[embolism]

Except that we don't really know what the organization does. We only have insinuations by Snowden and detractors against the US.

We do have evidence that they conduct massive surveillance could be unconstitutional.

We do not have evidence that they are abusing this, and more importantly we don't know whether they have been able to save lives.

It could be that the people who work there know about positive life-saving results from the work they do and that's why they continue to do it.

(Edit: downvotes are fine, but it would be nice to also see a single link to evidence that the intelligence itself is being misused as opposed to protecting people)

[PavlovsCat]

Abdulrahman Al-Awlaki, 16 years old, born to the "wrong father" and killed by a drone strike 2 weeks after his father was murdered. I say murdered because without a trial and imminent threat, that's what it is. And this is not a solitary incident either, just a rather poignant one. Next question?

edit:

http://www.emptywheel.net/2013/05/24/what-not-specifically-t...

In other words, it sounds like some in the Administration suspect that someone within the targeting chain of command may have invented the Ibrahim al-Banna presence as a way to get at Awlaki’s son.

If this doesn't make you throw up, what will?

[embolism]

Murdered by the NSA? Or is this a reason to bring down the entire US?

[PavlovsCat]

No, murdered by sending out drones in random directions without any targeting info. These things and their programming just pop out of thin air, after all. And then they track just by scent, for weeks even.

Or is this a reason to bring down the entire US?

For someone in the third world who may have little to lose and becomes witness to such senseless slaughter? Maybe.

But then again I'm not quite sure what you're even asking, maybe elaborate. Do you think maybe cutting down on the nazi stuff a liiiittle bit would endanger the US in any meaningful way?

[krapp]

No, murdered by sending out drones in random directions without any targeting info. These things and their programming just pop out of thin air, after all. And then they track just by scent, for weeks even.

I'm pretty sure that's not how drones work. They're not autonomous, self-aware predators that can smell a Muslim from a mile away, and make their own decisions about when and how and who to kill. I'm pretty sure there's always a pilot with a joystick watching a camera and pulling a trigger.

Not that that makes it any better, but unless you can provide some proof what you're describing seems like science fiction.

[PavlovsCat]

I was being sarcastic.

I'm pretty sure there's always a pilot with a joystick watching a camera and pulling a trigger.

Just like there is always a president near the top signing the order, in some shape or other. And: people collecting intelligence about whoever they are asked to collect intelligence about, because that's just the "requirements handed down to them". Which was the point I hid under my sarcasm.

[krapp]

It's getting hard to tell lately. My mistake.

[embolism]

I'm pointing out that espionage is a part of real world statecraft and that it's naïve to just rail against the NSA for doing it.

I do believe that there should be consequences for a lot of these actions. I'd just rather people were discussing what we actually know and how things could realistically be improved (by individuals, corporations, and'the government) than just jeering like an angry mob.

[PavlovsCat]

You asked for evidence, I gave you evidence.

I'm not sure what you mean by "real world statecraft", but when I hear that I have to think of Larkin's "This Be The Verse":

fools in old-style hats and coats, / Who half the time were soppy-stern / And half at one another's throats.

[embolism]

you don't seem very constructive - which is my point

[mikeash]

There is no need to demonstrate that the intelligence is actively being misused. The simple fact that collecting it is unconstitutional and abusive is enough.

[embolism]

It's certainly enough to warrant an open political inquiry and changes of policy, as well as resignations from those politically responsible.

It's not at all obvious that all the NSA staff should just walk away from their jobs. If the NSA is actually protecting people, that would be just as irresponsible.

[mikeash]

I think it's safe to say that they are not protecting people to any major degree. When pressed, the only justification they can come up with is "terrorism", which is a completely insignificant threat.

[embolism]

Just to be clear - what do you think they are actually doing? I.e. what does the government pay for them to do?

[mikeash]

I think they are trying to protect people. It's just that they have been tasked with a pointless job. I don't think they're deliberately evil, they're just a massive overreaction to an irrelevant threat.

Basically, what do you think the immune system in somebody with a bee allergy is actually doing when that person gets stung by a bee? It's only trying to help, of course. But that doesn't change the fact that 1) a bee sting can be ignored and 2) the massive allergic reaction threatens the person's life.

[embolism]

I understand the point you're making, I just don't think it's obvious that the NSA is unimportant. As well as detecting terrorism, they may well be doing a lot of other things to protect the us against then machinations of others e.g. Russia and china.

Also, don't underestimate terrorism. Over decades, the IRA did a lot to disrupt the UK, including killing cabinet ministers, and two nearly successful assassination attempts against the prime minister. Ultimately the UK conceded and the new Irish government contained ministers who had been leaders of the terrorist movement.