• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Islamic State using leaked Snowden info to evade U.S. intelligence

O

Objective Voice

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 14, 2008
Messages
13,005
Reaction score
5,739
Location
Huntsville, AL (USA)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
I know there are some people who honestly believe Edward Snowden to be a defender of free speech and liberty, but I've long held the view that although it was important for the American public to know that their government was loosely spying on them, the methodologies used didn't need to be fully disclosed. In short, tell the enemy how we're tracking them and they'll soon change tactics. Such is the case with ISIS/ISIL.

According to this article from WashingtonTimes.com:

A former top official at the National Security Agency says the Islamic State terrorist group has “clearly” capitalized on the voluminous leaks from former NSA contractor Edward Snowden and is exploiting the top-secret disclosures to evade U.S. intelligence.

Bottom line: Islamic State killers are harder to find because they know how to avoid detection.

...


The top-secret spill has proven ready-made for the Islamic State (also referred to as ISIL or ISIS). It relies heavily on Internet channels to communicate internally and to spread propaganda.

Mr. Snowden “went way beyond disclosing things that bore on privacy concerns,” said Mr. Inglis, who retired in January. “‘Sources and methods’ is what we say inside the intelligence community — the means and methods we use to hold our adversaries at risk, and ISIL is clearly one of those.

“Having disclosed all of those methods, or at least some degree of those methods, it would be impossible to imagine that, as intelligent as they are in the use of technology, in the employment of communications for their own purposes, it’s impossible to imagine that they wouldn’t understand how they might be at risk to intelligence services around the world, not the least of which is the U.S. And they necessarily do what they think is in their best interest to defend themselves,” he said.
Click to expand...

My concern has long been that once these terrorist groups came to understand how they were being tracked, they'd change tactics. Seems ISIS/ISIL is doing just that. To be clear, I've never been a fan of the PATRIOT Act or any government surveillance program that violated our 5th Amendment rights. However, I fully understood that prior to and since 9/11 the enemy lived within blending among the people in everyday life waiting until he (or she) received the word to carry out their murderous assaults upon the American people. As such, if their means of communications were pre-paid cellphones and the Internet, IMO, it stood to reason to track them where their lines of communications reigned. To that, the NSA surveillance program tried to do just that while also protecting the rights of U.S. citizens. Granted, the program didn't always succeed in that regard and it was important to disclose that much, but disclosing the methods used to track the enemy was wrong.

To me, the issue isn't how many terror attacks you can count on your fingers and toes that have been stopped using meta-data methodology. The issues was "what is the best way for our intelligence agencies to track the enemy from within to stop them from committing other terror attacks on the U.S. homeland". Snowden let the cat out of the bag. Despite his best intentions, he's given the enemy a stronger hand then they deserve.
 
Last edited:
You won't get many Snowden apologists to admit this. They'll dismiss it as propaganda and yet another in a long line of conspiracies against their privacy.
 
But the meta-data wasn't telling the NSA anything about anyone specifically. It merely focused on the keywords or phrases terrorist might use to carry forward with their attacks. For the most part, John and Jane Q Public were relatively safe unless they were suspected of doing something wrong. I'm sure there were some mistakes made here and there and that is regrettable, but if we are to catch the enemy our intelligence gathering sometimes may have to go where we dread.
 
Objective Voice said:
I know there are some people who honestly believe Edward Snowden to be a defender of free speech and liberty, but I've long held the view that although it was important for the American public to know that their government was loosely spying on them, the methodologies used didn't need to be fully disclosed. In short, tell the enemy how we're tracking them and they'll soon change tactics. Such is the case with ISIS/ISIL.

According to this article from WashingtonTimes.com:



My concern has long been that once these terrorist groups came to understand how they were being tracked, they'd change tactics. Seems ISIS/ISIL is doing just that. To be clear, I've never been a fan of the PATRIOT Act or any government surveillance program that violated our 5th Amendment rights. However, I fully understood that prior to and since 9/11 the enemy lived within blending among the people in everyday life waiting until he (or she) received the word to carry out their murderous assaults upon the American people. As such, if their means of communications were pre-paid cellphones and the Internet, IMO, it stood to reason to track them where their lines of communications reigned. To that, the NSA surveillance program tried to do just that while also protecting the rights of U.S. citizens. Granted, the program didn't always succeed in that regard and it was important to disclose that much, but disclosing the methods used to track the enemy was wrong.

To me, the issue isn't how many terror attacks you can count on your fingers and toes that have been stopped using meta-data methodology. The issues was "what is the best way for our intelligence agencies to track the enemy from within to stop them from committing other terror attacks on the U.S. homeland". Snowden let the cat out of the bag. Despite his best intentions, he's given the enemy a stronger hand then they deserve.
Click to expand...

Nice, a formal official from the NSA. When other former officials of the NSA have been quoted, they have been dismissed as disgruntled former employees.
 
a351 said:
You won't get many Snowden apologists to admit this. They'll dismiss it as propaganda and yet another in a long line of conspiracies against their privacy.
Click to expand...

“They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
Ben Franklin
 
a351 said:
You won't get many Snowden apologists to admit this. They'll dismiss it as propaganda and yet another in a long line of conspiracies against their privacy.
Click to expand...

That is because it is propaganda. The deputy director of the NSA they quote in the article, Chris Inglis, was part of the outright lies told to congress to conceal the spying on American citizens. He is being forced to resign along with General Alexander, and his credibility is basically zero. The article offers no actual evidence, only the unverifiable claims of a liar defending his crimes.
 
rathi said:
That is because it is propaganda. The deputy director of the NSA they quote in the article, Chris Inglis, was part of the outright lies told to congress to conceal the spying on American citizens. He is being forced to resign along with General Alexander, and his credibility is basically zero. The article offers no actual evidence, only the unverifiable claims of a liar defending his crimes.
Click to expand...
When all you've got is ad-hom :shrug: It's not like he's the only one claiming so. The current head of the Counterterrorism Center supports this claim, as does the former head of the NSA. It's not like this is an intellectual leap either. If Snowden wanted to play folk hero among the American people, he could have dumped only the relevant and domestic portions of their intelligence gathering practices. Instead, he chose just about everything he could get his hands on, including how we gather data against foreign and legitimate threats to our interests. Those who support Snowden wholly will eventually have to grapple with the consequences instead of just burying their head in the sand.
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1063728394 said:
“They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
Ben Franklin
Click to expand...
:roll: Wow. Never thought I'd see that quote in a Snowden thread. What a breath of fresh air. But on a serious note, what essential liberty did Americans sacrifice in order to keep our foreign intelligence methodology under wraps?
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1063728394 said:
“They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
Ben Franklin
Click to expand...

To be clear, I've never been in favor of warrantless wiretaps. However, when it came down to "finding the enemy from within," I believe the collection and scrubbing of meta-data via our wireless network was a prudent step given how the 9/11 terrorist were communicating with each other at the time. Where our government crossed the line was in the amount of data collected, how long it was being held and the "wide net" that was cast in order to find the bad guys when it was very clear early on that such a net could have and should have been narrowed without harming the effectiveness of the surveillance system. I hope going forward things are changed to protect the liberties of honorable, patriotic Americans. Everyone else...keep an ear out.
 
Proof or propaganda.
 
Objective Voice said:
I know there are some people who honestly believe Edward Snowden to be a defender of free speech and liberty, but I've long held the view that although it was important for the American public to know that their government was loosely spying on them, the methodologies used didn't need to be fully disclosed. In short, tell the enemy how we're tracking them and they'll soon change tactics. Such is the case with ISIS/ISIL. …
Click to expand...

If so, then the fault lies squarely and entirely on those corrupt public servants who abused this power against the American people, leading to the need to expose this abuse; and not on anyone involved in exposing this abuse. By abusing the power that they were given, to the detriment of the people that they were supposed to be serving and protecting, these corrupt agencies are wholly to blame for undermining their ability to use this power legitimately against our enemies. The greatest scandal of all associated with this is that as far as I know, none of the corrupt public servants responsible for this abuse are yet serving long prison sentences. In an indirect manner, their abuse of this power, and the subsequent undermining of their ability to use it properly against our enemies, amounts to outright treason.
 
a351 said:
:roll: Wow. Never thought I'd see that quote in a Snowden thread. What a breath of fresh air. But on a serious note, what essential liberty did Americans sacrifice in order to keep our foreign intelligence methodology under wraps?
Click to expand...

Those that would support government intrusion and spying on Americans to keep us safe, as they claim, from potential terror activities.
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1063729301 said:
Those that would support government intrusion and spying on Americans to keep us safe, as they claim, from potential terror activities.
Click to expand...

Did anyone ever manage to explain how spying on Americans could kept us safe from terrorists? There are 300+ million of us, but it didn't keep people safe during the Boston Marathon bombing and killing last year, and that was just a very small percentage of American people. What excuse will they come up with if we are attacked on a large scale, as some are predicting? It's all our fault for living here? :thumbdown:

Greetings, Mo. :2wave:
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1063729301 said:
Those that would support government intrusion and spying on Americans to keep us safe, as they claim, from potential terror activities.
Click to expand...
You failed to answer the question. What liberties did Americans sacrifice in order to keep foreign methodologies secret? Snowden was smart enough to release the ins and outs of how we collect data on the Taliban, Iran and Hezbollah, among others. American citizens had to sacrifice exactly nothing in order to keep those under wraps.
 
a351 said:
You failed to answer the question. What liberties did Americans sacrifice in order to keep foreign methodologies secret? Snowden was smart enough to release the ins and outs of how we collect data on the Taliban, Iran and Hezbollah, among others. American citizens had to sacrifice exactly nothing in order to keep those under wraps.
Click to expand...

I didn't fail to do anything. I commented about the government having no business in my cell phone or computer.

I'll bet you're a vociferous opponent of government intrusion in your bedroom though.
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1063729528 said:
I didn't fail to do anything. I commented about the government having no business in my cell phone or computer.
Click to expand...

Which is irrelevant to the stated effects on foreign intelligence gathering as a result of Snowden's heroics. It's the thread's topic you know.

I'll bet you're a vociferous opponent of government intrusion in your bedroom though.
Click to expand...

Depends on the topic. National security != Laws pertaining to sexual content. Different things are different.
 
a351 said:
When all you've got is ad-hom :shrug: It's not like he's the only one claiming so. The current head of the Counterterrorism Center supports this claim, as does the former head of the NSA. It's not like this is an intellectual leap either. If Snowden wanted to play folk hero among the American people, he could have dumped only the relevant and domestic portions of their intelligence gathering practices. Instead, he chose just about everything he could get his hands on, including how we gather data against foreign and legitimate threats to our interests. Those who support Snowden wholly will eventually have to grapple with the consequences instead of just burying their head in the sand.
Click to expand...

Everything you said was spot-on right up until the bolded. And the answer, sadly, is no, they don't. Denial aint' just a river in Egypt.
 
polgara said:
Did anyone ever manage to explain how spying on Americans could kept us safe from terrorists?
Click to expand...

The metadata program kept track of the point-to-point records; what numbers had called whom. This is useful for scenarios such as the following.

555-5555 suddenly starts calling a number tied to Abu McJihad in Pakistan. Abu McJihad is a member of the AQ cell for foreign operations, so this is serious. We quickly break out 555-5555's network. 555-5555 only regularly calls Abu McJihad, 666-6666, 777-7777, 888-8888, and 999-9999; so now you have your cell figured out. Unfortunately, the owner of 555-5555 only periodically turns on his phone, and we don't know who it is. The 8's, the 6's, and the 9's all only call each other and Mr 5, but good ole 777-7777 has apparently less personal devotion to OPSEC, and he calls a series of other numbers in a given geographic area. Notably, of the 5 other numbers Mr 7 calls, 1 of them is a pizza joint, 1 of them is a travel agency, and the other three are all members of a single family - the McKillTheInfedels, who live in Dearborne Michegan. Now we have a geographic area, and the family of at least one of the conspirators; likely by talking to them we can figure out who Mr 7 is, and by picking up and flipping Mr 7 we might be able to figure out Mr's 5-9. Additionally, Mr 8's phone pops up - he's active. He's currently co-located with 123-4567. In fact, once we pull up Mr 8's records, every time he makes a call, he is co-located with 123-4567. Fantastic, so both of these phones are probably owned by the same guy, and he uses one as his Operations phone, and the other as his Personal. Quickly we can break out 123-4567's network and find out A) where Mr 8 probably is and B) where he may run to try to hide if we start pursuing him. Now we have two solid leads on a cell in a scenario where time is critical.


:shrug: but unless we have the historical data.... we are just hoping that 555-5555 makes enough calls from the point at which he calls Mr McJihad for us to eventually put together the pieces, bit by bit, and hoping we do so in time.
 
a351 said:
When all you've got is ad-hom :shrug: It's not like he's the only one claiming so. The current head of the Counterterrorism Center supports this claim, as does the former head of the NSA. It's not like this is an intellectual leap either. If Snowden wanted to play folk hero among the American people, he could have dumped only the relevant and domestic portions of their intelligence gathering practices. Instead, he chose just about everything he could get his hands on, including how we gather data against foreign and legitimate threats to our interests. Those who support Snowden wholly will eventually have to grapple with the consequences instead of just burying their head in the sand.
Click to expand...

I'm not seeing any evidence in your posts, just blind faith in bureaucrats caught lying. Keith Alexander's deception is not a personal attack, its a matter of public record. He already has been caught creating fake justification for his spying with the false 54 plots he tried to claim were stopped by the violation of American privacy.

If you want to make your case, find some actual evidence beyond the word of disgraced individuals with track record of bull****.
 
cpwill said:
The metadata program kept track of the point-to-point records; what numbers had called whom. This is useful for scenarios such as the following.

555-5555 suddenly starts calling a number tied to Abu McJihad in Pakistan. Abu McJihad is a member of the AQ cell for foreign operations, so this is serious. We quickly break out 555-5555's network. 555-5555 only regularly calls Abu McJihad, 666-6666, 777-7777, 888-8888, and 999-9999; so now you have your cell figured out. Unfortunately, the owner of 555-5555 only periodically turns on his phone, and we don't know who it is. The 8's, the 6's, and the 9's all only call each other and Mr 5, but good ole 777-7777 has apparently less personal devotion to OPSEC, and he calls a series of other numbers in a given geographic area. Notably, of the 5 other numbers Mr 7 calls, 1 of them is a pizza joint, 1 of them is a travel agency, and the other three are all members of a single family - the McKillTheInfedels, who live in Dearborne Michegan. Now we have a geographic area, and the family of at least one of the conspirators; likely by talking to them we can figure out who Mr 7 is, and by picking up and flipping Mr 7 we might be able to figure out Mr's 5-9. Additionally, Mr 8's phone pops up - he's active. He's currently co-located with 123-4567. In fact, once we pull up Mr 8's records, every time he makes a call, he is co-located with 123-4567. Fantastic, so both of these phones are probably owned by the same guy, and he uses one as his Operations phone, and the other as his Personal. Quickly we can break out 123-4567's network and find out A) where Mr 8 probably is and B) where he may run to try to hide if we start pursuing him. Now we have two solid leads on a cell in a scenario where time is critical.


:shrug: but unless we have the historical data.... we are just hoping that 555-5555 makes enough calls from the point at which he calls Mr McJihad for us to eventually put together the pieces, bit by bit, and hoping we do so in time.
Click to expand...

Greetings, cpwill. :2wave:

Thanks for taking the time to give an explanation! *hug* . I have read many posts of yours, and also many posts about you from people who know you, and I am impressed that they are impressed with your expertise! I'm glad to meet you! :thumbs:
 
cpwill said:
The metadata program kept track of the point-to-point records; what numbers had called whom. This is useful for scenarios such as the following.
Click to expand...

That's fine, and there is no doubt that what would be MOST useful to NSA and others is repeal of the 4th Amendment. And then they could collect any and all records that would help them to "fight terrorism" and all the rest of us have to do is trust the NSA and FBI et al to use all our private information for good purposes and never for bad, which seems like a fair tradeoff. We have no more right to privacy, and they get all they need to catch bad guys.

And I see nothing at all problematic about secret courts issuing secret orders that massively expand the ability of the police state to delve into all aspects of our electronic communications. After all, if they get the metadata, who did 555-5555 call, how long, where were those callers located, surely it would make things easier if they just collected the content of all calls for possible later review! What could possibly go wrong?
 
polgara said:
Greetings, cpwill. :2wave:

Thanks for taking the time to give an explanation! *hug* . I have read many posts of yours, and also many posts about you from people who know you, and I am impressed that they are impressed with your expertise! I'm glad to meet you! :thumbs:
Click to expand...

Hey there Polgara! :2wave: Snowden's disclosures, with regards to the domestic spying alone, produced an American conversation about something senator Church and the Church committee warned America about 40 years ago. That warning went without heed, and we ended up in the very undesirable situation that we were warned would require due diligence to avoid. It also produced BI-PARTISAN support for legislation to reign that agency in, and terminate its extra constitutional practices. Don't let anyone convince you that there was no good that came of it. Or that the obscurity of Meta data gathering was/is benign.
 
Montecresto said:
Hey there Polgara! :2wave: Snowden's disclosures, with regards to the domestic spying alone, produced an American conversation about something senator Church and the Church committee warned America about 40 years ago. That warning went without heed, and we ended up in the very undesirable situation that we were warned would require due diligence to avoid. It also produced BI-PARTISAN support for legislation to reign that agency in, and terminate its extra constitutional practices. Don't let anyone convince you that there was no good that came of it. Or that the obscurity of Meta data gathering was/is benign.
Click to expand...

Greetings, Montecresto. :2wave:

I know that many companies like Amazon.com keep track of what we purchase so they can target what we might be interested in buying in the future, and offer it, and that's okay, I guess. Why anyone in government would be interested in my conversations with my grandkids escapes me, though, unless it eliminates me as a potential problem. What a waste of time and money - since most of us would just like to live our lives in peace. Wouldn't it be far better to concentrate on the troublemakers and leave the rest of us alone? How we ever managed to become the world's leaders without having someone monitoring our every move is a mystery, isn't it? And if we do have a terrorist attack, as some are predicting, odds are overwhelming that it won't be an average citizen doing it. IMO, this is just 1984 coming true, and we know what that produced! Constant propaganda and no freedom except for those governing! :bs:, and that is NOT benign!
 
a351 said:
:roll: Wow. Never thought I'd see that quote in a Snowden thread. What a breath of fresh air. But on a serious note, what essential liberty did Americans sacrifice in order to keep our foreign intelligence methodology under wraps?
Click to expand...

The liberty to not have that same methodology used on us.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom