The NSA watches you poop.

Tuco · Jun 23, 2013

tad10_sl said:
we know it isn't making us any more secure.

citation needed

BoldW · Jun 23, 2013

tad10_sl said:
The 'we've stopped 50 attacks' line is total fucking bullshit.

Unless you've been a government contractor, you have no clue, man. Senators sitting on the Intelligence committee were never government workers, therefor they have no clue. They've been trying to tell us for a long time about this program and concerns they had over it, and went the right away about it (Which is what Snowden should have done) by not being able to say anything and only throwing out really vague hints that went unheard so that these programs could be expanded even further. Traitors, the whole lot of them.

http://www.wyden.senate.gov/news/pre...d-nsa-programs

Based on the evidence that we have seen, it appears that multiple terrorist plots have been disrupted at least in part because of information obtained under section 702 of FISA. However, it appears that the bulk phone records collection program under section 215 of the USA Patriot Act played little or no role in most of these disruptions. Saying that ?these programs? have disrupted ?dozens of potential terrorist plots? is misleading if the bulk phone records collection program is actually providing little or no unique value.

If the NSA is only reviewing those records that meet a ?reasonable suspicion? standard, then there is no reason it shouldn?t be able to get court orders for the records it actually needs. Making a few hundred of these requests per year would clearly not overwhelm the FISA Court. And the law already allows the government to issue emergency authorizations to get these records quickly in urgent circumstances.

In fact, we have yet to see any evidence that the bulk phone records collection program has provided any otherwise unobtainable intelligence. It may be more convenient for the NSA to collect this data in bulk, rather than directing specific queries to the various phone companies, but in our judgment convenience alone does not justify the collection of the personal information of huge numbers of ordinary Americans if the same or more information can be obtained using less intrusive methods

They just don't know what it's like!!

And in Snowden news, Hong Kong said his extradition papers weren't explicit enough and didn't fully "comply" with Hong Kong law. Snowden boarded a plane for Moscow (with a Wikileaks lawyer) and should be landing there any minute, with different reports of where his final destination is (latest seems to be Venezuala via Cuba).

http://news.yahoo.com/snowden-ticket...094720633.html

I wonder if that car-exploding technology can be used on commercial airplanes yet.

BoldW · Jun 23, 2013

On a slightly more serious tone, There have been reports of lawyers wanting to get their hands on NSA information.

Maybe someone could tell me a bit more about how this would work, especially in a criminal trial. If the NSA has information that could exonerate someone on trial, but due to its classified nature does not comply, what happens then? Is that withholding evidence? Or is it just like, "meh, we could help you not go to jail, but you're going anyway" kind of thing?

http://redtape.nbcnews.com/_news/201...rce-cases?lite

fanaskin · Jun 23, 2013

a_skeleton_03_sl said:
I don't think you understand at all.

I am not "defending" the government in the slightest. I am calling Snowden and Manning before him cowards and they are unaware of what they even have. They release vague information because they live in an age where it's edgy and cool to stick it to the man. They have no knowledge of what is going on. Snowden isn't a whistleblower, he is a disgruntled employee that is now probably shocked he didn't get a hero's welcome from the rest of the world and will be genuinely confused if he is arrested and put on trial. He is of the same ilk as anonymous. Children with too much information and not enough knowledge with what to do with it.

A whistleblower and a hero doesn't flee the country. He unveils what is right and he stands his ground and faces the music.

Oh and if you had worked a day in the government you would know that slideshows like that are shown every day with pie in the sky scenarios and timelines and any such thing of the sort. I am not saying Snowden is downright lying but he definitely isn't telling the whole story. If I was the government and one of my employees did this and it wasn't 100% accurate or even 100% false I would still bring him up on charges. Just because he has charges against him doesn't make him guilty of those charges and doesn't mean that what he is saying is 100% accurate. It means that he is being prosecuted for a crime. This is Law and Order 101, they throw the book at the guy and tell him how bad it is, he admits to the lesser crime that made him an eyewitness to a major crime and then they collar the bad guy.

You're nuts, I'll take incomplete truth over vague lies and bullshit any day of the week, Which is what we have the head of the NSA on record Lying and deliberately misleading the public when asked direct answers like do you record any Americans information, less than a year ago he flat out said NO.we would never know about this stuff without whistle blowersstop trying to pretend the public didn't learn anything from the leaks.

I also find it ironic that in the same tirade that berates Snowden for talking while having incomplete information, you feel entirely free to make up all kinds of things about Snowdens state of mind, motivations, ect these are things you could have no possibility of knowing, when you have incomplete information about that a_skeleton_03 you should keep your mouth shut right?

fanaskin · Jun 23, 2013

Tuco_sl said:
citation needed

senator ron whiden and mark udell who are on the intelligence committee said they haven't seen ANY cases that this program alone prevented a threat,

The two senators released a joint statement today calling on Alexander to be more forthcoming with information about which attacks have supposedly been thwarted by the program.

"We have not yet seen any evidence showing that the NSA's dragnet collection of Americans' phone records has produced any uniquely valuable intelligence. Gen. Alexander's testimony yesterday suggested that the NSA's bulk phone records collection program helped thwart 'dozens' of terrorist attacks, but all of the plots that he mentioned appear to have been identified using other collection methods. The public deserves a clear explanation."

http://www.mediaite.com/online/sens-...rorist-events/

It seems likely that prevented "50" attacks line is crimes they prevented by other means but they happened to have some kind of prism data for, they are lying and talking out of both sides of their mouth.

The amount of conflicting testimony coming out of congress should alarm even a_skeleton_03, if the people on the intelligence commity and the nsa director's speeches don't match then there is a problem, it seems either they are lying systematically or they really are that compartmentalized and fragmented.

let's not forget the straight up lying/misleading congress(America) angle.

and a_skeleton_03 is questioning Snowdens credibility? madness

Dyvim · Jun 23, 2013

BoldW_sl said:
On a slightly more serious tone, There have been reports of lawyers wanting to get their hands on NSA information.

Maybe someone could tell me a bit more about how this would work, especially in a criminal trial. If the NSA has information that could exonerate someone on trial, but due to its classified nature does not comply, what happens then? Is that withholding evidence? Or is it just like, "meh, we could help you not go to jail, but you're going anyway" kind of thing?

http://redtape.nbcnews.com/_news/201...rce-cases?lite

I could be completely wrong since im no lawyer or such, but id think classified infos are not useable evidence in a trial open to public.

fanaskin · Jun 23, 2013

Dyvim_sl said:
I could be completely wrong since im no lawyer or such, but id think classified infos are not useable evidence in a trial open to public.

There was a case I'll have to find it again, A man accused the government of spying on him without a reason, the defense(the gov) accidently left a classified document proving they where spying on him in some kind of brief and the man's attorney got it, the judge ruled that even though they possessed absolute evidence the government was spying on that man and without a good reason, that the document was classified and therefore inadmissible, dismissed the case.

That's part of the legal problem, in order to sue the government for spying you have to prove you as an individual are being spied on, and all those documents are classified.

Tuco · Jun 23, 2013

fanaskin_sl said:
senator ron whiden and mark udell who are on the intelligence committee said they haven't seen ANY cases that this program alone prevented a threat,

thanks.

Torrid · Jun 23, 2013

Tuco_sl said:
citation needed

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013...ng?INTCMP=SRCH

The Guardian_sl said:
Most of those prevention efforts, Alexander said, came from the NSA's monitoring of foreigners' internet communications under a program known as Prism. He conceded that only 10 related to domestic terror plots.

The Guardian_sl said:
...would-be New York subway bomber Najibullah Zazi. That case has been sharply challenged thanks to court records as more attributable to traditional police surveillance.

The Guardian_sl said:
Ouazzani, however, was never convicted of plotting to bomb the stock exchange. Andrew Ames, a Justice Department spokesman, later clarified that he was convicted of "sending funds" to al-Qaida. The other case, Joyce said, involved an American who provided "financial support" to extremists in Somalia.

The Guardian_sl said:
Two members of the Senate intelligence committee, Ron Wyden and Mark Udall, said last week that they had not seen any evidence to show that the "NSA's dragnet collection of Americans' phone records has produced any uniquely valuable intelligence".

Cops could solve more crimes if they could ignore the 4th amendment and enter any home they wanted to at any time; that doesn't mean it's a good idea to repeal it. In a police state, you trade fear of crime and terrorism for fear of the government. I'd rather fear the former.

chaos · Jun 23, 2013

Torrid_sl said:
I double checked that statement before I wrote that. I found it in several articles that did not specifically apply it to whistleblowers. Seems a lot of reporters are 'making a point'. Regardless, even only applying to whistleblowers, it is still abusive and quite indicative of an administration that is hostile to federal employees that leak wrongdoing to the media. Even scarier is the government prosecuting the journalists who receive the leaked documents-- the trend Bush started, and the means that the current administration apparently wants to grab Assange with, even though he isn't even American or was even here when he communicated with Manning.

What you call "whistleblowing" is the unauthorized release of classified information in reality. What Snowden keeps calling "unconstitutional" isn't even illegal in reality. Like I keep saying, he is just a low level analyst. He doesn't have all of the information, he doesn't have the full scope to make the determination, and he isn't qualified to do so even if he did. And the government has systems in place you can turn to if you feel something illegal or unethical is being done. This guy didn't do that though, he went straight to violating the commitment he made to safeguard classified information.

chaos · Jun 23, 2013

The news is saying Snowden is in Moscow now. lawl. I wonder what he imagines life in Russia will be like for him. Should make for some good comedy.

Tuco · Jun 23, 2013

I heard he's hoping to be moved to Venezuela or Iceland.

chaos · Jun 23, 2013

My understanding was the Iceland's government said they didn't want him? Eh, whichever. The fact that he hasn't been snatched up by guo an bu speaks volumes about his worth and knowledge, imo.

a_skeleton_03 · Jun 23, 2013

tad10_sl said:
I understand that you're ready to welcome in the police state with open arms.

If Snowden had stayed here he'd have been locked up and never heard from again, he did us a service, "eveyone" understood back in 1990 that the NSA was using Echelon or wtf and listening in on phone calls but only those between the US and International Countries, as well as various international communications. Nobody was bothered by the intrustion on the 4th Amendment rights of those in the US who were calling Lebanon or Syria or wherever because it was a small minority of the country and we thhought it made us more secure, in hindsight we were wrong on both counts. Now we know the NSA was listening in on everybody and we know it isn't making us any more secure. The 'we've stopped 50 attacks' line is total fucking bullshit.

Sidenote, what was 'vague' about the information released by Snowden? The Verizon order seemed very specific too me, so too the PP listing the companies the NSA was grabbing info from.

His information is out. He could have released it using a free wifi hotspot at the Starbucks closest to the White House and his information would still be out. Hong Kong is because he is an attention seeking whore.

I do not support PRISM in any way. Doesn't make Snowden a hero though.

The slideshow I saw was your run of the mill brief that is vague as can be. With buzzwords like "could" in them. That wasn't information. Now I haven't looked at every document he has "sold" as of yet. I will say that if it doesn't spell it out verbatim in a leaked document without a shadow of a doubt and he makes some claim verbally your first instinct should be to not believe him. You know Snowden is lying when his lips are moving. When he hands you a document you can take the document at what it says with zero interpretation.

You are all taking a dislike and dismissal of Snowden as a hero as some kind of acceptance and support of PRISM. Snowden is a shitbag. He is an oathbreaker and a pussy. He has a rude awakening coming. He is telling you part of the story. Doesn't mean I support PRISM in any way. I do not think it's as big of a deal as half of you people are making it out to be.

chaos · Jun 23, 2013

a_skeleton_03_sl said:
You are all taking a dislike and dismissal of Snowden as a hero as some kind of acceptance and support of PRISM. Snowden is a shitbag. He is an oathbreaker and a pussy. He has a rude awakening coming. He is telling you part of the story. Doesn't mean I support PRISM in any way. I do not think it's as big of a deal as half of you people are making it out to be.

Basically, yeah. I mean, I thought it was a big deal 10 years ago when I was raising hell about the Patriot Act and later about the FISA shit. Now? This shit has been a part of our government for years and years, and it is so quaint to see the same motherfuckers who supported the Patriot Act get all upset at its application years later. Doesn't mean I think PRIZM is a good thing, it is just business as usual at this point.

a_skeleton_03 · Jun 23, 2013

fanaskin_sl said:
You're nuts, I'll take incomplete truth over vague lies and bullshit any day of the week, Which is what we have the head of the NSA on record Lying and deliberately misleading the public when asked direct answers like do you record any Americans information, less than a year ago he flat out said NO.we would never know about this stuff without whistle blowersstop trying to pretend the public didn't learn anything from the leaks.

I also find it ironic that in the same tirade that berates Snowden for talking while having incomplete information, you feel entirely free to make up all kinds of things about Snowdens state of mind, motivations, ect these are things you could have no possibility of knowing, when you have incomplete information about that a_skeleton_03 you should keep your mouth shut right?

Incomplete truth is way worse than vague lies. It lulls you into this false sense of superiority. It makes you think you know what is actually going on because it's so vague you have no idea which parts are true and which are wrong.

Here is your problem fanaskin. This is your entire problem on this forum and I think in life. You believe EVERYTHING that you read. Everything. If I said that I like to warm up coconuts in the microwave and have sex with them you would file that away as fact. I state an obvious opinion on a person and you read it as fact. The problem is you act on information you like. You like what Snowden is spewing and it fits into your conspiracy theories and you jump on it as pure fact. Somebody like chaos or me that has been working in the system a lot longer than he has says half the stuff he says just isn't possible and you dismiss it because it doesn't fit into your idea of what the government is doing. The minute we make "statements" though about his character you take them as us stating facts. You act like we are making an irrefutable stand and that we are acting like we read his psych file. We didn't. We know his type though. You see his type all over the place. You might know them as Anonymous or some other wannabe heroes. They are kids really with half the information and a god complex. They think that their computer skills give them the right to do whatever they want. They fell that they are crusaders with only the agenda of truth behind them. This couldn't be further from the truth.

The only thing stopping you from being one of these wannabe crusader hackers is you couldn't hack your way out of minesweeper or you would be in a basement somewhere convinced that the NSA has your picture up on the wall and they are scouring the internet for you daily and if they could only catch you they would be able to sleep at night. You think you are the nightmare that government agents wake up from. Someone unblinded by facts and truth and with your own truth in mind. You are free from the shackles of common sense and reality. You think outside of the box.

Fanaskin, you are a conspiracy nutbag and a moron.

fanaskin · Jun 23, 2013

chaos_sl said:
Basically, yeah. I mean, I thought it was a big deal 10 years ago when I was raising hell about the Patriot Act and later about the FISA shit. Now? This shit has been a part of our government for years and years, and it is so quaint to see the same motherfuckers who supported the Patriot Act get all upset at its application years later. Doesn't mean I think PRIZM is a good thing, it is just business as usual at this point.

This is why I say when you polarize politics it turns it into sports teams, the patriot act was never supported by a majority of the population at any time of it's introduction, you blame the supporters but they never had a majority, it's the leaders who made this happen and it's the leaders that should take the blame.

http://www.pewresearch.org/2011/02/1...e-patriot-act/

saying it's routine and therefore no jimmies to rustle is absurd 10 years is nothing that's literally a defeatist attitude.

chaos · Jun 23, 2013

Look at those numbers again, do some analysis, and get back to us on what you think they say about support for the Patriot Act.

fanaskin · Jun 23, 2013

nowhere do i see 51% support

chaos · Jun 23, 2013

Is that what you think is required? Like in SimCity, f public dislike for something rises to 51% is triggers the unhappiness module in that region? Look at how many either supported it or just didn't care, you're at about 60% there. Look at reelection rates for politicians who voted for the Patriot Act. Look at the lack of public reaction at the time and even following it. The people are responsible for what their government does. I know you like to think everything is some big conspiracy, that must be comforting divorcing yourself from responsibility for action or even words. But reality is the people could have stopped it then, and didn't. Because no one fucking cared.

Search

The NSA watches you poop.

Tuco

I got Tuco'd!

BoldW

Molten Core Raider

BoldW

Molten Core Raider

fanaskin

Well known agitator

fanaskin

Well known agitator

Dyvim

Bronze Knight of the Realm

fanaskin

Well known agitator

Tuco

I got Tuco'd!

Torrid

Molten Core Raider

chaos

Buzzfeed Editor

chaos

Buzzfeed Editor

Tuco

I got Tuco'd!

chaos

Buzzfeed Editor

a_skeleton_03

chaos

Buzzfeed Editor

a_skeleton_03

fanaskin

Well known agitator

chaos

Buzzfeed Editor

fanaskin

Well known agitator

chaos

Buzzfeed Editor