NSA officials told to evoke 9/11 sympathies when justifying mass surveillance

[revelarts]

NSA officials told to evoke 9/11 sympathies when justifying mass surveillance<time itemprop="dtreviewed" datetime="2013-10-31">
31 Oct 2013</time> by Anthony Cuthbertson
http://www.itproportal.com/2013/10/31/nsa-officials-told-to-evoke-911-sympathies-when-justifying-mass-surveillance/#ixzz2jKTB7Qo

A newly released internal document reveals details of how officials at the American National Security Agency (NSA) should cite 9/11 and the fear of future attacks when answering questions about the spying programme.
Al Jazeera America obtained the government document through a Freedom of Information Act request (http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/813096/nsa-talking-points.pdf), which details 'soundbites that resonate' and suggested talking points when dealing with the media and with Congress following the spy scandal that originated from leaked NSA documents by former contractor Edward Snowden.
Included in the 'soundbites that resonate', is the suggested response: "I much prefer to be here today explaining these programs, than explaining another 9/11 event that we were not able to prevent."
In the 27 page document, the phrase '9/11' is mentioned a total of fifteen times. Statements include: "NSA and its partners must make sure we connect the dots so that the nation is never attacked again like it was on 9/11," as well as, "Post-9/11 we made several changes and added a number of capabilities to enable us to connect the dots," "If we had Section 215 in place prior to 9/11, we may have known that 9/11 hijacker Khalid Al Midhar was located in San Diego," and "In recent years, these programs together with other intelligence have protected the US and our allies from terrorist threats across the globe, to include helping to prevent over 50 potential terrorist events since 9/11."
This final claim that over 50 potential terrorist events have been thwarted by the NSA was called into question recently (http://www.propublica.org/article/claim-on-attacks-thwarted-by-nsa-spreads-despite-lack-of-evidence), when investigative news site ProPublica stated that there is no evidence that this figure is accurate.


The latest revelations concerning mass surveillance to have come from the NSA spy scandal concern Spain, Germany and France. This week it was reported by Spanish newspaper El Mundo that the NSA secretly monitored 60 million phone calls in Spain in a single month (http://www.itproportal.com/2013/10/28/report-nsa-tracked-60-million-spanish-phone-calls-in-a-single-month-/), just a week after similar accusations of mass surveillance were reported in France (http://www.itproportal.com/2013/10/21/new-nsa-outrage-france-summons-us-ambassador-after-leaks-claim-70-million-phone-calls-spied-on/).

.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

NSA officials told to evoke 9/11 sympathies when justifying mass surveillance<time itemprop="dtreviewed" datetime="2013-10-31">
31 Oct 2013</time> by Anthony Cuthbertson
http://www.itproportal.com/2013/10/31/nsa-officials-told-to-evoke-911-sympathies-when-justifying-mass-surveillance/#ixzz2jKTB7Qo

A newly released internal document reveals details of how officials at the American National Security Agency (NSA) should cite 9/11 and the fear of future attacks when answering questions about the spying programme.
Al Jazeera America obtained the government document through a Freedom of Information Act request (http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/813096/nsa-talking-points.pdf), which details 'soundbites that resonate' and suggested talking points when dealing with the media and with Congress following the spy scandal that originated from leaked NSA documents by former contractor Edward Snowden.
Included in the 'soundbites that resonate', is the suggested response: "I much prefer to be here today explaining these programs, than explaining another 9/11 event that we were not able to prevent."
In the 27 page document, the phrase '9/11' is mentioned a total of fifteen times. Statements include: "NSA and its partners must make sure we connect the dots so that the nation is never attacked again like it was on 9/11," as well as, "Post-9/11 we made several changes and added a number of capabilities to enable us to connect the dots," "If we had Section 215 in place prior to 9/11, we may have known that 9/11 hijacker Khalid Al Midhar was located in San Diego," and "In recent years, these programs together with other intelligence have protected the US and our allies from terrorist threats across the globe, to include helping to prevent over 50 potential terrorist events since 9/11."
This final claim that over 50 potential terrorist events have been thwarted by the NSA was called into question recently (http://www.propublica.org/article/claim-on-attacks-thwarted-by-nsa-spreads-despite-lack-of-evidence), when investigative news site ProPublica stated that there is no evidence that this figure is accurate.


The latest revelations concerning mass surveillance to have come from the NSA spy scandal concern Spain, Germany and France. This week it was reported by Spanish newspaper El Mundo that the NSA secretly monitored 60 million phone calls in Spain in a single month (http://www.itproportal.com/2013/10/28/report-nsa-tracked-60-million-spanish-phone-calls-in-a-single-month-/), just a week after similar accusations of mass surveillance were reported in France (http://www.itproportal.com/2013/10/21/new-nsa-outrage-france-summons-us-ambassador-after-leaks-claim-70-million-phone-calls-spied-on/).

. As soon as Obama took office he started championing muslim outreach to listen to their complaints as if they were justified in making that attack!! Hell, he redirected NASA'S ROLE TO MAKE THAT EFFORT AND TO GIVE THE MUSLIM NATIONS TIME TO ADVANCE IN THE SPACE EXPLORATION FIELD.. Why is that important?? The answer is Helium -3..
http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-science/energy-from-space.htm


Can we harness energy from outer space?

by Jennifer Horton

Using helium-3 from the moon in nuclear fusion reactions could power the Earth without giving off any pollution. See more green science pictures.

HowStuffWorks 2008
x

People have been searching for clean alternative energy sources for decades to no avail. As soon as one source seems to pass the test, someone uncovers its fatal flaw. Nuclear, wind, solar and hydropower have all been dragged through the mud to some degree. Traditional nuclear fission is too risky, winds aren't consistent, the sun doesn't always penetrate the clouds and hydropower dams disrupt natural environments.

It seems like any workable solution is light-years away -- literally. Some researchers think the an*swer to our energy needs rests in the stars. From wind turbines on Mars to helium-3 fusion, people are increasingly looking to extraterrestrial sources for the Earth's energy needs.

One of the sources they're looking at is helium-3 to use in nuclear fusion reactions. As opposed to nuclear fission, which splits an atom's nucleus in half, nuclear fusion combines nuclei to produce energy. While nuclear fusion has already been tested with the hydrogen isotopes deuterium and tritium, those reactions give off the majority of their energy as radioactive neutrons, raising both safety and production concerns. Helium-3, on the other hand, is perfectly safe. It doesn't give off any pollution or radioactive waste and poses no danger to surrounding areas. Why was NASA REDIRECTED AWAY FROM SPACE SHUTTLE AND THE MOON? TO INSTEAD CONCENTRATEON MARS? HERE IS WHY..... 1.
" The only problem is we don't have 25 tons of helium-3 just lying around. But conveniently, the moon does. In fact, scientists estimate our lunar rock contains more than 1 million tons of the element. The energy stored in that much helium is 10 times the amount of energy you'd find in all the fossil fuels on Earth [source: Artemis]. If you put a cash value on it, helium-3 would be worth $4 billion a ton in terms of its energy equivalent in oil [source: Wakefield]. I've read other sources that stated that was an extremely low estimate. That it was low balled for a reason. Same reason Obama directed NASA AWAY FROM THE MOON. -Tyr

[red states rule]

http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/aria_c11332720131103120100.jpg

[revelarts]

Watch The Daily Show with Jon Stewart: A Bugged Life: Plausible Deniability Scramble online | Free | Hulu (http://www.hulu.com/watch/552896)

Above: Jon Stewart correctly characterizes the NSA congressional hearing response to questions on their illegalities as
"YOU can't handle the truth... You Need me on that wallll!"

<iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/SDOe_zl6xHk?feature=player_detailpage" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="360" width="640"></iframe>

[red states rule]

http://dashburst.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/ZV2dM7e.jpg

[red states rule]

http://d2tq98mqfjyz2l.cloudfront.net/image_cache/1375259564947842.jpg

[jafar00]

As a false flag, 9/11 has been used to diminish freedom the world over, not just in the USA. Naturally the NSA will try and worm their way out of this with the "but 9/11" excuse.

[red states rule]

As a false flag, 9/11 has been used to diminish freedom the world over, not just in the USA. Naturally the NSA will try and worm their way out of this with the "but 9/11" excuse.

We are trying our best to make sure another 9/11 never happens again

Much to your and your terrorists buddies dismay. So I can understand your desire to see the US return to the pre 9/11 days when we were not so watchful

[jafar00]

So I can understand your desire to see the US return to the pre 9/11 days when we were not so watchful

Hey, I'd just like to be able to catch a plane without having to discard my wife's expressed breast milk intended for my baby to drink on the flight. What a stupid restriction.

[Drummond]

Hey, I'd just like to be able to catch a plane without having to discard my wife's expressed breast milk intended for my baby to drink on the flight. What a stupid restriction.

How readily can security officials assess what it is you're transporting ? Do they have ready-made labs, capable of testing for anything imaginable, which can process an accurate assessment in a reasonable time, to let through hundreds of plane passengers safely and securely ?

I really think not. Far more sensible, therefore, to ban substances which have the POTENTIAL for harm, at the outset.

Or would you prefer a 15 hour plus check-in procedure to become standard ?

... OR ... just a blanket relaxation of security rules ? Now .. who'd be especially happy about THAT ?

Any thoughts on that, Jafar ? 5 letters, beginning with 'H' ... ?

[aboutime]

As a false flag, 9/11 has been used to diminish freedom the world over, not just in the USA. Naturally the NSA will try and worm their way out of this with the "but 9/11" excuse.


Sure thing jafar. If a man named Neville Chamberlain was alive on September 10, 2001. He probably would have said, and sounded exactly like you.

"A False Flag...Tomorrow...means more Dead Americans to those able to think, and remember."

[gabosaurus]

So why not? The 9-11 attacks were directly responsible for NSA and mass surveillance. Sometimes people forget who came up with the idea.

[aboutime]

So why not? The 9-11 attacks were directly responsible for NSA and mass surveillance. Sometimes people forget who came up with the idea.


Wrong again gabby. The NSA was started back in the 1950's. Do you ever bother to check anything out before you post it?

Read the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Agency (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Agency)

[logroller]

Wrong again gabby. The NSA was started back in the 1950's. Do you ever bother to check anything out before you post it?

Read the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Agency (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Agency)

note that she said the "NSA and mass surveillance." Perhaps you should finish reading a sentence before responding to it because, from the OP's quote of the NSA junket, "Post-9/11 we made several changes..." Like, i don't know, an unprecedented scope of mass surveillance to include all domestic phone calls including all US citizens. Or did that start in the 1950's too?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

note that she said the "NSA and mass surveillance." Perhaps you should finish reading a sentence before responding to it because, from the OP's quote of the NSA junket, "Post-9/11 we made several changes..." Like, i don't know, an unprecedented scope of mass surveillance to include all domestic phone calls including all US citizens. Or did that start in the 1950's too? I disagree . If anything aboutime's comment was at least a 50/50 deal on her comment.


The 9-11 attacks were directly responsible for NSA -and that part validates his reply. I saw the second half and still took it as a wrong statement because she said --"and" -- instead of ---The 9-11 attacks were directly responsible for NSA starting mass surveillance etc.... If anything it would be a net wash IMHO. SHE BEING EQUALLY AT FAULT BY HOW SHE CONSTRUCTED THE COMMENT. --Tyr

[logroller]

I disagree . If anything aboutime's comment was at least a 50/50 deal on her comment.

that part validates his reply. I saw the second half and still took it as a wrong statement because she said --"and" -- instead of ---The 9-11 attacks were directly responsible for NSA starting mass surveillance etc.... If anything it would be a net wash IMHO. SHE BEING EQUALLY AT FAULT BY HOW SHE CONSTRUCTED THE COMMENT. --Tyr
equally at fault for what, poor editing or poor comprehension?

she then continues with "Sometimes people forget who came up with the idea." -- thereby elaborating on the unity of the first sentence's predicate (who: NSA & idea: mass surveillance).
could it have been worded more clearly? Sure; but the nsa being formed post 9/11 is such a preposterous an idea the wise man would seek the more reasonable interpretation when there is one-- as your 50/50 implies, there was a more reasonable one.
Unfortunately wisdom and reason aren't what define aboutime's post(s) but rather personal insults in deference to the topic at hand-- the NSA's reference to 9/11 in regards to the necessity of mass surveillance. Look for yourself-- two posts, both snide comments directed at posters who addressed the topic and weren't even responding to him. Sorry bud, thats all on him, not gabby.

[red states rule]

Wrong again gabby. The NSA was started back in the 1950's. Do you ever bother to check anything out before you post it?

Read the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Agency (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Agency)

There you go again AT. Confusing Gabby with facts. Of course she does not mention how her boy Obama expanded the wire taps and even tapped the phone of the Pope

I guess that is Gabby being Gabby

[aboutime]

There you go again AT. Confusing Gabby with facts. Of course she does not mention how her boy Obama expanded the wire taps and even tapped the phone of the Pope

I guess that is Gabby being Gabby


red states rule. After reading all the comments about my post to gabby. All I have to say is "WHO REALLY CARES?"
What's the big deal? Was there any law broken?
Anyone injured?
History changed?

Think about it. It no longer matters what anyone says, does, thinks, or believes.
Somebody here WILL FIND a reason to dispute, disagree, or accuse someone of something. Just because it pleases their tiny, immature little whiny hearts.
WHY does everyone have a need to make Mountains out of Molehills on every topic, every sentence, every word, every wrong punctuation mark, the entire vocabulary???

Seems like some people need to grow up. Too bad we all have to remain anonymous here.
But then. After seeing how low some people are willing to go.
Jim would have to close DP down until the FBI finished their investigations.

[gabosaurus]

Most of you approved mass surveillance during the Dubya administration. It is no better or worse now.

[Jeff]

equally at fault for what, poor editing or poor comprehension?

she then continues with "Sometimes people forget who came up with the idea." -- thereby elaborating on the unity of the first sentence's predicate (who: NSA & idea: mass surveillance).
could it have been worded more clearly? Sure; but the nsa being formed post 9/11 is such a preposterous an idea the wise man would seek the more reasonable interpretation when there is one-- as your 50/50 implies, there was a more reasonable one.
Unfortunately wisdom and reason aren't what define aboutime's post(s) but rather personal insults in deference to the topic at hand-- the NSA's reference to 9/11 in regards to the necessity of mass surveillance. Look for yourself-- two posts, both snide comments directed at posters who addressed the topic and weren't even responding to him. Sorry bud, thats all on him, not gabby.

It must be worded perfect for Gabby or she deserves anything she gets , as much as she throws stones she had better be perfect.

Log gabby's post aren't all about post(s) but rather personal insults in deference to the topic at hand ??

Sorry but as long as you are going to throw stones then you must be perfect if not take what you dish out.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

It must be worded perfect for Gabby or she deserves anything she gets , as much as she throws stones she had better be perfect.

Log gabby's post aren't all about post(s) but rather personal insults in deference to the topic at hand ??

Sorry but as long as you are going to throw stones then you must be perfect if not take what you dish out. haha, Gabby is no dummy and she does dish some stuff out herself so one can not paint her as an angel or a victimized party in these things. I suspect she is a strong woman that is not lacking in courage. AT is like me in that he is often too open and too blunt with his views expressed here. Some take high offense to that while others just understands its his nature. Myself, I prefer a truthful man over one that uses guile and cunning as everyday tools. Truth is a very precious commodity, one should take it wherever they can get it IMHO.-Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Most of you approved mass surveillance during the Dubya administration. It is no better or worse now. IT'S SO MUCH WORSE NOW!!! --Tyr

[jimnyc]

Most of you approved mass surveillance during the Dubya administration. It is no better or worse now.

This shows just how out of touch with reality that you are. Many said that the patriot act was ok, and we thought that judges still needed to sign off on things that would normally require a warrant. We leaned towards this surveillance going after terrorists. NO ONE ever supported mass surveillance like is happening under Obama, like from the NSA and IRS and such. You do this all the time, try to make blanket statements about the past and try and state that others did the exact same thing when Bush was in office - and you're either outright lying, or have some serious memory issues. But feel free to bring up a bunch of old posts where "most of us" approved of such mass surveillance in the past. We KNOW that you either won't, or you'll bring up something lame and change the goal posts of course. But your continued lies about who did what back then, and just continually bringing up Bush to excuse the non-stop bullshit for a minimum of 5 years under this administration, is laughable at best.

The surveillance and liberties being taken on Americans is like 500% worse today than it was when Bush was in office. Hell, the NSA snooping alone would make 30 terms under GWB look barely intrusive in comparison.

I used to think that you tossed out absolute crap like this solely to stir the pot, to troll in your own little way. But the abundance of which you post, and the seriousness, and how often your posts back up prior posts - lead me to believe you aren't always trolling, that you are also highly uneducated, out of touch, a hack and completely oblivious to reality. 99% of your posts sound like regurgitated vomit from all the lowly talking point liberal sites.

[Jeff]

This shows just how out of touch with reality that you are. Many said that the patriot act was ok, and we thought that judges still needed to sign off on things that would normally require a warrant. We leaned towards this surveillance going after terrorists. NO ONE ever supported mass surveillance like is happening under Obama, like from the NSA and IRS and such. You do this all the time, try to make blanket statements about the past and try and state that others did the exact same thing when Bush was in office - and you're either outright lying, or have some serious memory issues. But feel free to bring up a bunch of old posts where "most of us" approved of such mass surveillance in the past. We KNOW that you either won't, or you'll bring up something lame and change the goal posts of course. But your continued lies about who did what back then, and just continually bringing up Bush to excuse the non-stop bullshit for a minimum of 5 years under this administration, is laughable at best.

The surveillance and liberties being taken on Americans is like 500% worse today than it was when Bush was in office. Hell, the NSA snooping alone would make 30 terms under GWB look barely intrusive in comparison.

I used to think that you tossed out absolute crap like this solely to stir the pot, to troll in your own little way. But the abundance of which you post, and the seriousness, and how often your posts back up prior posts - lead me to believe you aren't always trolling, that you are also highly uneducated, out of touch, a hack and completely oblivious to reality. 99% of your posts sound like regurgitated vomit from all the lowly talking point liberal sites.

She now has a Liberal in disguise to try and impress :laugh: and God knows she wont be able to do it with the TRUTH so do as liberals do and LIE like a effing rug !!!

[revelarts]

Most of you approved mass surveillance during the Dubya administration. It is no better or worse now.

Many here and others on the right did agree with the patriot act and other new Bush "legalized" blanket wholesale spying on "terrorist suspects" rules, (not me).
BUT what some here did do was DENY DENY DENY that Bush was targeting or tapping ANYONE BUT "terror suspects" and then they'd often add justifications or excuses LIKE:

"well if Americans were spied on, then if they were doing nothing wrong then there was no problem. The Gov't is trying to keep us safe, we have to give up some SO CALLED freedoms to catch the all powerful evil terrorist who are about ti kill us allll!. Are you saying You'd rather keep your phone/internet privacy BUT WE"D ALL BE DEAD??!!..."

"...I'm GLAD they are spying on us, they keeping us SAFE, and it IS legal cause they said so or wrote a new law or rule, and the U.S. is still a free'est best'est country ever ever amen, and your a leftist TRAITOR , terrorist lover , and HATE America if you say different...."

"....Do you know the Constitution better than all the real lawyers that support Bush, your just reading ignorant liberals twisted stupid views???!!!..."

"...If Americans are talking/working with terrorist THEY HAVE NO RIGHTS, SHOT THEM DEAD, that solves the problem!!!..."

"...and you CAN"T PROVE THAT BUSH IS SPYING ON AMERICANS even with all your so called facts and reports, that i won't take the time to read or acknowledge because they don't come from sources I like..."

"...And no harm done anyway, even if you can prove it...no harm done.. so what's your problem do you want us to DIIIE for FREEDOM!?!?...."


Lots of stuff like that.
But NOW Obama's doing it, so spying on citizens wrong wrong wrong. At least some on the right think so. All of the whistle blowers are suddenly telling the truth and the constitution does protect Americans from the gov't spying on our communications Without Probably Cause and Warrants. and Blanket Warrants really are unconstitutional.

But Obama is Carrying forward the ball on All of it. With the completion of the battle star... I mean the Utah spying Hub. And has added to the mix with the prosecution of those that expose the unconstitutional actions. And adding layers of secrecy to the actively. And Trying to solidfy the so-called legal codes/statutes/executive orders/policies that's Bush the FBI, CIA, NSA, DIA and both R and D congresses came up with try to make all of Unconstitutional STINK go away.

It's Worse. and the worse part about that is Obama PROMISED to do just the opposite.

<iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/AnKP9DFti5w?feature=player_detailpage" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="360" width="640"></iframe>

One caveat to the fine words of Candidate OBAMA, the FISA court doesn't "work", it's a rubber stamp. And it "authorized" blanket spying. The FISA court needs serious revision as well.

But to make the issue a partisan one is a big mistake.
BOTH OBAMA and BUSH are CRIMINALS on this Issue. Both Rs and Ds congresses are criminal on this issue. Getting hot an bothered over 'who's the worse mugger' is debatable i guess, but seems to me the main thing should be to stop the mugging in progress and stop defending any muggers. ESPECIALLY if your the one getting mugged.