NSA agent abused his power to spy on 9 women without detection; 12 other employees did similiar thin
27 replies, posted
[URL="http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/27/nsa-employee-spied-detection-internal-memo"]http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...-internal-memo[/URL]
[quote]Twelve cases of unauthorised surveillance documented in letter from NSA's inspector general to senator Chuck Grassley[/quote]
12 [U]documented[/U] cases.
[quote][B]A National Security Agency employee was able to secretly intercept the phone calls of nine foreign women for six years without ever being detected by his managers, the agency's internal watchdog has revealed.
[/B]
[B]The unauthorised abuse of the [URL="http://www.theguardian.com/world/nsa"]NSA[/URL]'s [URL="http://www.theguardian.com/world/surveillance"]surveillance[/URL] tools only came to light after one of the women, who happened to be a US government employee, told a colleague that she suspected the man – with whom she was having a sexual relationship – was listening to her calls.[/B]
The case is among 12 documented in a letter from the NSA's inspector general to a leading member of Congress, who asked for a breakdown of cases in which the agency's powerful surveillance apparatus was deliberately abused by staff. One relates to a member of the US military who, on the first day he gained access to the surveillance system, used it to spy on six email addresses belonging to former girlfriends.
The letter, from Dr George Ellard, only lists cases that were investigated and later "substantiated" by his office. But it raises the possibility that there are many more cases that go undetected. [B]In a quarter of the cases, the NSA only found out about the misconduct after the employee confessed.[/B]
It also reveals limited disciplinary action taken against NSA staff found to have abused the system. In seven cases, individuals guilty of abusing their powers resigned or retired before disciplinary action could be taken. [B]Two civilian employees kept their jobs[/B] – and, it appears, their security clearance – and escaped with only a written warning after they were found to have conducted unauthorised interceptions.
[B]The abuses – technically breaches of the law – did not result in a single prosecution[/B], even though more than half of the cases were referred to the Department of Justice. The DoJ did not respond to a request for information about why no charges were brought.[/quote]
"If you're not breaking the law you have nothing to fear about being spied on" -- Government abuse is inevitable once the capability exists.
Come on, what the fuck.
I heard about this a little while ago, but I figured it to be some rumored joke.
Not surprising it's real, anyway.
Can they get any worse?
- snip -
Just told my friends in a Skype call this, they didn't care in the slightest.
This is seriously absurd now. Why does the US have so much power.
[QUOTE=gerbe1;42335295]This is seriously absurd now. Why does the [b]NSA[/b] have so much power.[/QUOTE]
fixed that for you. us citizen here; we have no idea either.
Well, power corrupts. Especially left unchecked.
I swear to god that there is a radio advert in GTA V about this sort of thing [I]exactly[/I]
[QUOTE=Dr.Critic;42335328]Well, power corrupts. Especially left unchecked.[/QUOTE]
I don't think anyone here is or will be trying to claim otherwise. It's more par for the course than anything else.
The fact that they get away with it scot-free is an entirely different matter.
[QUOTE=Zeos;42335371]I swear to god that there is a radio advert in GTA V about this sort of thing [I]exactly[/I][/QUOTE]
the whole game is about corrupt feds getting their hands dirty in the crime industry and sadly it's really true
The NSA probably performs enough vital functions in other capacities that its worth it. In any case I doubt its really operating in a way that the big honchos don't know about so there's no one above them to close it who wouldn't lose something by it.
holy shit who would have guessed
"you only have to worry if you have something to hide!"
yeah, because the NSA isn't staffed by people or anything
[QUOTE=Dr McNinja;42337541]The NSA probably performs enough vital functions in other capacities that its worth it. In any case I doubt its really operating in a way that the big honchos don't know about so there's no one above them to close it who wouldn't lose something by it.[/QUOTE]
"guysd you just dont know about all the good things I did before I spied on women!?!!!"
If it's not ok for civilians to do, what makes it ok for NSA agents to do?
Why does this not surprise me?
In the business this is typically referred to as 'LOVINT' (a parody of sorts of the SIGINT, HUMINT, MASINT, and other intelligence short-forms) and it's a big no-no. Upper management tends to come down hard on these cases, don't ignore this line:
[quote]The case is among 12 documented in a letter from the NSA's inspector general to a leading member of Congress, who asked for a breakdown of cases in which the agency's powerful surveillance apparatus was deliberately abused by staff.[/quote]
It was the NSA itself that reported the breaches. Also, as for why no there were no convictions, blame the DoJ:
[quote]The abuses – technically breaches of the law – did not result in a single prosecution, even though more than half of the cases were referred to the Department of Justice. [b]The DoJ did not respond to a request for information about why no charges were brought.[/b][/quote]
These breaches of protocol and privacy ought to result in at the very least a security re-evaluation of the employees involved, since people who can't do the job without abusing the resources at their disposal aren't supposed to have clearance in the first place. I really want to know why the DoJ didn't prosecute these cases, because it should be open and shut. If you abuse your function as a government employee to break the law for your own benefit you should A. get fired and B. go to jail.
In that case all of Congress should get fired and incarcerated.
[QUOTE=AmericanInfantry;42338210]In that case all of Congress should get fired and incarcerated.[/QUOTE]
I think Congress holds a lot of responsibility for what the NSA does as a whole, but why here? An NSA employee abuses his power, he gets caught by his own agency, he gets referred to the Department of Justice- and nothing happens. What does Congress have to do with it?
[QUOTE=catbarf;42338252]I think Congress holds a lot of responsibility for what the NSA does as a whole, but why here? An NSA employee abuses his power, he gets caught by his own agency, he gets referred to the Department of Justice- and nothing happens. What does Congress have to do with it?[/QUOTE]
You said:
[quote]If you abuse your function as a government employee to break the law for your own benefit you should A. get fired and B. go to jail.[/quote]
What is Congress doing now? Bitching about healthcare and other shit and letting the country potentially shut down for a bit. They do not have anyone's best interests at heart.
That being said, it's pretty fucking sickening that neither Congress nor the DoJ has punished anyone regarding this. Nobody in the government cares anymore, as they can get away with whatever the fuck they wnat with no repercussion.
[QUOTE=Teddybeer;42335812]For the untrained eye this would look like a failure of the NSA, but its not.
See a normal person would have nothing to hide so nothing to fear, but this woman has something to hide. Do you also know who have to hide things? Terrorists![/QUOTE]
I know I am not a normal person, and I know that I don't have so much to hide
But the idea that somebody listens to my conversations is just creepy.
[QUOTE=Zeos;42335371]I swear to god that there is a radio advert in GTA V about this sort of thing [I]exactly[/I][/QUOTE]
Relevant:
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2fTkl0LsCE[/media]
[QUOTE=zakedodead;42337707]"guysd you just dont know about all the good things I did before I spied on women!?!!!"
If it's not ok for civilians to do, what makes it ok for NSA agents to do?[/QUOTE]
Oh no I'm not at all inferring that I'm sorry for the confusion. I its definitely not okay and all this absolutely should close it I just mean to whoever actually makes the decision they obviously aren't willing to close it even after how much they've done.
[QUOTE=AmericanInfantry;42338210]In that case all of Congress should get fired and incarcerated.[/QUOTE]
Congress gets fired by people not voting them back into office. It is entirely the United States citizens' fault that they are reelecting officials into office whom do this.
[QUOTE=Zally13;42339712]Congress gets fired by people not voting them back into office. It is entirely the United States citizens' fault that they are reelecting officials into office whom do this.[/QUOTE]
To be fair, voting someone out of office doesn't necessarily end the things that he did while in Washington.
[QUOTE=TheJoey;42335321]fixed that for you. us citizen here; we have no idea either.[/QUOTE]
NSA was set up by the US government, they could only get this sort of global surveillance (and when it is revealed get [I]support[/I] from other major influences in the international relations side of things) if the US government has too much influence.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;42339815]To be fair, voting someone out of office doesn't necessarily end the things that he did while in Washington.[/QUOTE]
I said fired, not reversed every single thing they did while in office. I'm aware of this. If the NSA is something people dislike, then the American people should vote people into office who are against it. People always complain about how democracy doesn't work, but then keep voting these people back in.
[QUOTE=Zally13;42340015]I said fired, not reversed every single thing they did while in office. I'm aware of this. If the NSA is something people dislike, then the American people should vote people into office who are against it. People always complain about how democracy doesn't work, but then keep voting these people back in.[/QUOTE]
Everyone isn't a single issue voter. And sometimes single issue voters don't have this as their most important issue. Voting for a candidate is rather complex in that regard.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.