6 ms·

>Like what? I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about here. Uh, the constant mass shootings that have occurred over the past year wherein, 100% of t

>Like what? I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about here. Uh, the constant mass shootings that have occurred over the past year wherein, 100% of the time, the perp was already known to police and FBI and had a very public troubling online presence detailing their years of mental instability and virulent racism? >intelligence agencies don't talk about their activities, even their successes, for very good reason. The hell are you talking about? The FBI is constantly publicly congratulating themselves when they "foil" a "plot" their agent provocateurs have cooked up. https://citationsneeded.libsyn.com/ep-31-fake-isis-plots-and-the-selling-of-forever-war https://citationsneeded.libsyn.com/ep-31-fake-isis-plots-and... The NSA doesn't like to brag as much as the FBI does but they're clearly just as responsible for dropping the ball on domestic terrorism every other week when yet another mass shooting happens...

BookmarkSaver 8y ago
I don't even know where to begin, there are just so many logical fallacies and complete misunderstandings in what you've said that the best I can recommend is for you to just not bother thinking about this stuff at all. It does no one any good.
- scrumption 8y ago
  Nice argument.
  - BookmarkSaver 8y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Agency https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Agency Try having even the tiniest bit of an idea what you are talking about.
    - dang 8y ago
      You crossed into incivility repeatedly in this flamewar, and here you cross into outright bannable offense. Could you please not do this when commenting here? If someone else is completely wrong, and you react like this, all you do is make them seem more credible, and discredit what you know. What would work much better is to wait until you can comment neutrally, and then comment neutrally with information we can all learn from. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- maybeiambatman 8y ago
  What a horrendously condescending reply. If you want to do any one any good, the least you can do is elaborate.
  - BookmarkSaver 8y ago
    What is the expectation here? The commenter has absolutely no idea what they are talking about. The arguments are being made are clearly without any understanding of how any intelligence agency operates, and absolute ignorance of the NSA's mandate, much less any actual data about its activities. It's like reading a post by someone bitching about the modern Hollywood blockbuster culture by citing Superman's plot arc in the new Avengers movie, except that somehow it isn't a trolling attempt. What sort of attention does that blatant misconception and willful ignorance deserve?
    - mgamache 8y ago
      Sure it's shallow and ill considered, but it's also a not uncommon view among a large part of the population. While a pro NSA voice is not common here, providing lucid counter arguments would allow all of us to view the augments and maybe learn how best to counter these types of assertions in other venues.
    - icebraining 8y ago
      What is the expectation here? What's yours? Is there something to gain from a post that effectively just says "you're wrong"?
- hmyr 8y ago
  All of your "arguments" so far have been nothing but "you have no idea what you're talking about" and "you know nothing". Why not contribute some facts and rational arguments to the discussion?
  - BookmarkSaver 8y ago
    Domestic mass shootings are no where even close to the NSA's mandate. Intelligence agencies DO NOT trumpet triumphs. The NSA is not the FBI. There's no arguments to be made here, there's just ignorance of incontrovertible and uncontroversial facts which can be easily looked up.
mentat 8y ago
So you're saying the NSA isn't spying on Americans effectively enough?
- scrumption 8y ago
  They have not justified the existence of these programs -- if they were efficacious they would still be wrong, in my opinion, but luckily for me my opinion never has to enter into it because as it stands it's just a double whammy of a 1) massively unethical 2) giant waste of money. So yeah, even if #2 wasn't in play I'd still be against it.
jMyles 8y ago
> Uh, the constant mass shootings I think your point is sound, but I'm not sure this is the best example. Regular shootings are causing a lot more deaths, although I doubt the NSA has any interest in stopping either one (and of course, their official charge doesn't include either one).
- scrumption 8y ago
  Right, but what else is the NSA ostensibly carrying out all this domestic espionage for if not to preempt domestic terrorism (which by and large has been dominated by mass shootings in recent years, it's been a bit since we had e.g. a bombing), which by all accounts is at its highest point in recent memory?
  - BookmarkSaver 8y ago
    >but what else is the NSA ostensibly carrying out all this domestic espionage for if not to preempt domestic terrorism Yeah... foreign terrorism only occurs when foreign entities stand at the border and throw things into our country. LMAO.
    - jMyles 8y ago
      Is there a reason you're being so intentionally mean throughout this thread? Take a deep breath, maybe a quick walk around the block. Your points are being lost because your vitriol is so overpowering.
      - BookmarkSaver 8y ago
        It's funny watching what is essentially the equivalent of the Yankees getting criticized for not scoring enough touchdowns this season by people who are dead serious and consider this topic of grave concern. If these people aren't even able to Google the NSA before venturing their opinion on something so complicated, then it seems unlikely just giving them the basic facts is actually going to do something. People should feel bad about this level of willful ignorance.
gknoy 8y ago
> NSA [is] just as responsible for dropping the ball on domestic terrorism every other week Domestic terrorism isn't the NSA's purview. Their job is signals intelligence against the rest of the world.
- garyfirestorm 8y ago
  Ummmmm. How do they achieve that by tapping 500 million local calls? Let me guess, the locals call rest of the world.
  - gknoy 8y ago
    Their claim is that it's in order to listen to the conversations where a foreign person of interest is the other party. :) Don't get me wrong, I don't like the surveillance either, but domestic terrorism isn't their job. Sure, if they notice something, they will pass it along, but it's not what they are looking for (I believe). If there's been a proverbial ball dropped, it's probably more accurate to blame the FBI than the NSA.
dang 8y ago
> The hell are you talking about? Crossing into incivility like this isn't ok on HN and will eventually get you banned, so please read https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and don't do this. Please don't do political flamewars on HN either.

BookmarkSaver 8y ago

I don't even know where to begin, there are just so many logical fallacies and complete misunderstandings in what you've said that the best I can recommend is for you to just not bother thinking about this stuff at all. It does no one any good.

scrumption 8y ago
Nice argument.
- BookmarkSaver 8y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Agency https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Agency Try having even the tiniest bit of an idea what you are talking about.
  - dang 8y ago
    You crossed into incivility repeatedly in this flamewar, and here you cross into outright bannable offense. Could you please not do this when commenting here? If someone else is completely wrong, and you react like this, all you do is make them seem more credible, and discredit what you know. What would work much better is to wait until you can comment neutrally, and then comment neutrally with information we can all learn from. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
maybeiambatman 8y ago
What a horrendously condescending reply. If you want to do any one any good, the least you can do is elaborate.
- BookmarkSaver 8y ago
  What is the expectation here? The commenter has absolutely no idea what they are talking about. The arguments are being made are clearly without any understanding of how any intelligence agency operates, and absolute ignorance of the NSA's mandate, much less any actual data about its activities. It's like reading a post by someone bitching about the modern Hollywood blockbuster culture by citing Superman's plot arc in the new Avengers movie, except that somehow it isn't a trolling attempt. What sort of attention does that blatant misconception and willful ignorance deserve?
  - mgamache 8y ago
    Sure it's shallow and ill considered, but it's also a not uncommon view among a large part of the population. While a pro NSA voice is not common here, providing lucid counter arguments would allow all of us to view the augments and maybe learn how best to counter these types of assertions in other venues.
  - icebraining 8y ago
    What is the expectation here? What's yours? Is there something to gain from a post that effectively just says "you're wrong"?
hmyr 8y ago
All of your "arguments" so far have been nothing but "you have no idea what you're talking about" and "you know nothing". Why not contribute some facts and rational arguments to the discussion?
- BookmarkSaver 8y ago
  Domestic mass shootings are no where even close to the NSA's mandate. Intelligence agencies DO NOT trumpet triumphs. The NSA is not the FBI. There's no arguments to be made here, there's just ignorance of incontrovertible and uncontroversial facts which can be easily looked up.

mentat 8y ago

So you're saying the NSA isn't spying on Americans effectively enough?

scrumption 8y ago
They have not justified the existence of these programs -- if they were efficacious they would still be wrong, in my opinion, but luckily for me my opinion never has to enter into it because as it stands it's just a double whammy of a 1) massively unethical 2) giant waste of money. So yeah, even if #2 wasn't in play I'd still be against it.

jMyles 8y ago

> Uh, the constant mass shootings I think your point is sound, but I'm not sure this is the best example. Regular shootings are causing a lot more deaths, although I doubt the NSA has any interest in stopping either one (and of course, their official charge doesn't include either one).

scrumption 8y ago
Right, but what else is the NSA ostensibly carrying out all this domestic espionage for if not to preempt domestic terrorism (which by and large has been dominated by mass shootings in recent years, it's been a bit since we had e.g. a bombing), which by all accounts is at its highest point in recent memory?
- BookmarkSaver 8y ago
  >but what else is the NSA ostensibly carrying out all this domestic espionage for if not to preempt domestic terrorism Yeah... foreign terrorism only occurs when foreign entities stand at the border and throw things into our country. LMAO.
  - jMyles 8y ago
    Is there a reason you're being so intentionally mean throughout this thread? Take a deep breath, maybe a quick walk around the block. Your points are being lost because your vitriol is so overpowering.
    - BookmarkSaver 8y ago
      It's funny watching what is essentially the equivalent of the Yankees getting criticized for not scoring enough touchdowns this season by people who are dead serious and consider this topic of grave concern. If these people aren't even able to Google the NSA before venturing their opinion on something so complicated, then it seems unlikely just giving them the basic facts is actually going to do something. People should feel bad about this level of willful ignorance.

gknoy 8y ago

> NSA [is] just as responsible for dropping the ball on domestic terrorism every other week Domestic terrorism isn't the NSA's purview. Their job is signals intelligence against the rest of the world.

garyfirestorm 8y ago
Ummmmm. How do they achieve that by tapping 500 million local calls? Let me guess, the locals call rest of the world.
- gknoy 8y ago
  Their claim is that it's in order to listen to the conversations where a foreign person of interest is the other party. :) Don't get me wrong, I don't like the surveillance either, but domestic terrorism isn't their job. Sure, if they notice something, they will pass it along, but it's not what they are looking for (I believe). If there's been a proverbial ball dropped, it's probably more accurate to blame the FBI than the NSA.

dang 8y ago

> The hell are you talking about? Crossing into incivility like this isn't ok on HN and will eventually get you banned, so please read https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and don't do this. Please don't do political flamewars on HN either.