How is charging people with "crimes" like this not a violation of the First Amendement? While it definitly should be investigated and if there is a credible threat maybe there is a crime to be charged (i.e. possession of illegal firearms, bombs, etc), but as long as its just talk, isn't it a violation of the first amendement to charge them for speaking the threat, no matter how vile?
The go-to counter argument for this will be people stating "you can't yell fire in a crowded theater" trope. But if everyone in the theatre looks at you and tells you to sit down and shut up, have you really committed any crime? Same thing here, its just talk and when even the possible targets of the threat don't take you seriously, how have you committed a crime?
Remember, the IG report also reveals that a "programming error" meant that a ton of phone calls placed from Washington DC were "intercepted" by the NSA (because someone typed in 202, DC's area code, instead of 20, Egypt's country code) -- and that mistake wasn't reported. That doesn't seem "incidental" to me.
When programming applications, if data validation isn't included its not an accident, its either by design or lack of funds. In this case, the NSA probably spec'd the system to be as free from restriction as possible so agents have maximum flexibility in running their searches. Therefore the program was never intended to be restrictive and subject to oversight, instead the NSA planned the system to be as permissive as possible. Also, agents have to report the "accidental" search results, how come the system isn't automatically finding these kind of results and creating a report? Sickening...
As a married adult without children, and no plans to have children, I want no scheme that interferes with my right to see distrubing, dirty, disgusting films (or any more bad 80s cartoon movies remade)! When will someone take into account my feelings on the subject and how these filters are going to deprive me of happiness?
We need a new depeartment to manage all of these drones since each agency is obviously incapable of it. Call it the Federal Use of Drones Department or the FUD for short. They can tell us all the things they are using drones for and assure us that nothing illegal is happening and our civil liberties are protected. It will be reassuring to get such messages from the FUD.