10 ms·

> After long research, his team of 120 counterintelligence officers hadn’t been able to find a single person, among the thousands of American agents and secret

by us0r 6y ago

> After long research, his team of 120 counterintelligence officers hadn’t been able to find a single person, among the thousands of American agents and secret sources in Afghanistan and Iraq, who could be shown to have died because of the disclosures. Sounds like the NSA who couldn't point to a single instance of stopping any type of terrorist attack/operation despite collecting anything they could get their hands on.

vkou 6y ago
Is he being accused of disclosing information that got someone killed? Or of assisting a hacker? If he's not accused of doing the first, then this is hardly relevant to his case.
- class4behavior 6y ago
  This is most certainly relevant. It may not be proof, but it's notable evidence; and not the only one.
  - asjw 6y ago
    If I put someone's life in danger and then that person doesn't die it's still a crime. We are in an historical moment when transmitting the COVID-19 to someone else could cost you lifetime jail, I don't think they will go easy on revealing the secret identities of operatives.
    - class4behavior 6y ago
      You talking past my point. Besides, the US government doesn't tolerate any kind of hindrance to its operations or operatives. They will cry foul like no one else and hunt you down without any regard to any foreign or international laws. Story telling is the easiest part. As for covid, that's simply a false equivalence.
      - chinesempire 6y ago
        If they are keen to sentence people to lifetime jail for spreading the covid, imagine what they will do to someone who reveals the identity of their operatives and their location
        ric2b 6y ago
        > If they are keen to sentence people to lifetime jail for spreading the covid What? This hasn't happened.
  - vkou 6y ago
    It's not evidence. Whether or not someone was hurt because of a hacking conspiracy has exactly zero bearing on the guilt of the parties involved. It has some bearing on the sentencing.
HenryKissinger 6y ago
That's because the CIA and the Department of Defense worked around the clock to prevent that from happening. Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper wrote in his book, "Facts and Fears: Hard Truths from a Life in Intelligence" > After Manning's arrest, Assange seemed intent on dumping as many classified documents onto the internet as he could, as quickly as he could. In my last few months as USD(I) and my first few months as the fourth DNI in five years, my time and attention were also taken up by the efforts at DOD and CIA to deal with these document dumps. Teams were on standby in both places to sort quickly through whatever was exposed in an effort to find names and identifying details for people in Iraq and Afghanistan who were helping the US war effort, and then try to rescue them before the Taliban or Iraqi insurgents could find and kill them.
- upofadown 6y ago
  Kind of missing the punch line there. Who did they save through their efforts?
  - fit2rule 6y ago
    >Who did they save through their efforts? More important to know than which Americans were 'saved' by the NSA's efforts, is: what are the names of the innocent people murdered by American forces, and why are we being prevented from knowing more about them?
  - votepaunchy 6y ago
    The models and projections showed thousands would die. No one died. Therefore, thousands of lives were saved.
    - dane-pgp 6y ago
      Or the models and projections were wrong.
theferalrobot 6y ago
> Sounds like the NSA who couldn't point to a single instance of stopping any type of terrorist attack/operation despite collecting anything they could get their hands on. This can’t be true - there are plenty of sources citing foiled plots and we see similar publications from other governments (EU and beyond) citing similar justifications. A quick google yields: https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/nsa-director-50-potential-terrorist-attacks-thwarted-controversial/story?id=19428148 https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/nsa-director-50-potential-te... https://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/nsa-leak-keith-alexander-092971 https://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/nsa-leak-keith-alexan... https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/gchq-foiled-terror-attacks-europe-brexit-eu-jeremy-fleming-a8407196.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/gchq-foiled-terr...
- voxic11 6y ago
  Those stories are from 2013 and later investigation found them to be false claims. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/nsa-program-stopped-no-terror-attacks-says-white-house-panel-flna2D11783588 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/nsa-program-stopped-no-te...
  - ASalazarMX 6y ago
    IIRC, some of those were entrapment, luring gullible individuals and goading them into terrorism.
  - theferalrobot 6y ago
    You didn’t even read your own article. A panel member claimed the phone metadata collection program hadn’t saved any lives/foiled any attacks - not that the NSA itself hasn’t. Additionally they present this as being at odds with the Obama administrations documentation, not a refutation (they didn’t find them to be false claims).
    - voxic11 6y ago
      Did you read your own articles? They specifically are claims that the NSA metadata collection program known as PRISM foiled terrorist attacks. They claim that evidence will not be presented publicly but will be presented to lawmakers. These exact lawmakers claim to never have received such evidence. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/13/senators-challenge-nsa-surveillance-terrorism https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/13/senators-chall...
jariel 6y ago
"Sounds like the NSA who couldn't point to a single instance of stopping any type of terrorist attack/operation despite collecting anything they could get their hands on." This is kind of a misrepresentation of the situation. Manning leaked mostly diplomatic cables, the contents of which he was unaware of, thereby harming his whistleblower credentials. The contents were not what we would regard as 'intelligence information' - more aptly described as 'the e-mails of the US diplomatic foreign corps', some of which contained sensitive information'. That gigabyte of private information was released and there wasn't a single scandal of it shows how tight the operation was, moreover any reading of the cables demonstrates how well the US diplomatic corps were actually doing their jobs. Far from releasing damning information about Americans, the cables released inside information about Arab leaders and their systematic corruption. To unearth that amount of private information, to have it combed over by thousands of journalists trying to find a juicy bit, and to come up with very little ... is frankly something Americans can be proud of. It's ridiculously ironic that Manning, in his attempt to discredit America, ended up doing what US diplomats were unable to do within the constraints of their jobs, which is to speak truth to power about the corruption in the Middle East - which ignited the Arab Spring. The real world is sausage making and grinding, any skeptical, decontextualized look under any rocks will always yield something to talk about - so in the end, it's really the details and context that really do matter. The cables did truly pose a serious threat to the security and integrity of individuals in various ways, and obviously it compromised many programs. That there doesn't seem to be any deadly outcomes is wonderful, but it doesn't abnegate Manning from the inappropriate actions he took particularly on the cable leak. What's far more interesting about this case, is the fact that the press used to be in love with Assange, and now they hate him. I wonder what caused them to turn. Obviously, his close ties to Russia are problematic, but it's hard to see exactly what it is. It's possible that he's just not contemporarily a social advocate in their view: we're now full-on into intersectional issues, matters of state etc. are 'old news' it would seem.
- deathgrips 6y ago
  >What's far more interesting about this case, is the fact that the press used to be in love with Assange, and now they hate him. I wonder what caused them to turn. He published Clinton's emails. After that he was no longer on the same "team" as American journalists.
roenxi 6y ago
I don't see that as being a solid point because it is pretty challenging to point to an instance of a rare event not happening due to your actions. The more pressing issue is that the NSA is a group of people. Nobody knows exactly what they are doing, or why, and the only information that comes out is "trust us, we're the good guys". They have a huge budget. Odds are they are massively corrupt and doing stupid things that either do nothing or make America less safe (like mass wire-tapping).
- lowdose 6y ago
  Only the fact their Information Dominance Center is build to resemble the Bridge of the USS Enterprise of Star Trek. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com/nsa-chief-keith-alexander-and-star-trek-2013-9%3Famp https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com/nsa-chi...
- ric2b 6y ago
  > because it is pretty challenging to point to an instance of a rare event not happening due to your actions. How is it hard? "Based on our data collection we found that these people were planning X and arrested them" doesn't sound hard... Unless it never happened.
didntknowyou 6y ago
well failure to find WMDs did not stop a war in Iraq so lack of evidence is hardly an obstacle to people's self interest.

by us0r 6y ago

vkou 6y ago

Is he being accused of disclosing information that got someone killed? Or of assisting a hacker? If he's not accused of doing the first, then this is hardly relevant to his case.

class4behavior 6y ago
This is most certainly relevant. It may not be proof, but it's notable evidence; and not the only one.
- asjw 6y ago
  If I put someone's life in danger and then that person doesn't die it's still a crime. We are in an historical moment when transmitting the COVID-19 to someone else could cost you lifetime jail, I don't think they will go easy on revealing the secret identities of operatives.
  - class4behavior 6y ago
    You talking past my point. Besides, the US government doesn't tolerate any kind of hindrance to its operations or operatives. They will cry foul like no one else and hunt you down without any regard to any foreign or international laws. Story telling is the easiest part. As for covid, that's simply a false equivalence.
    - chinesempire 6y ago
      If they are keen to sentence people to lifetime jail for spreading the covid, imagine what they will do to someone who reveals the identity of their operatives and their location
      - ric2b 6y ago
        > If they are keen to sentence people to lifetime jail for spreading the covid What? This hasn't happened.
- vkou 6y ago
  It's not evidence. Whether or not someone was hurt because of a hacking conspiracy has exactly zero bearing on the guilt of the parties involved. It has some bearing on the sentencing.

HenryKissinger 6y ago

That's because the CIA and the Department of Defense worked around the clock to prevent that from happening. Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper wrote in his book, "Facts and Fears: Hard Truths from a Life in Intelligence" > After Manning's arrest, Assange seemed intent on dumping as many classified documents onto the internet as he could, as quickly as he could. In my last few months as USD(I) and my first few months as the fourth DNI in five years, my time and attention were also taken up by the efforts at DOD and CIA to deal with these document dumps. Teams were on standby in both places to sort quickly through whatever was exposed in an effort to find names and identifying details for people in Iraq and Afghanistan who were helping the US war effort, and then try to rescue them before the Taliban or Iraqi insurgents could find and kill them.

upofadown 6y ago
Kind of missing the punch line there. Who did they save through their efforts?
- fit2rule 6y ago
  >Who did they save through their efforts? More important to know than which Americans were 'saved' by the NSA's efforts, is: what are the names of the innocent people murdered by American forces, and why are we being prevented from knowing more about them?
- votepaunchy 6y ago
  The models and projections showed thousands would die. No one died. Therefore, thousands of lives were saved.
  - dane-pgp 6y ago
    Or the models and projections were wrong.

theferalrobot 6y ago

> Sounds like the NSA who couldn't point to a single instance of stopping any type of terrorist attack/operation despite collecting anything they could get their hands on. This can’t be true - there are plenty of sources citing foiled plots and we see similar publications from other governments (EU and beyond) citing similar justifications. A quick google yields: https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/nsa-director-50-potential-terrorist-attacks-thwarted-controversial/story?id=19428148 https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/nsa-director-50-potential-te... https://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/nsa-leak-keith-alexander-092971 https://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/nsa-leak-keith-alexan... https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/gchq-foiled-terror-attacks-europe-brexit-eu-jeremy-fleming-a8407196.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/gchq-foiled-terr...

voxic11 6y ago
Those stories are from 2013 and later investigation found them to be false claims. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/nsa-program-stopped-no-terror-attacks-says-white-house-panel-flna2D11783588 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/nsa-program-stopped-no-te...
- ASalazarMX 6y ago
  IIRC, some of those were entrapment, luring gullible individuals and goading them into terrorism.
- theferalrobot 6y ago
  You didn’t even read your own article. A panel member claimed the phone metadata collection program hadn’t saved any lives/foiled any attacks - not that the NSA itself hasn’t. Additionally they present this as being at odds with the Obama administrations documentation, not a refutation (they didn’t find them to be false claims).
  - voxic11 6y ago
    Did you read your own articles? They specifically are claims that the NSA metadata collection program known as PRISM foiled terrorist attacks. They claim that evidence will not be presented publicly but will be presented to lawmakers. These exact lawmakers claim to never have received such evidence. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/13/senators-challenge-nsa-surveillance-terrorism https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/13/senators-chall...

jariel 6y ago

"Sounds like the NSA who couldn't point to a single instance of stopping any type of terrorist attack/operation despite collecting anything they could get their hands on." This is kind of a misrepresentation of the situation. Manning leaked mostly diplomatic cables, the contents of which he was unaware of, thereby harming his whistleblower credentials. The contents were not what we would regard as 'intelligence information' - more aptly described as 'the e-mails of the US diplomatic foreign corps', some of which contained sensitive information'. That gigabyte of private information was released and there wasn't a single scandal of it shows how tight the operation was, moreover any reading of the cables demonstrates how well the US diplomatic corps were actually doing their jobs. Far from releasing damning information about Americans, the cables released inside information about Arab leaders and their systematic corruption. To unearth that amount of private information, to have it combed over by thousands of journalists trying to find a juicy bit, and to come up with very little ... is frankly something Americans can be proud of. It's ridiculously ironic that Manning, in his attempt to discredit America, ended up doing what US diplomats were unable to do within the constraints of their jobs, which is to speak truth to power about the corruption in the Middle East - which ignited the Arab Spring. The real world is sausage making and grinding, any skeptical, decontextualized look under any rocks will always yield something to talk about - so in the end, it's really the details and context that really do matter. The cables did truly pose a serious threat to the security and integrity of individuals in various ways, and obviously it compromised many programs. That there doesn't seem to be any deadly outcomes is wonderful, but it doesn't abnegate Manning from the inappropriate actions he took particularly on the cable leak. What's far more interesting about this case, is the fact that the press used to be in love with Assange, and now they hate him. I wonder what caused them to turn. Obviously, his close ties to Russia are problematic, but it's hard to see exactly what it is. It's possible that he's just not contemporarily a social advocate in their view: we're now full-on into intersectional issues, matters of state etc. are 'old news' it would seem.

deathgrips 6y ago
>What's far more interesting about this case, is the fact that the press used to be in love with Assange, and now they hate him. I wonder what caused them to turn. He published Clinton's emails. After that he was no longer on the same "team" as American journalists.

roenxi 6y ago

I don't see that as being a solid point because it is pretty challenging to point to an instance of a rare event not happening due to your actions. The more pressing issue is that the NSA is a group of people. Nobody knows exactly what they are doing, or why, and the only information that comes out is "trust us, we're the good guys". They have a huge budget. Odds are they are massively corrupt and doing stupid things that either do nothing or make America less safe (like mass wire-tapping).

lowdose 6y ago
Only the fact their Information Dominance Center is build to resemble the Bridge of the USS Enterprise of Star Trek. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com/nsa-chief-keith-alexander-and-star-trek-2013-9%3Famp https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com/nsa-chi...
ric2b 6y ago
> because it is pretty challenging to point to an instance of a rare event not happening due to your actions. How is it hard? "Based on our data collection we found that these people were planning X and arrested them" doesn't sound hard... Unless it never happened.

didntknowyou 6y ago

well failure to find WMDs did not stop a war in Iraq so lack of evidence is hardly an obstacle to people's self interest.