SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Two articles have been received regarding the NSA and its activities:
NSA chief knew of Snowden file destruction by Guardian in UK
Surprising absolutely no one, the Guardian reports that Keith Alexander was fully briefed and supportive of the GCHQ's plan to destroy Snowden-related computers at the Guardian's offices in London.
The revelation that Alexander and Obama's director of national intelligence, James Clapper, were advised on the Guardian's destruction of several hard disks and laptops contrasts markedly with public White House statements that distanced the US from the decision.
White House and NSA emails obtained by Associated Press under freedom of information legislation demonstrate how pleased Alexander and his colleagues were with the developments. At times the correspondence takes a celebratory tone, with one official describing the anticipated destruction as "good news".
A Compromise with the NSA
"The NSA wants to know everything we do? Fine, but only if We the People see everything the NSA does. The real problem with the current mass surveillance is asymmetry."
Now we all know that the NSA is not going to open its doors and reveal its secrets - that would be foolhardy in the extreme and seriously endanger the US and its citizens. And despite the sincerely-held views of many of our members and others elsewhere, from the outside there doesn't appear to be anything like a groundswell of dissent in the US regarding Snowden's revelations about the NSA's activities.
However, perhaps by being a little more open it might begin to win back the trust of those who currently doubt that the NSA is working in their interests. What would it take for you to be convinced that the NSA was under control and acting in the best interests of every US citizen, and not just the interests of a small number who appear to use it to cling to power? What amount of spying on allies and partners would be acceptable while remembering that each time such activity is discovered it weakens the trust of the ally and can have serious repercussions for US business? Would clearly stating which terrorist plots had been thwarted by intelligence gathered, in part at least, by the NSA be enough? Or have we already passed the point of no return?
(Score: 5, Insightful) by TrumpetPower! on Saturday July 12 2014, @08:36PM
What on Earth makes you think that a secret police is necessary, desirable, or unavoidable? Or that the secret police have done anything to actually protect Americans outside of a small number of plutocrats? Or that they haven't caused far more and much worse problems than they ostensibly protect us from?
On the contrary; they are thugs, illegitimate usurpers who should be rounded up, tried, convicted, and sentenced to long terms behind bars. And we should make room for them by freeing all those currently held for non-violent victimless crimes -- a depressingly large portion of the current prison population.
The military has legitimate need for spying on all other militaries, as well as countries we are actually at war with. No other form of espionage is reasonable, helpful, or permissible in a free society.
All the claimed dangers the secret police are supposed to protect against are ordinary criminal matters that should be handled the same as any other: through regular police investigatory techniques with the help of specific and limited judicial warrants as appropriate. On the rare chance that a foreign country refuses to cooperate in the search for violent international criminals, that is itself grounds for war -- though sanctions and other diplomatic pressures would likely be all that's necessary.
Cheers,
b&
All but God can prove this sentence true.