Slashdot Mirror


Former NSA Chief Warns Hackers Will Attack US If Snowden Is Captured

Okian Warrior writes "The Guardian is reporting Michael Hayden speculating that hackers and transparency groups are likely to respond with cyber-terror attacks if the United States government apprehends whistleblower Edward Snowden. Hayden called the potential attackers 'Nihilists, anarchists, activists, Lulzsec, Anonymous, twentysomethings who haven't talked to the opposite sex in five or six years.'"

413 comments

  1. Old Married people? by ka9dgx · · Score: 5, Funny

    What do old married persons (people who haven't talked to the opposite sex in years), have to do with this?

    1. Re:Old Married people? by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 1

      They don't fit the profile of cyber attackers. Too much to lose.

    2. Re:Old Married people? by Galaga88 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Wife: My husband hasn't spoken to me in years.
      Husband: I know you don't like me to interrupt you.

    3. Re:Old Married people? by Notabadguy · · Score: 5, Funny

      The joke is on Mr. Hayden. Calling upstairs for your mom to bring you dinner totally counts as talking to members of the opposite sex.

    4. Re:Old Married people? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

      They don't. Michael Hayden is just a fucking prick. Not that that is any surprise to anyone who has every worked with the piece of shit.

    5. Re:Old Married people? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Too much to lose.

      Don't you mean "Too much, too loose"? :)

    6. Re:Old Married people? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about gay people too? Has the NSA done something specifically to upset gay people then?

      Oh right, nevermind, he's saying that if you're not a red blooded sex crazed straight middle aged patriotic kind of person then you're obviously an evil terrorist-hacker.

      This is why old people shouldn't be allowed to say things in public. It's as bad as my 90 year old grandma who still calls her local newsagents "the Paki shop".

    7. Re:Old Married people? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kegels

    8. Re:Old Married people? by interkin3tic · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You have to give him credit: it's a brilliant play. Insult script kiddies who see themselves as cyber activists, to get them to do their worst if and when the US arrests snowden for the crime of defending the constitution. When they finally do get him, they'll be able to shift the news story to the "cyberattacks" rather than "We've heard screams coming from the holding cell where Snowden is being held. Can you tell us you are not torturing him for exposing your crimes?"

      That the "cyberattacks" will be the equivalent of someone spraying "Fuck U!" on a billboard for the NSA won't matter. Citizens will get the message that the NSA is your first and only defense against an unholy cabal of virgin"cyberterrorists" who would hack your toaster to murder your spouse and are probably gay or something, child pornography rapists who will come for your kids, and Edward Snowden who evidently murdered US troops or something.

      In order to keep defending you against such evil people, they're going to need you to install a camera in your living room, and you'll need a license to go on the internet on your state-approved computer.

      (I'll admit I got carried away with this hyperbole...)

    9. Re:Old Married people? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most importantly, that guy is ugly and fat. Definitely the last person on the planet who can make fun of anyone else's relationship with the opposite sex.

    10. Re:Old Married people? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nononono, he's talking about GAY hackers. You know, the ones who deface your website with pink unicorns (http://fredericiana.com/media/wp/2009/12/github-fail-unicorn.JPG).

    11. Re:Old Married people? by kefalonia · · Score: 1

      Old married people, too much to lose? Depends how old!

    12. Re: Old Married people? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Old married people can be hackers to you know....

      Oh wait I guess this NSA chief forgets Zimmerman

    13. Re: Old Married people? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Old hackers know something that young hackers don't....

      We hack alone and dont need a unit so don't piss us off.

      Now I'm just going to use the excuse, I'm old and married I couldn't have hacked your system, I'm too old to hack anything.

    14. Re:Old Married people? by alexgieg · · Score: 1

      Insult script kiddies who see themselves as cyber activists, to get them to do their worst

      Wait. Do you mean that 'Nihilists, anarchists, activists, Lulzsec, Anonymous, twentysomethings who haven't talked to the opposite sex in five or six years' is an insult?

      --
      Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
    15. Re: Old Married people? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This says everything
      http://youtu.be/P9EbAZdb7hQ

    16. Re:Old Married people? by quacking+duck · · Score: 1

      Hyperbole? Hardly.

      At least Hayden didn't go overboard like Canada's then-public safety minister, Conservative Vic Toews, who actually did claim that online surveillance opponents supported child pornographers. That caused a very severe backlash from his own party's supporters, some of whom were against the legislation as much as the "liberals" were, if for different reasons.

    17. Re: Old Married people? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      unfortunately this is not true anymore, a group of hackers specialize on one particular area, each member is responsible for protecting and attacking a certain point. New hackers compartmentalize, it can make the attack stronger and harder to trace. there are still those that do it the old way of one man hacker but it is more common for a group of like minded individuals to launch an attack.

    18. Re:Old Married people? by perceptual.cyclotron · · Score: 1

      Yup. Under the current administration, Canada is in some ways worse than the States with respect to domestic policy – it's just that the world is emphatically not watching, because – hey – it's Canada. Who cares?

      Environmental charities are officially enemies of the state, budget watchdogs have to file freedom of information requests with their own money to get the information their mandates require, environmental protection and first nations rights have been gutted at the documented request of petroleum lobbies, it is now illegal to cover your face at a protest, activism of any kind is being branded as terrorism, and tens of millions of dollars are spent on blatant openly-reviled propaganda, while poverty is a growing problem.

      Canada's a mess.

    19. Re:Old Married people? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Carried away? Didn't look like it to me.

    20. Re:Old Married people? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, it's an insult. It's the truth. But it's also an insult.

    21. Re:Old Married people? by lgw · · Score: 1

      Each and every thing you warn of makes it sound like utopia to me! But it won't work; I'm not falling for it; I know Canada isn't the dreamland you make it out to be.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    22. Re:Old Married people? by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 1

      If they're very old, they can't afford to waste what little time they have left hacking.

    23. Re:Old Married people? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not very carried away, the TSA checkpoints in shopping malls is just the beginning.

      We've seen how this works demonstrated before. It was also spelled out by Sinclair Lewis in "It Can't Happen Here".

    24. Re:Old Married people? by rosencreuz · · Score: 1

      His statement shows how they underestimate the opposition and in the same time how concerned they are. Otherwise why to talk about bunch of nerds if they were not coming after government and military, right? I'm waiting for the time when one of those kids will bring them on their knees. Doesn't matter what happens afterwards...

    25. Re:Old Married people? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (I'll admit I got carried away with this hyperbole...)

      There was a time when this would be considered hyperbole. Now, there is very little that would surprise me.

  2. Nihilists? by Galaga88 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Nihilists! Fuck me. I mean, say what you like about the tenets of National Socialism, Dude, at least it's an ethos.

    1. Re:Nihilists? by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 2

      at least they don't work on Shabbas.

      (and, shut the fuck up, donnie)

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    2. Re:Nihilists? by CodeHog · · Score: 4, Funny

      Dude, the rug ties the room together.

      --
      Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life, son.
    3. Re: Nihilists? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Vee vant zee money, Lebowski!

    4. Re: Nihilists? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shomer Shabbos!....shomer fuckin' shabbos.....

    5. Re:Nihilists? by intermodal · · Score: 1

      Hey, careful, man, there's a beverage here!

      --
      In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
    6. Re:Nihilists? by noh8rz10 · · Score: 2

      at least they don't work on Shabbas.

      (and, shut the fuck up, donnie)

      beating a dead horse, they don't bowl on shabbas. this isn't nam! there are rules!

    7. Re:Nihilists? by DogPhilosopher · · Score: 1

      Today they mount a cyber-terror attack, tomorrow they come back and cut off your Johnson.

      You fink zey are kidding, making with ze funny stuff!?

    8. Re:Nihilists? by denvergeek · · Score: 1

      I am the walrus?

    9. Re:Nihilists? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Walter, what is the point? Look, we all know who is at fault here, what the fuck are you talking about? "
      -- The Dude

    10. Re:Nihilists? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ve don't care! Give us the Snowden or ve cut off your Chonson!

    11. Re:Nihilists? by Mordok-DestroyerOfWo · · Score: 1

      I want to sincerely thank you all for making my damned day so early in the morning. Now to explain to my cube-mates why I'm stifling laughter.

      --
      "Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right" - Salvor Hardin
    12. Re:Nihilists? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why wouldn't an nihilist work on Shabbos?

    13. Re:Nihilists? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's no rug. It's critical infrastructure.

      Get with the fricking DHS program, man.

    14. Re:Nihilists? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Okay. The old man told me to take any rug in the house.

    15. Re:Nihilists? by Mike+Frett · · Score: 1

      Shut the f*ck up Donny!

    16. Re: Nihilists? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LeBUFski

    17. Re:Nihilists? by lazy_nihilist · · Score: 1

      Too lazy to have an ethos.

  3. He's too kind... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Twentysomethings who don't recognize the opposite sex.

    1. Re:He's too kind... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Twentysomethings who don't recognize the opposite sex.

      /.ers

    2. Re:He's too kind... by Noughmad · · Score: 1, Redundant

      Hey! I'm twentysomething, and I definitely recognize when people on the opposite side of the hallway have sex, you insensitive clod!

      --
      PlusFive Slashdot reader for Android. Can post comments.
    3. Re:He's too kind... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you sure it's not just swing dancing? We were damn sure that there was some wild sex going on with our neighbors, and it turns out that they were just swing dancing. Ruined all our fun because that shit was loud when they were banging around the apartment and we'd come up with some pretty awesome scenarios.

    4. Re:He's too kind... by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      You know why Baptists don't have sex standing up don't you? It's because it might be mistaken for dancing.

    5. Re:He's too kind... by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 1

      We were damn sure that there was some wild sex going on with our neighbors, and it turns out that they were just swing dancing

      And you believed that story?

  4. Meanwhile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    This claim was made by a fossilised old fart who hasn't managed to get a rise out of his dick for thirty years and has decided to take it out on everyone else who isn't having a problem satisfying themselves and their partners sexually.

    If Hayden hadn't been spending the last 20 years trying to fuck over the entire country en-masse, he'd still be able to get a hard-on for normal sexual thoughts about individual people.

    1. Re:Meanwhile by TheNastyInThePasty · · Score: 4, Funny

      Can we get a +1 BURN?

      --
      The best thing about UDP jokes is I don't care if you get them or not
    2. Re:Meanwhile by TWiTfan · · Score: 1

      He's a former NSA officer. Even in his youth, his cum was made of black dust.

      --
      The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
    3. Re:Meanwhile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hahahahahaha! hi-5

    4. Re:Meanwhile by interkin3tic · · Score: 3, Funny

      I'd rather we didn't stoop to his level, but if insults about sexuality are what will win or lose the fight against government surveillance, sure. I've heard things about certain NSA chiefs who torture dogs while masturbating. I don't believe those rumors personally, but I'm just saying, Hayden has yet to say publically he DOESN'T fuck puppies to death.

    5. Re:Meanwhile by interkin3tic · · Score: 4, Funny

      The above post was a lie. I was lying. I'm going to spend the next few years vacationing now in some place that doesn't have the internet, so you probably won't hear from me.

      All praise the NSA, benevolent defenders of freedom.

      Sincerely,
      Little Girl

    6. Re:Meanwhile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those were the ashes of the constitution.

    7. Re:Meanwhile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...I've heard things about certain NSA chiefs who torture dogs while masturbating.

      How, by making them watch?

    8. Re: Meanwhile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Watch your old fart comments. An old fart maybe your only hope of savior from this hypocrisy

  5. Out of touch with reality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    In other news: crotchety old man demands kids get off his damn lawn.

    1. Re:Out of touch with reality by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      "old man shouts at (network) cloud"

      #include "oldmansimpson.png"

      no news here. just the keep-alive of "please be afraid, citizen!".

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    2. Re:Out of touch with reality by Grey+Geezer · · Score: 4, Funny

      As a crotchety old man I resent that! It is quite possible to be concerned about threats to the 4th admendment and still want kids to stay off of the lawn.

      --
      The USA is only 4X older than me...perspective
    3. Re:Out of touch with reality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Your compiler might toss an error or two at having a PNG file dumped into the middle of your sources.

    4. Re:Out of touch with reality by datavirtue · · Score: 0

      In some way I think that old men shouting at people to get off their lawn is actually a cry for attention. "(dont) GET OFF MY LAWN!!"

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
  6. Hours of ad hominem fun. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Mod Hayden -1 Troll.

    1. Re:Hours of ad hominem fun. by niftydude · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The NSA narrative has always been the same: give us more money so that we can protect you against a large unspecified threat.

      As a former NSA chief this is ingrained behavior for him, and so Hayden will keep spouting that line long after he's past the point of senility.

      --
      You can never know everything, and part of what you do know will always be wrong. Perhaps even the most important part.
    2. Re:Hours of ad hominem fun. by tibit · · Score: 1

      Can't but agree. You'd have thought that intelligence work would require one to at least be aware of how to form a rational argument. This includes one's awareness of fallacies common in rhetorics... Well, maybe he thought an explicit use of a fallacy will somehow bolster his argument with the dumb populace. Who knows, maybe it even worked.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    3. Re:Hours of ad hominem fun. by Belladora · · Score: 0

      ...so Hayden will keep spouting that line long after he's past the point of senility.

      It sounds as if already is past the point

    4. Re:Hours of ad hominem fun. by kilfarsnar · · Score: 1

      Can't but agree. You'd have thought that intelligence work would require one to at least be aware of how to form a rational argument. This includes one's awareness of fallacies common in rhetorics... Well, maybe he thought an explicit use of a fallacy will somehow bolster his argument with the dumb populace. Who knows, maybe it even worked.

      His statement was designed to scare people, and for that reason does not have to be a rational argument.

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    5. Re:Hours of ad hominem fun. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a former NSA chief this is ingrained behavior for him, and so Hayden will keep spouting that line long after he's past the point of senility.

      Is there a reason for using future tense here? It's a hiring qualification.

      Now Hayden seems to be of the opinion that being fucked silly is a working alternative, but I think the effect is not permanent.

  7. In other words, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    people who give a greater damn about the Constitution than the current government.

    1. Re:In other words, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Smug nerds who give a greater damn about the fashionable parts of the Constitution, such as the second amendment, and look at you like you are crazy when you mention the others

      FTFY

    2. Re:In other words, by Kurast · · Score: 1

      In this day and age, the mighty United States of America has been reduced to feeling "terror" from "twentysomethings who haven't talked to the opposite sex in five or six years."

      Wasn't that a standup joke 20 years ago?

      So, it has come to this.

    3. Re:In other words, by Mitreya · · Score: 2

      the mighty United States of America has been reduced to feeling "terror" from "twentysomethings who haven't talked to the opposite sex in five or six years."

      At least twentysomethings are a lot scarier than (possible) 3oz+ bottles. Just observed two very serious TSA agents gather around a non-standard bottle with foreign lettering and discussing in detail whether it does or does not exceed the 3oz allowance. They may have been looking for a translator, as I left security.

    4. Re:In other words, by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Smug nerds who give a greater damn about the fashionable parts of the Constitution, such as the second amendment, and look at you like you are crazy when you mention the others

      FTFY

      This just in: different people tend to care more about the stuff that they feel is important. Film at eleven.

      --
      I am not a crackpot.
    5. Re:In other words, by operagost · · Score: 1

      Nihilists and anarchists? As much as I like to bash these politicians... not likely.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    6. Re:In other words, by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      twentysomethings who haven't talked to the opposite sex in five or six years

      Sounds like a fitting description of 72-virgins-horny Arab terrorists, doesn't it?

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    7. Re:In other words, by operagost · · Score: 1

      It was probably a joke on Letterman 20 years ago-- and last week.

      When is that schmuck going to retire, anyway?

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    8. Re:In other words, by intermodal · · Score: 1

      It sure was nice back when we had a constitution.

      --
      In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
    9. Re:In other words, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I'm just trying to illustrate that you've got a group of people out there who make demands, whose demands may not be satisfiable, may not be rational, from other points of view, may not be the kinds of things that government can accommodate," Hayden said.

      I think we heard that line aplenty before some brave souls pointed out that in fact, yes, the government CAN accommodate dark skinned people a little better than indentured slaves.

      Hayden was just pretending to have a brain fart moment, but he was deliberately provocative, admitted as such, and we all fall for it and show our true "outraged" colours to make it easier for the TLAs to hunt us down. Well down, sir, fine job.

    10. Re:In other words, by nucrash · · Score: 1

      Last I heard, the Dark Tangent had a wife. In fact, I met her just this weekend, in the flesh even. I am pretty sure there were a lot of presenters at Defcon who had wives and/or children younger than the age of five. Oh, but here's the best part. There were children at Defcon. They were hacking. They were proficient as well. I didn't win the Edward Snowden look-a-like competition though. :/

      --
      Place something witty here
    11. Re:In other words, by timeOday · · Score: 1
      "Twentysomethings who haven't talked to the opposite sex in five or six years" is an equally good over-generalization of a few groups we think of as being separate:
      • soldiers
      • radicals (including Muslim radicals)
      • basement dwellers

      Certainly the latter group is the most innocuous.

    12. Re:In other words, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's been my experience that those who defend the second amendment know about and defend the others as equally important, while those who tout the first amendment as prime usually don't know what the others are or why they exist.

    13. Re:In other words, by jellomizer · · Score: 0

      Yes those hackers care so much about the Constitution that they immediately judge him innocent, and skip the jury of his peers thing, if this justice does happen, they will then attack more or less randomly at any target they feel like attacking to make a point.

      Not actually like using their freedom of speech to say publicly protest peacefully. But just using something rather minor as a reason to go all crazy and damaging infrastructure.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    14. Re:In other words, by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      Nah, it wasn't a joke. 20 years ago nerds got laid a lot more because there was much less obesity problem.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    15. Re:In other words, by BonThomme · · Score: 1

      you need more experience

    16. Re:In other words, by runeghost · · Score: 2

      Oh, we still have one, we're just not bothering to put any effort into following it. (Although lots of effort gets put into avoiding the bits of it that people in power dislike.) The Constitution, for all the nigh-divine reverence it gets, it just a piece of paper with a set of rules on what the people who wrote it thought was a good way to run a government. When the people running the country are no longer interested in good government, then the Constitution is irrelevant, no matter whether it is ignored or twisted into a semantic pretzel.

    17. Re:In other words, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      According to the law, he IS innocent, UNLESS proven guilty.

      But you don't wait for that, do you, you immediately skip jury and decide he's guilty, it's only a matter of time before he's found out.

      Did you know that killing Saddam Hussein WAS ILLEGAL in Saddam's Iraq? True story.

    18. Re:In other words, by runeghost · · Score: 1

      Yeah, they should go to their government-Designated Free Speech Zones, so that they can be identified and put on the No Fly List. (I'd add that they'd also be spied on, but the government is already doing that to everyone.

    19. Re:In other words, by intermodal · · Score: 4, Insightful

      When the constitution is the only authorization those people have, it is entirely relevant when they lose interest in following it. It's not merely advice or rules. It's the documentation of what was ratified by the states authorizing their authority. When that falls by the wayside, so does the legitimacy of their authority.

      --
      In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
    20. Re:In other words, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, the lesson for would-be 20-someting terrorists is obviously: put small AP-bombs in funny looking bottles? (I mean, if some terrorist does kill or maim a half-dozen TSA agents, is the general public going to care, beyond quietly going, "do it again"?)

    21. Re:In other words, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean you are a little seargeant trying to support the fat old guys's stupid propositions. When was the last time you did something useful, such as fucking your favourite whore, soldier ?

      Do something kind to humanity, visit her !

    22. Re:In other words, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Peaceful protesting has always been about, if not damaging, then at least hindering infrastructure.
      NSA is actually causing death of people. A bunch of script kiddies defacing or making a government homepage unavailable for a day or two is hardly violent.

      Also, censorship has never had anything to do with people ability to speak. The government doesn't care what you say. What they want to limit is what you hear.
      The point of free speech zones isn't to make sure that the protesters doesn't bother anyone who doesn't want to be bothered, the point is that their thoughts shouldn't spread to someone who haven't already heard them.

    23. Re:In other words, by hazah · · Score: 2

      It's been my experience, sitting in my mother's basement, pounding my fists on the table and muttering to myself about teh eevil lib'ruls and teh eevil gummint, that those who defend the second amendment ...uh, what was I talking about again?

      FTFY.

      You paint everyone with the same brush... My mother's basement happens to be a fully developed apartment complete with a whole back yard. Perfect for my wife and son to live in. And I only sound like that after about 8 beers... you know when the chance of me being taken seriously is nil. On the other hand, I do concider the constitution, as a whole, to be far more valuable than your government. And I'm not even american. Your attitude betrays you. You use the freedom you have to undermine those who wish you to have it in the first place. You're a douchebag.

    24. Re:In other words, by Conspiracy_Of_Doves · · Score: 1

      I was thinking the 4th Amendment.

    25. Re:In other words, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I find his statement fairly accurate. I'd die to protect your right to say what you want. But my will you start screaming about first amendment rights when I tell you to shut up about wanting to ban guns.

      And no, telling you to shut up isn't an infringement of your first amendment rights, an infringement would be if the police made you shut up.

    26. Re:In other words, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Twentysomethings who haven't talked to the opposite sex in five or six years" is an equally good over-generalization of a few groups we think of as being separate:

      • soldiers
      • radicals (including Muslim radicals)
      • basement dwellers

      Certainly the latter group is the most innocuous.

      Or maybe the least. Unlike the other two, they don't have to be physically present in order to cause massive destruction.

    27. Re:In other words, by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      Pre-fucking-cisely.

      If the federal government cannot or will not recognize the authority of the document that gives them their power, then they effectively have no power, and we, the People, have a duty to ourselves to refuse to recognize their false authority.

      Yes, children, it really is that simple. Read and understand your goddamn Constitution, it's all right there in plain (old) English.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    28. Re:In other words, by Shatrat · · Score: 1

      Isn't picking and choosing which parts of the constitution to support the reason we dislike the NSA so much in the first place?

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    29. Re:In other words, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To be fair, we all know he actually did at least something he'd be tried for because he's admitted it. In the sense of of the letter of the law, he's not adjudged guilty until the trial, but he certainly did give out classified material that it is very illegal to give out. Sure, perhaps there is some legal strategy that will get him off the hook (if he's ever brought to trial), but it would not be wrong to assert that he's a perpetrator and we believe he should be considered guilty based on the laws he broke.

      Since there is no doubt about what he actually did, having to hold off discussing what he is guilty of really doesn't need to wait.

    30. Re:In other words, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, pretty much everyone?

    31. Re:In other words, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (I'd add that they'd also be spied on, but the government is already doing that to everyone)

      >spying intensifies

    32. Re:In other words, by rk · · Score: 1

      "Anarchy is the sure consequence of tyranny; for no power that is not limited by laws can ever be protected by them." - John Milton

    33. Re:In other words, by VortexCortex · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Isn't picking and choosing which parts of the constitution to support the reason we dislike the NSA so much in the first place?

      No, it's the opposite. Picking and choosing which parts of the constitution to ignore is the reason the NSA is disliked. Additionally: I have limited resources as an individual, so I put my limited time and money into advocating the things I think are important. If many do so, then all bases are covered. Requiring me to "support" all views equally would spread me so thin as to be ineffective at any advocacy.

      Note that even though I do not rally in support of the 2nd amendment, I do not ignore it and think it is important. I think the 2nd needs to be reformed to become "The right to bear technology" such that our freedoms extend to 3D printers and all other technology including encryption systems (which are nearly considered munitions anyway). That means a new amendment... That new amendment would expand the 2nd, it's the one I would support.

      Perhaps with such a right to bear technology uncorrupted would have prevented the government from removing mandatory encryption from IPv6... Thus PRISM would be moot, making less likely the need to exercise our 2nd amendment rights to uphold the constitution.

      The point is: You've got it all wrong, mate.

    34. Re:In other words, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes those hackers care so much about the Constitution that they immediately judge him innocent, and skip the jury of his peers thing, if this justice does happen, they will then attack more or less randomly at any target they feel like attacking to make a point.

      Not actually like using their freedom of speech to say publicly protest peacefully. But just using something rather minor as a reason to go all crazy and damaging infrastructure.

      Sending messages from your computer isn't peaceful? And you think Snowden would receive a fair trial, just like Manning? You sir have a warped definition of "peaceful" and "peers" - if this were the 19th century, you'd be denouncing how the Underground Railroad disrupted infrastructure and implicitly declared its passengers to be innocent.

    35. Re:In other words, by tolkienfan · · Score: 1

      ...

      FTFY

  8. Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    'Nihilists, anarchists, activists, Lulzsec, Anonymous, twentysomethings who haven't talked to the opposite sex in five or six years.'

    Well, at least that excludes Slashdot. Slashdot is filled with thirtysomethings who haven't talked to the opposite sex in fifteen or sixteen years.

    1. Re:Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll have you know I'll be forty in a few months, you insensitive clod.

    2. Re:Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm 50 and I talked to my wife this morning..

    3. Re:Slashdot by Noughmad · · Score: 1

      He also forgot Methodists.

      --
      PlusFive Slashdot reader for Android. Can post comments.
    4. Re:Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Too bad, this means we will not profit from the obvious counter measure, namely providing those people with members of the opposite sex to talk to ;-)

    5. Re:Slashdot by Svenia · · Score: 1

      What about posters that are female but don't announce it? I suppose I mean to ask if you mean talk in the verbal sense or in a more general 'communicate' sense.

    6. Re:Slashdot by hazah · · Score: 1

      Why do you call yourself a pig?

    7. Re:Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now we know, you've announced it.

      captcha: trophy

    8. Re:Slashdot by Svenia · · Score: 2

      You can assume all day, for all you know I'm a cat on my owner's keyboard typing severely lucky random chains of key-presses.

    9. Re:Slashdot by Svenia · · Score: 1

      Why shouldn't I? People come up with all kinds of odd screen names and aren't asked for explanations regularly. I happen to think pigs are kind of interesting, in a vague 'I can't think up a screen name' kind of sense.

    10. Re:Slashdot by hazah · · Score: 1

      Was just curious... It made me chuckle. Wasn't a judgment call. Personally, i'd go for "parasyonok". But that's just me.

    11. Re:Slashdot by airdweller · · Score: 1

      RED ALERT! RED ALERT! Russian hackers with bad grammar detected!!! Grammar Nazis report to your stations immediately!!!

  9. In advance of possible cyber attacks, by Howitzer86 · · Score: 5, Funny

    US citizens are advised to flee the planet.

    1. Re:In advance of possible cyber attacks, by girlintraining · · Score: 5, Insightful

      US citizens are advised to flee the planet.

      In other news, US citizens will be punished either by the government for the actions of other citizens, or by other countries' citizens for the actions of the government. However, in no way and at no time, should this reflect that the government is in any way wrong. Meanwhile, police everywhere would like to remind women that if they were raped, it must be because of how they were dressed. "Lady Liberty was asking for it! She was showing leg."

      -_- My point is that if the government is concerned that its actions may be inviting wide-spread reprisals, they ought to be asking whether or not those actions have public support. Afterall, isn't this supposed to be a democracy? When most of your citizens are saying "Dude, you fucked up," it might be time to, I don't know... hold a meeting at least?

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    2. Re:In advance of possible cyber attacks, by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      When most of your citizens are saying "Dude, you fucked up," it might be time to, I don't know... hold a meeting at least?

      They do. It's called congress. They talk about what they're going to do about those goddamned uppity plebes.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:In advance of possible cyber attacks, by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      "Democracy" is why we're in this problem. You are seeing the difference between democracy and freedom highlighted quite starkly.

      We are, first and foremost, a free country that uses democracy to make government decisions. "Democracy" is not supposed to have carte blanche to respond to the panicked, transient political winds abused for millenia by politicans.

      Would that people learn from this.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    4. Re:In advance of possible cyber attacks, by runeghost · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, the U.S. is damn well not a democracy any more. Democracy doesn't mean, "going to vote every 2 or 4 years", although the so-called, "Republican" and "Democratic" branches of the Establishment Party would certainly like you to think that it does. Democracy requires (among other things) an informed electorate, a free press, and a government that is both accountable and responsive to its citizens. The U.S. does not have these things. It is not the public that panics in response to "political winds", it is the establishment that uses major events as excuses to do what they wanted to accomplish anyway.

    5. Re:In advance of possible cyber attacks, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Meanwhile, police everywhere would like to remind women that if they were raped, it must be because of how they were dressed.

      Well, the most important question will, of course, be whether the rapist talked to them. If so, he's no danger. Otherwise he may be a cyberterrorist. :-)

    6. Re:In advance of possible cyber attacks, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, the U.S. is damn well not a democracy any more. Democracy doesn't mean, "going to vote every 2 or 4 years", although the so-called, "Republican" and "Democratic" branches of the Establishment Party would certainly like you to think that it does. Democracy requires (among other things) an informed electorate, a free press, and a government that is both accountable and responsive to its citizens. The U.S. does not have these things. It is not the public that panics in response to "political winds", it is the establishment that uses major events as excuses to do what they wanted to accomplish anyway.

      You're an idiot! The US was NEVER a democracy... The US was initially established as a Representative Republic... I know that whole voting for elected officials is confusing but... Anyway, it isn't even a Republic anymore now, it is an Oligarchy. (That means a few people actually run everything.) If you doubt this, then I challenge you to examine the House which is run by Republicans... Has the house actually accomplished ANYTHING in the past 3 years under Republican leadership? The simple truth is that the President is a puppet executing the instructions of the Oligarchy... Which, if you haven't been paying attention, is using the full weight of the government to enhance their control of the people.

      Side not, all democracies devolve into dictatorships... The reason is that the masses always vote for the person who promises to give them the most stuff... Even if that stuff is obtained by taking it from someone else... Ultimately, the people elect a dictatorship. The founders of the US knew this and constructed a very limited Federal Govt comprised of elected officials who "in theory" would work for the common good. But all that has happened is that instead of voting for one grand "Santa Clause" we get a whole bunch of politicians who are promising bread and circuses.

    7. Re:In advance of possible cyber attacks, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry to burst your bubble, but the United States has never been a Democracy, it is a REPUBLIC. There's a bit of a difference there. In a Democracy the majority gets to have their way, in a Republic everyone lives by the same rules. The call for "Democracy" is a propaganda ploy to convince the majority of the uneducated masses that somehow they're in control and can have their way. Your comment above illustrates how deeply ingrained the Propaganda view of "Democracy" has twisted our thinking. I mean no disrespect and certainly think you're correct about some things, so don't take this wrong, but the wolves can take Democracy and shove it up their ass, I'll keep my Republic thank you very much.

    8. Re:In advance of possible cyber attacks, by irbishop · · Score: 0

      The US is not a democracy, it is a republic. We vote for people to represent us and our needs so we can go about our merry little lives without having to spend every day deciding on laws, bills, etc. The problem comes that the people we, the people, voted to represent us are actually more interested in representing themselves. We, the uninformed electorate, need to vote out those we put in power and replace them with representatives who actually care about the citizens of the United States and our constitution, or we, the uninformed electorate, need to accept representatives like Diane Feinstein are in congress for 20+ years because the majority of our nation believe destroying the constitution is the best thing for our nation.

    9. Re:In advance of possible cyber attacks, by tnk1 · · Score: 1

      Nope. What you're talking about is a "functional, useful democracy". All a democracy has to do is allow people to make decisions. There's no need for education, free press, or any of that. It doesn't have to be awesome in order to count. In other words, No True Scotsman is not valid here either. You're confusing democracy with democratic "best practices".

      As for accountability, technically we can vote in anyone we want at election time. It's just that we won't. Sure the politicians are pulling strings, but they didn't create those strings, those are created by our beliefs, greed, and situations. Just like any King, we all have individual self-interests and we want the government to be manipulated to achieve those goals. The situation then becomes how those blocs of individuals align and how politicians learn to find the big issues to talk about while having free reign over anything below that level of attention.

    10. Re:In advance of possible cyber attacks, by chihowa · · Score: 4, Informative

      The US was NEVER a democracy... The US was initially established as a Representative Republic...

      This is such a lame argument and it needs to stop being made. Democracy just means, "rule by the people". A representative republic is a form of democracy, as is a direct democracy. Saying that a country is a democracy is making the distinction that the government represents the will of the people, as opposed to an aristocracy (represents the will of a small ruling class), monarchy (represents the will of one person), a plutocracy (represents the will of the wealthy), etc.

      The entire basis of the United States is that the government must represent the will of the people, so the US is a democracy (in theory).

      I mean, read the dictionary before calling other people idiots:

      democracy (d-mkr-s)
      n. Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives.
      n. A political or social unit that has such a government.
      n. The common people, considered as the primary source of political power.

      Can we please never see this argument again?

      --
      If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
    11. Re:In advance of possible cyber attacks, by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      "Lady Liberty was asking for it! She was showing leg."

      That was only some ankle at it is still in a shoe. It could have been worse though.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    12. Re:In advance of possible cyber attacks, by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      No, the U.S. is damn well not a democracy any more.

      The U.S. was never a democracy. It is a Republic, but not a democracy.

    13. Re:In advance of possible cyber attacks, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The reason that you keep hearing it is because you are not listening. There is a difference, and it is not subtle. This site has a good explanation of the difference (very short version: democracy = majority rules).

      http://www.diffen.com/difference/Democracy_vs_Republic

  10. Activists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    So, 'activists' is a negative word now too?

    1. Re:Activists by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 1

      Hasn't it always been?

    2. Re:Activists by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      Yes it is.
      So are words such as Capitalist, Right leaning, Left leaning, Moderate, Corporate, Not for profit, Conformists...

      If you are an Activist, you could be active in a positive way, or a negative way. If you are breaking into computers to make a point, you are doing it a negative way. It is akin to the same thinking as people who have riots when something they don't like happends. Where they spend most of their time say stealing TV's then actually protesting the problem.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    3. Re:Activists by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 1

      Were the founding fathers responding negatively when they had the Boston tea party?

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    4. Re:Activists by pla · · Score: 1

      So, 'activists' is a negative word now too?

      The "activist" label suggests you don't like the status quo.

      Why would any Good Citizen object to paying a third of their income to kill Arabs, pay farmers to burn wheat, fund TLAs with no real oversight to spy on us all, or make sure Octomom can still collect welfare as long as she only makes $118.9k per year?

      Clearly, activists hate America. All you damned hippies should just move to Russia already.


      / I wish I didn't need this disclaimer, but I actually hear shit like that all too often. So: The above counts as sarcasm.

    5. Re:Activists by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      Yes they were.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    6. Re:Activists by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      Were the founding fathers responding negatively when they had the Boston tea party?

      Not to mention how they responded to the British attempts at disarming Lexington and Concord...

      Worked out pretty well for us, in the end.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  11. Did anyone... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even look at that guy's face in TFA?

    1. Re:Did anyone... by X0563511 · · Score: 0

      Let's see how you look at 68 years of age... assuming you manage to live that long!

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
  12. Kettle, pot by qbast · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That's from guy who instead of talking to person of opposite sex would tap her phone, read her journal and search her underwear drawer?

    1. Re:Kettle, pot by tibit · · Score: 1

      Well, YES! I wish a journalist would use that line in a press conference with that guy.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    2. Re:Kettle, pot by Prikolist · · Score: 1

      And then kidnap... err, arrest her, ship off to Gitmo, and torture her to his heart's delight.

      --
      I think Linux isn't better than Windows hence in the slashdot realm I'm a troll
    3. Re:Kettle, pot by pla · · Score: 1

      Dear Mr. Hayden:

      Edward Snowden hit that .

      Enjoy your senescence.

    4. Re:Kettle, pot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's your point? Hayden can hit whores too. He just needs to pay a little more money.

    5. Re:Kettle, pot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL! Journalists given press passes are vetted so they don't ask questions like that.

    6. Re:Kettle, pot by qbast · · Score: 1

      Courtship, CIA boss edition: kidnap random girl, brutally rape her then be very offended when someone calls it rape instead of 'enhanced sex technique'. Oh and keep her in basement for years after that.

  13. In other words, by orlanz · · Score: 5, Funny

    In this day and age, the mighty United States of America has been reduced to feeling "terror" from "twentysomethings who haven't talked to the opposite sex in five or six years."

    Wasn't that a standup joke 20 years ago?

  14. Twentysomethings who haven't... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    This country is terribly plagued with such a reprehrensible menace. The only solution is to mandate a free girlfriend to every twentysomething, to avoid their fall into tyranny and hackery. It will be a burden for us all, but I think we on Slashdot can manage.

    1. Re:Twentysomethings who haven't... by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 1

      Didn't work for Snowden. He had a girlfriend. But then again he didn't do any cyber attacks.

    2. Re:Twentysomethings who haven't... by Svenia · · Score: 1

      I'm curious as to how this would work, would it be on a volunteer based system with lots of speed dating, a lottery raffle to forced courtship or more of a russian bride type situation?

    3. Re:Twentysomethings who haven't... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'd love to have a mandated girlfriend. That way my wife would have less objections.

    4. Re:Twentysomethings who haven't... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm here for the gang bang.

  15. As opposed to what Hayden and his ilk are by tekrat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Which are fascist, traitorous, nationalistic power-fetishists who only view the opposite sex as tools or sex toys. Power in D.C. attracts a lot of arm-candy and those people get used to that very quickly.

    --
    If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
    1. Re:As opposed to what Hayden and his ilk are by ftldelay · · Score: 1

      +1 I couldn't have said it any better if I wanted to!

    2. Re:As opposed to what Hayden and his ilk are by classiclantern · · Score: 1

      He forgot to say, Citizens, Voters, Taxpayers, and My Boss.

      --
      Now that I said that, I fell better.
  16. Same Brush Syndrome by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I like how he lumps "activists" in together with Lulzsec and Anonymous.

    Within a couple of years, the US media will be using "activist" as a synonym for "terrorist".

    Sadly, most Americans will go right along with this.

    --
    Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    1. Re:Same Brush Syndrome by Kurast · · Score: 5, Informative

      I like how he lumps "activists" in together with Lulzsec and Anonymous.

      Within a couple of years, the US media will be using "activist" as a synonym for "terrorist".

      Sadly, most Americans will go right along with this.

      Fox News does that already.

    2. Re:Same Brush Syndrome by operagost · · Score: 0

      No, they don't. But the US government likes to call the Tea Party terrorist... and they're activists, too.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    3. Re:Same Brush Syndrome by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 3, Interesting

      > Within a couple of years, the US media will be using "activist" as a synonym for "terrorist".

      I am hoping and praying that it gets revealed that the NSA was feeding the FBI information as part of the nationwide crackdown on Occupy protesters. It's bad enough the FBI was involved but if the NSA can be proven to have directly fucked with a political movement like that, then the all pretense of defending against terrorism will be gone.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    4. Re:Same Brush Syndrome by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      You honestly didn't see that coming? We lost the hacker vs cracker argument, and we'll soon lose the activist vs terrorist one too.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    5. Re:Same Brush Syndrome by nucrash · · Score: 1

      I am not seeing your point.

      --
      Place something witty here
    6. Re:Same Brush Syndrome by odigity · · Score: 5, Informative

      Here in New Hampshire, home of the Free State Project (http://freestateproject.org), that's already happening. We're about to go have a protest next week in Concord against the city PD requesting what is essentially a tank. In the reasons stated on the form they filled out to apply for the DHS grant, they specifically reference "Free Staters" and "Occupy" as potential threats they're worried about -- as justification for getting a fucking TANK.

      http://freekeene.com/2013/07/29/concord-pd-requests-a-bearcat-to-deal-with-sovereign-citizens-free-staters-and-occupy-new-hampshire/

    7. Re:Same Brush Syndrome by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      "Welcome to thuh club!" -- Anarchists and nihilists

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    8. Re:Same Brush Syndrome by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 1

      I am not seeing your point.

      I think he was just citing another example . . .

      --
      I am not a crackpot.
    9. Re:Same Brush Syndrome by trewornan · · Score: 1

      "all pretense of defending against terrorism will be gone" How dumb can you be? Don't you know the Occupy movement ARE terrorists. Try to keep up!

    10. Re:Same Brush Syndrome by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      No, I wasn't especially surprised--in fact, I was alluding to hacker/cracker.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    11. Re:Same Brush Syndrome by HeckRuler · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Forget the old boogymen of terrorists and nihilists. Those are classic punching bags. The sort that everyone hates and everyone can get on board with hating. Don't like them? They're a terrorist! That's how it goes. Lumping activists in there is only a slight deviation from the typical script. It's effective when talking to republicans while democrats have a kinder view of the label. (Although, hell, the teapartiers have started to turn those tables)

      And forget the low-brow insult to twenty-somethings. Sure, it's uncouth and he's punching below the belt. He's specifically doing it to antagonize. He WANTS it to happen. He wants to poke that bear so he can have a raging bear to justify his bear-repellant.

      Forget all that. No, this is worse. Catch this part:

      "But certainly Mr Snowden has created quite a stir among those folks who are very committed to transparency and global transparency and the global web, kind of ungoverned and free. And I don't know that there's a logic between trying to [punish] America or American institutions for his arrest, but I hold out the possibility. I can sit here and imagine circumstances and scenarios, but they're nothing more than imaginative."

      He's specifically calling out TRANSPARENCY GROUPS. And he's kinda sorta maybe suggesting the possibility that they'll go "punish America". He can't actually tell us why that would happen but oh he's imagining it. It's like a wet dream where all of his illegal deeds throughout his life become justified and he's worshipped as a hero for stopping "those evil transparency groups". It's one where he doesn't go to sleep at night worrying that he'll be fired, tried, and thrown in prison for violating the law.

      That's what you have to focus on here. The man is in FEAR of transparency. This is a sign of a bad man.

    12. Re:Same Brush Syndrome by Svenia · · Score: 1

      Fleshy carbon bags protesting in city streets? I can't think of a more effective tool than a tank for this situation. Nothing else will suffice, not tear gas nor riot shields NOTHING.

    13. Re:Same Brush Syndrome by Inanna-qui-baille · · Score: 1

      That is already the case in Canada, specifically concerning the "carré rouge" crowd in Quebec but also in a more general way toward the environmentalists in particular.

    14. Re:Same Brush Syndrome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think Anonymous has WMD, I'm actually sure about it.

    15. Re:Same Brush Syndrome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Within a couple of years, the US media will be using "activist" as a synonym for "terrorist"."

      Unless you're with Occupy, or some other group they feel extends their cause or shares their same beliefs or supports their candidates. Then you're allowed to continue to be an activist and be given hundreds of hours of great publicity to boot while your failings get swept under the rug and marginalized.

      Remember, it's all about politics and cash in the end, whether the players like to admit it or not.

    16. Re:Same Brush Syndrome by kilfarsnar · · Score: 1

      "all pretense of defending against terrorism will be gone" How dumb can you be? Don't you know the Occupy movement ARE terrorists. Try to keep up!

      Exactly. The government decides who is a terrorist. Then the news media trumpet it and the people internalize and believe it. How many suspect that Brian Williams is pumping bullshit into their living room every evening? He's so charming and has such gravitas!

      The folks in power know how this works. It has been explained in the past. They know the common people don't want war. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along. And dragged along they are, because the idea that much of what is reported in the news is spinmeister bullshit is too high a hurdle for most people to get over. So Michael Hayden can run his game and people will be properly concerned about the people it is proper to be concerned about.

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    17. Re:Same Brush Syndrome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, they don't. But the US government likes to call the Tea Party terrorist... and they're activists, too.

      This site is comprised of a bunch of communists... It is hopeless to enlighten then to the simple truth that a small government is in their best interest. Unfortunately, that is the cycle of things... Small govt -> big govt -> dictatorship -> revolution -> small govt... If only these idiots would understand that keeping the govt small would save a LOT of lives... But they all want their Obama Phone and they don't care who the govt steals the money from or who is killed to have their "free" stuff.

    18. Re:Same Brush Syndrome by TheGreatMcCluck · · Score: 1

      Ha! And this after they came up with this little gem: socialism = communism = faschism = hitlerism = naziism = OMG they have Universal Healthcare in Canada Stephen Harper is the next Hitler!

      Seriously though, something should be done about Harper.

    19. Re:Same Brush Syndrome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What if we all find out that war is, and always has been, the most successful method of population control? I'm all for all people being 100% transparent in all matters, but I'm also prepared for the effect of the truth about things that I don't normally think about. Releasing small amounts of info may be the best idea. Dumping everything on us at once might cause to much insanity, then the zombies.

    20. Re:Same Brush Syndrome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Show it a$$, I think you mean CNN and everyone else douchie.

    21. Re:Same Brush Syndrome by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1
      I believe the correct phrase you are looking for is:

      Ugly bags of mostly water

      --
      Time to offend someone
    22. Re:Same Brush Syndrome by HeckRuler · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, are you actually suggesting that there can be a thing as too much truth too fast? To the extent that it would... what? Cause a war and/or zombies?

      Now, I understand the problem with selective truth. If you have person X and person Y and you air all the dirty laundry of person X, it doesn't mean that person Y is all roses and rainbows. He'll look a lot better than person X and he'll benefit from the exposure, albeit unfairly.

      But as far as "dumping everything" what the well would you call the massive dump that Manning released? The afghan war logs, , and the the diplomatic cables were a pretty massive load of the wrongdoing of the USA. If being caught red handed spying on our UN allies, using foreign aid as a beating stick so third-world nations would join the Copenhagen Accord, writing Canadian copyright laws, buying little boy sex slave for afghan warlords, knowing pfizer was trying to blackmail a lawyer in a multi-million dollar suit, helping McDonalds get more favorable judges in their suit, and just generally being a dick around the world. If none of that caused the major war-clusterfuck you're worried about, I highly doubt that the NSA being found out of spying on US citizens without a warrant will be that big of a concern. You know, on a global-thermonuclear-war sort of scale.

      Seriously, the other major political players have no expectation of privacy against our NSA and CIA. It's literally their job to go spy on them. It's still internationally illegal, and balls-to-the-wall wrong, but expected. They simply don't have the power to stop it. The NSA spying on US citizens is OUR OWN forces breaking OUR OWN laws. Furthermore, we have very important people being on record telling congress that no such spying is occurring. That perjury. Remember when that was a felony that would get you sent to prison? Or even fired?

    23. Re:Same Brush Syndrome by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

      He's specifically calling out TRANSPARENCY GROUPS.

      And transparency groups TERRIFY politicians and their appointees.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    24. Re:Same Brush Syndrome by budgenator · · Score: 1

      I doubt that will happen, because Snowden is still alive, I suspect that he blow-up his life by hacking into a NSA honey-pot! The spooks generally have several layers of miss-direction and miss-information going at anytime

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    25. Re:Same Brush Syndrome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe the FSP could also get a Bearcat (which are totally awesome, BTW).

    26. Re:Same Brush Syndrome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So clearly the free staters need two or three tanks!

    27. Re:Same Brush Syndrome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He is also lumping in "those folks who are very committed to transparency and global transparency and the global web, kind of ungoverned and free" so I guess those people will also be terrorists. So ungoverned and free = terrorist

    28. Re:Same Brush Syndrome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This site is comprised of a bunch of communists...

      Ah, if only that were even close to the truth...

  17. Oh Noes! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://xkcd.com/932/

  18. Fearmongering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "So if they can't create great harm to dot-mil, who are they going after? Who for them are the World Trade Centers? The World Trade Centers, as they were for al-Qaida."

    The only people who think like that are Al-Qaida and their American trainers. Oh wait, that's who was making the comment.

    1. Re:Fearmongering by TheCarp · · Score: 2

      Reminds me of an old Bill Hicks rant:

      "Frightening people man. Bush tried to buy votes towards the end of the election. Goes around, you know, selling weapons to everyone, getting that military industrial complex vote happening for him. Sold 160 fighter jets to Korea and then 240 tanks to Kuwait and then goes around making speeches why he should be Commander-in-Chief because, "We still live in a dangerous world."...Thanks to you, you fucker!"

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
  19. Chilling effect by SirGarlon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A government official advising against a course of action because he fears a terrorist response is proof that terrorism works.

    --
    [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
    1. Re:Chilling effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A government official advising against a course of action because he fears a terrorist response is proof that terrorism works.

      A government official advising for a course of action because he fears a terrorist action is proof that terrorism works, as well. Indeed, most of the damage to the US and its citizens in the last 15 years has been done not by terrorists, but by the US government in response/anticipation to terrorists.

    2. Re:Chilling effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think anyone is disputing that terrorism works ("go along with our agenda or we will attack you and innocent people you care about"), anymore than they are disputing that gang violence works ("don't testify against us or we will kill you and innocent people you care about"). Why would we have a "war on terror" if terrorism didn't work?

    3. Re:Chilling effect by sociocapitalist · · Score: 3, Insightful

      A government official advising against a course of action because he fears a terrorist response is proof that terrorism works.

      Where do you see that he recommended against a course of action?

      This is a government official trying to get more budget than he already has, nothing more.

      --
      blindly antisocialist = antisocial
  20. Wait what?!? by Pikoro · · Score: 4, Insightful

    When did hacking turn into "Cyber-terrorism"? Has the world gone stupid?

    --
    "Freedom in the USA is not the ability to do what you want. It is the ability to stop others from doing what THEY want"
    1. Re:Wait what?!? by Bender+Unit+22 · · Score: 2

      No, the world has always been stupid.
      It is just became more obvious after internet v2. or whatever they called it.

    2. Re:Wait what?!? by intermodal · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Terrorism as defined by the government is not what terrifies the people, but what terrifies people with cushy jobs in the government. Right now, they're terrified that people will find out what they're doing and call them out for it.

      --
      In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
    3. Re:Wait what?!? by Burntgerbil · · Score: 2

      At this point, I'm becoming more scared of the misguided, (presumably) well-meaning and ill-educated elected officials than I am of any tur-rur-rists. When does the Patriot Act start to apply to them ?

    4. Re:Wait what?!? by intermodal · · Score: 1

      Becoming? I've been more scared of well-meaning elected officials for a long time.

      "If I knew for a certainty that a man was coming to my house with the conscious design of doing me good, I should run for my life." - Henry David Thoreau

      --
      In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
    5. Re:Wait what?!? by X0563511 · · Score: 2

      The world has always been stupid. It's just gotten worse recently.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    6. Re:Wait what?!? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      The costs of hiring 2x the admins, consultants and experts to clean up after all the cyber action.
      The costs of hiring 2x the new vetting staff after http://rt.com/usa/probe-company-cleared-snowden-022/
      http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2013/06/18/nsa_buddy_system_director_keith_alexander_tells_congress_how_the_nsa_will.html
      ~a costly new No Contractor Left Behind Act.
      With todays fast adsl, adsl2+ modems and some having friends with hybrid fibre coax or even optical, twentysomethings are way more effective than the 56k users of the past.
      With a better understanding of Perl on the upgraded Windows Vista and 7 units, todays activists might see more than just the airbrushed NASA PR images - they might ftp out that moon flag fluttering clip this time.
      http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/click_online/4977134.stm

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    7. Re:Wait what?!? by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      When did hacking turn into "Cyber-terrorism"? Has the world gone stupid?

      If you control the spin and the message, you can make it mean anything you like. And "anybody who disagrees with what we do" is now the blanket term for "terrorists".

      Once they have that, they can do anything they want, at any time, and keep it secret under national security laws.

      Welcome to 1984, because what they are insisting on is Big Brother -- and anybody who disagrees must be a terrorist. Once you convince most of the populace it's "for their own good", they'll toe the line and decide anybody who isn't must be a terrorist and stop disputing it.

      And then you have them.

      Papers please, comrade.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    8. Re:Wait what?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably when weapons of mass destruction became pressure cookers.....http://news.slashdot.org/story/13/06/28/1441253/boston-marathon-bomber-charged-with-using-weapon-of-mass-destruction

    9. Re:Wait what?!? by jellomizer · · Score: 0

      When you hack an attempt to create fear and terror towards your group.

      Terrorism is the attempt to do an action to make people fear you. So you can try to get your point across because people are so afraid of you they have to listen or face your attacks.

      These Hacking groups are trying to do just that. So yes they are "Cyber-terrorist"

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    10. Re:Wait what?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd rather compare it to punching an asshole in the face for being an asshole.
      Punching assholes in the face should not be considered an act of terror, more along the lines of justice.

      I'm having a really hard time seeing the valid reasons for slapping the terror sticker on anything that goes against their will, they're just bullies with lots of power and a large audience.

    11. Re:Wait what?!? by Inanna-qui-baille · · Score: 2

      We are just getting wiser as we age and having a more critical view of things. There was no golden age before, people always have been very stupid in general.

    12. Re:Wait what?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Once it was the action needed to be violent.
      Apparently nowadays peaceful terrorists can exist.

    13. Re:Wait what?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "If I knew for a certainty that a woman was coming to my house with the conscious design of doing me good, I should have condoms at the ready" -AC

    14. Re:Wait what?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mr. Bond? 007, is that you?

    15. Re:Wait what?!? by budgenator · · Score: 1

      Because that worked so well against the IRS?

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    16. Re:Wait what?!? by tolkienfan · · Score: 1

      I've never been afraid of terrorists.
      And I grew up in London at a time the IRA were very active. They bombed London several times - my local underground station (Barking station) was bombed.
      Terrorists were considered something the police could handle.
      If you're afraid of terrorists you're probably both bad at judging risk and subject to careful manipulation.

    17. Re:Wait what?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When various government agencies decided they could enlarge their importance and power by setting up full-time groups to "protect America" from it. Same as "cyberwarfare".

      Next question?

  21. who? by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

    quote:

    "I'm just trying to illustrate that you've got a group of people out there who make demands, whose demands may not be satisfiable, may not be rational, from other points of view..."

    not sure if this refers to our rogue government (ie, the criminals in charge of the NSA and those who continue to fund it) or the ones we are being programmed to 'be afraid of'. ...gotta go: I'm almost late for my two minute's hate.

    --

    --
    "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
  22. Fighting words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He's trying to provoke an attack, isn't he?

    1. Re:Fighting words by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 2

      He's trying to provoke an attack, isn't he?

      It would be a win-win. That is to say a "win" for whoever does the attacking, and a "win" for the national security/defense/spying establishment. Maybe not as profitable for everyone as 9/11, but still not bad for a day's work.

      --
      I am not a crackpot.
    2. Re:Fighting words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean he is a General Provocateur ?

  23. because of the put-down, I imagine... by doug141 · · Score: 1

    they are going to start hacking michael hayden.

  24. We're the new bogeyman... by hazeii · · Score: 1

    And next time some random .gov or .mil website gets hacked, it'll be taken as "vindication" and proof of the correctness of his point of view.

    The US government closing all its Embassies seems less about an actual threat than about keeping the NSA jackboot on top of us all.

    Especially those of us who are kicking up a fuss.

    --
    All your ghosts are just false positives.
    1. Re:We're the new bogeyman... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Very astute.

  25. Not when the Americans were the activists. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You know, back before independence.

    Even today, *those* activists are practically deified.

    1. Re:Not when the Americans were the activists. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One day's Traitors are next day's heros. Do we really have to explain you that ?

      In 2050, President AlQahiri of the United Dshidahirra of America will be granted the Snowden Peace Prize shortly before he starts an undeclared war on the Argentinians who are alleged to harbour some catholic terrorists who flew a Cessna into the main mosque of Chicago, the 2050 center of American, Islamic and Worldwide finance.

    2. Re:Not when the Americans were the activists. by runeghost · · Score: 1

      The Founding Fathers (ugh) can't complain about how craptacular the U.S. government is, being safely dead. You'll note that aside from the occassional pro-forma publicity quote, no one presently in power actually bases decisions based on the Revolutionaries said, wrote, or did.

    3. Re:Not when the Americans were the activists. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Founding Fathers (ugh) can't complain about how craptacular the U.S. government is, being safely dead.

      Actually, our administration has attached electric generators to the Founding Father's coffins. By now, half the nation is being powered by them turning in their graves. The NSA is pretty sure that they can make this a sustainable resource. Eric Holder is assisting them in his function as Attorney General Electric.

    4. Re:Not when the Americans were the activists. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SCOTUS does.... selectively.

  26. Michael Hayden, like internet trolls everywhere... by Notabadguy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How many times have you seen someone respond to IRC, forum post, thread, etc with something along the following lines:

    "The person disagreeing with me is 15 year old acne-crusted, coke-glasses-wearing, living in his mother's basement loser with no social life and blah blah blah....."

    Reading Michael Hayden feels like reading an internet troll. I don't know if he's doing it because he's dumb troll, or because he used to be one of those 15 year old acne crusted, coke-glasses-wearing, living in his mother's basement loser with no social life before getting into the NSA so he could change venue to live in a government basement.

  27. The first rule of Fight Club is ... by Aguazul2 · · Score: 1

    ... that you don't talk about Fight Club. Then they made it into a movie. It is the American way.

  28. Never forget by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Since 9/11 America was not the same. Terrorist is by definition him who inflicts terror. Therefore 9/11 was successful even if the causalities would be 0. America is terrorized to the point that "Land of Freedom" title should be stripped away. Of course the government takes this tragedy as a campaign to further strip other rights of the American people.

  29. Oh, totally. by MobSwatter · · Score: 0

    Yes, they'd be all over us with harsh language and pointing at us, and the laughter, this would just be devastating.

  30. Hacking yes, terrorism no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He's right about the hacking but not about the terrorism. Even more of a reason why we should give Snowden a full pardon on the condition he return to USA, maybe add a clause that he be banned from any government work for the next 60 years. Embarrassing those in power should not be a crime in it self.

  31. Voice Of The Cheka Speaks Out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheka

    And don't tell me this guy is different. His pals stockpile hundreds of thousands of exploits and then he whines about "evil hackers" with their three exploits. Which are probably not used at all.

    http://www.infoworld.com/d/security/in-his-own-words-confessions-of-cyber-warrior-222266

    What he wants to do is to stifle any dissent. Like any professional Chekist, he hates to be out of control.

  32. and what is his point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you are warned by humans of earth to fucking leave him be....

    its easy move on ...touch him and we will...what ya gonna do big girlie boys now , rant rave and call us terrorists when the guy only told his own peopel the govt is illegally spying on them....

    or doing it legally in a way that actually should be illegal....
    ugh

    the nsa needs to learn the phrase shut the fuck up

    haha
    or
    https://www.uha1.com/14-mug.jpg --- will be there site next

  33. hurr durr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Calling nihilist and anarchist hackers that are capable of performing successful cyber terrorist attacks against the US and the NSA "twentysomethings who haven't talked to the opposite sex in five or six years." is more agitating than some stuff in the news about snowden. I think the former head of the NSA is trying to induce terrorist attacks against the USA. He should be charged as a terrorist. He also looks like he hasn't talked to the opposite sex in 5 or 60 years. That's a true sign of terrorism right there.

    TLDR: FUCK YOU.

  34. Sound advice from the Breakfast Club by sunking2 · · Score: 1

    Don't mess with the bull, young man. You'll get the horns.

    It's all fun and games until they get annoyed enough to start having people disappear. Then it's no longer a fun internet game. And the big money players won't tolerate loss of finances for long.

    1. Re:Sound advice from the Breakfast Club by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Once people start disappearing is when things move from the Internet and into real life bombs. America is already sick of the shit from the top, and if they keep adding to the pile it'll just get far worse for everyone involved.

  35. No need for getting personal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dear Mr. Hayden,

    I understand your position that these cyber attacks would be illegitimate. But there is no need to disparage people for not having talked to the opposite sex for years. Making fun on others isn't fair. But may be fairness isn't a word you have in your mind...

    Sincerely

  36. Such shame by lapm · · Score: 2

    Lol, maybe government should not be doing things they are shamed afterwords. Like spying its own citizens that have done nothing wrong. All this under fear of terrorist. I wonder how long until they realize terrorist won the war. They changed how certain superpower lives its lives. So much for land of the free... I all pro information freedom. And i don't fit any of those categories.. 'Nihilists, anarchists, activists, Lulzsec, Anonymous, twentysomethings who haven't talked to the opposite sex in five or six years.' Im 38 yeras old, i quess thats twentysomething.... Im married and talk my wife every day...

  37. Scare tactics for tax dollars by sl4shd0rk · · Score: 2

    This whole scare tactic on Hayden's part, especially since it was a speech at the "Bipartisan Policy Center" sounds like a grab for political support and funding to further broaden what the NSA, FBI, DEA and every other shitty acronym involved is already doing. People like Hayden are the types who create places like Gitmo, fund operations like Haliburton, and see nothing wrong with getting what they want by any means necessary. No wonder he's so scared.

    --
    Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
    1. Re:Scare tactics for tax dollars by nucrash · · Score: 1

      As long as he is getting his money, why should he care about his fortress. Say, that's a nice fortress you have there. So you have an automated environment system that can be accessed remotely? That's nice. How do you like your house in the middle of the summer? I think that's a great time to turn on the heater? This guy is a tool, and I won't feel bad if he is harassed for some of the things that he allowed to happen under his watch. He is right that there will be some people that get upset if Snowden is arrested. Just as Sony about what happens when one that the hacker community supports gets arrested or even mistreated. After what I say this weekend, I would say that Sony had a small bout compared to what would happen if Snowden is arrested.

      --
      Place something witty here
    2. Re:Scare tactics for tax dollars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People like Hayden are the types who create places like Gitmo, fund operations like Haliburton, and see nothing wrong with getting what they want by any means necessary.

      You seem to be under the impression that the American Dream(tm) stops being applicable to people once they accrue a certain amount of power. I think they think otherwise.

    3. Re:Scare tactics for tax dollars by tolkienfan · · Score: 1

      Bipartisan is such an Orwellian term...

  38. calling people gay by 6 · · Score: 4, Funny

    "who haven't talked to the opposite sex in five or six years.'"
    Really? Is calling people it doesn't like gay really the governments new tactic?

    1. Re:calling people gay by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      "who haven't talked to the opposite sex in five or six years.'"
      Really? Is calling people it doesn't like gay really the governments new tactic?

      Actually, I read it as calling them introverts. Otaku, if you like, if we had a word for that here. Dorks, I guess, though whale dicks are huge and the hypothetical people we're discussing are social lames, not gigantic cocks. Anyway, calling people it doesn't like gay is the government's old tactic. It doesn't work any more because statistically nobody gives a shit so long as you don't poke your genitals into their face without an invitation.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:calling people gay by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whooooooooooooosh

    3. Re:calling people gay by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Otaku, if you like, if we had a word for that here.

      I think you mean hikikomori, not otaku.

    4. Re:calling people gay by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I think you mean hikikomori, not otaku.

      Hmm, actually, I think I want a word in between the two of them. Not a total shut-in, but still a social retard.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  39. Wow by benjfowler · · Score: 1

    I'm a bit of a hawk and anti-libertarian myself, and have little time for narcissists like Snowdown and the Wikileaks crowd.

    THAT SAID --- it definitely appears that here, General Hayden is full-blown delusional. These remarks are of somebody whose tenuous grip on reality is seriously worrying for a man of his position.

    1. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, Hayden knows exactly what he's talking about.

      And by all means, no one is thinking about ways to defeat the US.

    2. Re:Wow by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      From:
      http://www.afr.com/p/national/transcript_interview_with_former_KnS7JDIrw73GWlljxA7vdK
      "I personally think Snowden is a very troubled, narcissistic young man who has done a very, very bad thing."
      "ideological embrace of transparency as a virtue."
      "Likewise, at what point does a cultural tendency towards transparency flip-over to become a deep threat inside your system?"
      http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/aug/1/secrets-are-hard-to-keep-in-the-whole-wired-world/
      "“a romantic, absolute attachment to transparency; [a belief] that secrecy in any form is wrong.”
      https://www.fas.org/irp/news/2006/01/hayden012306.html
      "The great urban legend out there then was something called "Echelon""
      "It is not a driftnet over Dearborn or Lackawanna or Freemont grabbing conversations that we then sort out by these alleged keyword searches or data-mining tools or other devices that so-called experts keep talking about."
      "If FISA worked just as well, why wouldn't I use FISA? To save typing?
      No. There is an operational impact here, and I have two paths in front of me, both of them lawful, one FISA, one the presidential -- the president's authorization.
      And we go down this path because our operational judgment is it is much more effective."
      Interesting how the press picks up on the "FISA statute itself says that it will be the exclusive means by which electronic surveillance may be pursued"
      and is then told : "I'm not asserting anything. I'm asserting that NSA is doing its job."
      http://freebeacon.com/china-military-preparing-for-peoples-war-in-cyberspace-space/
      "Cyber warfare may truly be called a people’s warfare"
      ...cyber reconnaissance, jamming, and attack”—from space vehicles.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    3. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And?

      Oh, I'm sorry -- you just chose to willfully misunderstand everything he said, or are steeped so deeply in your own beliefs that you are unable to consider any bigger picture.

    4. Re:Wow by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Whats to "willfully misunderstand" about "the exclusive means by which electronic surveillance may be pursued" question vs president's authorization?
      The press asked a great question.
      Re: "own beliefs" - most of that was just from reading the pages as linked.
      What "bigger picture"? That India, Brazil, China, Canada, Germany, South Africa or France might not want to 'rent' blurred limited images from commercial firms?
      Space is not the Soviet/German/US club it was in the 1950-70's - other nations will try building "space vehicles".

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  40. call them Saints by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because clearly, that's what They really are.

  41. Stick, Meet Hornet Nest by denmarkw00t · · Score: 3, Insightful

    twentysomethings who haven't talked to the opposite sex in five or six years

    It's great to see people putting down others, I'm sure statements like that won't at all cause people who otherwise probably wouldn't have wanted to be involved in any such thing to change their minds. It's like saying "we have information suggesting an attack is imminent on US interests abroad - keep an eye out for young men who have unsightly beards, sand in their butt cracks, and a strange fascination with goats" and not expecting more people to be violent towards you than before you made the statement.

  42. What a dumbass by Stumbles · · Score: 1

    We are and have been attacked by "hackers". Its a very lame attempt at scare mongering.

    --
    My karma is not a Chameleon.
  43. They won't attack the US by godless+dave · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They won't attack the US, they'll attack the US government. Completely different. These guys remind me of mafiosi who try to claim prosecutors going after the Mafia are going after all Italian-Americans.

    --
    "If it's real, then it gets more interesting the closer you examine it. If it's not real, just the opposite is true." -
    1. Re:They won't attack the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wrong as well. They'll not attack anyone or anything in any real sense, but they will vandalize web pages aplenty with lame images calling for Snowden's pardon. Some random DoS attacks, and probably publishing some address and phone number of someone completely unrelated to the case who happens to have a similar name to someone on the prosecution.

      In short, it's going to be the same riot crap that followed the recent over-publicized trial in Florida, except with people hiding behind computers rather than taking baseball bats to the street. Oh, and they won't even wait for a verdict, they'll start with the "cyber-rioting" as soon as Snowden is caught.

  44. Translation by gmuslera · · Score: 1

    IF we broke international law, kidnap/kill a citizen of another country in that other country, someone that denounced that us are breaking the human rights of basically every human of the planet, and steal their intellectual property, then could be consequences. The real, big problem, is the first move, not the consequences. Whats next? Killers that complain that judges will try to put them in jail, as if everything is judges fault?

  45. Self Loathing Much? by Bob9113 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "twentysomethings who haven't talked to the opposite sex in five or six years.'"

    Really? "Hah hah, little nerd, you don't get any pussy!" The former NSA chief is using sophomoric name-calling to make himself feel better about having become one of the most crafty and subversive enemies our nation has ever faced. Just like high school, when the jocks would do the same to feel better about their abusive relationships with their fathers.

    1. Re:Self Loathing Much? by Velex · · Score: 1

      My thoughts exactly. You're already at +5, so I'll add other thoughts I had instead of modding +1 I agree in case that's a karma bonus putting you at +5 instead of +4.

      I talk to plenty of people of the opposite sex. OOOOH, he means "talked" as in talked into bed, not just discussing TPS reports and being friendly to the members of the opposite sex my brother or ex have "talked to!" Ah, I see. Well, he can wake me up when there are any open-minded, intelligent, educated, bi females of a healthy body weight who have greater goals in life and interests than having children who would be interested in a relationship with me! Then I'll get around to "talking to" them. I see, I see.

      (Disclaimer: I completely realize the fact I haven't found a single woman I care to date even after saying farewell to being a twenty-something recently says more about me than it does about "all women.")

      Of course, the greater and always classic undertone here is to beware of young men who aren't falling over themselves fitting into their heteronormative role trying to find a wife and have children. Guys with families and responsibilities are much easier for oppressive governments/social orders to control.

      Then again, I have an internet friend who's "talked to" plenty of girls. He like works out regularly, has a nice bod, and is interested in all kinds of athletic, outdoor activities. Definitely not a basement dweller. I honestly can't figure out for the life of me why he's never gotten beyond the makeout/cuddling stage unless his personality is completely different IRL vs. on IRC. Since he hasn't gotten any, i.e. failed in "talking to the opposite sex," does he fall within our new threat classification of "twenty-somethings who haven't talked to the opposite sex in five or six years?"

      --
      Join the Slashcott! Stay away entirely Feb 10 thru Feb 17! Close all tabs to prevent autorefresh!
  46. WAT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    twentysomethings who haven't talked to the opposite sex in five or six years.

    Them's fighting words. _Every morning_ I talk to the girl who makes my coffee...

  47. Slashdot readers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So he called them Slashdot readers/members.

  48. Activist cyber attacks now cyber "terror" attacks by milkasing · · Score: 1

    Of the types of Cyber attacks motives -- Activist led, state sponsored espionage and ones driven by criminal activity, activist is a tiny fraction compared to the other two.
    http://www.verizonenterprise.com/resources/reports/es_data-breach-investigations-report-2013_en_xg.pdf
    Also of the three types, activist attacks are the least sophisticated while state espionage attacks are the most sophisticated. Its funny how activist attacks are considered as "terror" attacks.
    Yes there will be attacks because of Snowden, but they will be insignificant compared to the daily business of government led attacks

  49. This guy needs help by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 1

    Hayden sounds like he could use some Viagra and a hooker (or whatever he's into).

    Might take the edge off, and he could come up with a reasoned argument instead of just using the Wikipedia entry on logical fallacies as a checklist.

    --
    I am not a crackpot.
  50. grain of truth? by noh8rz10 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    OK, the guy's being a DB, but you have to admit there's a grain of truth:
    nihilists: that could be one way to describe groups like lulzsec, who aren't into transparency as a cause but would rather watch the world burn for the lulz.
    anarchists: I don't see this one per se, but the govt described bradley manning as an anarchist so that's why they think that.
    activists: for sure, groups like anonymous are activists. manning too. snowden too. they are motivated by effecting change in the system.
    Lulzsec: I'm not sure to what degree Lulzsec would participate themselves based on the FBI busts, but I'm sure there would be some offshoot phoenix "rise from the ashes" that would throw their hats in the ring.
    anonymous: i think this one is a given.
    neckbeards: kind of a stereotype, not suprised he through that out.

    tldr: I think he's more right than wrong, both to expect attempts at reprisals and in describing many of the groups that will attempt it. I would add foreign nations / hostile groups (not activists, but interested in harming USA interests). It's the perfect time to attack under the guise of these other groups.

    1. Re:grain of truth? by runeghost · · Score: 5, Informative

      Certainly there's a grain of truth - anyone who values freedom is likely to be unhappy with the Fed's nascent police state, and some of them will act out violently against their corrupt and unaccountable rulers. When that starts to happen more and more frequently, it's important not to see it not as justification for repression, but as a sign of just how hated and undemocratic the U.S. government has become.

      As John F. Kennedy once said, "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."

    2. Re:grain of truth? by Capt.Albatross · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The entire speech is spun from speculation: "I can sit here and imagine circumstances and scenarios, but they're nothing more than imaginative." (his words).

      Much like the Iraqi WMD thing.

    3. Re:grain of truth? by gl4ss · · Score: 5, Funny

      yeah so everyone and anyone might attack USA if Snowden is captured and might attack if Snowden is not captured?

      soo? more surveillance a cure?!? what the fuck is he making this statement for "we're acting kinda like dicks so we're likely to be attacked by dicks".

      in other news AQAP has figured out a new way to terrorize american interests - all they need to do is write messages to each other that "we'll attack with 100 militants sometime next month, RIGHT?!". so the surveillance that is based on just electronics is geared up for a big fail, they can spin up an entire fantasy terrorism empire that they'll be monitoring using massive resources... just by sending skype messages to each other they can shutdown embassy activities in multiple countries for far longer than a bomb would have.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    4. Re:grain of truth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      In other words, what happens when you heat a pressure cooker whose release valve is clogged?

    5. Re:grain of truth? by DarkOx · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Kinda brings the whole Golden Rule thing into focus doesn't it. Maybe if the NSA and by extension our nation does want to be attacked, terrorized, and treated so much; we should consider attacking, threatening, and terrorizing others less often.

           

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    6. Re:grain of truth? by feynmanfan1 · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      ("America has no functioning democracy at this moment"--former U.S. president Jimmy Carter). What data on the U.S. population should be legally in government hands? Note that the telecom companies like ATT, verizon and sprint have large stores of domestic call records. Google yahoo and microsoft have a good sized chunk of our emails, documents and search quarries. JP morgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, wells fargo and citigroup have most of our credit card and loan data. Should this data, domestic call records and all, also be in the hands of the federal government? Does Google have more up to date information about flu outbreaks than the Center for Disease Control? Is it unreasonable to suspect that Goldman Sachs has better data on the U.S. economy than say the treasury department and federal reserve? A recent foia request by propublica for emails between NSA employees and employees of the National Geographic Channel over a time period that the TV station had aired a friendly documentary on the NSA resulted in the following response from the NSA (the supercomputing powerhouse) "There's no central method to search an email at this time with the way our records are set up, unfortunately.... [the system is] a little antiquated and archaic." A former employee of the department of labor statistics said that the department's entire data set fits on a single hard drive. Note that in the 90â(TM)s the IRS was still using vacuum tube technology. The National Security Agency in the last couple of years just started building modern data centers in Utah. There is abundant evidence provided by the Thomas Drake prosecution and the 9-11 commission report that information management is a problem in the intelligence community. Does google have better information management technology than the NSA? If corporations do have better data on the U.S. economy and population than the U.S. government doesn't it make sense to be governed by these corporations, ie government sachs? Is it not true that he who has the information has the power? And of course doesn't that create a clear âoemoral hazardâand âoeregulatory captureâ situation as the corporations are run by the 1%? Regulatory capture is basically when the cops and judges are owned, the book "13 bankers" goes over the issue for wall street. Isnâ(TM)t corporate control of government part of what occupy wallstreet activists protested? What is reasonable in terms of government and corporate transparency and secrecy laws and what data on the U.S. population should the government have access to? What information should citizens have about their governments and corporations? Is U.S. law clear and consistent? In any logically inconsistent system one can arrive at any conclusion one likes--selective prosecution and "interpreting" the law. What is the role of the media in all this? A former NSA coworker noted to me that U.K.'s GCHQ can, by U.K. law, perform surveillance on U.S. citizens without a warrant and the U.K. shares that intelligence with the U.S., the English speaking countries have a cozy intelligence sharing agreement sometimes called "five eyes." An effective surveillance laundering strategy. Also, less friendly countries than the U.K. would be interested in data on the U.S. population in order to, for example, strategize a propaganda campaign. If foreign countries can "copy and siphon off several terabytes of data related to design and electronics systems" of the JSF (F-35) they can probably get their hands on our call record data and possibly a lot more. Is it a good situation for foreign governments to have more information on the U.S. population than the U.S. government has? On related issues you could see the google tech talk "secret history of silicon valley"--basically defense spending built much more of silicon valley than venture capital. There is pretty good evidence that the majority of U.S. tech gets its start as gov contracts (IBM and the contract for the 1890 census, Oracle and the CIA contract, Sun Micro and darpa money). A little less relate

    7. Re:grain of truth? by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      tldr: I think he's more right than wrong, both to expect attempts at reprisals and in describing many of the groups that will attempt it. I would add foreign nations / hostile groups (not activists, but interested in harming USA interests). It's the perfect time to attack under the guise of these other groups.

      Good list, but I would probably add "US government agents operating under a false flag" to it.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    8. Re:grain of truth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All these sum up as "People with nothing to lose, and people who don't care", which dovetails nicely with the "cyber-terror" definition. Hurray, America!

    9. Re:grain of truth? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's called terrorism. He is trying to terrify you into changing your behaviour and beliefs with threats.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    10. Re:grain of truth? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I think it's a bit late for that. It's already open season on the US.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    11. Re:grain of truth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      neckbeards: kind of a stereotype, not suprised he through that out.

      See what happens when you post from an iPhone? Did you mean threw or thought?

      tldr: doesn't belong on a nerd site. "tl;dr" really means "I'm an aliterate and a bibliophobe" and there's no such thing a an aliterate nerd. And for all you tldr aliterate faux nerds, that is not a misspelling of illiterate. Look it up.

    12. Re:grain of truth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Real nice. He's deliberately trying to provoke people now hoping to hide behind this great and mighty PRISM superweapon and their mighty hardened military networks. Might not be a good idea to piss people off by flaunting the very thing that is pissing people off worldwide.

      The only thing worse than a tyrant is a smug tyrant with an ego problem.

    13. Re:grain of truth? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Anonymous group isn't about activism, it's nihilism. If they are currently behaving like activists then it's only for the lulz.

    14. Re:grain of truth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "...nascent police state."

      Apologists like you will be saying that in 20 years, idiot.

    15. Re:grain of truth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... they can shutdown embassy activities in multiple countries

      This puts the police state in a quandary: If those countries aren't attacked, the police state worked. If they are attacked, the police need more 'powers'. Since pscyopaths always want more power, it is in their interest to defend their servants badly.

      Remember guerrilla war-fare? The power of a lightly-armed attack-force to move from enemy base to base faster than a dug-in enemy can move. It's the only way to beat the police state too. Although it's not so easy to out-maneuver an enemy defended by armed drones. The way round that is to leak information the guerrillas are 'over there' while the guerrillas attack a base in the other direction. The enemy is then unable to trust its intelligence abilities or mobilise its own attack-force in response.

    16. Re:grain of truth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OK, the guy's being a DB

      Is he a relational database or just a big flat file?

    17. Re:grain of truth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and they will keep doing it until either
      A. The NSA stops listening, then they will do a real attack, causing the US gov to go full on paranoid.
      B. The US keeps kneejerking till the American people get sick of it, and leave the middle east because it is no longer worth it.
      C. The US keeps kneejerking until it falls apart like the Soviet Union.

      Lets hope that it is B. At least that is the least amount of pain to the world that way. A and C both lead to Osama getting the last laugh in hell.

    18. Re:grain of truth? by lgw · · Score: 1

      Kinda brings the whole Golden Rule thing into focus doesn't it. Maybe if the NSA and by extension our nation does want to be attacked

      You know, the Golden Rule just kinda sucks as moral guidance for masochists.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    19. Re:grain of truth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's probably true that attacking the NSA wouldn't do much.

      Better off doing the old civil disobedience thing...setting up everyone you know with encrypted email, tunneling networks and getting darknet sites setup.
      The NSA's activities have already cost the economy with the loss of trust. If the internet starts going underground, privacy might just be restored to a degree at least.

      If people are concerned about the policies the government lobbyists are pushing, they should boycott products from those companies.

    20. Re:grain of truth? by thoughtlover · · Score: 1

      It's called terrorism. He is trying to terrify you into changing your behaviour and beliefs with threats.

      I thought it was called FUD. That seems to be the gov's primary tactic, unless you call FUD 'verbal terrorism'.

      --
      No sig for you! Come back one year!
    21. Re:grain of truth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like an exercise in the right to bear arms against a tyrannical government. But with no actual loss of life.

      I can't say it's a bad thing.

    22. Re:grain of truth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Too bad there's no "Crazy" mod.
      Dude, learn the fuck to write and proof-read!

    23. Re:grain of truth? by Leofcwen · · Score: 1

      anarchists: I don't see this one per se, but the govt described bradley manning as an anarchist so that's why they think that.

      I'm not sure if I understood the term anarchists in the same way as he meant it but anarchy has two main extremes. On one hand it may be seen as another definition for libertarianism where state has less control over the lives of the people. The result would, from the point of view of those within the state, this would be anarchy. They inevitably prefer a more ordered society they can control from the centre. The other extreme to which I referred is what these people hope people will associate the word with, that of burning cars, of gangs roaming the streets looking for a victim, the total breakdown of society. Based on the context and the speaker, I suspect he meant a negative meaning of the word. Aren't you glad the government is there to protect us from freedom?

    24. Re:grain of truth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did your and / keys stop working?

    25. Re:grain of truth? by occasional_dabbler · · Score: 1

      ...which of course, should have been : <, /, and > keys stop working..?

      (I learned something today.)

      --
      "Our opponent is an alien starship packed with atomic bombs," I said. "we have a protractor"
    26. Re:grain of truth? by aliquis · · Score: 1

      Loses your freedom by the NSA and your money by the FED / banks.

      Between a rock and a hard place or how is it said? =P

      Funny shit in inside job when they talked about I think it was technology companies as companies which produced things (relative banks then.)
      If half your economy isn't really about producing things but rather make money of the production made by others? .. :D

    27. Re:grain of truth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OTOH, if we let Snowden go, then no one in the world will ever try to hack into the US servers.

      Proper management of expectations does not make the news.

  51. He left out basement dwelling neckbeard autists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    chronic masturbators

  52. Whistleblowers deserve protection right here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it is easy to understand why he thought his revelations of dirty business meant he could not go to the normal "authorities".

  53. 20 somthings.... by mitcheli · · Score: 0

    I am not exactly sure what's scarier in the fact that General Hayden is worried about 20 somethings that haven't talked to the opposite sex in 5 or 6 years. Barring that the 20 somethings are at least 24, then I suppose that's a good thing, but a 21 year old? If they have talked to the opposite sex (implying a sexual relationship), then I guess we have bigger problems... Oh wait, take that down the rabbit hold further... Why would General Hayden be concerned about underage sex? ... And with the NSA sharing Intel with the FBI... Oh wait, and with the FBI infiltrating Tor. ... Oh my... Plot thickens... dawning aluminum foil hat...

    --
    Select from tblFriends where interesting >= 4;
    1. Re:20 somthings.... by Larryish · · Score: 1

      Not "rabbit hold", you meant "rabbit HOLE". It is a reference to the book "Alice in Wonderland".

      And it is not "dawning aluminum foil hat". It is "donning", as in "putting something on in order to wear or otherwise display it".

    2. Re:20 somthings.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...down the rabbit hold...

      Oh yeah!

    3. Re:20 somthings.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The "rabbit hold" is a move done in the WWE when they need to take down another wrestler. Duh.

      You don't believe that this guy actually read something, do you?

    4. Re: 20 somthings.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No its rabbit hold because it was a 20 year old who made the comment and knows nothing of the book Alice and wonderland. They don't have books anymore...

    5. Re: 20 somthings.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Books what are these mythical things you speak of? My E-tomb holds all my scrolls of knowledge and printed word materials.

    6. Re:20 somthings.... by mitcheli · · Score: 1

      Ouch... cross checking my spellchecker for accuracy...

      --
      Select from tblFriends where interesting >= 4;
    7. Re: 20 somthings.... by mitcheli · · Score: 1

      Actually it's someone who knows more about it than you think but thank you for playing. It was a typo.

      --
      Select from tblFriends where interesting >= 4;
  54. "The more you tighten your grip" by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "The more you tighten your grip, the more star systems will slip through your fingers" Seems fitting here.

    Let's ignore that some of what he leaked was about the US more or less illegally spying on their own citizens and people in other countries. Let's ignore that not everyone feels they should be spied on by the US. Let's pretend that some of this spying wasn't getting into the unconstitutional domestically and illegal where it happened. Let's completely ignore than political asylum has been around for centuries and America has certainly granted it to Russians over the years who were equally damaging. While we're at it, let's pretend that this 'apprehending' is essentially illegal in the countries where it happens.

    Instead, let's put the focus on how a bunch of nihilists and anarchists might decide to stage a little retribution and how God himself told America they're allowed to do these things and fuck everyone else.

    Because it couldn't possibly be because people disagree with what the NSA and other agencies do, or that everyone else in the world is tired of them thinking that what everyone else's rights don't matter. There's no way that the rest of the world doesn't feel like the US has overstepped its authority in other countries. It's inconceivable that we don't think you can have Liberty if we have to give up all of our privacy in order to make you safe. People couldn't possibly be protesting because the US is rapidly becoming a surveillance state which will happily trample on people's rights while telling other countries they should be more open and free.

    Fuck you Mr. Hayden, we're not buying the misdirection to a bunch of nerds in their basement. You may not be able to understand why people are venting their displeasure, but that doesn't mean your stated reasons are the right ones.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    1. Re:"The more you tighten your grip" by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      While you're engaged in starting and stopping all the ignoring and pretending, maybe you could stop ignoring and pretending that Russia, China, France, the UK, Germany, ......N aren't doing it too? Can you add some invective for them as well?

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    2. Re:"The more you tighten your grip" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because he wasn't talking about them. The subject of his little tirade was the US.

      Are you one of those people who can't stand to see criticism of Obama if it doesn't also criticize Bush (or swap that to suit your party affiliation)?

  55. That Explains Everything! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So. Snowden is going to - or threatening to - prove that the government is responsible for (exclusively hetero?) hacktivists' absence of comunication with the opposite sex? For at least 6 years, now? I knew it! I just knew it! :P That's the only explanation for it. And the lack of communication is forcibly the necessary consequence of not being able to talk to the opposite sex. ... Of course! Then, does that mean the government took a course of action that would knowingly turn them into hacktivists? Good grief! The government created the hacktivists through post-MKUltra mental and social cruelty! It's all so clear now! Thank you, Herr Hayl-den, for letting us all in on that terrible, horrible secret. Thank you!

  56. Mmh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seems like US already declared cyber-war against every single person (uncluding US citizens) and country. It seems more like an act of defense. Don't fake to be suprised there is response to these spying the world acts.

    These agencies are one of the enemy of the citizens of the world.

  57. and FUCK YOU, just on general principle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Free Speech Zones", beeotches.

  58. Bullcrap! by lasermike026 · · Score: 2

    Get this bullcrap off the front page. Complete nonsense.

    1. Re:Bullcrap! by Conspiracy_Of_Doves · · Score: 1

      The whole point of it being posted is that it IS nonsense. It is pointing out that the former NSA chief is spewing nonsense.

    2. Re:Bullcrap! by lasermike026 · · Score: 1

      No one needs to hear it. It's better to just filter what this guy has to say. I don't care what he has to say. He no credibility and the act of listening to what he has to say only harms everyone.

    3. Re:Bullcrap! by Conspiracy_Of_Doves · · Score: 2

      He has no credibility in our eyes. That doesn't mean that he doesn't have credibility in the eyes of a lot of other people and most of the news media.

    4. Re:Bullcrap! by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      In 1932, Mein Kampf was just a silly little book, written by a silly little man with a silly little moustache, full of stuff and nonsense that no reasonable person could take seriously. Most people chose to ignore it.

      By 1942, most of what was written in that book had become reality.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  59. It's resignation time. by WOOFYGOOFY · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's interesting Michael Hayden feels free to hold forth as an authority on the presumably private lives of his fellow American citizen's, specifically their sex lives.

    Does anyone seriously doubt that this is Hayden accidentally -and very publicly- accessing and referencing the very thing he denies the NSA is doing- watching, cataloging , storing (and sniggering at) the most deeply personal and intimate details of people's everyday affairs, in this case their masturbation habits and likely frequency of sexual intercourse?

    It's hard to keep clear the boundaries between what you know and can talk about and what you know and aren't supposed to talk about, isn't it Michael? It requires constant vigilance, doesn't it? You never know when you're going to let something slip.

    I am asking the president of the United States to relieve General Hayden of his responsibilities for conduct unbecoming, gross negligence in his public utterances, and failure to uphold the high standards of the US military.

    1. Re:It's resignation time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      He's already retired. He has no responsibilities.

    2. Re:It's resignation time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hard to comply, seeing as he's retired.

  60. Are they on Vacation? by medv4380 · · Score: 1

    I'm pretty sure all those groups are constantly attacking the NSA, CIA, FBI, and any other government org for the notarial and to "Fight the Power". Unless this is World Hacker Vacation month.

  61. If they get him... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bring it on...

    Hackers will continue to exist if Snowden is in US custody or not. They are always looking for an excuse to show their skills and deface some site or launch a DOS attack on something. If (or should I say *when*) the US gets their hands on him, it will just be one more reason for them to justify their illegal behavior.

    It's going to happen anyway, so I say, "BRING IT ON!" No need to wait for an excuse to prove your able... The sooner you make your attempt, the sooner we all can find you and lock you up too.

    How some online attack can be classified as a terrorist thing is beyond me. What they going to do that impacts me in any way? Take down the New York Stock Exchange or the Chicago Board of Trade? Disrupt Cell phone service? Where any of these would be *grand* feats for a hacker, *NONE* would put my life or property at risk and like any hacking attack, would be only temporary.

    Bring it on.... Or are you afraid of the light outside the basement or think the handcuffs are too painful?

  62. Obligitory on Nihilists by Subm · · Score: 1

    "Nihilists! Jesus. Say what you like about the tenets of National Socialism, Dude, at least it's an ethos."

    Wait, did I just Godwin the thread?

  63. Cyber-terror attacks? by SecurityGuy · · Score: 2

    Oh, give me a break.

    Not every attack is "terrorism". Not every crime is terrorism.

    IF this materializes, which who knows, it might, it will most likely be cyber-annoyance. You'll try to buy something on amazon and it'll be slow, so you'll do it later. Some web sites may be DDOSed off the net for a day or three. Life will go on.

  64. Article V Convention by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perhaps we need an Article V convention to amend the Constitution to prohibit all military and state secrets?

    Not saying the state can't do things.
    Not saying the military can't conduct operations.
    Rather, all such must be done with 100% total disclosure of everyone involved, what was done, and how much money was spent.

    Will some things be more difficult? Absolutely.
    Will those difficulties be better than the current crop of difficulties? I think so. What about you?

  65. Be veh-ee veh-ee quiet ev-wee-won by WOOFYGOOFY · · Score: 0

    i'm huntin... wabbits...

    Kill da wabitt !
    Kill da wa-bbit !!!!

  66. So now... by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

    So now the US needs Snowden for national security and to protect him from being tortured and coerced to give up secrets? Assuming if that threat is true, maybe if they had led with it instead of making him enemy number 1, this would have played out differently.

    This tactic of bait and switch seems all to common with the US. Invade Iraq because of of their involvement with 9/11. Oops once it is known by the public that they weren't involved with 9/11, change the story. Invade Irag because of WMD. Oops, once it is known by the public that there weren't any WMDs, change the story. I've lost track of why the US invaded Irag.

    Jump to Snowden. The cycle repeats. He's been branded a traitor, a spy, a terrorist... all to get him back and now that those have failed, we need to get him back to protect him in case he is captured.

    So which is it? Does the US want him back because he is a bad guy or to protect him? Just spin the wheel and see. At least on Wheel of Fortune, you have the opportunity to win a trip to some nice resort. With the NSA and the US military complex, the only resort they offer is on the tip of Cuba.

  67. Hedley Lamarr? by Blackmjck · · Score: 2

    "Nihilists, anarchists, activists, Lulzsec, Anonymous, twentysomethings who haven't talked to the opposite sex in five or six years."

    ...rustlers, cut throats, murderers, bounty hunters, desperados, mugs, pugs, thugs, nitwits, halfwits, dimwits, vipers, snipers, con men, Indian agents, Mexican bandits, muggers, buggerers, bushwhackers, hornswogglers, horse thieves, bull dykes, train robbers, bank robbers, ass-kickers, shit-kickers

    ...and Methodists!

  68. re: Hayden and people who couldn't get laid by WOOFYGOOFY · · Score: 1

    Look who's talking..

    http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023414198

    he looks like a fucking human tick that's just finished gorging itself ...

  69. Take it seriously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is the NSA trying to deflect from the fact that they have been flagrantly ignoring the constitution and lying to everyone. Everyone needs to remember the point here is that the NSA et al are trying to create a police state.

    If everyone sits around and jokes about it, then they we have lost.

  70. What worries me by HannibalRex · · Score: 1

    So he thinks you have to be some pimple-faced, buggar-eating dork to want to react cyber-wise?? What bothers me is he's basically saying for all their ability and resources some "twenty-something" has the ability to attack, successfully, the government against which they have little to no defense. I say BS, but still, it seems to have an undertow of slight acknowledgement that in fact they have NO idea what they are doing, other than knowing they are violating our rights and trashing the constitution, plus driving this society down the drain. All for the upper 3% (or 1%, whatever, the stooooopid rich). At the end of the day it's just more rhetoric and propaganda to change the focus of what's really going on, these guys (NSA and I'd say ALL government) are a bunch of asshats that are really f'ing it up for good, and it bothers me that I don't see it changing any time soon, if ever.

  71. two tales that have nothing to do with the parent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    " marriage interferes with romance , when i try to have a little romance the wife is sure to interfere .. " GM
    *
    "Mr Speaker i have put my wife in charge of the NSA's interception operations ..
    "Your wife ? How does she qualify for that job .. it takes a professional...
    "She is ,she's been bugging me for years .. "

    Frankly .. i hope they succeed at halting the NSA's illegal operations. Make em feel what it's like to be at our end of the stick.
    Maybe they will one day see the light .. but i doubt it. If we could trust the NSA it would be one thing , but they shown us we can't .
    They are supposed to be there to help us being safe , right now it's them we don't feel safe with. O the irony. Perhaps having a civilian ( ie taken from the public at random ) oversight , people with no relationship with the NSA FBI or any other agency would help make this confidence grow back . But for now it's work in progress and until proven , bash em :) An ounce of bashing the NSA is always good family entertainment. Ill get a huge cartoon mallet ..

  72. This is serious, millions could die. by EvilSS · · Score: 1

    Millions, billions, possibly trillions of innocent bits could DIE in a cyber terror attack! THINK OF THE BITS!

    --
    I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
  73. These men are nihilists.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ....there's nothing to be afraid of.

  74. Intelligence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is this what they call "intelligence?"

    So all this top-secret spying stuff gives you a precise profile of the enemy. They should know if anybody, right?

  75. "Cyber-Terror" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What is "Cyber-Terror" besides a FUD buzzword? Have hackers changed THAT much in the last 20 years? When did Al-Qaeda and Jihadists give a crap about a guy who leaked secrets about how hypocritical America is? They are too busy trying to end us to care about a former spy. To them, Snowden is just another evil American.

    Michael Hayden is a product of the much vaunted "War on Terror" and this statement just goes arm-in-arm with that "Enemies at the Gate" mentality that dominates our intelligence and law enforcement communities. This is why the NSA is spying on you, they see bad guys everywhere, and anything that seems "anti-American" (e.g. anti-establishment, even if that establishment is violating your Constitutional rights) is Terror/Terrorist/Terrorism.

    Suddenly, hackers are terrorists. Wow.

  76. Michael Hayden by fredrated · · Score: 4, Insightful

    is the kind of person that pulled the levers for the Third Reich.

    1. Re:Michael Hayden by hyperfl0w · · Score: 2

      It is true, most of the population went along with the Third Reich, Michael Hayden is in the class of "Doers" who turned idea into project plan.

    2. Re:Michael Hayden by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe I'm the last one to realize this, but Godwin's law no longer seems to apply. You can draw the comparison now and it's not hyperbolic anymore. Scary.

  77. So what? by T.E.D. · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yeah, and arresting terrorists makes other terrorists mad at us too. So what? Either its the right thing to do, and we do it, or it isn't, and we don't.

    The real conversation nobody seems to be having is wether its worth the tremendous black eye we are giving ourselves by ineffecitvely chasing this guy around the world. The guy broke the law, so he should be arrested. But that doesn't mean we have to publicly rail like impotent babies every time this dweeb sneaks into another country that doesn't like us much. For generations people have fled places like Russia and China after saying or doing things there that the government doesn't like (but are perfectly legal here), and we've rightly used each as an oppertunity to lecture them about freedom and human rights. Well guess what? Telling what you know about the NSA's operations is a form of speech that is not illegal in China or Russia. So now they can smugly do the same back to us. So what does our government do? Why, they make a big public stink about it, so that the damage to our reputation when China and Russia throw our own rhetoric back at us is a large as possible. This whole situation has been so perfect for Russia and China that they might start believeing in God again.

    1. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The guy broke the law, so he should be arrested.

      THAT statement is misleading at best. Snowden took an oath to protect the US Constitution and the 'Merica. It is obvious from his actions, he believes what he did was doing just that. And, since the United States has (or, used to as the case is the FISA courts) a public court system of peers, it would be very hard to convict him because over 50% [1] of 'Mericans believe he is not a traitor.

      [1] http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/07/10/19394570-poll-more-than-half-of-voters-say-snowden-is-whistle-blower-not-traitor?lite

    2. Re:So what? by T.E.D. · · Score: 1

      Disseminating USA classified material to uncleared people is a crime in the USA. I don't think anybody (even Snowden himself) is arguing that he didn't break that law.

    3. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Consitutition >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> law ./

    4. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      [quote]The guy broke the law, so he should be arrested.[/quote]
      The NSA broke the law, so they should be arrested.

      I don't recall "speech" - whether it be revealing secrets or not - as being "illegal". It may be a violation of contract, but that's another matter. And if you're going to spout out "the gov made it a law" then you can just hop on the bandwagon and call ObamaCare a "mandate" instead of a "tax" like it actually is.

  78. Translation... by dnebin · · Score: 1

    Doesn't he realize that this statement, 'Nihilists, anarchists, activists, Lulzsec, Anonymous, twentysomethings who haven't talked to the opposite sex in five or six years' translates directly into 'please initiate your attacks now'? Or maybe he does...

    1. Re:Translation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope the hactivist groups attack him directly.
      they need to spend less time hacking big websites and corps and attacking the people directly responsible the ones at the tops. ruin there fucking lives if they can't be held accountable through the legal system tear them appart make anyone who works there job fear for there fucking life if they chose to be corrupt

  79. Hayden forget one part by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hayden didn't include the words, "and we'll deserve it"

  80. Not to mention... by Shark · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The most important rule of propaganda: If you can't discredit the message, discredit the messenger.

    --
    Mind the frickin' laser...
  81. Twenty-Somethings? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I see the NSA is keeping up on the recruiting drive.

  82. Re:two tales that have nothing to do with the pare by RoknrolZombie · · Score: 2

    If we could trust the NSA it would be one thing , but they shown us we can't .

    This is where I see most people get tripped up. You're wrong. The fact that they want to spy on us at ALL proves that you're wrong. No Government can be trusted, and that includes the "good" one. Our Constitution was drafted specifically with this in mind...I really wish they'd teach this in public school, but that's probably asking too much.

    They are supposed to be there to help us being safe , right now it's them we don't feel safe with.

    You're assuming that the Government wants to keep you safe. This is false. The Government wants you to pay them to think that they're keeping you safe, but the reality is that they couldn't give a shit as long as they're getting paid.

  83. Odd stereotype .... by PPH · · Score: 2
    twentysomethings who haven't talked to the opposite sex in five or six years

    .... seeing as how Snowden was dating a stripper. Indeed, I can think of no better role model.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:Odd stereotype .... by MajVariola · · Score: 1

      Well, Julian was doing pretty well last year..

  84. Re:Michael Hayden, like internet trolls everywhere by jsepeta · · Score: 1

    who the fuck is Michael Hayden? and how does he pretend to know ANYTHING?

    --
    Remember kids, if you're not paying for the service, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT THAT IS BEING SOLD.
  85. OT: Dehydration Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    OK, I know this is kind of OT for this thread and has little to do with Snowden, but I was flipping through channels last night and ran across this movie where everyone was in a life raft. I don't know what movie it was, but it went on for a while with people in a life raft, and they were fighting off sun poisoning, sharks, and dehydration. They tried to create an evaporation still with some saran wrap and a cup and lick the condensed drops off, the bottom of the plastic, but it didn't work. Here's the thing- so they were completely dehydrated, but the two women with larger boobs seemed OK. Why do they never talk about drinking boob milk when they're out there on a life raft or in the desert with no water or whatever? Big boobs have to carry at least a few quarts of liquid.

    1. Re:OT: Dehydration Question by Webs+101 · · Score: 5, Funny

      OK, I know this is kind of OT for this thread and has little to do with Snowden, but I was flipping through channels last night and ran across this movie where everyone was in a life raft. I don't know what movie it was, but it went on for a while with people in a life raft, and they were fighting off sun poisoning, sharks, and dehydration. They tried to create an evaporation still with some saran wrap and a cup and lick the condensed drops off, the bottom of the plastic, but it didn't work. Here's the thing- so they were completely dehydrated, but the two women with larger boobs seemed OK. Why do they never talk about drinking boob milk when they're out there on a life raft or in the desert with no water or whatever? Big boobs have to carry at least a few quarts of liquid.

      I think we just found someone who hasn't talked to the opposite sex in five or six years.

      --

      "Even for Slashdot, that was a very obscure reference!" - Anonymous Coward

    2. Re:OT: Dehydration Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Maybe they were implants?

    3. Re:OT: Dehydration Question by fredrated · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Several years ago a life raft was found adrift off the coast of California. The several occupants had been in the raft a few weeks, had no water distillation or purification equipment, but were all adequately hydrated.
      The answer is something everyone that goes out on a boat should know.
      The fishing boat that want down had on board a nurse that had in her possession surgical tubing. With that tubing she periodically gave the survivors salt water enemas. The lower intestine, designed to extract water from the human waste stream, was adequate to extract moisture while being impermeable to the salt in the salt water.
      Bingo! Or, as they say here, profit!
      (Next time I go out on the ocean my kit will contain an enema syringe)

    4. Re:OT: Dehydration Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Robertson family. It wasn't pure seawater.

    5. Re:OT: Dehydration Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Several years from now a life raft is found adrift off the coast of California. The several occupants were dead, because they believed that salt water enemas would make a big difference to their survival, instead of making sure the life raft was adequately stocked with a source of pure drinking water. (Or a can, plastic tarp, Sterno/fire, and proper surfacing to create distilled water by boil and condensate method.) Or really because they believed in oft repeated medical urban legends when the real story was wholly different and has never been medically confirmed. (Bear Grylls aside, please.) Hell, bring a 1L bottle of water with instead of the syringe - you'll live longer.

      I was originally going to post about something more meaningful – like how Hayden’s crack about twentysomethings is far more likely to produce immediate results (“Bring it on!” George W. Hayden Bush), or how could a fuckwit who uses “cyber attack” meaningfully be in charge of the NSA. But I guess I’d rather give advice that might actually save a life.

      Captcha: Intend

    6. Re:OT: Dehydration Question by DeuceDaily · · Score: 2

      From a quick google, I found some countering arguments on this.
      I would rather address this point though:
      If you are found dead on a life raft, do you want it to be with or without a tube shoved up your arse? I'll take without thank you.

    7. Re:OT: Dehydration Question by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      At that point, does it matter?

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    8. Re:OT: Dehydration Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      or read a book, or a magazine article on lactation or had a recent reality check....

    9. Re:OT: Dehydration Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      am not an 'anonymous coward,' just don't have time to set up an account for every thread I respond to...I'm very busy trying to seek justice, defend the oppressed and other such things...so forgive me, please...

    10. Re:OT: Dehydration Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you didn't get the pun behind his statement. you may need to consider yourself a person who hasn't talked to the opposite sex in 5-6 years!!

  86. You know what this is? by RoknrolZombie · · Score: 1

    You know what this is? Fear. This is the same fear that they've been jamming down our throats for years, and we finally have an indication that the tables can turn. These douchebags are AFRAID of the sexually inactive anarchists. I can't help but see this as a good trend.

  87. Bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Caution, bait ahead.

  88. Poking the bear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nice. How'd taunting the anons work out for Stratfor and HBGary, General?

  89. Well as long as the issue is one guy then.. by MrLint · · Score: 1

    Its a good thing its just Snowden that would be the cause. And totally not an out of control power hungry paranoid organization that finds enemies in every crevice; that is hell bent on hiding its activities while co-opting the privacy of those they are allegedly supposed to protect. Because if it was that, it would be a horrible commentary on the state of affairs of our failed political system.

  90. This was never about Snowden by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This was always about the government controlling the internet, and through that, the cultural narrative...

    The internet is just TOO DANGEROUS to let the public have free reign... and now that people can be their own broadcasters, the narrative gets out of control - nothing scares a government more

    20 years ago to broadcast like you can on the internet today would have taken a ham radio license - and that was issued by the government and had less "reach"

  91. Married with children by chthon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I am married for fifteen years, and have a daughter of nine, but I sympathise with Snowden, not with the likes of NSA, CIA or FBI, or other likewise organisations.

    As a middle class engineer who has to comply with all kinds of regulations and laws and has to pay taxes, I want that the organisations which are created by the lawmakers also obey the law.

    Also, whistle blowers should be by default protected by the judiciary.

  92. The real tea party by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People opposed to, or uncomfortable with, unnecessary government snooping may be seen as today's Boston tea party activists, not the bogus Tea Party of today. England saw them as terrorists. Today we call them as patriots. Big government, while serving and protecting us, should read up on US history to see what happens when the people are deeply oppressed. We are likely nowhere near that digital point today. Let's hope that we never get to that point.

  93. Spy Magnet by EmperorOfCanada · · Score: 1

    The Russians must be loving Snowden as he must be target number one for Russia based US spies. So all they need to do is have him stand in an open field and see who "happens to randomly" stroll by with their 300mm camera. Then have him go rock climbing and see who "randomly" strolls by again.

    My guess is that if there were rumors that the Russians had developed a new superweapon and another rumor that Snowden was going out for an ice cream. That they would dedicate more resources to Snowden.

    Obama just went on Leno and said, "There is no domestic spying program" My biggest fear is that Obama is so misinformed that this is actually what he believes. Soon they will just be saying there is no Snowden. I have been waiting for the campaign of disinformation about him: that he is really a janitor and a Walter Mitty, that he likes child porn, that he does drugs, that he murdered his grandma, that he is UFO nut, that there is strong evidence that he made all this up, that he was a Russian plant all along, that he was a supporter of the Rebel Louis Riel.

    1. Re:Spy Magnet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obama just went on Leno and said, "There is no domestic spying program" My biggest fear is that Obama is so misinformed that this is actually what he believes.

      There is no basis for your fear, and no one who has been paying attention
      would even begin to imagine that Obama is an honest man.

      Obama has proven he is a liar. People of reasonable intelligence, as well as
      many of those who voted for Obama, understand this is the truth because Obama's
      words so frequently run counter to his deeds.

      This is sad times in the US, and in the world as well. I expect that before things
      get better, things are going to get a lot worse. Imagine martial law throughout
      the US, mandatory curfews, mass "disappearances" of activists and dissidents,
      and use of the military against US civilians within the borders of the continental US.
      It is quite likely that all this and more are going to happen, because the US government
      knows it is in danger of losing its power due to dissent from within and without.

  94. Re:Michael Hayden, like internet trolls everywhere by AHuxley · · Score: 1

    Top of page 3 and mid of page 2 of http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/aug/1/secrets-are-hard-to-keep-in-the-whole-wired-world/ Its like reaching out to a Nixon like silent majority of the contracting tech world.
    The GCHQ did it with better pay, conditions, academic support and lots of expensive US tech in the 1970-80's. A real living wage and advancement.
    The US gov seems to want to change the message back to a more positive debate vs the bitter people who cling to a 4th amendment subculture.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  95. This is what happens when... by millertym · · Score: 1

    You put former Jocks in charge of national security.

  96. Hayden's a hack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "If the US apprehends Snowden, hackers will attack us. So I'm going to make matters worse by insulting them. I'm such a genius! ARE YOU PROUD OF ME NOW, DADDY?"

  97. Hayden left gov't in 2009 by langelgjm · · Score: 1

    He's now in the private sector.

    --
    "Anyone who [rips a CD] is probably engaging in copyright infringement." - David O. Carson
  98. twentysomethings who haven't talked to the opposit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hayden knows this because the NSA's metadata analysis showed that those twenty-something men hadn't had any email correspondence with females in a long time, if ever.

  99. haven't talked to the opposite sex? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "twentysomethings who haven't talked to the opposite sex in five or six years."

    In my twenties I used to talk to my mother every day, you insensitive clod!

  100. I think he's underestimated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the likely hood of physical violence also.

    cyber attacks are somewhat annoying but do you think that no one is actually angry enough to start hurting people? I doubt it would be just 'cyberterror' attacks i suspect you'd get some good old 'terror' attacks

    well at least i hope so anyway

    1. Re:I think he's underestimated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i dream of a generation of Americans that grow up terrified and hungry, wonder what it is they did to deserve the constant bombings and drone strikes.

      you know like children in the rest of the world have it now

  101. He clearly wants to provoce such attacks! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So he gets more money for so-called cyber-defense-programs!

    I'm sure no real hacker is that stupid .. but probably the NSA's will simply pay some kids to do exactly that.

  102. Blah Blah Blah Fearmongering Blah Blah Blah by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

    Pretext to taking away more liberty in the name of security theater. /yawn

  103. Possibly Hayden hasn't met the new generation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Comments aside, to me it sounds as though Hayden hasn't spent much time with the current generation of computer nerds. Basements are less common these days while nice salaries, condos, and cars are not all that uncommon. He is right that the youngsters with nothing to lose (or think they have nothing to lose) are probably the most dangerous, but that doesn't mean that the stereotype is sound anymore. The NSA needs a dialog with the country to learn what the population thinks is okay, and he certainly isn't going to win over these "20 somethings" he talks about like this. Unfortunately because no one really knows what is going on, no one really knows how comfortable they are with it.

  104. What a solipsistic idiot by whitroth · · Score: 1

    Lessee, I just emailed my wife (of the opposite sex, as if that's anyone's business) an hour or so ago; does that count? And a lot of the techies I know are married or in long-term relationships, ESR for example.

    And some of us actually vote, and talk to our reps in Congress.

    The US gov't needs a new broom, and no, I don't mean the neoConfederate "Tea Party", or the neofascist Republicans.

                      mark "and yes, some of us working for the gov't do try to make it work"

  105. It's just metadata... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But somehow I think he knows how often they talk to females and how often they have sex.

  106. Obama Said We Don't Have Domestic Spying... by classiclantern · · Score: 1

    Obama just told Jay Leno the NSA doesn't do domestic spying so how does Hayden know the intimate details of our sex lives? How?

    --
    Now that I said that, I fell better.
  107. Re:two tales that have nothing to do with the pare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No Government can be trusted, and that includes the "good" one. Our Constitution was drafted specifically with this in mind.

    Yes and no. It is true that Government cannot be trusted, and our Constitution was drafted with this in mind. But at the same time, every day you and everyone else trust that they won't suddenly decide that, even after accounting for the 2nd Amendment, instituting a true police state is not only feasible, but that the risk of failure is negligible.

    Though given the direction we seem to be heading, eventually that trust will be breached.

  108. America is HAPPY with what's happening by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    anyone who values freedom is likely to be unhappy with the Fed's nascent police state,

    If people were unhappy, I think the Republicrats wouldn't still be winning every single election by a 99% landslide.

    1. Re:America is HAPPY with what's happening by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's a joke right? We haven't elected a leader in many many years. They are selected for us and both sides move towards the same goal. The right left paradigm so the sheeple think they have a choice and then all is justified as we like it because we chose this.

    2. Re: America is HAPPY with what's happening by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How can there be a landslide victory when almost 40% of the electorate did not vote at all?

  109. Hackers Will Attack US If Snowden Is NOT Captured by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 1

    It doesn't matter, hackers will attack because that is what they do, that is how they feel important. They'll find a reason, or no reason at all. Snowden will just be an excuse.

  110. Save Ferris by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

    "Oh, he's very popular Ed. The sportos, the motorheads, geeks, sluts, bloods, wastoids, dweebies, dickheads - they all adore him. They think he's a righteous dude."

    He in this case, standing in direct opposition to Commissar Hayden, is the US Constitution.

  111. Is he a homophobe? by stanlyb · · Score: 1

    Or he means that there are no gay-hackers? I think that this is good cause for the gay rights group to standup and defend the gay-hackers.

  112. MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    fredrated is spewing disinfo. Do not squirt seawater up your butt!

  113. And In Closing... by JeanCroix · · Score: 1

    ...Hayden shook with indignant rage and bellowed, "NERRRRDS!!"

    http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m74f0wvK501rq2uh5o1_400.jpg

  114. Meta by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How do you display all comments on iOS Safari on iPad mini? Sliders won't work!?!

  115. Nihilists? Really? by excelsior_gr · · Score: 1

    Does this guy even know what he's talking about? Nihilists don't care. According to nihilism, there is no government. In fact, there is no country either.

    I know, it must be exhausting...

  116. success with women goes both ways by epine · · Score: 1

    twentysomethings who haven't talked to the opposite sex in five or six years

    Pretty rich comment from a bunch of fortysomethings with an off-scale high divorce rate because they are constitutionally unable or unwilling to share the emotional corrosiveness of their work environment.

  117. he forgot 1 group by Nyder · · Score: 1

    he forgot the group that lives in Mom's basement.

    I mean, if you are going to start throwing out insults, you got to have mom's basement in there.

    Oh ya, and you also forgot the SKY is falling.

    --
    Be seeing you...
  118. So it's finally official by Jawnn · · Score: 1

    "Activist" = "enemy of the state". Sad times...

  119. TO,IH - Too Old, Ignored Him by doggo · · Score: 3

    Lest you think I'm some young, age-ist punk, he's only a decade & a half older than me. But most people who were born before personal computers were common in peoples' homes don't understand 'net culture. Or computers, for that matter.

    I'll give General Hayden some cred, in that's he served in the Air Force, and has worked in intelligence for most of his career. So he'll have some passing acquaintance with computers. But like many people his age, and from his background, he's probably clueless about "Nihilists, anarchists, activists, Lulzsec, Anonymous, twentysomethings who haven't talked to the opposite sex in five or six years."

    The fact that he's using "Nihilists & anarchists" in the same grouping makes me think of those fogies who say things like, "on the drugs", "hippy-hop", and "all gooped up on gop". It's a spew of things they might have heard, but aren't really familiar with. All they know is it's different... and it scares them.

    I'm sure Fox News'll give him lots of air time. You know, 'cause: Boo! Scary!

    1. Re:TO,IH - Too Old, Ignored Him by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Air Force generals are renowned for being complete idiots even inside the Air Force (all about the barely repressed “joystick envy”, no braincells, killing their own), no credibility given.

      Don't get it? Tom Cruise is the perfect Air Force general as is, no training required. You could replace any of them with him and there would be zero difference. Air Force generals are lower on the military IQ scale than US Marine shotgunners.

  120. Dennis! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I told you. We're an anarcho-syndicalist commune. We take it in turns to act as a sort of executive officer for the week.

  121. Reminds me of Deus Ex... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From a public info-terminal in fictional 2050s New York:

    Be Safe: Be Suspicious

    Terrorism has become an unfortunate fact of life, not only in New York, but the country at large, a direct assault on our communities and our way of life that leaves citizens struggling to find answers to difficult questions, not the least of which is "What can I do to prevent such atrocities? How can I help?"

    Quite simply, terrorism is successful because terrorists are able to pass unnoticed and unremarked upon — but they fail to count on the best intelligence network ever devised: the American people. How can you tell who might be a terrorist? Look for the following characteristics:

    • A stranger or foreigner.
    • Argumentative, especially about politics or philosophy.
    • Probing questions about your work, particularly high-tech.
    • Spends a greater than average amount of time on the Net.
    • Interests in chemistry, electronics, or computers.
    • Large numbers of mail-order deliveries.
    • Taking photographs of major landmarks.

    And those are just a few. If you're suspicious, then turn them in to your local law enforcement for a thorough background check. Better safe than sorry. You and your neighbors will sleep more securely knowing that you're watching each other's backs.

  122. er, yeah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    'Nihilists, anarchists, activists, Lulzsec, Anonymous, twentysomethings who haven't talked to the opposite sex in five or six years.'"

    Or perhaps people who care?

  123. Two great comments on TFA by Optic7 · · Score: 1

    In case some of you didn't read them, I have to quote two great comments on that Guardian page:

    Mankar
    06 August 2013 5:27pm

    WASHINGTON -- The former director of the National Security Agency and the CIA speculated on Tuesday that "nerds" and "homos" were likely to respond with cyber-terror attacks if the United States government apprehends whistleblower Edward Snowden.

    "If and when our government grabs Edward 'Four-Eyes' Snowden, and brings him back here to the United States for trial, what do these losers do?" said retired air force general Michael Hayden, referring to "oily, obese, pock-marked nerds, geeks, aspies, anime fans, bronies, freaks, homos, LARPers, asthmatics, Guy Fawkes mask-owners, twentysomethings who haven't left their mother's basement, let alone talked to the opposite sex in five or six years.

    "Snowden is a little spaz-boy, and I'd like to dunk his head in the toilet, take his lunch money and give him a wedgie," he continued. "And if these little freaks of nature want to try to hack us, they've got another thing coming!"

    When asked what sort of security measures were in place to prevent such cyber attacks against military networks, General Hayden responded, "We just installed the latest version of Norton Antivirus."

    Aside from being hilarious, it's a very insightful commentary on the original. It illustrates that many in the defense/intelligence industry, especially more so the higher up in the leadership chain, are basically the bullies from their school days. This guy is basically Biff from Back to the Future, 50 years later.

    Then, there's this:

    stopthewars
    07 August 2013 2:52pm

    Just me, or do all these NSA hotshots look like alien extras on the set of a vintage Star Trek episode?

    Macrocephalics on parade.

    Bald, pink, pumpkin headedness must be the career track in-look on Kolob.

    That and the over done military uniforms with the SS style cues.

    The total picture makes me think they're not even trying any more to hide their real mission....global domination through omniscience.

    Hehe...

  124. Now I'm hurt .. by roguegramma · · Score: 1

    .. because you forgot us slashdotters.

    --
    Hey don't blame me, IANAB
  125. HOLY SHIT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did anyone actually click the link to the article? this dude looks like the cross between a grey alien and Dr. Evil from austin powers.

    I can't wait until all these old, decrepit, pre-mature ejaculating, hater douches die off forever..

    I like to call them "The Shittiest Generation": pompous assholes who are nothing more than maniacal, sociopathic, power obsessed , little dicks, who think their generation saved us from any threat whatsoever.

    Those who've studied history know the truth - History was all a lie.

    Oh and, This guy looks like the kind of guy who likes watching his wife get fucked by another dude. I'm sure the slashdot 20something crowd might go as far as bukakeing her just to take a load off, however I think mr hayden's dime-piece is probably a bit too old/wrinkley/ugly for anyone to actually hit it..

  126. Re: Hayden and people who couldn't get laid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Looks like Heinrich Himmler would at age 113, Hmmm

  127. New Adjectives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your twentysomething Lulzsec you! You're such an insensitive and Anonymous twentysomething! Cease to be such an activist, or face the wrath of nihilist US government! Your mom was a Lulzsec!

  128. Obama will still be a brat though by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My bet is that Obama is planning a UAV attack against Snowden in Russia. With any luck, Russia won't appreciate having their sovereignty violated either. But Obama will still be a brat. Wouldn't surprise me if Obama again says its Bush Juniors fault. After all, being a brat and blaming others is BO's MO.

  129. I'm pretty sure "neckbeards" was a reference... by tlambert · · Score: 1

    I'm pretty sure "neckbeards" was a reference to the UNIX/Linux people who were unwilling to put back doors in their OS, at least not on purposed, as opposed to those nice, clean-cut Microsoft types.

  130. Does Michael Hayden get Irony? by Serendipidude · · Score: 1

    Mr Hayden might actually be justifying his own predictions by referring to these twentysomethings "who haven't talked to the opposite sex in five or six years.", as sexual frustration can be a powerful motivator when directed into other pursuits. Isaac Newton, for example, developed calculus during his period of celibacy which his contemporaries described as sending him a bit bonkers as well. Nerds not getting laid are to be feared indeed, rather than ridiculed. Besides, some of us just find the opposite sex unnecessary and annoying.

  131. Oh right by doom · · Score: 1

    Oh right, they just don't want to admit that they're scared of invading Russia

    And it's funny that Snowden's girlfriend didn't cure his idealism. Must've been something wrong with her.

  132. Hackers???? by CHIT2ME · · Score: 1

    We're already being targeted by hackers from abroad and from within!! This is news? Move along, nothing to see here. These are not the droids you're looking for!

    --
    My karma is bad. Don't get too close!!!
  133. Opposite sex only? by Mondor · · Score: 1

    Just wonder, was Hayden's note about the opposite sex a mass insult of LGBT society? Like - you are not a human being (or at least have no future in IT) if you haven't "talk" to the opposite sex? I think some gay should sue that fag.

    And before you think that "fag" is an insult - it's not in this case. See, what Mr. Hayden said can be translated into - "Regular sexual intercourse with the opposite sex turns you into a zombie". Which is FUD and could be a gay propaganda (hello, Russia!) if gays would be that stupid (to use Mr. Hayden's services, that is).

  134. so there are a lot of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    gay people involved?