Former CIA/NSA Head: NSA Is "Infinitely" Weaker As a Result of Snowden's Leaks 572
An anonymous reader writes "The Huffington Post reports, 'Michael Hayden, former director of the National Security Agency, said Sunday that he used to describe leaker Edward Snowden as a "defector," ... "I think there's an English word that describes selling American secrets to another government, and I do think it's treason," Hayden said ... Some members of Congress have also ... accused him of an act of treason. Hayden said his view of Snowden has grown harsher in recent weeks after reports that Snowden is seeking asylum in Germany and Brazil in exchange for assisting their investigations into NSA programs. Hayden said the NSA is "infinitely" weaker as a result of Snowden's leaks. "This is the most serious hemorrhaging of American secrets in the history of American espionage," he said. "What Snowden is revealing ... is the plumbing," he added later. "He's revealing how we acquire this information. It will take years, if not decades, for us to return to the position that we had prior to his disclosures."' — More in the Face the Nation video and transcript, including discussion of the recent legal decisions, and segments with whistleblower Thomas Drake, Snowden legal adviser Jesselyn Radack, and Washington Post reporter Barton Gellman who recently interviewed Snowden."
NSA is infinitely weaker? (Score:5, Informative)
GOOD!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I was thinking the exact same thing; then I realized, its not true, they must have just spelled infinitesimally wrong.
Were that they were infinitely weaker, that would be wonderful.
Re: (Score:3)
Good?
Only for those of us who won't have to pay for it. You'd expect the overpaid sinecurists who lost all this data to be trying to minimise the consequences of their laxity but they're doing the opposite. To the point that it's now an 'infinite' amount of damage caused. One that will, by extension, require an infinite amount of money to fix.
Unless the politicians see through this outrageous bit of self-interested lobbying, and there's no reason to suspect that they will, a whole lot of taxes will shortly
Re:NSA is infinitely weaker? (Score:5, Insightful)
Indeed it's not but I'll take weakened for decades.
The GCHQ and the NSA have been running roughshod over the people for years, it's about time they were brought to account by whatever means it takes.
Can't believe there's even a question as to whether he, chelsea manning or ed snowden did the right thing, it's obvious they did. Governments are supposed to work for/with us, not sit there spying on us, it's like living under bloody chinese surveillance, we just didn't know it.
Re:NSA is infinitely weaker? (Score:5, Insightful)
the extremists have much better odds now with the Snowden leaks
And you know this how, by listening to the NSA defend their vested interest? After claiming that this had stopped lots of terrorist attacks, it came out that it had actually stopped none.
While we're at it, ordinary crime kills a lot more people in this country in terrorism. Why don't we repeal the 4th Amendment (which was written by a bunch of know radicals) and allow law enforcement to search any home they have any reason to suspect of harboring crime.
Re:NSA is infinitely weaker? (Score:5, Insightful)
Odds of . . . well, what? Since the current system has not prevented a single terrier attack so far I'm not sure what "odds" have improved for them. From 0% chance of getting caught they now have a 0% chance? Since it's painfully obvious that the fundies aren't really what the scare-mongers make them out to be and the OMFG WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE rhetoric is doesn't even cause an eye blink among the populace any more I think your whole propaganda campaign is a dud.
Re:NSA is infinitely weaker? (Score:5, Funny)
Odds of . . . well, what? Since the current system has not prevented a single terrier attack so far I'm not sure what "odds" have improved for them.
I think you seriously underestimate the carnage small dogs can cause.
Re:NSA is infinitely weaker? (Score:4, Interesting)
Gambling casinos make an extraordinary amount of money based on a minor advantage in the odds, and the extremists have much better odds now with the Snowden leaks.
You mean... the extemists will make an extraordinary amount of money? Well, so do Goldman Sachs.
(if you wonder what extremists have to do with Goldman Sachs, you are on the right track: it's called critical thinking. That would be the same relation as between extremists and casinoes, be them of the gambling kind or... wait, are there non-gambling casinoes?).
Re:NSA is infinitely weaker? (Score:5, Funny)
Sorry, the Mooslems are a completely non-violent group here in Canada, that campaigns for special under/overpasses so moose can safely cross highways.
Re: (Score:3)
Sorry, the Mooslems are a completely non-violent group here in Canada, that campaigns for special under/overpasses so moose can safely cross highways.
Have you ever stared down the eyes of the moose?
Non-violent my ass.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
To all the terrorists in the world: You are all worthless, pathetic, impotent losers. Whatever cause you're fighting for is equally worthless. I insult your god(s) and or prophet(s), where applicable. Your mother was a hamster, and your father smelt of elderberries! Come at me bro! I dare you!
Now, Mr. Fjord, watch a big fat load of nothing happen to me in response.
Your profile lacks your real name, address, email address, phone number, and employer.
If you care to post those along with an insult to the Prophet Muhummad (PBUH), we'll know you're serious.
Who knows, you might even make the news like Drummer Rigby [cnn.com].
Re:NSA is infinitely weaker? (Score:5, Insightful)
The NSA IS among the "really scary people". If the FSB is tapping my phone calls and internet activities, I don't have to worry about them turning anything over to various law enforcement agencies to have me thrown in jail (doesn't matter what for, there's enough laws to be sure I'm breaking some), I don't have to worry about being put on the "no-fly" list for discussing explosives, I don't have to worry about being blacklisted for jobs for whatever reason. If the NSA is doing the tapping, I do have to worry about all that.
Boohoo (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Boohoo (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't believe a word of the NSA traitors (that's what they are - traitors to the Constitution, thus traitors to the Republic).
I think they are as strong as ever and their powers are growing, that's because while before Snowden they just pretended that they were an actual legal institution, now the courts will proclaim them to be legal! The system is corrupt completely and irreversibly, it will have to be replaced to be made workable again.
The problem is not NSA, the problem is the government that no longer follows the rule of law (the Constitution, the process) the government doesn't have a process anymore, it's based on mobocracy keeping it in power, it's based on propaganda, it's based on cult of personalities, it's based on class warfare talk and thus propaganda and it's based on ability to extort money from the RULED. The problem is that the government is absolutely illegitimate, it is now a system or rulers, the mob and the rest of those who are ruled.
Was it worth fighting against a Constitutional monarchy to end up with an authoritarian mobocracy/socialism/fascism/cronyism/Mafia?
tom cruise monday (Score:3)
I am reminded of
"I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it! I would rather you just said "thank you", and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to!"
and so on..
i have a feeling that nothing really will change, they will just be more secretive until we
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
We were set on this suicidal road to insecurity by a bunch of known radicals and self-admitted traitors 237 years ago. Apparently some people think it's time to rectify that situation.
Re:Boohoo (Score:5, Insightful)
We were caught abusing the rights of the American people and the people's of many other nations.
Obama said recently in an interview that spying in the US was limited by laws in the US. They he added that for the rest of the world, the NSA is not limited by any laws. So I guess that means that the US doesn't care about breaking laws in other countries.
That's a very sour thought, when you chew on the implications of that statement.
Re:Boohoo (Score:5, Insightful)
We were caught abusing the rights of the American people and the people's of many other nations.
Obama said recently in an interview that spying in the US was limited by laws in the US. They he added that for the rest of the world, the NSA is not limited by any laws. So I guess that means that the US doesn't care about breaking laws in other countries.
That's a very sour thought, when you chew on the implications of that statement.
What that means to me is that the President is saying that is okay for other countries to ignore USA laws. Like copyright and DMCA.
Re: (Score:3)
So I guess that means that the US doesn't care about breaking laws in other countries.
Why should it be? Every government is only responsible for enforcing laws of its own country. US is bound by treaties it signed, but internal laws of other countries? I should hope not. Why should we be bound by laws over which we have no control?
Re: (Score:3)
So how are they supposed to do their mission of "Global Cryptologic Dominance through Responsive Presence and Network Advantage" if they're only on US soil?
http://www.nsa.gov/about/values/index.shtml [nsa.gov]
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Boohoo (Score:4, Insightful)
You know, if there was any reasonable evidence to suggest that NSA, CIA, or DHS practices had prevented any attacks, you might have a good point. What evidence there is seems to suggest, however, that "Intelligence" actions have made the world less pleasant for most people, including most people in the US.
The quotes around "intelligence" allude to the fact there are many actions taken by our government's intelligence arms that have little to do with gathering or understanding information. Instead, many of the actions are about maintaining secrecy while doing their best to shape the world.
As a US citizen, I do want the world shaped to my advantage. But according to my morals and observations, my best advantage is served when neighbors respect and appreciate me, not when they fear me.
Re:Boohoo (Score:5, Informative)
Are you saying that the US becoming the world's police and forcing it on the world makes other people in other countries pissed off at us?
That's unpossible.
Also, that would cost the Americans trillions of dollars.
Re: (Score:3)
Pretty sure your sarcasm recognition program is borked.
Re:Boohoo (Score:5, Insightful)
They're inalienable rights. If you believe in them, everyone has them. They may not be protected by the constitution for foreigners or whatever but that doesn't mean they don't have them.
If you don't believe in them, then you don't believe in them for anybody.
Re:Boohoo (Score:5, Interesting)
I cannot and do not care about the citizens of other countries.
That's in one sentence the problem the rest of the world has with the US. By and large you only think of your own selfish needs and screw anyone else. A large majority of the US population doesn't even feel the need to explore what's outside their own little bubble and will live and die without ever crossing a border unless ordered by a general. Believe it or not but the rest of the world thinks that is a scary situation.
Let's take his word for it... (Score:3, Insightful)
...and celebrate the long-term crippling of an evil agency.
Let's also lament the fact that Snowden won't be able to return to the country he helped so much.
Re: (Score:3)
Michael Hayden is a traitor. (Score:5, Insightful)
Unfortunately so is most of the government and the courts.
Hayden has the definition of treason wrong! (Score:5, Insightful)
Treason is working against one's country. So the NSA has been the treasonous one.
So? (Score:5, Insightful)
Still waiting for the first shred of proof that the NSA's dragnet methods do any good whatsoever. Until then: nothing of value was lost.
Re:So? (Score:5, Insightful)
It wouldn't even matter if such proof existed. The means do not always justify the ends.
Treason huh? (Score:5, Insightful)
That's funny, I consider "treating every citizen of your country as an enemy and a criminal" as treason, Mr. Hayden.
Re:Treason huh? (Score:5, Informative)
School kids in the US used to be taught that a precise definition of treason was one of most important things that was included in the, now deprecated, US Constitution. It defined treason as: "Allegiance to a foreign country". This was because the British rulers would slap a charge on just about anyone in the colonies they didn't like.
Snowden has always claimed that he was not spying for Russia, nor Brazil, nor Germany, etc. He said he did it for the US.
I think there's an English word that describes . (Score:3, Insightful)
... illegal and un-Constitutional activity and I do think it is "criminal" and "un-American" respectively.
my thoughts (Score:5, Insightful)
Now as for doing damage that is in regards to other countries, I think the way snowden went about things was actually the best way he could have given the circumstances. He did not just dump the files, unredacted for the entire world to see and learn from. The articles and information that up until this point been released have been screened pretty well to protect numerous secrets.
From my point of view yes Id love to see all the data, unredacted but I underrstand that would have been a disaster for a number of reasons, one of those reasons being the concern of the people who are anti snowden, they are making the argument as if the entire treasure was dumped. but it wasnt so their argument doesnt hold water. The other reason, and the oneI am more concerned with is that if he dumped it all at once, it would be much easier for our no attention span having population to forget about it and move on to the new shiny of the day, and all of that information would be for nothing.
Re:my thoughts (Score:5, Insightful)
As far as treason is concerned, in the US that is a very narrow legal term defined by our constitution. That any high level government official would throw it around I think speaks to the lack of competency of that official. Treason is declaring war, giving aid and comfort or aligning with an enemy. Diplomatically, the US has few nation states that it claims as enemies. In fact we have a diplomatic term for them, 'rogue states', so we do not have to use the term enemy. In the current climate treason is a high bar, otherwise we would have some Generals who have been recently executed, for instance those that have somewhat decreased the ability of the navy in some parts of the world by selling secrets to foreign agents.
In the US the governement should not function under an excess of secrecy. People like Snowden are part of that. If he is convicted of anything, the next person who wants to report an abuse of power, for instance the FEMA concentration camps being built to imprison dissidents against the coming UN World Governemnt, will be too afraid to come forward. This is clearly not in the peoples interest.
Re:my thoughts (Score:5, Informative)
The current legal interpretation simply violate the black letter law. They violate the clear intent. Moreover they violate the precedents from earlier generations. Moreover they were conducted by secret courts which the constitution specifically forbids.
There is a deep fundamental problem here with our system that things have gotten so far out of control. But that's the problem.
no shit. (Score:3)
i mean really...what else is this guy gonna say?
Infinintely weaker? (Score:2)
Chain of Command (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Chain of Command (Score:5, Insightful)
I believe this is a relevant quote from Jayne Cobb/Firefly
"You know what the chain of command is? It's the chain I go get and beat you with until you understand who's in ruttin' command here."
Cry wolf... (Score:5, Interesting)
"This is the most serious haemorrhaging of American secrets in the history of American espionage," he said. "What Snowden is revealing ... is the plumbing,"
Worse than when Soviet intelligence penetrated the Manhattan project at every level that mattered thus enabling Stalin to take a multi year shortcut to building his own bomb? I mean let's not over dramatise this, the ability to steal airplane sales from Airbus and hand them to Boeing, to steal IP from foreign companies and donate them to US competitors, blackmail foreign politicians, etc..., may be important but an A-bomb can vaporise a city along with millions of it's inhabitants.
Methods, not intel (Score:5, Insightful)
Luckily for the NSA, the guardian hasn't said anything about specific operations or people involved. The releases have been about methods and reach, which aren't the same. The only surprises there are that the NSA was more active than most people thought.
There's nothing in there that's mind-glowingly unbelievable, like the NSA hooked up some kind of transmitter to an eyeball and has been using that realtime video feed to monitor meetings.
Of course, there are a few more million documents, but I'm sure the really juicy ones are being withheld.
NSA abusing power (Score:5, Insightful)
That's the point, sir... (Score:3)
"It will take years, if not decades, for us to return to the position that we had prior to his disclosures."
Yes, and the hope is that the US will have a very public conversation about whether that position is something we want to allow you to return to in the meantime.
Re: (Score:3)
when was the last time we had a 'public conversation' about public policy in the US? was there EVER a time? I honestly ask.
we don't rule by democracy. its plutocracy and other 'cracies' but it most definitely is NOT the will of any large bunch of people.
it would be great if we could have this 'national conversations' about things that pop up from time to time. we have the mans for communications at the largest scale. we can take instant votes and poll for a national pulse on any issue we want.
we don't
Treason? Not if illegal behavior is revealed (Score:4, Informative)
"I think there's an English word that describes selling American secrets to another government, and I do think it's treason," Hayden said.
Well, not if the revelations are about illegal - and especially unconstitutional - behavior.
Re:Treason? Not if illegal behavior is revealed (Score:4, Informative)
"I think there's an English word that describes selling American secrets to another government, and I do think it's treason," Hayden said.
Well, not if the revelations are about illegal - and especially unconstitutional - behavior.
Citation required on the aspect of treason which requires it to be legal and constitutional.
Article 3 of the US Constitution defines treason as: "levying War against [the United States], or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort."
I would say leaking how the US gov't is spying or collecting information does give aid and comfort to our enemies.
Re:Treason? Not if illegal behavior is revealed (Score:4, Insightful)
So the American public are the enemy of the state now?
Re: (Score:3)
You are right, it does. But one could also say that merely voicing one's opinion against a war "gives comfort to our enemies". Thus, the issue is not "black and white" and there must be a matter of degree as well as consideration of concomitant circumstances.
In my opinion, it all comes down to the level of risk: If we were in an actual war, with a true existential threat and bombs falling on our cities every day, that would be one thing, and it would be acceptable for the government to use any tool at its d
Huh? (Score:3)
Re:Huh? (Score:4, Insightful)
this is what the republicans are all pissed off about. the gave them away for free, he didn't sell anything.
clearly, he's a socialist commie pinko bastard.
What we don't see (Score:5, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:3)
Hyperbole (Score:3)
"Infinitely weaker' would mean powerless.
IF the NSA were powerless then it should be dissolved. Since No-one in the NSA is saying THAT should happen, they must think they still have a lot of power.
I don't doubt the NSA's spying effectiveness has been diminished, but I think the implication they are impotent is a lie.
Hayden sounds scared (Score:4, Insightful)
Sounds to me like Hayden's just afraid that he'd be subject to arrest and prosecution if he visits wherever Snowden lands. If he'd only done nothing wrong, he'd have had nothing to hide, and nothing to fear punishment for if caught. Perhaps he shoulda thought of that sooner. Sure, someone else would have done the job if he'd quit instead of following orders, but at least he'd be guiltless (or less guilty). There's a certain irony that Hayden could be a criminal in a land where Snowden could be free -- although I doubt either one will happen.
I wish I could believe him... (Score:4, Insightful)
At this point, I think we'd be better off if the NSA's efficacy were reduced to zero (infinitely weaker: 1/x -> 0). Then we could rebuild it from the ground up with proper political, legal, and operational controls.
In fact, I suspect that the NSA retains most--if not all--of its operational capabilities.
The NSA doesn't face any significant legal restrictions. The law allows them to do most of what they want, and they just do the rest anyway, secure in the knowledge that the courts won't(?) can't(?) shut them down.
The NSA does have a political problem right now. It's not much of a political problem: most of the political establishment wants them to keep doing what they are doing. They wouldn't have any political problem at all if their P.R. weren't so inept. Hayden yammering about "defectors" and "treason" and "infinite weakness" is just more P.R.
Ben said it best... (Score:4, Informative)
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
– Benjamin Franklin, 1759
Statement Indicates Lack of Contrition by All (Score:5, Insightful)
" It will take years, if not decades, for us to return to the position that we had prior to his disclosures."
First, if someone (NSA) breaks the laws of the country and gets caught, wouldn't the expectation be that they stop doing that?
This statement indicates that the NSA doesn't get it. The expectation is that they will continue with the surveillance
state as planned.
Second to that, no one from the government has actually taken this statement to task. This indicates
that it will be business as usual for the NSA and CIA no matter what the laws of the land are.
Finally, the lack of actual caring from all quarters about this would indicate that all the elected representatives
in government are on board, no matter what their bobbing heads say on T.V. . Apparently the law doesn't apply to employees
of the state since no one fom the NSA has been arrested or fired.
He is a defector (Score:3)
> "he used to describe leaker Edward Snowden as a "defector""
He is a defector. Away from the rogue near-nation of the NSA and toward the United States' Constitution.
Michael Hayden is the traitor (Score:3, Funny)
The sooner he is swinging from the end of a rope until he is 'dead dead dead' the better off America and the rest of the world will be. Just don't hold your breath.
Snowden is hero and villan, brave and cowardly (Score:4, Interesting)
Snowden is a hero for revealing secrets that need revealing. He is a villain for revealing more than necessary. He is brave for essentially throwing his life away. He is a coward for not being willing to accept all of the legal consequences for his actions.*
With a treasure trove of tell-alls as big as Snowden's allegedly is, I doubt he's had the time to sort out the things our government is doing that are generally likely to be considered by Americans and American allies as immoral or against our own Constitution from those that aren't.
There is no doubt that American owes Snowden a debt of gratitude for shining light on activities which are likely to have at least 4 of 9 Supreme Court justices ruling them unconstitutional, should a relevant case ever reach their docket, as well as many other activities which, while clearly constitutional, are generally regarded as things a civilized government simply should not do, at least not outside of times of war, invasion, or rebellion.
However, the odds are high that not all of the secrets he leaked are those kinds of secrets.
To the extent that Snowden is leaking secrets of things that Americans would NOT generally consider immoral or unconstitutional AND, (for things that affect other countries or their citizens) things which those other countries not only find immoral but which they themselves do not do, Snowden should've kept his mouth shut.
Perhaps the United States Government should take a page from the Doctor Who television episode "Tooth and Claw" [wikia.com]** and give Snowden a medal for releasing the secrets that show American was acting immorally and/or unconstitutionally, then charge him with treason for releasing secrets whose release expose anything that needed the disinfecting light of sunshine cast upon it. Maybe they will let him wear his medal and write his (classified, until Washington says otherwise) memoirs while he serves his time in Club Fed???
*The hallmark of an honorable person engaged in civil disobedience (or insurrection, treason, etc.) is their willingness to accept the full legal consequences to themselves for any actions they take on behalf of "the people."
**In the episode, Queen Victoria knights The Doctor and his companion then banishes them both. This episode is also part of the back-story for the spin-off series Torchwood.
Re:Snowden is hero and villan, brave and cowardly (Score:4, Informative)
legal consequences != justice
Why should being honourable mean martyring youself unnecessarily to a broken legal system? The law is an ass.
Espionage (Score:3)
When Snowden first started leaking he was, as is usually for the Obama administration, grossly overcharged. Instead of considering him a whistle blower or hitting him with minor charges regarding classified information the administration went for espionage. Espionage is a capital crime. They also threatened people to get him back.It is the USA that moved a whistle blower to a traitor.
If these secrets are really that damaging than Snowden should be given full immunity for past acts and the right to testify to congress behind closed doors. Otherwise all this "traitor" stuff is just more of trying to discredit him and distract from the conversation, the same as when they were mocking his girlfriend in the beginning.
I'm sorry but President Obama campaigned on shutting down the domestic telephone surveillance program under Bush. Instead he expanded it. He argued there was congressional oversight even while congress couldn't get documents and thus couldn't exercise oversight. I like Obama, I voted for him, I'd vote for him again. But he's just dead wrong on his war on leakers. We live in a democracy and we should not be engaging in intelligence activities not specifically authorized by Congress. It is simply too dangerous to the democracy to have a quasi military branch of government accountable only to the President.
USA vs. Rest-of-the-World (Score:3)
It seems to me that USA has a holier-than-thou attitude where anything in USA's interest is allowed and anything against USA's interests is illegal. If Snowden (USA) shares intelligence information with The Guardian (UK), it is illegal; if NSA (USA) shares intelligence information with GCHQ (UK) it is perfectly legal
Lastly, more as an example of the attitude of the USA government than because it has anything directly to do with Snowden et al: If somebody creates a website that is perfectly legal in their home country (like creating a gambling site) but illegal in USA, that person cannot enter USA or any of its territories without the risk of arrest, whereas if somebody from USA creates a website that is perfectly legal in their home country (like a website advertising prescription drugs) but illegal in many other countries, that would not normally have any impact on their travel in those countries.
Why are you producing words? (Score:3)
No one on earth trusts a word you say. Every single person remotely connected to human civilization has heard about what you've done. You have violated your own country's highest laws, violated the laws of countries around the world, and have spent enough money doing so that the USA could have supplied free healthcare to a sizable portion of its population.
Why would you ever speak to the media under circumstances like this? You know no one is going to take you seriously. You know no one is going to believe anything you say, no matter what you say. You cannot even really supply evidence at this point because you have violated trust at so deep a level, and gone to such extremes to do it, that no one will believe the evidence is real. All you accomplish by speaking is to further antognoize and enflame nearly the entire population of your country (and the world?). Is there anyone with half a brain working at this organization to do PR strategy?
The only reason I am not leaving the country in terror over the NSA is that they appear staggeringly incompetent at everything they do. Perhaps this is their strategy...?
Re:LIAR (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not sure that this isn't true.
The question is whether there's anything wrong with that.
Were the NSA meant to be doing the things that they're doing? To some degree, yes. But I'm also pretty sure they've overstepped what they're allowed to do.
The "treason" comments are pretty far off. Someone who's committing an act of treason is doing it to benefit themselves or another country. Seeing as he had to flee his life in the US and is between countries, risking imprisonment if he ever comes back, aside from the fame he's accrued, I'm not sure how this is to his benefit.
Re:LIAR (Score:5, Insightful)
He made a *huge* sacrifice for *our* benefit, and I hope he eventually gets recognized for it.
Re:LIAR (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm an American, and I consider him to be a hero.
But then, I use the word 'our' to be inclusive of humankind, not some subsection thereof.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm not sure why this is modded as a troll. I wish more people would think of the future for humans in general. We'd have fewer problems with pollution, global warming, abusive regimes, etc.
Re:LIAR (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Hero (Score:5, Insightful)
Nothing is so black and white. He may have revealed some things that will help Americans understand what policy changes need to be made, but he's also revealing information about operations the NSA is supposed to be doing, and now there's talk of him helping foreign governments in exchange for asylum. I'd say that makes him a naive idealist, at best.
Re:Hero (Score:5, Insightful)
So far, there's no evidence that the NSA was doing anything of value. Sure, in theory they have a mission which might possibly be valuable were it focused the right way, maybe. Maybe. But half their mission - making info security better for Americans - is now permanently destroyed. No one in crypto circles will ever trust the NSA again: they burned that bridge and lost their ability to give back to the public sector.
So all that's left to the NSA is SIGINT, and that's have proven worthless for asymmetric threats. Yes, it would be good to have SIGINT the next time a major nation goes to war, but at this point I'd rather it wasn't the NSA doing that. Let the NSA die, and the legitimate SIGINT role can pass on to military intelligence or some other group with no motivation to spy on US citizens, or steal secrets from foreign companies to share with US companies.
Re: (Score:3)
So far, there's no evidence that the NSA was doing anything of value.
I'm all for an independent investigation into whether or not the NSA has corrupted the judicial branch with a Kompromat database, but I think you do the nation a disservice with that kind of easily refutable hyperbole. In all likelyhood, the worst abuses were successfully compartmentalized away from many NSA employees that were reasonably doing good jobs in defense of their country, and perhaps even with the best interests of the world at heart.
Sure, in theory they have a mission which might possibly be valuable were it focused the right way, maybe. Maybe. But half their mission - making info security better for Americans - is now permanently destroyed. No one in crypto circles will ever trust the NSA again: they burned that bridge and lost their ability to give back to the public sector.
Again, you are going too far in your argument. First, people
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Wait, you want us to believe the NSA propaganda *AFTER* Snowden's release?
LOLWTF
Re:Hero (Score:5, Insightful)
and now there's talk of him helping foreign governments in exchange for asylum.
There's "talk", from the NSA itself. How very reliable.
And the talk is about him helping Germany. You know, one of your closest allies? Maybe not pissing off your allies should have been a little bit higher on the list of priorities, and this might not have been an issue right now?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's increasingly clear that Snowden is being "handled" though. We shouldn't overlook the fact that he is a prime target for exploitation, by the Russians, by whoever ends up with him. If he does indeed go to Germany and help them defeat NSA spying in that country, well then the treason label fits.
I don't have any problem with Snowden revealing mass surveillance on American citizens to American citizens, but spying on foreign governments is what the NSA is supposed to do. Yes, even our allies, and yes, even
Re:LIAR (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
I don't disagree. I'm merely saying Snowden has gone beyond his alleged duty to the American people in revealing unconstitutional, broad warrantless domestic spying. I'm glad he's leaked that information, and I hope things are changed.
But everything else he's up to, talking about spying on Merkel's phone calls and the like, that does nothing but hurt US interests. I'm not talking about the Federal Government's interests, but the interests of all Americans.
Re: (Score:3)
But everything else he's up to, talking about spying on Merkel's phone calls and the like, that does nothing but hurt US interests.
I would counter that by saying that tapping the phones of our closest allies hurts US interests and that complaining about the guy who let it be known is just shooting the messenger.
The American public (at least the cross section I work with) generally think this has gone too far. While we fully support analysts doing intelligence gathering on allies, we feel it can be done suff
Re:LIAR (Score:5, Insightful)
Well then Hayden et all should have considered that before they decided to shit where they eat!
It is nothing more or less than the NSA's decision to act unconstitutionally that caused this.
Re:LIAR (Score:5, Insightful)
don't have any problem with Snowden revealing mass surveillance on American citizens to American citizens, but spying on foreign governments is what the NSA is supposed to do. Yes, even our allies, and yes, even for economic reasons (most spying is economic in nature, and every ally spies on every ally).
Spying on your allies is a way to make them no longer your allies. Its as likely to drive them into other camps as it is to keep them your allies. Brazil is increasingly becoming disaffected with the US. How many more Venezuela's do we need in South America?
Spying on Germany and Brazil heads of state is pointless excess.
Your assertion that most spying is economic in nature is disingenuous.
Economic spying is useless for government. Most industrial spying may be economic in nature, but it is not performed by government agents. but rather by private interests. (Unless of course you accept the Chinese government's model of state sponsored industrial espionage as a legitimate model for the US to follow).
Who should receive the putative fruits of economic spying by the government? Private companies? Which ones? In exchange for what? Paid to who? How has that been working out for us?
If Snowden is being handled... (Score:3, Insightful)
It is because the United States is both too arrogant, and too heinous. When this came out and we had proof the NSA was acting beyond their capacity and had blatantly lied both to the general Congress and the Security Committee (which is authorized to hear such things). The first thing that should of been done was to have the Senate grant Snowden immunity, bring him back to the U.S. and address the issue.
Having done so would have limited any release of material, access of foreign nations, etc.
But everytime
Re: (Score:3)
I'm not sure that this isn't true.
The question is whether there's anything wrong with that.
Were the NSA meant to be doing the things that they're doing? To some degree, yes. But I'm also pretty sure they've overstepped what they're allowed to do.
The "treason" comments are pretty far off. Someone who's committing an act of treason is doing it to benefit themselves or another country. Seeing as he had to flee his life in the US and is between countries, risking imprisonment if he ever comes back, aside from the fame he's accrued, I'm not sure how this is to his benefit.
treason [tree-zuhn] noun
1.the offense of acting to overthrow one's government or to harm or kill its sovereign.
2.a violation of allegiance to one's sovereign or to one's state.
3.the betrayal of a trust or confidence; breach of faith; treachery.
Looks like it fits the definition of treason to me.
Re: (Score:3)
I think a legal definition of treason is what people are talking about.
Re:LIAR (Score:5, Insightful)
I.e., what every NSA official except Snowden has either committed or abetted, because allegiance to the United States means allegiance to its Constitution and its people, not allegiance to the bureaucracy, the President, or Congress.
Re: (Score:3)
Does it matter that Brazil and Germany aren't enemies of the U.S.? Also, he's being forced into that position since it's literally his only chance of not being tortured in U.S. prisons. I give him a pass for that.
Re:LIAR (Score:5, Informative)
He's revealing how we unconstitutionally acquire this information.
Fixed that for him.
Re: (Score:3)
The metadata program? So far every court case that has reached final adjudication has said its Constitutional.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." -- Daniel Patrick Moynihan
Re:LIAR (Score:5, Insightful)
If they are infinitely weaker, then by the math of the infinite, they must have been infinitely powerful which is not what they should be. And since they are STILL doing the things they have been doing with no indication that they have stopped or slowed down in any way, they must STILL be infinitely powewrful.
Where an organization like that exists, we are all in danger.
Re:It would be nice (Score:5, Interesting)
If he had been "selling American secrets to another government", as the idiot Hayden said, and if it had been an enemy government, then it would be treason. Of course, that's not what he did at all - he made the information public. But Hayden's "let's mischaracterize it a bit" is a typical propaganda techniques, and will probably help convince people who are ignorant of the facts.
BTW, in this day and age, how is it determined what's an enemy government? In the bad old days of the Cold War, it was clear to everyone that the USSR was an enemy. How about China though? They're not an enemy, and I hope they never become one, but we all know it's a concern. Will we, for example, convict GE execs for giving them jet engine technology if it's ever used to attack our forces?
Re:It would be nice (Score:4, Insightful)
To people like Hayden "the public" **is** the enemy. They're actively at war against them.
Re:Infinitely weaker... (Score:5, Insightful)
Before the leaks, they could say "it stops the turrurists", but after the leaks we know that it's stopped none (Boston is a prime example). Any half serious terrorist knows that the internet is heavily monitored and communicates covertly; now that it's public knowledge, the "but the turrurists will know our abilities" defense no longer carries weight. They can't justify using their overreaching surveillance apparatus against the general population of the world anymore. It's their defense to continue Orwellian surveillance that is infinitely weaker, nothing else has changed.
Re:The game is over... hopefully. (Score:5, Insightful)
Nothing bad could result from a crippled intelligence system, could it?
Sure. Bad things could happen. Hayden, and others -- including US Presidents and members of Congress -- should have thought of that before putting the system in jeopardy by committing illegal acts that might result in them getting caught when someone finally blew the whistle.
If I robbed a bank, got caught, tried and imprisoned, my family would suffer. But that suffering would be the result of my bad decision, not the legal system that frowns on robbery, the police tracking me down and catching me, and the judge and jury who convict and incarcerate me.
Re: (Score:3)
Let us set the wayback machine to 1929.
"Gentlemen do not read each others' mail." - Henry Stimson, U.S. Secretary of State.
Which brings us to another useful quote by George Santayana back in 1905 -- "Those who cannot remember the past, are condemned to repeat it."
The NSA needs to give up the concept of domestic, drag-net style data gathering. Pick a target, don't just gather everything and sift for potential targets.
Re: (Score:3)
Over 9000 at a minimum.
Re: (Score:3)
"It will take years, if not decades, for us to return to the position that we had prior to his disclosures." - Michael Hayden
One can only hope the later.
Well, I can do more than only hope for the later. How about hoping to never to return to the position prior to Snowden's discolusres?
Re: (Score:3)