NSA blows its own top secret program in order to propagandize
firstlook.org
firstlook.org
>What the Church and Pike committees found" nearly 40 years ago was "that people were doing things that were wrong. That's not happening here," Alexander said.
The particular definition of wrong used by Alexander would be interesting to know.
>"When you're the good guy and you're on the side of truth and democracy and the American way, anything that is an impediment to you is naturally bad and needs to be overcome, even if it's the law," German said.
Apparently the ability to have private communication digitally is one such annoying impediment.
>Now, Russian ground commanders and Al Qaeda cell leaders are on notice that the NSA is nearly everywhere.
Those evil Russian ground commanders... One tip for the author of this piece: Snowden leaks enabling child pornographers to avoid surveillance would be a much more effective appeal to emotion than a topical example like renewed fears of Russian aggression that risk fading from the zeitgeist soon!
[1]http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-alexander-nsa-20140331,0...
Probably the definition includes, "found in a congressional report."
The article says German is at the Brennan Center for Justice, a civil liberties organization, and believes that Alexander's world view "reflects a career in the national security bubble".
This capability in Iraq had already been publicly disclosed. It's detailed in Bob Woodward's 2011 book, "Obama's Wars". Search for "RTRG" in the excerpt.† It isn't clear who disclosed the program to Woodward, but I think it's pretty clear they wanted the capability to counter the (very real) IED threat in Iraq. It actually sounds pretty reasonable and not so Orwellian in that context.
† http://books.simonandschuster.com/Obamas-Wars/Bob-Woodward/9...
It seems that this mischaracterizes what Gen. Alexander says in the linked article.
In that article he says that there is a possibility that some of the information Snowden may or may not have leaked to the press (and which might be published in the future) could cost people their lives. Not that any secret information about NSA operations will cost people their lives. So, a bit cynical perhaps as he's basically saying only the NSA can make the judgement call about what information is "safe" to leak (thus avoiding accountability,) but this isn't really a contradiction.
A larger issue one might take with Alexander's words is that Snowden only sent the information to media organizations; it's up to them what and how much to publish. The NSA could attempt to protect lives that are at stake by offering feedback to these news organizations about Snowden leak stories before they're published to let them know which specific parts, if published, might endanger lives.
Psychological operations (PSYOP) are planned operations to convey selected information and indicators to audiences to influence their emotions, motives, objective reasoning, and ultimately the behavior of governments, organizations, groups, and individuals.
The purpose of psychological operations is to induce or reinforce behavior favorable to US objectives. They are an important part of the range of diplomatic, informational, military, and economic activities available to the US. They can be utilized during both peacetime and conflict.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_Operations_(Unite...
As for legality, the important parts of Smith-Mundt were repealed several years ago. But you should totally trust them, PSYOP would never be carried out on their own populations, in social media or media in general.
http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB177/ is a good read, for those interested.
As is a history on Smith-Mundt: http://mountainrunner.us/2012/02/history_of_smith-mundt/
[1] http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy-ope...
[2] https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipula...
Iraq and Afghanistan were my top guesses.
PRESIDENT: You think, you think we want to, want to go this route now? And the--let it hang out, so to speak?
DEAN: Well, it's, it isn't really that--
HALDEMAN: It's a limited hang out.
DEAN: It's a limited hang out.
EHRLICHMAN: It's a modified limited hang out.
PRESIDENT: Well, it's only the questions of the thing hanging out publicly or privately.
Cute. It's like those kids discovering music from the '70s.
Through 'Full Spectrum Dominance', in the news media, 'box set' dramas, movies and dead-tree spy thrillers an impression is made that the spy agencies are all seeing and all powerful. Fact and fiction are mixed up so you don't know what to believe and what not to believe. Whatever. The impression is made: you cannot beat The Man, the casino always wins and they know your thoughts before you think them.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/23/uk-gove...
And yet targetted strikes intended to take out key military targets based on high-quality intelligence still took out hospitals and schools. Hmm.
To be fair, if they were that smart, they might choose not to seem so. But there is no end to that type of thinking...
They have a few decades of computational (game theoretic) modeling and decades of (grant supported) academic research into individual and collective behavior behind them.
> ~rabbit hole
Apply that well worn razor. What information has actually been disclosed? Extra extra! "states spy on states"; "government reads your mail"; "technology firms are in bed with the military-industrial complex"; ...
What you need to ask yourself is whether you are now more inclinded to be guarded in your conversations with your fellow citizens and are self-censoring.