Posts: 901
Threads: 61
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Jul 2013
Nothing particularly new here but it's a well-collated and interesting set of clips. Richard Clarke in particular delivers a bravura performance...
“The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him.â€
― Leo Tolstoy,
Posts: 3,936
Threads: 474
Likes Received: 1 in 1 posts
Likes Given: 1
Joined: Dec 2009
Having watched this video, I am not quite sure what Richard Clarke said "they got away with." Did they get away with incompetence? Did they get away with being unable to to handle inter-agency squabbling? What does he think they got away with? Or is he as vague as usual?
"We'll know our disinformation campaign is complete when everything the American public believes is false." --William J. Casey, D.C.I
"We will lead every revolution against us." --Theodore Herzl
Posts: 3,905
Threads: 200
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Sep 2008
Lauren Johnson Wrote:Having watched this video, I am not quite sure what Richard Clarke said "they got away with." Did they get away with incompetence? Did they get away with being unable to to handle inter-agency squabbling? What does he think they got away with? Or is he as vague as usual?
Ya this is just another limited hangout. Let it happen on purpose at best. Same old same old. Had the info but did not share.
Posts: 2,131
Threads: 199
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Apr 2014
It seem apparent that this sort of disclosure and the "public outrage" accompanying it would be used to justify "easier" (read: "warrantless") law enforcement access to the wealth of data at the NSA. Legally (and now that the program is public knowledge, politically), you have a choice: You can either put the illegally acquired information in the hands of "local" law enforcement, making them more effective at stopping the bad guys (but less likely to obtain court convictions); or you can let them struggle along without it, making them far more likely to secure convictions in the work that they complete. The third option is to provide local law enforcement with the illegally obtained information and instruct them to perjure themselves about its' origin. Guess which option we're using now? Seems unlikely that this third option will survive public disclosure.
I expect that there will be a fair bit of debate about it in the 2014 and 2016 campaign cycles. Please make your position known to your representatives if the topic arises.
