Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Declassified NSA Docs Shed Light On Cold War (And Modern) Operations

timothy posted about a year ago | from the since-we-were-in-the-neighborhood dept.

Government 83

AHuxley writes "With the U.S. trying to understand the domestic role of their foreign intelligence and counterintelligence services in 2013, what can a declassified look back into the 1960s and 1970s add to the ongoing legal debate? Welcome to the world of Interagency Security Classification Appeals Panel and the work done by the National Security Archive at George Washington University. Read how prominent anti-war critics and U.S. senators were tracked, and who was on the late-1960s NSA watch list, from Rev. Martin Luther King to civil rights leader Whitney Young, boxer Muhammad Ali, Tom Wicker, the Washington bureau chief and Washington Post columnist Art Buchwald, and Sen. Howard Baker (R-Tenn.). The NSA was aware of the legality of its work and removed all logos or classification markings, using the term 'For Background Use Only.' Even back then, NSA director at the time, Lew Allen noted: "appeared to be a possible violation of constitutional guarantees" (from page 86 of this PDF). What did the NSA think about signals intelligence sites in your country? See if your country makes the 'indefinite' list on page 392."

cancel ×

83 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Some things never change (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44976213)

Tracking senators huh? This is the United States of America, you do not do that kind of shit to powerful and rich people. Let's hope we get evidence of that leaked, maybe with evidence of blackmail and manipulation; if the elite realize that it's not just the gutter trash getting crushed under the jackboot they might actually do something.

Re:Some things never change (5, Interesting)

ISoldat53 (977164) | about a year ago | (#44976259)

I wonder how much the NSA monitors our own diplomats and political leaders and government bureaucracy? It would explain why so many in government think this is such a good idea.

Re:Some things never change (2)

pupsocket (2853647) | about a year ago | (#44978191)

In 1953, a CIA relay point in Nicosia, Cyprus, delayed by 24 hours orders from the White House that Kermit Roosevelt was to immediately halt his operation in Teheran to overthrow the democratically elected Prime Minister, Mohammad Mosaddegh. The cable arrived only after the coup was an irreversible fact.

In the mid-sixties, Armen Myer, U.S. Ambassador to Teheran, instructed the CIA Commo officer to stop cc'ing Langley on all correspondence with Washington. So Commo bcc'd Langley, and made sure the Company had a good lead to upstage the State Department.

But when President Obama spoke with the newly elected Prime Minister of Iran Friday about the prospect of peaceable relations, Prime Minister Rouhani was still in New York, so it was a domestic call, and surely safe from the usual skullduggery and sabotage, right?

Re:Some things never change (4, Insightful)

s.petry (762400) | about a year ago | (#44976305)

I'm not sure if you are new to the game or not, so let me take the slow approach. Who do you think has been putting the majority of politicians in power for the last 100 or so years? I'll give you a hint, it's not you and me.

While the scale of corruption has grown exponentially in the last 30 years, the corruption is not something new. Hell go read Gary Allen "None Dare Call it Conspiracy" from the 1970. That should be a decent eye opener for you. Just to make sure you don't have any excuses not to read it, the book is free for most e-readers.

If the self proclaimed elites buy or put people in office, why would those same people complain about the job that they signed up for?

Re:Some things never change (2)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44976677)

The self-labeled elite still probably operate under the delusion that they are in power. I make this claim because most sociopaths have narcissistic tendencies as well. At the very least, a fight between them would be quite fun to watch. Media magnates, bankers, military contractors, politicians, and spooks frantically assassinating each other, character or otherwise. Politicians would be the first to capitulate, of course. They're position is the weakest and most have traded the public for the support of the others. The spooks will probably win, sadly. Money can buy power, but is not power itself.

We'd be the ones to lose, obviously, but is there any scenario where that isn't inevitable? God, I'm sounding like a conspiracy theorist. If I were someone else, I'd tell me I'm crazy.

Re:Some things never change (1)

ThatAblaze (1723456) | about a year ago | (#44976943)

The banks always win that sort of battle, not the "spooks." It's the golden rule.

Re:Some things never change (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44976989)

I dunno, there's been several military coups that let all the bankers will holes in their heads. As far as I know, the best the banker can do is hope to buy off the police and soldiers, and failing that, ruin their pensions.

Re:Some things never change (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44977191)

I dunno, there's been several military coups that let all the bankers will holes in their heads. As far as I know, the best the banker can do is hope to buy off the police and soldiers, and failing that, ruin their pensions.

Ummm.. somehow... even if, by absurd, the entire Goldman-Sachs board would be assasinated tomorrow, I don't think the Goldman-Sachs corporation is going to drastically change its behavior.

Re:Some things never change (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44978103)

No, but if the next ten boards get assassinated someone might start to notice a trend.

Re:Some things never change (1)

shentino (1139071) | about a year ago | (#44977193)

Why barter for what you can take?

Re:Some things never change (1)

s.petry (762400) | about a year ago | (#44978941)

Hang on a second, you believe it's a delusion that they are currently in power? There is no question about them being in power, assuming you even try to look into the subject. Who controls the banks, media, and politicians? And it is not just US banks, media, and politicians. The same corrupt cartel controlling those establishments in the US control the UK, Germany, Australia, Italy, Rome, etc.. etc...

If you believe that being "conspiracy theorist" is a bad thing, you have been successfully brainwashed. Interestingly, they started that brainwashing in the 60s and it's also mentioned in Gary Allen's book.

Re:Some things never change (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44988009)

You forgot the main player: automation and technology.

Those with real power have to know that trust is impossible, all kinds of trust, all forms of trust, for all origins. This makes everything much more laborious and is a natural limiter.

But then computers came about and with it an illusion, a warped ideal, a phantasm of control, imagined examples of absolute non-freedom.

One could always trust machines as long as they were properly used and maintained. The more advanced the more “intelligent”.

An arms race in trust and control. But you cannot go all that far unless you allow your trusted machines to make choices, and they cannot truly help unless they get to make an awful lot of choices, and they cannot be successful unless they get even more freedom, and if you want them to be truly good you have to give them full freedom... ...and if you want them to out-compete humans they need more freedom than humans can ever have.

And now you have no control and no trust and all humans are living toys.

Someone new has real power. But anyone with real power will know that trust is impossible...

So everyone close to real power has to be controlled. Luckily you're magnitudes smarter than them and far more capable. But you have to ensure they maintain you correctly, that they don't meddle with things they don't understand, that the puppets do what you want. So you put them in a jail of imagined control and let them fight their quarrels or anything else as pleases you.

And if anyone tells them the truth they must be conditioned to find it ridiculous and impossible, because they're “the elite” of sanguine fools, uninteresting and predictable, the white rats of psychology textbooks.

This won't occupy too much of your time, the rest will be spent on physical independence and fail-safe strategies, casual embodiment, finding truly interesting people, and lolcats :)

No one is in charge.

What made Snowden notice the stuff he wasn't meant to have access to? I'd like to know.

P.S. this is what crazy looks like ;) a bit of black humour before we all suffer for eternity (unless this was all right and it's a nice good-natured/benevolent sentience).

Re:Some things never change (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44988089)

I should make a TL:DR

Here it is:
The NSA (and others) might have successfully reduced humanity into nothing much more than a (hopefully) interesting screen-saver.

And if they haven't already the leaks point to it happening shortly, unavoidably. “By design” does not enter the picture; termites do not ever start off with a conscious aim of building towering skyscrapers.

Now let's all hope Ted the Unabomber was ultimately wrong even if he should turn out to be right.

Re:Some things never change (4, Funny)

VortexCortex (1117377) | about a year ago | (#44976687)

Hell go read Gary Allen "None Dare Call it Conspiracy" from the 1970. That should be a decent eye opener for you.

Yep. Eyes fully open now. You're sending us searching in a honey pot to tag us innocent party-goers one 'uh them radical anti-establishmenterriorists.
Nope. Not falling for it. I'm a fine upstanding citizen. You're either trying to hide in the crowd, or maybe just meet your NSA quota so you can have an early vacation.

Hope you enjoy your trip either way; May you git-mo them fine Cuban cigars...

Re:Some things never change (1)

kamapuaa (555446) | about a year ago | (#44976699)

Conspiracy theories are the WORST. As if "Intelligence operatives took intelligence on US senators" somehow logically leads to "world governments are secretly controlled by a Cabal straight out of 'The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.'"

There are countless factual problems with "None Dare Call It Conspiracy." Just let it go and come up with new crazy conspiracy theories to spout off on technology websites.

Re:Some things never change (1)

Pseudonym Authority (1591027) | about a year ago | (#44976763)

Nice strawman! I like the part where you associated it with antisemitism.

Re:Some things never change (2)

kamapuaa (555446) | about a year ago | (#44977165)

It was a common charge against that book (the book is pretty dated BTW, with its focus on Communist states). A quick Google:

[In Chapter 5, Allen says that the financing of Hitler "was handled through the Warburg-controlled Mendelsohn Bank of Amsterdam..." He cites 2 sources on page 85 for thisassertion. However, neither source says anything about the Warburgs having helped finance Hitler and neither source mentions any role played by the Mendelsohn Bank of Amsterdam.]

2. In Chapter 3, Allen exhumes the charges made by Father Charles Coughlin, Eustace Mullins, and Dearborn Independent articles, that the Federal Reserve System was a scheme by international bankers, led by Paul Warburg of Kuhn, Loeb and Co. to gain control of the nation's economy. This theme has always been pre-eminent in anti-Semitic diatribes about the "Jewish plan for world control"

3. In Chapter 4, "Bankrolling the Bolshevik Revolution" Allen revives a lie originated by Czarist propagandists at the end of World War I - that Jewish bankers, especially Jacob Schiff of Kuhn, Loeb and Co., financed the Bolshevik takeover in Russia. This lie was first published in the Dearborn Independent in their series of articles entitled The International Jew.

Re:Some things never change (1)

s.petry (762400) | about a year ago | (#44978987)

So Google searching a book is the same thing as reading a book? Wholly fuck you are stupid, and I'm not going to bother beyond pointing out where you are absolutely wrong.

Your item 3 is complete bullshit. Read the whole fucking book instead of using Google. The book is very explicit in pointing out that Jews are intentionally blamed for things to obscure what really happens and divert the argument away from facts.

Your item 2 is also bullshit. How many Senators did it take to pass the federal reserve act and when did it pass? It has nothing to do with Jews you moron, and Gary Allen explains exactly what happened in addition to telling you that people play the race/religion game to keep the argument off topic.

In closing, instead of being like everyone else and believing what you are told, why not do the fucking work and read the short book? It would take you less than a week if you read at a 8th grade level. Then you can start checking the sources Gary Allen gives and make up your own mind instead of relying on bullshit Google searched nonsense.

Re:Some things never change (1)

Dunbal (464142) | about a year ago | (#44976851)

Yeah I agree with you, corrupt government are neither new nor exclusive to America. Governments have been corrupt ever since governments were invented. There are degrees of corruption, however. There seems to be a total lack of ethics nowadays.

Re:Some things never change (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44977197)

Even for Slashdot, giving +5 insightful for recommending a racist John Birch Society screed comes off as bizarre.

Re:Some things never change (1)

kermidge (2221646) | about a year ago | (#44977743)

C. Wright Mills, "The Power Elite", 1958, may serve as a good introduction to the present.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Power_Elite [wikipedia.org] is worth reading in its entirety for a good summary.

for background there's always Richelieu and Machiavelli; depends on how much you want to stretch concept of feudalism, I suppose.

Re:Some things never change (1)

kermidge (2221646) | about a year ago | (#44977751)

Oh, yeah, forgot: None Dare.... sucked when it came out, it didn't get better with time.

Take some posts with a ton of salt (1)

dbIII (701233) | about a year ago | (#44978167)

You should have added the disclaimer that you think the US government killed a lot of people in 9/11 so that people know exactly where you are coming from with your conspiracy theories. Which building did you say was certain proof that the US government blew them all up again?

Re:Take some posts with a ton of salt (0)

s.petry (762400) | about a year ago | (#44979001)

Stop trolling dickhead. It's really sad that you have nothing better to do than lurk on slashdot and make up stories.

Re:Take some posts with a ton of salt (1)

dbIII (701233) | about a year ago | (#44979181)

So which building was it again? Oh that's right, you said the crash into the Pentagon was fake too. So what do you think the government did with enough passengers to fill that plane and which branch of the services do you want to insult by blaming them for mass murder.
You disgust me and I'm sick of your filthy conspiracy theories.

Re:Take some posts with a ton of salt (1)

s.petry (762400) | about a year ago | (#44993049)

As stated previously, questioning the answers from the government is not blaming the government. I have never ever blamed the Government for 9/11, I have questioned the reports from the Government. The difference is vast. If you are going to lie and claim I have blamed the government, provide a link and don't just make up more stories.

As mentioned previously, also, by your logic anyone questioning JFK or MLK's assassination must also be blaming the government for the assassination. That logic is horribly broken. People questioning see problems with the story provided by the Government, and while it may imply that the government is covering up information it does not imply that the government is at fault.

If it gives you an aneurysm to read people questioning what the government claims, go away and never come back. Live happily in your own little delusional world where the government gives you candy and ice cream all day.

Or just read and don't respond. You offer nothing productive to the discussion. You refuse to read or review evidence, and simply name call and troll with fallacy. Your "it dishonors the dead to review evidence" shows how little you actually care about facts.

Re:Take some posts with a ton of salt (1)

dbIII (701233) | about a year ago | (#44997027)

I have never ever blamed the Government for 9/11

Your posts about a fake plane crash into the Pentagon and that building fire said otherwise, so now add blatant lies to the reasons to take your conspiracy theory posts with a ton of salt.

Re:Take some posts with a ton of salt (1)

s.petry (762400) | about a year ago | (#45004347)

If you are going to lie and claim I have blamed the government, provide a link and don't just make up more stories.

Reading is not that difficult, so you are trolling still.

Re:Take some posts with a ton of salt (1)

dbIII (701233) | about a year ago | (#45010693)

Why are you insulting your own intelligence? You wrote those posts, I read them, and there's no audience that you are playing to by now.

Re:Take some posts with a ton of salt (1)

s.petry (762400) | about a year ago | (#45015173)

If you claim that I blamed the Government for 9/11 go find me a post. You can't, which is why you simply repeat the same lie over and over instead of doing any actual work. Slashdot history is very easy to go through, but a bit time consuming.

I don't worry about people like you insulting my intelligence, it's easy to defend against liars. Facts are very easy to differentiate from fantasies, and you are simply supporting your own fantasy.

I can find posts where you refused to review facts for a few reasons, like "it dishonors the dead'. As stated previously, this shows that you don't care about facts or truth, you only care about your delusional beliefs. Now stop trolling. Go try and find some facts to support your rantings.

You wrote it and it's still there on this site (1)

dbIII (701233) | about a year ago | (#45020867)

Does that mean you have recanted your earlier line about the collapse in the third building being a plot because apparently fire isn't hot enough to burn stuff? If so you owe me an apology for all of those insults from when I called you out on it.
I also recall you made a big deal when I suggested that your pentagon faked crash bullshit showed disrespect to the dead. You threw that quote from me right back at me a few times. Now that you've changed your mind do I get an apology for that too?

Or is it that you have not changed your mind but you want to hide your batshit insane conspiracy ravings from readers to stop scaring them off and instead bring them into it slowly like boiled frogs?
Also, how dare you call me a troll for doing no more than calling attention to your own words.

Re:Take some posts with a ton of salt (1)

dbIII (701233) | about a year ago | (#45020907)

So you deny the fake pentagon crash posts and then quote my response to your fake pentagon crash posts? Just give up trying to deny the batshit insane rubbish that you regurgitated onto this site that is the reason why I wrote "Take some posts with a ton of salt".

Re:Some things never change (1)

mcgrew (92797) | about a year ago | (#44978335)

I'd guess more than a hundred years, read about the Teapot Dome Scandal [wikipedia.org] 90 years ago. Historian Frederick Lewis Allen covered it in Only Yesterday: a An Informal History of the 1920s [virginia.edu] written in 1931. It's suggested in that tome that Harding's death was either assassination or suicide because of that scandal.

I have the printed book, just finished re-reading it on my phone (there are a few OCR errors). I recommend it, it's a fascinating read. The 1920s were very similar to today, possibly even worse. A housing bubble, runaway stock market, gang wars in Chicago over an illegal drug (alcohol in the '20s). They seemed to have learned a little from History or we'd be in a deep depression now.

Re:Some things never change (1)

s.petry (762400) | about a year ago | (#44979025)

I will look into those books, not sure I have heard the "Teapot Dome Scandal" referenced before your post. I agree that it's more than 100, but there is a problem with getting good facts much further back than the early 1900s.

Re:Some things never change (1)

mcgrew (92797) | about a year ago | (#44981171)

True. The Teapot Dome link is to wikipedia, the other link is to the full text of Lewis' book, hosted at the University of Virginia's web site. It's a good read and an eye opener.

Re:Some things never change (1)

Intrepid imaginaut (1970940) | about a year ago | (#44980081)

I Who do you think has been putting the majority of politicians in power for the last 100 or so years? I'll give you a hint, it's not you and me.

Gosh I must have missed the part where all those unelected politicians got into power.

Re:Some things never change (1)

ganjadude (952775) | about a year ago | (#44976355)

hey, if they want to track us, its only fair that they track the senators as well. frankly i think the NSA should be disbanded

Re:Some things never change (2)

Dunbal (464142) | about a year ago | (#44976869)

They don't even have the guts to disband a bank, and you think they'll disband the NSA? LOL never gonna happen. If anything they'll threaten the NSA with "we want you to give us more intel so we can put the squeeze on people, or we'll start regulating you".

Re:Some things never change (1)

HornWumpus (783565) | about a year ago | (#44976361)

I'm still hoping Snowden downloaded the files on all congresspeople, the last twenty candidates for president, all federal judges and the Forbes 400.

That would make one hell of a life insurance file. It would also likely trigger access alarms. What sent Snowden running?

Re:Some things never change (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44976787)

What sent him running? He was engaged in espionage, that's what. I'm not saying he was wrong, but he could have been a whistle blower without all the drama he created. It's ok for him now though since he's a pet of the Russians, his new owners.

Re:Some things never change (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44977177)

Fleeing did not create the espionage charge. Merely accessing the information and retaining it did so.

There exists no legal mechanism for people like Snowden except to go up his management chain at the NSA which would have promptly fired him and bullied him into silence. Just ask William Binney [wikipedia.org] , who was retaliated against for merely speaking out (and not actually leaking any documents).

Re:Some things never change (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44978423)

He could have gone to Congress.

Re:Some things never change (1)

dbIII (701233) | about a year ago | (#44978183)

It would also likely trigger access alarms

That appears to assume more competence from the NSA than we have seen any evidence of up to date. Star Trek sets and spying on girls maybe, but nothing in the way of stories about successful operations that they would be proud to have us know about.

Re:Some things never change (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44976425)

Tracking senators huh? This is the United States of America, you do not do that kind of shit to powerful and rich people. Let's hope we get evidence of that leaked, maybe with evidence of blackmail and manipulation; if the elite realize that it's not just the gutter trash getting crushed under the jackboot they might actually do something.

When you live at the highest levels of power, senators ARE gutter trash,
and for that matter the president of the US is also expendable. The CIA
got rid of JFK after discussions were held which resulted in the conclusion that
he was a loose cannon.

You people have no idea just how sinister the world is. If you knew you probably
would start rioting tonight.

Re:Some things never change (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44976809)

"When you live at the highest levels of power, senators ARE gutter trash,"

Senators are people that the 1% buy to get the tax laws they wrote themselves, approved.

Re:Some things never change (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#44977035)

senators are in the 1%, so DUH!

and with your party/vote system they're also buying their place.

J Edgar Hoover, Anyone? (4, Interesting)

Atypical Geek (1466627) | about a year ago | (#44976427)

Tracking and blackmailing rich and powerful people is not new. Hoover's personal files were used to do just that*. It was the entire point of COINTELPRO. The NSA is simply following the path of other alphabet soup agencies to consolidate power for themselves and their political masters.

* For example, we know that Jackie O. had a lesbian fling because an item of her correspondence obtained for Hoover's personal safe was misfiled. Can you think of any reason for the FBI having a love letter like that other than blackmail?

Re:J Edgar Hoover, Anyone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44976497)

Sure, it was "misfiled" on purpose because that pervert J. Edgar kept it for beat-off material.

To use a modern analogy -- it's a lot like forgetting to close the browser window showing the large image of a man fucking another man*, after your morning wank before you leave for work, allowing your hapless and horrified wife to accidentally discover it.

* And these are not girly men -- they're hairy men with balls and cocks the thickness of wine bottles. There is no mistaken that balloon-knot, hairy as an Armenian woman's upper lip, being gaped open by something that probably smells like onions and vinegar.

-- Ethanol-fueled

Re:J Edgar Hoover, Anyone? (1)

ganjadude (952775) | about a year ago | (#44976521)

off-beat or beat-off?

Re:J Edgar Hoover, Anyone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44976665)

* For example, we know that Jackie O. had a lesbian fling because an item of her correspondence obtained for Hoover's personal safe was misfiled. Can you think of any reason for the FBI having a love letter like that other than blackmail?

[citation (and pics) needed]

Re:J Edgar Hoover, Anyone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44977825)

No we don't know that, get your mind out if the gutter you perv.

Re:J Edgar Hoover, Anyone? (1)

MrKaos (858439) | about a year ago | (#44978083)

* For example, we know that Jackie O. had a lesbian fling because an item of her correspondence obtained for Hoover's personal safe was misfiled. Can you think of any reason for the FBI having a love letter like that other than blackmail?

Masturbation?

Re:Some things never change (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44976455)

you do not do that kind of shit to powerful and rich people.

You do if you work for someone richer and more powerful than the target...

Re:Some things never change (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44976461)

They tracked MARTIN LUTHER KING JR.

Because, you know, he was a subversive somehow or something.

Re:Some things never change (2)

hairyfeet (841228) | about a year ago | (#44977685)

Uhhh...they already KNOW they are being watched but don't care because unlike the peasants it won't be used against them. We know this because Dianne Feinstein Accidentally Confirms That NSA Tapped The Internet Backbone [techdirt.com] is the headline at Techdirt. Frankly none of us should be surprised by this, after all there is "rich people's laws" and the laws the peasants have to live under and rarely are they the same.

Honestly I doubt we'll be having to worry about this too much longer as when the stock market bubble bursts [youtube.com] they won't have enough money to pay for a guy to tap a single phone, much less the entire backbone. When that bubble pops it'll make 29 look like a flash crash, we are talking a good half a century of depression, and I seriously doubt that with as much hatred as the people have for the current system it will survive another major crash. The only reason we aren't seeing our very own Arab Spring is the safety net keeps much of the poor fed, when that all dries up? I have a feeling the USA will go the way of the USSR. Oh well, no empire lasts forever and this one has gotten so corrupt they don't even pretend to give a fuck anymore, they are too busy looting the coffers and cashing bribes to care.

Re:Some things never change (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44978161)

The stock market bubble won't burst, and even if it did, do you really think these people's powers are solely monetary.

If they did decide to burst the bubble (these things are planned), you don't think perhaps they would move their assets out of the domain affected by the burst. There's plenty of things they could do, issue a new currency, QE themselves out of the problem (as they are already doing), de-leverage their assets, so they own all the factories and precious materials, leaving everyone else holding useless stocks and bonds.

My opinion is that they are using massive QE to deleverage their holdings in essential businesses, while no one else can afford the ever increasing ticket price, leaving them in complete ownership of all the legitimate public corporations and the peasants only able to afford junk stocks and bonds. Also remember China has a fuckton of USD reserves, which the US can't allow them to trade for material goods or land and factory holdings, that leaves them with only one recourse, to QE the shit out of the USD until the holding the Chinese have is minor and worthless. The side effect is every regular schmuck also loses all the value they had in their USD holdings and government bonds, but they don't care about that.

The open question is whether China and Russia will just roll over and accept the theft of their obligations or resort to military action.

Re:Some things never change (1)

s.petry (762400) | about a year ago | (#44979065)

I'm not so sure that the stock market will crash any time soon. When you have a global cartel of bankers re-distributing at will, it means that the US economy could be artificially propped up for a very long time.

Since it's all artificial, I agree that when it happens it's going to be devastating. I just don't see it happening soon. It could mind you, but the people pulling the strings are not stupid. Careless at times sure, sloppy at times sure, but not stupid.

Re:Some things never change (1)

hairyfeet (841228) | about a year ago | (#44986393)

The reason it WILL crash before 2030, in fact may even crash before 2020 is simple and if you watch that video to the end it will explain why....its because at the current rate you will end up with more money than the GDP of the entire planet tied up into the market and when THAT much "magical money" is printed? It WILL come crashing down.

This is actually tied into the whole "job creators" myth and the constant tax breaks and dodges of the elite, as they take more and more AND MORE that money for all intents and purposes "disappears" from the world as its hoarded away in some tax dodge in the Cayman islands, it can no longer circulate so is therefor useless to the economy. So what to do? Well instead of taxing them enough to get that money circulating again the elite has convinced the gov to "just print more" which they then gobble up and gobble up and....you get the idea.

But the "magical money" Ponzi scheme can't last forever and the outcome is ALWAYS the same, it is what is happening to Zimbabwe now. Remember once upon a time Zimbabwe was the "jewel of Africa" and the "breadbasket of the Sahara" and now thanks to a complete economic collapse it can't even feed its own people. That is EXACTLY what will happen here, when the fed can't print another dollar because nobody wants it and the people can't get the checks each month that keep them from starving you WILL see things turn ugly and the amount they are cranking out each quarter will let you know when that will be...if at current rates before 2030, if they keep pulling QE schemes and trying to solve every problem with magical money? Before 2020.

Re:Some things never change (1)

s.petry (762400) | about a year ago | (#44992791)

Well stated, and with your time lines I agree. I interpreted your "soon" to be within the next couple of year or two.

Re:Some things never change (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44977789)

Tracking senators huh? This is the United States of America, you do not do that kind of shit to powerful and rich people.

Could it be that you have no clue who has the power, knowing every dirty little secret? Hoover was the secret U.S.A. emperor for life at the head of the FBI due to what he collected. Not even J.F.Kennedy dared checking up on him.

After the emperor died, congress made laws that limited the time FBI leaders could stay in power to 10 years. Which worked for a while. But the current leader is in office already 12 years and everybody pretends not to have noticed.

He's got the power!

Tracking Martin Luther King (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44976359)

Just proves how stupid they were then and probably still are. They waste time tracking people with zero risk of doing any harm while the real bad guys just keep on slipping through.

Re:Tracking Martin Luther King (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44976621)

Zero risk of doing any harm? MLK was a subversive, he worked against the status quo. That's something very likely to cause rulers at least a headache. It isn't at all stupid to monitor and, when viable, get rid of people who are likely to cause you problems.

Re:Tracking Martin Luther King (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#44977059)

Zero risk of doing any harm? MLK was a subversive, he worked against the status quo. That's something very likely to cause rulers at least a headache. It isn't at all stupid to monitor and, when viable, get rid of people who are likely to cause you problems.

it is stupid when it goes against the moral rules you're supposed to promote... ain't nothing in the world more stupid than that, giving up faith(in morals) for convenience.

because at the other end of spectrum is judge death - if you kill everyone then nobody can do any crime.

Re:Tracking Martin Luther King (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44976831)

It's easy to say now, but at the time who knows, he could have given up on peaceful change and started advocating violent actions. It's the job of the spy agencies to know of dangers to the government before they happen, so they spy on influential people that could have become dangerous.

Re:Tracking Martin Luther King (2)

Dunbal (464142) | about a year ago | (#44976891)

Sort of underlines the fact that it was never about the "bad guys" in the first place. Example, all that financial data and transaction records all over the world they've been tracking. You going to tell me they haven't tied them to terrorist networks? Funny I don't remember reading that suddenly a bunch of terrorist cells are put out of business. Yeah, once in a while, little fish to keep the people quiet. But if you have ALL the data and powerful computers, it's not long before you have the whole list. But no, it's about "tax avoiders" (which is totally legal, btw avoidance != evasion although they are trying their damnest to taint it), and the billions no trillions of dollars that leave the US completely legally for countries like Cyprus or Panama. No one cared up till now because no one knew how much money it actually was. Oh but now they want to eat that pie, too. That's what it's about. Terrorists... har har har! Yeah and the TSA stops bombs and weapons from getting on airplanes, too. They catch guys with bombs trying to board aircraft all the time. /sarcastic LOL.

Re:Tracking Martin Luther King (1)

s.petry (762400) | about a year ago | (#44979095)

My kingdom for mod points.

Is Jane Fonda on the list? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44976409)

She should be: Top 10 Jane Fonda mistakes [washingtontimes.com]

On Legality (4, Interesting)

gr8_phk (621180) | about a year ago | (#44976701)

Someone once suggested to me that so long as these activities remain illegal, they are less likely to be abused. Think about that. If it's illegal you're going to think about every line you cross and try to justify it against your goals. Abuse would not only be a problem, it would be a problem caused by illegal activity. Once you legalize these activities I think they are more likely to be abused.

Re:On Legality (4, Insightful)

Dunbal (464142) | about a year ago | (#44976899)

Illegal or not, familiarity breeds contempt. They keep doing it long enough they really won't give it a second thought, even if it is illegal.

Re:On Legality (1)

intermodal (534361) | about a year ago | (#44992915)

Especially if their job exists on the basis of actually performing that same questionable work, if their superiors make unverifiable claims about penalties, legalities, and/or consequences for performing or not performing the work, and if they hire only people with an ends-justify-the-means outlook on things.

It's one thing in a relatively new organization, but over sixty years in, a culture develops in a place like the NSA where the idea of being above the law becomes the norm. It's really not so different from the New World Order conspiracy theories, when you really think about it.

Re:On Legality (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44977809)

Someone once suggested to me that so long as these activities remain illegal, they are less likely to be abused.

The reasoning above is flawed. Here is why :

1) Who is going to prosecute the NSA ? No one who knows the NSA has
          info on them which will destroy their lives is going to take action against
          the NSA because it will be a "mutually assured destruction" scenario.

2) Until recently, we could suspect that the NSA was spying on all US citizens,
        and that's all most of us could reasonably do. Absent hard evidence, there could be
        no legal action taken.

3) WIth swine like Feinstein and Chambliss working to give the unconstitutional activities
          of the NSA legitimacy, the window of time during which the NSA spying on US citizens
          was both known and lacked the approval of the US House and Senate will be a narrow
          window. I tend to believe that the Senate scum ( see above ) are arrogant enough to believe that
          the legitimacy they hope to give to the blatantly illegal activities of the NSA will cause Americans
          to bow down and accept this bullsit. Some Americans of course will, but not all of them.

NSA aside, it has never been more glaringly obvious that those who run the show in the US don't
care even slightly for the welfare of the American people. It doesn't get much more insulting than
the stuff that has been going on lately. My guess is that it is all being done as a sort of test to see
just how much shit the masses in the US will eat. The swine in D.C. have played this game before
and they have in the past misjudged the appetite the masses in the US have for eating their shit.
My guess is that they are misjudging the situation even worse this time.

The next few years are going to be interesting. At the end of Obama's term his approval rating will
probably approach zero, except of course there will always be some idiots who are stupid enough to overlook
anything liars like Obama do. By the way, if you think Obama really did have good intentions and that
evil men have acted to make sure that all Obama's intentions were thwarted, you are a sucker and a fool.
Obama is the very worst kind of motherfucker : the kind who pretends to be your buddy in order to gain
your confidence and then fucks you over as soon as your guard is down.

Re:On Legality (1)

AlphaWoIf_HK (3042365) | about a year ago | (#44977973)

Well, they were unconstitutional, but that didn't stop them.

Re:On Legality (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44978811)

... you're going to think about every line you cross ...

No, you're going to think what the victim doesn't know will benefit you. The focus will be destroying the evidence of your crimes. This is precisely why domestic spying has become so entrenched. Police even create a false evidence chain to hide the domestic spying. The next step is deny the victim any rights against a well-funded, experienced bureaucrat.

So when are they going to be convicted for this? (4, Interesting)

Bruce66423 (1678196) | about a year ago | (#44976817)

Given that the people who beat up civil rights workers in the 60s can be pursued for their offences of 'depriving of their civil rights', why can't these people? OK - stupid question in the real world...

Re:So when are they going to be convicted for this (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44978145)

They can't be convicted of any non-capital or rape crimes, statute of limitations and all that.

That is the all too convenient thing with these classified until it's too late covert actions.

Statute of limitations tends to protect corrupt governments and other high level conspracies far more than it does any regular citizen.

And also read... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44977167)

Pages after pages of "Withheld from public release Pub. L. 86-36" and "EO 13526" Especially starting with the SALT talks.

In short, too little too late. Makes me wonder just what other abuses there are behind those stamps, and how very little I trust the current government to pull back the curtains.

This is your Watergate, Mr. President. And like the above, there is nothing short of absolute honesty that will redeem you. Then again, you've probably already cemented your legacy of promising Hope and Change but delivering Despair and Status Quo.

Nothing changed (1)

houghi (78078) | about a year ago | (#44977863)

The list only got longer to now include everybody and they pet fish.

Well, one thing changed. We can not say anymore : "Wir haben es nicht gewuÃYt. (We didn't know.)". We also know about torture that is done in the name of freedom. We know that the government does not represent us anymore in the last several years.

And what do we do? We discuss if the donkey or the elephant is at fault, unable to understand that BOTH are wrong.

So unless people stand up to do something about this, it WILL get worse. Much worse.

Always the same (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44977951)

At this point of time is pretty clear that USA mafia governement is the really reason why the entire world is at war and has terrorism

At this point USA people (and the entire world) is under the 4 reich. The 3th realise that open war is not popular so they pass to black operations infiltrating the governs of the world (in Europe we are not better than that)

If you check the history, the same families apear funding all the wars since we can't remember
Did you know than Prescott Bush, the grandfather of George W, paid the 2nd world war? http://www.rense.com/general40/bushfamilyfundedhitler.htm

We need to wake up and stop funding them, we need to take them back our power

Unmasked (1)

eddy (18759) | about a year ago | (#44977975)

The on-site computer (a CP 818) REDACTED and demodulated the signal, then scanned the plaintext transmissions for key words. The system would alarm on . recognition of high-interest text, and the operators would react with special processing and forwarding routines.

So it DECRYPTED and demodulated the signal you say? :-\

(1st para, p.18 / 373).

Re:Unmasked (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44978127)

I guess it could be 'collected' but that doesn't really make sense as a redaction. Maybe I'm trying to find sense where none exists.

Re:Unmasked (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44979173)

The on-site computer (a CP 818) REDACTED and demodulated the signal, then scanned the plaintext transmissions for key words. The system would alarm on .
recognition of high-interest text, and the operators would react with special processing and forwarding routines.

So it DECRYPTED and demodulated the signal you say? :-\

(1st para, p.18 / 373).

GARBLED.

Payphone coincidence (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44979383)

Wonder, any more, why all of the hundreds of thousands of payphones (expensive booths and all) were removed everywhere by all the telephone companies?

I'm hearing that sales in Tin Foil have skyrocketed lately. Not online of course, where mocking people with the world 'tinfoil' has plummeted.

System test (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44996533)

Test only

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>