Agreed. I mean, we were working China stuff when I was at OSAC (2002-2005), as well as Pakistan, Lebanon, Brazil and others. We got by just fine on the available information from both open and classified sources (scrubbing classified intelligence for distribution to American companies operating abroad being part of OSACs primary mission).
The major reason things are supposed to be classified is the fear of releasing information that will reveal sources and methods. This is a very real concern. There are people out there on the sharp end gathering this information that do not have diplomatic covers to hide behind, and would be very dead should they be discovered. Also, China has a very real impact on U.S. intellectual property and business in general. They copy everything and manufacture it without any royalties, often even beating import restrictions and tariffs. It's a tough situation, but I really don't thin that this bill is going to help that situation, only further shred whatever privacy we as individuals still retain. On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 7:39 PM, Dana <[email protected]> wrote: > > the new NSA data center has everything to do with this. They will need > the capacity. > > This is not about China, though. > > D > > On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 4:34 PM, LRS Scout <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > He also said he'd veto the NDAA, and we see how that turned out. > > > > FISA, NDAA, NDRP, Patriot Act, it goes on and on with these people. > > > > I really hope that we as Americans can get our shit together and change > > things electorally, but I don't see that happening. > > > > People are more interested in Dancing with the Stars and Jersey Shore. > > > > There is also a bill floating around to allow the IRS to deny you your > 2nd > > amendment rights, and your right to travel (through denying you a > passport) > > even when not convicted of anything. > > > > Plus the new NSA data center in Utah. > > > > Interesting times. > > > > On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 7:27 PM, Dana <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> > >> thank you! that means a lot coming from you. > >> > >> I should add that Obama has threatened to veto this legislation if it > >> gets to his desk in its present form, but it will not get to his desk > >> in its present form. A whole bunch more amendments were just proposed > >> today so it's anybody's guess what the bill currently says. Note -- > >> none of the amendments address the "notwithstanding all other law" > >> language apparently, and according to CNET some of them make the bill > >> even worse. > >> > >> I almost feel like chicken little saying the sky is falling this soon > >> again after SOPA, but it really is bad stuff. If the intent is not to > >> impinge on privacy, why retain language that says it's ok to do so? > >> > >> Remember all that fuss over warrantless wiretaps a few years ago? They > >> wouldn't have to worry about warrants any more. And the stated > >> rationale -- Chinese hackers -- would not be affected by the > >> provisions of this bill. > >> > >> On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 4:13 PM, LRS Scout <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> > Good article Dana, thanks. > >> > > >> > On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 4:17 PM, Dana <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> > http://www.fusionauthority.com/news/4841-threat-to-fourth-amendment-surfacing-in-congress.htm > >> >> > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:350248 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
