'Arrogant' Snowden putting lives at risk, says NSA's deputy spyboss Two days after NSA leaker Edward Snowden addressed the latest TED technology jamboree in robot form, the US intelligence agency has also made an appearance – with deputy director Richard Ledgett dialing in by video link. Ledgett said the NSA's core problem was that it was lousy at PR, rather than that it was invading innocent …
The examples given do not support the original claim that various and sundry "boss hoggs" could access the NSA databases. Indeed, there is no evidence that Edward Snowden was able to do that.
Twelve instances of individual military and civilian agency employees do not constitute a pattern of agency abuse, and a 15 year old article about an even older program suggests, if anything, that the NSA poses a much smaller threat to anyone than the general run of comments asserts.
The documents that Edward Snowden leaked were "official" NSA documents, vetted by several USA and International credible Media - like the NY Times, The Washington Post, The Guardian, The Globe and Mail, Der Spiegel and others.
Therefore any"lies and half truths" were those of NSA, and Richard Ledgett is making himself and his agency look more asinine than it already is.
Rewind to the 1980s or so, and USA had great international goodwill. Fast forward to late 1990s and the wheels started to fall off the bus, Now any goodwill is well and truly shot.
Yes folks, there was once a time when American backpackers in Europe would have a US flag on their backpacks and not the Canadian flag!
If 9/11 had happened in the 1980s, most people in the world would have been outraged. When it happened (2001), far more people could see the opposing point of view. If it happened now, probably most people would consider it nasty, but pretty much "ah well, you had that coming to you".
Now, I am not promoting terrorism or anything, but merely pointing out how far the old Stars and Stripes has slid down the flag pole in the last two decades or so.
A great part of that erosion of goodwill is the way USA arrogantly wades in where it does not belong, including making war for bugger-all reason, spying on everyone and screwing over everyone they can.
When they do this, they increase the hostility towards themselves and thus increase the likelihood of attacks.
Thus, what the NSA does certainly increases the risks the USA faces, particularly now that the USA's international power is fading and it's ability to enforce its bully tactics is decreasing.
The only way out is to start rebuilding the goodwill:
* Start playing nice with the other kids.
* Stop spying on them.
A good starting gesture would be to
* completely disband and purge the NSA.
* hold some public enquiries to find, and prosecute, any criminal acts by NSA.
* bulldoze that monstrous data centre in the desert.
And the UK are is the same situation for pretty much the same reasons.
Only we have the additional problem of being led by idiots who STILL think that 'Great Britain' is still a world power. And of course there are plenty of knuckle-dragging sheeple here who share the same blind patriotic fervour as some of their knuckle-dragging American cousins.
If it weren't for the fact that the UK has nuclear weapons, NO-ONE would pay even the slightest bit of attention to the sabre-rattling coming from our Scumvernment
So as above.
Wind our necks in
Shut the fuck up
Mind our own business
Leave the big boys to play their silly games
"Yes folks, there was once a time when American backpackers in Europe would have a US flag on their backpacks and not the Canadian flag!"
I'm 75% English but I hope that the Scottish vote "yes" in the Autumn so I can get myself a Scottish passport and no longer be ashamed of being British when abroad.
"no longer be ashamed of being British when abroad."
Slightly random, I've been to many places in the world, Middle East, US, Europe and never felt ashamed to be British and never faced any hostility either.
I also hope Scotland votes Yes as well, it will give you the opportunity to loose the chip on your shoulder that you like to polish and froth about.
Charles Manning sez: "When they do this, they increase the hostility towards themselves and thus increase the likelihood of attacks."
Works out perfectly, then. More spying and more 'interventions' abroad mean more hatred against the US and more terrorist threats. More hatred against the US and more terrorist threats mean we need more spying and more 'interventions' abroad. Repeat, as long as you like.
It's kind of beautiful, really... in a monumentally evil, Mephistophelian kind of way.
… For Treason.
Bravado, FUD, propaganda (aka 'PR') and pushing around US citizens (aka your bosses) accomplishes nothing in the effort to hide your crimes. The NSA went rogue. You lost your integrity. You broke your vow to protect and defend the Constitution of the USA.
Go To Jail.
Disband the NSA.
Start again, legally and properly.
Everyone yells "Disband the NSA" until the next terrorist attack occurs, then it's suddenly, "We need security!" As it stands, we can't have it both ways. Internal secrecy means our own government becomes an existential threat. Disband that secrecy, we open ourselves up to existential threats from without (and since we can't please everyone, someone out there's going to desire to totally destroy our civilization and stop at nothing to achieve it).
I thought the fundamental idea of having a free and democratic society is that it does lead to more security and a better world in the long term. This concept was heavily propagated by the US in the time of the cold war and Nazi Germany. Alternatively you can try to gain some extra security today -- just lock away all those political / religious / ethnic troublemakers. But the resulting regimes usually become violently unstable after a while. North Korea is the big exception, China might go either way.
Three words: They were wrong.
Freedom is dual-use. It inherently includes with it the vulnerability to undermine itself. And given human nature, someone will eventually latch onto that vulnerability. Take Oklahoma City. The freedom to purchase diesel fuel and fertilizer and rent a truck (all completely legitimate normally) = the ability to detonate a truck full of homemade ANFO with deadly results. It wouldn't be too much of a stretch to think someone(s) can use those freedoms to come up with an existential threat.
So what'll it be? Accept Big Brother or accept the Big Bang?
So, what are you advocating here? Banning the sale of diesel & fertilizer? Banning truck rental?
Universal Quasi-governmental wire-tapping? Do you want us all living back in the fecking stone-age, because no amount of scumvenmental wire-tapping will prevent the lone, or close-knit group of crazy motherfuckers doing as above.
If our various scumvernments stopped trying to impose 'our way of doing things' on people & cultures that like, and WANT, to do things differently, then the 'organisations' that our scumvernments have whipped you (and the rest of the sheeple) into believing want to destroy your way of life, rape your women, drink the blood of your children (won't somebody think of the CHILDREN!!) or whatever cockamamie idea that's been dreampt up next will be seen as the smoke and mirrors that they are.
Stop watching Fox 'News' (or the BBC). Turn of the fear machine. let others deal with their own problems in their own way unless they ask for help. And above all: shut down the global arms machine.
I'm advocating for going with the serene route and just go on living and realize we're screwed either way. Odds are we won't be able to improve our lot, and even if we can we'll just be staving off the inevitable (which is DTA anarchy resulting in eventual winner dictatorship, the cycle repeats until we don't survive a round). Humanity like anything is going to have a bad apple, and as the adage goes, one ruins everything. It's like thermodynamics: you can't win, you can't break even, you can't leave the game. Might as well just go along for the ride unless you wanna take the easy way out.
PS. I've stopped watching all news, as it's all become too opinionated, even when they "report" news. So this is all my own design, not the result of any news influence.
Those who trade freedom for security will have neither freedom nor security. I live in the USA and want the NSA stripped down and disbanded. They did not protect the Boston Marathon, they do f-all to shield us against the shooters in schools and theatres, or against the completely crazy "tea party" people who are trying to take over the government. Their rationale is "Look at all the tigers we have saved you from!" "There are no tigers roaming here" "Yes, and we have saved you from them all!"
The seemingly endless paraphrase of Benjamin Franklin's observation would carry more weight if, in fact, there were evidence that NSA surveillance activities had resulted in reduction of freedom. Some people might feel inhibited or even fearful, but it is pretty hard to connect the NSA to any government actions like arrest, or worse, that would justify such feelings.
The accusations, here and elsewhere, that NSA failed to prevent the Boston Marathon bombing, or school or theater shootings are spurious. These events appear to have been hatched within the US, and therefore not to have been legal NSA targets. The FBI might have dropped the ball in the Boston case, but it is far from clear that any evidence available ahead of time would have justified an arrest. Unlike NSA employees, FBI agents are armed with weapons and arrest authority. We do not want them arresting people on suspicion that they are planning something bad or based on warnings from foreign police. The events mentioned, tragic as they are, suggest that the US is not a police state.
As for the TEA Party people: they are citizens exercising their constitutional rights under Article I and the first and other amendments to seek office and influence government action as they consider proper. Of course they are trying to take over the government, the same as those now in office, TEA Party, other Republican, Democrat, or Socialist, have done. They have the same right to compete in the political arena as any others. Some might think them crazy, but some others think Democrats are crazy. The notion implicit in this sorry post that they should be suppressed by government action is as anti-American as the worst the NSA stands accused of doing.
Anonymous coward sez: "Everyone yells "Disband the NSA" until the next terrorist attack occurs, then it's suddenly, "We need security!"
On the contrary... a great many people, myself included, are saying loudly and plainly: "Disband the spies, police and military, and by all means, bring on the terrorists!" These mushrooming government agencies are a looming threat over every aspect of our daily lives, whereas the actual danger from terrorists has never been more than vanishingly small.
We need to do as much to protect ourselves from terrorism as we do to protect ourselves from lightning strikes and bathroom accidents. Anything more is a waste of taxpayer dollars, and the thin end of totalitarian government over-reach.
"On the contrary... a great many people, myself included, are saying loudly and plainly: "Disband the spies, police and military, and by all means, bring on the terrorists!"
That is now. In late 2001 the Patriot Act was passed with votes of 357 of the 435 House members (82%) and 98 of 100 Senators (98%) and contemporary polls measured widespread support. Those of us who opposed it either in part or in its entirety were heavily outnumbered and too often silent.
""half-truths and distortions.""
And who were they written to be read by?
Because by Ledgett's description they were either written to suggest the NSA cas capabilities it does not, which sounds like setting up a fraud to milk the US Black budget or does he mean they were written to play down the NSA capabilities, which are in fact more extensive than stated?
Note that the NSA under Shrub didn't need to do PR.
Because they (virtually) believed they were "On a mission from God"
Here's my thought. Can a country operate without any secrets whatsoever? If not, then I don't think it's possible to have a country worthy of trust for the simple reason that as long as a country has to keep a secret, there's no way to know if the secret is justified (for the simple reason that it's a secret).
So IOW, keeping secrets = no trust in the people, but no secrecy = no defense. Pick your poison, we're screwed either way.
but maybe I can interest you in a few million shades of grey.
One might imagine a country with a modest secret service, reasonably secure, democratic and with a very limited number of secrets. Actually, almost all true democracies are such countries and the US used to be the same before they started pumping billions of dollars into black ops.
No, I am not interested in shades of gray because this scale polarizes. IOW, give it enough time and you end up with either black or white..Grays don't stay gray for long.
The thing about polities is that they usually can't stay that way for long. Eventually, internal elements corrupt the system and degenerate the government. I much equate the US at present to the latter days of Rome. All the others, who followed in the US's footsteps to some degree, are simply earlier along that same timeline: IOW, they'll become like the US (and Rome) eventually.
Instead of seeing it as "everything gray will eventually become black and white" why not in reverse? If things truly always moved towards being black and white, then surely human society would've just stagnated in year -10.000. It's exactly because black and white is dangerous that it keeps being broken up into more intricate connections and viewpoints.
Even if things revert to a black and white stage of whatever sort, it can't and wont last - no matter how much those on top want it to (they will probably just ride along with the changes and stay on top anyway).
There's always a new generation coming along and there'll always be some who disagree with how things are, that's how we progress and regress (and congress?). Have some faith in humanity, I mean otherwise what's the fucking point?
If things truly always moved towards being black and white, then surely human society would've just stagnated in year -10.000.
Exactly. Look back 100 years, 200 years. We've come a very long way. Right now, we're on a downward part of the curve, but it's not a vicious circle, it's an upward spiral.
I disagree. I think what we're seeing is a bungee effect, yes, but with each "bounce" more weight (power) is added to the line. I think we're just about at the point where a bounce-back may not be possible because the concentration of power is too great and the extremism so much that mutual destruction is preferred to surrender. Instead, the line will snap and the entire power structure will collapse (if not civilization itself).
Actually, currency can't work without trust. It's trust that allows currency to operate. What good is a bitcoin if no one will accept (= trust) it?
Same with government. We trust them with some power over us in the name of order. Thing is, in this day and age, we're virtually in DTA mode. Without trust, government has no authority. No authority = no government = anarchy.
A year ago everything was dandy in the PR dept at the NSA. An easy job, turn up and simply write "Allegation denied! Nothing to see here!" on everything.
Nowadays they must get up in the morning and it has to be such a struggle to even bother get dressed properly, before heading into work to something so futile as to try to "big up" how great the NSA really is! Ha ha!
"He claimed the agency only slurped the communications of targeted individuals, and said that the vast majority of people who weren't on the target list had nothing to fear from his spies."
This if you look at it from his point of view is a licence to spy on everyone.
Just imagine that the target list is everyone with an internet connection then he is telling the truth, the vast majority of those without access have nothing to fear as they will have at best dumb mobiles that can only text or call.....
"I think there's an amazing arrogance to the idea that [Snowden] knows better than the framers of the Constitution how the government should be designed to work in terms of separation of powers,"
I can't confidently compare the legal expertise of some blokes from 2 centuries ago to Snowden's, but I'm pretty sure he knows more about the sort of surveilance that has only become possible in the last few years than a bunch of revered skeletons.
"Ledgett said that the documents Snowden was responsible for leaking were full of "half-truths and distortions." "
Well, that's one of the things we are complaining about...
"The capabilities [of the NSA] are applied in very discreet, measured, controlled ways," the deputy director said."
'everything' is, of course, a discrete measurement
Source Code Breached: "According to a top secret NSA presentation, NSA workers not only succeeded in accessing the email archive, but also the secret source code of individual Huwaei products .. the Americans were able to read a large share of the email sent by company workers beginning in January 2009, including messages from company CEO Ren Zhengfei and Chairwoman Sun Yafang." link
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
