Slashdot Mirror
Whistleblowers: How NSA Created the 'Largest Failure' In Its History (zdnet.com)
An anonymous reader writes: Former NSA whistleblowers contend that the agency shut down a program that could have "absolutely prevented" some of the worst terror attacks in memory. According to the ZDNet story: "Weeks prior to the September 11 terrorist attacks, a test-bed program dubbed ThinThread was shut down in favor of a more expensive, privacy-invasive program that too would see its eventual demise some three years later -- not before wasting billions of Americans' tax dollars. Four whistleblowers, including a congressional senior staffer, came out against the intelligence community they had served, after ThinThread. designed to modernize the agency's intelligence gathering effort, was cancelled. Speaking at the premier of a new documentary film A Good American in New York, which chronicles the rise and demise of the program, the whistleblowers spoke in support of the program, led by former NSA technical director William Binney."
Where the powers that be were convinced that warrantless wiretapping of everyone was an improvement over concentrating on terror targets.
I imagine it got really cold in that room with all the hand waving going on.
It's very easy after a disaster to claim that an unfunded or ignored project would have prevented the disaster. Since the whistleblowers in the article are talking about the 9/11 terrorist attack, it seems a bit late. to be blowing whistles on it now.
It does seem clear that the NSA suffered, and is suffering, from Jerry Pournell's "Iron Law of Bureaucracy"
>> First, there will be those who are devoted to the goals of the organization.
>> Secondly, there will be those dedicated to the organization itself
The amount of money, time, and manpower burned on oversampling incredible amounts of personal traffic would seem much better focused on parts of the world, and populations, where the monitoring is likely to bear more fruit. But that doesn't expand the NSA itself and its overall capacity.
Greed is supposed to rule in Corporate America. But Corporate America is not supposed to rule America.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
If NSA hadn't been caught searching and storing content there wouldn't now be such effort into encrypting everything.
And after conversations are encrypted effort will be made to render traffic analysis useless as well.
Well given the CIA report entited "Bin Laden determined to attack US" mentioning flying planes into buildings... and with the spooks trying to get emergency meetings with El Presidente Bush, I don't think Thin Thread would have helped.
The problem with 9/11 was a President who was too lazy to act, and was family friends with the Bin Ladens, so had a reason to ignore anything that might cause his friends/business partners bad press. It happened to suit his friends political agendas too. Giving them the excuse to pass Patriot act, and, as we learned from some of the leaks, the mass surveillance started 1998, and 9/11 Patriot act simply gave it a legal cover.
When the buck is almighty in any system, you end up with Hell wallpapered in dollar bills.
"But Corporate America is not supposed to rule America."
Actually you are incorrect. Big business has always ruled america.
Those who own the country ought to govern it.--John Jay, 1745-1829
Legends and myths grow around the historic events.
It is true that a couple of years before 9/11 events CNN/ABC sent a crew to meet Bin Laden's to get the interviews multiple times. Even two months before the events bin Laden was giving interviews to the local journalists.
If journalists could meet, why the fuck do we need electronic surveillance at all and later we hear complains saying that we needed more surveillance, since if we had more surveillance events would have been prevented. If journalists can get interviews freely, then I would be really stupid to believe that US, which has very powerful and most expensive intelligence agencies in the world, really wanted to catch him, because they did not.
Money may be a necessary evil, but the problem is not the money it's the way we structure our society and government around it. There should be absolutely no way for politicians to make money from anything except their paycheck, period. Sure, give them a nice salary and pension so they can live well, but any other income should be illegal, period. Direct or indirect. If you want the privilege of representing your fellow Americans in the government, there is a price you pay. Americans should be absolutely disgusted with the amount of corruption in the government. I really don't understand how people can be so complacent about it.
Of course Corporate America is supposed to rule America. What do you think the word "capital" in "Capitalism" means? Rule of those with capital., i.e. rule of the rich.
Funny, I thought capitalism was an economic system in which capital goods are owned by private individuals or corporations and in which decisions about pricing, production and distribution of the output of those capital goods is determined by the owners in a free market. Note that this does not preclude myriad forms of government regulation.
The only surprise is how "capitalism" has been marketed to Americans such that generations of them defend the rule of the rich as some utopia or ideal.
Well it's hardly surprising that private interests have rebranded regulation in the public interest by the boogey-man term "socialism", but I expect we are seeing early signs that this is starting to backfire. Americans in my generation associate "socialism" with the Soviet Union -- as a kind of "Communism lite". Millennials are increasingly apt to associate the word with the kind of "Nordic model" social democracy practiced in hellholes like Denmark and Sweden [note irony].
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.