Slashdot Mirror
Former Head of NSA Calls For Obama To Reject NSA Commission Recommendations
An anonymous reader writes that USA Today reports "Retired general Michael Hayden ... called on President Obama Monday to ... reject many of the recommendations of the commission he appointed to rein in NSA surveillance ... 'President Obama now has the burden of simply doing the right thing,' ... 'And I think some of the right things with regard to the commission's recommendations are not the popular things. They may not poll real well right now. They'll poll damn well after the next attack ...' ... The commission ... said the recommendations were designed to increase transparency, accountability and oversight at the NSA. Hayden ... oversaw the launch of some of the controversial programs ... He defended them as effective and properly overseen by congressional intelligence committees and a special court. 'Right now, since there have been no abuses and almost all the court decisions on this program have held that it's constitutional, I really don't know what problem we're trying to solve by changing how we do this,' he said."
He has no incentive to change anything. How it 'polls' is irrelevant. Someone with 2016 aspirations will need to make this their issue.
They'll poll damn well after the next attack
The next attack will happen with or without illegal, unconstitutional domestic spying. I don't want you magic tiger protection rocks sir.
Silence is a state of mime.
Painful truths:
NSA workers are not traitors that should be killed. Please look at the scum who cut off children's heads in CAR to understand what real tyranny is.
NSA will be changed but domestic surveillance will probably go to the DOJ (who has a stellar track record)
This has all happened before 20, 40, 70, and I think 150 years ago. It will probably happen again.
Now, please, can we talk about changes without devolving into fake revolutionaries? You're pissed off. We all get it. Now let's do something useful other than scream.
..who was on guard duty before 9/11.... why should anyone listen to him?
He argues that it is legal because it is useful. Using that logic, I should be allowed use claymore mines to protect my property from intruders. Indiscriminate, illegal but probably effective. He should remember, if you subvert the constitution, you corrode the very fabric of the nation. We're becoming just another regime.
I really like the part about "there have been no abuses". Perhaps Hayden would like to tell the US public the truth. Let's see how long it takes before he gets a bullet to the face, let alone a prison sentence.
Scumbags.
[quote]They may not poll real well right now. They'll poll damn well after the next attack ...'[/quote]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_probability
I'm not an America, although I am a citizen of one of the 5eyes - the one with a fundamentally criminal past.
Freedom is about being about being able to live your life as you choose. Freedom is about disagreeing with other peoples' choices as to how they live their life, yet accepting that choice, as long as it doesn't to detrimentally affect yours.
"O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?"
Question mark is very well placed. The question mark was in the positive for around 200 years, however I think it is conclusive now. The answer is "Nope."
There is no question about America now about being home of the free and the brave. Terrorism won, because terrorism is about causing terror, and therefore ridiculous levels of measures against it.
(heh, this post will probably get me on the NSA list, but I'm probably already there anyway.)
His claim about there being no abuses is a bald-faced lie. Why should anyone believe anything in that sentence after the first major lie?
The record of prevented attacks, according to the official report, is zero. The surveillance programs the NSA runs have prevented no attacks. They have, however, fundamentally undermined our Constitution and the entire rule of law in the United States of America. The citizenry has been watching, stunned, while the Congress, Whitehouse, and courts in DC have been wiping their collective behind with our foundational document, and are now looking at each other, waiting to see who's gonna pick up the gun and put the mad dog down. The criminals in DC and Wall Street misread the apparent lack of reaction with acquiescence or agreement. It's not. It's the entire mass of the country, who already have their hands full with many, many deep problems, discovering this massive systemic betrayal and trying to process what the best course of action is. If DC does not act now to channel things into productive reform, they will explode to the detriment of all, but especially to the detriment of DC and their masters on Wall Street.
Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.
"After the next attack"
Wait a second - you mean that you admit the NSA is not able to prevent the attacks? OK, so explain again why it is a necessary, nay, "vital" government agency?
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
"They may not poll real well right now. They'll poll damn well after the next attack ..."
So... these things aren't popular now... but the next time they fail to stop an attack... Americans will be glad the NSA was here to fail to stop the attack?
The sad part is he's probably right, the public actually is that stupid.
He's right in one way. It's probably not going to change.
And then he pulls the boogie man out of his pocket.
"The next attack."
"The next attack."
So we're supposed to just huddle up in a corner and live in fear for the rest of forever. Just so that, MAYBE, some day, they catch another underpants bomber?
Uhm...
Not to put too fine a point on that, FUCK NO!
At some point, reality sets in and people need to realize that The Real World (not the stupid "reality TV show") is NOT a safe place. And NO amount of watching will curtail EVERY attempt.
Nor will throwing away our rights like a hot potato make us any safer.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Looking at it from the outside, i.e not being a US citizen:
1. You piss of everybody else on the planet, so do not expect any goodwill.
2. There were abuses, please do google loveint.
3. Snowden walked ot of NSA with *all* their goodies, so how says that that did not happen before ? He was just the first to go public with the abuses.
4. How can any US citizen still talk about the "land of the free", that is totally ridiculous and hypocrite at the same time.
5. You do have the best democracy that money can buy
is why I have not had an elephant knock my fence down. The evidence is there - my fences have stood strong after I replaced them in the gales a couple of years ago. If I were to cut the tree down I would run the risk of damaged fences; it is far safer to keep the tree.
Likewise: we know that if the NSA had not been snooping then there would have been worse attacks than the Boston bombers, etc. They just have to deny their achievements to protect their effectiveness. If they are reined in they will loudly tell everyone how it could have been prevented when the next attack happens.
(The fact that I live in urban England is surely irrelevant on the absence of elephants in my garden.)
"Right now, since there have been no abuses..."
NSA employee spied on nine women without detection
NSA broke privacy rules thousands of times per year, audit finds
No abuses, General?
"If it's real, then it gets more interesting the closer you examine it. If it's not real, just the opposite is true." -
Doesn't LOVEINT count?
Even if it doesn't, that's not the point.
I think we can all agree that having these sorts of communications records is a despot's wet dream. The fact that it hasn't been abused yet is immaterial. It's too tempting a tool for those with the wrong motives.
They'll poll damn well after the next attack ...
And they'll STILL be wrong.
"There have been no abuses"
What about LOVEINT?
http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/09/26/20709855-loveint-nsa-letter-discloses-employee-eavesdropping-on-girlfriends-spouses?lite
I'd certainly call using your "catch the terrorists super-spying" powers to eavesdrop on your girlfriend an abuse of power. Of course, he'd probably just hand wave that away as inconsequential because [super spooky voice]TERRORISTS!!!!!![/super spooky voice]
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
"far safer and privacy is far more secured with NSA holding the data than some third party."
This data is not safe for long term storage ANYWHERE.
Brave Sir Robin ran away. ("No!") Bravely ran away away. ("I didn't!")
'I really don't know what problem we're trying to solve by changing how we do this,' he said.
We know you don't, pudding. Now go sit down and be quiet.
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
Hayden: 'And I think some of the right things with regard to the commission's recommendations are not the popular things. They may not poll real well right now. They'll poll damn well after the next attack ...'
So, appeal to emotion. We can safely disregard your message then since it is, by definition, not well thought out.
I am not a crackpot.
I wonder if this idiot general realize people are beginning to be more afraid of the nsa than terrorists. And I would say the level of incompetence the nsa has shown in being able to manage this enormous power with a single individual able to walk off with their intelligence crown jewels indicates no one should have these types of power. More innocent people are at risk from nsa and government incompetence than anything they think they are doing. The tsa is security theater not adding any actual security, and now the nsa is now is showing a level of intelligence theater whose only value may be their agents abusing to spy on their girlfriends.
During the interview General Michael Hayen stated. "...and the only thing that people like me wish is: that when we do these kinds of decisions, that we base it on facts". Well, here are some facts for the POTUS to consider:
FACT - U.S. Intellegence agencies ignored credible tips that could have stopped 9/11 (Flight Instructor).
FACT - U.S. Intellegence agencies ignored credible tips that could have stopped the failed underwear bomber (Father).
FACT - U.S. Intellegence agencies ignored credible tips that could have stopped the Boston Marathon Bombings (Boston Murder / Russia).
FACT - Countries across the world are ceasing to use technology products with U.S. origin (Cisco, Google, etc), damaging the economy.
FACT - U.S. (CIA specifically) drone strikes kill innocent civilians and create more enemies of the U.S.
FACT - U.S. citizens killed by drone strikes are not provided due process.
FACT - Documents released by Snowden indicate that FISA judges found NSA activities unconstitutional.
In that light, General Michael Hayden and his ilk should be arrested for treason and war crimes. This may include members of the current and former exective branches (Read "Dirty Wars").
He [Michael Hayden] is currently a principal at the Chertoff Group, a security consultancy co-founded by former Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff. Hayden also serves as a Distinguished Visiting Professor at George Mason University School of Public Policy and was elected to the Board of Directors of Motorola Solutions effective January 4, 2011.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Hayden_(general)
Actually, they'll poll really well if some SWAT team kicks in some doors and stops the next attack. And the NSA's contribution to that is revealed. I don't think the current surveillance regime (what we knew of it, anyway) polled terribly well after Boston. The Russians told us to watch these guys and still our entire bag of tricks didn't stop them.
Have gnu, will travel.
This article is from a mainstream source, USA Today, which might be the most widely circulated periodical in the nation... and this "Hayden" says what?
Reacting reflexively to irrational human impulses is not good leadership. What Hayden is talking about is called "taking advantage of the public to further political goals."
Bullshit. A flat out lie. Most of the data collection the NSA does is an abuse simply by its nature, and that's ignoring the blatant abuses we already know about.
What? All one out of two cases? Another flat out lie.
This is a propaganda piece, plain and simple. Grease the peons for the next move no matter how toxic the lubrication. Enzensberger said the "consent industry" was the most important of the twentieth century. And so it is in the twenty-first as well.
If you have a brain and a proper education, you will see through this swill immediately. Unfortunately, the nature of the media machine and the ignorance of the masses will mean this story gets eaten up by many of our more gullible brothers. Consider the peons greased.
I wouldn't expect explaining it to people who experienced direct loss to be either possible or -- ideally -- necessary. It is irresponsible governance for the politicians to respond to the impulsiveness of people too grief-stricken to think clearly.
There were nearly 300 million people in the United States in 2001. Even if the loss of each of the 2,977 9/11 victims directly affected 1000 people, that's still less than 1% of the population. The President should have made a speech after 9/11 to explain this concept to everybody else.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Actually, they'll poll really well if some SWAT team kicks in some doors and stops the next attack. And the NSA's contribution to that is revealed. I don't think the current surveillance regime (what we knew of it, anyway) polled terribly well after Boston. The Russians told us to watch these guys and still our entire bag of tricks didn't stop them.
True. Results would be a more effective argument. But they're not really interested in results -- at least from what people like Hayden do and say -- they're interested in pursuing unconstitutional total dragnet surveillance of everyone's communications for its own sake (and whatever nefarious uses they can come up with now or in the future). As you say, the system didn't help catch the Boston bad guys. It was never intended to. The Boston guys could have been caught by acting on the tip, getting a warrant based on that, which a judge would have certainly approved in a Constitutional, above-the-board process, tapping their phones, searching their place, interviewing acquaintances and other old-fashioned police work. All things that could be done with regular oversight and due process. No new laws, no secret courts, no black budgets.
The NSA and the Executive branch want unfettered, unlimited, unaccountable surveillance for their own reasons. "Catching terr'ists" is just the excuse. I've even got a car analogy. Back in the day, I wanted a 4 barrel carburetor and high performance manifolds from my Mustang. I told my dad that it would get better mileage that way -- you know, 'cause "better breathing." Of course he didn't fall for that, he knew I just wanted it to go faster to impress friends and (in my mind) girls.
I am not a crackpot.
"LOVEINT" isn't an abuse of power so much as it is an abuse of privilege by approximately 1 person of 40,000 per year. It isn't an institutional problem but rather a personal problem for a miniscule portion of the NSA's employees ~ 1 per year. That 1 person is then disciplined or fired. It has no official sanction, it is against policy and the rules, people that do it get fired.
If you want to use that as a justification for dismantling the NSA then shall we dismantle every large city police force? I'm pretty sure most of them have at least one policeman that engages in some form of abuse on at least one occasion. That would be an interesting standard to apply to government, don't you think? One mistake by a peon in a far away state and you lose your job? Any thoughts on how that would work out in practice?
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
they never once stop to ask if they themselves would be any better
That's because it's a completely irrelevant point. Even if they wouldn't be any better, that has nothing to do with whether or not what the government is doing is morally wrong. Try being more logical.
or consider that the vast majority of our government is indeed composed of good, honest, tax-paying citizens
A vast majority of our government is composed of greedy, power-hungry fools who will violate our rights and the constitution if we let them. We've seen this time and time again, and unless you ignore history (and the present) completely, your vision of what the people who make up the government are like is but a mere delusion.
It might not be an abuse by a majority of people, but it is an abuse. Hayden specifically stated that there were NO abuses and that the absence of abuses shows that the program should continue. Demonstrating that there WERE abuses (even if they weren't NSA-approved abuses) shows this line of argument to be completely false. (The fact that a program shouldn't be evaluated solely on the basis of "is it being abused right now" is a different conversation, though a relavent one to the overall discussion.)
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.