Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Declassified memos show FBI illegally shared spy data with private parties

circa.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 60 posts

Re: Declassified memos show FBI illegally shared spy data with private parties

#11

Post by AlexandrB »

ak4g wrote: post #7

Here's the actual source document. https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/icotr/51117/2016_Cert_FI... It appears to be proper judicial oversight of national security operations. Unsurprisingly, having the rule of law applied even in the pursuit of those who seek to end it is smeared by those who would prefer to weaken the United States' national security and the institutions of liberal democracies the world over.

> It appears to be proper judicial oversight of national security operations.

I'm not sure how you consider a toothless, secret court applying secret law "proper judicial oversight". If the FISC ruled that left-handed people were a threat to national security, would the FBI be justified in rounding up all lefties? If not, how do the lefties appeal this ruling?

Re: Declassified memos show FBI illegally shared spy data with private parties

#12

Post by jrcii »

dang wrote: post #10
ak4g wrote: post #7

Here's the actual source document. https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/icotr/51117/2016_Cert_FI... It appears to be proper judicial oversight of national security operations. Unsurprisingly, having the rule of law applied even in the pursuit of those who seek to end it is smeared by those who would prefer to weaken the United States' national security and the institutions of liberal democracies the world over.

> Unsurprisingly, having the rule of law applied even in the pursuit of those who seek to end it is smeared by those who Please don't post grandiose ideological rhetoric here. It's flamebait, and we're trying to avoid what that leads to.

"grandiose ideological rhetoric"?

He's simply disagreeing. Although I disagree with him, I support his right to respectfully disagree. He takes, by the way, the position of most members of Congress and most of those who ran for President.

It's disgusting how the mods on this site shut anybody down that doesn't conform to Silicon Valley political thought.

Re: Declassified memos show FBI illegally shared spy data with private parties

#13

Post by CWuestefeld »

One wonders: is there ANY point at which the Congress or even the Courts will step in and say that the abuse has been excessive? Is there really any threshold, and they're just waiting to see if we reach it? I'm really starting to believe that there's no limit at all. It's the proverbial frog in hot water.

Re: Declassified memos show FBI illegally shared spy data with private parties

#14

Post by Shivetya »

djjdiud wrote: post #5

52 points 2 hours and this is on page two. Not a big surprise given how pro Government HN commenters can be.

I would not claim HN readers are pro government, they are frighteningly pro government when those they do not agree with are in the cross hairs.

this is exactly how the system gets to be so abusive. government, politicians and those in power, manipulate the system by playing off the fears, desires, and hatred, of the constituency.

what those who frequent sites like this need to learn is to see that manipulation for what it is and stand firm against it regardless of who is the target. wrong is wrong, it does not become magically right if someone you don't like gets taken down. when they go we all go.

the danger specific to FBI is that it has become way to political in recent years due in part with how the Department of Justice has. Organizations with powers such as these should have all political leanings minimized if not actively sought out and ended.

Re: Declassified memos show FBI illegally shared spy data with private parties

#15

Post by MrZongle2 »

killin_dan wrote: post #3

Oh lord, this is so shocking! /s Why is state intelligence even a thing? The military is capable of gathering all of the defensive intelligence that we need to protect ourselves. These state cowboys are out there making deals and cracking my WiFi to see what porn I'm watching in the name of counter-terror. Nonviolent threats do not necessitate or validate state intelligence imo.

"The military is capable of gathering all of the defensive intelligence that we need to protect ourselves."

In theory, yes. In practice, no.

Military intelligence focuses on identifying and tracking threats to military forces. During the Cold War, for instance, this meant having a decent understanding of Soviet doctrine, equipment, and tactics. Civilian intelligence agencies focused on government operations, infrastructure, and the like. Overlap existed (and still exists), but their focus was different.

But let's say, for the sake of argument, that you wanted to close civilian-run intelligence agencies and turn it all over to the military.

How do you get enough green-suiters to fill all those chairs previously filled by civilians and, more importantly, keep those chairs filled by qualified individuals?

Enlistments end, and soldiers/airmen/sailors are generally given other duty assignments on a routine basis. That's institutional knowledge that walks right out the door, that doesn't necessarily happen if you've got civilian employees.

What you may be saving budget-wise (military personnel being cheaper than civilian), you're spending on training and retention. Why would an E-6 with plenty of analysis and personnel management experience stick around when he or she could make a lot more in the private sector?

And when all is said and done, does this really prevent the kind of abuses we're already seeing with civilian-run agencies?

Re: Declassified memos show FBI illegally shared spy data with private parties

#16

Post by SomeStupidPoint »

dang wrote: post #10
ak4g wrote: post #7

Here's the actual source document. https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/icotr/51117/2016_Cert_FI... It appears to be proper judicial oversight of national security operations. Unsurprisingly, having the rule of law applied even in the pursuit of those who seek to end it is smeared by those who would prefer to weaken the United States' national security and the institutions of liberal democracies the world over.

> Unsurprisingly, having the rule of law applied even in the pursuit of those who seek to end it is smeared by those who Please don't post grandiose ideological rhetoric here. It's flamebait, and we're trying to avoid what that leads to.

I've mentioned it before, but it seems that the mods only enforce this rule (and similar ones) very selectively: precisely those times that "grandiose ideological rhetoric" disagrees with groupthink. This comment is no more grandiose, ideological, or rhetorical than hundreds I've seen recently on a myriad of topics.

I think the very notion of "flamebait" is an Orwellian euphemism for not agreeing with popular sentiment: it's not mere disagreement, it's flamebait, so of course we must censor it!

I'm very curious: what are the statistics on times you've applied this rule to comments you agree with versus those you don't -- or do you always disagree with "flamebait"?

Re: Declassified memos show FBI illegally shared spy data with private parties

#17

Post by ypeterholmes »

CWuestefeld wrote: post #13

One wonders: is there ANY point at which the Congress or even the Courts will step in and say that the abuse has been excessive? Is there really any threshold, and they're just waiting to see if we reach it? I'm really starting to believe that there's no limit at all. It's the proverbial frog in hot water.

This is what a broken system looks like- the people are no longer represented, and corruption has no check or balance. Question is, what do we do about it?

Side note: it would be foolish to think that these two things are not related. The motivations for removing our civil rights dovetail with the goals for keeping us under control.

Re: Declassified memos show FBI illegally shared spy data with private parties

#18

Post by philipov »

CWuestefeld wrote: post #13

One wonders: is there ANY point at which the Congress or even the Courts will step in and say that the abuse has been excessive? Is there really any threshold, and they're just waiting to see if we reach it? I'm really starting to believe that there's no limit at all. It's the proverbial frog in hot water.

If I were in charge of an intelligence agency, I imagine the most interesting targets of surveillance would be congresspeople and judges.

Re: Declassified memos show FBI illegally shared spy data with private parties

#19

Post by pyre »

SomeStupidPoint wrote: post #16
dang wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Unsurprisingly, having the rule of law applied even in the pursuit of those who seek to end it is smeared by those who Please don't post grandiose ideological rhetoric here. It's flamebait, and we're trying to avoid what that leads to.

I've mentioned it before, but it seems that the mods only enforce this rule (and similar ones) very selectively: precisely those times that "grandiose ideological rhetoric" disagrees with groupthink. This comment is no more grandiose, ideological, or rhetorical than hundreds I've seen recently on a myriad of topics. I think the very notion of "flamebait" is an Orwellian euphemism for not agreeing with popular sentime…

> "flamebait" is an Orwellian euphemism for not agreeing with popular sentiment

Well, there's also the manner in which you present yourself and your argument that counts for something. It's flamebait if it is presented in such a way to do nothing but start an argument (i.e. not constructive).

Re: Declassified memos show FBI illegally shared spy data with private parties

#20

Post by AlexCoventry »

killin_dan wrote: post #3

Oh lord, this is so shocking! /s Why is state intelligence even a thing? The military is capable of gathering all of the defensive intelligence that we need to protect ourselves. These state cowboys are out there making deals and cracking my WiFi to see what porn I'm watching in the name of counter-terror. Nonviolent threats do not necessitate or validate state intelligence imo.

If you're relying on your Wifi encryption to protect your privacy, there are easier ways to spy on you.
Post reply on HN