Slashdot Mirror
NSA's Former General Council Talks Privacy, Security, and Snowden's 'Betrayal'
blottsie writes: In his first interview since retiring as general council to the NSA, Rajesh De offers detailed insights into the spy agency's efforts to find balance between security and privacy, why the NSA often has trouble defending itself in public, the culture of "No Such Agency," and what it was like on the inside when the Snowden bombshell went off. He describes the mood after the leaks: "My sense of it was that there were two overriding emotions among the workforce. The first was a deep, deep [feeling] of betrayal. Someone who was sitting next to them—being part of the team helping keep people safe, which is really what people at the agency think they are doing—could turn around and do something so self-aggrandizing and reckless. There was also a deep sense of hurt that a lot of what was in the media was not entirely accurate. Questioning the motives and legality of what NSA employees were being asked to do to keep Americans safe—all within the legal policy construct that we've been given—that was difficult for the NSA workforce."
1) The NSA is aware of computer software vulnerabilities and exploits by other unscrupulous entities, yet they hoard this information rather share with the public (they are mandated to protect). Imagine how much safer American computers would be from say, phishing and ransomeware that affects even public institutions like schools should the NSA actually try to help them. 2) A lot of NSA espionage resources are dedicated to industrial espionage of foreign entities to maintain economic hegemony for a handful of corporate interests rather than American business at large. 3) Retroactive punishment. Web activity is stored and mined should future laws be broken to retroactively punish a populace or build profiles. For instance, someone takes part in a protest such as the occupy movement. That person's web life becomes an opportunity to search and find anything incriminating, no matter how trivial. 4) Mandated sharing of raw intelligence gathering with Israel, without reciprocity. Rather than empowerment, the NSA seems more of a repressive regime tool.
"SO we bide our time, waiting for a purer kick to bloom and the future is still bleak, uncertain and beautiful" -GSYBE
Even if their daily grind gives them no personal access to the objectionable work being done; only stupidity or willful ignorance would prevent them from learning about and thinking about what the NSA does in the same way the rest of us did.
Somebody who just pushes buttons or spies on North Korea or whatever wouldn't have any reason to develop an on-the-job sense that they were doing the wrong thing; but when you can't open a newspaper without seeing reports on 'NSA basically spies on all the stuff, all the time, at home and abroad; FISA is a sad joke, massive domestic dragnet, etc, etc.'; the fact that you don't feel like you do bad things at work is irrelevant to your consideration of whether your employer does some deeply troubling work.
In fact, if they do feel 'betrayed'; it's hard to argue that they aren't explicitly identifying with the actions of the agency; even if their job is unrelated to the ones that caught the public eye. Given that those programs were effectively certain to operate with impunity for as long as they wanted if they went undiscovered(even with public knowledge, they've been substantially resistant to any real change); there is very little room for a "Well, those programs are wrong but Snowden should have opposed them more responsibly!" position that isn't bullshit. Filling out a form and dropping it in the suggestion box or sending his boss a worried email or something would have been indistinguishable from doing nothing, in terms of effect.
The British have claimed the Falklands since 1690.
The Falklands are well outside of customary territorial waters for any country, let alone Argentina.
The people of the Falklands have voted to remain British in referendum.
Is your position based on anti-Imperialism rather than will of the inhabitants of the islands?
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
Yes, we British don't really have an historical right of ownership of the Falklands, it's not like they are on our doorstep, or even in our hemisphere. However, the Argentinians have never had a presence on the islands (except for the famously brief war) and their only interest is in the oil reserves suspected, and now being found, in the surrounding waters. The war was also an attempt by the Junta to boost their flagging popularity in Argentina and a corresponding opportunity for the Conservative government to boost their own flagging popularity in the UK. There are no white hats in this fight.
The only tangible facts are that the people who now live on the islands voted overwhelmingly to remain under British sovereignty and that Mrs Thatcher had bigger balls (and better-trained special forces) than the Junta.
"Our opponent is an alien starship packed with atomic bombs," I said. "we have a protractor"
But, big BUTT here, the people at the NSA and people with university degrees, supposedly well educated and well informed people so the excuse but 'I'm stupid' doesn't really cut it. They knew they were breaking the law, every single last one of the lying asshats, they knew they were betraying their fellow citizens, there is no escape from that. What Snowden, was the one and only properly informed individual in the whole NSA including contractors, fucking bullshit. We are talking literally tens of thousands of co-conspiring criminals, obeying orders is no excuse, it is illegal to obey an illegal order and they are as guilty as the politicians who ordered them to do it.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen