Senator Collins is investing her political rhetoric and the security of the country on telephone data. Republican rhetoric never deserves a certain death.
She asked a secretary or somebody if there was any inappropriate use of the telephone data in the collection computer banks. The authoritative figure stated, "No." No clue. If a program doesn't work there aren't going to be a lot of users or abusers.
I was wondering something. Does the government have access to all the financial information of the telecommunication companies and their subscribers? See, Morgan is starting a new internet financial game and it is just a logical curiosity.
Senator Leahy come on now. The very people stated as 'our security people' didn't find three young women leaving the country to join Daesh. These are young people with lots of use of the internet and telecommunications.
What is the failure rate of the agencies in using this data efficiently? It has to be a high failure rate. There has been far too much information flowing into government computers that ended two days ago. Now that the information is no longer fresh everyday the 'security people' can finally begin to scan the old records for anything that the FBI and CIA may have missed.
Telecommunication data is not pertinent to finding the facts in 'high traffic' channels. There are trends in communication over the net that are HELPFUL, but, will never substitute for agents on the ground conducting the smart work.
The best investment for detection of dangerous activity in our society is made in local intelligence. If Boston's finest was funded as a subgroup to the FBI the bombing may have been prevented. The funds for such activity has to be channeled efficiently to EXPERTS at the local level willing to do the work without victimizing their citizens.
The funds also have to go to the FBI to begin a new program for local agents working for their governments and/or police force.
Expanding the local exposure of FBI information and continual surveillance is a far better investment. The federal government can expand their investment in meaningless intelligence such as telecommunication or they can do it with purpose and continual quality of investment assessments.
In realizing that, New York City has one of the best local intelligence agencies in the world. They missed the van bomb. So, the focus of the intelligence community has to be better and with real outcomes to success. With the recent assessment of TSA airport security one has to wonder who is authoring these programs and how actual trials have proven to work or not.
Perhaps asking retired agents to review, assess and author programs that actually work might be a good route to using all of the USA's talent. Retired agents have no investment in the outcomes of programs except that they work. They could easily be recruited as contract personnel only without any need for alternate identities. These are programs that the public will witness working in their lives. It isn't a matter of security so much as national security.
Statistics can help to focus and begin effective outcomes. But, it is not the only focus. People think, they don't necessarily follow a determined logic.
REMOVE THE POLITICS from the country's national security.
NOW!
Senator Cornyn is wrong. Get rid of Clapper.
A person employed by the federal government has a well paying job. It is just that simple. It has to be a good paying job with benefits to continue the longevity of well educated and trained employees. In realizing the status of a federal employee and how they will do anything to maintain that status is to understand how completely insignificant information is regarded as important.
The NSA program is a failure. A complete and abject failure. FISA needs to regain it's meaning and definition to provide a vehicle to achieve an effective end. The public rhetoric regarding this program is paid for in their rights for privacy. Defund the program.
After September 11, 2001 Americans provided their government relief from their rights in order to facilitate their protection. These programs have been proven more than ineffective, they have at least a 95% failure rate. There is no reason to continue them. To continue these programs is to throw vital funds to the wind. There has to be far better outcomes to justify the funding.
Effective programs have to take over the protections of citizens which probably won't remind them at every trip by jet the cost of less vigilant times. The underwear bomber was stopped by an observant Dutch passenger. If Air Marshalls were standard for flights beginning at the gate and continuing through flight would it promote a safer venue for passengers? I don't know of anyone more vested in a safe flight than an authority on board the jet. The surveillance of the assigned seat on the jet can begin 24 hours before it's departure by the Marshall assigned to it in examining passenger and flight crew lists.
I also believe "The No Fly List" is important and effective. Limiting bomb making materials both on board and the luggage compartments is an effective tool as well.
There have to be methods instituted that are effective and not simply programs that are political to make people feel good about their elections.
I would think the President would ask the Air Marshalls currently in the country's national security network what they believe works and what doesn't. It is within his Executive reach to question and evaluate the nation's security. I guarantee you the Marshalls would have plenty to say.
The reason there is not an Air Marshall on every flight is because of cost. If the cost was absorbed from other ineffective programs there would be negligible changes to the budget.
So, expanding the FBI authority through local investigators and expanding the national security interests by placing Air Marshalls on flights sure sounds more effective to me.
Shame on Senator Burr. You know what he said? He said the reason the investigation to the Boston bombing wasn't effective is because it was done by the FBI and not the NSA.
Do you believe that?
Excuse me, but, Americans have spent enormous amounts of money to consolidate the intelligence agencies in an Executive Branch Cabinet Seat called Homeland Security.
The reason Americans did that and pay their taxes to facilitate that Executive Branch agency is because it was determined in the early years of Bush immediately after September 11, 2001 that the agencies weren't talking to each other. Is Senator Burr saying the monies spent on such IMPROVEMENTS are worthless?
It may be the truth actually is the NSA program is an abject failure and provided a feel good feeling at the FBI that should never have existed.
Is it reasonable to say, "We don't trust the NSA?" Hell, yeah.
There it is. Senator Burr's oath to office is to protect the American people. Really? So that means every 'idea' is a good idea regardless of it's ineffectiveness and insult to American's rights. Cost is no consequence.
If I hear the words "telephone company" one more time I'll vomit. I wish ATT never entered into a required division of it's assets and interests after Graham Bell founded the technology. It would be easier on Senator Burr if it were just one company. And of course it would have to be nationalized for the efficient use of the NSA.
continued...
She asked a secretary or somebody if there was any inappropriate use of the telephone data in the collection computer banks. The authoritative figure stated, "No." No clue. If a program doesn't work there aren't going to be a lot of users or abusers.
I was wondering something. Does the government have access to all the financial information of the telecommunication companies and their subscribers? See, Morgan is starting a new internet financial game and it is just a logical curiosity.
Senator Leahy come on now. The very people stated as 'our security people' didn't find three young women leaving the country to join Daesh. These are young people with lots of use of the internet and telecommunications.
What is the failure rate of the agencies in using this data efficiently? It has to be a high failure rate. There has been far too much information flowing into government computers that ended two days ago. Now that the information is no longer fresh everyday the 'security people' can finally begin to scan the old records for anything that the FBI and CIA may have missed.
Telecommunication data is not pertinent to finding the facts in 'high traffic' channels. There are trends in communication over the net that are HELPFUL, but, will never substitute for agents on the ground conducting the smart work.
The best investment for detection of dangerous activity in our society is made in local intelligence. If Boston's finest was funded as a subgroup to the FBI the bombing may have been prevented. The funds for such activity has to be channeled efficiently to EXPERTS at the local level willing to do the work without victimizing their citizens.
The funds also have to go to the FBI to begin a new program for local agents working for their governments and/or police force.
Expanding the local exposure of FBI information and continual surveillance is a far better investment. The federal government can expand their investment in meaningless intelligence such as telecommunication or they can do it with purpose and continual quality of investment assessments.
In realizing that, New York City has one of the best local intelligence agencies in the world. They missed the van bomb. So, the focus of the intelligence community has to be better and with real outcomes to success. With the recent assessment of TSA airport security one has to wonder who is authoring these programs and how actual trials have proven to work or not.
Perhaps asking retired agents to review, assess and author programs that actually work might be a good route to using all of the USA's talent. Retired agents have no investment in the outcomes of programs except that they work. They could easily be recruited as contract personnel only without any need for alternate identities. These are programs that the public will witness working in their lives. It isn't a matter of security so much as national security.
Statistics can help to focus and begin effective outcomes. But, it is not the only focus. People think, they don't necessarily follow a determined logic.
REMOVE THE POLITICS from the country's national security.
NOW!
Senator Cornyn is wrong. Get rid of Clapper.
A person employed by the federal government has a well paying job. It is just that simple. It has to be a good paying job with benefits to continue the longevity of well educated and trained employees. In realizing the status of a federal employee and how they will do anything to maintain that status is to understand how completely insignificant information is regarded as important.
The NSA program is a failure. A complete and abject failure. FISA needs to regain it's meaning and definition to provide a vehicle to achieve an effective end. The public rhetoric regarding this program is paid for in their rights for privacy. Defund the program.
After September 11, 2001 Americans provided their government relief from their rights in order to facilitate their protection. These programs have been proven more than ineffective, they have at least a 95% failure rate. There is no reason to continue them. To continue these programs is to throw vital funds to the wind. There has to be far better outcomes to justify the funding.
Effective programs have to take over the protections of citizens which probably won't remind them at every trip by jet the cost of less vigilant times. The underwear bomber was stopped by an observant Dutch passenger. If Air Marshalls were standard for flights beginning at the gate and continuing through flight would it promote a safer venue for passengers? I don't know of anyone more vested in a safe flight than an authority on board the jet. The surveillance of the assigned seat on the jet can begin 24 hours before it's departure by the Marshall assigned to it in examining passenger and flight crew lists.
I also believe "The No Fly List" is important and effective. Limiting bomb making materials both on board and the luggage compartments is an effective tool as well.
There have to be methods instituted that are effective and not simply programs that are political to make people feel good about their elections.
I would think the President would ask the Air Marshalls currently in the country's national security network what they believe works and what doesn't. It is within his Executive reach to question and evaluate the nation's security. I guarantee you the Marshalls would have plenty to say.
The reason there is not an Air Marshall on every flight is because of cost. If the cost was absorbed from other ineffective programs there would be negligible changes to the budget.
So, expanding the FBI authority through local investigators and expanding the national security interests by placing Air Marshalls on flights sure sounds more effective to me.
Shame on Senator Burr. You know what he said? He said the reason the investigation to the Boston bombing wasn't effective is because it was done by the FBI and not the NSA.
Do you believe that?
Excuse me, but, Americans have spent enormous amounts of money to consolidate the intelligence agencies in an Executive Branch Cabinet Seat called Homeland Security.
The reason Americans did that and pay their taxes to facilitate that Executive Branch agency is because it was determined in the early years of Bush immediately after September 11, 2001 that the agencies weren't talking to each other. Is Senator Burr saying the monies spent on such IMPROVEMENTS are worthless?
It may be the truth actually is the NSA program is an abject failure and provided a feel good feeling at the FBI that should never have existed.
Is it reasonable to say, "We don't trust the NSA?" Hell, yeah.
There it is. Senator Burr's oath to office is to protect the American people. Really? So that means every 'idea' is a good idea regardless of it's ineffectiveness and insult to American's rights. Cost is no consequence.
If I hear the words "telephone company" one more time I'll vomit. I wish ATT never entered into a required division of it's assets and interests after Graham Bell founded the technology. It would be easier on Senator Burr if it were just one company. And of course it would have to be nationalized for the efficient use of the NSA.
continued...
