Home > Uncategorized > NSA PRISM Program Linked to Creation of “No Fly List” And “Drone Kill List”

NSA PRISM Program Linked to Creation of “No Fly List” And “Drone Kill List”

Earlier, I suggest that NSA put the effectiveness of the PRISM program to the test, by performing something easier, like fixing the “No Fly List”, long plagued by inaccuracies.

As it turns out, I spoke too soon.  I thought about it some more, and I realized that an obvious RESULT of the PRISM program would be a “No Fly List.”

As it turns out, the PRISM program was actually partly responsible for the creation and generation of the “No Fly List”, as recently confirmed by an Ex-NSA, Bill Binney, who claimed that he was the creator of PRISM 1.0.

http://www.thebostonliberal.com/video-nsa-whistleblower-and-creator-of-prism-recently-spoke-at-mit-33909/

Not just that, PRISM is also linked to the creation of the “Drone Kill List” (which at least gets vetted by humans).

Is this linked to the President’s “kill list?”

Yes. And the no fly list. Senator Kerry from MA was accidentally placed on the list and it took him two years to get off of it.  Can you imagine what a regular person would have to go through?  And don’t forget, drones are not precision weaponry. They have a large kill radius.  A lot of people die who aren’t targeted.

So what does that mean?

It means that PRISM is already operationally INEFFECTIVE, because the “No Fly List” which nearly doubled in the last 1 year or so to 21,000 names, is known to have had a history of inaccuracies (false positives), for example, banning people like Senator Edward Kennedy from flying.

And yes, the US government (President) is using another list generated by PRISM to determine who to “drone kill”.  Although no one knows if the President himself have actually caught any errors made by PRISM, or did he just went along with the list.

So, I retract my earlier offer of a 2nd chance to PRISM.

Based on its past performance in the generation of the “No Fly List” and the “Drone Kill List”, PRISM is a worthless piece of garbage.

It should be permanently shut down, and its operators in NSA made to explain why they are still hawking a piece of SH*T to the public, and killing people and banning people from flights based on its error prone logic.

It is obviously not working right.  And it is by itself a clear and present danger to the public.

 

Categories: Uncategorized Tags:
  1. Black Pheonix
    June 16th, 2013 at 07:46 | #1
  2. Black Pheonix
    June 16th, 2013 at 07:47 | #2

    Remember this story back then:

    “The group cites evidence from Mark Klein, who in 2006 went public with documents purporting to show a secret room at an AT&T facility in San Francisco where he believed the NSA was copying telecommunications traffic. AT&T lawyers have acknowledged in court that the documents are genuine — without confirming that they show what Klein believes.

    Klein said what he found was consistent with Snowden’s disclosures on NSA programs code-named Fairview and Blarney, which involved the collection of communications on fiber cables and infrastructure as data flows past, as well as the PRISM program that accesses data from Internet companies.”

  3. Zack
    June 18th, 2013 at 19:09 | #3
  4. Black Pheonix
    June 19th, 2013 at 06:14 | #4

    @Zack

    It’s ridiculous for these corporate types to whine about it. They are just using it as an excuse to later say, Oh we tried.

    Technically, they can easily object (and issue legal challenges) a long time ago.

    For example, the corporations can argue that the Government is attempting to steal property from them. To Google, these data are their property, (it says so on their user agreements).

    Google could have issued a 5th Amendment “Eminent Domain” challenge.

    Also, Google probably knew about NSA’s tapping of internet cables, and could have challenged the necessity of turning over Google data (as it is duplicative). In other words, the US government could easily collect the data by itself, why force companies to spy on users?

    The answer to the last question is simple. If companies do it, then the government has even less accountability. If the US government was forced to do it, then it would have to request budget, spend, maintain, etc., all very hard to keep secret and keep going.

    But no, the companies went along with it, as accomplices.

  5. Black Pheonix
    June 19th, 2013 at 08:33 | #5

    US Intelligence on defensive: We prevented attack.

    http://www.defensenews.com/article/20130618/DEFREG02/306180026/Intel-Officials-Push-Back-Phone-Snooping-Case

    Really?

    “He also talked about the case of David Headley in Chicago, who was involved in helping to plan the bloody 2008 Mumbai attacks. The NSA again gave the FBI information that “Headley was working on a plot to bomb a Danish newspaper office that had published the cartoon depictions of the Prophet Muhammad,” after which he was tracked, then arrested.”

    * In case we need a refresher on events, NSA was actually asleep at the wheel on David Headley.

    “News reports in October 2010 revealed that U.S. authorities had much advance knowledge about Headley’s terrorist associations and activities. Headley’s American and Moroccan wives had contacted American authorities in 2005 and 2007, respectively, complaining about his terrorist activities. The Moroccan wife told reporters that she had even shown the U.S. embassy in Islamabad photographs of their stay at the Taj Mahal hotel in Mumbai, warning them that he was doing something on behalf of Lashkar-e-Taiba.”

    I would say NSA didn’t really need PRISM to get Headley. His 2 wives turned him in, but NSA didn’t bother to have him arrested.

    Talk about missing the obvious.

  6. Black Pheonix
    June 19th, 2013 at 21:48 | #6

    Now, FBI admits using drones to spy domestically, but “very few”.

    http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-fbi-mueller-20130620,0,5216531.story

    Why is it, when they know they are doing some thing wrong, they excuse themselves with “very few” or “very rare”, without bothering to actually prove how “few” or how “rare”.

    Well, yes, most murderers probably only committed “very few” murders, otherwise, they would be “serial murderers”.

    So what did FBI try to say? That they are not “serial” violators of American privacy, while actually admit that they did violate just that.

    How much is too much? Let’s just put on a bar that applies to most serious crimes in US: “3 Strikes and you are out.”

  7. Black Pheonix
    June 21st, 2013 at 09:33 | #7

    http://www.pcworld.com/article/2042673/nsa-can-retain-encrypted-communications-of-americans-possibly-indefinitely.html

    This seems to contradict what NSA folks said in recent testimony that they destroy data inadvertently collected from American citizens. So apparently, they retain data indefinitely, even if inadvertently collected.

    *I get the feeling that Guardian is just releasing bits of information that they think contradicts NSA’s public statements every now and then, as needed.

Time limit is exhausted. Please reload the CAPTCHA.