Jump to content

Talk:National Security Agency

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Technical 13 (talk | contribs) at 19:20, 21 February 2014 (→Semi-protected edit request on 21 February 2014: Responded to edit request (EPH)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:CryptographyReader

Toolbox


Can someone please update the numbers?

There are 107,000+ employees spending $52.6 billion, not those "classified" guess numbers showing on the article page. Here's the reference:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/black-budget-summary-details-us-spy-networks-successes-failures-and-objectives/2013/08/29/7e57bb78-10ab-11e3-8cdd-bcdc09410972_story.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.151.160.158 (talk) 04:21, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

san antonio nsa activities

It's interesting to note that no mention is made of NSA's extensive activities at Lackland AFB here in San Antonio (vis: Air Intelligence Agency; AKA: AIA). There was also a recent purchase of a fair amount of real estate in the area intended to house approx 1200 NSA employees initially with room for up to 3000 in total. Anyone interested can verify this with articles published in the San Antonio Express News (the local daily).

Cheers...—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.243.56.169 (talk • contribs) 04:58, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Call Connected Thru the NSA

Recently the rock band They Might Be Giants have created a ringtone for download called "Call Connected Thru the NSA" the lyrics consist of " Call connected thru the NSA, complete transmission thru the NSA, suspending your right for the duration of the permanent war." hope you guys can add it in here.

Patent Citation

Ok, I think I have found a source for the "Citation needed" bit in the patent section, see: [1], however, it seems to be a clone (or vice versa) of this page, your thoughts? Help plz 12:29, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, that's just a mirror (it even says it's taken from Wiki), so it can't be used as a source (it would literally be citing ourselves). Ddye 12:59, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Link to a list of NSA patents: http://www.wolfgang-pfaller.de/NSA%20Patents.html --92.230.155.214 (talk) 11:50, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is a complete lack of information on the NSA mind control, Remote Neural Monitoring, ...

... Electronic Brain Link, Remote Nerve/Brain Stimulation, synthetic telepathy, directed energy weapons, and radar or electromagnetic imaging capabilities on Wikipedia.

In all the Wikipedia articles on the NSA and US government, there is no information on the satellite or remote sensor installation which facilitate the governments deployment of NSA mind control, Remote Neural Monitoring, Electronic Brain Link, Remote Nerve/Brain Stimulation, synthetic telepathy, directed energy weapons, and radar or electromagnetic imaging capabilities. This technology is in it's prime, police have access to it nationwide, and articles exist about it's existence. But all of the official Wikipedia pages are lacking in any information on the subject. I suspect someone needs to edit in some information to cover this area of technology and the controversy of it's use. I also suspect heavy censorship and lack of information being provided by the police and government about it. There was an old article on Wikipedia about synthetic telepathy, but an edit war essentially made Wikipedia shut it down (all that's left is the medical grade brain computer interface article).

Here is a circulating document from 2006 on the technology. Enough information exists that there needs to be some mention of it in official articles. This system appears to be the backbone for the NSAs intelligence gathering and communication systems. It is being used not just without warrants, but in complete secrecy, likely because of the illegality of it's use. It allows all the information in the human brain and body to be observed and recorded remotely, what a person sees, hears, thinks, feels, dreams, all information stored in the mind including passwords and history is available to police, NSA, CIA, FBI, and government personnel.

Is the NSA Conducting Electronic Warfare On Americans?

Jonas Holmes May 19, 2006 CHRONICLE ARTICLE [full text of document of uncertain provenance deleted as possible WP:BLP violation and possible WP:COPYVIO--Rybec] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Togiff (talk • contribs) 2013-07-23T12:07:37 (UTC)

"[A]ll of the official Wikipedia pages are lacking in any information on the subject" because all reliable sources are lacking in any information on the subject. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 05:56, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"because all reliable sources are lacking in any information on the subject" not true. there is nearly millions of websites on the subject, information on how neurons can be read remotely and manipulated remotely, patents, laws, and research. information can be found at http://www.mindjustice.org/ and many other websites. RNM is a classified NSA project with tons of people who allege it to exist, and the basic principles of synthetic telepathy are even better established. there are also tons of victims worldwide of it's alleged use, with tons of reports on the technology and it's use. also, see the old Wikipedia article 'synthetic telepathy' - information exists that was once on Wikipedia, before Wikipedia censored it and took it offline. Wikipedia is void on details due to government censorship and attacks to the Wikipedia pages by people who are misinformed on the subject matter, or wish to control and hide the information. http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2010/05/451768.html what I want to see is someone create a research article based on the information in the Wikipedia electromagnetism, electron, and electric charge articles, describing how neurons emit radio frequencies, and how microwaves and other electromagnetism can be used to stimulate ion channels and other parts of the nerves remotely. this is what allows remote non invasive brain computer interfaces like RNM/EBL to work. this would be perfect complements to Wikipedia and finally explain in detail how all this nonsense works, without the need to rely on data we cannot obtain from the government directly.
You call http://www.oregonstatehospital.net/ or http://www.mindjustice.org/ reliable? Not in the real-world sense, and not in the Wikipedia sense. As for http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2010/05/451768.html , the article Synthetic telepathy, although having little content sourced to anything, was properly merged into Brain–computer interface. If there were reliable sources, information could be added to that article. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 19:09, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Cheryl Welsh the director of mindjustice.org is listed as one of six mind control/non-lethal weapons experts in the world by the * United Nations. Yes everything on their website is credible and a proper source of reference, per Wikipedia's standards. mindjustice.org also references books, newspaper articles, and literature, and laws, all very good sources of information on this. did you happen to see the Russian Research section, complete with full copy of the Russian law on this? they also have tons of interviews with PhD doctors and neurologists on the subject. the Synthetic Telepathy article that was removed from Wikipedia also references several patents, and research pieces related to this technology in the USA. There are laws, and patents related to this. None of this is in the Wikipedia Brain Computer Interface article, nothing from it was merged. All that is left is a reference to the militaries investment into the technology and research, which seems to be largely outdated misinformation. It has also been deleted and removed from the article several times, meaning people keep removing the information rather than building on top of it. I actually posted these links in hopes that someone would include or amend the articles with this information. You are ignorant, you keep claiming all this is "irrelevant" and "no good sources of information exist" while ignoring the research and information provided. as far as I am concerned, your statements are irrelevant. I am providing this just for another Wikipedia'er to evaluate and hopefully build on. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Togiff (talk • contribs) 12:07, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That is not an official UN document, even if it had been hosted on UN web sites. (The link on the mindjustice page is broken. ) Among the purported "author" organizations, UNIDIR appears to have some credibility, but QUNO does not, and PSIS seems to no longer exist.
No, I don't buy it.
Even if all you say is correct, Welsh and mindjustice would still not be a reliable source, unless Welsh has published her work in reliable sources.
And, even if there were a reliable source for your information, it still wouldn't fit in this article, only in mind control. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 19:18, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I tend to agree, that reliable sources are an issue here. Sephiroth storm (talk) 20:01, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This entire section needs to be discarded, lest we allow the camel's nose of hearsay, pure invention, science fiction and conspiracy theories to shove itself under the tent flap. Remote viewing indeed. The next thing they will be suggesting is that NSA employees wear tin foil hats. Please. Let us limit this discussion to reality.````12/16/13 — Preceding unsigned comment added by USAFSS60 (talk • contribs) 18:04, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The main web page now has credible sources of information, including US patent 6,011,991, which describes remote brain reading tech, with remote firing devices to remotely control a persons brain/nervous system. There are also now references to there being nearly 30 satellites deployed by the National Reconnaissance Office, most of them ELINT, which is exactly what would be used to do this sort of remote brain imaging. ELINT is the monitoring of non-communication unintentionally emanated radiation, not including nuclear, which would include brain waves and psychotronic energy. Take another look (videos of NSA Whistleblower Russell Tice discussing using satellites to do spying, too): http://www.oregonstatehospital.net/d/russelltice-nsarnmebl.html Togiff (talk) 17:38, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted from Togiff's initial comment the "circulating document from 2006". It looks like a hoax to me. Some of the people circulating the document claimed it was an article that had been published in the California Chronicle. I found a Web site called californiachronicle.com (whether that's the same California Chronicle, I don't know) but a search there for "Jonas Holmes", the supposed author of the piece, turned up nothing. The article may have been written to discredit Russell Tice.

Also, even though this is all over the Internet, posting the full text of a document written by someone else may be a copyright violation. —rybec 00:26, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

More NSA sources

WhisperToMe (talk) 06:16, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The ANT catalog

http://defense-update.com/20131229_der-spiegel-backdoor-openers-paving-way-nsa-surveillance.html Der Spiegel mentioned a particular digital lock pick called “FEEDTROUGH” tailored to match the back door the NSA managed to gain on Juniper Networks systems.

Worth a mention? Hcobb (talk) 22:17, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There's more stuff about the NSA Office of Tailored Access Operations (TAO) and other NSA stuff:

I'm glad German newspapers are publishing articles in English. WhisperToMe (talk) 02:44, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

iPhones and more

Old articles:

WhisperToMe (talk) 07:06, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

NSA and Congress

WhisperToMe (talk) 06:52, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to help craft a proposal

Surveillance awareness day is a proposal for the English Wikipedia to take special steps to promote awareness of global surveillance on February 11, 2014. That date is chosen to coincide with similar actions being taken by organizations such as Mozilla, Reddit, and the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

Feedback from editors of this article would be greatly appreciated. Please come join us as we brainstorm, polish, and present this proposal to the Wikipedia Community. --HectorMoffet (talk) 12:30, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

New lead

I have semi-protected the article. Those wishing to insert this new lead, please make your case here for its being neutral and supported by references. Yngvadottir (talk) 13:43, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is a spelling error the subheading "Scope of surveillance" in the "History" section of this article. The second sentence of paragraph three reads: "The NSA supplies domestic intercepts to the DEA, IRS and other law enforcement agencies, who use these to intitiate criminal investigations against US citizens." The word "intitiate" should be changed to "initiate". [Unregistered] 18:13, 29 January 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.9.188.28 (talk)

Got it, thanks, sorry about the protection. Yngvadottir (talk) 18:22, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 30 January 2014

I have found an declassified document from the NSA to incoming President Bush titled "Transition 2001" (http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB24/nsa25.pdf).

Interestingly, in the "Major Policy Issues" section of the document the issue of rethinking 4th amendment rights in light of changing SIGINT from analog technologies to electronic technologies is identified as a major issue for the NSA. This is before there was much public attention or awareness on the issue of collection of data from U.S. citizens. It would seem to fit within section 1.7.2 Legal accountability or 5.1 Criticism. The edit would go something like:

"The declassified document "Transition 2001" makes clear the NSA identified that the changing nature of SIGINT would require not only care on the part of the intelligence organization, but a rethinking of policy and constitutional rights surrounding the collection of data. In regard to the fourth amendment, it is stated that the "Information Age will however cause us to rethink and reapply the procedures, policies and authorities born in an earlier electronic surveillance environment". Indeed many of the recent criticisms of the NSA surround the challenge of collecting electronic data while protecting fourth amendment rights."

Kmws48 (talk) 00:30, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. That's very much a primary source (and I'm not sure of either its authenticity or the legality of its display online). I'm inclined to perform the edit, since the article is only semi-protected and therefore any confirmed editor can revert it back out, but there's no big rush, so can we hear from others on this, please? Yngvadottir (talk) 17:10, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia has an article about the Web site, National Security Archive and has [2] 130 links to documents on the site. US government publications are usually in the public domain; taking a glance at this one, I didn't see any copyrighted material. After declassification, documents are no longer considered secret...unless they are reclassified. In principle documents such as this can be verified by requesting a copy. —rybec 22:35, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Agree it is a primary source, so shouldn't be added, however the semi-protection has now expired.... Arjayay (talk) 17:58, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

N.S.A. Director

The Obama administration recently announced that the new Director of the National Security Agency and the commander of the new Pentagon unit will be Vice Admiral Michael S. Rogers. General Alexander decided to retire and Admiral Rogers was the leading candidate to succeed him with far more experience. Before taking this new position, he must be confirmed by the Senate. Here is the article I found the information at [3]. Once this can be confirmed and he begins serving, we should update the content on the page. I'm posting on the talk page so we can keep an eye out on it. Let me hear your thoughts. Thanks. Meatsgains (talk) 22:17, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 21 February 2014

please let me edit 99.247.162.199 (talk) 18:55, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: requests for decreases to the page protection level should be directed to the protecting admin or to Wikipedia:Requests for page protection if the protecting admin is not active or has declined the request. — {{U|Technical 13}} (t • e • c) 19:20, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:National_Security_Agency&oldid=596530680"