Slashdot Mirror
NSA Deletes 'Honesty' and 'Openness' From Core Values (theintercept.com)
An anonymous shares a report: The National Security Agency maintains a page on its website that outlines its mission statement. But earlier this month, the agency made a discreet change: It removed "honesty" as its top priority. Since at least May 2016, the surveillance agency had featured honesty as the first of four "core values" listed on NSA.gov, alongside "respect for the law," "integrity," and "transparency." The agency vowed on the site to "be truthful with each other." On January 12, however, the NSA removed the mission statement page -- which can still be viewed through the Internet Archive -- and replaced it with a new version. Now, the parts about honesty and the pledge to be truthful have been deleted. The agency's new top value is "commitment to service," which it says means "excellence in the pursuit of our critical mission." Those are not the only striking alterations. In its old core values, the NSA explained that it would strive to be deserving of the "great trust" placed in it by national leaders and American citizens. It said that it would "honor the public's need for openness." But those phrases are now gone; all references to "trust," "honor," and "openness" have disappeared.
The WH and Fox News are going all out on the efforts to besmirch government institutions to protect Trump and his foreign allies and advance their politcal adgenda. It used to be that people believed in the rule of law. Now as is evident from Fox News coverage a higher priority is 1) coercive political power and 2) the greed that motivates it.
Abe Lincoln was right. You can fool some of the people all the time.
The sad part is that so far the only approach the US has taken in countering meddling and cybercrime by authoritarian regimes is to become one instead. This is not going to end well, either for demoracy or the rule of law. However, as the old Judy Collins song used to say "you won't know what you have lost until it is gone".
It's always interesting, when you're deliberately doing everything you can to ignore the facts in front of you (there's no need to unmask names like Kislyak's, because the NSA provides that in clear text for their audience - it's the US citizens associated with political rivals that Rice was gunning for) that your first reaction is to start obsessing about homosexuality. What an odd reaction on your part. I understand that you can't trouble yourself to deal with the facts, because you don't like where those facts point. But what's with your fetish, here? Have you considered getting some help with how to communicate about unrelated matters while keeping your sexual fantasies out of the conversation?
Rice has already testified about why she unmasked those people who turned out to be Trump associates. Before they were unmasked she wouldn't have known who they were, and unmasking isn't the same as publishing their identities. They were unmasked because they met with an important foreign dignitary who had chosen not to notify the American government that he was travelling to New York. The U.S. Government does have a legitimate interest in knowing what a foreign dignitary who is making an unannounced visit is up to. But you don't have to take my word for that, you can take reported words of the Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee:
That's three Republicans, who are in a better position than you to judge the matter, who seem to think their is nothing to your accusations.
Fanatically anti-fanatical