The NSA Is Recording Every Cell Phone Call In the Bahamas

the question is by fche · 2014-05-19 09:37 · Score: 5, Interesting

.. what will the Bahama government/people do - will they sue the US for the presumable crime of breaking into their phone system?

Re:the question is by Rich0 · 2014-05-19 10:06 · Score: 4, Informative

.. what will the Bahama government/people do - will they sue the US for the presumable crime of breaking into their phone system?
In what court would they do this? You can't sue the US government in a US court without the permission of the US government, and the US will just ignore the ruling of just about any other court.
And yes, many (most?) other countries work the same way...
Re:the question is by king+neckbeard · 2014-05-19 10:52 · Score: 1

The majority of Americans may have no problem with 'spying on other countries' in the sense of collecting a fairly wide swath of individuals reasonably close to known or suspected criminals, but I'm not sure they are as keen on 'spying on other countries' in the sense of spying on the all telephone communications for the entire fucking country.

--
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Re:the question is by Opportunist · 2014-05-19 11:01 · Score: 2

Considering how quite a bit of money is stowed in the general area, and not from the poor people of this planet, turning off access to those accounts from the US just might cause a few owners of senators to prod their whores.

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re:the question is by amiga3D · 2014-05-19 11:30 · Score: 2

Wonder what the repercussions would be of that? Maybe a ban on US tourists visiting the Bahamas? Wonder how many dollars that'll cost?
Re:the question is by amiga3D · 2014-05-19 11:31 · Score: 2

I bet they're more pissed off about AT&T buying up DirectTV.
Re:the question is by swb · 2014-05-19 12:07 · Score: 3, Interesting

That worked once in Cuba. After the Dominican Republic, Panama and Grenada the track record of that kind of strategy looks like poking the wrong end of the 82nd Airborne.
Re:the question is by dbIII · 2014-05-19 13:15 · Score: 2

Not quite so stupid as it sounds since they are still a colony so the legal machinery doing the suing would be the UK government.
I can't see that happening though because the British spooks probably already knew.
Re:the question is by dbIII · 2014-05-19 13:18 · Score: 3, Interesting

They didn't with Grenada but apparently Thatcher verbally tore strips off Reagan in a prolonged phone call afterwards.
Re:the question is by The+Snowman · 2014-05-19 13:31 · Score: 2

Wonder what the repercussions would be of that? Maybe a ban on US tourists visiting the Bahamas? Wonder how many dollars that'll cost?
This.
Follow the money.

--
24 beers in a case, 24 hours in a day. Coincidence? I think not!
Re:the question is by Rich0 · 2014-05-19 14:32 · Score: 2

Meh, the US would just phone up the PM and something would get worked out - probably without firing a shot.
Re:the question is by Jmc23 · 2014-05-19 16:00 · Score: 1

You must be a USian. Let me help you with the geography.
The Bahamas are not part of the USA.

--
Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
Re:the question is by Opportunist · 2014-05-19 16:55 · Score: 2

The US would probably call the PM and tell him to be a good puppy and roll over.
This ain't Mrs. T you're talking about. The prime minister of the UK is today more like the first lady of the US.

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re:the question is by rtb61 · 2014-05-19 19:55 · Score: 1, Interesting

How about an invasion of the Bahamas and the arrest and imprisonment of all those person involved in the tax evasion industry. That call monitoring is all about gathering data for corporate and political blackmail to do with hundreds of billions of tax evaded currency from all over the world. As for the Bahamians, you want to play tax haven and steal other countries social services and actively profiting from money handling for organised crime, well 'FUCK YOU' and I hope you get it hard and painful, really fucking hard and really fucking painful.

--
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
Re:the question is by Anonymous Coward · 2014-05-19 20:53 · Score: 1

No, fuck YOU. Who the hell do you think you are?
Re:the question is by AmiMoJo · 2014-05-20 00:12 · Score: 1

Chances are the British spooks helped, and so could be sued themselves. It would be worth it just to bring attention to them.

--
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Re:the question is by stealth_finger · 2014-05-20 00:13 · Score: 1

The question is more WHY The Bahamas? Is is a particular hive of scum and villainy or just a testbed because they can?

--
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
Re:the question is by AmiMoJo · 2014-05-20 00:19 · Score: 1

They could try the WTO as well. Restitution for unfair commercial gain and costs associated with finding and removing NSA spying equipment. Since the US will never pay up they would most likely be allowed to extract the money in other ways, such as ignoring US copyright and patents for a while.

--
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Re:the question is by myowntrueself · 2014-05-20 01:07 · Score: 1

Considering how quite a bit of money is stowed in the general area, and not from the poor people of this planet, turning off access to those accounts from the US just might cause a few owners of senators to prod their whores.
I guess the Bahamas could do some discrete 'lobbying'; "hey mr US Senator you wouldn't want this secret bank account coming out would you, what with elections coming up and all that?"

--
In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
Re:the question is by penguinoid · 2014-05-20 01:48 · Score: 1

.. what will the Bahama government/people do - will they sue the US for the presumable crime of breaking into their phone system?
They could threaten to take away our rich people's money, or to help our rich people hide their money in offshore accounts so they don't have to pay taxes, or something along those lines.

--
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
Re:the question is by Rich0 · 2014-05-20 01:59 · Score: 2

In the International Court of Justice.
Hence my point about "the US will just ignore the ruling of just about any other court..."
Re:the question is by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · 2014-05-20 02:07 · Score: 2

The prime minister of the UK is today more like the first lady of the US.
I wish. I would much rather look at Michelle Obama than David Cameron.

--
Time to offend someone
Re:the question is by Chris+Mattern · 2014-05-20 19:35 · Score: 1

Enforcement of a verdict from the ICJ is done by the Security Council. Where the US can veto it.

Cayman Islands? by rogoshen1 · 2014-05-19 09:40 · Score: 5, Insightful

Had they done this with Cayman Islands they could have possible nabbed some real criminals, and probably made the world a better/safer place.

Re:Cayman Islands? by CanHasDIY · 2014-05-19 09:55 · Score: 1

Had they done this with Cayman Islands they could have possible nabbed some real criminals,
Uh, you mean like themselves?
Yea, funny how that never happened... natch.

--
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
Re:Cayman Islands? by MRe_nl · 2014-05-19 10:41 · Score: 1

look up ARCOS-1

--
"Kill 'em all and let Root sort 'em out"
Re:Cayman Islands? by NettiWelho · 2014-05-19 10:49 · Score: 1

Had they done this with Cayman Islands they could have possible nabbed some real criminals, and probably made the world a better/safer place.
Why exactly would have they gone after their own bosses? They know who butters their bread.
Re:Cayman Islands? by Jahoda · 2014-05-19 11:31 · Score: 5, Interesting

1) It seems much more likely they do monitor the Cayman Islands in a similar fashion than them not monitoring them.

2) What you say is indeed humorous, but what isn't funny is that we know that the purpose has never been to catch criminals, it is to catch people doing things contrary to the interests of the state, conduct corporate espionage, and/or gather useful blackmail-worthy information for use at a future time.
Re:Cayman Islands? by zr · 2014-05-19 11:45 · Score: 1

shh.. thats in the next episode!
Re:Cayman Islands? by RabidReindeer · 2014-05-19 13:12 · Score: 1

Had they done this with Cayman Islands they could have possible nabbed some real criminals, and probably made the world a better/safer place.
The Bahamas host a lot of "Corporate America" themselves. This could could ignite a real stinkstorm.
Re:Cayman Islands? by swillden · 2014-05-20 00:43 · Score: 1

we know that the purpose has never been to catch criminals, it is to catch people doing things contrary to the interests of the state, conduct corporate espionage, and/or gather useful blackmail-worthy information for use at a future time.
Cite?

--
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Re:Cayman Islands? by GameboyRMH · 2014-05-20 03:26 · Score: 1

The NSA spied specifically on foreign corporations and the leaders of human rights organizations.
They didn't catch the Tsarnaev brothers.
Do the math.

--
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Re:Cayman Islands? by swillden · 2014-05-20 03:48 · Score: 1

The NSA spied specifically on foreign corporations and the leaders of human rights organizations.
They didn't catch the Tsarnaev brothers.
Do the math.
That doesn't follow. They spied on foreign corporations, organizations, heads of state, etc., but that's not all they spied on. And they didn't catch the Tsarnaev brothers, but that doesn't prove they weren't spying on people like that, just that they failed. But it doesn't prove Jahoda's claims that catching criminals (terrorists) isn't one of their purposes. At most it proves that they suck at it. Or that the goal is inherently infeasible(*).
So, I repeat: Cite?
(*) My take is that it is mostly infeasible, and to the degree it can be achieved it's not worth the cost. But it's not at all uncommon for large organizations -- especially government organizations -- to spend vast amounts of effort and resources trying to do something that can't be done and isn't worth doing anyway. c.f. DRM, for one example that's top of mind.

--
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.

To serve and protect by gmuslera · 2014-05-19 09:41 · Score: 4, Insightful

Surely there is a branch of al-quaeda there to have that kind of surveillance. When they will start to send the killer drones?

Re:To serve and protect by funwithBSD · 2014-05-19 09:42 · Score: 4, Funny

Send in the drones... there ought to be drones....

--
Never answer an anonymous letter. - Yogi Berra
Re:To serve and protect by CanHasDIY · 2014-05-19 09:56 · Score: 1

I volunteer for the foot-search.

--
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
Re:To serve and protect by ubrgeek · 2014-05-19 10:02 · Score: 1

Damn for a lack of mod points. Very funny :)

--
Bark less. Wag more.
Re:To serve and protect by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · 2014-05-19 10:08 · Score: 1

They'll drone you when you're trying to be so good
They'll drone you just like they said they would
They'll drone you when you're trying to go home
They'll drone you when you're there all alone
But I would not feel so all alone
Everybody must get droned.
Re:To serve and protect by BancBoy · 2014-05-19 10:40 · Score: 2

Don't bother...they're here!

--
[UID-HeinzIntel]
Re:To serve and protect by funwithBSD · 2014-05-19 11:33 · Score: 1

Gives an ominous note to
"I smoked two joints before I smoked two joints, then I smoked two more."

--
Never answer an anonymous letter. - Yogi Berra
Re:To serve and protect by atticus9 · 2014-05-19 13:18 · Score: 2

Why not? If I wanted to smuggle something or someone into the US, I'd route them through friendly looking countries to lower scrutiny. It's probably way easier to get fake Bahamian papers and sneak into the US, then sneaking in directly from Syria or someplace.

Favoritism. by Forbo · 2014-05-19 09:41 · Score: 5, Insightful

"The U.S. Department of Treasury estimated that in 2011 the Caribbean Banking Centers, which include Bahamas ...held almost $2 trillion dollars in United States debt." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

I bet there were some pretty juicy tidbits swept up in that massive dragnet. I certainly believe that tax evaders are a lot more of an actual threat to the US than the terrorism "boogeyman". So where are our prosecutions on this crap?

The answer is that there never will be. All this mass-surveillance will never actually be used to our benefit, only as a means enforcing the status quo for the powers that be.

Re:Favoritism. by rahvin112 · 2014-05-19 11:40 · Score: 5, Interesting

The US has aggressively been targeting tax evaders since about 2008. They've collected billions in back taxes, penalties and interest. Most haven't gone to jail because they are using the government's amnesty program that grants amnesty from criminal charges and partial penalty relief (but still typically takes better than 50% of the value of the accounts often far more than the taxes and interest).
The interesting bit is each year you don't come forward the amount of penalties they reduce goes down. If you took them up in 2008 you got a pretty decent deal, not so in 2014. With the steady decrease in what they will forgive they are setting the stage for genuine criminal prosecutions once the amnesty programs winds down in a few more years. IIRC the IRS has estimated they've discovered and taxed better than 50% of the hidden accounts and the people coming forward goes up each year because of the agreements the US is striking with other nations is revealing the tax cheats. Fact is you either come forward using the amnesty program and take your lumps or in a few years you could be looking at jail time.

Legally speaking... by jcr · 2014-05-19 09:43 · Score: 1, Insightful

Anyone at NSA who is participating in this is committing an act of war against a sovereign nation without any declaration of war.

-jcr

--
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."

Re:Legally speaking... by JoshuaZ · 2014-05-19 09:51 · Score: 4, Insightful

Anyone at NSA who is participating in this is committing an act of war against a sovereign nation without any declaration of war.
Under what theory of international law? This behavior is clearly bad and is the sort of thing a country has a right to be pissed off about, but there's no coherent, conventional theory that makes this an act of war. The situation is bad enough without exaggerating.
Re:Legally speaking... by bobbied · 2014-05-19 10:08 · Score: 2

Anyone at NSA who is participating in this is committing an act of war against a sovereign nation without any declaration of war.
-jcr
Slow down cowboy and holster that side arm... The Article is a bit conflicting on this.. It says EVERY cell call, *then* it clarifies that it's only international calls, which is certainly NOT every cell call. So, this might not be what you suspect and before you start a shooting war we need to think about this.
Seems this is NOT an act of war, it's simply monitoring traffic coming over international trunks and that they simply have the ability to intercept the signaling, and both sides of the conversation. This requires no *in country* equipment or invasion of territory to do. This is NOT new information, we've know about this for years, even before Snowden did his document dump. Now if they set this tap up IN the Bahamas, you *might* have an argument, but I don't think that's what happened here.
Now, if they really are monitoring ALL cell calls, then it would be necessary to have assets in country and you MIGHT have your "act of war" but then again, you might not. At any rate, even if the NSA invaded the Bahamas to do this, I seriously doubt they'd be incensed enough to do much more than protest. What you going to do? Throw out all the rich American tourists or start a shooting war and watch them run? I don't think so.

--
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Re:Legally speaking... by Rich0 · 2014-05-19 10:10 · Score: 1

To be fair - an act of war is whatever somebody wants it to be.
If I'm a dictator of some country and you're the dictator of another country and you sneeze and I don't like it and I order my military to kill all your citizens, then you basically started a war with your sneeze. Or maybe I started it with my craziness. Either way there were some acts and a war, so figure it out however you like.
There are just some particular actions that people think of as crossing a line. The US never really went to war with Cuba and the Soviet Union, though the US did a naval blockade (sorry, quarantine) of Cuba which was clearly an act of war. Basically countries do stuff to each other all the time, and when one calculates that will make out better with bloodshed than diplomacy you have a war.
Re:Legally speaking... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-05-19 10:23 · Score: 1

Espionage: the practice of spying or of using spies, typically by governments to obtain political and military information.
So, Edward Snowden is not only a foreign government of himself, but also was spying or using spies against the US government? And here I thought he was just some guy that had access to some government secrets and went to the press with it after the superiors he tried to remedy the situation with had turned him down. How silly of me!
Or... maybe you're just an idiot or a shill. Seriously, the amount of stupidity that I hear to justify our government's corrupt ways is astounding. But I guess the king can do no wrong, isn't that so?
Oh, and while we're on the subject, Obama himself has called this type of behavior an act of war. Funny how when he's caught perpetrating it, it is just "national security." Oops!
Re:Legally speaking... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-05-19 10:30 · Score: 1

They never defined it that way! If the cyber attack has physical damage then it's treated as an act of war.
"If the physical consequences of a cyberattack work the kind of physical damage that dropping a bomb or firing a missile would, that cyberattack should equally be considered a use of force.”
Re:Legally speaking... by c · 2014-05-19 10:38 · Score: 1

Anyone at NSA who is participating in this is committing an act of war against a sovereign nation without any declaration of war.
Actually, since it's interception of communications of a foreign country, this may be one of the few recently reported instances of the NSA actually doing their job.

--
Log in or piss off.
Re:Legally speaking... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-05-19 10:41 · Score: 2, Informative

It says EVERY cell call, *then* it clarifies that it's only international calls, which is certainly NOT every cell call. So, this might not be what you suspect and before you start a shooting war we need to think about this.
Seems this is NOT an act of war, it's simply monitoring traffic coming over international trunks and that they simply have the ability to intercept the signaling, and both sides of the conversation. This requires no *in country* equipment or invasion of territory to do. This is NOT new information, we've know about this for years, even before Snowden did his document dump. Now if they set this tap up IN the Bahamas, you *might* have an argument, but I don't think that's what happened here.
Did you even read the article? It clearly says that they are intercepting every cell call in the Bahamas and that it was based on exploiting legal access arranged with the Bahamas police for a specific case in order to install a blanket tap of all calls. If it was about tapping international cables, why would it only be picking up cell phones? The article also discusses broader programs which involve more countries and in many of those the scope of interception is more limited, but in the Bahamas it is everything - not just stuff that passes over international trunks.

When U.S. drug agents need to tap a phone of a suspected drug kingpin in another country, they call up their counterparts and ask them set up an intercept. To facilitate those taps, many nations – including the Bahamas – have hired contractors who install and maintain so-called lawful intercept equipment on their telecommunications. With SOMALGET, it appears that the NSA has used the access those contractors developed to secretly mine the country’s entire phone system for “signals intelligence” –recording every mobile call in the country. “Host countries,” the document notes, “are not aware of NSA’s SIGINT collection.”
In the Bahamas, the documents say, the NSA intercepts GSM data that is transmitted over what is known as the “A link”–or “A interface”–a core component of many mobile networks. The A link transfers data between two crucial parts of GSM networks – the base station subsystem, where phones in the field communicate with cell towers, and the network subsystem, which routes calls and text messages to the appropriate destination. “It’s where all of the telephone traffic goes,” says the former engineer.
Re:Legally speaking... by AHuxley · 2014-05-19 11:41 · Score: 3, Insightful

Try and think of what "intercepting data off a network" is really about into todays digitally connected world.
Thats every private call, legal documents as a fax or junk crypto, every electronic court document, banking records protected with international junk crypto, local contracts been discussed between gov departments before been offered, international contracts been discussed between gov departments, the expensive needs of education, science wrt to costly upgrades, mil and police needs, health, energy policy, food exports, trade with other nations.... Any nation thats opened itself up to that kind of constant "intercepting" is really sinking into colony status with every act, law, deal, contract been seen and fully understood by a few other nations (5++ other nations).
International tenders become a costly joke with a full understanding of the gov position, needs and price range.
A digital banana republic, as Argentina had the the English Octopus over rail. Once another nation is in your domestic infrastructure they get to understand and shape policy.

--
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Re:Legally speaking... by amiga3D · 2014-05-19 11:44 · Score: 1

Getting caught spying on another nation is embarassing. It is not however an act of war. It is a crime but you have to be caught by the country you're spying on to get punished for it. Mostly spies just get held for trading to get back your own spies. I'd guess the Bahamas probably have a very limited espionage program though.
Re:Legally speaking... by jcr · 2014-05-19 12:04 · Score: 2, Insightful

maybe you're just an idiot or a shill.
That's where the smart money is betting. NSA has a number of minions tasked with bad-mouthing the man who exposed their billions of felony wiretapping crimes. There are also a few knee-jerk bootlickers who will do likewise.
-jcr

--
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Re:Legally speaking... by Charliemopps · 2014-05-19 14:04 · Score: 4, Informative

Anyone at NSA who is participating in this is committing an act of war against a sovereign nation without any declaration of war.
-jcr
I'm not sure if you've noticed, but the united states does that like every other week. Noticed Ukraine lately? We started that. Everyone seems to forget there was a fucking US backed coup before Russia stepped in. It's not like they randomly decided to invade.
Re:Legally speaking... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-05-19 16:17 · Score: 1

It is not just the NSA with the sock puppets, all 4 branches of Military in the US have the same exact programs in addition to the CIA and the FBI. The UK Government has the _SAME_ fucking programs for GCHQ, MI5 and MI6 in addition to their military units. I'm sure when one runs out of accounts to shit talk people the other can take over. They seem to reach around to each other quite often.
Re:Legally speaking... by jcr · 2014-05-19 16:50 · Score: 1

It is not just the NSA with the sock puppets, all 4 branches of Military in the US have the same exact programs in addition to the CIA and the FBI.
Yeah, of all the things the government wastes our money on, propaganda is one of the ones I find really fucking offensive.
-jcr

--
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Re:Legally speaking... by bill_mcgonigle · 2014-05-19 17:01 · Score: 1

Under what theory of international law? This behavior is clearly bad and is the sort of thing a country has a right to be pissed off about, but there's no coherent, conventional theory that makes this an act of war.
Well, it's massive looting if you believe in imaginary property.

--
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Re:Legally speaking... by Ja'Achan · 2014-05-19 18:16 · Score: 2

Espionage is not an attack.
The IETF would disagree with you
Re:Legally speaking... by phorm · 2014-05-20 09:39 · Score: 1

A U.S.-backed coup of the corrupt Russia-backed previous government?
Unclean hands all around.

the NSA reply? by Moheeheeko · 2014-05-19 09:43 · Score: 1

No we didn't, that's a glitch.

Foreign Signals Intelligence by CrimsonAvenger · 2014-05-19 09:44 · Score: 1, Troll

The NSA's mandate...listening in on foreigners is why they were created back in the day.

In other words, this is a non-issue. Almost as silly as an article that accused the FBI of arresting kidnappers in Pennsylvania....

--

"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"

Re:Foreign Signals Intelligence by Anonymous Coward · 2014-05-19 09:56 · Score: 3, Insightful

Except that getting caught at it is a major embarrassment and is going to destroy the relationships with Bahamas and most likely erode even further that of other countries. And given the breach of trust involved in this specific instance, is going to have a negative effect in the war against terror and drug cooperation. Not to mention that indiscriminate eavesdropping in an entire population is both overkill an unnecessary for gathering relevant intelligence of any kind.
Re: Foreign Signals Intelligence by bobbied · 2014-05-19 10:18 · Score: 2

Right and there was not american to american phone calls from the Bahamas.
This doesn't matter, or so the courts say. You step off sovereign US territory and the legal assumption that you are a US citizen no longer applies. So, where they cannot TARGET you knowing you are a citizen (without a warrant), they can intercept your phone calls in their quest for intelligence information when you are on foreign soil. The rules are literally different OUTSIDE the country, and you need to get used to that because it's been this way for decades.
What's changed though is the *sharing* of intelligence information gathered by the NSA with law enforcement.... But that's not what this article is about..

--
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Re:Foreign Signals Intelligence by rmdingler · 2014-05-19 11:14 · Score: 2

Right... and the Germans have cut off trade relations after the revelations regarding NSA funny business with the Chancellor's personal cell phone.
All the major players do it, and all the major players know the other Countries do it.
Hell, Enemy of the State is a 1998 movie and the tinfoil hatters have been right about this one for years.
Since the time of Kings, he who spies best, has the attention of the rest.

--
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
Re:Foreign Signals Intelligence by rmdingler · 2014-05-19 11:22 · Score: 1

Yes, in exactly the same fashion your local police department might gather alternative evidence to protect a valuable confidential informant.
Regression analysis.
It makes proving a suspect guilty so much easier when you work backward from a known outcome.

--
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
Re:Foreign Signals Intelligence by Jmc23 · 2014-05-19 16:14 · Score: 2

Those who are evil cannot comprehend the actions of those who are not.

--
Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.

What goood exactly has the NSA done for us? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-05-19 09:46 · Score: 1

It is a serious question. I'm beginning to think that collectively the NSA (and CIA too for that matter) is just ... dumb. At best, a bunch of careerists milking the govt gravy train.

Re:What goood exactly has the NSA done for us? by duke_cheetah2003 · 2014-05-19 10:07 · Score: 2

It is a serious question. I'm beginning to think that collectively the NSA (and CIA too for that matter) is just ... dumb. At best, a bunch of careerists milking the govt gravy train.
Unlike all their activities... the good they're doing is top secret!
Re:What goood exactly has the NSA done for us? by amiga3D · 2014-05-19 11:48 · Score: 1

The NSA is a lot like government in general. A necessary evil. It's handy to have an idea what your enemies are up to. The problem is that they try to do too much so they get stretched too thin. Instead of concentrating on real threats they just watch everyone then filter it. They've substituted technology for spycraft and we suffer for it.
Re:What goood exactly has the NSA done for us? by AHuxley · 2014-05-19 12:00 · Score: 2

During Vietnam their skilled teams did try and save a lot of US lives by predicting and tracking the enemy.
They also tried to help with complex flight paths around layers SAM.
They did great work tracking Soviet weapons tests and digging under embassy foundations to get near telco equipment.
re "milking the govt gravy train", think of it as a leadership table and a set number can vote.
You want to be at the table voting and setting policy with the budget that reflects that role.
You do not want to be called in for tech support and then sent out of the room as in decades past.

--
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"

congress by p51d007 · 2014-05-19 09:46 · Score: 5, Funny

Oh no, can't have them monitor the Cayman islands...they would net about 90% of our congress, senate and 3/4 of the power brokers in DC...can't have that ya know ;)

Re:congress by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · 2014-05-20 03:44 · Score: 1

Best to go after brown people with drugs.

--
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.

and the answer is by Anonymous Coward · 2014-05-19 10:04 · Score: 1

turn off / deny all US based access to your countries infrastructure. Can't trust them to do the right thing, then we just won't trust them at all.
See how well their intelligence systems work without backdoor co-operation from the rest of the world.

Re:and the answer is by JMJimmy · 2014-05-19 11:05 · Score: 5, Interesting

As if a country like the Bahamas can do anything like that. The US is the only country they could hook into for internet infrastructure without running a cable to South America or Mexico.
The US also flies unmarked helos in Bahamas airspace - the DEA would do low level flights up and down the island of Eleuthera looking for crops and attempting to follow drug mules. The mules would drop the drugs off on the south end of the island, transfer from boat to a truck, drive up to the north end of the island and dump them on another boat to get around satellite surveillance. It's scary seeing an unmarked Apache 30 feet off the deck fly over as you're laying on the beach.
Re:and the answer is by AHuxley · 2014-05-19 11:23 · Score: 3, Insightful

The problem is in some parts of the world is the domestic cost of telco interconnects. It can be cheaper to connect domestic calls via an international peering loop that goes way out past a few other nations and their shared facilities. Kind of hard to re build a decades of contracts and local hardware thats all about reducing costs.

--
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Re:and the answer is by amiga3D · 2014-05-19 11:28 · Score: 1

Don't think they wont still manage. It'll just cost more.
Re:and the answer is by JMJimmy · 2014-05-19 20:55 · Score: 3, Informative

First off, the incident took place prior to 2007 when the Army was supplying the many of aircraft for the DEA to use in the operations there. Prior to 2007 the DEA only had 3 Jayhawks and 1 other helicopter for it's OPBAT operations, everything else was supplied by the Army.
This is the helicopter I saw: http://www.forthoodsentinel.co... - in this configuration. Armaments were not equipped though. It's rather hard to mistake the thin/relatively small profile of an Apache compared to the Blackhawks.
As to the nature of the mission, I cannot say exactly what they were doing that day, all I know is that they were flying below the tree line directly over the beach, facing in-land and strafing north. For all I know they were cruising for boobs. I suspect though, knowing the local geography/topography, that because of the density of the forest/jungle they were trying to see under the canopy as much as possible to identify grow ops that were not visible via satellite. This would be particularly effective in Eleuthera because the island is one long strip for the most part with very little change in elevation. Between the density of the bush and the number of poison wood trees, grows would likely need to be near a road - in the area where I was when I saw it there is only 1 road, right near the beach for about a 30km stretch http://goo.gl/maps/FSM9G
Re:and the answer is by JMJimmy · 2014-05-19 21:39 · Score: 3, Informative

There are a mess of cables in the area, http://www.submarinecablemap.c... and I suppose they could but by "right by the bahamas" you're actually talking 1,000-2,000km of cable (depending on whether you went to Jamaica or directly to Caracas). The Bahamas largest project is around 3,500km which hooks up 20 islands and Haiti. Adding an extra 1/3rd to the length/cost just to avoid the US? Political/tourist implications aside, from a financial perspective it doesn't make sense. You have to remember that outside of Nassau/Freeport it's very much a 3rd world country - last I was there the entire island would lose power at least once every couple weeks.
Re:and the answer is by deadweight · 2014-05-20 03:26 · Score: 1

I once layed out a series of strobe lights off the north end of Eleuthera before dinner and followed them out to a reef after dark to do some night diving. Sure enough the helos showed up thinking it was a drug op and lit up the reef for us real well with their searchlights :)
Re:and the answer is by JMJimmy · 2014-05-20 04:41 · Score: 1

That sounds awesome. Did you ever snorkel/dive off the cut south of Winding Bay? Brutal currents but I saw more species there in an hour than the rest of the six months I spent there. The reefs south of Windermere Island, off Glenelg, were also pretty spectacular.
Re:and the answer is by deadweight · 2014-05-20 06:11 · Score: 1

We did the cut. Tons of fun with a current running about 8 knots. We also found a plane shot down by an OPBAT helo off of Great Harbor Cay and dove on that.

Correction by duke_cheetah2003 · 2014-05-19 10:05 · Score: 1

The National Security Agency is secretly intercepting, recording, and archiving the audio...

The National Security Agency was secretly intercepting, recording, and archiving the audio...

FTFY.

Re:Correction by shutdown+-p+now · 2014-05-19 13:49 · Score: 1

The National Security Agency was secretly intercepting, recording, and archiving the audio...
FTFY.

Congressional hearing transcript by Anonymous Coward · 2014-05-19 10:09 · Score: 1

Q. Does NSA totally own contents of all voice communications of hundreds of thousands of Bahamans?

A. No, sir.

Q. It does not?

A. Not wittingly. There are cases where they could inadvertently perhaps own the Bahamas but not wittingly.

I feel sorry for those of you who think this is ok because it was done against another flag.

A Bahamian jail cell by Vinegar+Joe · 2014-05-19 10:11 · Score: 1

Is calling Eric and Barack.

--
"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes

Still less troubling than Sterling by Triklyn · 2014-05-19 10:22 · Score: 3, Insightful

I'm still much less troubled about NSA surveillance than about what what a forced sale of the clippers means for privacy. And what Brendan Eich's ousting means for free speech. I wish Hitchens were still alive, just to see what his take would be on the current trend of popular suppression.

It is certainly legal, and proper for popular opinion to move against unpopular ideas in the private arena, so long as government holds itself apart from this censure... but it does not feel good. it does not feel right.

The NSA can wire-tap the crap out of me, because I don't think they'd do something so capricious as out me to the public. And the public doesn't work through proper channels. Judge, jury, executioner through mob rule.

Orwell would weep, punishing people for what they think.

Re:Still less troubling than Sterling by GameboyRMH · 2014-05-20 03:38 · Score: 1

Nobody's opinions are sacred.
Actions have consequences.
Deal with it.

--
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Re:Still less troubling than Sterling by Triklyn · 2014-05-20 04:06 · Score: 1

yes they do, and your (collective) actions have the potential to be a whole lot more damaging than anything eich or sterling are being punished for. He contributed 1000 dollars to a political campaign aligned with his religious beliefs. that is it. period. and sterling uttered a thought in private. these consequences are vastly disproportionate to the "crime" if they were imposed by the courts, we'd call them cruel and unusual... because mob mentality knows no restraint.
Re:Still less troubling than Sterling by GameboyRMH · 2014-05-20 05:36 · Score: 1

Well what would you propose doing to prevent people from choosing which products they consume? Because that's what it comes down to. People were free to stop using Firefox or stop watching NBA basketball. Mozilla and the NBA did not want this. So they removed the offending parties from their respective organizations, to remove the motivation for people to stop consuming their products.

--
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Re:Still less troubling than Sterling by Triklyn · 2014-05-20 06:53 · Score: 1

i'd say the solution is probably also social, don't cover it, and people don't react like animals to it.
I'd be tempted to boycott mozilla and the NBA on principle for their overreactions and bending to "peer pressure" but i'm not the biggest fan of their products to begin with. There might also not be a good solution, and going forward we might have to live with this new reality. But that doesn't mean it's right, nor does it mean we shouldn't try to solve it.
My problem isn't with boycotts and mass action. Ultimately, it's that it's punitive to individuals. If mozilla did something you didn't like, boycott it, campaign against it, protest it, i'm all for all of those things. But this is a private citizen, exercising his right to get involved in the political process, something that should be lauded... and we lynch-mobbed him. His dirty laundry is literally as clean as they come and at this rate, the moral high-ground will be as the dodo, lost to time.
Re:Still less troubling than Sterling by GameboyRMH · 2014-05-20 07:04 · Score: 1

Are you saying Mozilla should have taken the damage that this guy's leaked donation information caused? What if he decided to support the cause in the future and publicly declare it himself, should Mozilla have just taken the losses in that case as well? If so, isn't it wrong that the other employees would have to suffer for Eich's actions?
I see something rather immoral and shameful about donating to a campaign supporting an effort to strip rights from a group of people. There's a lot of historical precedence to back my view up. Like opinions, nobody's political cause is sacred. They aren't all fungible things, equally reasonable and worthy of respect.

--
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Re:Still less troubling than Sterling by Triklyn · 2014-05-20 07:42 · Score: 1

and i see nothing but slippery slopes for going after someone for having contentious views.
or are you alright with marginalizing parts of society that are different?
i find many things distasteful, bigotry and flagrant pda among them. but i'll defend people's right to hold and express views and ideas of all stripes because the only way to gaurantee that my minority views aren't punished by an overzealous majority is to protect the, at times abhorrent, views of those i do not agree with. ... hmmm just did a thought experiment, and, apparently i'd protect a CEO who in his past contributed to the KKK too...
i might hate myself a little for it, but it really is that critical we not give an inch on this.
Re:Still less troubling than Sterling by GameboyRMH · 2014-05-20 08:06 · Score: 1

Shunning sources of oppression and intolerance is a positive force in society, not something that deserves to be lumped in with "marginalizing parts of society that are different." We did that to South Africa, we do it to NK right now. Hand-waving them away as mere "contentious views" or "different" actively makes it easier for intolerance and oppression to spread. That's not just turning a blind eye to the problem, that's whitewashing it.
I wouldn't work for or buy from a CEO who I thought was likely to contribute to the KKK in the future.

--
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Re:Still less troubling than Sterling by Triklyn · 2014-05-20 10:06 · Score: 1

the whitewashing of history is the whitewashing of history. i don't get to judge what is intolerant or oppressive until I know what people are saying. It doesn't mean i have to give it special credence after they've said it. But once you've punished people so disproportionately that they no longer feel free to express dissenting views. Then you've dug a deep hole for yourself. Society does not get to judge what I have in my head, only what i do with those beliefs.
Eich supported a political campaign, something those of us who follow politics encourage. Sterling said something to someone in private, something everybody expects not to cost them upwards of 300 million dollars.
The founding fathers were wiser than i thought, if this is the face of true democracy.
Re:Still less troubling than Sterling by GameboyRMH · 2014-05-20 10:30 · Score: 1

If you encourage people to follow "a political campaign" regardless of what it is, then you're holding people's political causes sacred, a pointless, counterproductive and potentially harmful thing to do.
If that's not what you're doing, then how silly or backwards would a political campaign have to be before you would not encourage supporting it?
Sterling's leaked tape was not the only event that triggered backlash, it was more like the straw that broke the camel's back. He'd been caught in discriminatory renting practices before. Asking his girlfriend to not bring black people to NBA games is more than just thoughts too.

--
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Re:Still less troubling than Sterling by Triklyn · 2014-05-20 13:07 · Score: 1

if political campaigns and speech don't warrant extra protections then this whole great experiment is kind of pointless isn't it? the bedrock of this republic is that we aren't allowed to intimidate voters. I find libertarianism and veganism ridiculous, but i don't want to arbitrate that line, neither do i want others to do it for me. I find the full-throated defense of the 2nd amendment patently ridiculous, but i'll defend their right to defend it without repercussion. If you want to debate the merits of a political cause, debate them in a political arena, but when mob-mentality starts bleeding into politics we've got issues. It's why we have a bicameral system, and we're a consitutional republic for a reason. Not trusting the monarchy, but equally leery of the mob.
Sterling- but that's not why he's being crucified for. He's being crucified for a 30 minute private conversation. And he's set to lose somewhere in the range of 30% of his property value to taxes because of it, at best. He's been caught in discriminatory renting practices before, so they claim. You say it so casually, he's been accused of discriminatory renting practices before, and he settled out of court, which means that the issue is settled without any wrongdoing being admitted. We are a nation of laws, not of men, and the law is the only thing that stands between us and a bad day before the kangaroo court of public opinion.
Re:Still less troubling than Sterling by GameboyRMH · 2014-05-21 02:34 · Score: 1

Throughout history, political campaigns and speech have never had extra protections. Never. If anything there are probably more "protections" now than ever before, since actual lynching, actual witch hunts, and applying social pressure solely because someone is the "wrong" race or religion are now frowned upon. We even apply social pressure to people who try to enact bigoted oppression, bringing the discussion full-circle.
Was the system doomed from the start, or is something different now?

--
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Re:Still less troubling than Sterling by Triklyn · 2014-05-21 03:29 · Score: 1

just looked it up. I guess i was wrong, i thought political speech was protected in some way... but apparently if you work in the private sector, political speech gets no protection whatsoever except in a handful of blue states.
you can be fired for having a bumper sticker. this is the world we live in.
the hilarious thing being, in a bunch of these states they can't fire you for being gay, but they can fire you for being a democrat :).
Re:Still less troubling than Sterling by Triklyn · 2014-05-21 06:27 · Score: 1

also, just thought it through, and this kind of precedent is pretty scary in relation to political transparency. if people want to argue for transparency in political contributions, we can't have examples of people getting punished for going through proper channels. this just makes for more evidence that political contributions of all kinds should be anonymous.

Reaction guestimations... by mythosaz · 2014-05-19 10:23 · Score: 4, Interesting

Based on the number of proportional font memos with a blacked out second country name, it shouldn't be too hard to narrow down the other country (in addition to the Bahamas) for which "full retrieval" was possible.

I mean, it's not Laos, and it's not Nagorno-Karabakh, but with a known font, you could narrow it down pretty quickly based on the redacted images.

Here:
https://prod01-cdn00.cdn.first...
And here:
https://prod01-cdn02.cdn.first...

Re:Reaction guestimations... by Opportunist · 2014-05-19 11:14 · Score: 1

Identify the font, write out every country of the planet, take measurements.

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re:Reaction guestimations... by mythosaz · 2014-05-19 12:11 · Score: 1

How long does it take to cut-and-paste a list of countries in that font and see how many fit the width?
Then repeat the process against the other documents in other fonts?
Then compare the two lists? How many countries will be left?
[Leading or trailing whitespace is a non-issue, since you know where the next word starts.]
Re:Reaction guestimations... by peter.kowalchuk.reid · 2014-05-19 13:30 · Score: 1

Someone please write something to do this, it wouldn't be too hard in python.
Re:Reaction guestimations... by narcc · 2014-05-19 14:49 · Score: 1

Someone please write something to do this,
You don't need a program to do this. It would likely take less time to do by hand.

it wouldn't be too hard in python.
Do I need to call the ASPCA?

--
Required reading for internet skeptics
Re:Reaction guestimations... by Jmc23 · 2014-05-19 16:38 · Score: 1

Are you serious???
Load a font, set the size and dpi, write a simple loop to take a list of countries, render and measure, compare to length wanted and print those that match. Maybe 10 lines in lisp.

--
Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
Re:Reaction guestimations... by Opportunist · 2014-05-19 16:57 · Score: 1

10 lines and a billion parentheses later...

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.

Live 100 miles from US border? No rights for you. by Trachman · 2014-05-19 10:25 · Score: 1

Next thing you will hear that all the Americans who live within 100 miles from the US Border, including west and east seashores, do not have constitutional 4th and 5th amendment. At least that what DHS is trying to project by setting border checkpoints. Probably 80% of US population live within 100 miles from US borders. Guess that the next revelation will be that American's calls are getting intercepted, recorded and archived, but never kept for more than 5 years, unless NSA is involved in lawsuit. We know that all calls recorded in UK, Bahamas, Bermuda, Cayman islands, Iraq so far.

Enemy of the state... 1998... by Rooked_One · 2014-05-19 10:33 · Score: 1

And look where we are now. Insanity...

On the Bahamas, TOO. by rmdingler · 2014-05-19 10:38 · Score: 2, Insightful

Yeahhhh... No.

Everyone who's anyone is using electronic eavesdropping to supplement their Country's intelligence agenda.

If the United States took the high ground and refused to engage this, it would be to the detriment of the West, likely including the Country you've posted from.

This technology is already out there for everyone to exploit.... Once the toothpaste is out of the tube, it's hard to get back in.

--
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

Ernest Hemingway

Re:On the Bahamas, TOO. by Anonymous Coward · 2014-05-19 16:08 · Score: 4, Insightful

If the United States took the high ground and refused to engage this, it would be to the detriment of the West, likely including the Country you've posted from.
And how exactly? Are the evil Internet terrorists going to hack us? Wait I know, maybe some evil foreign spy agency will steal trade secrets from our businesses... oh wait.

This technology is already out there for everyone to exploit
"But Johny also did it" is the kind of excuse I'd expect from a first grader. Just because someone else engages in something morally questionable doesn't make it ok for you to do it.
Just stop. This isn't about "defending" anything, but American financial interests. If you honestly believe there is some higher purpose behind the US spying efforts, then you are either extremely naive, or suffering from a severe case of cognitive dissonance.
Re:On the Bahamas, TOO. by AmiMoJo · 2014-05-20 00:17 · Score: 1

There is a difference between doing some limited, targeted spying against individuals whom a country has a legitimate security interest in. The US doesn't do that though, it spies on everyone in the entire country, records every single phone call and uses the intelligence for commercial gain.

--
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Re:On the Bahamas, TOO. by rmdingler · 2014-05-20 01:04 · Score: 1

I'm going to stop short of assessing values such as good, bad, right, and wrong to the behavior of governments.
Information gathering is advantageous to each and every sovereign nation, and though the US is in the fire presently as the preeminent surveillance state, it would be difficult to imagine most other capable nations have passed on the opportunity to set up their own version of an American NSA. Akin to the MAD theory of the Cold War, I presume we exist in an era of mutually assured surveillance. Allowing a sovereign state to determine, to its own benefit or detriment, what constitutes legitimate or limited imparts an ability to choose for the greater good that not too many people possess.... let alone governments.
On the bright side, it's possible the power of surveilled intelligence will wane once many nations can do it equally well, and nations may find themselves less likely to attempt the development of secret evils if there's literally no chance secrets can be kept any longer.

--
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway

On main junction box by Anonymous Coward · 2014-05-19 10:55 · Score: 1

I remember, years ago, some friends moved there for a few years. One of the big things about the apartment they got is it came with a land line. You see it could take years to get new phone service. During their stay a disgruntled employee cut the phone lines for the whole country. Apparently there is or was one main junction for the whole island, and nothing was labeled right, so it took months to piece the wires back. My friends got reconnected, but got someone elses line, and the locals just handled that as situation normal. Once they found out their new number (from people calling them) they just started using it.

It makes sense if everything is still through a single point, that they can all be tapped easily.

Re:On main junction box by AHuxley · 2014-05-19 12:28 · Score: 1

Yes that one hub idea seems to be useful.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
"2000, 95% of intra-German Internet communications was routed via the DE-CIX Internet exchange point in Frankfurt, Germany"

--
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"

Re:the other country by Opportunist · 2014-05-19 11:10 · Score: 1

If you're really interested, check what technology the named countries used for phone calls, check who maintains them, check who audits them, check who operates them, look for a connection between them...

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.

They do this everywhere. by mosb1000 · 2014-05-19 11:11 · Score: 1

I don't know why it's taking people so long to realize this. The NSA records everything they can get their hands on. And thanks to the USS Jimmy Carter they can get their hands on all terrestrial communications.

Uhm.. by viperidaenz · 2014-05-19 11:57 · Score: 2

The Bahamas already knew about it?
How else did the DEA have access?

Re:Uhm.. by Charliemopps · 2014-05-19 14:12 · Score: 2

The Bahamas already knew about it?
How else did the DEA have access?
We sold them their equipment...
Re:Uhm.. by viperidaenz · 2014-05-19 19:38 · Score: 1

The Bahamas gave the DEA full access to their network.

There's an app for that. by BiggerIsBetter · 2014-05-19 12:20 · Score: 1

I guess we have to accept that we can't trust The Powers That Be to respect our right to privacy. Fortunately there are options.

I reckon more folks should be installing Open Whisper Systems RedPhone for encrypting their own calls. https://whispersystems.org/

Then there's always the Blackphone handset for more serious business too. https://www.blackphone.ch/phone/

I supposed if you were really paranoid you could run RedPhone on your Blackphone...

--
Forget thrust, drag, lift and weight. Airplanes fly because of money.

Re:Storage by AHuxley · 2014-05-19 12:22 · Score: 1

You don't need a lot of "hard drives" - you just keep the records of call made, time, a voice print and all connections to known and new people.
If the person uses a webcam you keep a few select frames showing - useful for facial recognition.
Every call is sorted in realtime, the small portions of unique data kept and the 'hops' sorted.
Classically you had the above based on spoken words by known people or known people to new people or the use of spoken words or digital data.
Now you just keep every call as a small amount of code and look back over all calls as needed.
In the past it was sort, translate, drop most, store and index.
Now with todays cheap storage you translate, sort, store and index everything and then look back..
The only issue now is the US domestic legal setting and US legal teams in open court. The hard drives needed issue was understood and solved over decades.
Recall what a telco could offer for parallel construction - many years of call data. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/...
http://www.reuters.com/article...

--
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"

Fact-Checking by Irate+Engineer · 2014-05-19 12:51 · Score: 1

Not that I think Snowden is completely pulling stuff out of his ass, but..how do we know Snowden is NOT pulling stuff out of his ass?

I'm asking in the spirit of diabloa advocatus. Snowden should get the same scrutiny as any other source. If he is as genuine as I think he is, he shouldn't be offended by this questioning of the source.

--

Left MS Windows for Linux Mint and never looked back!

Vote for Bernie in 2016!

Re:Fact-Checking by dbIII · 2014-05-19 14:34 · Score: 1

but..how do we know Snowden is NOT pulling stuff out of his ass
Investigate, charge and try the people he has accused of crimes. For some reason nothing like that is happening.
Re:Fact-Checking by Jmc23 · 2014-05-19 16:42 · Score: 1

You do know Snowden isn't releasing anything right?

--
Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.

the question is by Anonymous Coward · 2014-05-19 13:12 · Score: 2, Interesting

I love how your response is "what will THOSE people do" not "what will WE do", like the NSA is significantly more careful with our rights, or like us and them are separate groups. Obviously military intelligence is completely out of control and doing whatever they have the means to regardless of morality or law. I guess people like you are waiting for some kind of referendum to vote against NSA power. IT'S NOT COMING. The people we've allowed the wrong people to make decisions for us. If one doesn't see that, one is blind, and an obstruction that must be removed immediately. Do you think they're going to serve you the option to take their power away on some kind of platter crafted of precious metals? Do you think it's possible to make big enough waves from the bottom of the power structure up to make a change in the government's behavior?

Time for revolution.

endless opinion poll by Max_W · 2014-05-19 18:55 · Score: 1

Recording and analyzing intimate private conversations en masse allows to know what people think, what are they hopes, fears, etc.

I allows to evaluate effectiveness of different media, etc.

Re:Storage by GameboyRMH · 2014-05-20 03:31 · Score: 1

So, the NSA must have like a shitload of hard drives.

They sure do! You might be able to see their storage array from space:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

--
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel

Re:the question is...Bullshit! by 0xG · 2014-05-20 07:46 · Score: 1

And yes, many (most?) other countries work the same way

So, you are saying that the Bahamas records every cell phone call made in the US?

--
A pox on web designers who feel that window.innerWidth == screen.availWidth

Re:the question is...Bullshit! by Rich0 · 2014-05-20 10:21 · Score: 1

No, I'm saying that in most countries you need the permission of the government to sue the government.

I'm sure many countries try to record phone calls/etc, but I doubt any do so nearly as extensively as the NSA.

Slashdot Mirror

The NSA Is Recording Every Cell Phone Call In the Bahamas

130 of 205 comments (clear)