General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhoa... Anybody Got A Second Source On This ???
The NSA surveillance controversy explained in five simple pointsSAM CLENCH NEWS.COM.AU
NOVEMBER 04, 2013 8:38AM
<snip>
NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden is preparing to testify in the Angela Merkel wiretapping case after meeting with a German MP in Moscow. Mr Snowden is set to give explosive testimony and according to the MP Hans-Christian Stroebele, it's "clear that he knows a lot" about the scandal involving the NSA and Ms Merkel, the German Chancellor. As Mr Snowden threatens to blow the case wide open, we take a closer look at the NSA. and explain the controversy over America's spying operations in five simple points.
WHAT IS THE NSA?
The National Security Agency is one of America's largest intelligence organisations. Think of it as a less famous cousin of the FBI and CIA. It specialises in codemaking and codebreaking, and providing secret information to US political and military leaders.
The NSA outlines two broad "missions" on its website. Its "Information Assurance" mission is aimed at keeping stickybeaks out of America's business, while its "Signals Intelligence" mission gathers and processes information for "intelligence and counterintelligence" purposes.
The agency describes its vision as "Global Cryptologic Dominance through Responsive Presence and Network Advantage". Ironically, you would need to be a codebreaker yourself to make any sense of that.
Orwellian language aside, the NSA basically spies on people. But it can't conduct "human-source" intelligence gathering - everything's electronic. There are no James Bonds in the NSA.
<snip>
More: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/the-nsa-surveillance-controversy-explained-in-five-simple-points/story-e6frg6n6-1226752489737


riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)HOWEVER what isn't clear is if the rest of the Five Eyes members were party to the worst NSA overreaches.
We know the US is. And since the US and the UK are practically one and the same intel agency, I presume the UK is also massively involved.
I presume the Canadians, Australians and New Zealanders were kinda hoping nobody would notice them...
FarCenter
(19,429 posts)Each of the Five Eyes nations has legal restriction on intercepting communications of its own citizens.
The assumption has been that each intercepts the international communications of the others citizens, and then they swap analyzed information based thereon as is advantageous.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Including Deutche Welle
http://www.dw.de/calls-for-snowden-to-testify-in-germany-met-with-skepticism/a-17200050
http://boingboing.net/2013/11/01/snowden-invited-to-testify-in.html
I could to on. There is a plethora of links. I think the may want to, to will, will come fairly fast.
FreakinDJ
(17,644 posts)truedelphi
(32,324 posts)In the article the OP cites, there is an entire section that carries the following "header" ":But does Obama know?"
Jon Stewart asked that question the other day, along with his colleague Jessica Williams. Rather hilarious banter, but in reality it is tragic - Obama is becoming simply a "know nothing" ambassador of good will, who can't afford to know what is really happening as then he couldn't possibly be so upbeat in his "speechifying."
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-october-28-2013/wait-wait----don-t-tell-him-
WillyT
(72,631 posts)RKP5637
(67,112 posts)Savannahmann
(3,891 posts)Let's say I work for you. You're the President, and I'm one of your direct report subordinates. In other words, I report directly to you. For five years I've kept information from you, and then you find out about it from the Press. Now, political considerations may keep you from firing me, but would you put me in charge of a panel to review what it is my department is doing?
If you were previously ignorant of my activity, and are disturbed enough by the reports of what I have been up to, wouldn't you either fire me, or appoint someone to take a look at what I am really up to?
If it was me? I'd appoint the most rabid Civil Rights Attorney from the Justice Department to crawl up the NSA's ass with a mining headlight to make sure we got all the dark corners exposed, at least to the boss, Me.
So the claim that President Obama didn't know might be a useful way to avoid congressional hearings, but nobody is really going to believe it, and nobody is going to take the administration seriously again.