Slashdot Mirror
Former CIA/NSA Head: NSA Is "Infinitely" Weaker As a Result of Snowden's Leaks
An anonymous reader writes "The Huffington Post reports, 'Michael Hayden, former director of the National Security Agency, said Sunday that he used to describe leaker Edward Snowden as a "defector," ... "I think there's an English word that describes selling American secrets to another government, and I do think it's treason," Hayden said ... Some members of Congress have also ... accused him of an act of treason. Hayden said his view of Snowden has grown harsher in recent weeks after reports that Snowden is seeking asylum in Germany and Brazil in exchange for assisting their investigations into NSA programs. Hayden said the NSA is "infinitely" weaker as a result of Snowden's leaks. "This is the most serious hemorrhaging of American secrets in the history of American espionage," he said. "What Snowden is revealing ... is the plumbing," he added later. "He's revealing how we acquire this information. It will take years, if not decades, for us to return to the position that we had prior to his disclosures."' — More in the Face the Nation video and transcript, including discussion of the recent legal decisions, and segments with whistleblower Thomas Drake, Snowden legal adviser Jesselyn Radack, and Washington Post reporter Barton Gellman who recently interviewed Snowden."
http://latablegastronomie.com.br/uploads/2011/05/asian-man-crying-gif-i1.gif :(
Look what you've done Snowden! ..
GOOD!
We were caught abusing the rights of the American people and the people's of many other nations. Now that we've been caught people won't trust us anymore. Fell so sorry for us!
I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours. - Hunter S. Thompson
...and celebrate the long-term crippling of an evil agency.
Let's also lament the fact that Snowden won't be able to return to the country he helped so much.
They must of been infinitely powerful to begin with.
Unfortunately so is most of the government and the courts.
if people who took oaths to uphold and defend the constitution actually tried reading the document. Article 3, Section 3
Oh the land of the free, and the home of the brave.
Pity neither is true any more, and the US has become the worst parody of the Soviets.
This clown needs to get the NSA renamed as the Ministry of Truth.
I think there's an English word that describes a person who makes statements which are untrue, and I do think it's liar.
Treason is working against one's country. So the NSA has been the treasonous one.
Still waiting for the first shred of proof that the NSA's dragnet methods do any good whatsoever. Until then: nothing of value was lost.
That's funny, I consider "treating every citizen of your country as an enemy and a criminal" as treason, Mr. Hayden.
... illegal and un-Constitutional activity and I do think it is "criminal" and "un-American" respectively.
My thoughts on this are simple. It is in us, the people who live in the USA's best interest that this leak happened. Plain and simple the NSA has been running wild with a total disregard to the constitution. I personally want to see the NSA disbanded as they will never be taken seriously again by america, and they will never be trusted again by the rest of the world.
Now as for doing damage that is in regards to other countries, I think the way snowden went about things was actually the best way he could have given the circumstances. He did not just dump the files, unredacted for the entire world to see and learn from. The articles and information that up until this point been released have been screened pretty well to protect numerous secrets.
From my point of view yes Id love to see all the data, unredacted but I underrstand that would have been a disaster for a number of reasons, one of those reasons being the concern of the people who are anti snowden, they are making the argument as if the entire treasure was dumped. but it wasnt so their argument doesnt hold water. The other reason, and the oneI am more concerned with is that if he dumped it all at once, it would be much easier for our no attention span having population to forget about it and move on to the new shiny of the day, and all of that information would be for nothing.
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
i mean really...what else is this guy gonna say?
never bring a twinkie to a food fight.
GOOD
...exactly why? They still do dragnet surveillance; their backdoors are still in place; they only lost what they gleaned from Google's internal network.
I wouldn't go as far as saying he has made the United States any weaker. The world is still revolving, and there has been no blowout other than lost trust, and a lot of red-faced vendors (Cisco, RSA, Google, etc). I WILL go as far as stating he has had a negative impact economically on many companies who are now losing business due to the leaks. Governments are well aware that EVERYONE is spying on EVERYONE. No one is innocent in this game of espionage. Snowden has however caused many people to lose their jobs, and this I have seen first-hand.
If Snowden would have voiced his concerns to his immediate supervisors, he would have been silenced immediately.
You can tell that it is the plumbing because it is mostly full of shit.....
"It will take years, if not decades, for us to return to the position that we had prior to his disclosures." - Michael Hayden
One can only hope the later. Sorry, but the most important thing Snowden did was show us that the NSA had betrayed the public it was meant to server. In effect, he served us better than you did. This trust SHOULD take decades to get back.
"This is the most serious haemorrhaging of American secrets in the history of American espionage," he said. "What Snowden is revealing ... is the plumbing,"
Worse than when Soviet intelligence penetrated the Manhattan project at every level that mattered thus enabling Stalin to take a multi year shortcut to building his own bomb? I mean let's not over dramatise this, the ability to steal airplane sales from Airbus and hand them to Boeing, to steal IP from foreign companies and donate them to US competitors, blackmail foreign politicians, etc..., may be important but an A-bomb can vaporise a city along with millions of it's inhabitants.
I'm not sure that this isn't true.
The question is whether there's anything wrong with that.
Were the NSA meant to be doing the things that they're doing? To some degree, yes. But I'm also pretty sure they've overstepped what they're allowed to do.
The "treason" comments are pretty far off. Someone who's committing an act of treason is doing it to benefit themselves or another country. Seeing as he had to flee his life in the US and is between countries, risking imprisonment if he ever comes back, aside from the fame he's accrued, I'm not sure how this is to his benefit.
Luckily for the NSA, the guardian hasn't said anything about specific operations or people involved. The releases have been about methods and reach, which aren't the same. The only surprises there are that the NSA was more active than most people thought.
There's nothing in there that's mind-glowingly unbelievable, like the NSA hooked up some kind of transmitter to an eyeball and has been using that realtime video feed to monitor meetings.
Of course, there are a few more million documents, but I'm sure the really juicy ones are being withheld.
If they had not been abusing their power to conduct illegal surveillance then Snowden may not have resorted to this. Perhaps then their techniques would have remained secret and been available for legitimate purposes. Perhaps they should be looking in the mirror when placing the blame.
"It will take years, if not decades, for us to return to the position that we had prior to his disclosures."
Yes, and the hope is that the US will have a very public conversation about whether that position is something we want to allow you to return to in the meantime.
War on Drugs is against the citizens of the USA, and the NSA has been a part of this with the SOD and parallel construction. So one could make the argument that anyone involved with the NSA is guilty of treason.
ALL THE REST OF US believe that "the position" they "held" is and/or should be flat out ***king illegal. We think the morons passing laws that mangae to circumvent and directly violate key attributes of our democracies - are the traitors. It's getting damn close to the time when a "citizen's rights" shouldn't be bound by borders, and a governments "limitations on powers" shouldn't end at the borders nor be different outside the borders.
Actually, that sounds exactly like the governmental state equivalent of "Freemen on the Land"!
"I think there's an English word that describes selling American secrets to another government, and I do think it's treason," Hayden said.
Well, not if the revelations are about illegal - and especially unconstitutional - behavior.
When did Snowden sell secrets? I thought he released them to the public, I never read anywhere that he SOLD them.
What we don't see in the Snowden revelations is any scrap of value derived from the NSA's blatant power-grab. As I understand it, the essence of NSA's defense is "but...TERRORISTS!", yet they have failed to produce any results that come even close to justifying their extraordinary usurpation of power. Even if the NSA could demonstrate real value in the data they've stolen, they would still have to justify their process for taking it from us. Last I knew, the constitution does not state "the ends justify the means".
I do not know what is more disturbing. The facts revealed by Snowden, or the statement by Hayden that the goal is "to return to the position that we had prior to his disclosures".
To Terminate, or not to Terminate, that's the question - SCSIROB
I am reminded of
"I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it! I would rather you just said "thank you", and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to!"
and so on..
i have a feeling that nothing really will change, they will just be more secretive until we the people decide that
" I feel the need... the need for" freedom
"Infinitely weaker' would mean powerless.
IF the NSA were powerless then it should be dissolved. Since No-one in the NSA is saying THAT should happen, they must think they still have a lot of power.
I don't doubt the NSA's spying effectiveness has been diminished, but I think the implication they are impotent is a lie.
Article X: The powers not delegated... by the Constitution...are reserved...to the people
"He's revealing how we acquire this information. It will take years, if not decades, for us to return to the position that we had prior to his disclosures."'
Let us hope we can never return to that position.
So the NSA was completely useless before they were spying on all of us? How did they do their jobs before these unconstitutional programs? What an ass.
Sounds to me like Hayden's just afraid that he'd be subject to arrest and prosecution if he visits wherever Snowden lands. If he'd only done nothing wrong, he'd have had nothing to hide, and nothing to fear punishment for if caught. Perhaps he shoulda thought of that sooner. Sure, someone else would have done the job if he'd quit instead of following orders, but at least he'd be guiltless (or less guilty). There's a certain irony that Hayden could be a criminal in a land where Snowden could be free -- although I doubt either one will happen.
I am not a crackpot.
At this point, I think we'd be better off if the NSA's efficacy were reduced to zero (infinitely weaker: 1/x -> 0). Then we could rebuild it from the ground up with proper political, legal, and operational controls.
In fact, I suspect that the NSA retains most--if not all--of its operational capabilities.
The NSA doesn't face any significant legal restrictions. The law allows them to do most of what they want, and they just do the rest anyway, secure in the knowledge that the courts won't(?) can't(?) shut them down.
The NSA does have a political problem right now. It's not much of a political problem: most of the political establishment wants them to keep doing what they are doing. They wouldn't have any political problem at all if their P.R. weren't so inept. Hayden yammering about "defectors" and "treason" and "infinite weakness" is just more P.R.
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
– Benjamin Franklin, 1759
The real Sig captains the Northwestern. This one captains
" It will take years, if not decades, for us to return to the position that we had prior to his disclosures."
First, if someone (NSA) breaks the laws of the country and gets caught, wouldn't the expectation be that they stop doing that?
This statement indicates that the NSA doesn't get it. The expectation is that they will continue with the surveillance
state as planned.
Second to that, no one from the government has actually taken this statement to task. This indicates
that it will be business as usual for the NSA and CIA no matter what the laws of the land are.
Finally, the lack of actual caring from all quarters about this would indicate that all the elected representatives
in government are on board, no matter what their bobbing heads say on T.V. . Apparently the law doesn't apply to employees
of the state since no one fom the NSA has been arrested or fired.
The dude was revealing unconstitutional behavior on part of the US government towards it's own citizens. The "leak" was to the US electorate as a wake up call. The labels hero and patriot might apply, but certainly not traitor.
Hopely never will get back to it. The position before disclosures were happily attacking, installing backdoors, infiltrating into private encrypted channels/vpns and networks, stripping everyone in the world of any hope of privacy (and enjoying it). Getting back means that even with this revelations they will continue to perpetrate those crimes and that the governments of the world didn't learnt anything from this event.
> "he used to describe leaker Edward Snowden as a "defector""
He is a defector. Away from the rogue near-nation of the NSA and toward the United States' Constitution.
"an act of treason is doing it to benefit themselves or another country"
Just to point out, if that is the definition, then it probably fits - from TFS:
"after reports that Snowden is seeking asylum in Germany and Brazil in exchange for assisting their investigations into NSA programs"
Note I'm not saying whether Snowden is right or wrong, simply that using your definition would imply the NSA guy is correct with his _statement_.
... illegal and un-Constitutional activity and I do think it is "criminal" and "un-American" respectively.
You forgot "treason". That's the other word for acts against the Constitution.
You know, I think I heard that one of these NSA/CIA guys had a suggestion about what should be done with people who commit treason - something about ropes and necks...
You never really know how close to the edge you can go until you fall off.
"I think there's an English word that describes selling American secrets to another government, and I do think it's treason,"
Fascinating, but irrelevant. How about a word that describes giving NSA secrets to the sovereigns (We The People) of the United States, when those secrets expose violations of The Constitution? I'd use "whistleblowing", something the POTUS promised to protect when he asked us to vote for him.
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
The sooner he is swinging from the end of a rope until he is 'dead dead dead' the better off America and the rest of the world will be. Just don't hold your breath.
He's revealing how we unconstitutionally acquire this information.
Fixed that for him.
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
He made a *huge* sacrifice for *our* benefit, and I hope he eventually gets recognized for it.
It's increasingly clear that Snowden is being "handled" though. We shouldn't overlook the fact that he is a prime target for exploitation, by the Russians, by whoever ends up with him. If he does indeed go to Germany and help them defeat NSA spying in that country, well then the treason label fits.
I don't have any problem with Snowden revealing mass surveillance on American citizens to American citizens, but spying on foreign governments is what the NSA is supposed to do. Yes, even our allies, and yes, even for economic reasons (most spying is economic in nature, and every ally spies on every ally). Snowden's reveal of spying on foreign governments and leaders, and any methods to do so, does cross a definite line. That does actually harm the US diplomatically, harms US businesses, and harms those American citizens Snowden claims to support. Snowden may be a naive idealist in over his head, or he may have been "turned" by those who are currently surrounding him.
-mrxak
Onions Will Kill You
Make no mistake, there will be changes, but they will not be the result of “we the people” are incensed and enraged by the indiscretion and total disregard of laws and rights from our Government. This Government is owned and run by international corporations. In light of the Governments activities large companies are losing business. Cisco has complained that foreign customers no longer trust their product. Boeing lost a 4.5 billion dollar contract in Brazil because of the spying. When enough companies have lost revenue, the NSA will get immediately collared.
Snowden is a hero for revealing secrets that need revealing. He is a villain for revealing more than necessary. He is brave for essentially throwing his life away. He is a coward for not being willing to accept all of the legal consequences for his actions.*
With a treasure trove of tell-alls as big as Snowden's allegedly is, I doubt he's had the time to sort out the things our government is doing that are generally likely to be considered by Americans and American allies as immoral or against our own Constitution from those that aren't.
There is no doubt that American owes Snowden a debt of gratitude for shining light on activities which are likely to have at least 4 of 9 Supreme Court justices ruling them unconstitutional, should a relevant case ever reach their docket, as well as many other activities which, while clearly constitutional, are generally regarded as things a civilized government simply should not do, at least not outside of times of war, invasion, or rebellion.
However, the odds are high that not all of the secrets he leaked are those kinds of secrets.
To the extent that Snowden is leaking secrets of things that Americans would NOT generally consider immoral or unconstitutional AND, (for things that affect other countries or their citizens) things which those other countries not only find immoral but which they themselves do not do, Snowden should've kept his mouth shut.
Perhaps the United States Government should take a page from the Doctor Who television episode "Tooth and Claw"** and give Snowden a medal for releasing the secrets that show American was acting immorally and/or unconstitutionally, then charge him with treason for releasing secrets whose release expose anything that needed the disinfecting light of sunshine cast upon it. Maybe they will let him wear his medal and write his (classified, until Washington says otherwise) memoirs while he serves his time in Club Fed???
*The hallmark of an honorable person engaged in civil disobedience (or insurrection, treason, etc.) is their willingness to accept the full legal consequences to themselves for any actions they take on behalf of "the people."
**In the episode, Queen Victoria knights The Doctor and his companion then banishes them both. This episode is also part of the back-story for the spin-off series Torchwood.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
Not for "our" benefit, unless we're Russians or Chinese. Personally I'm American, and consider Snowden a traitor.
This guy is just in it for the fame and cash at this point. He wants more paid gigs giving his opinion out, it's easier to get paid having a polarized stance, regardless of accuracy or insight. Hayden is short-sighted, the system he says is meant to "protect America" is a threat to the very fibers of democracy. In a future where every digital fingerprint and trace of all potentially elected leaders is cataloged and kept in NSA databases, there's a very palatable and real end for "democracy" in the not-to-distance future. All elected leaders will be controlled by such an apparatus.
Snowden could have leaked far more damaging details, and to more than journalists. The fact of the matter is, the majority of Americans don't support what the NSA is doing in their name, but the NSA isn't interested in Democracy or American principles in general. They're interested in exploiting any and all information to their gain.
The NSA is the most dangerous Advanced Persistent Threat ever known to mankind.
But Snowden didn't sell American secrets, and a fortiori neither did he sell them to a government, so even by the definition Hayden himself employs Snowden is not guilty of treason.
Hayden also doesn't understand what "infinitely" means.
The NSA really bet that, over time, none of the thousands of employees having access to this data would leak some of it ? That's really stupid at best. If something is weak, it's by design here. Yes, it takes some real guts to do this leak, but that had to happen. I am actually glad it did.
"I think there's an English word that describes selling American secrets to another government, and I do think it's treason,"
That's only really true if what the US government is keeping secret is morally and legally justifiable. Otherwise what Mr Snowden did is best described as heroism. All the evidence we presently have indicates that the activities of the NSA are very likely in violation of any reasonable interpretation of the 4th amendment. It's pretty hard to trust a secret and unaccountable organization especially when to every appearance they seem to be ignoring any rules they find inconvenient.
I'm an American, and I consider him to be a hero.
But then, I use the word 'our' to be inclusive of humankind, not some subsection thereof.
Nothing is so black and white. He may have revealed some things that will help Americans understand what policy changes need to be made, but he's also revealing information about operations the NSA is supposed to be doing, and now there's talk of him helping foreign governments in exchange for asylum. I'd say that makes him a naive idealist, at best.
-mrxak
Onions Will Kill You
Treason is what members of the NSA have been doing all along. Snowden only told people (who aren't in the know) about how they were doing it.
But inversion of due process seems to be standard procedure by now.
Seriously, NSA only wanted to keep secret how useless and damaging it is to keep funding these kinds of organisations whilst still pretending it's a democracy.
that a government supposedly "of the people, for the people, and by the people" has such an adversarial relationship with its people.
When does this happen in the movie?
I'm not sure that this isn't true.
The question is whether there's anything wrong with that.
Were the NSA meant to be doing the things that they're doing? To some degree, yes. But I'm also pretty sure they've overstepped what they're allowed to do.
The "treason" comments are pretty far off. Someone who's committing an act of treason is doing it to benefit themselves or another country. Seeing as he had to flee his life in the US and is between countries, risking imprisonment if he ever comes back, aside from the fame he's accrued, I'm not sure how this is to his benefit.
treason [tree-zuhn] noun
1.the offense of acting to overthrow one's government or to harm or kill its sovereign.
2.a violation of allegiance to one's sovereign or to one's state.
3.the betrayal of a trust or confidence; breach of faith; treachery.
Looks like it fits the definition of treason to me.
When Snowden first started leaking he was, as is usually for the Obama administration, grossly overcharged. Instead of considering him a whistle blower or hitting him with minor charges regarding classified information the administration went for espionage. Espionage is a capital crime. They also threatened people to get him back.It is the USA that moved a whistle blower to a traitor.
If these secrets are really that damaging than Snowden should be given full immunity for past acts and the right to testify to congress behind closed doors. Otherwise all this "traitor" stuff is just more of trying to discredit him and distract from the conversation, the same as when they were mocking his girlfriend in the beginning.
I'm sorry but President Obama campaigned on shutting down the domestic telephone surveillance program under Bush. Instead he expanded it. He argued there was congressional oversight even while congress couldn't get documents and thus couldn't exercise oversight. I like Obama, I voted for him, I'd vote for him again. But he's just dead wrong on his war on leakers. We live in a democracy and we should not be engaging in intelligence activities not specifically authorized by Congress. It is simply too dangerous to the democracy to have a quasi military branch of government accountable only to the President.
I think a legal definition of treason is what people are talking about.
-mrxak
Onions Will Kill You
If they are infinitely weaker, then by the math of the infinite, they must have been infinitely powerful which is not what they should be. And since they are STILL doing the things they have been doing with no indication that they have stopped or slowed down in any way, they must STILL be infinitely powewrful.
Where an organization like that exists, we are all in danger.
The only thin g that happening is they are weakening their own credibiklity (what's left of it) by their continued transparent lies, deceit and attempts to cover their tracks.
I find many of these threads fascinating as a non-USA citizen and think the government of the USA with their information gathering agencies should consider the impact their activities have on the rest of the world — after all, the United States of America represent less than 4% of the world's population ... but hey! who cares about a measly 96+% of the people of the world?
... er, what?!?
It seems to me that USA has a holier-than-thou attitude where anything in USA's interest is allowed and anything against USA's interests is illegal. If Snowden (USA) shares intelligence information with The Guardian (UK), it is illegal; if NSA (USA) shares intelligence information with GCHQ (UK) it is perfectly legal
Lastly, more as an example of the attitude of the USA government than because it has anything directly to do with Snowden et al: If somebody creates a website that is perfectly legal in their home country (like creating a gambling site) but illegal in USA, that person cannot enter USA or any of its territories without the risk of arrest, whereas if somebody from USA creates a website that is perfectly legal in their home country (like a website advertising prescription drugs) but illegal in many other countries, that would not normally have any impact on their travel in those countries.
So far, there's no evidence that the NSA was doing anything of value. Sure, in theory they have a mission which might possibly be valuable were it focused the right way, maybe. Maybe. But half their mission - making info security better for Americans - is now permanently destroyed. No one in crypto circles will ever trust the NSA again: they burned that bridge and lost their ability to give back to the public sector.
So all that's left to the NSA is SIGINT, and that's have proven worthless for asymmetric threats. Yes, it would be good to have SIGINT the next time a major nation goes to war, but at this point I'd rather it wasn't the NSA doing that. Let the NSA die, and the legitimate SIGINT role can pass on to military intelligence or some other group with no motivation to spy on US citizens, or steal secrets from foreign companies to share with US companies.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
You are a fool. The traitors are the ones calling him a traitor. How we ever supposed to stop the NSA if no one tells on them? Make no mistake the NSA is a huge threat to Liberty in this country.
Good-bye
It's the U.S. government's illegal actions that are harming the U.S., not the revealing of them -- and that includes spying on our allies.
But they aren't just spying on foreign governments, they are spying on the citizenry EN MASSE. That is far beyond the NSAs mandate. Spying is a dishonorable and destructive force, i dont buy the argument that we HAVE to do it. We choose to.
Good-bye
I for one pretty much want them to NEVER get back to where they were - if the NSA wands to spy on every person outside our broders every waking moment, go ahead - ... that's a political matter - I think it harms us more than it helps, but hey, that's what spys do.
However, the minute they turn their gaze inward - indiscriminately picking up communications / data/ video/ pictures, etc of ordinary Americans inside US borders well, that's where the line is drawn.
Hell, if they accidentally collected some citizens info in the course of monitoring a person of interest who has come into the US, ok, it's a fair cop - easy mistake... but it should be the exception, not the rule, and when you start to mix that unrestrained spy-agency level ability of snooping with federal and law enforcement officials for actions inside the US that have NOTHING TO DO with National Security: well, then you've gone too far.
This flies in the face of the 1st, 4th, and 5th amendments. This is about building a survailence and police state. This is not the direction I want to see our country take - we need to be directly speaking Truth to Power (which is what Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden have done).
We need to stop living in utter fear of our own shadows - not letting the terrorists WIN by feeling terrorized and not let our government BECOME the terrorists (using intimidation and violence for political aims)
The Digital Sorceress
Well then Hayden et all should have considered that before they decided to shit where they eat!
It is nothing more or less than the NSA's decision to act unconstitutionally that caused this.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Precisely my thought. How was his actions so beneficial for him and his family? I spent 7 years saluting whatever flag we were waving and it never came near costing me as much as Snowden's service has cost him. If Snowden did damage, more accurately, embarrass and slow down the NSA, bless him for it.
I.e., what every NSA official except Snowden has either committed or abetted, because allegiance to the United States means allegiance to its Constitution and its people, not allegiance to the bureaucracy, the President, or Congress.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
"He's revealing how we acquire this information. It will take years, if not decades, for us to return to the position that we had prior to his disclosures."
Hopefully the revelations about what they have been up to will be enough to prevent them from ever being able to "eturn to the position that we had prior to his disclosures".
'The tyrant will always find pretext for his tyranny.' - Aesop's Fables
Ostensibly, the NSA's recording and then subsequent unpacking of all communications is to help prevent terrorist attacks. If they never reveal how these helped, truthfully not helping any investigation, or just to avoid showing their hand to suspected terrorists in a courtroom - the same paradox arises: The "terrorists" are part of the population that demands freedom from tracking. In other word, they are hiding among the populace.
The question we may all want to face is if a terrorist bomb takes out a bus with our family on it, would any amount of NSA tracking be acceptable? If the attack was instead thwarted via a program that was never, ever revealed (officers just magically knew about a plot), we'd be exactly in the current situation. So I find it difficult to accept that I know the truth about this situation still.
I don't trust the NSA - not so much about the snooping on general citizens, but that their program won't be used to find critical journalists, political opponents, budgetary critics, and perform a scientology-style smearing of their character. If they detect a bunch of would-be terrorists via web usage, TOR hacks, phone snooping, I would have to just go along with it: so far, no representative or candidate of my district is ready to stop any of these programs, although I've writen them about how we can put checks and balances into the programs.
If theoretically the NSA could know about *everything, everywhere* - would this be beyond some personal limit? What is the limit of what a police program should track about the citizenry?
now produces 1/1000 of an unverifiable benefit, at an unknown cost to boot.
Look, there has to be *some* transparency that's independently verifiable. Right now, if I was a business analyst and tasked to determine the cost/benefit of the NSA, I couldn't do it, an neither could anyone else. Certainly not cluster of clueless congressmen.
If the NSA wants to continue existing in some form, it's going to have to open up to some degree. Moreover, some things *have* to remain off-limits, like spying on friendly heads of state, congress itself, suprement court justices or the president. Right now, they're *all* gunning for the NSA, because they've all realized that they too, have been spied on. That too, will have to be independently verifiable.
It's doable, just not comfortable.
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
I read the title as: Sauron Is "Infinitely" Weaker As a Result of Destruction of the One Ring
don't have any problem with Snowden revealing mass surveillance on American citizens to American citizens, but spying on foreign governments is what the NSA is supposed to do. Yes, even our allies, and yes, even for economic reasons (most spying is economic in nature, and every ally spies on every ally).
Spying on your allies is a way to make them no longer your allies. Its as likely to drive them into other camps as it is to keep them your allies. Brazil is increasingly becoming disaffected with the US. How many more Venezuela's do we need in South America?
Spying on Germany and Brazil heads of state is pointless excess.
Your assertion that most spying is economic in nature is disingenuous.
Economic spying is useless for government. Most industrial spying may be economic in nature, but it is not performed by government agents. but rather by private interests. (Unless of course you accept the Chinese government's model of state sponsored industrial espionage as a legitimate model for the US to follow).
Who should receive the putative fruits of economic spying by the government? Private companies? Which ones? In exchange for what? Paid to who? How has that been working out for us?
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
The NSA has been "weakened" in the same way that law enforcement is "weakened" by having to follow rules about evidence and warrants. It would be so much easier if they could just bust into any home/business whenever they wanted for any reason they could think up, but there are all these pesky rules they need to follow. Of course, the reason for these rules is to prevent abuse, corruption, and protect innocent people's rights.
In other news, my employer is "financially weakening" me by not giving me a $100 million salary!
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
There is no talk about him helping governements. Germany looked into him as a witness for their own inept situation.
Sure, if you call that 'helping a foreign country' then I hope he does not help an old lady cross the street, because that would be helping mother Russia.
The issue is that the NSA gave him a reason to do what he did. If they would have done nothing illegal, then there would have not been an issue.
The US people were dressed in ignorance and the NSA decided to rape the people because they were asking for it? Never blame the raped. Always blame the raper.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
I don't disagree. I'm merely saying Snowden has gone beyond his alleged duty to the American people in revealing unconstitutional, broad warrantless domestic spying. I'm glad he's leaked that information, and I hope things are changed.
But everything else he's up to, talking about spying on Merkel's phone calls and the like, that does nothing but hurt US interests. I'm not talking about the Federal Government's interests, but the interests of all Americans.
-mrxak
Onions Will Kill You
>> Not for "our" benefit, unless we're Russians or Chinese. Personally I'm American, and consider Snowden a traitor.
> Personally, I'm an an American and I consider you an idiot.
Remember to quote what you are replying to when appropriate. As here where the >> above got disappeared as 0:flamebait (an inappropriate mod IMHO, though I would also be of the opinion of executing the commenter as a traitor for that sentiment, so it all balances out I guess). I.e. in the current slashdot rendering it looks like you are calling an idiot the >>> and not >>
The Constitution of the United States of America, Article 3, Section 3:
"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort."
Dictionary definitions don't much matter.
"Educate the mind but never at the expense of the soul."~Blessed Basil Moreau
No one on earth trusts a word you say. Every single person remotely connected to human civilization has heard about what you've done. You have violated your own country's highest laws, violated the laws of countries around the world, and have spent enough money doing so that the USA could have supplied free healthcare to a sizable portion of its population.
Why would you ever speak to the media under circumstances like this? You know no one is going to take you seriously. You know no one is going to believe anything you say, no matter what you say. You cannot even really supply evidence at this point because you have violated trust at so deep a level, and gone to such extremes to do it, that no one will believe the evidence is real. All you accomplish by speaking is to further antognoize and enflame nearly the entire population of your country (and the world?). Is there anyone with half a brain working at this organization to do PR strategy?
The only reason I am not leaving the country in terror over the NSA is that they appear staggeringly incompetent at everything they do. Perhaps this is their strategy...?
Perhaps you should at least RTFS before you comment. I know this is Slashdot, and I'm not new here, but come on.
-mrxak
Onions Will Kill You
Good thing that's not what Snowden did at all, then.
and now there's talk of him helping foreign governments in exchange for asylum.
There's "talk", from the NSA itself. How very reliable.
And the talk is about him helping Germany. You know, one of your closest allies? Maybe not pissing off your allies should have been a little bit higher on the list of priorities, and this might not have been an issue right now?
Why does the NSA hate our Freedoms?
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Except the helping with they spying as you call it is about securing there network infrastructer not about helping them spy. For it to be treason he has to provide aid and comfort to the enemy, as we still call Germany one of our allies and he is not helping them to attack us then he has still done nothing wrong and is not a traitor nor would he have committed treason.
---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
...meaning he hasn't committed treason yet.
Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
Sometimes I think trying to be a naive idealist is the only way to retain my sanity.
Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
Don't you just love it how if enough people misuse a term long enough, that use gets added to the dictionary?
Uggh.
Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
Who are these enemies of which you speak? The Chinese? The Russians? The French? Al Q?
Do tell.
> I'd say that makes him a naive idealist, at best.
Oh wait, that's right, it is easier to criticize (destroy) then to create.
The metadata program? So far every court case that has reached final adjudication has said its Constitutional.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." -- Daniel Patrick Moynihan
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
> but spying on foreign governments is what the NSA is supposed to do.
You do realize there is an option from living in fear, right?
1. For lying to Congress under oath - it's called "perjury"
2. For violating the Constitution - criminal breaking of Oath of Office.
3. For spying on the American people - treason.
Snowden didn't sell his secrets. He gave them free of charge to the press.
Inifinitely weaker after U.S. led invasion overthrows Nazi regime.
The question is not whether the NSA's position is currently weaker or more compromised. It's whether that prior position was wrong, and whether the current position is not in fact a better one.
Most diplomacy is economic in nature, what do you think the G8 is all about, or the WTO? Countries spy on each other to gain an upper hand in negotiations, much more than to gain an upper hand militarily. Since most of this diplomacy happens between friends, much of the spying happens between friends (or at least trade partners). Spying on Iran or North Korea may get most of the press, but don't let that fool you.
Is it embarrassing when this sort of thing comes out? Of course. Will countries go to war over it? Of course not. Germany is spying on us just as much as we're spying on them (or at least trying to), and everyone in the upper echelons of government in both countries know it. The reason this is even big news is because the German government doesn't want their own citizenry to start asking questions about German domestic spying. Best to keep the focus on Snowden and the US. Meanwhile I'm sure Merkel is furious more at her own security than the NSA.
-mrxak
Onions Will Kill You
Your civility and comprehension seem to have converged.
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
And I feel Snowden aided the U.S. people against a clear and present danger to American safety and the Constitution. That being the NSA.
Good, I'm a former serviceman, and swore an oath to protect the Constitution. In which case, guess we can deem you a threat. Sadly, a cowardly threat...
Boo hoo.
Civility is for people who aren't for spying on everyone in the world, at US taxpayers expense.
So fuck off until you realize how horrible what the NSA is doing truly is.
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
So far, there's no evidence that the NSA was doing anything of value.
I'm all for an independent investigation into whether or not the NSA has corrupted the judicial branch with a Kompromat database, but I think you do the nation a disservice with that kind of easily refutable hyperbole. In all likelyhood, the worst abuses were successfully compartmentalized away from many NSA employees that were reasonably doing good jobs in defense of their country, and perhaps even with the best interests of the world at heart.
Sure, in theory they have a mission which might possibly be valuable were it focused the right way, maybe. Maybe. But half their mission - making info security better for Americans - is now permanently destroyed. No one in crypto circles will ever trust the NSA again: they burned that bridge and lost their ability to give back to the public sector.
Again, you are going too far in your argument. First, people have short memories. FBI's COINTELPRO, the Church hearings (nothing to do with religion), etc. Anybody who "trusted" the NSA for the past decade was just plain ignorant of history. I mean, this is the same government, that, in the span of human history, just yesterday allowed whites to enslave blacks, and denied women the right to vote. Anybody whose "trust" in any part of this or any government wasn't *rationally _measured_*... well, wake up and smell the coffee of life.
So all that's left to the NSA is SIGINT, and that's have proven worthless for asymmetric threats.
Again, you are coming off as disingenous by making such obviously too-far-reaching arguments. I'm sure any country's basic SIGINT operations are valuable enough for some level of mitigation of asymmetric threats.
Yes, it would be good to have SIGINT the next time a major nation goes to war, but at this point I'd rather it wasn't the NSA doing that. Let the NSA die, and the legitimate SIGINT role can pass on to military intelligence or some other group with no motivation to spy on US citizens, or steal secrets from foreign companies to share with US companies.
I think you have the right feelings about the operation (violation of human and constitutional rights, etc). But I'm worried you aren't headed in the direction of viable improvement to the situation. The NSA, for all intents and purposes *is* 'military intelligence'. Renaming them to something other than NSA probably isn't going to happen, and if it did, isn't going to help. What needs to happen is for their evil deeds to come into public view (many have, I'm sure many other relevant ones will sooner or later). And then for judges, under no threat of NSA Kompromat/LOVINT/SEXINT, to rule these practices as blatantly in violation of human and constitutional rights. And in fact as basically treasonous. Because compiling a LOVINT/SEXINT database of your entire nation, or all of humanity, is simply too dangerous a tool for the neo-stasi to get ahold of.
Wait, you want us to believe the NSA propaganda *AFTER* Snowden's release?
LOLWTF
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
HEIL!
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
I'm not sure why this is modded as a troll. I wish more people would think of the future for humans in general. We'd have fewer problems with pollution, global warming, abusive regimes, etc.
It is because the United States is both too arrogant, and too heinous. When this came out and we had proof the NSA was acting beyond their capacity and had blatantly lied both to the general Congress and the Security Committee (which is authorized to hear such things). The first thing that should of been done was to have the Senate grant Snowden immunity, bring him back to the U.S. and address the issue.
Having done so would have limited any release of material, access of foreign nations, etc.
But everytime some dumbass Senator or former NSA/CIA/TSA/ASS head goes out and speaks about how horrible Snowden is and ignores their present actions. I become more and more and more convinced, that Snowden did what was both right and necessary. And that is by definition a hero.
Everybody but the NSA and cold fjord does.
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
Unless 'their Enemies' are the populace.
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
Twerk it baby...
It's increasingly clear that Snowden is being "handled" though. We shouldn't overlook the fact that he is a prime target for exploitation, by the Russians, by whoever ends up with him. If he does indeed go to Germany and help them defeat NSA spying in that country, well then the treason label fits.
If you are correct about "the treason label" (which I don't think you are, but lets do some serious debating here), then I think it is time to seriously re-examine "the treason label". Let's, for debate purposes, replace "spying on all people" with "beating up and extorting money from a few people". Just because many would try to defend the former, but not the latter. If Snowden had gone to another country, and taken knowledge that would help prevent some people from being beaten up and extorted, then I don't think even you would think "the treason label" fits. I for one, if supreme unbending national allegience is the measure, am a traitor. I believe that the human rights of foreignors, outweigh in many cases, strategic benefits to my domestic neighbors.
Lock me up. Throw away the key. Seriously though, the days of running rampage with your tribe, and saying 'fuck if I care about what happens to the rest of the global population' are coming to an end. That is a fact.
You can give them every dot in the known universe, they still never connect them. And it sure as hell won't stop planes from being blown up again.
That said, American passengers, WILL keep "passenger" planes from EVER being used as missiles again. If it ever happens again it will use cargo or military planes.
It may be the NSA's job to spy on foreign goverments, but there has to be form of rationale behind it. It is good to have the capability when there is a need, but right now, it seems that the NSA's actions are not tied in any way to the needs of this countries citizens. Most of the spying appears to be politically motivated and done for the benefit of persons/politicians/companies that are part of the intelligence community. As far as economics go, who determines where the economic interests of the citizens lie? Should the NSA spy on BP for Exxon? Which companies employs more US citizens? does it matter that Exxon is headquartered in the US? In an era of huge multi-national companies, how can anybody make an unbiased decision on which "freind" should be subject to spying and which "freind" should receive a direct benefit?
The only way the the spying machine can function and provide value for the tax payers is if it is restrained with the correct set of checks and balances, transparency, and oversight.
Is the NSA weaker after Snowden leaks, or is computer security over all when the NSA socially engineered all major security vendors and telecoms and the resultant fraud of companies selling rooted products? We all knew what was going on, we just didn't have proof of it until the Snowden leaks, so yeah I'd have to say the economy was damaged long before the Snowden leaks..
Realize we're right there with you....we're victims of our own police state gone rogue.
I don't have any problem with Snowden revealing mass surveillance on American citizens to American citizens, but spying on foreign governments is what the NSA is supposed to do. Yes, even our allies, and yes, even for economic reasons (most spying is economic in nature, and every ally spies on every ally).
Right, just like Nazis are supposed to gas Jews, and Sunnis are supposed to blow up Shi'ites. Don't bother thinking about whether or not any of this actually makes sense, it's just the natural order of things, yes?
I say if the NSA is supposed to engage in activity that harms the US diplomatically, harms US businesses, and harms American citizens, then it's only rational for us to want to dismantle the NSA in its entirety.
Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
>They he added that for the rest of the world, the NSA is not limited by any laws.
Means that fibre optic cable zig-zagging over the US/Canadian border qualifies as 'international' and therefore bypasses US constitutional protections.
---- The above post was generated by the Turing Institute. Maybe.
If the nation has "Most Favored Nation Status" (aka China), they can't be an enemy state, now can they?
spying by a government on behalf of a private corporation for the purpose of giving them an advantage over a foreign competitor is crony capitalism. Didn't work for the Philippines under Marcos, and it won't work for anyone else.
Did I miss something? I haven't read anything that said he is making money off of this.
Again, you are coming off as disingenous by making such obviously too-far-reaching arguments. I'm sure any country's basic SIGINT operations are valuable enough for some level of mitigation of asymmetric threats.
So what do you say about the recent review that found that 0 terrorist threats were averted by the NSA's broad-reaching data gathering?
What needs to happen is for their evil deeds to come into public view (many have, I'm sure many other relevant ones will sooner or later). And then for judges, under no threat of NSA Kompromat/LOVINT/SEXINT, to rule these practices as blatantly in violation of human and constitutional rights. And in fact as basically treasonous. Because compiling a LOVINT/SEXINT database of your entire nation, or all of humanity, is simply too dangerous a tool for the neo-stasi to get ahold of.
Yes, sure, but we see judges split on this already. If the NSAs budget were set to 0 (the worst possible fate for any government organization), it would stand as an object lesson to future US intelligence organizations for generations to come. As there's no current major power threatening war, I don't see any significant downside to simply ending the NSA and letting other agencies pick up the slack. Sure, our SIGINT would be bad for a couple years, but it's just not that valuable in peacetime to begin with. And we might instead focus on the HUMINT which has proven itself useful.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Snowden? Treason? No faith can be returned to justice until the kettle faces accusations of the pot backed by evidence indicating the kettle violated the supreme law of the land. The aspect of treason being revealed by Snowden and hidden from the people by use of the national security apparatus implies corruption at levels that might have previously been overlooked. See, when you post as "Anonymous Coward", with entities like the NSA granted powers they have contrary to the supreme law of the land, you are not anonymous, in fact you might as well just post your IP address too along with your physical address as the ISP you are posting from has that in their NSA compromised computer system. In fact they might just target you because your post might provoke outrage to some and decide to screw with your smartphone, your banking transactions, and even the firmware in your car because they might not like you for doing such. These people are spies, they are not saints, and they have been granted anonymous access keys to the palace, and are a militant force that have been turned on their own people. I don't know about you, but I do not care for the idea of my own country turning upon me, are you okay with your country and it's military force turned upon you?
No, the most horrible thing in the world is having US taxpayer money paying for a police state in other countries where there are folks, just like those in 1776, who want to force us out through any means necessary.
If we stop spreading our police state in the first place, we won't have to worry about suicide bombers. Since the cost seems to be about $10Trillion for about each incident prevented, they're aren't remotely effective at doing their job in the first place.
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
This guy is probably creaming his jeans just thinking of all the new war spending that can be accomplished by tarring and feathering his new favorite scapegoat Snowden (remember, even if he's retired, he's connected to all the defense contractors and defense "community" where his gravy train is tied to.
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
If the President orders the military to march on the capital and kill anyone who refuses to proclaim him emperor, is it they who are engaging in treason when they refuse his command, or is it the President who is engaging in treason for having given the command in the first place? I, and I would assume most others here, would suggest that it would be the latter. The President was acting in violation of his allegiance to the nation, and the military was acting in accordance with the higher calling they had to safeguard the nation, rather than the person currently leading it.
The situation here is less extreme and has different players, but the dissimilarities end there. From the NSA's own Q&A page:
What is more important – civil liberties or national security?
I'm often asked the question, "What's more important – civil liberties or national security?" It's a false question; it's a false choice. At the end of the day, we must do both, and they are not irreconcilable. We have to find a way to ensure that we support the entirety of the Constitution – that was the intention of the framers of the Constitution, and that's what we do on a daily basis at the National Security Agency.
The President, NSA, and other government agencies and officials have a calling to uphold the Constitution in its entirety. They have an additional calling to protect our safety, provide information to the decision makers, or engage in other actions depending on their role in the government, but only insomuch as they can do so within the bounds of the Constitution. When they get those priorities out of balance, such as valuing our safety beyond its worth, we end up in situations where the government begins stripping us of freedoms in the name of keeping us safe, which is an act of treason, in that it betrays the trust we've put in them to preserve our liberty above all else. Most of us have heard a variation of Benjamin Franklin's famous quote:
They who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
So, I ask you: who committed treason? The ones who violated the trust of the nation, or the one who refused to be a part of it?
But everything else he's up to, talking about spying on Merkel's phone calls and the like, that does nothing but hurt US interests.
I would counter that by saying that tapping the phones of our closest allies hurts US interests and that complaining about the guy who let it be known is just shooting the messenger.
The American public (at least the cross section I work with) generally think this has gone too far. While we fully support analysts doing intelligence gathering on allies, we feel it can be done sufficiently without stooping to actually breaking into their stuff, tapping their phones, etc. You can get enough by watching their political movements, their budget/expenditures, seeing who they meet, etc. You don't have to tap their phones to learn "enough".
We only support an invasive level of espionage for our antagonists, and actual credible threats. Maybe you disagree. That's fine, we can have that conversation.
Snowden has enabled that conversation to happen.
Government by the people for the people doesn't happen if the people are kept out of the loop.
Again, you are coming off as disingenous by making such obviously too-far-reaching arguments. I'm sure any country's basic SIGINT operations are valuable enough for some level of mitigation of asymmetric threats.
So what do you say about the recent review that found that 0 terrorist threats were averted by the NSA's broad-reaching data gathering?
I say that believing that at face value will hurt you in the debate. I suspect it is probably disinformation, designed to provoke opponents into relying on that information. I'm trying to prepare the debate for the eventuality that the NSA comes back in 6 months, and either reveals, or simply fabricates a list of threats they defeated, "but couldn't reveal ealier, because it would have empowered further terrorists/criminals".
And I'm prepared to consider the possibility that maybe lives were saved, rapes averted. But the question for how to react to the whole scenario depends on a big picture that includes that, as well as larger issues of subversion of the free-speech based democratic process. People in favor of liberty and free speech need to be fully prepared for the police-state argument that routine home searches without warrants can stop some amount of violent crime. It's a real argument, that is not disingenous. But one needs to point to examples in recent history where that was abused to such a level, that the overall effect on the average human was much worse, even if some violent crimes were thwarted by the police-state.
What needs to happen is for their evil deeds to come into public view (many have, I'm sure many other relevant ones will sooner or later). And then for judges, under no threat of NSA Kompromat/LOVINT/SEXINT, to rule these practices as blatantly in violation of human and constitutional rights. And in fact as basically treasonous. Because compiling a LOVINT/SEXINT database of your entire nation, or all of humanity, is simply too dangerous a tool for the neo-stasi to get ahold of.
Yes, sure, but we see judges split on this already. If the NSAs budget were set to 0 (the worst possible fate for any government organization), it would stand as an object lesson to future US intelligence organizations for generations to come. As there's no current major power threatening war, I don't see any significant downside to simply ending the NSA and letting other agencies pick up the slack. Sure, our SIGINT would be bad for a couple years, but it's just not that valuable in peacetime to begin with. And we might instead focus on the HUMINT which has proven itself useful.
This is purely my opinion, and not a strong one, but I see the budget-setting-to-zero as a political theatre/stunt that will only have the lasting value dampening the public rage against the specific human rights abuses. I say focus on the human rights abuses, not on the budgets. And by human rights abuses, I mean both the known, and the potential (Kompromat et al)
It's not 'flamebait' just because you disagree with it. This man drinks the kool-aid that the Obama administration is serving, that if the press releases any information that could theoretically be used by our enemies, then they're traitors. When smart people read about Snowden's leaks, they realize there's nothing specific about the leaks that could possibly help any enemy, unless they were stupid enough to think the U.S. wasn't capable of doing these things. Despite what some corrupt judge says, this a clear violation of the 4th amendment and has been used to spy on the press, and, who knows, probably political opponents as well. If the NSA is 'infinitely weaker', then it's only politically, not on the basis that they can't protect the U.S. effectively, if they ever cared about that anyway. If Snowden's leaks cause political damage to the NSA and the Obama Administration then that's almost proof that, by the very nature of a democracy, the leaks were justified. If Snowden has to leak to Russia or China (which there's no evidence of) to continue to survive, then that's the result of the U.S's ridiculous policy toward leakers.
For that statement to be true, then the NSA would have had infinite power before Snowden blew the whistle on them. No government or agency of a government should ever have unlimited power in the first place.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Considering what Snowden got his hands on, I have to wonder whether the NSA has any secrets at all, considering that there are probably numerous professional foreign agents in the organization. It would not surprise me to learn that Russia, China, Israel, and maybe even France have total access to the lot.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
It's increasingly clear that Snowden is being "handled" though. We shouldn't overlook the fact that he is a prime target for exploitation, by the Russians, by whoever ends up with him. If he does indeed go to Germany and help them defeat NSA spying in that country, well then the treason label fits.
I don't have any problem with Snowden revealing mass surveillance on American citizens to American citizens, but spying on foreign governments is what the NSA is supposed to do. Yes, even our allies, and yes, even for economic reasons (most spying is economic in nature, and every ally spies on every ally). Snowden's reveal of spying on foreign governments and leaders, and any methods to do so, does cross a definite line. That does actually harm the US diplomatically, harms US businesses, and harms those American citizens Snowden claims to support. Snowden may be a naive idealist in over his head, or he may have been "turned" by those who are currently surrounding him.
Would you be this philosophical if Germany had been caught tapping Obama's phone?
I think it's expected that countries will pry in the sense that they'll look for sources willing to share more than they should. But the idea that allies would be breaking into each others communications feels outdated. I'm not saying other countries aren't doing this, but it's still wrong. To me this is one place where the public has moved on but the governments are still caught in some kind of Cold War or Great Powers mindset. First world Democratic governments should not be spying on each other.
I stole this Sig
We should never be loyal to our race, our states or even our families. But we are. If you discovered your son or daughter was a killer, most family members would do what they could to protect that person out of a sense of loyalty. That's why people stay with companies who then make them redundant after 8 loyal years of service to cut costs.
People should only be loyal to one thing: The Human Race.
And by that, Snowden's loyalty is solid.
They do not need physical contact to completely screw with you and your life in powers they have been granted, you can't ask that same question of Microsoft, Yahoo, Google can you? I wonder what compelled those companies to go along with it? Could it be information they obtained on the individuals in power in those companies? Why does the NSA collect data on porn usage? Is it because they might need to compel a judge at one point or another? The abuse is of the constitution that is in place to prevent perversion of these powers.
The NSA and the US Government under at least the last two administrations has betrayed the United States Constitution and undermined the freedom that generations have fought and died for.
No line that Snowden has crossed is even remotely comparable to the wholesale betrayal by the NSA and the executive of our Bill of Rights or diminishes from the debt of gratitude that we owe Snowden for revealing the depth and breadth of that betrayal.
What we need to do now is focus on what is wrong with what the NSA has been doing. That they and the entire US government again comes to respect the Bill of Rights, within our own borders, and stops forceably collecting records without constitutionally valid warrants.
Such times and needs surely do exist in the extreme, but we don't want to live in a society where this level of government spying has become the norm. We have faced greater threats before and, even in the face of complete nuclear annihilation, our history shows that such spying by the government on Americans is never acceptable.
But everything else he's up to, talking about spying on Merkel's phone calls and the like, that does nothing but hurt US interests. I'm not talking about the Federal Government's interests, but the interests of all Americans.
The people who did this are, according to German laws, criminals. If their identities were known, they wouldn't be able legally to enter any EU country. If the USA hire criminals, then the hiring of criminals is hurting them, not the fact that it is exposed.
Surely, the bully who beat you up in elementary school wasn't the ONLY kid bullying other kids. Therefore it's okay that he did it.
Is that REALLY THE !@#$% LOGIC YOU'RE USING?
"I think there's an English word that describes violation of the 4th amendment of the U.S. Constitution, and I do think it's treason"
Sounds good, but that's incorrect. Treason is [a]...citizen's actions to help a foreign government overthrow, make war against, or seriously injure the [parent nation].
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
Its Hayden who is treasonous. Doesn't he understand that the American Revolution was caused by Writs of Assistance? Hayden, Alexander and Clapper should be tried for treason, and punished accordingly..
Does it matter that Brazil and Germany aren't enemies of the U.S.? Also, he's being forced into that position since it's literally his only chance of not being tortured in U.S. prisons. I give him a pass for that.
His two options are to turn himself in to a government that tortured its last whistle-blower, or commit treason (if you could even call it that). He's literally being forced into the latter position.
If he does indeed go to Germany and help them defeat NSA spying in that country, well then the treason label fits.
What? Germany is an enemy now? You're off for a better part of a century
Nihil in publicum sputa.
Ehr, seriously? That's easy. Since paying money for laws is perfectly legal in the US, you give private companies those secrets. Which ones? The ones that pay you the most. In exchange for what? More money of course.
As for how it is working out for you -- it is not, but it is for that elite 1% that owns all those companies.
In the same way that I don't blame Assange for not coming out "to face the rape charges." Agreed on both counts.
Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
In case I was unclear, I'm not proposing punishing him for something he's talking about doing. I mean, obviously he's violated some agreement or law somewhere, but...who hasn't, after all?
Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
The threat to Liberty in your country has been walking around for years, waving a bell and shouting "Bring out your Liberty!" before shooting it and dumping it in a river, and you've been allowing it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_and_Ethel_Rosenberg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Pollard ???
Europe is about as rural as the northeastern states in the USA. There are farms and towns dotting the countryside. Never are you more than maybe 15 miles (25 km) from someplace populated.
You've never been to Finland, have you?
Hint: Europe != Germany, France, or the UK.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
How do we know that's what they are SUPPOSED to be doing? Did they ever ask us if that's what we wanted them to be doing?
The NSA wants total access to everything man-made. They could use effective restraint, but from where? Not from the useless news media, not from an ill-informed public, and certainly not from the congress nor executive branches, & apparently not from the judiciary. I'm sure those in the NSA are stopping all kinds of evil doings that human beings do. Without proper oversight that eavesdropping power is open to all kinds of abuse/misuse, from petty personal vendetta's, to political/commercial spying and assassinations. I'd like to believe that every NSA agent is an outstanding and responsible, disciplined, individual with a much higher than average intellect, wisdom, and moral compass driving them. Is that really the case though? Apparently it is not the case.
"but couldn't reveal ealier, because it would have empowered further terrorists/criminals".
therein lies the rub of these horseshit, government intel escapades. the reason why anwar al-awlaki was murdered..."we can't tell you because it's too dangerous." LIES!
either they did something illegal to get intel or they had nothing. either way, it's only dangerous to them.
I guess exposing the already known shouldn't affect anything then.
...
They were over-reaching and taking too much power. They proved that they were corrupt and were not doing much other than infringing on American (and our Allies)'s rights.
They need to be pruned back and learn that we do no live in a fascist state.
Really, some of those leaders who lied under oath should be facing prison time.
No! It's a *SIG*. Keep the Special Interest Groups away! (Con joke!)
"Yes, we are weak now... oh no, everyone knows all of our secrets... damn... yes, decades before we are powerful again, uh huh, yep...." The NSA man is saying that they are weak, I'd be wondering at their intentions with that statement.
Actually he didn't conclude what you state. He awarded the injunction because he thought it likely he would rule against them, but he actually hasn't as yet. Even if he does it still would have to survive the appeals process, which is unlikely. Legal experts find a number of problems with his ruling, and precedent is against him.
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
It's absolutely not true, and here's why:
1. All of this highly secretive, decades-to-rebuild information was exposed by ONE guy with a conscience. From everything we've heard, Snowden wasn't some hacker genius, this stuff was just extremely poorly protected once you got to a certain access level. It's possible, in fact I would say probable, that the exact same set of secrets and more have been removed without authorization in similar ways in the past, but by people with less conscience. From there they could sell them to Russia, China, Al Qaeda, or GIVE them to any number of causes to which they happen to be sympathetic. They may do this either out of greed, loyalty to something other than the US intelligence apparatus, or because they were planted by an external power in the first place.
Why do I think it's highly probably this information has leaked before? Simple: the information was clearly too easy for Snowden to reach, which indicates a fundamental flaw in the NSA security structure... inside any organization, you have to assume that some people aren't what they say. No matter how good your psych screening process, no human system can keep out people with ulterior motives with 100% accuracy -- you have to limit access to only those who truly "need to know" and that doesn't mean broad cross-cutting security clearance levels. It's obvious that foreign governments would be highly interested in information like this, yet Snowden was able to access a huge array of information that he had no legitimate need to access (from the NSA's point of view). Clearly they trust people "inside the circle" far more than they should, which combined with the high probability of at least a couple of successful infiltrations by foreign agents makes it all but a certainty that Snowden's isn't the first leak, only the first PUBLIC leak.
2. All of the public surprise and outrage is coming from people who never bothered to stop and think about the subject before the leak. If they had, it would be fairly obvious that a pretty wide set of things described in the Snowden leak were probably happening. Of course you could never tell for sure, but if you were a little paranoid there were a large number of safe bets you could make, most of which have now turned out to be true. Now, the general public had no specific reason to be paranoid, so they're surprised and upset by these revelations... but they don't matter. This official is claiming that the leak puts them in a worse position compared to the people they want to use these tools against, and (unless the NSA is actually in the business of spying on innocent civilians) anyone they need to legitimately use these tools against is by definition doing something fairly obviously illegal, and would have every reason to be paranoid.
In short, nobody evil enough for the NSA to legitimately want to target AND smart enough to warrant tools this sophisticated is surprised by any but a very small handful of these revelations. And even the ones that are surprising are likely made moot by precautions those people would take against the more obvious NSA tricks.
In short, either the NSA rep is lying, or they really think the people they're hunting are so dumb that they never questioned whether plaintext email over SSL to the GMail servers was enough security to hide them from the NSA, or whether phones registered in their name could be tracked. And frankly, neither answer is good. If they're lying, it's more of the same; and if they really believe the people they were hunting hadn't guessed the majority of this already, then they're criminally underestimating the very people they're supposed to be watching (or door 3, they wanted to watch people who hadn't done anything wrong, and so had no reason to think about this stuff... but they sure do now!)
As an aside, I like how he casually tosses it out like, "yeah, it'll take decades to get back to this level again" as if it were
Slashdot needs a "-1, Wrong" moderation option.
The Urban Hippie
Please don't underestimate the power of gradual propaganda. Let's say you want to damage Snowden's reputation. You won't begin by saying that he's a paranoid schizophrenic who's taking drugs 24/7 and has a Swiss bank account funded by North Korea and Cuba or membership in some fringe anarchist or survivalist group. No you'd begin by enumerating a list of his quirks, preferably stuff that can't be verified independently, trivial things like being in an unstable relationship with his partner, "frequent" bouts of insomnia, or maybe just being a practicing non-believer who likes to listen to Richard Dawkins speeches in his sleep. The first step would thus be to paint him as a bit right or left of the norm. Once that's established, that our supposed patriot isn't that all-American boy next door, you can proceed to tar him with more serious allegations, say, that because of his emotional problems he acquired a drug habit that he could fund by selling out to foreign states or that maybe he was being blackmailed by foreign agents who have threatened to expose one of his own personal secrets.
>> Not for "our" benefit, unless we're Russians or Chinese. Personally I'm American, and consider Snowden a traitor.
> Personally, I'm an an American and I consider you an idiot.
How are you quoting?
Hayden said the NSA is "infinitely" weaker as a result of Snowden's leaks.
Bullshit.
Your group is still alive and still doing its highly unconstitutional antics. I'd call that anything but "infinitely weaker".
Just because you can does not mean that you should. The US intelligence community oft gets confused on this.
"You say that like it's a bad thing."
There's no time like the present. Well, the past used to be.
Not for "our" benefit, unless we're Russians or Chinese. Personally I'm American, and consider Snowden a traitor.
I consider all the 1776 revolutionaries to be traitors. They disobeyed the law and undertook acts of treason against the legitimate governments. Where you stand depends upon where you sit and we don't sit together. In my book, Snowden is a hero.
Good if it were true, but this is probably NSA misinformation. I am stunned and appalled that an important organization such as the NSA could have been run by such a square-headed idiot. Obviously the military mind at work. It is high time that the NSA were put under civilian control and directed by respected and intelligent people of substance trained in the law. Intelligence matters are far too important to be left in the hands of the so-called "intelligence community".
Is the NSA the equivalent to the Russian KGB? Citizens should be grateful that the NSA now has to be caged, and be required to use legal process to do detailed snooping.
I would not want them or my wife to know about my mistress. (I call Linux my mistress). My wife says I am obsessive compulsive about my love for her. (Her, being my wife, not my mistress).
Happy New Year.
Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
On the one hand I commend him for exposing the extent to which American's communications are being monitored outside of what I consider to be the bounds of the constitution (no unreasonable search, etc). On the other hand, information about what the US is doing to other countries is a very delicate matter. True, we like to think of ourselves as the good guys who don't spy on our allies but, the reality might be that all countries are doing it. Certainly the Russians and the Chinese are.
My hope is that we will have some clarity and limitations on US spying respecting our constitution. Let's not forget that most of the people working at the NSA believe that they are doing the right thing to protect our country, but let's also not forget that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely,
I'd feel better about Hayden's opinion if I didn't get this visual of Hayden saying "This is the intelligence we have." and then nodding compliantly as Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld & PNAC, LLP said "Well, this is what we'll say we have - and this is what you'll say it means." And Voila! - we're in Iraq with too few, too under-armored, for too little justification...and consequently taking too many casualties for too long at too great of an expense in both dollars and world opinion.
There are many - to include me - who despise Snowden for turncoating...but the reality is when you must watch the very top of the food chain betraying the nation for purely selfish reasons - just to hurt "labor" a.k.a. the American people and further enrich the top of the energy and financial food chains - you don't have to be an analyst to project that others further down the food chain will follow that leadership example.
That is what leaders are for: To set the example. Sell-outs shouldn't bitch about other sell-outs.
Orwell: "In a Time of Universal Deceit, telling the Truth is a Revolutionary Act"
I don't believe in a secret government. I think if congress cut the funding for the NSA tomorrow and told them to disband they would.