Off-Topic :
Fairfax Underground
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
NSA surveillance played little role in foiling terror plots, experts say
Posted by:
Moe Lies
()
Date: June 12, 2013 03:14PM
NSA surveillance played little role in foiling terror plots, experts say
Obama administration says NSA data helped make arrests in two important cases – but critics say that simply isn't true
Lawyers and intelligence experts with direct knowledge of two intercepted terrorist plots that the Obama administration says confirm the value of the NSA's vast data-mining activities have questioned whether the surveillance sweeps played a significant role, if any, in foiling the attacks.
The defence of the controversial data collection operations, highlighted in a series of Guardian disclosures over the past week, has been led by Dianne Feinstein, chairwoman of the Senate intelligence committee, and her equivalent in the House, Mike Rogers. The two politicians have attempted to justify the NSA's use of vast data sweeps such as Prism and Boundless Informant by pointing to the arrests and convictions of would-be New York subway bomber Najibullah Zazi in 2009 and David Headley, who is serving a 35-year prison sentence for his role in the 2008 Mumbai attacks.
Rogers told ABC's This Week that the NSA's bulk monitoring of phone calls and internet contacts was central to intercepting the plotters. "I can tell you, in the Zazi case in New York, it's exactly the programme that was used," he said.
A similar point was made in anonymous briefings by administration officials to the New York Times and Reuters.
But court documents lodged in the US and UK, as well as interviews with involved parties, suggest that data-mining through Prism and other NSA programmes played a relatively minor role in the interception of the two plots. Conventional surveillance techniques, in both cases including old-fashioned tip-offs from intelligence services in Britain, appear to have initiated the investigations.
In the case of Zazi, an Afghan American who planned to attack the New York subway, the breakthrough appears to have come from Operation Pathway, a British investigation into a suspected terrorism cell in the north-west of England in 2009. That investigation discovered that one of the members of the cell had been in contact with an al-Qaida associate in Pakistan via the email address sana_pakhtana@yahoo.com.
British newspaper reports at the time of Zazi's arrest said that UK intelligence passed on the email address to the US. The same email address, as Buzzfeed has pointed out, was cited in Zazi's 2011 trial as a crucial piece of evidence. Zazi, the court heard, wrote to sana_pakhtana@yahoo.com asking in coded language for the precise quantities to use to make up a bomb.
Eric Jurgenson, an FBI agent involved in investigating Zazi once the link to the Pakistani email address was made, told the court: "My office was in receipt – I was notified, I should say. My office was in receipt of several email messages, email communications. Those email communications, several of them resolved to an individual living in Colorado."
Michael Dowling, a Denver-based attorney who acted as Zazi's defence counsel, said the full picture remained unclear as Zazi pleaded guilty before all details of the investigation were made public. But the lawyer said he was sceptical that mass data sweeps could explain what led law enforcement to Zazi.
"The government says that it does not monitor content of these communications in its data collection. So I find it hard to believe that this would have uncovered Zazi's contacts with a known terrorist in Pakistan," Dowling said.
Further scepticism has been expressed by David Davis, a former British foreign office minister who described the citing of the Zazi case as an example of the merits of data-mining as "misleading" and "an illusion". Davis pointed out that Operation Pathway was prematurely aborted in April 2009 after Bob Quick, then the UK's most senior counter-terrorism police officer, was pictured walking into Downing Street with top secret documents containing details of the operation in full view of cameras.
The collapse of the operation, and arrests of suspects that hurriedly followed, came five months before Zazi was arrested in September 2009. "That was the operation that led to the initial data links to Zazi – they put the clues in the database which gave them the connections," Davis said.
Davis said that the discovery of the sana_pakhtana@yahoo.com email – and in turn the link to Zazi – had been made by traditional investigative work in the UK. He said the clue-driven nature of the inquiry was significant, as it was propelled by detectives operating on the basis of court-issued warrants.
"You can't make this grand sweeping [data collection] stuff subject to warrants. What judge would give you a warrant if you say you want to comb through vast quantities of data?"
Legal documents lodged with a federal court in New York's eastern district shortly after Zazi's arrest show that US counter-intelligence officials had been keeping watch over him under targeted surveillance with the warranted approval of the special intelligence court. During the course of the prosecution, the US served notice that it would be offering evidence "obtained and derived from electronic surveillance and physical search conducted pursuant to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (Fisa)."
Feinstein and Rogers have also pointed to the case of David Headley, who in January was sentenced to 35 years in jail for having made multiple scouting missions to Mumbai ahead of the 2008 terrorist attacks that killed 168 people. Yet the evidence in his case also points towards a British tip-off as the inspiration behind the US interception of him.
In July 2009, British intelligence began tracking Headley, a Pakistani American from Chicago, who was then plotting to attack Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten in retaliation for its publication of cartoons of the prophet Mohammed. Information was passed to the FBI and he was thereafter, until his arrest that October, kept under targeted US surveillance.
An intelligence expert and former CIA operative, who asked to remain anonymous because he had been directly involved in the Headley case, was derisive about the claim that data-mining sweeps by the NSA were key to the investigation. "That's nonsense. It played no role at all in the Headley case. That's not the way it happened at all," he said.
The intelligence expert said that it was a far more ordinary lead that ensnared Headley. British investigators spotted him when he contacted an informant.
The Headley case is a peculiar choice for the administration to highlight as an example of the virtues of data-mining. The fact that the Mumbai attacks occurred, with such devastating effect, in itself suggests that the NSA's secret programmes were limited in their value as he was captured only after the event.
Headley was also subject to a plethora of more conventionally obtained intelligence that questions the central role claimed for the NSA's data sweeps behind his arrest. In a long profile of Headley, the investigative website ProPublica pointed out that he had been an informant working for the Drug Enforcement Administration perhaps as recently as 2005. There are suggestions that he might have then worked in some capacity for the FBI or CIA.
Headley was also, ProPublica found, the subject of several inquiries by agents of the FBI-led Joint Terrorism Task Force. A year before the Mumbai attacks his then wife, Faiza Outalha, reported on him to the US embassy Islamabad, saying he was on a secret mission in India and was a "drug dealer, terrorist and spy".
Obama administration says NSA data helped make arrests in two important cases – but critics say that simply isn't true
Lawyers and intelligence experts with direct knowledge of two intercepted terrorist plots that the Obama administration says confirm the value of the NSA's vast data-mining activities have questioned whether the surveillance sweeps played a significant role, if any, in foiling the attacks.
The defence of the controversial data collection operations, highlighted in a series of Guardian disclosures over the past week, has been led by Dianne Feinstein, chairwoman of the Senate intelligence committee, and her equivalent in the House, Mike Rogers. The two politicians have attempted to justify the NSA's use of vast data sweeps such as Prism and Boundless Informant by pointing to the arrests and convictions of would-be New York subway bomber Najibullah Zazi in 2009 and David Headley, who is serving a 35-year prison sentence for his role in the 2008 Mumbai attacks.
Rogers told ABC's This Week that the NSA's bulk monitoring of phone calls and internet contacts was central to intercepting the plotters. "I can tell you, in the Zazi case in New York, it's exactly the programme that was used," he said.
A similar point was made in anonymous briefings by administration officials to the New York Times and Reuters.
But court documents lodged in the US and UK, as well as interviews with involved parties, suggest that data-mining through Prism and other NSA programmes played a relatively minor role in the interception of the two plots. Conventional surveillance techniques, in both cases including old-fashioned tip-offs from intelligence services in Britain, appear to have initiated the investigations.
In the case of Zazi, an Afghan American who planned to attack the New York subway, the breakthrough appears to have come from Operation Pathway, a British investigation into a suspected terrorism cell in the north-west of England in 2009. That investigation discovered that one of the members of the cell had been in contact with an al-Qaida associate in Pakistan via the email address sana_pakhtana@yahoo.com.
British newspaper reports at the time of Zazi's arrest said that UK intelligence passed on the email address to the US. The same email address, as Buzzfeed has pointed out, was cited in Zazi's 2011 trial as a crucial piece of evidence. Zazi, the court heard, wrote to sana_pakhtana@yahoo.com asking in coded language for the precise quantities to use to make up a bomb.
Eric Jurgenson, an FBI agent involved in investigating Zazi once the link to the Pakistani email address was made, told the court: "My office was in receipt – I was notified, I should say. My office was in receipt of several email messages, email communications. Those email communications, several of them resolved to an individual living in Colorado."
Michael Dowling, a Denver-based attorney who acted as Zazi's defence counsel, said the full picture remained unclear as Zazi pleaded guilty before all details of the investigation were made public. But the lawyer said he was sceptical that mass data sweeps could explain what led law enforcement to Zazi.
"The government says that it does not monitor content of these communications in its data collection. So I find it hard to believe that this would have uncovered Zazi's contacts with a known terrorist in Pakistan," Dowling said.
Further scepticism has been expressed by David Davis, a former British foreign office minister who described the citing of the Zazi case as an example of the merits of data-mining as "misleading" and "an illusion". Davis pointed out that Operation Pathway was prematurely aborted in April 2009 after Bob Quick, then the UK's most senior counter-terrorism police officer, was pictured walking into Downing Street with top secret documents containing details of the operation in full view of cameras.
The collapse of the operation, and arrests of suspects that hurriedly followed, came five months before Zazi was arrested in September 2009. "That was the operation that led to the initial data links to Zazi – they put the clues in the database which gave them the connections," Davis said.
Davis said that the discovery of the sana_pakhtana@yahoo.com email – and in turn the link to Zazi – had been made by traditional investigative work in the UK. He said the clue-driven nature of the inquiry was significant, as it was propelled by detectives operating on the basis of court-issued warrants.
"You can't make this grand sweeping [data collection] stuff subject to warrants. What judge would give you a warrant if you say you want to comb through vast quantities of data?"
Legal documents lodged with a federal court in New York's eastern district shortly after Zazi's arrest show that US counter-intelligence officials had been keeping watch over him under targeted surveillance with the warranted approval of the special intelligence court. During the course of the prosecution, the US served notice that it would be offering evidence "obtained and derived from electronic surveillance and physical search conducted pursuant to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (Fisa)."
Feinstein and Rogers have also pointed to the case of David Headley, who in January was sentenced to 35 years in jail for having made multiple scouting missions to Mumbai ahead of the 2008 terrorist attacks that killed 168 people. Yet the evidence in his case also points towards a British tip-off as the inspiration behind the US interception of him.
In July 2009, British intelligence began tracking Headley, a Pakistani American from Chicago, who was then plotting to attack Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten in retaliation for its publication of cartoons of the prophet Mohammed. Information was passed to the FBI and he was thereafter, until his arrest that October, kept under targeted US surveillance.
An intelligence expert and former CIA operative, who asked to remain anonymous because he had been directly involved in the Headley case, was derisive about the claim that data-mining sweeps by the NSA were key to the investigation. "That's nonsense. It played no role at all in the Headley case. That's not the way it happened at all," he said.
The intelligence expert said that it was a far more ordinary lead that ensnared Headley. British investigators spotted him when he contacted an informant.
The Headley case is a peculiar choice for the administration to highlight as an example of the virtues of data-mining. The fact that the Mumbai attacks occurred, with such devastating effect, in itself suggests that the NSA's secret programmes were limited in their value as he was captured only after the event.
Headley was also subject to a plethora of more conventionally obtained intelligence that questions the central role claimed for the NSA's data sweeps behind his arrest. In a long profile of Headley, the investigative website ProPublica pointed out that he had been an informant working for the Drug Enforcement Administration perhaps as recently as 2005. There are suggestions that he might have then worked in some capacity for the FBI or CIA.
Headley was also, ProPublica found, the subject of several inquiries by agents of the FBI-led Joint Terrorism Task Force. A year before the Mumbai attacks his then wife, Faiza Outalha, reported on him to the US embassy Islamabad, saying he was on a secret mission in India and was a "drug dealer, terrorist and spy".
Re: NSA surveillance played little role in foiling terror plots, experts say
Posted by:
The Real Deal
()
Date: June 12, 2013 04:05PM
The administration and the intelligence community are appealing to the fears of the bed-wetters to dodge the bullet from this scandal.
Re: NSA surveillance played little role in foiling terror plots, experts say
Posted by:
Boogey boogey
()
Date: June 12, 2013 04:22PM
The Real Deal Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The administration and the intelligence community
> are appealing to the fears of the bed-wetters to
> dodge the bullet from this scandal.
Yup. Convince them into giving up privacy willingly with the threat of the boogeyman.
-------------------------------------------------------
> The administration and the intelligence community
> are appealing to the fears of the bed-wetters to
> dodge the bullet from this scandal.
Yup. Convince them into giving up privacy willingly with the threat of the boogeyman.
Re: NSA surveillance played little role in foiling terror plots, experts say
Posted by:
MrMephisto
()
Date: June 12, 2013 04:33PM
Foiling? No. Helping to gather enough evidence to make a case? Probably.
I haven't called any terrorist groups or other public enemies, so what do I care if they look at my incoming and outgoing calls? Show me where they're reading my emails, tapping my phone, or otherwise getting information about me above and beyond what other people have available, and then I'll get good and mad.
Seriously, you trust a bunch of bored office workers at Verizon with your incoming/outgoing call log (and a wealth of other personal information), but the NSA having your call log is somehow evil and sneaky?
The only way to truly protect your privacy is to stay off the grid. If you have a job that doesn't pay cash under the table, the government knows where you live and work. If you have a credit card, your movement can be tracked with that. If you have a cell phone, beeper, or GPS, better get rid of it because they can track your ass down with it if they want to.
Otherwise, welcome to the future. Call me when they're actually listening in on your calls. Or rather, don't. They might be listening, right?
--------------------------------------------------------------
13 4826 0948 82695 25847. Yes.
I haven't called any terrorist groups or other public enemies, so what do I care if they look at my incoming and outgoing calls? Show me where they're reading my emails, tapping my phone, or otherwise getting information about me above and beyond what other people have available, and then I'll get good and mad.
Seriously, you trust a bunch of bored office workers at Verizon with your incoming/outgoing call log (and a wealth of other personal information), but the NSA having your call log is somehow evil and sneaky?
The only way to truly protect your privacy is to stay off the grid. If you have a job that doesn't pay cash under the table, the government knows where you live and work. If you have a credit card, your movement can be tracked with that. If you have a cell phone, beeper, or GPS, better get rid of it because they can track your ass down with it if they want to.
Otherwise, welcome to the future. Call me when they're actually listening in on your calls. Or rather, don't. They might be listening, right?
--------------------------------------------------------------
13 4826 0948 82695 25847. Yes.
Re: NSA surveillance played little role in foiling terror plots, experts say
Posted by:
Wisdom of Mephisto # 42
()
Date: June 12, 2013 04:43PM
MrMephisto Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> blah blah blah
Translation: When rape becomes inevitable, relax and enjoy it.
-------------------------------------------------------
> blah blah blah
Translation: When rape becomes inevitable, relax and enjoy it.
Re: NSA surveillance played little role in foiling terror plots, experts say
Posted by:
MrsMephisto
()
Date: June 12, 2013 04:45PM
MrMephisto Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Foiling? No. Helping to gather enough evidence to
> make a case? Probably.
>
> I haven't called any terrorist groups or other
> public enemies, so what do I care if they look at
> my incoming and outgoing calls? Show me where
> they're reading my emails, tapping my phone, or
> otherwise getting information about me above and
> beyond what other people have available, and then
> I'll get good and mad.
>
> Seriously, you trust a bunch of bored office
> workers at Verizon with your incoming/outgoing
> call log (and a wealth of other personal
> information), but the NSA having your call log is
> somehow evil and sneaky?
>
> The only way to truly protect your privacy is to
> stay off the grid. If you have a job that doesn't
> pay cash under the table, the government knows
> where you live and work. If you have a credit
> card, your movement can be tracked with that. If
> you have a cell phone, beeper, or GPS, better get
> rid of it because they can track your ass down
> with it if they want to.
>
> Otherwise, welcome to the future. Call me when
> they're actually listening in on your calls. Or
> rather, don't. They might be listening, right?
After what's been going on with the IRS and EPA, blind sheep like you still believe that the government is benign and has the public's best interest as their main goal. Verizon can't unleash the power to close down your business or throw you in jail. The federal government can. Sheep like you are part of the problem.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Foiling? No. Helping to gather enough evidence to
> make a case? Probably.
>
> I haven't called any terrorist groups or other
> public enemies, so what do I care if they look at
> my incoming and outgoing calls? Show me where
> they're reading my emails, tapping my phone, or
> otherwise getting information about me above and
> beyond what other people have available, and then
> I'll get good and mad.
>
> Seriously, you trust a bunch of bored office
> workers at Verizon with your incoming/outgoing
> call log (and a wealth of other personal
> information), but the NSA having your call log is
> somehow evil and sneaky?
>
> The only way to truly protect your privacy is to
> stay off the grid. If you have a job that doesn't
> pay cash under the table, the government knows
> where you live and work. If you have a credit
> card, your movement can be tracked with that. If
> you have a cell phone, beeper, or GPS, better get
> rid of it because they can track your ass down
> with it if they want to.
>
> Otherwise, welcome to the future. Call me when
> they're actually listening in on your calls. Or
> rather, don't. They might be listening, right?
After what's been going on with the IRS and EPA, blind sheep like you still believe that the government is benign and has the public's best interest as their main goal. Verizon can't unleash the power to close down your business or throw you in jail. The federal government can. Sheep like you are part of the problem.
Re: NSA surveillance played little role in foiling terror plots, experts say
Posted by:
nice justification
()
Date: June 12, 2013 04:51PM
MrMephisto Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Foiling? No. Helping to gather enough evidence to
> make a case? Probably.
>
> I haven't called any terrorist groups or other
> public enemies, so what do I care if they look at
> my incoming and outgoing calls? Show me where
> they're reading my emails, tapping my phone, or
> otherwise getting information about me above and
> beyond what other people have available, and then
> I'll get good and mad.
>
> Seriously, you trust a bunch of bored office
> workers at Verizon with your incoming/outgoing
> call log (and a wealth of other personal
> information), but the NSA having your call log is
> somehow evil and sneaky?
>
> The only way to truly protect your privacy is to
> stay off the grid. If you have a job that doesn't
> pay cash under the table, the government knows
> where you live and work. If you have a credit
> card, your movement can be tracked with that. If
> you have a cell phone, beeper, or GPS, better get
> rid of it because they can track your ass down
> with it if they want to.
>
> Otherwise, welcome to the future. Call me when
> they're actually listening in on your calls. Or
> rather, don't. They might be listening, right?
You are okay with your dis-empowerment. Cool.
Doesn't mean the rest of are sheeple.
These programs are incompatible with a functioning democracy.
Unless your bills are paid by a security state paycheck, then you're a fucking fool.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Foiling? No. Helping to gather enough evidence to
> make a case? Probably.
>
> I haven't called any terrorist groups or other
> public enemies, so what do I care if they look at
> my incoming and outgoing calls? Show me where
> they're reading my emails, tapping my phone, or
> otherwise getting information about me above and
> beyond what other people have available, and then
> I'll get good and mad.
>
> Seriously, you trust a bunch of bored office
> workers at Verizon with your incoming/outgoing
> call log (and a wealth of other personal
> information), but the NSA having your call log is
> somehow evil and sneaky?
>
> The only way to truly protect your privacy is to
> stay off the grid. If you have a job that doesn't
> pay cash under the table, the government knows
> where you live and work. If you have a credit
> card, your movement can be tracked with that. If
> you have a cell phone, beeper, or GPS, better get
> rid of it because they can track your ass down
> with it if they want to.
>
> Otherwise, welcome to the future. Call me when
> they're actually listening in on your calls. Or
> rather, don't. They might be listening, right?
You are okay with your dis-empowerment. Cool.
Doesn't mean the rest of are sheeple.
These programs are incompatible with a functioning democracy.
Unless your bills are paid by a security state paycheck, then you're a fucking fool.
Re: NSA surveillance played little role in foiling terror plots, experts say
Posted by:
How Far Will You Let Them Go?
()
Date: June 12, 2013 05:03PM
MrMephisto Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Foiling? No. Helping to gather enough evidence to
> make a case? Probably.
>
> I haven't called any terrorist groups or other
> public enemies, so what do I care if they look at
> my incoming and outgoing calls? Show me where
> they're reading my emails, tapping my phone, or
> otherwise getting information about me above and
> beyond what other people have available, and then
> I'll get good and mad.
>
> Seriously, you trust a bunch of bored office
> workers at Verizon with your incoming/outgoing
> call log (and a wealth of other personal
> information), but the NSA having your call log is
> somehow evil and sneaky?
>
> The only way to truly protect your privacy is to
> stay off the grid. If you have a job that doesn't
> pay cash under the table, the government knows
> where you live and work. If you have a credit
> card, your movement can be tracked with that. If
> you have a cell phone, beeper, or GPS, better get
> rid of it because they can track your ass down
> with it if they want to.
>
> Otherwise, welcome to the future. Call me when
> they're actually listening in on your calls. Or
> rather, don't. They might be listening, right?
Why don't you let them put a camera in your bedroom if you have nothing to hide?
If all this other stuff doesn't bother you, where will you draw the line?
You gonna let them finger your wife next time you go thru security at the airport?
Can they fuck you up the ass anytime they like?
After all, they already know everything about you.
Welcome to the (near) future, if people like you keep supporting and/or surrendering everybody else's rights to the government.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Foiling? No. Helping to gather enough evidence to
> make a case? Probably.
>
> I haven't called any terrorist groups or other
> public enemies, so what do I care if they look at
> my incoming and outgoing calls? Show me where
> they're reading my emails, tapping my phone, or
> otherwise getting information about me above and
> beyond what other people have available, and then
> I'll get good and mad.
>
> Seriously, you trust a bunch of bored office
> workers at Verizon with your incoming/outgoing
> call log (and a wealth of other personal
> information), but the NSA having your call log is
> somehow evil and sneaky?
>
> The only way to truly protect your privacy is to
> stay off the grid. If you have a job that doesn't
> pay cash under the table, the government knows
> where you live and work. If you have a credit
> card, your movement can be tracked with that. If
> you have a cell phone, beeper, or GPS, better get
> rid of it because they can track your ass down
> with it if they want to.
>
> Otherwise, welcome to the future. Call me when
> they're actually listening in on your calls. Or
> rather, don't. They might be listening, right?
Why don't you let them put a camera in your bedroom if you have nothing to hide?
If all this other stuff doesn't bother you, where will you draw the line?
You gonna let them finger your wife next time you go thru security at the airport?
Can they fuck you up the ass anytime they like?
After all, they already know everything about you.
Welcome to the (near) future, if people like you keep supporting and/or surrendering everybody else's rights to the government.
Re: NSA surveillance played little role in foiling terror plots, experts say
Posted by:
MrMephisto
()
Date: June 12, 2013 05:10PM
I have a sneaking suspicion that all those posts were by the same person, but I can address them all at once: It is clear that you are against this only because someone you listen to told you to be against it. Otherwise, you would have been able to provide something more than the desperate "sheep" "insult" and pretending I wrote things that I really didn't. Classic uninformed. Anybody who doesn't agree with you, and especially anyone who can explain WHY they disagree with you, is just a "sheep" who just like, doesn't know, man. It's much easier to write off a difficult conversation like that instead of thinking about it.
Snowden is not a hero. He is a traitor. It doesn't matter what his personal beliefs or silly hippie fantasies are, he agreed to take money to be part of the organization he betrayed. He agreed to protect information to serve the public trust, and he betrayed us. Maybe there's no harm done this time, but that only encourages other cowards to break the public trust. Hell, if this coward truly believed that what he was doing was right, why run to China? Why not stay here and work to expose what you think is so wrong, instead of running away?
Both sides have their blinders on, saying it's either right or wrong. There's a huge amount of gray area, and there are thousands of secret, scary operations going on right this second to ensure that we have the freedom to come on the internet and bitch about what a police state we live in.
Gotta go, Obama just showed up at my door to take my guns away.
--------------------------------------------------------------
13 4826 0948 82695 25847. Yes.
Snowden is not a hero. He is a traitor. It doesn't matter what his personal beliefs or silly hippie fantasies are, he agreed to take money to be part of the organization he betrayed. He agreed to protect information to serve the public trust, and he betrayed us. Maybe there's no harm done this time, but that only encourages other cowards to break the public trust. Hell, if this coward truly believed that what he was doing was right, why run to China? Why not stay here and work to expose what you think is so wrong, instead of running away?
Both sides have their blinders on, saying it's either right or wrong. There's a huge amount of gray area, and there are thousands of secret, scary operations going on right this second to ensure that we have the freedom to come on the internet and bitch about what a police state we live in.
Gotta go, Obama just showed up at my door to take my guns away.
--------------------------------------------------------------
13 4826 0948 82695 25847. Yes.
Re: NSA surveillance played little role in foiling terror plots, experts say
Posted by:
tired of libs
()
Date: June 12, 2013 05:17PM
MrMephisto Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have a sneaking suspicion that all those posts
> were by the same person, but I can address them
> all at once: It is clear that you are against this
> only because someone you listen to told you to be
> against it. Otherwise, you would have been able to
> provide something more than the desperate "sheep"
> "insult" and pretending I wrote things that I
> really didn't. Classic uninformed. Anybody who
> doesn't agree with you, and especially anyone who
> can explain WHY they disagree with you, is just a
> "sheep" who just like, doesn't know, man. It's
> much easier to write off a difficult conversation
> like that instead of thinking about it.
>
> Snowden is not a hero. He is a traitor. It doesn't
> matter what his personal beliefs or silly hippie
> fantasies are, he agreed to take money to be part
> of the organization he betrayed. He agreed to
> protect information to serve the public trust, and
> he betrayed us. Maybe there's no harm done this
> time, but that only encourages other cowards to
> break the public trust. Hell, if this coward truly
> believed that what he was doing was right, why run
> to China? Why not stay here and work to expose
> what you think is so wrong, instead of running
> away?
>
> Both sides have their blinders on, saying it's
> either right or wrong. There's a huge amount of
> gray area, and there are thousands of secret,
> scary operations going on right this second to
> ensure that we have the freedom to come on the
> internet and bitch about what a police state we
> live in.
>
> Gotta go, Obama just showed up at my door to take
> my guns away.
Go back to Africa
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have a sneaking suspicion that all those posts
> were by the same person, but I can address them
> all at once: It is clear that you are against this
> only because someone you listen to told you to be
> against it. Otherwise, you would have been able to
> provide something more than the desperate "sheep"
> "insult" and pretending I wrote things that I
> really didn't. Classic uninformed. Anybody who
> doesn't agree with you, and especially anyone who
> can explain WHY they disagree with you, is just a
> "sheep" who just like, doesn't know, man. It's
> much easier to write off a difficult conversation
> like that instead of thinking about it.
>
> Snowden is not a hero. He is a traitor. It doesn't
> matter what his personal beliefs or silly hippie
> fantasies are, he agreed to take money to be part
> of the organization he betrayed. He agreed to
> protect information to serve the public trust, and
> he betrayed us. Maybe there's no harm done this
> time, but that only encourages other cowards to
> break the public trust. Hell, if this coward truly
> believed that what he was doing was right, why run
> to China? Why not stay here and work to expose
> what you think is so wrong, instead of running
> away?
>
> Both sides have their blinders on, saying it's
> either right or wrong. There's a huge amount of
> gray area, and there are thousands of secret,
> scary operations going on right this second to
> ensure that we have the freedom to come on the
> internet and bitch about what a police state we
> live in.
>
> Gotta go, Obama just showed up at my door to take
> my guns away.
Go back to Africa
Re: NSA surveillance played little role in foiling terror plots, experts say
Posted by:
MrMephisto
()
Date: June 12, 2013 05:19PM
tired of libs Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> MrMephisto Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I have a sneaking suspicion that all those
> posts
> > were by the same person, but I can address them
> > all at once: It is clear that you are against
> this
> > only because someone you listen to told you to
> be
> > against it. Otherwise, you would have been able
> to
> > provide something more than the desperate
> "sheep"
> > "insult" and pretending I wrote things that I
> > really didn't. Classic uninformed. Anybody who
> > doesn't agree with you, and especially anyone
> who
> > can explain WHY they disagree with you, is just
> a
> > "sheep" who just like, doesn't know, man. It's
> > much easier to write off a difficult
> conversation
> > like that instead of thinking about it.
> >
> > Snowden is not a hero. He is a traitor. It
> doesn't
> > matter what his personal beliefs or silly
> hippie
> > fantasies are, he agreed to take money to be
> part
> > of the organization he betrayed. He agreed to
> > protect information to serve the public trust,
> and
> > he betrayed us. Maybe there's no harm done this
> > time, but that only encourages other cowards to
> > break the public trust. Hell, if this coward
> truly
> > believed that what he was doing was right, why
> run
> > to China? Why not stay here and work to expose
> > what you think is so wrong, instead of running
> > away?
> >
> > Both sides have their blinders on, saying it's
> > either right or wrong. There's a huge amount of
> > gray area, and there are thousands of secret,
> > scary operations going on right this second to
> > ensure that we have the freedom to come on the
> > internet and bitch about what a police state we
> > live in.
> >
> > Gotta go, Obama just showed up at my door to
> take
> > my guns away.
>
>
> Go back to Africa
--------------------------------------------------------------
13 4826 0948 82695 25847. Yes.
Attachments:
-------------------------------------------------------
> MrMephisto Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I have a sneaking suspicion that all those
> posts
> > were by the same person, but I can address them
> > all at once: It is clear that you are against
> this
> > only because someone you listen to told you to
> be
> > against it. Otherwise, you would have been able
> to
> > provide something more than the desperate
> "sheep"
> > "insult" and pretending I wrote things that I
> > really didn't. Classic uninformed. Anybody who
> > doesn't agree with you, and especially anyone
> who
> > can explain WHY they disagree with you, is just
> a
> > "sheep" who just like, doesn't know, man. It's
> > much easier to write off a difficult
> conversation
> > like that instead of thinking about it.
> >
> > Snowden is not a hero. He is a traitor. It
> doesn't
> > matter what his personal beliefs or silly
> hippie
> > fantasies are, he agreed to take money to be
> part
> > of the organization he betrayed. He agreed to
> > protect information to serve the public trust,
> and
> > he betrayed us. Maybe there's no harm done this
> > time, but that only encourages other cowards to
> > break the public trust. Hell, if this coward
> truly
> > believed that what he was doing was right, why
> run
> > to China? Why not stay here and work to expose
> > what you think is so wrong, instead of running
> > away?
> >
> > Both sides have their blinders on, saying it's
> > either right or wrong. There's a huge amount of
> > gray area, and there are thousands of secret,
> > scary operations going on right this second to
> > ensure that we have the freedom to come on the
> > internet and bitch about what a police state we
> > live in.
> >
> > Gotta go, Obama just showed up at my door to
> take
> > my guns away.
>
>
> Go back to Africa
--------------------------------------------------------------
13 4826 0948 82695 25847. Yes.
Attachments:
Re: NSA surveillance played little role in foiling terror plots, experts say
Posted by:
Mephisto circa 2018
()
Date: June 12, 2013 05:31PM
First they came for our Verizon metadata,
and I didn’t speak out because I didn't give a shit.
Then they came for Snowden, and I didn't speak out
because he's a goddamn hippy traitor.
Then they came for my Facebook status, and I didn’t
speak out because I'm not really that big into Facebook.
Then they fucked me in the ass,
and I liked it.
and I didn’t speak out because I didn't give a shit.
Then they came for Snowden, and I didn't speak out
because he's a goddamn hippy traitor.
Then they came for my Facebook status, and I didn’t
speak out because I'm not really that big into Facebook.
Then they fucked me in the ass,
and I liked it.
Re: NSA surveillance played little role in foiling terror plots, experts say
Posted by:
Big Dog, Little Dick
()
Date: June 12, 2013 05:33PM
MrMephisto Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Snowden is not a hero. He is a traitor. It doesn't
> matter what his personal beliefs or silly hippie
> fantasies are, he agreed to take money to be part
> of the organization he betrayed. He agreed to
> protect information to serve the public trust, and
> he betrayed us. Maybe there's no harm done this
> time, but that only encourages other cowards to
> break the public trust. Hell, if this coward truly
> believed that what he was doing was right, why run
> to China? Why not stay here and work to expose
> what you think is so wrong, instead of running
> away?
Shows how little you know.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Snowden is not a hero. He is a traitor. It doesn't
> matter what his personal beliefs or silly hippie
> fantasies are, he agreed to take money to be part
> of the organization he betrayed. He agreed to
> protect information to serve the public trust, and
> he betrayed us. Maybe there's no harm done this
> time, but that only encourages other cowards to
> break the public trust. Hell, if this coward truly
> believed that what he was doing was right, why run
> to China? Why not stay here and work to expose
> what you think is so wrong, instead of running
> away?
Shows how little you know.
Re: NSA surveillance played little role in foiling terror plots, experts say
Posted by:
ju639
()
Date: June 12, 2013 05:38PM
MrMephisto Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Gotta go, Obama just showed up at my door to take
> my guns away.
It's juvenile dismissive crap like this which lets things like this continue in a gradual erosion of rights.
You can't have the freakin government doing mass data collection like this. You need hard stops against overreach just as a matter of principle. If you don't then it WILL be abused. Just like the old adage of turning up the heat slowly on the frog...
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Gotta go, Obama just showed up at my door to take
> my guns away.
It's juvenile dismissive crap like this which lets things like this continue in a gradual erosion of rights.
You can't have the freakin government doing mass data collection like this. You need hard stops against overreach just as a matter of principle. If you don't then it WILL be abused. Just like the old adage of turning up the heat slowly on the frog...
Re: NSA surveillance played little role in foiling terror plots, experts say
Posted by:
MrMephisto
()
Date: June 12, 2013 05:54PM
ju639 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You can't have the freakin government doing mass
> data collection like this.
I take it you didn't fill out the census, then?
How is the government doing it for security worse than private industry doing the exact same thing for profit? I'd be upset too, if I wasn't voluntarily part of memberships, clubs, groups, and subscriptions that do the exact same thing. How do you think telemarketers get your number? At least the NSA isn't calling me when I'm in the middle of a movie.
The NSA didn't just do internet at Verizon and steal this data; Verizon gave it to them. So it's OK for the people at Verizon to have access to this information because they can't throw you in jail, except when they give it to the people who can throw you in jail.
How many of you super-patriots are going to switch to AT&T or Sprint? Surely they'd never supply detailed records to the government.
--------------------------------------------------------------
13 4826 0948 82695 25847. Yes.
-------------------------------------------------------
> You can't have the freakin government doing mass
> data collection like this.
I take it you didn't fill out the census, then?
How is the government doing it for security worse than private industry doing the exact same thing for profit? I'd be upset too, if I wasn't voluntarily part of memberships, clubs, groups, and subscriptions that do the exact same thing. How do you think telemarketers get your number? At least the NSA isn't calling me when I'm in the middle of a movie.
The NSA didn't just do internet at Verizon and steal this data; Verizon gave it to them. So it's OK for the people at Verizon to have access to this information because they can't throw you in jail, except when they give it to the people who can throw you in jail.
How many of you super-patriots are going to switch to AT&T or Sprint? Surely they'd never supply detailed records to the government.
--------------------------------------------------------------
13 4826 0948 82695 25847. Yes.
Re: NSA surveillance played little role in foiling terror plots, experts say
Posted by:
7P6Wy
()
Date: June 12, 2013 07:29PM
MrMephisto Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ju639 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > You can't have the freakin government doing
> mass
> > data collection like this.
>
> I take it you didn't fill out the census, then?
>
The census is trivial compared to stuff like this.
> How is the government doing it for security worse
> than private industry doing the exact same thing
> for profit? I'd be upset too, if I wasn't
> voluntarily part of memberships, clubs, groups,
> and subscriptions that do the exact same thing.
> How do you think telemarketers get your number? At
> least the NSA isn't calling me when I'm in the
> middle of a movie.
>
> The NSA didn't just do internet at Verizon and
> steal this data; Verizon gave it to them. So it's
> OK for the people at Verizon to have access to
> this information because they can't throw you in
> jail, except when they give it to the people who
> can throw you in jail.
a. Because it's voluntary and disclosed vs involuntary and not disclosed.
b. Because most of such things are limited in scope without the ability to aggregate and cross-compile multiple sources.
c. Because there are limitations on what they can do and what they must disclose and in most cases opportunities to opt out. And there should be more such restrictions as for example being pushed in the EU. There likely would be here too if there wasn't so much money influence involved and pushing against them.
d. Because they can't do much to anyone versus the government and/or individuals and groups within the government.
e. Verizon, et. al, are required to give up data under law and aren't in a position to aggregate multiple sources and store 5 zetabytes of data.
f. I can and do avoid and block as much of that kind of crap as I possibly can where I don't have that ability in the case of the government doing it surreptitiously.
>
> How many of you super-patriots are going to switch
> to AT&T or Sprint? Surely they'd never supply
> detailed records to the government.
What's amazing to me is how some on the right who would be ready to go to war over something like a gun registry, are fine with something like this simply on some ambiguous justification around "terrorism."
Likewise, on the other side, those on the left who trust virtually nothing that the police, military, or government does otherwise are cool with it because they view it as some criticism of Obama when it's him in power and doing it versus Dick Cheney.
-------------------------------------------------------
> ju639 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > You can't have the freakin government doing
> mass
> > data collection like this.
>
> I take it you didn't fill out the census, then?
>
The census is trivial compared to stuff like this.
> How is the government doing it for security worse
> than private industry doing the exact same thing
> for profit? I'd be upset too, if I wasn't
> voluntarily part of memberships, clubs, groups,
> and subscriptions that do the exact same thing.
> How do you think telemarketers get your number? At
> least the NSA isn't calling me when I'm in the
> middle of a movie.
>
> The NSA didn't just do internet at Verizon and
> steal this data; Verizon gave it to them. So it's
> OK for the people at Verizon to have access to
> this information because they can't throw you in
> jail, except when they give it to the people who
> can throw you in jail.
a. Because it's voluntary and disclosed vs involuntary and not disclosed.
b. Because most of such things are limited in scope without the ability to aggregate and cross-compile multiple sources.
c. Because there are limitations on what they can do and what they must disclose and in most cases opportunities to opt out. And there should be more such restrictions as for example being pushed in the EU. There likely would be here too if there wasn't so much money influence involved and pushing against them.
d. Because they can't do much to anyone versus the government and/or individuals and groups within the government.
e. Verizon, et. al, are required to give up data under law and aren't in a position to aggregate multiple sources and store 5 zetabytes of data.
f. I can and do avoid and block as much of that kind of crap as I possibly can where I don't have that ability in the case of the government doing it surreptitiously.
>
> How many of you super-patriots are going to switch
> to AT&T or Sprint? Surely they'd never supply
> detailed records to the government.
What's amazing to me is how some on the right who would be ready to go to war over something like a gun registry, are fine with something like this simply on some ambiguous justification around "terrorism."
Likewise, on the other side, those on the left who trust virtually nothing that the police, military, or government does otherwise are cool with it because they view it as some criticism of Obama when it's him in power and doing it versus Dick Cheney.
Re: NSA surveillance played little role in foiling terror plots, experts say
Posted by:
squidworth
()
Date: June 12, 2013 07:33PM
"The census is trivial compared to stuff like this."
The census is also specifically provided for, and in fact mandated by, the US Constitution.
NSA's shenanigans, not so much.
Apples and oranges, bra.
The census is also specifically provided for, and in fact mandated by, the US Constitution.
NSA's shenanigans, not so much.
Apples and oranges, bra.
Re: NSA surveillance played little role in foiling terror plots, experts say
Posted by:
MrsMephisto
()
Date: June 12, 2013 07:36PM
Mephisto circa 2018 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> First they came for our Verizon metadata,
> and I didn’t speak out because I didn't give a
> shit.
>
> Then they came for Snowden, and I didn't speak
> out
> because he's a goddamn hippy traitor.
>
> Then they came for my Facebook status, and I
> didn’t
> speak out because I'm not really that big into
> Facebook.
>
> Then they fucked me in the ass,
> and I liked it.
Unnecessarily crude, but still +1
-------------------------------------------------------
> First they came for our Verizon metadata,
> and I didn’t speak out because I didn't give a
> shit.
>
> Then they came for Snowden, and I didn't speak
> out
> because he's a goddamn hippy traitor.
>
> Then they came for my Facebook status, and I
> didn’t
> speak out because I'm not really that big into
> Facebook.
>
> Then they fucked me in the ass,
> and I liked it.
Unnecessarily crude, but still +1