I'm thinking this is a deliberate attempt to deflect attention from the massive abuse of power by the IRS, and to a lesser degree Benghazi and the whole "boo-hoo, I'm a reporter...you can't target me!" thing. Also on the burner are the full-frontal assault on Judeo-Christian beliefs and the continued brainwashing (and dumbing-down) of our youngsters.
Many Americans are basically stupid. Their short attention span is momentarily grabbed by anything shiny. "Oh hey, look! Wait, what were we talking about? Ummmm....like, where's my free phone, bro?"
I also find it perplexing that the hippies and radicals from the sixties who sat on their asses smoking dope and sobbing about tolerance and free love are now the suits carrying the baseball bats.
The bad guys are entrenched, and they're drunk with power. Who will lead us out of this unholy mess?
And no. I will NOT sit down and shut up, you effers. Hah!
Ted Cruz.
ReplyDeleteBut first we need to take the Senate in the midterms.
Good post, lady red. You're right, it's nothing new. When I'm on the computer or phone I always assume someone can be listening.
Love your gif. I'll add one as well if it's ok...
img:"http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y117/floranista/irsobamacare_zpsd4438328.jpg"
The Verizon snooping was a surprise to me. I didn't think they were vacuuming up _all_ the metadata. BTW afaik Obama is not lying when he says "nobody is listening to you calls" - the thing is, the data about who is talking to who, and when, and from where, is in a sense more valuable.
ReplyDeleteAnd yes, it has very, very bad internal US political implications. This kind of data can make a country "revolution proof" and I'm pretty certain it's operating in Europe as well as the US.
The PRISM thing doesn't surprise me - I'd kind of assumed as much.
Greenwald had a third piece about Obama's plans for cyber war. Which was like, well, duh, and good to know Obama's not completely letting everyone roll us.
Best angle I've heard: the key beneficiary of all this coming out right now is China. This is all preparing the battle space with respect to the US claiming the moral high ground in censorship, cyber snooping, etc. Obama's meeting with Xi now. Does China have a mole? Or some sympathetic allies in USG?
Remember this is all coming through Greenwald, who is of a piece with Chomsky and Eduard Said: If the US is doing some thing, then by definition it is wrong. He would be the logical choice to leak the stuff through. He might even publish stuff directly from Chinese spies and attribute it to USG sources to start a counter-intelligence vortex.
Huh. My wifi router is dying. If I were really paranoid... but I'm not.
Delete(May be offline for a bit though until the stores open tomorrow.)
HAH!
DeleteOK, now that Greenwald's leaker has shown himself, things get really interesting.
ReplyDeleteThere are two narratives:
- Snowden is a hero
- Snowden is a traitor
I don't think it's either/or.
Instapundit has published some reader feedback with people taking different sides.
Personally I have to acknowledge that if someone like this had leaked to Greenwald around 2004, I'd have been pretty pissed and figured them for traitors. That instinct is still very present in my mind.
Does Greenwald hate the US? Is this guy Snowden a useful idiot for real and dangerous enemies of the US? Was this leak engineer by those who wish us ill? Was this treason? Signs point to yes.
Does the NSA program - particularly that new data center going in - go way beyond what an intelligence program aimed at foreign threats would require? Does it smell more like total surveillance aimed at totalitarian hegemony by the ruling class? Signs point to yes.
Not seeing any contradictions here. Personally, thinking that arguing the point is counterproductive. We have two data points from this:
1) We have real enemies and a huge security breach and nobody minding the store. This sucks.
2) We have a government bent on implementing 1984 and instituting perpetual power. This sucks.
Both seem valid to me.
Good analysis, lewy. I too have beeb wavering back and forth on Snowden, I can see both sides. I think we have to hear more and I'm sure we will.
ReplyDeleteLast night I was seeing Snowden as a classic, heroic whistle-blower - caring more about the freedom of Americans than his own safety.
ReplyDeleteI did not (and still do not, really) think that the information he leaked was damaging to the US, other than the reputation of the government, which is already lower than whale crap with me.
But if he defects to China, my opinion changes by 180 degrees - his supposed claim the the US and China are not antagonists is simple foolishness, and a dangerous foolishness on the part of someone with so much potentially-damaging information on intelligence methods.
Dances, I read the interview with Snowden in the Guardian - seems to me that his motivations stem as much from the spying we do on _foreigners_ as it does from the collection of data on Americans.
DeleteHe sounds like a naive kid who simply doesn't think much of the US, or that it has much right to self defense. Again, telling that it's Greenwald that he leaked to.
This is a place where the Ron Paul people and the hardcore progs like Greewald are exactly on the same page.
What's happening now is that the tech industry is in crisis management mode - they're watching their global potential evaporate over the weekend. I can't help but think that Google is worth less as an enterprise this morning than it was last monday.
Time will tell, and who knows what the market will do, but there will be "what the f*** do we do now about the cloud services we use?" meetings in organizations all over the world in the coming weeks and months. Obviously as someone with investments in some of those companies I'm concerned. But I suppose I have to let the chips fall where they may (they will anyway). It could create some interesting architectures and business models.
Interesting take from Ann Althouse's husband, Meade. link
DeleteI've been trying to get up to speed on this Snowden thing (these 12+ hour shifts don't leave much time for news, lol).
ReplyDeleteI saw a few clips of his interview on Fox, and have been reading a bit about him this morning.
First impression: he's a well-spoken, intelligent, and obviously educated young man. All of that morphs into a giant question mark when I read that he's a high school dropout with a GED. How does this kid land a $200k job and have access to that much data? What's his background in that he's comfortable jetting off to Hong Kong while seeking asylum in Iceland? I wouldn't think that most high school dropouts are globetrotters.
Events are getting curiouser and curiouser.
Another thought: those who support J. Ass and the twerp Manning now are stuck supporting Snowden. It's hilarious watching all the talking heads jumping from bed to bed.
Your analysis is really good lewy. I'd like to hear more of your thoughts as this thing plays out.
Snowden has not revealed diddly squat that four others have not revealed in far better detail years ago. The other four are comfortable in the US of A, however, not fleeing to Hong Kong in fear of the Triads who might kill him. [Bwahahahaha] This was a staged publicity event, with Snowden portraying himself as the Lone Ranger. Yippee Kyai Ay. Pbbffftt.
DeleteAri I think what's new here is the degree to which the programs are documented... I don't recall big powerpoint decks being smuggled out - or published.
DeleteAlso, the extent of the Verizon metadata trolling - basically "SELECT * FROM CALLS" every three months (and probably at all the carriers) seems to me to be new info - at least with this level of certainty.
Lewy and others...here is a good summary of the reporting history of NSA vis a vis data tracking and mining, which clearly is not a new issue.;..the current iteration is at least a decade old, just with some new names and scripts.
DeletePosted by "leslyn" on Althouse yesterday [responding to an assertion that Snowden was first to speak up]:
NSA workers Kirk Wiebe, William Binney, Ed Loomis, and Thomas A. Drake, along with House Intelligence Committee staffer Diane Roark (an expert on the NSA budget) complained to the NSA IG in 2002 that the NSA data collection system "ThinThread" should not be abandoned for a new system called "Trailblazer," because ThinThread had more privacy protections. Kirk Wiebe, William Binney, Ed Loomis, and Thomas A. Drake, quit NSA over concerns about the legality of the agency's activities
Even though ThinThread had been tested and found to be reliable, the NSA went ahead with Trailblazer because it was the desire of Michael Hayden, a retired Air Force four star who was appointed Director of the NSA in 1999, a position he held until 2005, when he was appointed CIA director.
Hayden oversaw NSA surveillance of technological communications between persons in the United States and alleged foreign terrorist groups, which resulted in the NSA warrantless surveillance controversy.
The IG report came out in 2004. The New York Times published a story about Traialblazer in 2005. The Baltimore Sun carried a series about it from 2006-2007.
The Patriot Act and the Authorization for Use of Military Force (passed shortly after 9/11) were used by the GW Bush administration to bypass FISA to spy on "terrorists." This included domestic surveillance. The program was known as "Solar Wind" and was publicized by the New York Times and the Washington Post in 2006.
At least one Congressional hearing about it was held in January 2006. Sens. Leahy (D-VT) and Kennedy (D-MA) introduced Resolution 350 to the Judiciary Committee that purported to express a "sense of the Senate" that the existing law "does not authorize warrantless domestic surveillance of United States citizens". Resolution 350 was never reported out of committee.
In introducing their resolution to committee, they quoted Justice O'Connor's opinion that even war "is not a blank check for the President when it comes to the rights of the Nation's citizens."
In February 2006 the American Bar Association denounced the NSA spying as an unConstituional warrantless domestic surveillance program. This was followed by a letter to Congress signed by numerous prominent legal scholars, and which was published in the New York Review of Books.
...and Glenn Greenwald argued that the program was unconstitutional in 2006.
The question you have to ask is not why were there no other disclosures? but, Why did we not pay attention?
I should add that "Leslyn" is an occasional commenter on Althouse, but one who I appreciate as very bright, succinct, and clear headed, even when I might disagree...which isn't often.
DeleteAs for those who have the time to belabor a long thread, this is Page 1 and Page 2 of the thread I quoted above. A rather wide range of opinion is covered, most sincere, some trite.
Finally, I will also admit to reading Micky Kaus and The Daily Caller.
Did Obama just destroy the internet?
DeleteObama destroy something....well maybe Syria soon. The Internet...not likely,and nothing the NSA is doing is new, as I've said and cited previously. I should add that the wee hero Eddy has insight in to maybe 1/10th of 1% of what NSA does. First NSA did a silence of mea culpa, and a few days later, whoops, they call him a liar. Call we say "Obfuscation"...?
DeleteNow my personal opinion of previous NSA head General Hayden is that he was attracted to data gathering power without safeguards...or that he didn't really have a lot of Db knowledge himself. His preferred system was eventually shut down once thoroughly reviewed by Congress and both DOD and NSA IG's.
One NSA employee also went to news outlet(s) with stolen documents, but no grand hurrah was forth coming...other than his indictment and charging as a traitor, charges that were dropped subsequently. I fault Drake for taking classified materials to the press when other avenues actually worked better to correct governmental mistakes...as I knew directly from my own whislte-blowing episode(s). It is NOT about YOU when you set out to effect change of immoral or illegal activities...it is all about effecting the change. Drake at least vetted his objections with associates, as I did, but choose to go a step too far.
Now Drake actually knew tinigs and had credentials. Just what makes Snowden's revelations of old news so compelling now?
It must be the pursuit by the Triads he talks about, eh?
Ari, I need to look back through some of your links - I was aware of the leaks as they occurred, but again, I don't think we knew of something like PRISM.
DeleteFurther, between the (carefully parsed) denials by the tech companies, the anonymous counter leaking of details by the tech companies, and the actual leaked slides, I'm getting a clearer picture of how it worked.
Point being, an analyst at his desk could "task" the system with collecting info on targets without interacting with the tech companies. Just key clicks. Whether the PRISM software actually resided on Google's servers or not is irrelevant - to the operator it looked like it did. This is news, AFAIK.
Further, regardless of how it's come about or how much is new, the firestorm has major collateral damage: namely the tech companies.
Face it, if you are government IT functionary in any country from Canada to Kazakhstan, your agenda is: how do we get rid of the American Cloud? Get out from under Google? Find computers from someone other than Intel? When we buy network equipment, do we want to get hacked by the Americans (Cisco, Juniper) or the Chinese? (Huawei)
In the late 90s, Microsoft allowed the perception to grow that they were incredibly predatory and dishonest, to the point that it was dangerous to do business with them as a partner or customer. Some of it was real and some hype my opinion was mostly the former, but forget my opinion - the perception was real, that's a fact. (This negative perception was in fact the genesis of the "Don't be Evil" slogan of Google - what they were signaling was not that they were angels, simply that they weren't Microsoft. That was then; things change.)
Companies felt like Coyotes caught in a trap. And like Coyotes they came to accept that they had to chew their own leg off to escape.
I think a similar dynamic is at work now with basically any cloud computing company based in the US.
The taint is going to be powerful. Expect the media to play this down; foreign opinion of the US just took a major hit and the whole Nobel Peace Prize winning, restore American reputation meme from the White House just became that much more risible.
Lewy...I am convinced Snowden's theatrics were designed to one thing...blow foggy flatulence around to cover other scandals. Nothing he revealed has indicated actual abuse, only potential. As I commented elsewhere...
DeletePrism has potential for abuse, and has been run up the pole to distract from actual abuse that has already occurred. Think IRS, Benghazi, HH&S Sibelius' solicitation of money bypassing appropriations [how many people even know that is illegal?], at al...
Now, beyond that, I know you know [and I know it too] that once a data accumulation system is deployed, either by ODBC link or by direct discrete download [less efficient], any person with access, with appropriate Role assigned and Permissions granted,[even if undeserved] can generate queries and reports from a properly equipped computer....regardless of how or where the primary data is "stored". My military laptop with the applicable VPN installed allowed me to access 4 global databases from almost anywhere at any time, and consolidate their data in combinations I needed for analysis. I was one of a few who had both a high end laptop for home and travel, as well as a high end desktop (Dell Precision) in the office...and they could "talk" to each other. That was nearly 8 years ago now.
No worries, my stuff was boring & mundane...but the capability is not knew...I began in 1994 using Dbase III. It became much easier around 2000 [don't recall the exact year?] or so when the databases were made web based...not to mention used Oracle in the main. With the advent of "Teh Cloud"...oh, my...keys to the kingdom stuff. And I actually do understand how real geeks immediately feel challenged to penetrate things like that. I'd not put so much as my under-ware inventory on any cloud service.
I agree that the new firestorm has major collateral damage: namely the tech companies. What I am puzzled by in all the various media reporting, including Internet media, is the almost total lack of conversation about just how we wound up with so many private contractors hooked in to the intelligence and military system. I know why...so what is the deal with the head in sand routine by presumed experts? The mumble about budgets and appropriations, without a clue...once an activity is determined to be "non-governmental" in a "commercial activities" study in accord with OMB Circular A-76, it cannot be staffed by feds or soldiers by law, and appropriations and caps on personnel reflect that fact. Almost ALL IT and ITE related support work has been determined "non-governmental" under A-76...and THAT is why you have contractors every fricking where, with minimal government supervision.
The whole Nobel Peace Prize bullshit surrounding this White House has been risible from day one. Foreign opinion of us will be severe...we've just demonstrated we are idiots....as if PFC Manning was enough already.
Okay. coincidently I just watched a video of Snowden on TV news telling us everything he knew...ie, virtually everything about NSA. He is either a consummate liar [time will tell] or he had undeserved access, like Manning did. In my experience no highly classified materials were ever put up in PowerPoint decks....at the most some FOUO stuff with no-dissemination tags. "Sysadmin" can still be compartmentalized and in a tight run shop I assure you it is ... if roles & permissions are applied properly. In my day I remember having to deal with as many as three different system administrators to accomplish one connection between dissimilar DB's. Something really stinks in this whole story.
DeleteOr may be we and our intelligence agencies really are this clumsy and stupid now?
Things change quickly. Consider this article on the computer power available to the IRS today and how insanely it's grown in the last six years.
DeleteI think "clumsy and stupid" is what you get when you have this much power and this little accountability, yes.
If Snowden was trotted out to blow fog, I think that strategy is failing.
DeleteIf anything these scandals are reinforcing each other and building momentum - widespread NSA and FBI dragnets give weight to the IRS and journalist scandals, and vice versa. "they couldn't possibly" => "they do already"... "they wouldn't dare" => "they do it brazenly, like a boss"...
I tend to believe that a Snowden was bound come forward sooner or later.
I know lots of young guys like him. Articulate, smart, self taught, capable. Fashionable facial hair. Square glasses. Idealistic - and still lacking the maturity and reflective cynicism to separate self-involved sanctimony from authentically selfless sacrifice. No one but an avatar of the divine ever gets that distinction 100% clean, of course, and offhand I don't think Snowden is especially good or bad on that score. He comes across, like I said, as a peer of the guys I know. He'd get a job in my town; I might have hired him myself or funded someone who would have.
And I can't help but think that most of these people, the guys I know, are gonna be like yeah, that guy is just like me. They will give him the benefit of the doubt.
And these guys were, basically to a man, 100% in the tank for Obama. And here comes Snowden, pissing all over the narrative. He has credibility in a space that frankly none of us have.
Myself, like I said, I'm a bit torn. I was pretty hard core neo-con anti-jihadist for years - and still am. I actually accept the fact that yes, the US is a battlefield and it's war, baby, and when it comes to war, rights shmights. The Constitution is not a suicide pact - who the hell was saying that? Oh, right, I was, not so many years ago. I have to own that.
I respect the position that folks like those that write at Reason magazine have - the sane and respectable anti-war libertarians. And on principle, I respectfully disagree.
Problem is - the war that I see as regrettable and un-wished for, but necessary - that war isn't being fought.
The powers that be - and not just the President - talk out of both sides of their mouth. The war is winding down, AQ is on the run, we're withdrawing. Great. Then why are we ramping up systems that are demonstrably not even catching the people like the Tzarnaev brothers? Not even really looking for them? Really those systems are aimed at us, not the terrorists.
I can't abide the national security arguments on this one. If the system is necessary to keep us safe - that's too bad. It has nobody driving it that I can trust. There's nobody driving such a system that anyone can or should trust.
Tea Partiers aren't big on dhimmitude*, but they're short on trust in the leadership. That includes the RINO leadership which is right now demonizing Snowden.
Reasonable people may differ and I'm very open to other views here.
* [Remember that phrase from the neo-con heyday? Back when Pam Geller, Robert Spencer, and Charles Johnson were all on the same page? Good times, good times.]
The new IRS data gathering power is interesting in the "oh, oh" sense. Right up front, most know that the IRS shares basic data with states for income tax purposes. Now it will be able to share purchase data for sales & use tax purposes. This may be the end of the usual pro-rata fee, based on your federal AGI, guesstimate states allow if you allege your purchases are under minimal and you don't save receipts. I assume most filers use that feature in Michigan at least.
DeleteNo need for that now[maybe]...minimally you will need to calculate the actual un-taxed Internet and Out of State purchases....no receipts needed so long as your report matches the federal report.
Coincidently this year I've begun actually tracking, via spreadsheet, my Internet and out-of-state purchases by credit card, debit card, or PayPal, and any cash purchases of items with serial numbers & registry requirements, rather than just a "desktop" folder full of e-receipts when I remember to keep them in PDF format. My sales & use tax data for out of state or Internet has been close, but perhaps not precise....ppbbbfffttt. Due to the fact it seems like my Internet purchases are now about 50/50 split between those who bill sales & use tax and those who do not, I figured a better tracking method might serve me better too. Little did I know, heh heh.
What's next, a federal sales tax to really take advantage of this new capability? It already enables remotely executed "life style analysis" ...e.g., does what you spend match up with what you earn?
PS: I sort of like Senator Cruz...but, why in G-d's name does he keep saying his flat tax ideas will eliminate the IRS...that is pure hogwash, just like it was when Forges claimed it for his "fair tax." Collection of sales, use, and excise taxes are more demanding, if anything, than income taxes where a nice 1099, W2 & W3 form gets filed for you. Eliminate the IRS...it just may double it.
An example of non-income tax collect complexity is illustrated my by links, for Excise Taxes, Manufacturer's Taxes, FAQ's Medical Device Taxes, and Taxable Medical Devices, posted on the "Skool Daze" thread [which no one has noticed apparently]. It gives a nice preview of how the Affordable Care Act will collect its taxes under the "manufacturer tax" section of federal excise taxes...a section that is amusing or shocking in its own right.
DeleteIf Snowden was trotted out to blow fog, I think that strategy is failing.
DeleteI'm starting to think so, too. The string of top senior executives and cabinet level "leaders" who can't remember anything, don't know anything, don't recall anything, never saw anything, it's not my job, etc. is beginning to piss off people who know, sometimes from experience, that if they said such things under oath that they'd be in prison. I'm not sure who was more ridiculous, Mueller, Miller, Hillary, Clapper, Dempsey, or Lerner, et al.
I tend to believe that a Snowden was bound come forward sooner or later.
Given he is arch typical for his field, as you've said, just what is it that made his less than substantial revelations [so far] to the press more "dramatic" than those of Thomas Drake, also to the press, a decade ago? He even had to go to court to defend himself...mostly yawns from the public at large, if that.
Yet, Snowden with all his melodrama is a big deal? His self-reported "history" in the military is about 90% bull crap and SOCOM-Fort Bragg has confirmed it, he never made it there. Add in to all this Snowden's use of the word "I" reminds of another speaker we all know...never mind his "my life is over, the 'Triads' may kill me" or whatever it was he said along those lines. It is mystifying to me. I have to assume it was staged, and thus for a reason other than the idealistic one claimed.
I do agree with your remark about how power and low accountability can lead to clumsy and stupid. My comments earlier about OMB Circular A-76 impacts are an example of stupidity....some clerk says computers and IT technology are not governmental...unlike such things as deployment and use of M4 carbines and hand grenades is "governmental" [protect the nation]. Computers and IT tech are weapons every bit ads much as M4 carbines...and certainly fit within the "protect the nation" criteria where intelligence gathering is concerned....as the purported justifications for this data gathering claim it is....but we are forced to hire contractors to enable this weapon...not to build it, but operate it. That is about as s-t-u-p-i-d as it gets...next to trying to carry wet 2 inch slump wet cement in a paper grocery bag....it's going to leak a lot and soon dump everything.
A very dangerous trend, growing for many years now in government, is the concept that experience is no longer a prerequisite for senior leadership and policy making. I place its birth at 1979 when the SES was formed from previously senior civil service grades, and made appointed. No one in the military senior level is deployed in command for the duration of anything. And the NSA is substantially military. Hello?
Problem is - the war that I see as regrettable and un-wished for, but necessary - that war isn't being fought.
I agree...we are not fighting the war that is, asymmetrical [which does NOT mean "no front line"] and stateless more or less. I also agree the problem with these grand data plans is that there is no one I'd trust to run them. Often stooges are put in place to disguise who is really running what...think Petraeus as DCIA. That didn't last long did it? Dempsey and his predecessor Mullen, ....agggghhh! Generals who take action are usually sent home these days. I'd love to know the truth of why Gen Carter Ham [Africom] decided he needed more time with family very shortly after 11 Sep 2012?
Next...yes, I am not one to like RINO's being I am from Michigan where with very rare exception all Republicans have been RINO's and the worst of them was the governor who gave us both a state income tax and a business VAT, to go along with our sales & use tax and sundry property & specialty taxes. No Democrat ever fucked us harder than pseudo-Republican Milliken, who later aligned with Democratic candidates, including Kerry and Jenny the Dimwitted that Canada sent us. :-)
Meanwhile, back at the rancho... an impassioned plea from Mickey Kaus.
ReplyDeleteCan't believe I've been reading Mickey's blog since it was independent... his first new media gig was Slate... how things change.
Got this from a facebook friend. I thought it so appropriate for this thread:
ReplyDeleteimgw:"https://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/941134_10151561144525889_1268357502_n.jpg"
Snowden's spilling the beans.
ReplyDeleteA taste:
Glenn Greenwald follow up: When you say "someone at NSA still has the content of your communications" - what do you mean? Do you mean they have a record of it, or the actual content?
Both. If I target for example an email address, for example under FAA 702, and that email address sent something to you, Joe America, the analyst gets it. All of it. IPs, raw data, content, headers, attachments, everything. And it gets saved for a very long time - and can be extended further with waivers rather than warrants.
Bonus! The left begins to eat its own tail...
DeleteIn trashing NSA leaker Edward Snowden on Sunday, CBS's Bob Schieffer joined a fast-growing club of establishment pundits who have derided his actions and questioned his character.
It has seemed sometimes that commentators have been trying to compete for who can come up with the most sneering description of Snowden.
More at HuffPo.
Under the bus you go, Schieffer and Toobin! Bwahaha!
Nothing can get in the way of their fawning adoration of Obama. He-can-do-no-wrong.
ReplyDeleteTinker-Bell Snowden said [to Guardian stooge]...
ReplyDelete"All I can say right now is the US Government is not going to be able to cover this up by jailing or murdering me" ... "Leaving the US was an incredible risk, as NSA employees must declare their foreign travel 30 days in advance and are monitored,"..."There was a distinct possibility I would be interdicted en route,..."
Bwahahahahahahaha. Please. Make. It. Stop.
Conservatives who buy this guy's crap are being played by Progressives who will use it to their advantage. There. Is. Nothing. New. Here.
I don't get how the progressives are going to use this to their advantage.
DeleteThis is already taking a toll on Obama's support among young people.
Kids who would otherwise look at the IRS targeting the Tea Party as a feature, not a bug, are ditching Obama's "brand" in favor of Snowden's "brand".
How is this working out?
I'm still thinking the most likely explanation is that Snowden is on his own, just went rogue. Nobody "sent" him. Truth is he is splitting convervatives as well as liberals; he's actually making the ruling class vs peasants divide more apparent to everyone - which certainly isn't in the interest of anyone in the ruling class.
Lewy you said "Truth is he is splitting conservatives as well as liberals ..." which is all he has to do to wreck conservatives. I agree he is a rogue wannabe, sent up by no one, but the progressives have a policy of letting no crisis go to waste. The Liberals are less split every day, quickly re-coalescing around dear leader. If you can, name me one credible liberal leader who has laid any of this at Obama's feet in a serious fashion? It has already turned in to "Bush did it first." Our wobbly dear leader has stamped his petulant little foot and traipsed off on a grand tour of Africa...the message? Move, nothing to see here, watch me win us some friends, I am charming, you love me, you know you do.
DeleteSnowden is so bizzare that he couldn't be made up. He really is what some of us old vets call a "shitball." Every unit had at least one. Pause a moment and ask ourselves, why is this time a publicity charm, given it has happened before a couple times in the past decade? But now we have mega whoop de do? Who does it serve overall, give the litany of scandals these days? You're right, this isn't about wee Edward, but it is all about using the mess he created to advantage. Nothing is going to change, not one iota...any more than all the obfuscating, blatant lying very senior leaders testifying under oath have come to any political harm. Hell, Holder was found in contempt a long time ago...and ? Crickets.
I'm going to sit here and tell all of us frankly that Snowden cannot possibly know everything he says he knows, that he thinks he knows, all garnered in 90 days as a low rent (he even lied about his pay) contractor. He sounds like Ian Flemming on a tear. Yes, low rent...hell, I was offered more for mere consultancy and periodic management services, half of it as "work from home" ... not exactly a system Administrator for NSA or even close. Yet, Snowden is yapping on and on about what NSA is doing like he understands it. Nonsense. You know, Lewy, as well as I do, that the cliche' "you gotta have the haystack to find the needle" is imprecise...no, all you need is access to the haystack and write query scripts designed for dangerous needles. Big difference.
I did similar work for years, at a less classified level, that covered multiple columns and rows of information that was not for anyone's eyes except the the proponents specifically, by law, under penalty of the law if revealed. I never revealed one iota although I pulled my information from the mass of tables in four different global databases that contained the restricted information. Even if by accident you did query, thus cache, some restricted data, you erased it on your server by using software designed for erasing with multiple overwrites...in my day in DOD that was three over-writes, today I think it is up to seven now. You query only what you need. For example: No one is looking at Betty Boop's recipe exchanges with Sally Ann, unless perchance ammonium nitrate is mentioned as an ingredient.
It is possible, like Bradley Manning, that he downloaded a wad of data that he really doesn't know about or understand, and essentially shopped it to a willing newspaper guy. If so, he broke the law on day one by by-passing the limitations on USB port use and/or external media connections. If he managed that his supervisors are equally to blame, starting with what roles & permissions he was assigned ...e.g., roles are supposed to be compartmentalized, even for Sysadmns. Now if this scenario is the case, the NSA will utter grunts and burps now and then and tell you nothing. You and I will be left to guess.
And those kids ditching Obama for Snowden...let me know when Snowden runs for POTUS...and when those kids vote for anything but an Obama successor. Romney mentioned 47% who pay no tax of any kind...approaching 50% fast, IMO...tell me how many of those folks give a tinker's dagnabit about "Prism?"
Thinking about it. Bottom line is that I have to go back in read more detail about what he actually said. In the meantime, one congressman on the intel committee heard behind closed doors that Snowden's assertion that individual analysts can pull down data from (e.g.) Google on their own authority - this was corroborated. That rep (forget his name right now) then walked that back once he'd gotten "official denials". Awesome. Who to believe?
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThere is a great deal we don't know about Snowden and just what exactly he has or has revealed. My main point of conention in my own head, based upon my own limited experience, is that TS/SI info is just not put up on PowerPoint decks. However, today, a half dozen years away from it all for me, the rules may have been changed by idiot IT contractors and establishment figure head generals who presume it is "efficient." PP decks provide effective deniability, by dint of lack of details, for senior ranks in military and civilian governance...thus they never do anything "wittingly." Add in lazy arrogance, coupled with self-interested agendas, of Miller, Lerner, Clapper, Clinton, Shulman, Mueller, et al. and we have what we have today. Hell, none of them are even "good" liars...just clumsy obvious ones.
DeleteAnd we will never be told. We can research and re-read everything...and at best we'll come up with *it was Colonel Mustard in the Library with a rolling pin*. NSA is like the proverbial tar baby. NSA will let us entertain whatever theory we arrive at, even let us change it daily, and seen some institutional moron hack like Clapper out there to obfuscate further and even outright lie again...with the smooth technique of the Three Stooges. I am quite sure our enemies are taking notes.
The real problem, in my less than humble opinion, is not what NSA can do, even should do [war is no longer border to border or between true sovereigns], or the FBI, even the IRS...it is who we elect, anoint, or appoint, in vast numbers, to run these operations. We now have SES or higher deputy assistant deputy directors of deputy assistants' deputies, etc. Since 1979 we've been busy installing appointed aparatchiks at every level above GS-15 Civil Service grade [any civilian grade above GS-15 is equivalent to a military general in rank]...effectively eliminating the old isolation of civil service from political pressure. We done the same with the military, by creating a ticket-punching system where no one commands for the duration of anything...and that began even before the civil service muck up. "General" rank or equivalence alleges expertise...they each get a special flag you know, like Bush and Gates dumping a USMC General for a Navy Admiral "expert" to oversee two land wars in essentially land locked nations, no less. Yabba Dabba Do!! Teh Barackster liked them...because he kept them on after 2008. Hello?
One far worse scenario would be if the NSA, FBI, et al actually tells us everything. Outrage would reign, and voters will still vote in schmucks anyway...similar to a battered wife syndrome...and no one thing will change, not-one-thing. It is too late I fear. Liberalism is no longer modeled after John Locke, rather Karl Marx, with a big dollop of Lenin & Stalin.
Pre-2008 Obama said all this was wrong...2013 Obama says it is necessary. Is that experience talking, or self interest? And his minions again are about to arm Al Qaeda [And John Brennen will again be in charge] ...oh, wait, Al Qaeda is defeated right, no worries then?
...Snowden's assertion that individual analysts can pull down data from (e.g.) Google on their own authority...
DeleteWhich as you and I know is a "roles & permissions" issue...e.g., lax controls, or just bad query design per se, where everything **joins on** everything and voilà '! Elmer Fudd can read your mail.
I'm going to go away now. Slap somebody's momma syndrome is approaching. I need to ignore! Ignore! Ignore!
DeleteIf you're still around Ari... "impacting"... analysts do what they see fit, apparently.
ReplyDeleteI respect your understanding of how things were. But things change. That was then. This is now, apparently.
Oh, and Silicon Vally doesn't even ask "how high?" when the NSA tells it to jump... it figures out how high it can jump and then just does it.
DeleteNote that James Risen is one of the reporters on the NYT story; he reported many leaks from the Bush admin. Something is a bit off though; there isn't any outrage in his piece: you are invited to just get used to it. Whattyagonnado.
Still lurking....here's what I find very irritating about the links you provided, both very enlightening however:
Delete1.) The massive privatization of the actual analytical work and IT infrastructure in government. (See OMB Circular A-76 as I've said before) Nothing has wrecked government efficiency, thus enlarged it ever more, all the while purporting to reduce government, than OMB A-76 rules. My experience with it is first hand, direct and personal. It is the ultimate taxpayer *con* .. a travesty beyond literal description.
2.) The key man position occupied by Eric Holder vis a vis both Justice and NSA. All this NSA hullabaloo now is highly orchestrated to distract from other major scandals...ones where life was lost due to malfeasance at the highest levels. If Snowden had not created himself, government would have had to create him...and probably did so by conning and coddling him.
What is both back then and now, is the gross misunderstanding, among the public, of the effect of all this "privatization" of activities deemed non-governmental....by persons with zero know of said activities as it relates to either the military or Intelligence gathering...e.g., it IS governmental, every bit as much as weapons of any other kind.
"Whattyagonnado?"
Maybe nothing...it may very well be too late. We can amuse ourselves by wating and watching for the next...
OH, LOOK .... SQUIRREL!!
...moment. With luck no more Americans will have been killed in the meantime....a false hope at best, because in most lethal instances, you/we never hear about it. F & F and Benghazi just got out of hand...move along,nothing to see....
PHUCK!
Just occurred to me that many folks who have not been involved with the military or government operations, including budgeting and manpower allocations, might not understand how OMB A-76 purports to cut government, but does the opposite.
DeleteSee, all positions in the military and government are authorized and allocated, indirectly, but essentially by Congress. When an A-76 study determines XX number of position are *non-governmental*..those positrons are deleted from allocations, and to fulfill the work, that work is contracted out to company YY who hires XX+ZZ contract employees to do the same work XX employees did previously. Not to be left out, government or the military then returns to the allocation process and gets WW positions allocated for *oversight*...so you really have new manpower numbers of WW+XX+ZZ. In my time I never saw it work any other way. 4 minus 2 always equals 6...its new math.
Remember I cited "Company YY" as the private sector contractor? Good. But, "company YY" may also turn out to be a brand new government sub-agency, using all the same XX employees and creating new oversight WW employees for a cost saving group of XX+WW employees!! Even better, a brand new sub-agency is created in partnership with a private sector "Company YY" so you get a staff savings of XX+ZZ+WW!! Voilà '...oh, wait?
4 minus 2 equals 6....remember?
The result is this: government always counts reductions in personnel allocations as a cost savings, while ignoring the increased hired private staffing...quite simply because it reveals easily that the actual savings are non-existant, in fact total cost has grown. Whoopee...this is how we approach a $17 Trillion deficit and climbing!
We may be left with the singular option of placing our heads between our knees and kissing our asses goodbye.
Damn...on a roll here. Here is a educational opportunity if you wish to know just what my "new sub-agency" XX+WW straw man is...defined as a federal High Performing Organization
DeleteAri and Nancy Pelosi agree - the problem is the privatization.
Delete[I have the dark heart of a troll.]
But seriously... public vs private, I think you really just have your choice of bad side effects. Personally I don't think the government is capable of attracting and retaining the necessary talent these days.
Oh, man, you are mean! :-)
Delete“The real problem is outsourcing our national security,” she said, to applause from the audience. “When you outsource, you lose a lot of that strength.” ~ Nancy Pelosi
Actually, like a broken watch, she can be right twice a day. That's still only 0.138% of the time when she's right. That's roughly the level of certainty required for the sale of raw hamburger, or truckloads of scrap iron, by weight ...e.g., 1/10th of 1%.
Continued ...
DeleteIn this case, she is absolutely correct, but she fails to explain how and why that is, just as Robert J. Woolsey [prior DCIA] failed to do so last evening in his interview with Geraldo...where he said something similar, also without the cause. It is the elephant in the room that no one wants to cite....it is the weaponization of technology that few in senior executive service & above even grasp. Everyone cites Congressional manpower allocations, but no one admits that in order to contract functions out, Congress must also appropriate funding for same. The reason no one wants to acknowledge that is because it promptly gives lie to the idea that reducing manpower allocations per se and contracting work out saves the government money....a feature I have never [ever] seen take effect in 50+ years experience in the field at one level or another.
This is DOD "budgetary" information that I can't really go in to much further, by way of concrete examples, without stepping over the line of FOUO/no dissemination classification, or worse. Save it to say that the scenarios I cite above are just the way it works...especially the addition of new "oversight" drone "sub-agency" staff [always...always always always!!!] who do virtually nothing functionally necessary, rumored to be where you promote idiots or lazy narcissists who get in the way of real work otherwise. This nonsense, in turn, fosters the culture of lying...and in my 50 odd years I learned how to lie straight up in year number one & two...either that or get re-assigned to burning shit barrels on a remote Aleutian Island outpost, or maybe mess-pig duty at Long Binh. I never got nailed because I kept notes [contemporaneous records]specifically on the when, what, why, and on whose orders I did that crap. When I felt it was asking too much, I blew a whistle clandestinely, with support from associates, and within the law...successfully. It is never about you. Never.
As for government "attracting & retaining" necessary talent? Of course it can, with the mechanisms built in to civil service for rewarding exceptional skills, both technical and management....IOW, the GS schedule Plus. The hard part would be re-training the highly paid SES and above levels to actually do some of the work they're paid to do and to utilize some of the technology that has been at their fingertips since about 1995...beyond email and, and now smart phones, I mean....and this could mean {should mean] reducing the size of SES by 50% or more, firing the inept, and rewarding the remainders who actually can do something. Last, but not least, to retain them the culture of lying must be defeated...if anything, that just might be the hardest to do.
Continued ...
DeleteMany times previously I have ranted on about the excessive number of generals, admirals, and flag ranks (SES+) in government and defense. Yes, SES'rs get their own pretty flag that you're expected to unfurl for them whenever they appear in your presence, as well as provide virtual butt kissing, elevator holding, butler services just a General gets. Just admirals and Generals has gone past 800+ now...and soon the Navy will have more Admirals that it has ships of the line. In short, thin out the flag ranks, cut the lard of contracts, and there's money for civil service technical expertise without increasing spending.
But this cannot be done with regard to IT and ITE with serious changes to the "Non-governmental" criteria contained in OMB Circular A-76. To date, A-76 holds that IT and ITE related work is Non-Governmental and must be contracted out as a commercial activity. Logistics has also been classified Non-Governmental where subjected to A-76...and without capable military logistics, you have no Army responsive capabilities. At the very same tinme, while GSA, DLA and USACE maintain strong contracting capabilities...DHS/FEMA has created a brand spanking new one [of late, notorious for the RFP for 1.6 billion bullets], quite frankly in violation of Title 48, presented in Part 8, 48 CFR, Federal Acquisition Regulations, and part 208 DFARS, regarding sources of supply and acquisition processes...e.g., use of existing features, contracts and inventory systems is required, by law. Someone run tell fat Janet, uhmkay. Ppbbffftt. [There's that culture of lying and misrepresentation again, eh]
Some easy reading for those interested:
48 CFR , Part 8-48 CFR , OMB Circ A-76 , and OMB Circ A-76 Supplemental
Enjoy.
One final comment on the application of OMB Circ A-76. At the end of a "study of commercial activites" within an functional part of an agency, and series of bid proposals are requested, from both private sector and government. The private sector rarely ever loses this bid, and always assures the performance criteria is vague. Result, after a year or so, the private sector determines, on its own, just what isn't covered by their contract and gets away with it due to the vagaries in their proposal...as well as a some well lobbied re-negotiation when necessary. I have seen this happen, first hand, dead ass in front of me, where the contractor wound up performing less than 50% of what was anticipated, and there is another drafty hole out which to blow taxpayer dollars to compensate. Said contractor deemed it self merely a "facilitator" in year 3 and onward of its contract that appeared to say they were in complete control materially of the technology, assets, and the technical matériel. Whoops.
ReplyDeleteI've run on and on regarding these topics because I have not seen them covered by any news outlet, televised or Internet, although I kept hoping. Therefore I am just posting them for the hell of it and to illuminate part of the issue not admitted by pundits or government.
Delete