The thing is, Hayden has a point. Geesh, never thought I'd be saying that!
Terrorism is an act of politics, not warfare. It's the use of stealth to deliberately attack civilian targets in order to affect political change. (My working definition only). The goal of terrorism isn't dead people, and you don't weigh a terrorist campaign by how many bodies it creates. Terrorism is all about striking fear into the heart of the population in order to get them to vote or behave differently. That's why the tactic of terrorism is so effective against modern democracies. With the help of mass media, a few crazy people can inflict fear on millions.
So sure, in response to the United States' government implementing draconian surveillance technology, some 20-somethings that live in their parent's basement and have no life (notice how quickly the stereotypes come?) will strike out stealthily in order to inflict fear on the population, to be noticed.
But what he's missing is what military leaders in Iraq and Afghanistan have learned: you don't put out fires by dumping gasoline on them. In other words, the asshole that approved of this idiotic idea to store everything possible and then search later is the last person in the world you want defending it. He's gone off the reservation and somebody should shut him up before he makes things worse.
If the establishment starts circling the wagons on this issue, and it looks like that's what is happening, it's going to drive a wedge between the people and the government. This is not a good thing for them to be doing, terrorist threat or not.
All these political and agency leaders are betting that the next time there's a terrorist attack -- and there will be -- that anybody who supported killing this program will be rounded up and laughed at. I'm not so sure about that. I wouldn't bet on it.