the bad guys punished and justice served, there is no justice when you run roughshod over half of the Bill of Rights. The NSA data, IMHO, was not theirs to take in the first place. The use of it by other agencies not only compounds the damages, perhaps exponentiating the damage, but also sets the precedent that we're not protected from the boorishness of illegal search.

Soon the shakedowns will start. The big campaign contributors, already in control of the legislatures, will help vicariously fund their own "blood" wars.

Summary: We agree. Mod parent up.

Re:2 points

[Rich0]

The act of spying & collecting this data didn't already pass this threshold?

While I tend to agree, I can at least commend the NSA for trying to limit the use of this data where there isn't an overriding purpose.

The problem is that once databases like these are compiled there will be constant pressure to expand their use. First national security letters are used to find out who is reading bomb-making books at the local library. Later national security letters are used to find out who is reading communist/cryptography/whatever books at the library.

The next problem is that these are secret databases whose existence isn't generally admitted to in the first place. How do these other agencies even know (prior to Snowden) that this data is out there to begin with? If they were obtaining data from these databases, how would we even find out about it?

Better to not collect this kind of data in the first place, unless it is in reaction to a specific threat (and if there is a specific threat, you should be able to obtain a warrant which makes it completely legal). When this kind of data is collected, it should only be used for the original intended purpose.

Re:2 points

[jameshofo]

How about, if it ever was misused in those ways, will we even know...oh right, that's number 1.

Re:2 points

[Anonymous Coward]

As a non-American I'm very much for this. The USA often get slammed for doing bad stuff, and some of the time they do. I think that the NSA operation should have been done with public insight for example. But overall I'm thankful to all that America has done and to this day does to make the world a better place for all of us.

Re:2 points

[Bradmont]

The "It hasn't actually caught any terrorists!" argument (also applied to the TSA), while tempting, is an error on the part of anti-spying advocates. This is a mistake for two reasons:

1. It puts the emphasis on the incidental situation, and not the actual violation of rights. So it makes it easy for the opposition to straw-man the civil liberties point of view, for example, that they're arguing based on a waste of money.
2. The technology may well advance to the point where it does work. If our argument is frequently presented as "it doesn't work," when that changes, the civil liberties cause will take a massive hit to its credibility.

So, it's better to stick to the real issue, which is that these programs are a violation of peoples rights.

Re:2 points

[Salgak1]

That's assuming the Government is SMART enough to claim threats "thwarted" due to the data. Consider the current "threat" that has caused extended closures of US Embassies overseas. For all we know, it COULD be 3-4 operatives generating massive "chatter" back and forth on a number of methods and media, forcing a reaction. And then, physically doing. . . nothing. Thus calling the usefullness of data acquired by these means into question. Which was the REAL attack, and it looks to be massively successful. . .

Re:2 points

[Anonymous Coward]

What is boils down to, can the data be stored "securely". Terrorist threats are one thing, but using the snooping data to chase after some 15 year old kid who might want to download the latest Black Sabbath CD via ISO for an example case in the civil courts is another.

One has to remember in the US, there is a very strong prison lobby. 48 out of 50 states in the US have signed an agreement to keep bed occupancy in private prisons at 90% or face fines by the hour.

Judges, DAs, and other elected officials also get elected or ejected depending on how many people are tossed in the cooler.

With this in mind, if a county DA was able to get ahold of this info, they can do mass arrests, be it cell phone logs of people at a park after dark for criminal trespass, logs of people suspected of a drug deal since they were in the same area when one went down (and that is good enough for arrest due to suspician), someone griping about a public official on a private call to a friend being run in for threats, or even something as stupid as a flash mob going to a place can be considered collusion or conspiracy (with felony charges.)

Then, there are always international treaties. Someone griping about a new mosque to a friend can be extradited to Saudi Arabia, Egypt, or Pakistan for blasphemy charges and have their head hacked off. Right now, Americans have not had the pleasure of being sent to another nation, but who is to say this isn't going to happen, especially now that the US is behind the barrel in the diplomatic arena?

Don't say it is "fruit of the poisoned tree" either. Judges in the US have to have a conviction ratio above a certain percentage or else they will be replaced by ones that do, so one can be not guilty, and still get convicted because the judge knows that it will cause him/her to lose their job.

Oh, don't give me the "if you didn't break any laws, you have nothing to worry about" line. It can take one TOS violation at some dumbass website that you didn't put in your correct name and address for someone to wind up facing Federal charges, or a mere mention of smoking marijuana can be evidence enough for a possession case.

The acid test will be if the NSA can keep their information bottled up, or if many Americans in the future wake up to the US version of the "knock on the door" for something long since forgotten about. However in the US, it won't be a knock on the door; it will be a door off the hinges, and either a 12 gauge or a .40 semi auto pointed at the head of the person and others at their family.

Re:2 points

[Anonymous Coward]

Wait! Did you ever walked on the wrong side of the road?
You know - on the left side whil right was required...

You did? OMG!!!! YOU ARE A TERRORIST!!!!!
Just wait a minute until we tracked you down.
And -naturally- your parents, rest of family, friends, co-workers, and everybody in your street and town..
They are obvioulsy guilty of everything we can make up...

Just relax while our arrest team breaks down your door and beat you up - and after that put you remains in prison!
For your own sake of course!
You know - "think about the children an that kind of stuff"

Now - I bet you feelings now are warm and cosy, and you realise you are very,very safe under our protection...

Re: 2 points

[Anonymous Coward]

I guess we shouldn't be surprised that the nsa would astroturf too...

Re:2 points

[SuricouRaven]

Or they just considered that if retroactive phone taps start appearing in drug trials, someone is eventually going to notice and start asking where this evidence is coming from.

Re:2 points

[Anonymous Coward]

So, they don't use this data to curb drug trafficking, money laundering, cyberattacks. And it turned out that only one terrorist plot was POSSIBLY curbed with all this giant spying operation. This is enough to convince me that governments, banksters and corporations around it are using this surveillance to keep themselves in power and control US population regardless of how much fraud and outright crimes will the government do. From the beginning this had nothing to do with safety of ordinary americans and has everything to do with protecting corrupt, criminal US elites from US population. They don't give a crap about our safety or well being - should they care, they wouldn't defund and dismantle local police and fire departments just to ensure their fellow banksters have bigger profits (thanks to bailouts). They built this monster for the same exact reason STASI built its apparatus. Everything this surveillance would do to benefit citizens is regarded as unnecessary cost and we know what corporate aparatchics and their government cronies do with such "excess costs".

I guess the premise of your answer just melted ;)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/05/dea-surveillance-cover-up_n_3706207.html

Next stop: IP / Copyright enforcement. Oh wait, you can ask Kim DotCom about how that went.

Turns out criminals aren't the only people who thinks doing it the illegal way is an easier way to get the job done / get rich.

Re:2 points

[Anonymous Coward]

EVERY time there is a NSA story, one of your COINTELPRO pieces of shit comes in here, and tries to *deliberately and actively* shift the discussion from "How can we stop those pieces of shit from spying on us" over "Is it good or bad?" (As if that was even in question!) to "Is it surprising? Yes or no?".

We know every single of your shit tricks by now. First you shift the topic to an unrelated and much milder "discussion", then you create a false dichotomy (= only two choices, when actually there are many... in this case all of which completely unrelated to the actual un-shifted discussion), and finally you mark one "side" as "bad" and the other as "good". So that people think they have an opinion, but actually have zero choice.

AIN'T GONNA WORK ANYMORE, ASSHAT!

Re:2 points

[click2005]

The copyright industry just weren't offering to pay enough for the data.

Re:2 points

[Anonymous Coward]

The "It hasn't actually caught any terrorists!" argument (also applied to the TSA), while tempting, is an error on the part of anti-spying advocates.

It does counter the vague claims of "Oh, this program stopped 50-200 of deadly, deadly terror plots. Think of how many children it must have saved!"

But you are right, it should be "In addition to being illegal, it also hasn't actually caught any terrorists"

Re:2 points

[somersault]

Yeah, because the paranoid non-sequitur rants are so incredibly useful.

Re:2 points

[cheekyjohnson]

That seems rather odd, given the NSA's actions (even before the drug trafficker nonsense). I think this is more of a case of people pretending they care about individual liberties.

Re:2 points

[nine-times]

1) " for fear they could be misused in ways that violate Americans' privacy rights" The act of spying & collecting this data didn't already pass this threashold?

Well I think it really illustrates something that the NSA believes that this data can't be provided to anyone else, because *then* it would be a violation of privacy. You know, like the ATF asks for access to the data, and the NSA goes, "Whoa, whoa, whoa. We can't let anyone see this information. It's private information on US citizens. Having access to a store of this information is a fourth amendment violation waiting to happen!" It kind of kills the argument that it's ok for the NSA to have it, unless you first assume that the NSA is some kind of special government agency that is allowed to violate the constitution.

Re:2 points

[93 Escort Wagon]

While I tend to agree, I can at least commend the NSA for trying to limit the use of this data where there isn't an overriding purpose.

1) we only have hearsay to attest to that. Since every part of this program is handled in secret, we have no idea exactly what purposes are being allowed.

2) Given past governmental behavior, at all levels from local to national, isn't it just a matter of time before congress passes new laws allowing new "targeted" accesses to this data for, say, copyright violations? After all, they're the ones who passed the laws allowing this program to happen in the first place.

Re:2 points

[Immerman]

I don't necessarily care about how honest the people in the offices are *today*. Ask yourself just how great is the potential for abuse, and just how appealing a target will that make for the corrupt? Whether they pursue the position for access to the power, or simply corrupt existing officials via bribes, blackmail, etc. doesn't matter - just imagine the success the "New Tyranny Party" could have with access to that kind of information about all their political rivals (how many politicians do you suppose *don't* have career-ending skeletons in their closet?), and continuous surveillance and elimination of anyone who might head a resistance movement, *before* that movement gets enough momentum to enter the popular consciousness.

Re:2 points

[Anonymous Coward]

What it boils down to is that the terrorists "won".
Our government and political system has created a atmosphere of fear and distrust, and now worked to have the citizens crying for protection from the "terrorists".
I am not saying that there are no terrorists, or elements that would like to see harm done to the U.S., but in the 12 years since 9-11-2001 how many truly devastating plans have been launched against the U.S.?

Re:2 points

[budgenator]

Or they just considered that if retroactive phone taps start appearing in drug trials, someone is eventually going to notice and start asking where this evidence is coming from.

"No Knock" warrants to "Preserve Evidence" has taken us quite a ways down that slippery slope already. Add to that how DNA databases are being worked, where a request for a certain profile is broadcast and the holder of a matching profile make themselves known so a search warrant can be sent; now it's easy to envision law enforcement send a near endless stream of requests for retro-active wire taps, and being able to get them. Up to now the NSA could always say whether or not we have than opperational capacity is classified, but Snowden blew that completely out of the water.

Re:2 points

[TheNastyInThePasty]

Officials have stated (although you never see this in the headlines) that the closures were not due to ANY NEW INTELLIGENCE COLLECTED. This is a pure scare tactic by the government in response to changing public opinion. Of course nothing will happen, or maybe something will. It's a win-win for the government either way because they can either claim to have stopped it and protected Americans or claim that we need more surveillance.

Re:2 points

[jittles]

The act of spying & collecting this data didn't already pass this threshold?

While I tend to agree, I can at least commend the NSA for trying to limit the use of this data where there isn't an overriding purpose.

I suspect the real reason they don not want to release this information to law enforcement agencies is to prevent it from being used in a court of law. It will be very difficult to raise the domestic spying issue as a violation of the 4th amendment if there is no one who can claim standing in a civil or criminal procedure. So I definitely think you misunderstand the NSA's motive in this.

Re:2 points

[Jason Levine]

Plus there's the "even a broken clock is right twice a day" situation. If you argue that the TSA is bad because they don't catch terrorists, what happens when they catch one? It's bound to happen eventually just due to pure luck (or incompetence on the part of the terrorist). If your only argument is "TSA is bad because they don't catch terrorists" your argument is severely weakened thanks to one lucky snag.

Re:2 points

[Rich0]

suspect the real reason they don not want to release this information to law enforcement agencies is to prevent it from being used in a court of law. It will be very difficult to raise the domestic spying issue as a violation of the 4th amendment if there is no one who can claim standing in a civil or criminal procedure. So I definitely think you misunderstand the NSA's motive in this.

Fair enough, but at least the constitution is providing us a little protection either way. Industries that police themselves usually are only doing so to prevent being subject to expensive regulation, but the end result is that at least some kind of policing is taking place.

Re: 2 points

[Anonymous Coward]

The US is not the only country closing embassies, the UK and France did also.

Re: 2 points

[Anonymous Coward]

Minor nitpick, please stop saying liberty when talking about surveillance. Freedom is a stretch, privacy is the word you're looking for.

Re: 2 points

[Anonymous Coward]

Not everyone thinks "spying" == "autobad"

The topic of collecting and analyzing information is so stupefyingly broad and enormous if you have no interest in debating it somewhere in the middle, your opinion is worthless.

- genuine opinion of random person on Internet

Re: 2 points

[Anonymous Coward]

So what? They also denied air travel of a head of a sovereign state by request of the US in an attempt to find Snowden.

Re: 2 points

[cheekyjohnson]

Freedom is not a stretch. I believe that, in many instances, privacy should be considered a fundamental right. Actually, the 4th amendment does, in a way, describe a right that the NSA violates; they don't have any probable cause to do any of this.

Re: 2 points

[TheNastyInThePasty]

Privacy has long been held to be essential to liberty. It is required for freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, etc. etc.

Re:2 points

[budgenator]

Well if anybody know what kind of assholes those other guys are, I suppose it would be the NSA because the seem to have the shit on everybody; I've heard they've been survailing Obama since before he was a Senator.

Re:2 points

[Anonymous Coward]

They couldn't possible pay enough for that data. The MAFIAA likes to think themselves big, but they don't have shit on the defense industry or even the tech industry.

Re: 2 points

[dryeo]

The Canadian Supreme Court has actually ruled that our equivalent of the 4th amendment is actually a right to privacy.

Who is being kept safe?

[Ckwop]

Right across the free world we're told this these giant databases are there to keep us safe.

The question is more who is being kept safe who. Is the purpose of these databases to protect me or protect the politicians? Is to protect me or big business? Is it to protect my right to process or restrict it?

In my own country, William Hague said that it was unthinkable that GCHQ would be operating outside of the law. The problem is I don't believe you!

Practically every time the government has secrecy it abuses that power to its own ends. This is just the nature of power held in secret with a lack of transparency. The entire span of human history shows that kind of power is hugely destructive.

The cure is worse than the disease here. Honestly, I'd rather have more terrorist attacks that having my privacy systematically shredded for the greater good. All terrorists can ever do is kill people. It takes a government to kill a society.

Re:Who is being kept safe?

[Totenglocke]

Who is being kept safe? Politicians and their thugs. That's who.

Re:Who is being kept safe?

[Thanshin]

Right across the free world we're told this these giant databases are there to keep us safe.

The question is more who is being kept safe

Sadly, your view is optimistic. It's not "who" that's being kept safe, but "what". And the answer is "Capital".

There has never been a working economic system that had the general populace as its priority. Capitalism is most certainly not an exception.

The simple truth is that the mentioned information has a large cost, and agencies (at least theoretically) oriented to the protection of the citizens are not a good investment.

Citizens are simply not valuable enough to spend the high cost of these surveillance tools in their protection.

Re:Who is being kept safe?

[Totenglocke]

Wow, that was one of the least intelligent comments I've read. So how does your "evil capitalist" theory work when you look at the domestic spying of China, North Korea, the USSR, etc?

Re:Who is being kept safe?

[Thanshin]

Who is being kept safe? Politicians and their thugs. That's who.

Politicians are puppets. Well paid puppets, but puppets after all.

Politicians are being watched too; probably even more than simple citizens. You wouldn't want your puppets to act under no surveillance.

Re:Who is being kept safe?

[Anonymous Coward]

What is protected is the power apparatus. In the USofA, it is the militaro-industrial complex. In China, it is the "communist" party. And so on.

Re:Who is being kept safe?

[Type44Q]

Practically every time the government has secrecy it abuses that power to its own ends.

Fortunately for the feudal aristocracy, the serfs tend to have very short attention spans...

Re:Who is being kept safe?

[Anonymous Coward]

The cure is worse than the disease here. Honestly, I'd rather have more terrorist attacks that having my privacy systematically shredded for the greater good. All terrorists can ever do is kill people. It takes a government to kill a society.

If the aim is to combat terrorism, then there is a certain cravenness to what the government is doing. Instead of meeting our foes on the field of battle and soundly defeating them there we attempt to pay them off, win their hearts and minds while striking at them with cowardly drone strikes, and put them on the same level as US citizens as far as privacy rights are concerned. Who among our enemies wouldn't hold the US in utter contempt?

Re:Who is being kept safe?

[AHuxley]

The establishment needs to be out in front of any issues with a new gov, the celebrities, press with sources, inventors with disruptive technology, arms dealers talking to the press, diplomatic blackmail (both sides), dissidents, protesters, disarmament/peace protesters near bases, police corruption stories, local elections, trade unions - anything and anyone that could get traction in the press.
Add in the classics - generational wealth protection, arms dealers who can keep "freedom fighters" in weapons and ammo at short notice long term.
Lawyers and bankers talking to the press eg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libor_scandal.

Re:Who is being kept safe?

[DexterIsADog]

I don't see how the GP's post contradicts the similar use of surveillance of civilian populations by more totalitarian regimes.

That Manichean worldview is not useful, because it sets up false choices.

Re:Who is being kept safe?

[AHuxley]

RE: What could China, North Korea, the USSR vs the NSA?
Float a few really good quality spy ships off the coast of the USA, UK?
Some great trackable satellites passing over the US/UK and friends?
Dedicate a few embassy floors to signals? Build a huge complex in Cuba to listen in?
The Soviets went for weak people in the US/UK in areas that where interesting or shaped liked minded peoples careers very long term.
East Germany tried to put young agents into West German firms hoping some might get to middle management much later in life...
They went for the press, academics, spies, scientists, engineers, mil and gov technicians.
Only the NSA/GCHQ had the power and vision to shape the worlds telecommunications standards long term to be NSA usable.
The West has other issues - drug for cash for freedom fighters to buy arms. The banks to ensure the cash flowed.
China seems happy just to buy and educate its way along with any help it can get from Russia, the USA.
What can the USA do if the signals intelligence ever stops again ;)
The Russians can return to typewriters. Can the CIA buy their way in again?

Re:Who is being kept safe?

[Anonymous Coward]

Insider trading is a great way to make money for "black ops" shit. Compared to growing a bunch of drugs underground. Do you not think the NSA has a whole department of day traders acting as private individuals making money off all the data they have?

Re:Who is being kept safe?

[Anonymous Coward]

The Russkies could stop being lazy fucks and build their own software and hardware.

Re:Who is being kept safe?

[Thanshin]

Do you not think the NSA has a whole department of day traders acting as private individuals making money off all the data they have?

OMG! Now I do! :)

Re:Other Agencies Clamor For Data *That* NSA Compi

[auric_dude]

One Compile To Rule Them and in the darkness bind them.

more than clamouring, apparently

[fche]

http://news.yahoo.com/exclusive-u-directs-agents-cover-program-used-investigate-091643729.html

Re:more than clamouring, apparently

[Rich0]

Not a surprise at all. This is the problem with the nation of a bazillion laws that we live in. Selective enforcement of laws that everybody violates can be used to easily justify any raid/seizure/etc.

Suppose a police vehicle uses listening equipment without a warrant to listen in on random houses to find evidence of drug manufacture. Any data they collect would be thrown out of court, as well as any follow-on evidence (fruit of the poisonous tree and all that). So, when the police find a home engaged in drug use using such methods they don't document it in any way.

They then setup surveillance of the home, completely off the books. They figure out when the drugs go in and out and all that. Maybe they just go up the chain for bigger fish and never bust the house. If they do want to bust the house, they send an officer down the street right when something is going on, and they happen to notice some suspicious behavior (could be a car parked more than 6" from the curb, grass that is too tall, whatever - with so many laws on the books you can ALWAYS find something to be an excuse for an investigation). When they knock on the door they happen to notice through the window something suspicious, so they act. The official story is that the police got lucky but everything that is presented to the court is legal.

Strange

[MTEK]

for fear they could be misused in ways that violate Americans' privacy rights.

But..but.. the people asking are professionally trained law enforcement officials. What's the problem?

Collecting it at all is a huge risk

[Anonymous Coward]

If it exits at all, it can be put to malicious uses as well as good ones.

There are some systems that are too dangerous to build, especially if they are founded on a lack of open consultation with the public and without a clear legal standing. It's playing with fire. Blanket "90-day warrants for everything" and secret courts are NOT adequate oversight for this stuff. They never were. And they want to expand the application of this stuff? The answer better be "no".

Ya think?

[Anonymous Coward]

"they could be misused in ways that violate Americans' privacy rights"

Really? This is the concern they have?

Let's hunt everybody!

[Anonymous Coward]

No wait, some people actually seem to enjoy "Americans' privacy rights". Does that apply to non-american citizens beeing spied upon too or is it just for govermental protection. gee.

so uh um

[Anonymous Coward]

WHO THE FUCK ARE THEY COLLECTING DATA FOR THEN?
NO REALLY
CAPS INTENDED
kjsdhfkjdsfkjshbdnf hwhafhsdfhdsfkjhdsfkjsdf
kkjjd hasdkjhas

hkaihsdh ashdkjasjsh
all this to be able to YELL AT THE USA

Problem is the data collection, not...

[Anonymous Coward]

...the other agencies.
When they have warrants, why shouldn't they be able to consult the data? As long as it solves crimes.

If you are massively collecting my data ANYHOW, why not using it to catch the thief of my phone?
Or some rapists.

Re:Problem is the data collection, not...

[Anonymous Coward]

Because you might be implicated and arrested for something you did not do.... Even if not convicted that can screw up your life...

So it starts with that the police tracks all people 2 steps away from a person that where murdered and then cross-references them against all phones that where in the area where it happened... And since someone claims to have heard you argue with the person sometime you are a suspect... So now they drag you in and have a hearing..

Example hearing:
Police: Where where on the 15'th?
You: I was at home sleeping.
Police: So you where not near StreetX?
You: No.
Police: Well, we have surveillance placing your phone in the area. Why are you lying?
-- And here the DA decided to prosecute you since they have sort of a motive, that you where in the area and that you lied when being questioned. ... What do you think the jury would think of you after hearing something like that being read into the protocol by an police?

The thing is.. Everyone lies... Wittingly or unwittingly ... From the above it might have been that you forgot your phone in the car while a friend had borrowed it or it might be that you where not sleeping but out having a beer and you forgot about it or mixed up the days.. Problem is that the damage is already done to you... Since you 'lied' you have lesser trust from the jury and you are much closer to being sentenced for something you did not do.

DEA already gets the data

[scorp1us]

The DEA is getting the data and then falsifying the source of the data. And not telling the court or anyone about it. To protect national security is one thing, but to conduct non-national security operations using the data seems to me to be a blatant violation of the constitution.

Re:DEA already gets the data

[Xest]

This doesn't surprise me. In the last decade we've had numerous stories of people's houses being raided or arrested or charged because of something they've said on Twitter and it's always made me a bit suspicious that these people got caught given they had only a handful of followers they knew closely.

Take the Doncaster airport guy in the UK who made a joke about blowing it up if the delays weren't sorted in 7 days or whatever - the chance of one of those few tens of people he had following him taking it seriously and reporting it to the police is probably about zero. In reality I suspect an NSA/GCHQ automated monitoring program picked it up and forwarded it to the police as a threat. The same goes for people who have flown to the US only to be investigated by border security for jokes they've made on Twitter - that shit doesn't just coincidentally get stumbled across in the pool of billions of tweets, it's being monitored and reported to all these agencies automatically, presumably through "anonymous tip off" - aka an NSA/GCHQ computer.

Re:DEA already gets the data

[bill_mcgonigle]

If we allow that the CIA is part of the national security apparatus, rather than a bunch of sociopaths who go around the world screwing everything up for narrow political and corporate interests, then the DEA is absolutely an essential part of the national security apparatus too, as it promotes the high prices that gets the CIA its off-books funding. See also the wrist-slap HSBC got for laundering trillions of dollars of drug money.

Oh, but Nancy Reagan said, "just say no", so none of that can be true. How gullible do they think we are?

Re:DEA already gets the data

[Charliemopps]

It's, but whats' worse is hiding the source of the info from the courts. It's indefensible, and completely unconstitutional. Watch for thousands of requests from defense attorneys to come rolling in now. A lot of people just got their get out of jail free cards.

Re:DEA already gets the data

[DexterIsADog]

I think it's more likely you've fallen victim to the phenomenon of unrealistic view of probabilities, like people who fear terrorism but drive like idiots, which is much more likely to kill them.

Imagine all the millions of asshats who use Twitter every day. They probably generate tens of thousands of tweets similar to the UK example you cited, but you don't read about tens of thousands of similar arrests every day, do you?

So, you think the odds are "probably about zero", so let's say *only* ten thousand asshat tweets are generated every day, and the chance that the twits' "only a handful of followers" took it seriously was one in ten thousand - viola, there's one per day.

No need to posit nefarious use of surveillance there. Train your sights on the more likely abuses - high profile criminal cases, "terror cell plots unmasked", and more importantly, usage of data to make the rich richer. That's where the problem actually lies.

Re:DEA already gets the data

[AHuxley]

The problem for the DEA is the CIA and US mil trains all of South America.
To avoid the Cubans, Russians. Nationalists leftists... all wanting to escape the bad national loans....
People know what a cell signal is, voice prints, calls made to the USA, tracking of everything entering US airspace...
Strange that it all works, the bank accounts stay open and shipments arrive... year after year after year, flight after flight, ship after ship... trucks... small subs...

Re:DEA already gets the data

[LF11]

Thank you for this link.

Re:DEA already gets the data

[nine-times]

To protect national security is one thing, but to conduct non-national security operations using the data seems to me to be a blatant violation of the constitution.

Except that part of the reason for the Bill of Rights is specifically to protect the citizens from having the government infringe on their rights for "national security" reasons. Saying it's for "national security" doesn't make it better, really.

What the founders feared, what the Bill of Rights was intended to be a protection against, was an oppressive government using its power to subdue people who opposed the government. So the First Amendment is not saying, "You have the freedom to express yourself artistically," so much as, "You have the freedom to speak out *against the government*." The Second Amendment is not saying, "You're allowed to have guns for hunting purposes," as much as, "You have the right to have military weapons *to protect yourself from the government*." And the 4th Amendment was not really focused on preventing overzealous police officers as much as it was about preventing the government from going after dissidents, rifling through their lives, looking for a pretext to arrest them.

It's really all about protecting people from the danger of a government using "national security" as a pretext for shutting down dissent. This NSA stuff is *exactly* what the founding fathers were worried about.

Re:DEA already gets the data

[sgt_doom]

Exactly, scorp1us, exactly, thus making a lie of this bullcrap post, unfortunately! This is simply more political theater of the absurd.

Missing Comma in Headline

[Anonymous Coward]

There needs to be a comma in the headline. It should be "Other Agencies Clamor For Data, NSA Compiles".

Irony

[Anonymous Coward]

Intelligence officials say they have been careful to limit the use ... for fear they could be misused in ways that violate Americans' privacy rights

The irony in this statement is just mindboggling.

Squirrel?

[craigminah]

I'm only here cuz I the article mentioned a squirrel.

First it's for national security, then it's revealed the DEA has it's own methods to spy on Americans sans warrant. The Constitution was put in place to limit the government...politicians can do whatever they want but they absolutely cannot decide not to comply with the Constitution. Don't they swear to uphold and defend it when they take office or are their fingers crossed?

Out of the mouth of the coolest Old Guy

[Anonymous Coward]

It's an interesting thing. When Coretta Scott King passed away recently they had a memorial where they refreshed people's minds about Martin Luther King, and the idea of non-violence. And now in America you're suddenly seeing war movies again on TV - they never showed war movies until recently - and how great it is to be patriotic. It's wrong. The day and age we live in now, it's all full of fear and frightening feelings. It's the opposite of Roosevelt saying, 'The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.' Now we're saying, 'Look out, this is going to happen.' We're being told: get frightened. This business of machoism is ridiculous. I'm not interested in that. search for truth and beauty in what I do.

Tony Bennet

It's a misuse all right

[arth1]

... for fear they could be misused in ways that violate Americans' privacy rights.

As opposed to misused in ways that doesn't violate Americans' privacy rights?

Irony?

[greg.allen.uk]

Previously they might have been loath to allow access to their systems as their very existence was not "public" knowledge. Thanks to leaks that is no longer a hindrance...

Re:Irony?

[spacepimp]

You are missing the larger point that this illegal practice was occurring prior to the Snowden leaks. It is only visible/under public scrutiny as a result of the public awareness. There is nothing ironic about ignorance/bliss.

Give them an inch

[msobkow]

The governments of the entire world need to unify and rise up against this illegal intrusion into the private lives of their citizens, which violates the Charter of Rights here in Canada and equivalent legislation around the globe. Contrary to their self-righteous beliefs, the US is not the world police.

Furthermore, we need to hold our own governments to task for allowing our intelligence agencies to use information collected by the US as a means of bypassing the rights legislation that is supposed to protect our own citizens. CSIS is complicit in this, relying on US feeds of intelligence that are based on this illegally collected data.

But give them an inch, and they have already taken a league.

Now the other "police" agencies want access to the information, again in clear violation of our civil rights.

This will not end on it's own. It will only end if the people of the world unite in condemnation of this illegal activity. It is not up to the US citizens alone to protest. We all have to.

Re:Give them an inch

[blackest_k]

your assuming that there are governments that are not actively taking part or have their own versions of the same thing.

Iceland maybe has a clean government any other suggestions?

Let's chant the mantra..

[RenHoek]

"We need to know who downloaded copies of 'The conjuring'. It's rated R, so imagine the horrors if a child were to download this! Do you hate children?!? THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!" -- RIAA

I'll beat the dead horse a bit here.

[intermodal]

The founding fathers didn't write the fourth amendment to protect us from intrusion in our personal information unless the agencies claimed they wouldn't abuse it.

They wrote the fourth amendment because they knew that if the power weren't prohibited, the information would be abused.

Al Qaeda scare an ad for NSA?

[Anonymous Coward]

Is the new Al Qaeda scare, U.S. still on edge in face of uncovered terror plot, just manipulation to scare people into accepting NSA and other "security" agencies doing anything they like?

Re:Al Qaeda scare an ad for NSA?

[Anonymous Coward]

Is the Pope Catholic?

Re:Al Qaeda scare an ad for NSA?

[TheNastyInThePasty]

I read in the Wallstreet Journal this morning (which my father-in-law reads) that "Washington Officials say this move is not an indication that there is new intelligence information that has been collected" Meaning: Yes, it absolutely is a manufactured scare tactic.

Re:Al Qaeda scare an ad for NSA?

[TheNastyInThePasty]

I should clarify that by "the move" in the above quote they mean the move to close 22 embassies in the middle east.

Re:Al Qaeda scare an ad for NSA?

[Anonymous Coward]

I should clarify that by "the move" in the above quote they mean the move to close 22 embassies in the middle east.

(anonymous to preserve mods)

Yeah, I wondered why that story never made it to slashdot frontpage. Not for-nerds enough, I suppose, but I digress.

I was particularly piqued by some Senator saying something like "we're seeing chatter much like before 9/11".

Meaning either (1) we were grotesquely overstepping our mandate even before that, and/or (2) we noticed something special prior to 9/11 but, well, didn't do enough about it.

Re:Al Qaeda scare an ad for NSA?

[TheNastyInThePasty]

I read the same thing and to me the fact that they are invoking 9/11 is just to instill greater fear throughout the populace. Remember V for Vendetta? The public opinion of the government begins to change so the government tries to remind the populace that it needs the government by planting scary news stories and invoking the St. Mary's virus. This is

THE

EXACT

SAME

THING

Re:Al Qaeda scare an ad for NSA?

[erikkemperman]

Sorry for totally offtopic, replying to own post... Could it be that posting anonymously does not in fact preserve mods, but just undoes them silently? Cause the posts I moderated show no sign of it now. I just assumed it would work because I see quite often lines like "anon to preserve mods".

Actually it's probably a good thing. A warning would be nice though, waste of perfectly good modpoints.

Re:Al Qaeda scare an ad for NSA?

[dgatwood]

Checking the "post anonymously" box results in the moderation going away silently. You have to completely log out.

Re:Al Qaeda scare an ad for NSA?

[erikkemperman]

That makes sense, I'll keep that in mind. Thanks!

Re:Al Qaeda scare an ad for NSA?

[Synerg1y]

In V they put black bags over people's heads and made them disappear, we've had Guantanamo for years. And... remember anthrax?

Re:Al Qaeda scare an ad for NSA?

[perceptual.cyclotron]

...and/or (2) we noticed something special prior to 9/11 but, well, didn't do enough about it.

They knew all sorts of things. They knew a plot would likely unfold soon, involving massive casualties. They'd been warned about strikes using airplanes, and that Jihadis were in the US, and that four were receiving flight training.

And precisely nothing was done. They didn't even warn the airlines.

One way or another, any weirdness surrounding 9/11 is dead and buried at this point. Whether random terrorism, domestic false flag, or some hybrid of the two (a Bush - Saudi - Bin Ladin 'understanding'), there is likely no remaining information that will ever be dislodged to 'resolve' the issue for anyone who remains unconvinced one way or another. What we do know, with absolute certainty, was that 9/11 was a godsend for US imperialism. Writing in 2000 on the subject of revitalizing the US military to put it back on a war footing, with a focus on a 'two-war capability' (i.e., the ability to fight two major wars simultaneously), the Project for the New American Century report Rebuilding America's Defenses notes that: (pp. 51)

... the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.

A range of high level members of the Bush administration were members or signatories of the PNAC.

So regardless of the extent to which (1) is true in the parent posting, (2) is definitely the case. And if you are willing to look for causality or intention in that stubborn inaction, you do not have to look far – though you should be prepared for an onslaught of "omg lolz conspiracy theory!" declamations to put closure on any honest discussion of the incentives, invested parties, and policy outcomes.

Re:Al Qaeda scare an ad for NSA?

[gmanterry]

...and/or (2) we noticed something special prior to 9/11 but, well, didn't do enough about it.

They knew all sorts of things. They knew a plot would likely unfold soon, involving massive casualties. They'd been warned about strikes using airplanes, and that Jihadis were in the US, and that four were receiving flight training.
  And might I mention the Boston Marathon bombings. The Russian told the U.S. the two brothers were terrorists and the U.S. let them blow the bombs anyway. You don't suppose this was another way to reinforce the position that security is far more important than that Old useless piece of paper that used to keep getting in the way of their power? I'm glad I'm old. I fought to defend this country and it's Constitution and now it seems no one cares that we have torn up that document and replaced it with secret courts and secret spying. This is not the country I was born into. I weep that the "Grand Experiment" is dying.

And precisely nothing was done. They didn't even warn the airlines.

One way or another, any weirdness surrounding 9/11 is dead and buried at this point. Whether random terrorism, domestic false flag, or some hybrid of the two (a Bush - Saudi - Bin Ladin 'understanding'), there is likely no remaining information that will ever be dislodged to 'resolve' the issue for anyone who remains unconvinced one way or another. What we do know, with absolute certainty, was that 9/11 was a godsend for US imperialism. Writing in 2000 on the subject of revitalizing the US military to put it back on a war footing, with a focus on a 'two-war capability' (i.e., the ability to fight two major wars simultaneously), the Project for the New American Century report Rebuilding America's Defenses notes that: (pp. 51)

... the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.

A range of high level members of the Bush administration were members or signatories of the PNAC.

So regardless of the extent to which (1) is true in the parent posting, (2) is definitely the case. And if you are willing to look for causality or intention in that stubborn inaction, you do not have to look far – though you should be prepared for an onslaught of "omg lolz conspiracy theory!" declamations to put closure on any honest discussion of the incentives, invested parties, and policy outcomes.

Re:Al Qaeda scare an ad for NSA?

[Anonymous Coward]

Probably not. He is however Roman.

Other Agencies GET Data NSA Compiles

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

And as we all knew would inevitably be the case, the DEA has been GETTING data from NSA intercepts and laundering it.

defend the constitution

[tekrat]

They heard it as "uphold and DEFUND the constitution".

Lied about Why

[CaptainOfSpray]

"careful to limit the use ... for fear they could be misused in ways that violate Americans' privacy rights."

Nonsense. The NSA restrict access for exactly the same reason as access to Ultra was restricted in Wrld War II. "If the enemy [the US public] knew we are reading their signals, they would take steps to prevent us continuing".

Yet another use

[Anonymous Coward]

seems to me that the FCC could use the data to track down all those calls from Rachel, and the calls to people without computers claiming that their computer has a virus.

Here we go

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe it's going to accelerate from now on onwards (or maybe it's still a tad too early for that).

When it comes around feel free to let out a “wheeeeee!” as all or much of the world plunges down the abyss. Keep an eye out for the spectacular falls of people “in power” (and their families etc.) and see if you can spot any sign of them realizing that they themselves built their Rube Goldberg suicide & murder machine :)

Data Driven Policy

[Anonymous Coward]

There are numerous potential uses for this data that go well beyond enforcement activities.

Development of public and social policy based on data (rather than idealogic blather) looks like an obvious benefit.

Why should a select group of No Such Agencies be the exclusive benefactors of data collected about Americans.

Why not 'anonomyze' and 'open source' the lot?

Cut to SS/Medicare, Pensions failing

[Anonymous Coward]

Spending instead on spy networks with little ROI (if any) for 'criminals caught' masking it as "anti-terrorist" when it is the terrorist itself used by those who are supposed to be 'better than' their actual criminal opponents. When those protecting rules/laws start acting like the crminals, operating on their own low ground, we have a problem. The potential for misuse is there, and always seems to happen, absolutely power corrupting absolutely. Enemies both foreign and domestic (question is who's the enemies? Regular US citizens getting fucked points to it along with Pension funds failing http://www.cnbc.com/id/100929269 with the domestic enemies being the 1%'ers ). Caught this today on Medicare and Social Security too http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0vP6fIzYho and it's disgusting.

Dude, you're old.

[Anonymous Coward]

Now to quote "Strange Days": It's not whether your paranoid, it's whether you're paranoid enough.

Hey shithead

[Anonymous Coward]

Former Governor speaks out vs. your troll crap http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZzWqV4S2RAI so I have to ask you: What's it like "being on the payroll" of the controller somerdouche?

Re:Hey shithead

[Anonymous Coward]

Jesse Ventura is about as credible as any other pro wrestler, i.e. not at all. I'd rather listen to Alex Jones, who is at least crazy and not stupid.

Told you so

[Anonymous Coward]

To all the people who weren't overly concerned about the NSA gather "mere" metadata, I said that any system that could be used would be.

Turns out I was wrong. It was already being abused.

Re:Told you so

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

No, I told you so first! >:-(

In the late 90s, they passed anti-terrorism permissive powers, swearing up and down they would only use it against terrorists. Then proceeded to immediately use it against drugs.

They didn't even bother with the sophistry that drugs are akin to terrorism. They just bald facedly said the law didn't specify terrorists only, tough shit.

Actually, I tell a lie. The Founding Fathers said, "I told you so!" over 200 years ago. They knew history and the value of an absolutist constitution to prevent the inevitable slide to dictatorship. Forbid building the tools of dictatorship to begin with.

Interagency Rivalry? Poppycock

[Notabadguy]

We at the NSA mock the idea of tension and turf-fights with our sister agencies. There is not, and never has been any rivalry between us and the other three letter entities, who by the way can keep their damned dirty ape paws off of our databases.

Re:Interagency Rivalry? Poppycock

[Anonymous Coward]

How could you fags have let a CIA mole like Snowden have access to your databases and methods?!

Saaaaaaayyy Whaaaaaatttt ? ? ?

[sgt_doom]

"Agencies working to curb drug trafficking, cyberattacks, money laundering, counterfeiting and even copyright infringement complain that their attempts to exploit the security agency's vast resources have often been turned down because their own investigations are not considered a high enough priority..."

Excooooose meeeee, but is everyone freaking ignorant about the reason behind the recent firing of the acting head of the IRS?

About eight days or less, prior to his termination, the IRS announced, at their very web site, the largest tax investigation in history to be undertaken by them, in conjunction with the UK and Australia, into the skulduggery at those offshore tax havens (a k a Offshore Financial Centers)!

He wasn't fired for any bullcrap political "non-profits" targeting which they scammed from an old IG internal report from a year or so back!

lol

[fazey]

I'm sure this wasn't just some bullshit to try and make Americans trust the NSA... "ohhh they are at least protecting our data from other agencies that want to farm it". No one is falling for it. Move along...

Anyone with any actual common sense

[ralphaostrander]

Would completely avoid the internet now. Even this has been recorded. Next government might not like me saying this and use this to come after me. You just never know what it might be even your political view.

Time to devastate you

[Anonymous Coward]

Ok, then explain what this guy says away (good luck) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MhYIpeFnjPc then I'll destroy you myself, with ease, since I understand THIS stuff, cold... go for it, troll.

Drug trafficking, terrorism and money laundering

[dgharmon]

"Agencies working to curb drug trafficking, cyberattacks, money laundering, counterfeiting and even copyright infringement complain that their attempts to exploit the security agency's vast resources have often been turned down because their own investigations are not considered a high enough priority"

I would suspect that anyone engaged in any of the above activities don't use the public Intertubes for communication. Besides which, where you do have such activity there's usually some nation state behind it. Yea, really, go look it up ...

Ironic: That's what Ventura calls government!

[Anonymous Coward]

That former wrestler even says politics are scripted just like wrestling which was why he left it. There are no 2 parties, no democrats or republicans. There is the wizard of oz behind the curtain living off your tax dollars and his stock market insider trading rigged investments (and at 1/2 the tax rate on those investments @ 17% to you being currently taxed @ 33.3% on your wageslave wages, that is, until they export out your job overseas since labor is the easiest cost to control since plant/property/equipment are on lease, not owned, allowing for such heinous quick mobility on their end). I'd listen to Alex Jones on some things. However, a lot less than Jesse Ventura. He's been inside the machine (and you saw what he thought of it). Jones, hasn't. The fiat money system backed by GDP. Great. Until you stop being a manufacturing power (which we aren't anymore & in fact have "rebuilt" competition by giving away our taxes for offshore competitors to build such infrastructure). What happens then? Inflation. How?? Take away folks disposable income from GOOD paying jobs (powers that be don't want that - costs, but is an overhead that's easily controlled by offshoring jobs). Problem being is that those folks "fold" on their debts (a dumb thing to get into, an illusion of ownership you don't really have, only on loan from banks). That means prices go up on money too. Now, smaller businesses die. That forces their suppliers to raise prices. This continues all through the economic foodchain. What's the illegal FED do? Print more FIAT monopoly money (which has lost 98% of its purchasing power vs. the time when it was based on Gold/Silver). Then they *tried* bundling pension funds (contruction men and others in hedge funds + derivatives) and selling them to other financial institutions around the planet. How many of those are defaulted or currently doing so? See here http://www.nbcnews.com/business/pandemic-pension-woes-plaguing-nation-6C10825512?ocid=msnhp&pos=1 very recently/current news. This is the price of Keynsian economics. This is the price of poor leadership that don't understand this. Why? Smart men who are aware of all of this, aren't allowed in offices of political power. The ones put there? Financed by the wealthy. Try buy TV or radio time enough to run for big offices. Good luck. That's THE cutoff measure in that. The main one. Let's see: Former governor + Navy Seal vs. somersault. Who do you pay attention to? Not you, troll on the payroll.

Noise

[hicksw]

How can we poison the well? Is there a non-defeatable way to spoof enough false metadata to make the fedgov harvesting a broken exercise?

If they cannot trust their own data theft or "probable cause" can be denied, we might have a short-term win.

Can we DDOS the spies?
--
then I went back to sleep and had the same nightmare again