Discussion for article #224705
Who cares? This entire story is supposed to be about Snowdenās personality. Nothing to see here ā move along now.
ā¦the intercepted messages contained material of considerable intelligence valueā¦
This will, of course, be cited by some as justification for the program. After all, weāre at āwarā with terrorists, right?
The counter-argument is certainly simple enough. If the FBI tapped every phone conversation, opened every letter and package, and read every Internet message, theyād really get a leg up in the āwarā on crime. But we have a term for that: itās called a āpolice state.ā
The Washington Post should answer why anyone should trust them for a second with Edward Snowdenās jump drive, when the NSA themselves were too incompetent to keep it secure.
And Greenwald is a dick, so double-secret nothing-to-see-here.
Banks and corporations track detailed information about me even though Iām an incredibly average citizen. Secret surveillance officers walk around stores all the time to check on what weāre all doing. Cameras are everywhere. I donāt like it, but I also donāt complain. (How does one complain about those cameras everywhere?)
At this point, Iām not as afraid of a āpolice state,ā as I am of being lost in the huge corporation āstateā of this country.
āAt the same time, the intercepted messages contained material of considerable intelligence value, the Post reported, such as information about a secret overseas nuclear project, double-dealing by an ostensible ally, a military calamity that befell an unfriendly power, and the identities of aggressive intruders into U.S. computer networks.ā
But wonāt somebody think about the metadata?!?
āā¦nearly 900 additional email addresses that could be strongly linkedāto U.S. citizens or residents.ā
Thatās it? 900 email addresses that ācould be strongly linkedā to U.S. citizens? Heavens! The very notion of privacy has forever been shattered by a totalitarian government!
Personally, Iām offended that anyone would leak 900 email addresses that ācouldā be linked to U.S. citizens to the Washington Post and other media outlets. Talk about an invasion of privacy, amiright?
People do realize that you can legally purchase a list of 900 email addresses of American citizens (along with their names, mailing addresses, and phone numbers) for about $50 from hundreds of different data brokers around the world, no questions asked. Just google ālist of american email addressesā and find out how. Heck, if youāre savvy enough, you can find these lists for free.
I understand the drama and glamour of wanting to pretend we live under constant threat of surveillance, but seriously, lets at least attempt the very slightest level of perspective here.
Well, technically it was Booz Allen that was too incompetent to keep it secure, but it was the NSA that trusted a for-profit government contractor with apparently low security standards and suspect hiring procedures.
Ah, the impeccable logic of the NSA dead enders :
āI donāt like the guy, therefore I am going to pooh-pooh everything that he and a slew of other journalists have revealedā¦Cuz Obama!ā
How surprisingā¦NSA Fan Wiscojoe sez:
āNo big dealā¦nothing to see hereā
Wow. The first comment on this thread and weāre already resorting to strawmen arguments. Freak out!
Lotta questions on this. The 1200 references to āminimized US presidentā come when people talk about him in intercepted conversations.
ā Barton Gellman (@bartongellman) July 6, 2014
Huh? Iām a NSA āfanā all of sudden? Please. The need to resort to identity politics with this issue is baffling to me. Letās drop the egos and deal with the facts at hand.
Iām definitely a fan of monitoring the type of activity that these programs are meant to monitor as spelled out in this article (and apparently supported by the documents at hand). Iām not a huge fan of āincidental collectionā but as someone with a basic understanding of how the internet works, itās a pretty low priority on my list of things to be worried about. I definitely support reforms that would minimize incidental collection, anonymize data that is incidentally collected, and put a time limit on how long incidentally collected data is stored for.
Perhaps you missed the last one hundred threads on this subject here, and therefore, the irony.
The Obama administration declines to discuss the scale of incidental collection. The NSA, backed by Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr., has asserted that it is unable to make any estimate, even in classified form, of the number of Americans swept in.
Most Transparent administration in history.
In fact, you can see right through it!
Ah, now Iām starting to understand what your real issue is here. Thanks.
You sure sound like an apologist for the NSA to me. TPM is pretty much a hotbed of NSA apology.
LIke this moronic statement:
Drama and glamour? Wanting to pretend? What a crock of shit.
In a fevered and jaded mind-- one is a āfanā of the NSA-- when simply questioning something of an insignificant magnitude.
But thatās the starting-line for you isnāt it?
Degrading anyone who sees it differently from your One True Path.
If you have facts?
If you have viable opinions?
Why go straight to āpounding on the tableā?
jw1
Yes. It is indeed a crock. I find no need to apologize for the NSA. Our government, like every other government our size, has a surveillance/intelligence agency utilized because of national security concerns. Where you see NSA apologists, I see NSA realists. But I suppose itās a matter of perspective. Iām pretty clear on what parts of the NSA I want reformed and what parts of the NSA I think are necessary and what problematic parts of the NSA have more to do with the reality of the internet and digital data. Iām a big picture kind of guy. No apologies for that. And yes, if you feel like you live under constant threat of surveillance, Iām going to question your motives and/or sense of proportionality. I admit I can sometimes demean my own comments with snark (hey, itās the internet). I apologize for that.