NSA Spied On Porn Habits As Plan To Discredit 'Radicalizers'

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 3085
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2010 4:35 pm

PostWed Nov 27, 2013 10:58 pm » by Poooooot


I know you guys hate Huffington Post, but I figured I'd share.

WASHINGTON -- The National Security Agency has been gathering records of online sexual activity and evidence of visits to pornographic websites as part of a proposed plan to harm the reputations of those whom the agency believes are radicalizing others through incendiary speeches, according to a top-secret NSA document. The document, provided by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden, identifies six targets, all Muslims, as “exemplars” of how “personal vulnerabilities” can be learned through electronic surveillance, and then exploited to undermine a target's credibility, reputation and authority.

The NSA document, dated Oct. 3, 2012, repeatedly refers to the power of charges of hypocrisy to undermine such a messenger. “A previous SIGINT" -- or signals intelligence, the interception of communications -- "assessment report on radicalization indicated that radicalizers appear to be particularly vulnerable in the area of authority when their private and public behaviors are not consistent,” the document argues.

Among the vulnerabilities listed by the NSA that can be effectively exploited are “viewing sexually explicit material online” and “using sexually explicit persuasive language when communicating with inexperienced young girls.”

Image

The Director of the National Security Agency -- described as "DIRNSA" -- is listed as the "originator" of the document. Beyond the NSA itself, the listed recipients include officials with the Departments of Justice and Commerce and the Drug Enforcement Administration.

"Without discussing specific individuals, it should not be surprising that the US Government uses all of the lawful tools at our disposal to impede the efforts of valid terrorist targets who seek to harm the nation and radicalize others to violence," Shawn Turner, director of public affairs for National Intelligence, told The Huffington Post in an email Tuesday.

Yet Jameel Jaffer, deputy legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union, said these revelations give rise to serious concerns about abuse. "It's important to remember that the NSA’s surveillance activities are anything but narrowly focused -- the agency is collecting massive amounts of sensitive information about virtually everyone," he said.

"Wherever you are, the NSA's databases store information about your political views, your medical history, your intimate relationships and your activities online," he added. "The NSA says this personal information won't be abused, but these documents show that the NSA probably defines 'abuse' very narrowly."

None of the six individuals targeted by the NSA is accused in the document of being involved in terror plots. The agency believes they all currently reside outside the United States. It identifies one of them, however, as a "U.S. person," which means he is either a U.S. citizen or a permanent resident. A U.S. person is entitled to greater legal protections against NSA surveillance than foreigners are.

Stewart Baker, a one-time general counsel for the NSA and a top Homeland Security official in the Bush administration, said that the idea of using potentially embarrassing information to undermine targets is a sound one. "If people are engaged in trying to recruit folks to kill Americans and we can discredit them, we ought to," said Baker. "On the whole, it's fairer and maybe more humane" than bombing a target, he said, describing the tactic as "dropping the truth on them."

Any system can be abused, Baker allowed, but he said fears of the policy drifting to domestic political opponents don't justify rejecting it. "On that ground you could question almost any tactic we use in a war, and at some point you have to say we're counting on our officials to know the difference," he said.

In addition to analyzing the content of their internet activities, the NSA also examined the targets' contact lists. The NSA accuses two of the targets of promoting al Qaeda propaganda, but states that surveillance of the three English-speakers’ communications revealed that they have "minimal terrorist contacts."

In particular, “only seven (1 percent) of the contacts in the study of the three English-speaking radicalizers were characterized in SIGINT as affiliated with an extremist group or a Pakistani militant group. An earlier communications profile of [one of the targets] reveals that 3 of the 213 distinct individuals he was in contact with between 4 August and 2 November 2010 were known or suspected of being associated with terrorism," the document reads.

The document contends that the three Arabic-speaking targets have more contacts with affiliates of extremist groups, but does not suggest they themselves are involved in any terror plots.

Instead, the NSA believes the targeted individuals radicalize people through the expression of controversial ideas via YouTube, Facebook and other social media websites. Their audience, both English and Arabic speakers, "includes individuals who do not yet hold extremist views but who are susceptible to the extremist message,” the document states. The NSA says the speeches and writings of the six individuals resonate most in countries including the United Kingdom, Germany, Sweden, Kenya, Pakistan, India and Saudi Arabia.

The NSA possesses embarrassing sexually explicit information about at least two of the targets by virtue of electronic surveillance of their online activity. The report states that some of the data was gleaned through FBI surveillance programs carried out under the Foreign Intelligence and Surveillance Act. The document adds, "Information herein is based largely on Sunni extremist communications." It further states that "the SIGINT information is from primary sources with direct access and is generally considered reliable."

According to the document, the NSA believes that exploiting electronic surveillance to publicly reveal online sexual activities can make it harder for these “radicalizers” to maintain their credibility. "Focusing on access reveals potential vulnerabilities that could be even more effectively exploited when used in combination with vulnerabilities of character or credibility, or both, of the message in order to shape the perception of the messenger as well as that of his followers," the document argues.

An attached appendix lists the "argument" each surveillance target has made that the NSA says constitutes radicalism, as well the personal "vulnerabilities" the agency believes would leave the targets "open to credibility challenges" if exposed.

One target's offending argument is that "Non-Muslims are a threat to Islam," and a vulnerability listed against him is "online promiscuity." Another target, a foreign citizen the NSA describes as a "respected academic," holds the offending view that "offensive jihad is justified," and his vulnerabilities are listed as "online promiscuity" and "publishes articles without checking facts." A third targeted radical is described as a "well-known media celebrity" based in the Middle East who argues that "the U.S perpetrated the 9/11 attack." Under vulnerabilities, he is said to lead "a glamorous lifestyle." A fourth target, who argues that "the U.S. brought the 9/11 attacks on itself" is said to be vulnerable to accusations of “deceitful use of funds." The document expresses the hope that revealing damaging information about the individuals could undermine their perceived "devotion to the jihadist cause."

The Huffington Post is withholding the names and locations of the six targeted individuals; the allegations made by the NSA about their online activities in this document cannot be verified.

The document does not indicate whether the NSA carried out its plan to discredit these six individuals, either by communicating with them privately about the acquired information or leaking it publicly. There is also no discussion in the document of any legal or ethical constraints on exploiting electronic surveillance in this manner.

While Baker and others support using surveillance to tarnish the reputation of people the NSA considers "radicalizers," U.S. officials have in the past used similar tactics against civil rights leaders, labor movement activists and others.

Under J. Edgar Hoover, the FBI harassed activists and compiled secret files on political leaders, most notably Martin Luther King, Jr. The extent of the FBI's surveillance of political figures is still being revealed to this day, as the bureau releases the long dossiers it compiled on certain people in response to Freedom of Information Act requests following their deaths. The information collected by the FBI often centered on sex -- homosexuality was an ongoing obsession on Hoover's watch -- and information about extramarital affairs was reportedly used to blackmail politicians into fulfilling the bureau's needs.

Current FBI Director James Comey recently ordered new FBI agents to visit the Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial in Washington to understand "the dangers in becoming untethered to oversight and accountability."

James Bamford, a journalist who has been covering the NSA since the early 1980s, said the use of surveillance to exploit embarrassing private behavior is precisely what led to past U.S. surveillance scandals. "The NSA's operation is eerily similar to the FBI's operations under J. Edgar Hoover in the 1960s where the bureau used wiretapping to discover vulnerabilities, such as sexual activity, to 'neutralize' their targets," he said. "Back then, the idea was developed by the longest serving FBI chief in U.S. history, today it was suggested by the longest serving NSA chief in U.S. history."

That controversy, Bamford said, also involved the NSA. "And back then, the NSA was also used to do the eavesdropping on King and others through its Operation Minaret. A later review declared the NSA’s program 'disreputable if not outright illegal,'" he said.

Baker said that until there is evidence the tactic is being abused, the NSA should be trusted to use its discretion. "The abuses that involved Martin Luther King occurred before Edward Snowden was born," he said. "I think we can describe them as historical rather than current scandals. Before I say, 'Yeah, we've gotta worry about that,' I'd like to see evidence of that happening, or is even contemplated today, and I don't see it."

Jaffer, however, warned that the lessons of history ought to compel serious concern that a "president will ask the NSA to use the fruits of surveillance to discredit a political opponent, journalist or human rights activist."

"The NSA has used its power that way in the past and it would be naïve to think it couldn't use its power that way in the future," he said.

Adriana Usero and Ryan J. Reilly contributed reporting

Arguments for which radicalizers are being targeted:

Image

Image

Intelligence gleaned from electronic surveillance:
Image



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/2 ... 1385526024
Matthew 7
“Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.

Super Moderator
User avatar
Posts: 15836
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 7:12 pm

PostThu Nov 28, 2013 12:47 am » by Spock


I figured many porn sites were run via the NSA anyway. I remember in an interview with James McAfee he specifically said, "don't visit porn sites".

Also Flash player plug-ins, notice how often that is having to update.

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 7683
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 7:14 am

PostThu Nov 28, 2013 4:07 am » by 99socks


Lol, red herring alert again. :bullshit:



The document, provided by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden, identifies six targets, all Muslims, as “exemplars” of how “personal vulnerabilities” can be learned through electronic surveillance, and then exploited to undermine a target's credibility, reputation and authority.




Yet Jameel Jaffer, deputy legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union, said these revelations give rise to serious concerns about abuse. "It's important to remember that the NSA’s surveillance activities are anything but narrowly focused -- the agency is collecting massive amounts of sensitive information about virtually everyone," he said.



So, the concern is about the precise reason for doing the surveillance on the 6 Muslims who are targeted for this...

But the debate isn't about profiling or anything else... Instead, the (I'm assuming, Muslim) deputy legal director of the ACLU wants to talk about the broad surveillance on everyone. :mrcool:

Y'all are being played.

Yes, the broad surveillance by the NSA on EVERYONE is bad enough, but the fact of the matter is; these isn't for everyone- it's about 6 specific individuals. Which probably makes it legitimate in some manner. Which means, the deputy legal director of the ACLU trying to rouse the general population to stand up for these 6 by throwing around the name Edward Snowden is nearly genius.

But not genius enough. :nwo:
Image

Writer
User avatar
Posts: 42
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2013 2:24 am

PostThu Nov 28, 2013 4:14 am » by F.A.R.T.


The last thing I want to read online, is a wikileaked memo about Alex Jones' sexual habits.....

lets hope this Intel isnt true.....

Super Moderator
User avatar
Posts: 15836
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 7:12 pm

PostThu Nov 28, 2013 4:39 am » by Spock


99socks wrote:Y'all are being played.


How exactly do you come to this conclusion? I'm not sure I understand how any of us are being played, when it comes to surveillance and internet traffic monitoring?

I believe Snowden, James McAfee, the Google car cams that collect home network data, downloadible spyware (not just for advertisements but other reasons). We know for a fact that iOS devices can control your cameras and speakers on your phone remotely. We also know that individuals can be tracked simply by opening an email message.

As far as "the plan to discredit "radicalizes", it's not a far stretch at all to think something like that could be in place.

Initiate
User avatar
Posts: 384
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2012 3:30 am

PostThu Nov 28, 2013 6:22 am » by Innosent


Just goes to show...ya always can tell. I mean, what kind of lame asses think that you can undermine someones authority just because they like porn. I'd be more upset if the people in charge didn't like it.

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 7683
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 7:14 am

PostThu Nov 28, 2013 5:08 pm » by 99socks


Innosent wrote:Just goes to show...ya always can tell. I mean, what kind of lame asses think that you can undermine someones authority just because they like porn. I'd be more upset if the people in charge didn't like it.




Um... people who know that a Muslim with a proven record of sexual immorality is instantaneously discredited and stripped of any respect within the Islamic community.
Image

Initiate
Posts: 464
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 1:33 am
Location: USA

PostThu Nov 28, 2013 5:29 pm » by Blondie1w2000


I think this type of spying would also be used to try to discredit American conservatives who profess family values.

Conspirator
Posts: 1733
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2011 10:29 pm
Location: canada

PostFri Nov 29, 2013 3:08 am » by Mydogma


I have little doubt they have controlled many a scum by way of extortion of their private lives...but quite frankly with the clintons (and rob fords) of the world that the line of moral separation has greatly expanded since the leave it to beaver days....most are more concerned about honesty rather then what toe they suck on....so here is a note to any future nsa peeping tom handler of mine should i ever amount to anything beyond a DTVer threat....kiss my but and get a life...i love women, in many shapes and sizes, i find their bodies near godly...and i dont have much of a fetish other then pregnant women...i have never sucked a toe(but reserve the right too) and i like women from 18-88....maybe a hundred...how old is Rachel Welch?....anyway thats my opinion on their silly invasive government paid peeping tom shit...get a real job and deliver pizza or something....
If you don't wake up, Your the problem, not the thief...www.cattledum.com

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 2119
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2010 9:15 am
Location: Cornwall U.K.

PostFri Nov 29, 2013 6:54 am » by Temps13


The Huffington post is published by a woman whos a liberal ..& people hate liberals.
It's not entirely clear to me why,I dont follow this party politics nonsense,I head Alex Jones ranting about liberals - what did they do wrong.Liberal sounds like a good thing..sort if free n easy,sounds ok..
I always guessed its like you hate liberals its a bit like hating political correctness or something..
So what am I missing?
I know they run down their political opponents..thats reasonable though isn't it?
And while they may have some wrong policies or whatever,aren't their hearts in the right place?
Isn't that guy Ron Paul a liberal? he seems alright
Republican libertarian it says he is
Image Image
IRMENSUL13



  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post
Visit Disclose.tv on Facebook