Obama to balance privacy and security concerns in speech on surveillance aides say
Nytimes article. Mentioned in another Politico article...mindful that defense of the program stated to the extent that spying were not a problem for those deemed 'ordinary' whatever this classification should mean and likely, however, without the clearest sets of elaboration how broadly defined this would potentially be, or in other words, likely crap rhetoric as usual for a program that had little defense to begin with.
What's all interesting about this are a number of points here...the NSA running often to the defensive shield of FISA courts which in so many words, relates to the Foreign intelligence gathering...which you'd say big deal, you know it means that they were supposedly watching terrorists abroad...not quite, since much domestic data happens to travel overseas through foreign servers, even if sender and recipients of data are domestic in origins. As a matter of fact this very problem were at least a short lasting scandal some time ago, when hacks overseas managed to bottleneck a size able portion of data through a given country (like Estonia) indicating that domestic data here were being intercepted. What all this amounts to broadly in my opinion, is that generally spying could be justified to virtually anyone here in the states the minute data exchanges are occurring, or in other words, the rhetoric you hear on the 'ordinary people' are safe from being spied on by the NSA, a big steamy load of crap.
So outside of the principle of the matter of spying, if at least you claimed not to care in the least whether it were going or not I'd offer at least some additional logic here:
Considering that the NSA, while it has been claim has thwarted any number of terrorist incidents past...minding the shoe bomber's apprehension was really at the behest of a given plane's co passengers, Saudi intelligence likewise claims (I believe in part to have provided some intel on this guy). Then considering the Boston incident approximately a year ago, appeared at least in so far as the public eye, had the FBI appealing to a greater public for additional intelligence information...here more clearly we know that the NSA was not adequate to mobilize any response or enough warning of substance to put law enforcement in place. Of course, you figure this is a small breach, which if it were that the NSA weren't collecting a massive amount of information and apparently knew how to coordinate and sift through this given data, one should suspect that a given alert by Russian official would be something of a tip off for watchful eyes...here, something it seems possibly amiss?! One reasons at least to some extent that data handling by the NSA isn't exactly scrupulous, or really that great, given the nature of open ended ness one should wonder between the accessibility of data that were warehoused, and the nature of security clearances provided to those having access...the sort of impression that might lead one to wonder, how far and often rent a cop mall contractors (no offense Snowden but I haven't been that impressed with some of the personalities that I have personally witnessed in some way claiming to represent that watchful eyes bunch, whom seem more the two wrongs make a right power trippers) that really hadn't the foggiest notion of securities while running with scissors potentially after the wrong individuals, but then one could be a bit more concerned because exactly the sort of FISA dependency which had shrouded the whole kit and kaboodle in secrecy precisely seems aimed at migrating the mass of generally U.S. stored data at times in a convection cycle out of the US for precisely the possible reason of spying on that same data (or masses of individuals), here if you weren't concerned enough about the global nature of data in general, and weren't a Target shopper that had to have your card replaced, at least one is to wonder if in part the general level and safety of online consumer data weren't in part a result of the practices of the NSA in general?
Then compared to any other agency with appointed public speakers, the NSA seems the least accountable to the public of them all, man if had my choice of budget cuts, it would be appointed to the NSA and DARPA.
By the way, elated to see you seeing that you potentially had an 'Olivia' running the 'silent rapture' set up at a Macroni Grill in Overland Park trying to taunt and tease on the food, I hope it weren't bad, that would be potentially a war crime for some?
So I haven't seen that little street goon you sent a couple years ago that called me Rasputin wink wink wink!
Nytimes article. Mentioned in another Politico article...mindful that defense of the program stated to the extent that spying were not a problem for those deemed 'ordinary' whatever this classification should mean and likely, however, without the clearest sets of elaboration how broadly defined this would potentially be, or in other words, likely crap rhetoric as usual for a program that had little defense to begin with.
What's all interesting about this are a number of points here...the NSA running often to the defensive shield of FISA courts which in so many words, relates to the Foreign intelligence gathering...which you'd say big deal, you know it means that they were supposedly watching terrorists abroad...not quite, since much domestic data happens to travel overseas through foreign servers, even if sender and recipients of data are domestic in origins. As a matter of fact this very problem were at least a short lasting scandal some time ago, when hacks overseas managed to bottleneck a size able portion of data through a given country (like Estonia) indicating that domestic data here were being intercepted. What all this amounts to broadly in my opinion, is that generally spying could be justified to virtually anyone here in the states the minute data exchanges are occurring, or in other words, the rhetoric you hear on the 'ordinary people' are safe from being spied on by the NSA, a big steamy load of crap.
So outside of the principle of the matter of spying, if at least you claimed not to care in the least whether it were going or not I'd offer at least some additional logic here:
Considering that the NSA, while it has been claim has thwarted any number of terrorist incidents past...minding the shoe bomber's apprehension was really at the behest of a given plane's co passengers, Saudi intelligence likewise claims (I believe in part to have provided some intel on this guy). Then considering the Boston incident approximately a year ago, appeared at least in so far as the public eye, had the FBI appealing to a greater public for additional intelligence information...here more clearly we know that the NSA was not adequate to mobilize any response or enough warning of substance to put law enforcement in place. Of course, you figure this is a small breach, which if it were that the NSA weren't collecting a massive amount of information and apparently knew how to coordinate and sift through this given data, one should suspect that a given alert by Russian official would be something of a tip off for watchful eyes...here, something it seems possibly amiss?! One reasons at least to some extent that data handling by the NSA isn't exactly scrupulous, or really that great, given the nature of open ended ness one should wonder between the accessibility of data that were warehoused, and the nature of security clearances provided to those having access...the sort of impression that might lead one to wonder, how far and often rent a cop mall contractors (no offense Snowden but I haven't been that impressed with some of the personalities that I have personally witnessed in some way claiming to represent that watchful eyes bunch, whom seem more the two wrongs make a right power trippers) that really hadn't the foggiest notion of securities while running with scissors potentially after the wrong individuals, but then one could be a bit more concerned because exactly the sort of FISA dependency which had shrouded the whole kit and kaboodle in secrecy precisely seems aimed at migrating the mass of generally U.S. stored data at times in a convection cycle out of the US for precisely the possible reason of spying on that same data (or masses of individuals), here if you weren't concerned enough about the global nature of data in general, and weren't a Target shopper that had to have your card replaced, at least one is to wonder if in part the general level and safety of online consumer data weren't in part a result of the practices of the NSA in general?
Then compared to any other agency with appointed public speakers, the NSA seems the least accountable to the public of them all, man if had my choice of budget cuts, it would be appointed to the NSA and DARPA.
By the way, elated to see you seeing that you potentially had an 'Olivia' running the 'silent rapture' set up at a Macroni Grill in Overland Park trying to taunt and tease on the food, I hope it weren't bad, that would be potentially a war crime for some?
So I haven't seen that little street goon you sent a couple years ago that called me Rasputin wink wink wink!
No comments:
Post a Comment