Slashdot Mirror


NSA Officers Sometimes Spy On Love Interests

Jah-Wren Ryel writes "The latest twist in the NSA coverage sounds like something out of a dime-store romance novel — NSA agents eavesdropping on their current and former girlfriends. Official categories of spying have included SIGINT (signals intelligence) and HUMINT (human intelligence) and now the NSA has added a new category to the lexicon — LOVEINT — which is surely destined to be a popular hashtag now."

384 comments

  1. I am shocked shocked I tell you by DarkOx · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Really is anyone surprised?

    --
    Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    1. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by kthreadd · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Wasn't the oversight supposed to prevent this?

    2. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by ebno-10db · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No one is surprised, but what about spying on other people's sexting (or whatever you call it when people send revealing pictures of themselves via email). If you really want the general public to get properly outraged over this stuff, forget the 4th Amendment, and find cases of Carly sending interesting pictures of herself to her boyfriend, with the expectation of privacy (forget the technical aspects of whether that expectation is reasonable - human decency says you don't read other people's mail).

      It's actually better if Carly, and a bazillion others are at least 18. Otherwise it would degenerate into a discussion of "child pron", whether it was reported, individual criminals at NSA, yada, yada, yada. 18+ women sending revealing pictures of themselves to boyfriends/husbands, and people at the NSA checking them out, is exactly the sort of Peeping Tom behavior that would get the whole country up in arms.

    3. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by jamstar7 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Really is anyone surprised?

      Wasn't the oversight supposed to prevent this?

      Didn't the FISA court just reveal a few days ago that they can't do proper oversight on NSA? And nothing from the House Intelligence Committee either...

      --
      Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
    4. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      > Wasn't the oversight supposed to prevent this?

      Yes it was. According to the article most of these were only found out during un-related lie-detector sessions, not by any auditing system. It poses the question - how many other cases of abuse have slipped by because the employee knew how to fake out the lie detectors?

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    5. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obama told us that program is not being abused. If the American people examine what was going on the people would say it was ok, they are following the law, they would be ok with what is going on.

      I'm having a hard time finding a statement by Obama since reelection where he told the truth. Am I the only one that finds that odd?

    6. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, the oversight is to find institutional problems. The IG is to catch individual bad actors. And, apparently, some have been caught.

    7. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by mickwd · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Check out the this article and search for the section on Geoffrey Prime and read what he got up to.

      And remember his "data collection" was done on pieces of card, and was before the days that most adults/parents carry mobile tracking devices around with them so their locations could be known at most times.

    8. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm having a hard time finding a statement by insert name of a President here since reelection where he told the truth. Am I the only one that finds that odd?

      Ya, you probably are. What, did you think he was Black Jesus or something? He's a fucking politician, they all lie like dogs. An honest man would never make it on the ballot much less win an election.

    9. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by jamstar7 · · Score: 2

      Obama told us that program is not being abused. If the American people examine what was going on the people would say it was ok, they are following the law, they would be ok with what is going on.

      I'm having a hard time finding a statement by Obama since reelection where he told the truth. Am I the only one that finds that odd?

      Do you REALLY believe any intelligence agency is going to tell the truth to their supposed bosses? TLAs, especially those involved in espionage, deal in lies every day. They call it 'disinformation' or 'security procedures', no matter what their country of origin or who the ultimate boss is. Just look at the CIA under Dubyah. They got told to 'find the WMDs' and came up with the sketchiest evidence possible, then sold it to the powers that were because if they found nothing, they woulda been fired and replaced by somebody who could. Look at Team B under Reagan. They indulged in wishful thinking and stacked 'what ifs' to the point where their final report was total paranoia and science fiction, but it convinced Reagan et al to continue pressuring the Soviets and kept the Cold War going for another decade. Team B wasn't CIA professionals, but the CIA was watching over their shoulders and learned from them that the bosses want to hear what they want to hear, so if you wanna keep your jobs, tell them what they want to hear.

      --
      Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
    10. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by rtb61 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Oversight. Don't you get it at all. You are being handed another charade. NSA is meant to secure and gather intelligence, not act upon it, it was never set up that way.

      You are being handed the "BIG LIE", what counts is what other agencies who received private information from the NSA, who had access to the electronic interception established by the NSA, did with that illegally obtained information. They are now looking to through out a few scape goats, a smoke screen to hide the others well beyond the confines of the NSA.

      How much information did the US Department of Homeland Security receive from the NSA. What was the nature of the information, who had control over it and what did they do with it. The NSA are a direct feeder of information into the CIA, again, what information was received, who had access and what did they do with it. Next up the FBI, how much were the FBI in bed with the NSA, why did the FBI allow agents of the NSA to freely break the law. What information did the FBI receive and what did they do with it.

      Now you would think it would stop there, but oh no, it get's far far worse. It is public knowledge the corporate security contractors had full access to the information being gathered under the NSA auspices. Private for profit individuals with total and full access to all the intelligence information, now what the hell did they do with that information and who else did they give it too. What politicians and their backers had access to what information, to leverage power.

      Now you are getting a pretty little song and dance about a couple of NSA agents being naughty, all the while else the NSA provided access too with out any control at all and no record of what they did and Uncle Tom Obama the choom gang coward pretending it all stops at the NSA's door. The intelligence gatherer and not at the CIA's, Department of Homeland Security, FBI's et al (basically the whole US military industrial complex and it's financing banks). Those are the organisations that act upon the information provided by the NSA, they were all in on it, they all knew it was going on and they all had access to the information.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    11. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Informative

      According to TFA most incidents were "self reported", meaning someone failed a polygraph. Since polygraphs are bullshit we know a lot of times the criminal abusing this power got away with it.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    12. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by arobatino · · Score: 5, Insightful

      According to TFA most incidents were "self reported", meaning someone failed a polygraph. Since polygraphs are bullshit we know a lot of times the criminal abusing this power got away with it.

      Not to mention that it's not in the NSA's self-interest to learn about these cases, since it makes them look bad. So they probably don't ask more than the most perfunctory questions in this area.

    13. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Surprised? No, just waiting for more to come.

    14. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by hedwards · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I'm sorry, but this is bullshit.

      Where were you racist idiots when these programs were being started by President Bush? Seems to me that it was only when we got a black President that suddenly these things became a problem. And none of you folks ever bother to mention that these policies were started by the GOP. Most of us on the left never wanted these policies in the first place, but it's not like voting GOP would have offered a better situation. So, we mostly voted for somebody that was going to fix something. Which he did, DOMA is over, DADT is over, ACA passed and he hasn't started any pointless wars.

      But, unfortunately, he's staying the course on things that I would rather he not stayed the course on. But, you're a naive moron if you think that Romney or McCain wouldn't have. And in all likelihood they would be abusing it even worse.

    15. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by hedwards · · Score: 2

      Probably a significant number. Polygraphs are at best 85-95% reliable, according to supporters, and the real reliability is probably substantially lower for people that have to pass a polygraph in order to get hired. What's worse is tha the type of people that would be engaged in this sort of thing are much less likely to think it's wrong or expect to be caught. If you don't think something is wrong and don't expect to be caught, the likelihood of a polygraph catching you is minimal.

    16. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by smpoole7 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      > Where were you racist idiots when these programs were being started by President Bush?

      Disagreeing with someone over policy has nothing to do with racism. That's a red herring whose only purpose is to stifle discussion. The truth is, those who keep playing that card are just crying "wolf," and it will eventually lose any meaning whatsoever.

      For the record, I DID disagree with Bush on this endless surveillance, even though I'm a conservative.

      And there were some of us who were hoping that Obama would do BETTER. And you can't understand their disappointment?

      Two wrongs don't make a right.

      --
      Cogito, igitur comedam pizza.
    17. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      Hopefully. If everyone knows how bad an idea this is, but we all just go along with it because meh, then that doesn't really say good things about our ability to make decisions.

      It wouldn't be a whole lot better if most people went along with the NSA because they honestly believed it was necessary and wouldn't be abused, but at least that would mean that stories like this coming out could make them realize it was a bad idea and change it. Wheras if it's just apathy, then that's not going to be changed as easily.

    18. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by sideslash · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm sorry, but this is bullshit. Where were you racist idiots when these programs were being started by President Bush? Seems to me that it was only when we got a black President that suddenly these things became a problem.

      Please cut out the ridiculous accusations of racism. Whether you noticed or not, there has been a fairly sustained clamor about the Patriot Act, beginning with that ill-conceived law's passage. The clamor is louder during the current administration because (thanks to Snowden) we know more about the abuses now.

      There's an unfortunate pattern of responding to any criticism of President Obama with "racist! racist!" whether there's any evidence of racism or not. There are plenty of valid criticisms of Obama and his administration, several of them potentially impeachable offenses (yes, including starting an unauthorized war). But getting back on subject, since there isn't any racism evident in the comment to which you were responding, I'd thank you kindly if you would just shut your big mouth.

    19. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by smpoole7 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      > Really is anyone surprised?

      No, and I'm afraid that endless surveillance is going to become the "New Normal."

      If something can be done, it WILL be done, regardless of any laws passed to stop it. People are curious, people want power, people want control. For better or worse, the Digital Age is upon us, and all the laws in the world are not going to stop a determined person from digging into your data if he/she wants to. They'll just find better ways to hide what they're doing.

      Think about it. The government's approach to this has been to punish the LEAKERS who've brought attention to the surveillance. Not to make any meaningful changes in the surveillance itself. That, right there, proves my point.

      --
      Cogito, igitur comedam pizza.
    20. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He was sent to jail for 35 years for spying and 3 years for the assaults on young girls - which says a lot about the priorities of the British establishment at that time.

      Oddly enough I think that still matches the priorities... Except spying is now called hacking or whistle-blowing.

    21. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 2

      It is public knowledge the corporate security contractors had full access to the information being gathered under the NSA auspices. Private for profit individuals with total and full access to all the intelligence information

      I'm going to need a cite for that because I've been following this pretty closely and this is the first I've heard of private citizens having "total and full access" to the NSA's data.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    22. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by RogL · · Score: 4, Informative

      It is public knowledge the corporate security contractors had full access to the information being gathered under the NSA auspices. Private for profit individuals with total and full access to all the intelligence information

      I'm going to need a cite for that because I've been following this pretty closely and this is the first I've heard of private citizens having "total and full access" to the NSA's data.

      Wasn't Snowden a corporate security contractor?

    23. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is indirect evidence that the DEA, and certain other law enforcement agencies used this information as well. This would of course lead you to the conclusion that the rights of Americans have been violated in a very bad and covert way.

    24. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 2

      I'm sorry, but this is bullshit.

      Yes it is, but you posted it anyways. There was *more* of an outcry when this stuff happened under Bush, because the press hated him. Not enough to get it stopped, alas. But we have to keep trying. Focusing on somebody almost six years gone will be a great way to ensure that nothing continues to get done.

    25. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You might wish to read the post he was responding to... That specific post definitely has racial undertones.

    26. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      The only thing remaining is whether anyone has used it for political advantage yet. At that point, we'll have literally hit all of the, "what could possibly go wrong?" steps available.

      I actually expected it to take a few more years before it degenerated to this. Naive me.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    27. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      hedwards (correctly IMHO) deduced the poster is racist from this comment:

      "...everyone not merely the black man."

    28. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Stormwatch · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's what's fucked up about the US&A, you think you only have those two options: the right-wing party, and the far-right-wing party.

    29. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      > Wasn't Snowden a corporate security contractor?

      No, he was a contract employee. A "corporate security contractor" would be a company like Blackwater/Xe/Academi. The implication of the OP is that these private firms were able to request data from the NSA for their own purposes, not that people who worked for the NSA on contract did the same jobs as direct employees of the NSA.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    30. Re: I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know nothing a out US politics. STFU!!!

    31. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by sideslash · · Score: 0

      I read it, and don't see anything distinctly racist. Note that just because something mentions race doesn't mean it's racist, and just because you disagree with something doesn't mean it's racist.

      With those handy guidelines in mind, let's look at the "racial" comment being responded to. It was a complaint that Obama has expanded oppression from "the black man" to "everyone". I'm not really sure what the commenter was referring to, but this isn't a racist comment by itself. If they said they _wanted_ "the black man" to be oppressed, that would be racist, but they didn't say that. If anything, a fair reading would bear the interpretation that that Obama should have reduced oppression of "the black man" instead of expanding oppression to everyone. Again, the commenter may be wrong, but that doesn't make the commenter racist.

      Have we belabored this long enough yet?

    32. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by nbauman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Parent said

      Obama implements his real agenda, namely oppression of everyone not merely the black man.

      From reading the right-wing web sites, like the Wall Street Journal comments page, it's clear that racism is one of the things that drives the right-wing anti-Obama movement. And you can hear this from their right-wing "leaders" too.

      They're recycling the Reagan-era tropes about welfare mothers and lazy, irresponsible black men. (Which were themselves recycled from the racist South.) Sometimes they use code words and sometimes they come right out and say it.

      I saw one comment on the WSJ comments page saying that Charles Rangel should be "lynched." (Rangel is a real war hero, BTW. He saved the lives of 40 men in his unit. My question for right-wing assholes is, "Where did you earn your combat ribbons? That usually shuts them up. "Uh -- I had other priorities.")

      There has always been a strain of racism in America -- half the country was slave states, after all, and it took years after the Voting Rights Act of 1965 before they were allowed to vote in those formerly slave states.

      As conservatives like John Dean complain, the Republican Party made a Faustian bargain to win power by exploiting the stupid racist vote. After LBJ got the Democratic Party to support voting rights for blacks, the racists moved into the Republican party, and the South turned Republican (and racist), just as LBJ predicted.

      It's true that there are some racist Democrats. But the Republicans use racism as a basic strategy to divide Democrats -- and Americans.

      It's too bad racism distracts us from other important issues, like privacy and government snooping.

    33. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by nbauman · · Score: 1

      According to TFA most incidents were "self reported", meaning someone failed a polygraph. Since polygraphs are bullshit we know a lot of times the criminal abusing this power got away with it.

      Demonstrating again that polygraphs don't work on their own merits; they're just a prop that interrogators use to bluff people while they ask improper, incriminating questions that nobody would ever answer with a lawyer present.

      And demonstrating again that there are good, legitimate reasons why someone would take a course on how to beat the polygraph.

    34. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Dare+nMc · · Score: 2

      Snowden downloaded NSA secrets while working for Dell But that was top secret documents, not access to the spy data. Snowden had claimed to be able to access that as well, but I don't know at what role he was in, when he claimed he could do that.

    35. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oversight? You still believe that Obummer lie?

    36. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by hedwards · · Score: 0

      It's typo, it's clear what I meant.

      And there was outcry, but not from the sort of right wing bigots that the person I was referring to represents. They only started to disagree with the policy when a black Democrat started to do it. It was just hunky dory when it was a Republican policy.

      And also, if you read the post, it had some clear racist undertones to it. Why would anybody feel the need to underline that the President wasn't just oppressing black people? The obvious implication there is that it was fine when it was just colored people that were being oppressed, but somehow oppressing other groups isn't OK.

    37. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually if it made it to a polygraph session I don't think it counts as self reporting. It has to be reported to security officer so it is on the record prior to polygraph discovery....but things may have changed since I worked in a secure environment.

    38. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by hedwards · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      The US Government is out of control and President "Hope & Change" Obama implements his real agenda, namely oppression of everyone not merely the black man.

      Any further questions? The vast majority of the criticism of the President is not being done on the basis of what he's done or not done, it's based upon the color of his skin. People like the bigot I referred to had no problem with these policies when they were being enacted by a white President primarily against Muslims, but now that the policies are being enacted by a black President on a more equal basis, suddenly it goes too far.

    39. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by sideslash · · Score: 1

      People like the bigot I referred to had no problem with these policies when they were being enacted by a white President primarily against Muslims

      Really? "People like the bigot I referred to"? How about you find that sentiment (approval of pre-Obama civil rights violations) in their actual post, instead of just making it up and lumping them in with people you don't like. Maybe you are the real bigot here?

      but now that the policies are being enacted by a black President on a more equal basis, suddenly it goes too far.

      I didn't read it that way. The AC didn't give any indication that they wanted oppression of "the black man" to continue. They just complained about it being expanded to everyone. A little logic and rationality here, dude.

    40. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You fail at reading. It's the Pres doing the oppression, the color of HIS skin is not mentioned by the poster. I guess the implication is that prior presidents might have oppressed blacks in preference for non-blacks?

      Whatever. Haven't you learned to not feed the trolls?

    41. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Dare+nMc · · Score: 1

      > those who keep playing that card are just crying "wolf," and it will eventually lose any meaning whatsoever.

      Seams about right, what you were accused of would have been prejudiced, not racist. IE were you treating Obama differently based on race, that is predjudice. The original meaning of Racism, is that you feal one races difference makes them less likely to succeed. Would it even be racist to say since he is black he'll never reach a higher level than POTUS? Although I will say it is a compliment to the levels of opportunities attained in the US, that racism is now rare enough, that it is being redefined such that racism now must include prejudice, just to be able to continue to complain about it.

    42. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Guess its all ok since Bush did it. Nothing else to see or discuss here.

      Why does /. keep posting stories like this? It appears the majority of people here, likejamstar7, are perfectly fine with what the NSA is doing because it was done before..

    43. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There was also a lot of praise for the Obama re-election software, which was able to help him target exactly the right people to win a very difficult re-election battle. I wonder where they got their data from.

    44. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by ttucker · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm sorry, but this is bullshit.

      Where were you racist idiots when these programs were being started by President Bush? Seems to me that it was only when we got a black President that suddenly these things became a problem. And none of you folks ever bother to mention that these policies were started by the GOP. Most of us on the left never wanted these policies in the first place, but it's not like voting GOP would have offered a better situation. So, we mostly voted for somebody that was going to fix something. Which he did, DOMA is over, DADT is over, ACA passed and he hasn't started any pointless wars.

      But, unfortunately, he's staying the course on things that I would rather he not stayed the course on. But, you're a naive moron if you think that Romney or McCain wouldn't have. And in all likelihood they would be abusing it even worse.

      Yo dawg, I'm sorry, your, "I'm sorry, this is bullshit", is bullshit.

      Trying to paint everyone who does not like Obama as bigoted big establishment Republicans is a false dichotomy. Open your mind to this possibility, there are people that did not like Bush or McCain, do not like Obama, and would rather not have voted for Romney.

    45. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    46. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by ttucker · · Score: 1

      http://www.quickmeme.com/meme/3vl7k0/

      Yes, that is what I had in mind.

    47. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by jcr · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Here's a little tip for you, sparky: tossing off insults like "racist" doesn't excuse the crimes that are currently being perpetrated on the teleprompter-in-chief's watch, and trying to excuse them on the basis that they happened first during the Bush regime raises the question of what anyone gained then by picking Obama over the other guy. Wasn't Obama supposed to be the guy offering "hope and change"?

      As for starting wars, well: you're flat out lying. Obama has committed acts of war against Yemen, Libya, Egypt, and is about to do so to Syria without even getting a fig-leaf non-declaration of war like Bush did.

      Regarding gay rights, well praise him! Praise him for coming around on the gay marriage issue only a little while after Dick fucking Cheney did.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    48. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Immerman · · Score: 1

      > And demonstrating again that there are good, legitimate reasons why someone would take a course on how to beat the polygraph.

      Certainly not in this case, unless you consider hiding the fact that you engaged in blatantly illegal, unconstitutional surveillance "legitimate".

      I fully agree that polygraphs operate with a large dose of "black magic", and I'd be happy to hear a few well-reasoned arguments in favor of legitimate uses of being able to reliably beat one. But this ain't it.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    49. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      No, polygraphs are not 85-95% reliable. More like 50%. So save some time and money and just flip a coin.

      What's next, phrenology? Polygraphs are scientifically invalid. If you are asked to take one just laugh in their face, and say you would prefer using a seance to have your long-dead grandfather testify.

    50. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Immerman · · Score: 1

      Not necessarily. If corporate interests are able to openly insert their own moles into the organization without rigorous oversight, then for all practical purposes it amounts to the same thing.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    51. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by joe_frisch · · Score: 2

      Just because there are people opposed to President Obama for racist reasons doesn't mean that there aren't rational reasons to oppose his policies.

      One of the big problems with the partisan divide in the US is that each side can point to a subset of crazies on the other side and claim that the crazy's views invalidate all the opinions on the other side.

    52. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by wbr1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's true that there are some racist Democrats. But the Republicans use racism as a basic strategy to divide Democrats -- and Americans.

      Both parties do whatever they can to divide us. All these divisions keep us from seeing the real issues that we get fucked on.

      Do you think Exxon or BP give a flying fuck about abortion rights?

      Do you think Blackwater cares what color you are

      Do you think the MPAA gives 2 shits if you engage in gay marriage?

      Do you think the NSA gives a hoot about immigration reform?

      Do you think Boeing has nightmares about obesity and school kids diet?

      Their agendas are much different, and much more nfarious, because we are manipulable dollar signs or targets to them. (maybe not to the NSA, but we are to the corporations that provide them and the TSA et all equipment, research, training, etc.)

      The politicians do not care, because as long as they get CORPORATE money, they can swing voters to get in on the divisive shit. That is not to say that racism, gun control, immigration, abortion, etc are not important, but they are the lubricants with which we are finding ourselves more easily fucked.

      --
      Silence is a state of mime.
    53. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by jcr · · Score: 1

      what counts is what other agencies who received private information from the NSA

      I would argue that the wiretapping itself is already a crime and a violation of the 4th amendment, regardless of what other organizations ever gain access to it.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    54. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's too bad racism distracts us from other important issues, like privacy and government snooping.

      Its too bad when Obama breaks the law and someone says something about it they are called a racist and the issue has to be dropped. Because of that no one can critize the administration on issues like privacy, government snooping, killing of US citizens without trial, and on and on.

      If only we didn't have liberals crying "RACIST" every time Obama gets caught lying or doing something illegal, people might be able to get pressure on him to stop some of it. Unfortunatly that appears to not be possible in the US anymore.

    55. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Another thing that's bogus about this - the statement that it didn't involve spying on Americans.

      So all of these NSA officers have foreign girlfriends and wives? Isn't that maybe a trifle problematic?

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    56. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uncle Tom Obama

        Obama is not Uncle Tom. Uncle Tom is a character of absolute integrity. Obama is a minion bereft of any ethical principles at all.

      -jcr

    57. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And I thought it was the lazy "it'll all solve itself" party vs. the "batshit insane" party. Or something like that. They also trade positions once in a while so, who know which is which anyway.

    58. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Tom · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It also means the auditing systems failed.

      I used to run the IT compliancy in a mid-size company (2500 employees). I know the technical and process options you have, and frankly, this should either not be possible at all (technology solution) or have been caught during auditing (process solution). This is the kind of stuff that Separation of Duties was invented to prevent.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    59. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      Not that kind of oversight.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    60. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by nbauman · · Score: 1

      I don't understand you.

      The person who is engaged in illegal, unconstitutional surveillance is the interrogator.

      The person who takes the course on how to beat the polygraph is the person being tested.

    61. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by nbauman · · Score: 1

      The subset of crazies seems to include a greater proportion of the Republican party than the Democratic party. Probably because the Southern racists moved to the Republican party after the Voting Rights Act. The Republicans even had a name for it, the "Southern strategy."

      As Paul Krugman says, it's not an equivalence where both sides are partially right and partially wrong. It's mostly the Republicans' fault.

      I wish the Republican crazies would get down to a manageable level and I could devote more of my efforts to crazies on the left.

    62. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by nbauman · · Score: 1

      I think you're agreeing with me.

      In that case, I agree.

    63. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Although I will say it is a compliment to the levels of opportunities attained in the US, that racism is now rare enough, that it is being redefined such that racism now must include prejudice, just to be able to continue to complain about it.

      Fuck you. I live in the south and racism is alive and good. So, fuck you, with rare enough. Rare enough for an uncaring white fuck like you maybe. The state of Texas is fighting to keep Hispanics from voting. They've been unable to show in court any valid reason (no fraud) for voter ID, but they're fighting hard for it, because they know how it will affect. Florida's been caught many times doing similar things (felons list only listing hispanics, etc). If you go to rural areas in the south people still call black people nigger. In public, without any shame, so fuck you. Fuck you to hell.

    64. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Two wrongs don't make a right.

      But three lefts do!

    65. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by ogdenk · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, but this is bullshit.

      Where were you racist idiots when these programs were being started by President Bush?

      LOL Really? I was right here bitching about it. And are you seriously trying to say Republicans are racists? Are you retarded, or were you just raised on hatred?

      But, unfortunately, he's staying the course on things that I would rather he not stayed the course on. But, you're a naive moron if you think that Romney or McCain wouldn't have. And in all likelihood they would be abusing it even worse.

      Which is why I voted Libertarian. I actually vote for who I'd like to see in office. The only difference between Repub and Dem nowadays is their corporate sponsors.

    66. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Immerman · · Score: 2

      No, it's the other way around - In this case the people failing the polygraph are the ones engaged in unconstitutional surveillance of love interests. The interrogator is the one charged with overseeing them to make sure they don't violate policy.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    67. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by msobkow · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Crying "racism" denigrates everyone who hates Obama for his bad policies, and belittles Obama himself by portraying him as a man whose sole reason for being judged is being black.

      If anyone is racist, it's those who cry "racism" in the face of years of stupid and abusive policies. They can't argue against the points, so they play the race card. It's bullshit. Obama is more than a black man. Give him some credit for being able to instigate hatred for reasons other than the colour of his skin.

      --
      I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    68. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by anagama · · Score: 0

      You are a fucking retard and a purplebelly. Seriously.

      All the guy said was that Obama has expanded "oppression" from a historically oppressed group to a larger group.

      "Oppression" is a word with moral content -- you don't use it as a praise. You use it when you are criticizing someone for their policies. That sentence criticizes those who oppress minorities, AND it criticizes those who oppress more. Get it, "oppress" is a word of criticism, not support.

      Secondly, policies have nothing to do with melanin.

      The fact that Obama's POLICIES are worse than GWB's on an objective basis (for example, due process free detention vs due process free execution; lying to Congress to get authorization for a war (Iraq) vs destroying the separation of powers by totally usurping the power to make war (Libya)) is not something you can get around by labeling any criticism of Obama as racist. It just makes you look like the idiot partisan tool that you are, a New GOP (aka Democrat) conglomeration of red and blue. Red and blue makes purple, thus you're a purplebelly.

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    69. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by khallow · · Score: 1

      It's too bad racism distracts us from other important issues, like privacy and government snooping.

      It is indeed too bad racism distracts us from other important issues. But who's fault is that? You spent your entire post ranting about imaginary racism (or racism exhibited by a single poster on a single story) rather than discussing real problems. Maybe you should take your own advice here?

    70. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by quarterbuck · · Score: 1

      You should read the grand parent post before getting angry at the parent post. The GP post bought in race and implied that (Black) Obama was out to oppress everyone, not just the black.
      That was a very good flame bait/troll . It drifted the discussion off from surveillance to both partisan politics and race in one post.
      Now you are just feeding him.

      --
      http://slashdot.org/submission/1062723/Cheap-mobile-data-plan?art_pos=2
    71. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by aristotle-dude · · Score: 2

      hedwards (correctly IMHO) deduced the poster is racist from this comment:

      "...everyone not merely the black man."

      Or perhaps they don't want to use the bullshit politically correct moniker "African American"? Unless if you are a first or second generation immigrant from Africa, you should lose the right to that moniker IMHO. Let's just stick with the relatively inoffensive labels of black, caucasian etc.. Africa is a continent, not a race or even a country. Do you see people labeled as European American? No and it will be a bit silly to call a white Australian who immigrated to the US an European American.

      Are you sure that you are not racist yourself and you are just pandering out of some misplaced white guilt?

      Enough with the PC bullshit and enough with labels that bring up slavery. The current people living in US were all born free men. It is just that some of them have voted in leaders who want to enslave everyone.

      --
      Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
    72. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by wbr1 · · Score: 1

      I am in a sense agreeing, but also stating that it goes deeper than party lines or racism. There are little if any party lines left. Just corporate shills mouthing off whatever will appease the masses and give them their bread and circuses.

      --
      Silence is a state of mime.
    73. Re: I am shocked shocked I tell you by Dutchmaan · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Caucasian, as in from the Caucasus region? I find it interesting that you insisted on black, but refrained from using white... No hate, just an observation.

    74. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's no other way to say it.. you're a BIG RACIST..

    75. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Racist" is just another way of trying to stifle free speech.

      Black or not, this president is just eligible to cricism and protest of any program he supports or does not support.

      However, lesson learned, the USA should never, ever elect a minority race president ever again.

    76. Re: I am shocked shocked I tell you by jakimfett · · Score: 1

      Additionally, Obama signed the extention of the surveilance into law.

      --
      Bits of code, random ramblings: jakimfett.com
    77. Re: I am shocked shocked I tell you by aristotle-dude · · Score: 1

      Caucasian, as in from the Caucasus region? I find it interesting that you insisted on black, but refrained from using white... No hate, just an observation.

      There in lies the problem with mixing scientific classifications with politically correct ones. Maybe we should just use scientific grouping instead for everyone for racial groups and only allow everyone to use their "Motherland"-American, "Motherland"-Canadian etc... if they are first or second generation? That would be more fair for everyone. Even the Caucasian grouping seems a bit too broad. For example, Finns are closest to Cro-Magnons in terms of anthropological measurements and yet they are grouped with other Europeans as Caucasian.

      --
      Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
    78. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by crakbone · · Score: 1

      " If you go to rural areas in the south people still call black people nigger." Funny I see people on tv say that all the time, as well on the radio, and even in town. The majority of the people even seem to have a darker skin color. Seems little weird to limit the use of a word because of a particular skin color. True racism is alive in the south but it is alive and well on radio, tv, and in most neighborhoods.

    79. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Both groups are both composed of people who believe in the desperate necessity of authority, secrecy, and the husbandry of the public.

    80. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Penguinisto · · Score: 1

      ...logic, rationality, and ideology? Like mixing salt, sodium, and water... the results are always messy and explosive.

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    81. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      Not necessarily. If corporate interests are able to openly insert their own moles into the organization without rigorous oversight, then for all practical purposes it amounts to the same thing.

      Yes necessarily. Contract employees have exactly the same restrictions on them as direct employees. They go through all the same vetting processes to get a security clearance and they operate under the exact same rules. You migjht as well propose that corporations have moles in the ranks of the direct employees.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    82. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by nbauman · · Score: 1

      There are a few politicians who really do represent the people rather than corporate interests. Bernie Sanders is the first I would mention. Most (not all) of the progressive caucus fit into that category. I admit these are dark times and people are apathetic. But we do win some battles. If the Republican Supreme Court justices die off under a Democratic president and Senate, that would change things.

    83. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is the kind of stuff that Separation of Duties was invented to prevent.

      Oh, you mean like how you're supposed to have a separation between the executive, legislative, and judicial branches? How's that working out for you?

    84. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      I disagree. I believe it has been reported that the NSA runs 20 million searches a month on the data they collect. That kind of volume makes it impossible to audit and even separation of duties isn't going to be feasible. It isn't like you can separate the guy who chooses what to search for from the guy who looks at the results. At best you could 2-man it, but even with that the volume would prevent the second man from being able to tell the difference between results personal to the 1st man and just a widely cast net.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    85. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by dbIII · · Score: 1

      There's already been a movie about this sort of abuse (with Arnie no less in the lead role) and it put a positive spin on this sort of shit.

    86. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by dbIII · · Score: 1

      And there were some of us who were hoping that Obama would do BETTER

      You don't vote in a constitutional lawyer if you want to change things, you just find out then that "conservative" does not equal Republican but instead means someone that wants to keep stuff mostly the way it is, especially when he's under a lot of pressure to not do the few changes he promised like shutting down a torture camp that makes the US look bad internationally. Obama is better but not in the way you hoped - in a lot of ways he's baby Bush if he'd bothered to come into work.

    87. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by dbIII · · Score: 1

      People still use this shit? Look, it was a scam by a comic book writer on the FBI back when J. Edgar Hoover was taking kickbacks. Courts don't like it and law enforcement outside of the USA laughs at it. Just give up on it or roll over and use the scientologists new version of it that doesn't work either.

    88. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Have you been following the Snowdon thing? He's an example himself since his employer was a private for profit company that had a contract with the NSA.

    89. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sigh, apparently you weren't at school during the unit on civil rights.

      I read the post for comprehension, apparently you did not. The bottom line is that underpinning the whole post is that white people shouldn't have to put up with this crap, but it's OK to do it to black people.

      If you're so fucking stupid that you can't grasp that, then you can go fuck yourself.

    90. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by dbIII · · Score: 1

      I don't know how you got this so badly wrong - it's not just contract employees but also outsourcing to external contracting companies off site. The NSA then does not get to control who is in the same room looking at the same screen as the carefully vetted people.

    91. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by dbIII · · Score: 1

      exactly the sort of Peeping Tom behavior that would get the whole country up in arms

      Like groping people in airports?

    92. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by dbIII · · Score: 1

      We hit that point with Nixon. I think it's got worse since.

    93. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by hedwards · · Score: 2

      No, the sentence says no such thing. Perhaps if you would bother thinking about what was written you'd see that.

      First off, there's no objective basis for claiming that Obama's policies are worse on any objective basis than W's were. We know more about what Obama is doing than what W was doing, but I have yet to see any evidence that Obama is torturing anybody. Whereas even W himself admitted that he was torturing people. Sure, he didn't use the word "torture" but he's acknowledged ordering the water boarding and various other harsh interrogation techniques

      Second off, Presidents have had the authority to engage in short term conflict for decades. Hell, nobody ever bothered to go to congress to get Vietnam authorized. In terms of Libya, we parked a few gun ships off the coast, and that was about it. To call that a war is rather disingenuous as the Libyans were the ones actually fighting the war. We were just shooting missiles in there as support

      It's people like you that hold back progress. Pretending like racism isn't the main cause, requires magical thinking. Obamacare was a GOP proposal that came from the Heritage Foundation. And it was more conservative than what Nixon proposed back in the '70s. And yet, all we hear are lies from the GOP about how terrible it is to force people to buy health insurance. Well, that section of legislation was from their own party.

      Bottom line here, is that the criticism has nothing to do with policy and everything to do with melanin. Most of the most controversial things he's done were all GOP ideas and policies. But, suddenly, you get a black man doing it and all of a sudden there's something wrong with it.

    94. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Immerman · · Score: 2

      >You migjht as well propose that corporations have moles in the ranks of the direct employees.

      Exactly. We *know* we have direct employees abusing their power for personal reasons. What makes you think contract employees are going to be any *less* corruptible faced not with personal curiosity, but with the favor of their wealthy and powerful employers?

      Not that I would be at all surprised to find that corporations have their moles in the direct ranks either - I mean the evidence is pretty plain that our congressmen themselves vote strongly along the lines suggested by their campaign's corporate sponsors in plain sight of the whole world. Why would I suspect that the secretive organizations they create and fund would be dramatically more resistant to corporate influence?

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    95. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually it was demonstrated how incredibly easy it is to vote in someone else's name. Does this happen often? I have no idea. But to claim there is no valid reason to not verify the identity of voters is asinine.

      You claim to have knowledge of the intent of these voter ID laws and in Texas in particular. Can you cite any quotes from officials or lawmakers stating that is, in fact, the intent of these laws? Of course you can't.

    96. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A fucking teleprompter joke? REALLY?

      Tell us a 57 state one next.

    97. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      I don't know how you got this so badly wrong - it's not just contract employees but also outsourcing to external contracting companies off site.

      I am waiting for ANY proof that people off-site of the NSA's classified facilities had "total and full access" to any of the NSA's classified databases.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    98. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      We *know* we have direct employees abusing their power for personal reasons.

      Doing personal searches is not even in the same league as "total and full access." If you want to walk back the OP's claim to "on-site contractors could have abused their access to do unauthorized searches in individual cases," then I wouldn't be complaining. But "fotal and full access" is not even close to that - "total and full access" is the ultimate level of access it implies not only the full cooperation of the NSA it implies that the NSA's own access controls were deliberately out of the loop for these hypothetical companies use of the NSA's databases.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    99. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oversight never works as long as you're giving politicians enough power. The more power you give a politician the bigger and tastier target he is for a corrupting agent (either internal or external). The only way to prevent this kind of thing is to seriously scale down the government and remove all unnecessary possibilities of interference.

    100. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 2

      There was also a lot of praise for the Obama re-election software, which was able to help him target exactly the right people to win a very difficult re-election battle. I wonder where they got their data from.

      That was no secret at all. They don't need the NSA to figure out consumer profiles, there is already a billion dollar industry doing exactly that already. BlueKai, Facebook, Doubleclick, etc. There are hundreds of companies dedicated to figuring that stuff out based on credit-card usage, loyalty card usage, census data, voter registration records, purchasing history, salary history, etc.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    101. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Suppose the poster was himself black, and it was a sarcastic troll?

      I've heard such sarcasm, playing the other side, in the past. It's like when blacks talk about being ticketed for DWB. They're not really in favor of it. In fact, to them it stinks.

    102. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The comment doesn't actually make that clear; you just wish it did.

    103. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Really? You think every other president has been using the US law enforcement or whatever to get electoral advantage? Because that sounds like what you are saying.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    104. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yet another "Giant Douche or Turd Sandwich" argument why even bother peddling your point?

    105. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Mr.+Firewall · · Score: 1

      Forgive me for feeding a troll

      Where were you racist idiots when these programs were being started by President Bush?

      BUSH??? Where were you during the Clinton years, sonny? 'Twasn't Bush that started all this!

      --
      In times of universal deceit, telling the truth gets you modded -1 Troll
    106. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by sackofdonuts · · Score: 1

      Not surprised. I actually expected this was the case. But that doesn't mean I condone it. And your short retort to the story only serves to diminish the issue. This is some serious shit. And everyone should be outraged by this. And outraged at teh NSA overall. But one wonders what other organizations, those that are less well know, are up to. Organizations like the NRO.

    107. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Wah! We don't know what Obama is doing and Bush is a war criminal so you're racist!"

      Just shut the fuck up you moron.

    108. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 2

      You are what is wrong with this country. Your response to Obama's treasonous betrayal of the country is to start playing party politics.

      Are you seriously so stupid as to think you're doing anything other than enabling this shit? Is your point really that we shouldn't criticize Obama because Romney would have been worse? Really? Because that's what you're saying.

      And none of you folks ever bother to mention that these policies were started by the GOP

      I also tend not to remind people that water is wet or that the sky is blue because there is no reason to remind them. IT DOESN'T MATTER WHO STARTED IT. What matters is who has the power to end it. Are you too stupid to see that? Are you so wrapped up in part politics that you actually think who started it matters now?

      THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS IS WHO CAN END IT.

      That is who we need to be yelling at.

    109. Re: I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rather narrow on your part. Do we need a confession from a career criminal to know she is a career criminal? And still is? No. All we need is the pattern and a current anomoly that fits the pattern. I rather casually think we have both. Here is a nicely adjudicated pattern element: gerrymandering to suppress the election of minorities to Congress. Do we need a confession from you to be suspicious of your future posts? Do we need a confession from me that some of my affilations tend to be a bit egalitarian?

    110. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A contract employee of a third party company not of the fucking government you idiot.

      Captcha: Chortle *chortle*

    111. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by dbIII · · Score: 1

      For a really blatant one there's also Reagan who manipulated the Iran hostage crisis via contacts in various agencies. Things just got worse and worse for Carter on that issue with broken lines of communication but Reagan paid off the terrorists and solved it apparently in a day. Funny how it looked like the result of weeks of negotiation.

    112. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 2

      A contract employee of a third party company not of the fucking government you idiot.

      No, he was a direct employee of a contract house that handles staffing for some government agencies. His employer of record, Booz Allen, is basically a glorified temp agency.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    113. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      Wasn't the oversight supposed to prevent this?

      You think that Congressional or court oversight is supposed to prevent that 1 person per year out of 30,000 - 40,000 people that breaks the rules due to the base human emotion of jealousy? You can mark yourself down for a comprehension fail.

      --
      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
    114. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      According to TFA most incidents were "self reported", meaning someone failed a polygraph. Since polygraphs are bullshit we know a lot of times the criminal abusing this power got away with it.

      So you think that the rate might be higher than 1 person per year out of 30,000 - 40,000 people that was identified and disciplined or fired? I'll correct you on this: you don't know anything. You're just making wild speculation.

      --
      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
    115. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      Since this is the same process that NSA would use to ferret out moles and other law breakers, it certainly is in their interest to find out. Do you think Snowden made them look bad? That is the way undetected criminal action tends to work out. Undetected problems of this sort seldom age well. They are way better off detecting it themselves, before it festers and blows up.

      I have no idea where some of you people get your ideas. Too much bad TV?

      --
      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
    116. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Polygraphs are the incarnation of American pseudo-science and irrationality. They are not allowed to use it on US soldiers/airmen/sailors.

    117. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Boronx · · Score: 1

      First of all, LOVEINT guys are law breakers. Second of all, I doubt polygraph screening is really how they ferret out moles. The truly stupid ones, maybe, but a mole is somebody that they care about. They clearly don't worry too much about the LOVEINT guys.

    118. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you think Boeing has nightmares about obesity and school kids diet?

      Yes, definitely. They can fit more thin people into those planes - more profit you know.

    119. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Tom · · Score: 1

      Feasibility is a matter of desire (or need). If you really want to comply, you always can. I have never found one single case where compliance was truly impossible. If someone says he would like to... but he can't, that is ALWAYS a lie.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    120. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by BenoitRen · · Score: 1

      Seams

      Seems

      predjudice

      prejudice

      feal

      feel

      races

      race's

      F---, would not read again.

      "Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 4.1)."

    121. Re: I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I live up north and racism is alive and well here too, with very rare holdout areas (more liberal/college students).

    122. Re: I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bogus? Seems like a policy to me. Date (and file paperwork) a foreigner, they get a background check. Date an American? No check. In theory.

    123. Re: I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not so much the fact that a black man is doing it as much as it's the fact the Democrats are doing it. Claiming the GOP wouldn't bitch and moan if a white Dixiecrat had pushed it through is disingenuous at best.

    124. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by gordo3000 · · Score: 1

      what does teh 1970's GOP have to do wtih the GOP today, or frankly what conservatives think today (or the majority of people, for that matter)? Similar proposals were made by Clinton and they were roundly shot down in the 90's! That was long before anyone could envision a black president 15 years later.

      How is it the best that a supporter of Obamacare can do is say it was a republican idea 40 years ago during the heyday of liberal policies? And why is it that if one or a small group of republicans support something at some point the greater majority today have to by party affiliation? That's like saying Obama must support Jim Crow laws because they were mainly instituted by Democrats.

    125. Re: I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How oversight of the intel weenies in the shop /I/ was in worked (granted this is a sample size of one in a rather large gov't agency.) We had one midlevel linguist who had the glorious additional duty of looking at all the phone numbers we looked up to make sure we weren't looking up the numbers of citizens of countries we shouldn't be (which is not to say we didn't listen/record conversations legitimate targets had with citizens in those countries, but that's a whole different can of worms.) If he found any irregularities he'd then confront the individual about it.

      In an idealized perfect world where the good guys are perfect, save the world in 120 minutes or les, get the girl, and never make typing/clicking mistakes; all such irregularities would be sent immediately to the IG for investigation into the perp's actions (because in said perfect world mistakes never happen unless you're working for the big bad). That's not the world we live in though; intel weenies are human and make mistakes. Which isnot to say people looking up who their wife/girlfriend has been calling isn't a blatant abuse of power.

    126. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by bogjobber · · Score: 1

      Hell, nobody ever bothered to go to congress to get Vietnam authorized.

      That's not true. And the reason Obama isn't torturing anybody is because he just kills them outright. There's no need to worry about dragging a suspect halfway around the world and dealing with the judicial system and public scrutiny that entails when you can just call in a done strike to murder them and everyone in their vicinity. It's much simpler that way.

    127. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by gordo3000 · · Score: 1

      do you honestly not realize that there is a huge plurality of Americans that find any amnesty for illegal immigrants a non-starter? it's not racism either, as the strongest proponents of kicking them out come from high educated immigrants (at least in my circle) of color. Sure, there are racists that are against immigration reform, but they are few, far between, and easy to spot.

      do you honestly not realize that abortion is actually a fundamental ethical belief for a large portion of the population? It's not some made up divisive issue but one that is a core belief?

      These groups may not be the majority, but a strong enough plurality in our system is what is required to prevent large scale changes, and it works because it forces people to realize a large percent of the population can't be ignored because you crossed a magic 50% mark, because if you do, the result leaves us even more divided.

    128. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Racism IS alive and well..... It's just typically not caucasians exercising it.

      I live in the south as well, and the poster is full of crap. Probably lives in New York City.

    129. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right Wing == Limited Government, Fiscal Responsibility, Personal Responsibility

      FAR Right Wing == Anarchists

      Umm.... last I checked we were dealing with socialists in the federal government. You are WAAAAY off base!

      Right and Left in America != Right and Left in Europe.

    130. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obama is just as white as Zimmerman....

      So how is he called "White" while anyone who objects to current policy called a racist?

    131. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by cetacius · · Score: 1

      I would like to see your certificate of graduation from kindergarten!

    132. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by anagama · · Score: 1

      "there's no objective basis for claiming that Obama's policies are worse on any objective basis than W's were"

      You are fucking DNC partisan troll, incredibly uninformed, or stupid. Probably the first one because even morons can see that Obama is worse than GWB, if for no other reason than for making the radical abuses and executive power grabs of the GWB administration, the new normal. Set aside whether due process free execution is worse than due process free detention, whether tripling the war in Afghanistan is thrice as bad as GWB, or destroying the War Powers Act so any Cheney type president in the future has carte blanche to start any war, any time, any where, and there isn't anything anyone can say about it.

      "Obamacare was a GOP proposal that came from the Heritage Foundation. And it was more conservative than what Nixon proposed back in the '70s."

      No shit. You use this a defense, but Obama was touting the public option even after he cut a deal with the for profit insurance/drug industries. Is this supposed to be an example of how liberal Obama is? That he gave us NixonCare with the liberal parts stripped out? How does enacting NixonCare prove that the DNC is *not* the New GOP?

      The bottom line is, Obama is a murderous neocon. I don't care if he is Chartreuse -- his policies are bad, racist, cronyist, and murderous. I bitched the same way about GWB because of his policies, and to suggest people let up on Obama because he is black (i.e., playing the racist card) IS racist.

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    133. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by StewBaby2005 · · Score: 1

      nope. Human nature is such that this is SOP....and why we can;t trust anyone with our personal details...

    134. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not sure what you're aiming at. It's Obama's job to know what the NSA is doing. Are you saying, "Obama didn't lie intentionally, he's just horribly bad at doing his job"?

      Well at least, screwing up is morally superior to buttfucking a whole nation intentionally.

    135. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      nope

    136. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by wbr1 · · Score: 1

      You misunderstand gordo. I openly said that these issues are important. At least to certain groups at certain times. However, they are devisive and used as a smoke screen to hide other actions.

      --
      Silence is a state of mime.
    137. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Incidents are self reported just because the subject believes it will be revealed in a polygraph. Not everyone can beat polygraphs, even with planning. Polygraphs are given every so many months at the NSA to everyone. The problem with polygraphs is 1) they're beatable by conniving by some people and 2) some sociopaths can beat them because sociopaths often don't display any distress when lying.

      For the record, a better polygraph mousetrap is being worked on that involves imaging the brain. Essentially, the brain has to work harder to lie, even if the body doesn't otherwise t give itself away.

      Just curious if people here generally feel the NSA electronic eavesdropping is useful to national security at all and if so how ti ought to be conducted if you have any ideas about that also...

    138. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by tom+arnall · · Score: 1

      sleep with dogs, get fleas.

    139. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL... and this is a fine example of being Latino. Fuck you, you embarrassment to the race.

    140. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You really swallowed the GOP's discourse, hook, line, and sinker.

    141. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow,.. it's public knowledge that security contractors had access to everything?.. lol.. I find it so funny when people that have never worked there claim to know how it works,.. I was there for 22 years buth military and contractor. Snowden had access to the data he had because HE WORKED IN THAT OFFICE. The different programs there do not even share a network. It's called Compartmentalization... everyone works a mission and without readon to specific areas,. they cannot get access to it. Their badges won't even get them in the doors,.. or for that matter,.. the hallways in that area of that building without alerts going off.

    142. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Keith+Henson · · Score: 1

      Not surprised. What I do expect is that someone will be caught, maybe some very senior people, using the trawl to play the stock market.

      --
      End MGM. Get prospective parents of boys to Google: Men do complain
    143. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What a butthurt!

    144. Re: I am shocked shocked I tell you by sunsurfandsand · · Score: 1

      You claim to have knowledge of the intent of these voter ID laws and in Texas in particular. Can you cite any quotes from officials or lawmakers stating that is, in fact, the intent of these laws? Of course you can't.

      Oh, come on, man. In what world do cheaters announce their intent to cheat?

    145. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by aiht · · Score: 1

      No, polygraphs are not 85-95% reliable. More like 50%. So save some time and money and just flip a coin.

      What's next, phrenology? Polygraphs are scientifically invalid. If you are asked to take one just laugh in their face, and say you would prefer using a seance to have your long-dead grandfather testify.

      Did you actually read GP's post?

      Polygraphs are at best 85-95% reliable, according to supporters, and the real reliability is probably substantially lower

      Your point is entirely correct, but you're not contradicting them, you're agreeing.

    146. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by jamstar7 · · Score: 1

      Not sure what you're aiming at. It's Obama's job to know what the NSA is doing. Are you saying, "Obama didn't lie intentionally, he's just horribly bad at doing his job"?

      Well at least, screwing up is morally superior to buttfucking a whole nation intentionally.

      I'm saying the TLAs routinely lie to their bosses. The heads of the various TLAs are politicians, not intel professionals, they're kept out of the loop for black projects/ops because their job is to go to Congress and say 'Nothing is wrong, we're cool, we're obeying the law, now can we have our funding please?' while the deputies do the dirty work. I'm saying nobody told Obama anything about the illegal shit the TLAs do on a regular basis as there is 'no need to know' the nuts and bolts, only the results. It's been that way since Day 1 of every TLA in existence.

      --
      Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
    147. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by SanDiegoFreeway · · Score: 1

      Agreed. I don't like Obama. Or McCain, Romney, et al. They're all corporatist, authoritarian whores. And as much as his supporters, and channels like MSNBC like to imply that disagreeing with Dear Leader makes you racist, it's preposterous to make the argument. So what did I do in 2008 and 2012? I wrote in Gerald R. Ford for President. (We may as well elect him once, after all.)

      --
      -J
    148. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bottom line here, is that the criticism has nothing to do with policy and everything to do with party. Most of the most controversial things he's done were all GOP ideas and policies. But, suddenly, you get a Democrat doing it and all of a sudden there's something wrong with it.

      FTFY

    149. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by intermodal · · Score: 1

      Only if he believes the GOP is even remotely right-wing. Whatever right-wing even means anymore.

      Personally, I don't believe we have a left or right in this country, nor conservatives and liberals as most of the world knows them. I think we just have a lot of bullshit terminology with no real meaning, and a bunch of oligarchs who talk one way or the other based on which voting base they wish to appeal to. Sure, occasionally someone else sneaks their way into office, but seldom does it matter.

      The irony is, the way half the terms are used in US media, the meanings are almost entirely misleading if compared with their historical use.

      --
      In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
    150. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by volmtech · · Score: 1

      An "African-American" is anyone who ancestors where slaves in America. The term has now become generic for any person of Black African ancestry even if they are Canadian or Jamaican. Neither of Barack Obama's parents had any American slaves in their family. He had the experience of being "Black in America" so he is an African American. The children of Nigerian oil princes qualify for affirmative action admissions in colleges. A White person who's parents are from Johannesburg is NOT an African American.

    151. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As someone who voted for Obama twice (and doesn't regret that decision), I'd just like to tell you to go fuck yourself. Your derailment of a discussion with ad hominem accusations of racism aren't any better than the conservative whines about the "war on Christmas."

      You aren't contributing anything to the discussion. You make me embarrassed for liberal causes. Go fuck yourself. Learn to fucking debate or shut the fuck up. We don't need your bullshit; you do more damage to the credibility of progressives than you're worth.

      Also note: I'm not saying racism doesn't exist. I'm just calling you an intellectually dishonest lying duplicitous asshole that embodies everything that is wrong with American political discourse today.

    152. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by ttucker · · Score: 1

      Indeed. The whole vote for Republicans and they will make everything OK notion died for me when G.W. Bush had Republicans in both houses of the US Congress, at that time we saw what the party's policy goals were.

      Our system now is to vote for two flavors of the same thing. We get one party who supposedly cares about one dimension of liberty, who forwards it mostly by not abridging it any further, while at the same time relentlessly usurping some other freedom. Then the other guys get in there, and by god they are going to not make what the previous party did any worse! Of note, they are not going to reverse the damage, merely not make it any worse. Then they will proceed to usurp the liberties that the other party held so dear.

      What to do about it is a harder question. Casting votes into the wind probably wont actually change anything. Perhaps the power of change is not really in the Congress and White House, but instead in selecting local governors and leaders that do advocate principles of freedom. In our day, we will probably see another constitutional convention.

    153. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by jamstar7 · · Score: 1

      And there were some of us who were hoping that Obama would do BETTER

      You don't vote in a constitutional lawyer if you want to change things, you just find out then that "conservative" does not equal Republican but instead means someone that wants to keep stuff mostly the way it is, especially when he's under a lot of pressure to not do the few changes he promised like shutting down a torture camp that makes the US look bad internationally. Obama is better but not in the way you hoped - in a lot of ways he's baby Bush if he'd bothered to come into work.

      Keep in mind that Congress passed a bill to prevent the government from moving anybody out of Camp X-Ray and defunded any attempt to move any prisoners scheduled for release back home.

      When are people going to realise that whoever sits in the Oval Office is not a whole lot more than a figurehead?

      --
      Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
    154. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Modded up by all guilty feeling white men. I live in a state where black people call white people crackers in public, only they don't get arrested for it like whites do when we say nigger. So fuck you you profane douchebag.

    155. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And fuck you for confusing Hispanic with illegal alien. You need an ID to buy a beer, open a bank account, or use a credit card.
      Yet somehow, its too much to ask to show your ID when you vote?

      Racist claiming racism... Too funny.

    156. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The left hand sockpuppet or the right hand sockpuppet, you mean. The puppeteer remains the same.

    157. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by jamstar7 · · Score: 1

      Why do you assume I'm 'perfectly fine' with the NSA actively and openly breaking the law and having zero oversight?

      --
      Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
    158. Re:I am shocked shocked I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the Hispanic you're referring to are American citizens, then they can't be stopped from exercising their voting rights. However, illegal aliens aren't citizens and therefore don't have a right to vote. That's the way it is and the way it will remain. I'm sure Mexico wouldn't want me to show up down there and vote (as if it would matter anyway).

  2. ctrl-c by suso · · Score: 5, Funny

    I had to do a SIGINT on previous girlfriends too.

    1. Re:ctrl-c by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and on your mum

    2. Re:ctrl-c by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Doing ctrl-c on girlfriends, followed by ctrl-v: that's where babies come from.

    3. Re:ctrl-c by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

      Doing a ctrl-x on girlfriends is where sanity comes from. Maybe Sheldon Cooper has it right, but most of the rest of us suffer from certain weaknesses.

    4. Re:ctrl-c by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Doing ctrl-c on girlfriends, followed by ctrl-v: that's where babies come from.

      *woosh*

    5. Re:ctrl-c by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      She wanted a SIG 69 but I had to SIGHUP that one.

    6. Re:ctrl-c by jones_supa · · Score: 2

      I had to do a SIGINT on previous girlfriends too.

      I have never needed to use such drastic measures. Usually a SIGTSTP has been enough.

    7. Re:ctrl-c by jittles · · Score: 4, Funny

      I had to do a SIGINT on previous girlfriends too.

      I have never needed to use such drastic measures. Usually a SIGTSTP has been enough.

      Hans Rieser found that SIGKILL was the only way to work things out with his wife... Did I go too far? No seriously, sometimes SIGSTOP isn't enough and they try to continue to lurk as zombie processes.

    8. Re:ctrl-c by girlintraining · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I had to do a SIGINT on previous girlfriends too.

      Joking aside, it's a well-known fact dating back to well before the roman empire that family is a vulnerability that can be exploited in warfare. The NSA, like any good intelligence agency, keeps track of all exploitable weaknesses in both its own agents as well as the enemy's.

      I don't think this is particularly newsworthy -- the problem with the NSA isn't their capabilities, but rather who they're using them on. Very often, it seems the NSA is being run more like the FBI; chasing down the political adversaries of the current majority party, doing DNA analysis on dog shit (true story -- Hoover did it), and investing an inordinate amount of resources in suppressing speech unpopular to the current majority party. The NSA may have once been a first-rate intelligence organization but nowadays they're looking more KGB-ish... overconfident and leaking like a mcdonald's coffee cup during morning rush hour. They really have only themselves to blame for this sorrid state of affairs.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    9. Re:ctrl-c by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Girlfriend? Rumor has it, it was a SIGTRAP.

    10. Re:ctrl-c by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I did a ctrl-v on your girlfriends face! She loved it :)

    11. Re:ctrl-c by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank goodness that he didn't killall instead.

    12. Re:ctrl-c by mcgrew · · Score: 2

      doing DNA analysis on dog shit (true story -- Hoover did it)

      Hoover died in 1972, DNA profiling didn't come until 1984.

    13. Re:ctrl-c by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      In any case it should have triggered SIGILL.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    14. Re:ctrl-c by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *woosh* yourself.

    15. Re:ctrl-c by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's what THEY want you to believe.....

    16. Re:ctrl-c by gman003 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Eh, I was trying to figure out a SIGABRT joke, so I don't think you went too far.

    17. Re:ctrl-c by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These days, they first scan your envelope for sender name/address and then get your DNA from the poststamp. Then they can fuck with your DNA.

      I just made this up, but if I were an executive for Raytheon, I would see 2000 million dollars in this idea. So: 100% chance this is going to happen if it has not yet happend.

  3. I don't believe it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nobody breaks office policies

  4. Yet again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    "Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely." -- Lord Acton

    1. Re:Yet again... by jamstar7 · · Score: 2

      "Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely." -- Lord Acton

      Yeah, but we need the electricity.

      --
      Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
    2. Re:Yet again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely." -- Lord Acton

      But "hope and change"!! But Bush did it too!!! HOW DARE YOU SPEAK ILL OF GLORIOUS LEADER OBUMMER!!!!

  5. Humans by TCM · · Score: 2

    Humans pursuing their petty little human needs when noone is looking? YOU DON'T SAY!

    Separation of power was not thought up by idiots, you know.

    --
    Of course it runs NetBSD. BTC: 1NT7QvbetmANwaMzhpVL6
    1. Re:Humans by kthreadd · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Actually it's not that unlikely that your girlfriend/boyfriend might be a terrorist if you work for the NSA. Just think of it, the perfect way to infiltrate the system. If anything this should be mandatory procedure for all NSA employees.

    2. Re:Humans by ebno-10db · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You would make a brilliant bureaucrat/politician. I'm not saying you are one, or even that you have the slightest inclination towards such sleazy behavior, but you certainly understand how they think.

    3. Re:Humans by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah this is exactly why people have a real problem with ubiquitous spy networks. They will inevitably be abused. What happens when the government changes and the new guys don't mind using this apparatus to suppress political dissent? What happens when dissent has been suppressed, the administration becomes the aristocracy and the president effectively becomes king? It's happened before in many places, and the only lesson to take away from all this is that the price of freedom is indeed eternal vigilance.

    4. Re:Humans by hazeii · · Score: 3, Informative

      Em, it's already being used like that.

      --
      All your ghosts are just false positives.
    5. Re:Humans by PPH · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's not the way background checks for security clearances work. You don't snoop on your own wife/girlfriend/whatever. The agency has people that check out your activities and associates from time to time for any potentially compromising (blackmail potential) situation or connections to foreign intelligence or criminal groups. Other information uncovered is rarely fed back to the employee.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    6. Re:Humans by nine-times · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This is something we should all understand: There's effectively no difference between "actual abuse" and "a system that enables abuse with no accountability". If you have a system that enables abuse without the proper safeguards against abuse, then it's only a matter of time before people start taking advantage of the situation.

    7. Re:Humans by cervesaebraciator · · Score: 1

      Actually it's not that unlikely that your Slashdotting colleagues are bureaucrats/politicians. Just think of it, the perfect way to infiltrate the opposition. When they get control of enough karma they can begin manipulating which opinions get heard and which do not by a segment of the pro software-, speech-, and political-freedom movement.

    8. Re:Humans by blahplusplus · · Score: 1

      "If you have a system that enables abuse without the proper safeguards against abuse..."

      I think the whole concept of safeguards has been discredited because once you have sufficient money and resources you can erode, destroy and work around them with impunity.

      I think people who think 'we just need to fix the system' are totally deluded. People have been saying that since the founding of the USA. The entire US style system is corrupt but most are simply not intelligent enough, nor educated enough to recognize how corrupt the modern western world has become. Add up all the wars america has been involved in, over the last 60 years and you can really only come to one conclusion: The average citizen is a moron incapable of seeing the world as it is.

    9. Re:Humans by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 2

      The late, great East German Spymaster Markus Wolf, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Markus_wolf , aka "The Man Without a Face", was a virtuoso at this. In post-war West Germany, there was a shortage of eligible bachelors, and an overabundance of lonely, frumpy spinster single secretaries working for important politicians. He slipped in East German romeos who were more than welcomed by the secretaries . . . and didn't mind handing over a few frivolous documents that they were typing for their bosses. The secretaries thought that the romeo needed the information for "business purposes."

      In one case, the secretary had to work on the weekend, because she had so much to type. The romeo typed stuff for her all weekend. Wasn't that sweet of him?!

      Anyway, given that spooks do look at their past mistakes, I wouldn't be surprised if the partners of NSA workers get scrutinized, to see what they have under their fingernails.

      In a more recent case a CIA traitor, Aldrich Ames http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aldrich_ames , had a wife who shopped like Imelda Marcos. He turned over information to the Soviets to support their lavish life style.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    10. Re:Humans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wrong, people aren't morons. Statistics on average IQs can demonstrate that. The problem is that human beings are easily controlled by their emotions, and there is a huge amount of propaganda that implants lies into the general collective. It takes research, education, and an open mind to even begin to penetrate the layers of bullshit laid down. The average person isn't a moron, instead they are people who hope that their countries are actually looking out for their best interests...

      With knowledge of how corrupt the world is it can be difficult not to fall into cynicism but please try. There are more people hoping things get better than those that hope it gets worse. Which are you? Do your feelings help things get better in any way?

    11. Re:Humans by wiredlogic · · Score: 1

      The investigators look into your relationships when you apply for these organizations. You are obliged to report changes in relationship status as they occur while you are employed there. Taking it upon yourself to pry into another person's business outside of your normal duties is an unethical abuse of government resources.

      --
      I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
    12. Re:Humans by khallow · · Score: 2

      I think people who think 'we just need to fix the system' are totally deluded. People have been saying that since the founding of the USA.

      And they've been right in the past. A lot of things have been fixed and work pretty well now.

      The entire US style system is corrupt but most are simply not intelligent enough, nor educated enough to recognize how corrupt the modern western world has become.

      Corrupt compared to what? The world has always been rotten to the core. And compared to other governments and societies, the US is a bit better than the median of the pack.

      Add up all the wars america has been involved in, over the last 60 years

      You do realize that's a pretty small number of wars for a global power? Especially one that was in a undeclared state of war with another global power (the USSR) for most of that period?

      What's special about countries like the US isn't the scale of the corruption, but the potential for harm. You don't have to worry about Belgium or Finland trying to create a massive empire or nuking the world. I still see room for the usual fixes in here.

    13. Re:Humans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Statistics on average IQs demonstrate the opposite. The average IQ is 100 - always. It's a scaling average. As time goes on, people's IQ has been gradually scaled up, because the average is going down. If Tommy is 90 one year, and the entire scale is moved down, Tommy will now be 91 (or 92, etc). It's not because Tommy got smarter, it's because Tommy got closer to "average intelligence". People are morons, and are becoming increasingly moronic as time goes by.

    14. Re:Humans by ancientt · · Score: 1

      shhh

      --
      B) Eliminate all the stupid users. This is frowned upon by society.
    15. Re:Humans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And Ames still did less to damage the United States than the ones he was stealing from.

    16. Re:Humans by jpublic · · Score: 0

      Yeah this is exactly why people have a real problem with ubiquitous spy networks.

      I have a real problem with them not only because of that, but because I simply don't want my privacy to be violated. I see the mere collection of this data as an abuse in and of itself.

    17. Re:Humans by jpublic · · Score: 0

      Wrong, people aren't morons. Statistics on average IQs can demonstrate that.

      Wrong. IQ != intelligence. A grand majority of people are unintelligent.

    18. Re:Humans by dywolf · · Score: 1

      because no one has evern ever infiltrated a government agency or gained access to secrets by romancing an employee of said agency......

      oh wait.

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
    19. Re:Humans by nine-times · · Score: 1

      I think the whole concept of safeguards has been discredited because once you have sufficient money and resources you can erode, destroy and work around them with impunity.

      I'm not sure what you'd suggest then. The whole concept of "safeguards" doesn't work? Precautions are just not going to help? I guess we should just go kill ourselves, then.

      Or maybe you misunderstand and you think I'm saying that the NSA's program would be fine, but we only need a few additional safeguards? Not really. My point is more that the system of having secret courts with secret laws governing a secret surveillance program all enables abuse, and the public has no safeguards against what's done in secret.

      So my point is, there's no such thing as secret courts with secret courts with secret laws governing a secret surveillance program that is "not being abused". Having that sort of system enables abuse with no accountability, which is equivalent to abuse even before the abuse takes place.

  6. Foreign girlfriends by kanweg · · Score: 1

    They must have been foreign girlfriends, so what is the problem?

    Bert

    1. Re:Foreign girlfriends by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or officers stationed abroad, dummy.

  7. Only _girl_friends? by kthreadd · · Score: 2

    I guess there's no one spying on their boyfriends at the NSA then.

    1. Re:Only _girl_friends? by ebno-10db · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Good point. Probably the only ethical thing about the NSA is that they're an equal opportunity employer.

    2. Re:Only _girl_friends? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So far no cases involving women snooping on boyfriends have been made public.

    3. Re:Only _girl_friends? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a national sexual insecurity issue.

    4. Re:Only _girl_friends? by PPH · · Score: 1

      I think the parent was implying something else.

      Don't ask, don't tell, don't spy.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    5. Re:Only _girl_friends? by cold+fjord · · Score: 0, Troll

      Both Moses and George Washington used spies, and Benjamin Franklin opened other people's mail for intelligence purposes. Do you think it is too much to ask that the US and its allies be allowed to use them in our age to prevent a surprise nuclear attack, and maybe the occasional 9/11 or bombing? Or is that just right out? Is the only "ethical" thing to do simply carting away large numbers of bodies after an attack and rebuild the airplane / stadium / city, assuming there aren't new overlords at that point who prevent it? What about the rights of the victims? Isn't the right to life the most basic right of all? What would you do for them, to prevent their being killed? Or does that not matter? Would you even approve of Thomas Jefferson's actions to prevent Americans from being taken into slavery, or as hostages?

      --
      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
    6. Re:Only _girl_friends? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So far no cases involving women snooping on boyfriends have been made public.

      But what about boys spying on their boyfriends?

    7. Re:Only _girl_friends? by cosm · · Score: 1

      Both Moses and George Washington used spies, and Benjamin Franklin opened other people's mail for intelligence purposes. Do you think it is too much to ask that the US and its allies be allowed to use them in our age to prevent a surprise nuclear attack, and maybe the occasional 9/11 or bombing? Or is that just right out? Is the only "ethical" thing to do simply carting away large numbers of bodies after an attack and rebuild the airplane / stadium / city, assuming there aren't new overlords at that point who prevent it? What about the rights of the victims? Isn't the right to life the most basic right of all? What would you do for them, to prevent their being killed? Or does that not matter? Would you even approve of Thomas Jefferson's actions to prevent Americans from being taken into slavery, or as hostages?

      Your strawman needs new clothes, he's becoming very recognizable. Not drinking enough of the koolaid? Or is that you COINTELPRO?

      --
      'We are trying to prove ourselves wrong as quickly as possible, because only in that way can we find progress.' RPF
    8. Re:Only _girl_friends? by jpublic · · Score: 0

      Isn't the right to life the most basic right of all?

      I do not want the government to violate our rights to keep us safe. And to begin with, it isn't the government that's violating that "basic right" of which you speak, so it's an utterly irrelevant point when you're talking to people who don't want the government violating our rights.

    9. Re:Only _girl_friends? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're right! We should let the NSA go full Stasi on everyone, just in case it prevents something bad

      It's a heavy burden, preventing bad things from happening! We little people ought to be grateful and not doubt that they're acting in our best interests always, because they love us. That they should be a bigger threat to us than the things they defend us against? Preposterous nonsense! Sure, throughout history far more people have been killed by their governments than by foreign enemies... but those were bad governments! Not like ours. Also, obviously our external enemies are the evilest ever.

      Above all, we must not ourselves dare to do anything that might cause things to happen that our protectors don't want. Then, people could die. We would have blood on our hands. We don't want that, do we? Better leave to our betters these hard decisions!

    10. Re:Only _girl_friends? by cold+fjord · · Score: 0

      That's funny, I don't see any argument or facts in your post other than where you quote me. Is that what you meant to write?

      --
      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
    11. Re:Only _girl_friends? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Isn't the right to life the most basic right of all?

      If life is a basic right than why does everyone die? You sound like Loretta in "The Life of Brian".

      Everyone has to die but not everyone has to be spied on by their own governments, and nothing in the US Constitution gives government authority to spy on citizens.

      This god damned surveillance state was what I thought I was fighting against while I was in the military.

    12. Re:Only _girl_friends? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only people any of us need to worry about going nuclear as a "surprise" are the US and Israel.

      Even North Korea, if they actually had them, would not be that stupid.

      Nukes are a government-vs-government deterrent, because no one wants to be "the villains that launched nuclear weapons at other countries".

      It's how the world knew Iraq had no actual weapons of mass destruction of any kind: If they did the US would never have gone beyond empty threats, let alone actually invade the country.

    13. Re:Only _girl_friends? by nbauman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The debate is over what's an effective way to protect our security.

      As Bruce Schneier says, you don't find a needle in a haystack by piling on more hay.

      Look at some of the articles that were written by real intelligence agents, like the ones who interrogated the Nazis during and after WWII. They all knew German very well. If you're interrogating German officers it's a good idea to know German. Duh.

      If you think you're engaged in a war with with Arabic terrorists, it would be a good idea to learn Arabic and Farsi. Before you start tapping every cell phone and Internet connection in the world, it would be a good idea to start by reading their newspapers (rather than depending on MEMRI).

      The lazy thing to do is to sit on your ass behind a computer and, if you have an infinite budget, scoop up every electronic communication the world and save it "just in case." Then if you see somebody talking about terrorism, arrest them and keep them in prison forever "just in case." Which is what we're doing.

      The smart thing to do (and here I betray myself as a liberal) is to understand your adversary, and find out why they hate you so much and if there's anything you can do about it.

      After 9/11, the Wall Street Journal offices, which faced the WTC, were destroyed and they had to put the next day's edition together in an editor's uptown apartment. They spent the next year using their network of reporters (many of whom did speak Arabic and Farsi) interviewing people around the world trying to figure out why they hated us. That's what Daniel Pearl was doing.

      One of the themes that kept coming up again was Israel. One Arab businessman was a subscriber to the WSJ. He said, "I like America. I got my MBA in America. But you've got to do something about Israel." For the moderate, westernized Arabs, "doing something about Israel" means stopping the settlements (which is reasonable) and a two-state solution with Israel on the 1967 borders, which Hamas and the Arab League have already agreed to.

      The way to protect our country is to do real intelligence, find out what the rest of the world is thinking, and go after the basic causes.

    14. Re:Only _girl_friends? by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      "Both Moses and George Washington used spies ..."

      It is hard to take you seriously when you cite a work of fiction to make your point.

      ". Do you think it is too much to ask that the US and its allies be allowed to use them in our age to prevent a surprise nuclear attack, and maybe the occasional 9/11 or bombing?"

      Yes. Yes we do. At least those of us who know history, understand the dangers, and realize that your "choice" represents a false dichotomy do anyway. If it were true that the choices were "Allow illegal surveillance" or "Have no way to stop terrorists", then we might have something to discuss. As it stands now you merely come off as an ignorant person lacking basic skills in logical analysis.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    15. Re:Only _girl_friends? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're right! We should let the NSA go full Stasi on everyone, just in case it prevents something bad

      It's a heavy burden, preventing bad things from happening! We little people ought to be grateful and not doubt that they're acting in our best interests always, because they love us. That they should be a bigger threat to us than the things they defend us against? Preposterous nonsense! Sure, throughout history far more people have been killed by their governments than by foreign enemies... but those were bad governments! Not like ours. Also, obviously our external enemies are the evilest ever.

      Above all, we must not ourselves dare to do anything that might cause things to happen that our protectors don't want. Then, people could die. We would have blood on our hands. We don't want that, do we? Better leave to our betters these hard decisions!

      Yes, I wonder how long it will be before the NSA has use taken away for saying something bad about the NSA like, "They are the bad people who come to take people away?" Hold on a sec, I need to get the door. Oh look, it's 0983j4c0983qjv97yh6^D [NO CARRIER]

    16. Re:Only _girl_friends? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are assuming the US/Israel security establishment and industry actually wanted to stop 9/11 from happening. I would venture to say that 9/11 rescued NSA from dramatic downsizing, several defence companies from bankruptcy and made the careers of lots of colonels and flag officers. In 2001, Russia was militarily almost dead in the water. No enemy, no business, no careers.

      Plus, it took out Saddam Hussein, a nuisance for Israel. Totally unrelated to BinLaden and Sunni Terror. The heart of Islamic Wickedness, Saudi Arabia, is still alive and kicking.

      So, my dear NSA friends, I say YOU did it. 9/11 MADE YOUR CAREERS. And I give a fucking shit you know me. I know YOU too.

      You are simply traitors to your nation. Otherwise you would have simply nuked out Mekka, to demonstrate once and forever, that the Wahabist "god" is just vile phantasy, a wicked Anti-Freedom open wound on humanity. Military rationality must dramatically humiliate Wahabism to drive home the message that their god does not help them. What did you do towards that ? Nothing. Traitors.

    17. Re:Only _girl_friends? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, Counter-revolutionaries are EVERYWHERE. Let's analyse the communications of everybody all the time. Shield and Sword of the revolution.

      What you say ? Commie rhetoric ? Indeed. You talk like the Tsheka.

    18. Re:Only _girl_friends? by jpublic · · Score: 0

      then we might have something to discuss.

      I'd say the chances of having something to discuss would be zero. Freedom is simply more important than security, and since we're supposed to be the land of the free and the home of the brave...

    19. Re:Only _girl_friends? by Pseudonym+Authority · · Score: 1

      Your flimsy `think of the children!' arguments and appeals to tradition have been rejected several times already. There is no longer any need to give you the privilege of a rebuttal. If you want statements that refute what you said (I didn't bother reading it, because coming from you, it's no doubt just more fascist garbage), then go to your post history and view the responses to your earlier threads.

    20. Re:Only _girl_friends? by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      They spent the next year using their network of reporters (many of whom did speak Arabic and Farsi) interviewing people around the world trying to figure out why they hated us. .... One of the themes that kept coming up again was Israel. ... The way to protect our country is to do real intelligence, find out what the rest of the world is thinking, and go after the basic causes.

      Al Qaida has long been attacking the Saudi government with the goal of replacing it with a religious government that will rule according to their principles. The Saudi government is not a supporter of Israel. Al Qaida has important roots in Egypt where one of its pre-al Qaida components was attacking the government to try to replace it with a religious government that would rule according to their strict version of Islam, and al Qaida itself continues that work today. Egypt did sign a peace treaty with Israel, but I don't think you can call them a big supporter of Israel. Al Qaida is active in Yemen where it is trying to overthrow the government to replace it with a religious government that will rule according to their principles. Yemen is not a supporter of Israel. Al Qaida sent many people to Iraq, and recruited man locals to fight the government and try to establish a religious government that would rule according to their principles. Iraq is not a big supporter of Israel. By now you should be discerning a pattern.

      Al Qaida's primary goal has little to do with Israel. Al Qaida actually came to the anti-Israel cause very late, and it is a peripheral goal to them. Their main objective is to replace the governments in Muslim countries with religious governments that rule according to their principles - strict Sharia law with their interpretation, restore the Islamic Caliphate government that was dissolved in 1924 with the fall of the Ottoman Empire, continue with the long interrupted Muslim conquest of the world until all countries are ruled by Islamic governments that they approve of, and the world's peoples turn to Islam.

      When Bin Laden wrote his letter to America he made a series of demands. The first one: convert to Islam. He followed that with demands to replace the Constitution with Sharia law, and begin behaving according to Islamic law (no alcohol, no drugs, no pornography, no blasphemy, etc., etc., etc.). This is consistent with al Qaida's long range goal. Once again, Israel has nothing to do with that.

      The correct information regarding al Qaida's goals has been available for more than 11 years, and it has been 17 years since Bin Laden issued his original fatwa, his declaration of war, at the start of the conflict. Despite this you advocate intensive research to figure out what is already known, and then derive the wrong answer, blaming it on Israel. The only way I can see that happening is that the correct answer does not agree with your stated liberal politics. That is a European problem as well.

      I'm afraid you are going to have more disappointments in the future since various Muslim and Palestinian groups are ready for peace, just not with Israel, the Jewish state - ever. They fundamentally reject Israel's right to exist at all. They do not accept the state of Israel in any form, nor do they accept Israel's stewardship of Jerusalem, the only possible site for the Jewish temple, and the current site of the third holiest site in Islam. Conflict in some form is practically guaranteed to endure.

      The fact that the Palestinians and Israel have unsettled differences is no excuse to accept aggression by al Qaida.

      As Bruce Schneier says, you don't find a needle in a haystack by piling on more hay.

      With all due respect, Bruce is not an oracle, he is serving in this case a

      --
      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
    21. Re:Only _girl_friends? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For the moderate, westernized Arabs, "doing something about Israel" means stopping the settlements (which is reasonable) and a two-state solution with Israel on the 1967 borders, which Hamas and the Arab League have already agreed to.

      The way to protect our country is to do real intelligence, find out what the rest of the world is thinking, and go after the basic causes.

      99% of Arabs are neither moderate nor westernized. While a considerable variance of opinion exists within that majority, the rigid consensus is that Israelis have no right to form a significant community at the current location of Israel, and must be removed; at this scale the only viable method of removal is genocide. Thus, if America wants to have a wide support of the Arab public (and as the Arab Spring taught us, the Arab elite does what the Arab public wants), America's only option would be to promote the execution of an encompassing genocide on Israel's Jews.

      It should of course be noted under those circumstances that Israel would probably object to this kind of genocide, and try to fight back, and do so successfully, unless America actively helps the Arab cause, taking an active part in the genocide of Jewish Israelis. This variant of an American-backed solution for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would probably satisfy the constraint of appeasing the Arab majority, but it would also involve the deaths of about 10 million individuals, which would include a significant majority of the Jewish citizens of Israel.

      The US of course have the option of not supporting Israel as diligently as it does. But it would definitely not be what the Arab majority wishes, and Israel would probably still be OK (Israeli budget is circa US $100 billion, American 'aid' being around US $3 billion and Israel having the industrial capacity to manufacture whatever it wishes for); this strategy would give America much less leverage than it currently exercises both on directly on Israel and on the Middle East.

      I otherwise concur with your conclusion that doing something about intelligence is finding out what the rest of the world is thinking; it is my impression that the U.S. government has difficulty recruiting competent individuals that would do that for public service.

    22. Re:Only _girl_friends? by Boronx · · Score: 1

      I don't think nukes are deterrent because leaders don't want to be seen as villains, I think they're a deterrent because leaders' friends and families are under immediate threat should a nuclear war start. Leaders who start conventional wars find it easy to believe they will escape severe consequences.

    23. Re:Only _girl_friends? by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      The reason why I used might, as well as bold facing it, is that I tend to be open minded. You certainly summarized my view, but there is always that 1 in a million chance that someone will make a point I hadn't considered. Still, the likelihood that someone would make a point thatI would change my position is about that, to wit: 1 in 1 million.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    24. Re:Only _girl_friends? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's common knowledge that cold fjord is COINTELPRO. Just check his posting history. A continuous stream of posts, day after day defending the actions of the NSA.

      It's almost as if it is his job. oh wait, it is.

    25. Re:Only _girl_friends? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The debate is over what's an effective way to protect our security.

      As Bruce Schneier says, you don't find a needle in a haystack by piling on more hay.

      Look at some of the articles that were written by real intelligence agents, like the ones who interrogated the Nazis during and after WWII. They all knew German very well. If you're interrogating German officers it's a good idea to know German. Duh.

      If you think you're engaged in a war with with Arabic terrorists, it would be a good idea to learn Arabic and Farsi. Before you start tapping every cell phone and Internet connection in the world, it would be a good idea to start by reading their newspapers (rather than depending on MEMRI).

      The lazy thing to do is to sit on your ass behind a computer and, if you have an infinite budget, scoop up every electronic communication the world and save it "just in case." Then if you see somebody talking about terrorism, arrest them and keep them in prison forever "just in case." Which is what we're doing.

      The smart thing to do (and here I betray myself as a liberal) is to understand your adversary, and find out why they hate you so much and if there's anything you can do about it.

      After 9/11, the Wall Street Journal offices, which faced the WTC, were destroyed and they had to put the next day's edition together in an editor's uptown apartment. They spent the next year using their network of reporters (many of whom did speak Arabic and Farsi) interviewing people around the world trying to figure out why they hated us. That's what Daniel Pearl was doing.

      One of the themes that kept coming up again was Israel. One Arab businessman was a subscriber to the WSJ. He said, "I like America. I got my MBA in America. But you've got to do something about Israel." For the moderate, westernized Arabs, "doing something about Israel" means stopping the settlements (which is reasonable) and a two-state solution with Israel on the 1967 borders, which Hamas and the Arab League have already agreed to.

      The way to protect our country is to do real intelligence, find out what the rest of the world is thinking, and go after the basic causes.

      I am pretty sure Israel doesn't consider that reasonable considering three countries invaded them during the Six Day War and Israel only ended up with those territories after a counter offensive.

  8. Don't worry about the Government by puddingebola · · Score: 4, Funny

    Don't worry about the government spying on you, it may just be that special someone listening to all your calls.

    1. Re:Don't worry about the Government by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean the fat hairy ex-TSA agent, now NSA contractor, that was removed from the job because he liked giving pat-downs a little too much?

  9. True Lies by voul · · Score: 1

    Didn't Harry Tasker invent LOVEINT?

    1. Re:True Lies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tell it to the MAFIAA, maybe THEY can sue the NSA for copyright infringment...

    2. Re:True Lies by godrik · · Score: 1

      Actually True Lies is a remake of La Totale! [1] by Claude Zidi. But I don't think Francois Voisin invented it either.

      [1] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0103103/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

  10. Child Molestors Sometimes Spy on Future Victims by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Spying on love interests is one thing, but spying on innocent children to plan sexually assaulting them is a different category. It's happened before, and I don't understand how people can still defend these monstrous surveillence activities.

    Why won't someone think of the children when it's finally appropriate?

    1. Re:Child Molestors Sometimes Spy on Future Victims by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you actually get to do that? Sign me the fuck up! I'm really getting tired of trailing soccer moms in my white van looking for an opportunity to get that little cherub alone in the back. This is a wonderful opportunity for me. Does the NSA have any positions available for hedge fund managers?

    2. Re:Child Molestors Sometimes Spy on Future Victims by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      -1.

      You're not subverting the "think of the children" trope, you're playing it straight

  11. Pink Floyd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Us, us, us, us, us.... and them, them, them, them, them... after all, we're all just ordinary men...

  12. So ladies... by mwvdlee · · Score: 5, Funny

    So ladies, that boyfriend you have, the one with the steady career in government, who seemed to understand you like no man ever had before...

    --
    Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    1. Re:So ladies... by mjwalshe · · Score: 2

      lol or as Smiley says re control at controls funeral "he went to his grave with his wife believing he was mid ranking official at the coal board" or in Spooks (MI5) Sir harry piece commented "oh i told my ex wife when we signed the bans in church"

    2. Re:So ladies... by photonic · · Score: 1

      Relevant XKCD here.

      --
      karma police: arrest this man, he talks in maths; he buzzes like a fridge, he's like a detuned radio. [radiohead]
  13. Its OK: Obama says you can trust Gov by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    No need to worry. US presidents don't lie. Especially not the Nobel Peace prize winning ones. So it's Ok. Because if you can't trust the government... Well then we really are really screwed.

  14. Most of the KNOWN incidents were self-reported by arobatino · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Most of the incidents, officials said, were self-reported. Such admissions can arise, for example, when an employee takes a polygraph tests as part of a renewal of a security clearance.

    Which is exactly what you'd expect if the probability of getting caught is close to zero and the true number of cases is much larger.

    1. Re:Most of the KNOWN incidents were self-reported by mjwalshe · · Score: 1

      Why its just as likely that the incidence is low than high

    2. Re:Most of the KNOWN incidents were self-reported by king+neckbeard · · Score: 1

      One way, to get an estimate of the numbers of actual incidents is by taking the number of reported incidents and the likelihood of getting caught and multiply. Failing a polygraph at a spy agency is something that has a very low chance of getting caught., so the number of actual incidents is likely a great deal higher.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    3. Re:Most of the KNOWN incidents were self-reported by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      Most of the incidents, officials said, were self-reported. Such admissions can arise, for example, when an employee takes a polygraph tests as part of a renewal of a security clearance.

      Which is exactly what you'd expect if the probability of getting caught is close to zero and the true number of cases is much larger.

      Are you kidding? If the probability of getting caught is essentially zero, there is no incentive for someone to report themselves unless they are ethical. So now you have to choose - is the probability of getting caught not close to zero, or are the employees that break the rules in this way taking responsibility after having broken the rules, or is it both? You really haven't presented any evidence to support the assertion that there are significantly more than the 1 employee per year out of 30,000 - 40,000 that breaks the rules this way and is subjected to discipline.

      --
      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
  15. There IS a law against stalking. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    And it seems that the boys who work at Ft. Meade may have
    been breaking this law.

    Of course they are above the law, aren't they ? Time will tell, just
    as it did with Hitler, Himmler, Goebbels, Goering, and the rest.

    1. Re:There IS a law against stalking. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Investigation is a subset of stalking, so I don't really think this applies.

  16. termination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In each instance, the employee was punished either with an administrative action or termination.

    termination ? you keep using that word ...

    1. Re:termination by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      He he. Some idiot one day thought "we fired his ass" was too harsh and not fancy enough, so started saying "we terminated his employment." Then some other idiots simplified that to "we terminated him." So now instead of saying "we fired his ass" all the PHBs and personnel drones just say "we killed him."

  17. True Lies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, I would, if my girlfriend were Jamie Lee Curtis. 20 Years ago.

  18. To the surprise of no one by FuzzNugget · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Corrupt is as corrupt does. They've already demonstrated a profound moral bankruptcy and a willingness to collectively serve only themselves, this just a matter of scale.

    1. Re:To the surprise of no one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not corruption. It's human nature. Opportunistic spying happens everywhere: IT departments, hospitals, police departments, ISPs, ...

      We are the engineers. Why don't we remove the temptation by making it technically difficult to eavesdrop?

      Instead, we are logging everything, adding call-home features and making home gadgets remote-controllable. For all you know, your phone camera or laptop is videofilming you live just because some Apple engineer/NSA technician can.

    2. Re:To the surprise of no one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not corruption. It's human nature. Opportunistic spying happens everywhere:

      It is human nature to want to have sex with that goood looking member of your preferred target group, however, doing so without their permission is beyond corrupt. You can't simply do/take everything you desire, to do so corrupts your social conscience.

    3. Re: To the surprise of no one by nbritton · · Score: 1

      When you're working on confidential or classified systems, rule number one is don't open things you have no business looking at. When auditors pull logs they can see the files you access, and regardless of your access level, you open yourself to unnecessary liability. You're also a liability to the company if you can't restrain yourself from prying into matters that don't concern you. Ignorance is bliss, moreover, rummaging through someones possessions without cause is unethical.

      LOVEINT is nothing more then a euphemism for stalking. No past, present, or future lover is going to be ok with leveraging national security resources to keep tabs on them; this is criminal.

    4. Re: To the surprise of no one by mjwalshe · · Score: 1

      And Phone company employees, banks, those with access to medical records and ISP employees Google fired some one for doing this a while back.

      I recall our internal security team at BT sent round a briefing about looking up peoples details on our systems as some one had found the new of address of an estranged wife for a mate - who then killed her.

      And then there was an unholy shit storm when a journalist posing as a temp employee looked up the queens private number in Scotland a few years back.

    5. Re:To the surprise of no one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      doing so without their permission is beyond corrupt

      Ok, fine. A good percentage of human beings is corrupt. What next?

      The NSA is built on impunity; effective oversight is not possible. I say make it technically difficult for them to do their jobs. End-to-end encryption (easier said than done, I know) and IPv6 (reducing the dependency on in-betweeners) come to mind.

  19. Men In Black by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...
    And that's why birds do it, bees do it
    Even Tommy Lees do it
    Let's do it, let's spy on love...

    (With apologies to Cole Porter)

  20. Their girlfriends by gmuslera · · Score: 2

    But what about intercepting phone sex calls of troops with their loved ones? And not just intercepted, shared between them when the conversation was hot.

    And they did that with soldiers, in an environment where their superiors were more or less aware of what they were doing, so they restricted themselves in what they could do. What kind of respect you can expect from them? What kind of respect should they (as people and as institutions) deserve?

    Oh, this is for your safety, so all is justified, except that the most monitored countries includes China, Russia, France, Germany, Japan, and Brazil, This is more about starting a war (and/or stealing IP) than defending from terrorists.

  21. The scariest sentence... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Most of the incidents, officials said, were self-reported." So their "significant care to prevent any abuses" consists primarily of "tell us when you've done something bad."

    If they actually had strong internal checks in place, the majority of abuses would be detected by those systems, not by self reporting.

  22. Nature of holding secret information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The Scientologists do it even worse. Hundreds of hours of polygraph testing, where you're compelled to reveal your crimes and thoughts against your superiors, and it's all recorded and sent to the central offices, the "Sea Org", where it is used against you by the "Guardian Office" to "dead agent" you if you ever rebel. These practices were all well documented in the book "the Scandal of Scientology", whose author was so abused by the cult that the founder's wife, Mary Sue Hubbard, and her minions went to jail for it.. Other cult members who've left since then have testified to the continuing abuse of these "auditing" materials by current members of the cult.

    1. Re:Nature of holding secret information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      There's a very suspicious number of posters diverting this thread into 'X does it worse' or 'everybody does it' territory.

      You might even think that there is a concerted campaign to avoid the important issues:
      1/ That the NSA has access to *everyone's* emails (and the rest). Not like a specific company or non-gov organisation.
      2/ That they are an arm of the government that is effectively above the law, the US constition etc.

      Stuff about the scientologists or whatever (bad as they are) looks like smokescreen tactics.
      I guess I've joined the tinfoil hatters who I've always dismissed, but I now think all discussions on this sort of topic are being manipulated to try and derail them.

    2. Re:Nature of holding secret information by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Yes, but they are a bunch of evil pricks that demonstrate what would have happened if the Manson family had been run by someone with some material success instead of an ex-con that went ballistic over not being called back by a record producer.

  23. Stupidly easy to game the system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Have your friend from Saudi Arabia call your girlfriend, or anyone for that matter. Wide open door.

  24. I once commented that the NSA was like a stalker. by dicobalt · · Score: 3, Funny

    I didn't mean to be so correct.

  25. More evidence by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 2

    I keep saying setting rules agents "are supposed to follow" isn't good enough, and should be constitutionally invalid in the computer age.

    The rules against warrantless searches have to do with political spying, not mundane spying, even on girlfriends by jackasses. If they can get away with this, operatives working for someone powerful can get away with tapping an opponent's phones.

    They need security software that cannot be bypassed that logs everything in incorruptible logs for future review, and auto-stored at multiple sites without delete communication (someone at any given site cannot send out a signal to alter or delete logs at other sites.)

    This is not technically that hard to do but it needs to be done.

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    1. Re:More evidence by jpublic · · Score: 3, Interesting

      They need security software that cannot be bypassed that logs everything in incorruptible logs for future review, and auto-stored at multiple sites without delete communication (someone at any given site cannot send out a signal to alter or delete logs at other sites.)

      No. We need to get rid of the entire organization and get rid of the system they have in place to wiretap to begin with.

    2. Re:More evidence by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 1

      Logging everything like you describe is very expensive plus has it's own security problems.

      The thing to do is to supervise these clowns so it doesn't happen in the first place.

  26. Simple fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Right now the NSA analyze the communications of people three or less degrees of separation from person of interests. Obviously the simplest proactive fix would be implement rules automatically enforced by the computers that prevent employees or contractors from accessing any information from anyone with three or less degrees of separation from themselves. It's easy to implement, the fact they didn't and don't just show NSA's upper management is not really interested in stopping these practices.

    1. Re:Simple fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obviously the simplest proactive fix would be implement rules automatically enforced by the computers that prevent employees or contractors from accessing any information from anyone with three or less degrees of separation from themselves.

      And that would do nothing. Obviously, the targets of abusive data mining would be people within two or three degrees of separation to the abuser.

    2. Re:Simple fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obviously, the targets of abusive data mining would be people within two or three degrees of separation to the abuser.

      That's kind of the point. Or maybe you understood the contrary of what I wrote. Three, two, one or zero degree of separation from the analyst: no access.

  27. Fire them immediately by Tippler · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "administrative action or termination." ...OR termination? Every single one of them should have been fired at the least. If I looked up an ex girlfriend on the electronic medical record system I'm logged into right now, I would be subject to a $50,000 dollar fine and a year in prison even after being fired ( AMA HIPAA penalties page). This kind of abuse of access to privileged information similar to a HIPAA violation, except double illegal since most of the surveillance has no legal basis either.

    1. Re:Fire them immediately by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And if you don't comply when an FBI agent sends you a NSL asking for the medical records of his ex-girlfriend, you also go to jail.

    2. Re:Fire them immediately by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 2

      Administrative action is probably revocation of security clearance. That's worse than firing for these guys because it's end of career.

    3. Re:Fire them immediately by dbIII · · Score: 1

      North and Poindexter seemed to manage OK after being caught selling weapons to a group that had killed over a hundred US Marines only a year previously, plus the cream on top was North embezzling to pay for a convertible and air conditioning. It's amazing what can be got away with in US Intelligence without ending a career.

    4. Re:Fire them immediately by Jason+Levine · · Score: 3, Informative

      I work in the medical field also and have personally seen it happen. We had someone who was in a position of IT power and had been with the organization awhile. He was caught looking at things he shouldn't have been and was immediately fired. This was a guy whose job security - before this incident - seemed rock solid, no previous incidents (to my knowledge which admittedly might not be perfect in this matter). Just one day there and the next day gone. He wasn't even allowed to clear out his office right then. They had him come back another day and - under a careful eye to make sure he only took his own stuff - let him clear out his office.

      The more power (and access to information counts as "power") you have, the steeper the penalties should be for abusing that power. If the NSA is going to have access to nearly everything whenever they want (something I think they shouldn't have), they should have STRICT penalties for misusing said access. They should have systems that double-check access and the first time you search for something you shouldn't, you're FIRED!

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  28. Re:All IT staff do this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    BULLSHIT! You are an unethical pervert if you look at another person's email without their explicit consent. When I was doing email systems administration and/or migration projects sometimes it was necessary to examine the format of some of the messages flagged as corrupt to ensure the recovery tool had fixed the issue if possible. I scanned the appropriate messages for format but never remembered the actual content even in those case where reading the entire content of the message was necessary. I held myself to a much higher ethical and professional standard.

  29. How long were their prison sentencies? by mwasham · · Score: 2

    none I know..

  30. 'Skeeping my secrets safe tonight by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  31. This isn't a "twist", it's PR by ljw1004 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This isn't a "latest twist in the NSA saga". It's a transparent PR fluff piece.

    Obviously the PR division at the NSA figured out a plan to trivialize the revelations. John DeLong at his press conference comes out with "Oh yes, once or twice in the past decade we have broken the rules, but it's been for lighthearded laughable trivial matters like LOVEINT. Ha ha ha, what a joke. My bad. We're all good now, right?"

    Of course the media will lap this up. And it distracts attention from the real systematic unconstitutional behavior of the NSA, and the fact that the NSA's overseers themselves believe their oversight to be inadequate.

    1. Re:This isn't a "twist", it's PR by msobkow · · Score: 1

      Actually the media is more likely to rave about the peeping toms and stalkers working for the NSA, I think.

      --
      I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    2. Re:This isn't a "twist", it's PR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not really. This revelation just raises even more deeply concerning questions.
      Many of us have argued these kinds of issues over and over to death already. Now is the time for democracy and transparency to correct the wrongs.

    3. Re:This isn't a "twist", it's PR by mjwalshe · · Score: 1

      and The NSA looks at the press and goes yeah right we believe you that classy count down you did for charlote church counting down the days until she was "legal" to fuck is just so moral.

    4. Re:This isn't a "twist", it's PR by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 3

      Obviously the PR division at the NSA figured out a plan to trivialize the revelations.

      If that's their plan, it is a stupid one. For most of the population spying on politicians and fat-cats is unrelatable. But having a lover break trust and spy on you is something just about everybody has experienced be it snooping through your phone, your email, or even just the stuff in your house.

      One of the big reasons the public is apathetic to the NSA is that most people just don't see how it could ever affect them personally. With these revelations the NSA has made it crystal clear to the general public just how "icky" the NSA can be.

      It might not be the best reason to be pissed off about the NSA, but it is the kind of thing that most people can immediately feel in their gut and that counts for a lot in this fight.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    5. Re:This isn't a "twist", it's PR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Not really. The president said in his press conference defending the NSA and such that (paraphrased), "One thing you're not finding is any reports of abuses." Well, now we got your reports of abuses right here. That's of course ignoring the disingenuous argument that because an organization whose details are completely secret hasn't had abuses made public that there are no abuses.

    6. Re:This isn't a "twist", it's PR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They have to give us something. We know they did bad. They'd rather give us this, something entirely relatable which we are not truly afraid of, because most of us don't have exes working for the NSA, than the more sinister things that we don't want to believe because believing that they do those would make our lives a living hell.

      It's like someone who admits to adultery to fake an alibi for a murder: It makes initial denial plausible, because it's bad enough that most people would not just admit it, but it's much more forgivable than the actual deed.

    7. Re:This isn't a "twist", it's PR by khallow · · Score: 1
      Maybe. But I have to agree with the other poster. This gives the public hooks in which to both understand what is going on and care.

      It's like someone who admits to adultery to fake an alibi for a murder

      How strong was that case for murder? Unless you can get more info at this time, getting the NSA on the equivalent of adultery may be among the better choices possible. Keep in mind that they haven't solved the problem of security leaks. If they plea for adultery now, they still have to worry about those bodies getting revealed later no matter how carefully they vet their people.

    8. Re:This isn't a "twist", it's PR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cut the bullshit. This is an Information Operation to make them look "nice".

  32. Still just a distraction from... by istartedi · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Still just a distraction from STOCKINT. Follow the money. The first time I considered such massive surveillance, front-running market events was what came to mind. This is just like anything else in politics. Get people thinking about sex to distract them from the real crimes.

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    1. Re:Still just a distraction from... by ron_ivi · · Score: 2

      And if I understand right - is doing it to foreign markets even legal by design?

    2. Re:Still just a distraction from... by Tom · · Score: 2

      It's not about stocks. Stocks are boring to the government.

      It's about patents, technology, tech secrets, major trade deals, contracts, and so on.

      Guess which European company has the most massive interest in security and installs six-digit hardware encryption routers in even minor switching rooms? No, it's not a bank. It's not a stock exchange, either. It's Airbus.

      Here in Europe, it's been an open secret for almost two decades that our "american friends" are doing massive amounts of economic espionage on us.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    3. Re:Still just a distraction from... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That sounds like 'The Campus' in Tom Clancy's book Threat Vector.

    4. Re:Still just a distraction from... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And where does Airbus "Google" ? I bet, they present their collective conscience every FUCKING DAY to Google. At least that's what they do at the German company I work at. Most Euros are too busy thinking about food and laziness to think about proper security.

    5. Re:Still just a distraction from... by dbIII · · Score: 1

      No, it's not a bank. It's not a stock exchange, either. It's Airbus

      Since they got fucked over by taxpayer funded US agents for Boeing (yes it made it into a US court and was proven) I'm not really amazed that they decided they needed enough security to stop taxpayer funded US agents coming back, especially since Boeing didn't seem to have stolen enough to solve their battery problems.

  33. Sex is the key by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Clinton murdered plenty of people in a cruise missile attack in Sudan - US reaction - Yawn.
    Clinton had consensual sex with a willing female - US Reaction - Impeach, impeach, impeach.

    1. Re:Sex is the key by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Clinton had consensual sex with a willing female - who was not his wife, who was a subordinate (see abuse of power, quid pro quo, etc), and LIED about it under oath. Yes, he was impeached. No, he was not removed from office.

  34. But but ... oversight?!?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How is this possible after all oversight NSA goons and political stooges get on TV and tell us is going on?

  35. At least Obama's dog Bo got to Martha's Vineyard by mc6809e · · Score: 1, Interesting

    If Obama can arrange to have his dog Bo airlifted to Martha's Vineyard , he can arrange to visit with the NSA to make sure they're following the rules.

    C'mon, Mr Prez!

  36. Facebook and OKCupid made it all obsolete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why do I need to monitor all of the communications, when Facebook will tell me where she will be and who she was with? OKCupid tells me more about a person than a job interview or dating.

  37. Re:At least Obama's dog Bo got to Martha's Vineyar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Anything else that Rush is talking about that we need to hear about at least twenty more times?

  38. The Police by Dripdry · · Score: 3, Funny

    Wow. "Every Breath You Take" was NEVER more true (and creepy) than now.

    Shiver

    --
    -
  39. In Other News... by NotSanguine · · Score: 2

    Teenage boys are horny. Film at 11:00.

    --
    No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
  40. MiB by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bwa-ha-ha-ha-ha.

    But seriously, why does this remind me of the scene in Men in Black where K is using the organization's equipment to keep tabs on his old girlfriend.

  41. So PRISM really is Global Clarity by barlevg · · Score: 1
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0AgBecuFdU

    You've got guys listening in on ex-wives, dropping in on calls from soldiers overseas, checking out what movie stars are up to...

    Now, to be fair, a lot of this (as others have pointed out) is just what you would expect from a group of people given that kind of power, but the details match up so perfectly, I wonder if Sorkin was tipped off by someone.

  42. One Cannot Help But Wonder by LifesABeach · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How Senator Mitch McConnell got his information about Ashley Judd's private medical data for a slander campaign; and not see a corollary of the humanity that is the NSA?

    1. Re:One Cannot Help But Wonder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He got it from her autobiography.

    2. Re:One Cannot Help But Wonder by davesays · · Score: 2

      How Senator Mitch McConnell got his information about Ashley Judd's private medical data for a slander campaign; and not see a corollary of the humanity that is the NSA?

      If you read the news or the transcripts you would have seen they were talking about *what she wrote in her autobiography.* No one accessed her private medical data...

    3. Re:One Cannot Help But Wonder by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

      Why would the honerable senator use a personal attack instead of a political one? What was Ms.Judd bringing to the argument that had to be silenced?

    4. Re:One Cannot Help But Wonder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have wondered about that myself.

      "They then delve into Judd's mental health, which she has spoken about openly for years including in her 2011 autobiography."

      That and her anti religion statements, Looks like no abuse of power there. I am actually relieved a bit. Theoretically, the Senate minority leader would have enough power to get access to spy agency intel.

    5. Re:One Cannot Help But Wonder by ancientt · · Score: 1

      Because it works. As sad as it is, that's what people want to hear about when they turn on their TV or radio.

      The biggest problem is that it actually makes sense. Do you want to be represented by someone who has proven they're untrustworthy? Do you want to be represented by someone who has admitted they have a history of mental instability?

      It doesn't even matter what her campaign might have looked like because they were playing whack-a-mole. Seriously, that's how they referred to it. Read the article.

      --
      B) Eliminate all the stupid users. This is frowned upon by society.
  43. How else... by azcoyote · · Score: 1

    ...is a geek supposed to get a girlfriend?

    NASA Scientists Plan to Approach Girl by 2018

    --
    Incipiamus, fratres, servire Domino Deo, quia hucusque vix vel parum in nullo profecimus.
  44. Of course by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Intelligence gathering on foreign markets is not only legal by design, it is in the spirit of the law as well. When the common man thinks of national security, they think of politics and military work. The real bread and butter of a country is its actual bread and butter.

    Economic power has greater effects than any other. An added benefit is it is (mostly) bloodless. A government looking after its citizens before all others as a justification for existence has a duty to give its citizens an economic advantage with whatever resources it has available. It can come in the form of trade negotiations, treaties, road networks, employment regulations, tariffs, and even intelligence gathering.

    Of course the devil is in the details, nonetheless- spying, leveraging, and controlling foreign markets for local advantage is a huge part of why international government relations exists instead of constant violent conflict. It isn't fair to all people, yet I am glad for what it has mostly displaced.

  45. HaHaha- so funny, I can safely ignore the issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Here we have a standard black propaganda psy-op, dressed as a humiliating 'revelation' to the sheeple. The ploy is an ages old one. Trivialise an issue (even while actually confirming the scale and scope of the abuses) so everything takes on a 'tabloid' flavour, and can be soon forgotten as 'tabloid' coverage soon gets bored and moves on to the next 'scandal'. It is straight from the Edward Bernays' playbook (and if you don't know who Bernays was, you should be pretty ashamed of yourself).

    The NSA does FULL surveillance, and grabs every piece of communication currently possible. ALL emails. ALL phonecalls. Shills try to mislead by asking you what possible use such data could have. However, 'use' is very much a secondary issue- and is the focus of constant data-mining R+D. The experts that examine the data (the people you NEVER see discussed in these NSA stories) are very much interested in societal trends- both current and historical. They wish to deliver revelations to their masters about how ordinary people, en masse, think and respond.

    NSA full surveillance spying allows the following:
    1) reading the current mindset of the general population, or defined subsets, to allow the maximum effectiveness of propaganda campaigns, especially those that run in the mainstream media (eg., the anti-secular Syria, pro-extremist radical terrorist one we see playing out today)

    2) the identification of emerging grass-roots ('bottom-up') activism, groups and potential leaders, for either co-opting or extermination (take out people/groups when they are just beginning to act, and there is little chance of wider public back-lash). And to counter the usual shills here, 'extermination' almost never means murder, but bringing the full weight of state harassment on the people, family and friends involved. Most people simply back-down under such pressure.

    3) collecting blackmail material for use against those that may find themselves in positions of power or influence. A single identified act of infidelity, for instance, allows the NSA to provide information to their masters that can be used to win the 'support' from the individual involved for some political cause or other.

    The NSA is about accumulation of power. Think of it like an electronic mega-fortress that your masters build for themselves, and then perpetually rule you from, safe from attack from either the sheeple, or other different forces that might also seek to rule over the sheeple.

    The only counter would be 21st Century additions to the US Constitution, specifically criminalising all forms of full surveillance activities by the State, regardless of excuse. This isn't going to happen, because the US. like other great nations, is actually ruled by 'non-partisan' (hoho) star chambers that exist under the excuse of 'continuity' and 'consensus'. These star chambers adore the power provided by the growing NSA full surveillance projects. The star chambers operate above the visible government and court system (although, of course, senior members from both participate in various star chambers). And above the star chambers themselves are the people really working to pull the strings of Human History. Those that are planning to set in motion the great conflict between the US, Russia and China. Why do you think the US is becoming an ever more vicious warmongering nation day-by-day?

    1. Re:HaHaha- so funny, I can safely ignore the issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I do think the finance suckers who run the US are very much scared by Russkies ready and willing to nuke out New York, if required. Syria will do just fine to generate new weapons revenue and take out a nuisance.

    2. Re:HaHaha- so funny, I can safely ignore the issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      There is also the possibility that control of the people through propaganda is a measure for limiting unrest when major financial problems arise. Hedging bets perhaps?
      It would be unfortunate if a surveillance state and war was seen as a required outcome. You'd think politicians would feel they owe more to future generations, wouldn't you?

      My opinion is that there are probably many people doing the best they can to try and provide an outcome that is desirable to their nation...but not necessarily looking at the bigger picture of how focusing on war will likely make humanity more vulnerable in the next major natural disaster.

      The surveillance state might give a more stable environment for governments but it also limits the human spirit. People will achieve far more if they want to do something than they ever will by being compelled.
      Voluntarily giving your browsing data to Google is not the same as having it taken from you by the government. Google can only control a subset of the total data and they have a ToS that says your personal information will be kept private.
      Government started collecting the data for finding people accused of terrorism... then drugs... organised crime... child porn...
      If full surveillance continues, eventually government will actively target individuals through their browsing history for even minor infractions. Maybe not immediately, since it might take a few years for authoritarian personalities to take full control.
      Corruption and laziness will increase as whistleblowing and freedom of speech are eliminated.
      Innovation will die out as regulation limits those acting outside the interests of the authorities...

      I don't think there's a need for intelligence gathering to be eliminated, just refocused so that access to data is limited to those actively working on a case. Identifying threats shouldn't actually need mass data collection...people will say what they think voluntarily. Analysis of this data could identify the real threats so more traditional surveillance and preventative measures can be employed.
      Getting rid of the mass data collection doesn't necessarily increase the threat from terrorism.

      The time to call for a reversal is now.
      It sounds like leaders around the world want to hear people say they're more concerned about surveillance than terrorism.
      Reducing surveillance without a mandate from the people would be political suicide, since they'd be the scapegoat for the next attack blamed on terrorism.
      Making more people aware of the situation is perhaps a key to it. Let people know the consequences of the surveillance state and perhaps they'll decide they don't really want it.
      They might also decide to go along with being compliant sheeple, "If I don't have anything to hide, I don't have anything to worry about, right?"

      Put out fliers with catch phrases, asking why people aren't walking around naked if they're not concerned about their privacy.
      Let them know they can protest by encrypting their emails and browsing the web anonymously if they don't want to talk to their government representative.
      Give government a mandate for returning to rule-of-law and rolling back terrorism legislation.
      At least then you can say you tried.

  46. Re:At least Obama's dog Bo got to Martha's Vineyar by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 4, Informative

    If Obama can arrange to have his dog Bo airlifted to Martha's Vineyard

    It isn't like the 2nd helicopter was only for the dog. It was carrying all the personnel and equipment that didn't fit in the first helicopter with the president.

    --
    When information is power, privacy is freedom.
  47. Criminal Charges under the CFAA? by schwit1 · · Score: 1

    Persons were accessing data they were not authorized to access.

    When are the criminal charges to be filed?

  48. You're hard to take seriously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    1. Re:You're hard to take seriously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let me guess, APK? You're the only one to ever make such a retarded post like that. Go drink a gallon of gasoline you worthless sack of shit.

      Also, you've definitely been banned from slashdot (that worthless pink-page), so why are you hear? I have not problem being a ban-evading shitposter, but you actually claim to not be a troll, so you shouldn't get around that.

    2. Re:You're hard to take seriously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wrong and let me guess: Zero__Kelvin (aptly named, you are zero).

    3. Re:You're hard to take seriously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He doesn't look banned to me in those posts. You fail.

  49. Jaime Lee Curftis by perry64 · · Score: 1

    Can we just get to the part of the movie where Jamie Lee Curtis dances? I wonder if any of the NSA geeks knows how to fly a Harrier?

  50. None of the above by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People are curious, people want power, people want control

    That's what they would like you to believe, because their real objective is even more despicable. The goal of a spy state (or any police state in general) is profit. Power is merely a stepping stone on the road to riches, a tool used for a job. Their profit is never taken directly, of course, but obfuscated through a variety of perfectly legal methods (they are the same ones who invent the laws, of course).

    Follow the money. When evaluating the actions of government, always follow the money first.

  51. Re:All IT staff do this by tqk · · Score: 2

    The hypocrisy of the /. crowd it quite stunning : most of them would do exactly the same if given the chance.

    I believe you're tarring yourself there more than your intended targets. I've never given a rat's ass about co-workers' or supervisors' personal secrets or private lives. I very much doubt that anyone who chooses tech for a career would find that cruft the least bit interesting. If you do, you might find reality TV more entertaining than /.

    --
    "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
  52. Love Interests, but what else? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The spying on love interests angle was obviously coming down the pipe. I can't wait to read when it hits the news that these creeps are abusing their positions for financial interests as well.
     
    It's not insider trading if you're "inside" due to national security concerns, right?

  53. Coming soon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Coming soon ... SEXINT for all of the NSA's porn.

    1. Re:Coming soon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That comes handy if you talk too much truth (e.g. about financial corruption) and must be silenced. Based on PORNINT, CIA can send you a fitting whore and later make sure your wife becomes aware. Thereby you are taken out of action for some weeks at least. If you kill yourself, even better for the thugs who run the show.

  54. Every industry does this ... like telecom, ISPs, e by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Every industry does this. If there is easy access to sensitive data, workers with that access often use it.

    There have been times when telecom workers access their "significant other's or Ex-SO's voicemail and this is a highly regulated industry. In the cellular world, access to private data happens all the time both for good reason and for personal interest - cell networks are not regulated much at all.

    Working at ISPs, I know people snooped on emails. As a young email admin, I looked out of curiousity. In the last 15 yrs, I have NOT looked unless required to do so for my job. It is better to know know things that you shouldn't know.

    As a network and server admin many, many, years ago at a company growing from 20-3000+ employees, I found the spreadsheet that had a summary of all corporate salaries and stock option grants. I looked and actually felt good about it - the company was fair in my opinion for both salaries AND option grants. BTW, I was just a team leader there, so more like 1st line management. Seeing that the owners salaries were $20K/yr less than mine was encouraging - of course, they had real stock, not just options, and they were paid end-of-year bonuses from the excess profits. The best performers were paid accordingly. Anyway, I let the HR manager know about the file permissions and suggested that he NOT store it on a network drive where everyone in the company could review it. We never spoke about it again. BTW, even his salary was not out-of-line for the work he did. How often would an network admin say that about their HR team?

    So, if any industry doesn't mandate controls for private information, it will be abused. Even with controls, there will always be a small group of uber nerds with pretty much complete access to all data. For most industries, encrypting databased per-record just isn't worth the effort and that is the only way to prevent the sort uber-nerd access.

  55. It's OK... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't worry, all of the analysts doing the LOVEINT eavesdropping have proper credentials. Their IDs all say "McLovin."

  56. Re:At least Obama's dog Bo got to Martha's Vineyar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It isn't like the 2nd helicopter was only for the dog. It was carrying all the personnel and equipment that didn't fit in the first helicopter with the president.

    Good thing he canceled Whitehouse tours given to school children otherwise the country might have to go into debt paying for his vacation luggage copters.

  57. DEAR NSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    That was a nice attempt to make yourself look sympathetic. If you could now stop killing your POWs and doing random, worldwide kidnappings. You will never be able to outdo the NKVD, despite all your best efforts.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/66th_Military_Intelligence_Brigade#Misconduct_in_the_past

  58. And no one will be surprised that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    ... they also get excellent financial "advice" from all the best sources.

  59. Re:All IT staff do this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, we don't. Only those megalomaniacs inclined to do so, do so. If you're reading your employees emails outside the purview of systems security or spying on your staff, then you're simply a bad person - a lot of people are, to be sure, but that by no means makes your group normal. You're the folks who the rest of us call "the bad guys". No amount of trying to convince you that all other IT staff are the same actually makes it true. Because there's no such thing as karma and the universe isn't geared towards personalities, life *is* actually tougher if you're a person of good character. Most 'successful' people aren't. Hence why most IT nerds stay IT nerds - and don't spy on their co-workers.

  60. There's Nothing Like CP to catch a Creep by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why not go for the child porn angle? They take ALL our conversations and data, and pass them on to the highest bidder. And the next highest bidder. And the next.
    Think about that.

    The NSA willfully engages in the for-profit creation [capturing and putting together data that would not otherwise have been as such] and mass-distribution of child pornography.

    Even if we can't get them for the racketeering, terrorism, espionage, blackmail, complicity in assassinations, and all the other shit they do, then maybe we can at least get every last one of those fuckers behind bars for exchanging photos of diddling kids.

  61. The debate is over ______ by ancientt · · Score: 1

    I agree with quite a bit of your post, and the most of the things I disagree with, I believe are rational positions that I can agree somebody reasonable can hold even if I don't. But you led off with the single thing that I take exception to.

    The debate is over what's an effective way to protect our security.

    Sorry. No. That IS NOT what the debate is over.

    The debate is over what right people have to privacy from their government.

    --
    B) Eliminate all the stupid users. This is frowned upon by society.
    1. Re:The debate is over ______ by nbauman · · Score: 1

      Oh. Well. The debate is over what's an effective way to protect our security, within the requirements of our rights and freedoms.

  62. Birds of a Feather by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, given what you do for a living, it's understandable you'd want to be with someone who uses the same methods for her job.

  63. Let's clarify this a bit: by Penguinisto · · Score: 2

    well, technically a "white" man can be on of many various shades of pink and/or tan/olive** in skin color, and a "black" man's skin can range from a very pale beige to nearly jet-black. An Asian man's skin isn't really yellow at all (unless something like jaundice is involved).

    "African American" could just as easily describe a pale blue-eyed dude from South Africa as it could a dude with jet-black skin from Rwanda or a more Arabic-looking gent from Egypt. QED: The term is ignorant at best. "Caucasian" is a holdover from days when scientists thought that pale folks all stemmed from folks who lived in the Caucasus region of the world, as you half-stated. IMHO, the only term that even halfway seems to fit would be "Native American", but as a group, they all emigrated from Asia about 100k years ago, and as time goes by even that particular distinction will fuzz and fade.

    It would just be easier to call 'em all "people" and be done with it, no? I figure in about 500 years (assuming civilization holds up that long), skin color will be too blended and mixed to even hope to tell any differences by mere sight.

    FYI: I'm currently typing this missive while on business in Atlanta, Georgia; I've seen nearly every shade of skin color in the past 24 hours. I've seen folks getting along in social situations just fine, the participants individually bearing radically differing skin colors. I grew up under similar circumstances, and I can tell you that Obama is very inept, very ideological, very selfish, and a very lousy president; not one of the worst, but pretty close to it.

    ** BTW, maybe we can just call 'em pink?

    --
    Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    1. Re:Let's clarify this a bit: by bogjobber · · Score: 1

      The Caucasian racial definition constantly changed throughout history (and being largely pseudo-science in the first place makes it hard to pin down a precise definition), but it was actually more of a linguistic designation than one of skin tone. What we call Caucasian in the United States was more properly (in a sense) called Aryan, the Caucasians being a race subdivided into Aryans (speakers of Indo-European languages), Semites (Semitic languages) and Hamites (Afroasiatic languages) and distinct from the races of Mongoloids (East Asians, Southeast Asians, Pacific Islanders, South Indians) and Negroids (Africans).

      Of course this was a thoroughly confusing and incorrect way to group people. Why Caucasian was kept as an "official" and scientific designation when what we really mean is white or more properly European American I have no idea, because the term Caucasian included many dark-skinned people even when it was in common scientific usage (Berbers and Sri Lankans, for example).

    2. Re:Let's clarify this a bit: by gordo3000 · · Score: 1

      pink could be used, except that is resreved for commies now.

  64. Re:All IT staff do this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You are obviously entirely incapable of becoming a soldier.

  65. This is why you cannot trust the NSA or the FBI. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They are made up of human beings. And human beings invariably abuse the system. It is not preventable. If information is collected, it WILL be abused. 100% certainty.

  66. So... by Greyfox · · Score: 1
    Using government resources to stalk a potential, current or ex SO? That's nice and slimy. Not that I wouldn't expect that sort of behavior of a member of Congress, but I was kind of hoping we'd hold the guys who actually do things to a slightly higher standard. I'm always happy to find that no matter how overly-cynical I thought I was, it never was enough. At this point I think cynicism, not hydrogen, must be the most common element in the universe. Thanks guys. That makes me... mmm.... happy really isn't the word. I'm sure the Germans have a word for it. Whatever it is, it makes me that.

    Oh yeah, and my tax dollars at work. Huzzah!

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  67. Source? by manu0601 · · Score: 1

    What is the source of that information? Snowden leak? NSA PR? Other?

    1. Re:Source? by manu0601 · · Score: 1

      Here is a hint from the Guardian: it is not Snowden, and it may be the UK government that is leaking stuff that can be considered harmful, in order to suggest it is from Snowden, and call Snowden's discolsure harmful. Hmmmm...

  68. Jealousy is a hell of a sentiment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Jealousy gets people, its too damn powerfull. Strong enough to make people kill each another, and strong enough to eat a person alive, and force them to do stuff like spyiing on his partner. If you have attended a hackers irc channel, is very common the visit of some male asking for help to "restore the hotmail password" of his girlfriend, and stuff like that. They want to check if his girlfriend is cheating them.

  69. Had no idea NSA emps had so many foreign gfs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I mean, the point of it all was that no domestic intelligence was being collected, right? So all those emps checking up on gfs must have been foreign, right? After all, metadata isn't private or anything, right?

  70. You've already had the proof by dbIII · · Score: 1

    There is this guy called Snowdon that worked for a private contractor in Hawaii which was doing outsourced work for the NSA. The US government has been treating him as if he had "total and full access."

    1. Re:You've already had the proof by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 2

      Snowdown worked on-site, not off-site and he wasn't working for the interests of his employer of record. Basically your entire point is hyperbole and that shit only hurts the cause. Quit it.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
  71. Re:All IT staff do this by jpublic · · Score: 2, Informative

    The hypocrisy of the /. crowd it quite stunning : most of them would do exactly the same if given the chance.

    No. You don't get to decide what other people would do if they were put in a different situation and then decide that they're hypocritical because of the actions they took in your delusions.

  72. Re:All IT staff do this by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

    I've worked almost daily with direct access to my company's HR database for years. I needed said access to write queries for web applications. Had I wanted to, I could have easily looked up anyone's salary, birth dates, SSN's, home addresses, etc. I never have, though. Partly because I'd be fired if found out (and I'm awful at keeping secrets), but partly because I know that accessing that information for that reason would be wrong.

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  73. Best job ever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh man, this would be such a sweet job! Trawl around for a while to see if I could spot the odd domestic terrorist/tax evader to keep Amurica safe and then in my "spare time", keep tabs on that hottie living down the street from me, like where she buys her coffee, how her current relationships are going etc. Then I can check through the email history of a few of my favorite company CEOs to see what stocks I should be buying/selling.

    It's really hard to see a downside.

  74. NSA IS The Porn King by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Got to sell Got to sell.

    NSA will be 'rigging' trading on NASDQ on Monday. Get ready! NSA ass-whipes RULE the RUE.

    Viagra enema's for everyone!

    YawHooo.

    1. Re:NSA IS The Porn King by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The financial Mafia has set up massive walls of numbers and concepts to conceal their nasty dealings from any kind of supervision. Even though going after the finance criminals would be the Right Thing To Do (considering the political fallout of a NY finance core implosion, see 1929 and 1933), the US security apparatus choses to put a blind eye on this. Instead they fuck with some (militarily) irrelevant brown-skin medievalists which they protect and nurture with their left hand.

      Compare that to Russia, where the Finance Criminals actually are sent to Siberia, if they try to dead-fuck the nation. Putin is a real hero, a patriot and not just a puppet of Israel Finance International. Brace for the coming Great Depression 2.0, my dear Americans.

  75. Do you guys live under a rock? by dbIII · · Score: 0

    He worked at a contractors site on an island not some huge government building in Virginia or Utah. The shambolic mess is a watering can with dozens of holes to leak from. Given that modern subs are mainly in the role of communications interceptions it's also a pretty insane idea to pipe secret stuff to that contractors site in Hawaii. Since they are fucking everything else up how do we know that their own transmissions are encrypted and not in the clear thus vunerable to something put opportunisticly on a cable during an outage? There are windows of up to several days between when cables break and they are repaired.

    1. Re:Do you guys live under a rock? by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 2

      He worked at a contractors site on an island

      No, he worked at a government facility. So do us all a favor and shut up until you figure out how to fact check yourself. You and your screaming ignorance only make this fight harder for the people who do know what they are talking about.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    2. Re:Do you guys live under a rock? by dbIII · · Score: 0

      OK then - site full of contractors. Happy now? Either way it's only very loosely under control which doesn't change the objections to such a stupid way of running a core business of a government at all.

  76. It says what it says by dbIII · · Score: 1

    No, I'm saying we hit that point of using intelligence agents for political advantage with Nixon and Watergate, but there have also been worse incidents since (eg. recently the turf war between the FBI and CIA which resulted in the removal of the CIA head on "moral" grounds from misused intelligence). Another is Hillary demanding agents obtain credit card details of diplomats so that they could be framed to apply pressure (not supposition, that reason was given in the order). I'm sure you remember a few others. Politics isn't just something that happens at election time according to the dictionary.

    1. Re:It says what it says by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Oh yeah, I was talking about the current NSA spy programs. Of all the ways they can possibly be abused, politics is the only one that I haven't seen come up. Everything else has happened.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    2. Re:It says what it says by dbIII · · Score: 1

      The NSA is supposed to be the information feed for other agencies who get to misuse the information - at least according to the plot of "Sneakers" :)

  77. Re:At least Obama's dog Bo got to Martha's Vineyar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes. The dog walker, and the kennel.

  78. Re:At least Obama's dog Bo got to Martha's Vineyar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hopefully he will take his dog with him when he visits, and hopefully it has lots of sharp teeth.

  79. Hope and Change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wasn't Obama supposed to be the guy offering "hope and change"?

    That's one election promise he actually kept. You can't deny that you actually got hope for improvement and a change to the worse.

  80. The obvious joke by alphatel · · Score: 1

    It's a shame everyone missed the obvious lead-in this article has provided. Unauthorized agent activity will now be known as...
    Prism Jism

    --
    When the foot seeks the place of the head, the line is crossed. Know your place. Keep your place. Be a shoe.
  81. Find out what the rest of the word is thinking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The way to protect our country is to do real intelligence, find out what the rest of the world is thinking, and go after the basic causes.

    If the rest of the world is thinking something different from Fox news, they are potential terrorists. Understanding other people is not a reproducible or scaleable process and does not secure jobs in the defense industry. Building remote-controlled weapons and exterminating bad guys along with a bit of collateral, then hiding the information about it is much more reproducible.

    And not just that, it is also sustainable. As long as one keeps killing people in the Near East with a somewhat loose focus, the war against Eurasia, excuse me, against Terror will be kept alive and kicking. Jobs in the defense industry depend on it. Engineering jobs.

    What you propose would cause people to study languages and cultures. Do you want to make them ashamed of some curd-chewing bozos who had a high culture going long before Columbus even started killing Americans in order to make room for the outcasts from Europe?

    Where is the fun in that? Where is the profit?

  82. So... by Ronin+Developer · · Score: 1

    When everything goes South in my life, it might all because some geek has a woody for my girlfriend or wife? Ducky.

    No...not a misprint.

  83. they spy on Wall Street too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what about the "insider information" obtained by NSA which enriches a few secret operatives?
    When will that come out ?!

  84. Re:At least Obama's dog Bo got to Martha's Vineyar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Groomer, Vet, dog food, doggie bath/pool, etc.

  85. You = "pwned" by apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4117625&cid=44668899 APK's "banned"? He pwned you there. Oh, it's "here", not "hear", illiterate worthless sack you project about yourself (via ad hominem illogical attacks that failed here and on security vulnerabilities Linux vs. MS OS in the link above).

  86. I am so impressed ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... by the level of discourse in these discussions. Still, there's always room for improvement and it's just possible that words like "fuck," "idiot" and so on may get a little old eventually, so I've selected a few lines from which you folks might like to choose future invective:

    On thee, the troubler of the poor world's peace!
            The worm of conscience still be-gnaw thy soul!
            Thy friends suspect for traitors while thou liv'st,
            And take deep traitors for thy dearest friends!
            No sleep close up that deadly eye of thine,
            Unless it be while some tormenting dream
            Affrights thee with a hell of ugly devils!
            Thou elvish-mark'd, abortive, rooting hog,
            Thou that wast seal'd in thy nativity
            The slave of nature and the son of hell,
            Thou slander of thy heavy mother's womb,
            Thou loathed issue of thy father's loins,
            Thou rag of honour, thou detested-

  87. Too Late... by DiEx-15 · · Score: 1

    Thank you for your interest in me, NSA. However, I got a woman already.

    Thanks, but no thanks.

  88. I Love ______ by niftymitch · · Score: 1

    #LOVINT...

    I love New York.... == I love to listen to the mayor of New York

    I love Obama == I love to listen to the wire taps of the white house.

    I love Woody Allen == I love to listen to old men fantasize about _______

    I love to intimidate members of Senate intelligence committee members. == Listen for dirt J. Edgar style.

    I love HRC == Hillery is hot so I listen to her, Bill and Monica.

    I love Paris... == I listen to anyone I want in Paris or anyplace near Paris... (all of France)

    --
    Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't. Mark Twain.
  89. Google: Gangstalking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and read the free book, "The Hidden Evil":

    http://www.thehiddenevil.com/

    the author lives under a bridge and is harassed.

  90. Much ado.... by ibsteve2u · · Score: 1

    I hope nobody out there believes that workers in the various telecommunications corporations ain't never, ever...never ever never eavesdropped on other people's e-communications...for at least as long as there have been long-haul lines.

    lolll...QA and QC, donchaknow.

    --
    Orwell: "In a Time of Universal Deceit, telling the Truth is a Revolutionary Act"
  91. Re:At least Obama's dog Bo got to Martha's Vineyar by steelfood · · Score: 1

    It was carrying all the personnel and equipment that didn't fit in the first helicopter with the president.

    So...the dog?

    --
    "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
  92. Re:At least Obama's dog Bo got to Martha's Vineyar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey man. Dogs are people too.

  93. Been there by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Slightly different situation, but same shit.

    I used to be on an incident response team with a DoD agency doing forensics for a variety of defense organizations, and my boss's favorite thing in the world is when we would get laptops from SOCOM, because invariably the special ops guys had nude photos of their girlfriends/wives/etc on their work computers. He always had some excuse for running an image search... and so did everyone else. That kind of behavior is endemic.

  94. Not a technology issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    but a management one. Anyone behaving inappropriately ought to face disciplinary measures. The fact that it happens to be sensitive data and that NSA officials can access it for inappropriate purposes demonstrates poor data access control and poorer HR management. It has little or nothing to do with "ooo, the spooks have all my data"

  95. You gotta love America. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    US used to be my dream country when I was a kid. If it wasn't for the numerous interesting places I'd like to take my kid one day, I'd never ever fly to this country.