10 ms·

Students Question the NSA at Recruiting Session [audio]

241 points by martin_k 13y ago

HSO 13y ago
This is brilliant. Instead of that less than half-assed interview Charlie Rose did with Obama, we should have had those students go at it.
- Sven7 13y ago
  Students can ask all the questions they want (of Facebook and Goldman Sachs too). At the end of the day the only question that matters is who is going to pay off those little student loans.
  - jlgreco 13y ago
    > "little student loans." You are correct on the "little" front. While it may seem astronomical to people in countries with different educational systems and people without career prospects, the median and mean student loan debt is under $30k. So long as they are in a field with more than one major employer, then the NSA is hardly has significant power over them.
    - Sven7 13y ago
      And what is the mean and median savings rate?
      - jlgreco 13y ago
        Good enough that if these students seek employment and take their loans seriously, they are in no dire danger. Student loan discussion is dominated by the few fools who wrack up massively debt then think that they can make the minimum required payment for 10 years and have everything turn out okay. The mean debt is also slewed upwards by people who acquire very large amounts of debt that is not an unusual amount for their field (doctors, particularly). Those who don't actually graduate are another obvious cause of the perception that student loan debt is crippling (and for them it certainly is), but of course they are not being considered in this discussion unless the NSA is making a habit of hiring college dropouts.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
fvrghl 13y ago
Why are they doing student recruiting right now? I imagine all sessions would go like this.
- PavlovsCat 13y ago
  Then I hope they get recorded and posted as well, because this made my heart sing with joy. "I mean, I think the question here is, do you actually think about the ramifications of the work that you do, which is deeply problematic, or do you just dress up in costumes and get drunk?"
- DanBC 13y ago
  Sales of horse meat rose after food contamination scares in UK. Also, we want ethical people working for them, because then there's more people to say "Is this legal?" when an order for intelligence comes in.
  - jlgreco 13y ago
    Horse meat was not the issue; the issue was mislabeled cow meat. What did cow meat sales do after the cow meat contamination news in the UK? I don't buy the classic "change the organization from within" line. If that were the proper thing to encourage then we should all be running out looking for the most despicable corporations to work for and the most horrendous governments to pay taxes to.
    - DanBC 13y ago
      While many people avoided cheap cow meat products there were a few people intrigued by the idea of horse meat. I agree the "change the organisation from within" line is weak. But I also think that there are many people who still think "You only need to worry if you have something to hide" and who don't see a problem with what NSA does. I guess those people will believe the NSA obeys the law. I could understand people thinking the GCHQ box is "just a cache". Collecting the data isn't a problem; looking through the data for targeted information (grepping the specific name of a terrorist, for example) is ok; it's only a problem if they start to look at everything. And those people won't think that collection is the same as looking. It's not something I believe myself, but I can see how others might. Also, as has been mentioned, cognitive dissonance. People rationalise and justify weird things all the time. I don't see that being different when they're looking for work. I'm not saying that not a single person has decided to not work for NSA! Obviously, there's probably many people who would have been fine with spying on foreign nations but very uncomfortable with the idea of spying on citizens.
martin_k 13y ago
Some background on the event and recording: http://mobandmultitude.com/2013/07/02/the-nsa-comes-recruiting/ http://mobandmultitude.com/2013/07/02/the-nsa-comes-recruiti... edit: Cached version http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://mobandmultitude.com/2013/07/02/the-nsa-comes-recruiting/&rlz=2C5CHFA_enDE0538DE0538&strip=1 http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://...
hkmurakami 13y ago
I have some sympathy for the recruiters since they really have no say in the high level decision making in the organization. They may not even be involved with domestic spying of citizens. But on the other hand they continue to stay at the organization so while I do feel some sympathy for their predicament,I guess it's really just up to each person to figure out whether they're really okay with staying there, given all the pros and cons involved.
- malandrew 13y ago
  I hate to invoke Godwin's Law because it never helps any discussion, so instead I'll refer to the discussion of Death Star politics and the impact on contractors: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQdDRrcAOjA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQdDRrcAOjA
- martin_k 13y ago
  I found this part particularly interesting: "Our business is apolitical, okay? We do not generate the intelligence requirements. They're levied on us. And so if there is a requirement for foreign intelligence concerning this issue or this region or whatever, then that is [...] what we are going after. That is the intelligence target we are going after because it is the requirement." I think as engineers, we have a certain degree of responsibility for how our work is used. To say your work is apolitical when you're in the business of spying on people is quite the statement, especially if "people" is basically everybody. (I am aware that the speaker is probably not an engineer and it wasn't an engineering recruiting program, but the same can be said about their field, I'd assume.)
  - meowface 13y ago
    Quite true. The policy makers and intelligence directors can't have huge spying apparatuses if they have no engineers willing to build them.
  - angersock 13y ago
    "Once the rocket goes up, who cares where it comes down? That's not my department", says Werner von Braun.
blantonl 13y ago
NSA Recruiting sessions are staffed by NSA recruiters - i.e. sales people. There might be the token engineer on hand to answer in very generic terms about technology etc, but to think that any questions would be met with useful responses is like asking the President's press secretary information on details of classified operations. You'll get nothing more than spin at best.
- PavlovsCat 13y ago
  You'll still get "the requirements are handed down to us" though, which is the classic Eichmann defense.
c0ur7n3y 13y ago
I have to imagine their recruiting is going to suffer greatly due to the recent revelations. Very few smart people are going to want to join an organization that spies on their fellow citizens. Plus, the NSA is going to have to be even more skeptical of anyone they do recruit.
- TallGuyShort 13y ago
  I spoke to the NSA at a career fair. They weren't full-time recruiters, so I asked them how much they ran into brick walls of politics and bureaucracy in their day-to-day work. Their response was "well... not all of the time". I walked to the next booth.
- dromidas 13y ago
  The TSA hardly has a shortage of employees. Why would the NSA have problems? I have more disgust for TSA than NSA currently, albeit by a very small margin.
  - coryl 13y ago
    I would assume NSA roles have much higher requirements in education and training.
    - mpyne 13y ago
      Requirements like having a high school diploma? ;)
- DanBC 13y ago
  A lot of people just don't care. They want a job with other smart people and neat technology where they can do math in peace and quiet. See also "You don't need to worry if you don't have anything to hide" etc.
  - angersock 13y ago
    Truly it is a wonderful thing that the most anti-social and introverted people get to deploy technology affecting the common man.
Camillo 13y ago
Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrOZllbNarw http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrOZllbNarw
- codeulike 13y ago
  Its a good speech. I transcribed it a while back: Why shouldn't I work for the NSA? That's a tough one. But I'll take a shot. Say I'm working at the NSA, and somebody puts a code on my desk, something no one else can break. Maybe I take a shot at it and maybe I break it. And I'm real happy with myself, 'cuz I did my job well. But maybe that code was the location of some rebel army in North Africa or the Middle East, and once they have that location, they bomb the village where the rebels are hiding. Fifteen hundred people that I never met, never had no problem with, get killed. Now the politicians are saying, "Oh, send in the marines to secure the area", 'cuz they don't give a shit. It won't be their kid over there, getting shot. Just like it wasn't them when their number got called, 'cuz they were pulling a tour in the National Guard. It'll be some kid from Southie over there taking shrapnel in the ass. He comes back to find that the plant he used to work at got exported to the country he just got back from. And the guy who put the shrapnel in his ass got his old job, 'cuz he'll work for fifteen cents a day and no bathroom breaks. Meanwhile he realizes the only reason he was over there in the first place was so that we could install a government that would sell us oil at a good price. And of course the oil companies used the little skirmish over there to scare up domestic oil prices. A cute little ancillary benefit for them but it ain't helping my buddy at two-fifty a gallon. They're taking their sweet time bringing the oil back, of course, maybe even took the liberty of hiring an alcoholic skipper who likes to drink martinis and fuckin' play slalom with the icebergs, it ain't too long till he hits one, spills the oil and kills all the sea life in the North Atlantic. So now my buddy's out of work. He can't afford to drive, so he's walking to the fuckin' job interviews, which sucks because the shrapnel in his ass is giving him chronic hemorrhoids. And meanwhile he's starving 'cuz every time he tries to get a bite to eat the only blue plate special they're serving is North Atlantic scrod with Quaker State. So what did I think? I'm holding out for something better. I figure: fuck it, while I'm at it why not just shoot my buddy, take his job, give it to his sworn enemy, hike up gas prices, bomb a village, club a baby seal, hit the hash pipe and join the National Guard? I could be elected President.
calebhc 13y ago
That was fantastic! Thanks for sharing this. Hope to see more stuff like this arising.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
Gorpus 13y ago
Wow I bet this girl is real proud of herself. But why is she trying to have this debate with recruiters? How immature. I hope NSA switches up their recruitment a little bit, make it easier for technically qualified people who aren't exactly choir boys to get a job there. I'd love to work for them. Surveillance isn't going away, and I bet the technology side of it is fascinating, full of interesting problems.
- Osmium 13y ago
  I'm sure you realise you're been obtuse, but here it goes: I really do hope this girl is proud of herself! She should be. For all we know, she might be an excellent candidate for an NSA job and have a real interest in working for them, provided that in doing so she doesn't have to sacrifice her integrity as an American. Given what we currently know from the press, her questions seem to be entirely reasonable. And if they aren't, that's not her fault, because she can only ask questions based on what she believes to be true. In short, don't shoot the messenger.
- md224 13y ago
  I hate when comments people disagree with get downvoted, because now nobody's going to see this and we're missing a great opportunity to debate with someone who shares a drastically different viewpoint than the rest of us. > "technically qualified people who aren't exactly choir boys" I'm curious, are you referring dismissively to people with a steadfast commitment to their own ethical compass? And if so, why? Edit: I think Gorpus is dead now. I misinterpreted his comment about choir boys though, he was just saying they only hire people with completely spotless records, drug testing, etc.
  - Gorpus 13y ago
    What I meant was that they have requirements for employment (regarding drug use, travel history, etc.) that disqualify otherwise qualified individuals.
- adammil 13y ago
  Anyone who represents the NSA in public is absolutely the appropriate person to confront about their organization's illegal activities. They are civil servants after all.
nugget 13y ago
As Federal employees, the men and women who work at the NSA swear an oath which dates back to 1884: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God." Rather than instantly pass the buck about the scope, context and impact of their domestic surveillance work, perhaps the recruiters on this clip should re-read this oath and think about what it really means; what their responsibilities are to the citizens of the United States; and what kind of country they want their children and their children's children to live in.
- ajuc 13y ago
  Even atheists must do the part with God?
  - mjn 13y ago
    As far as I know, it may usually (always?) be omitted. Oddly enough, it didn't require a Supreme Court decision, because the precedent was set with the first such oath: the Judiciary Act of 1789 was the first to specify a legal oath ending with "so help me God", and it at the same time explicitly included an opt-out clause, after which that has been accepted practice. See Sec. 7 here: http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=001/llsl001.db&recNum=199 http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=00... The fact that this accommodates atheists, however, is a bit of a coincidence: such opt-out clauses were initially included because Quakers objected to swearing oaths to God.
    - calebhc 13y ago
      "So help me God" should be omitted since it doesn't even make any coherent sense. Might as well say "So help me snorkleflurp". Edit: The reason I say that phrase doesn't make any sense is because "God" has so many inconsistent, incoherent definitions that it seems nonsensical to request help from it. No idea what "God" even is.
zachrose 13y ago
Is this at University of Wisconsin-Madison? The image in the SoundCloud sidebar suggests this happened at Ingraham Hall.
- RDeckard 13y ago
  Yes. See http://mobandmultitude.com/2013/07/02/the-nsa-comes-recruiting/ http://mobandmultitude.com/2013/07/02/the-nsa-comes-recruiti...
droopyEyelids 13y ago
I have a trick I feel would make a confrontation like this better. Always speak under the assumption that the other person is 'good'. That means not calling them a liar. Instead, ask the questions that you feel would expose the inconsistency. That way they show everyone the point you're trying to make. Also it prevents personal animosity from obscuring the real content you might discover. Furthermore, it allows a 3rd party who hears the discourse more freedom to make up their mind, whereas they might naturally go against your point of view because it's being pushed down their throat.
- dhimes 13y ago
  This is very wise advice, and has served me well also. Always give the benefit of the doubt and let them show why there should be no doubt- either way.
- lisper 13y ago
  +1. It is very important always to keep in mind that the person you are talking to is a human being. And if you're talking to someone at a recruiting fair, they don't make policy. They're just trying to do their jobs so they don't get fired and they can continue to pay the mortgage and put food on the table. Which is not to say that you should not call them out, just that you should do it respectfully and with compassion for a fellow human who might be in a very difficult position.
- griffordson 13y ago
  According to one of the students involved[1], the confrontation wasn't premeditated so they probably weren't really considering how it might look to outside observers. But there is value in making NSA employees feel bad about what their organization is doing and whether they are personally accountable for it. In fact, this seems like a spontaneous incident of "Haunting" officials from Gene Sharp's list of 198 methods of nonviolent action. I hope others learn from this example and make the jobs of all NSA recruiters difficult everywhere they go. This incident reminded me of the scene from Good Will Hunting where Will explains why he might not want to work for the NSA after all[2]. Everyone who works for the NSA should be asking themselves that question every single day. [1] http://mobandmultitude.com/2013/07/02/the-nsa-comes-recruiting/ http://mobandmultitude.com/2013/07/02/the-nsa-comes-recruiti... [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrOZllbNarw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrOZllbNarw
gmisra 13y ago
It's rarely actually impressive to observe somebody attack lesser proponents of the ideas they disagree with. Sure, none of the actual decision makers will come within ten miles of an open forum, but this comes off mostly as just bullying.
- jlgreco 13y ago
  They are publicly (mis)representing their organization, the line of questioning is more than fair. They are not somehow entitled to only receive questions that they planned for.
malandrew 13y ago
Posted in the other thread about this[0]: "This was a fun read and it seams like many people could just DDoS the recruiting efforts of the NSA and CIA by showing up to recruiting sessions and playing devil's advocates. If you are well informed and good at internet arguing, you are well equipped to attend these recruiting sessions. At the very least it would plant the seeds of cognitive dissonance in the minds of everyone recruiting for the NSA and CIA. e.g. "Why do so many of the citizens we are trying to protect not agree with our decision to do a job where we trade liberty for security?" To be clear, my suggestion here is not meant to prevent either the CIA or NSA from doing their jobs, but to help them remember that their job is clearly spelled out in the US Uniformed Services Oath of office, which AFAIK the CIA and NSA also swear to. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5983709 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5983709
- rbanffy 13y ago
  > my suggestion here is not meant to prevent either the CIA or NSA from doing their jobs Quite the contrary. The conclusion of your suggestion is the CIA and the NSA actually doing the job they need to do rather than making more enemies to a country that has already amassed an impressive amount of them.
gasull 13y ago
This is so great. This is the only thing that has made me feel some hope since all of this started. Thank you!
dlss 13y ago
Can we organize a list of time + locations for NSA recruiting sessions, maybe with GPS based email alerts? 1. I think that if this kind of questioning become the norm, we'd have a significant impact on their ability to recruit. 2. Maybe some startup founders in the area could go poach the talent :p
downandout 13y ago
While I happen to agree with her views, I think it was unfair to other students for her to unleash her rant during a recruiting session. She went there to intentionally cause conflict, evidenced by the fact that she recorded it. Everyone in attendance was well aware of the NSA scandal - they didn't need her to fill them in. While she may have the financial resources to take the moral high ground on such matters, most college kids need jobs when they graduate. She took away valuable time that those kids may have wanted to interact with a potential employer.
sliverstorm 13y ago
Sounds to me like this girl is doing her best to dig for a confrontation. She alternates between questions and barely-veiled insults targeted at the recruiters.
valugi 13y ago
these students are gold!
dmead 13y ago
i'm having flashbacks to a recruiting session i attended at my school in like 2005/6. shiver.
leke 13y ago
I was watching a documentary last night on youtube about the lulzsec hackers that got caught. A British woman with some government credentials made the point that the hacking of companies and organisations had real knock on effects that affected the jobs and careers of people in those targeted areas. This is why it was wrong, and this is why hackers must be punished fro their crimes. Now, if the NSA are spying for US global corporations, the intelligence gathered is to benefit the US corporations and negatively effect the corporations being spied on. This means people affiliated with those corporations/organisations targeted by the spying will be negatively affected by the hacking/spying. Of course, nobody will prosecute NSA affiliated hackers (or those in charge) that destroy or affect the livelihoods of people they have targeted.
DevX101 13y ago
I don't think they called her back.

241 points by martin_k 13y ago

HSO 13y ago

This is brilliant. Instead of that less than half-assed interview Charlie Rose did with Obama, we should have had those students go at it.

Sven7 13y ago
Students can ask all the questions they want (of Facebook and Goldman Sachs too). At the end of the day the only question that matters is who is going to pay off those little student loans.
- jlgreco 13y ago
  > "little student loans." You are correct on the "little" front. While it may seem astronomical to people in countries with different educational systems and people without career prospects, the median and mean student loan debt is under $30k. So long as they are in a field with more than one major employer, then the NSA is hardly has significant power over them.
  - Sven7 13y ago
    And what is the mean and median savings rate?
    - jlgreco 13y ago
      Good enough that if these students seek employment and take their loans seriously, they are in no dire danger. Student loan discussion is dominated by the few fools who wrack up massively debt then think that they can make the minimum required payment for 10 years and have everything turn out okay. The mean debt is also slewed upwards by people who acquire very large amounts of debt that is not an unusual amount for their field (doctors, particularly). Those who don't actually graduate are another obvious cause of the perception that student loan debt is crippling (and for them it certainly is), but of course they are not being considered in this discussion unless the NSA is making a habit of hiring college dropouts.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]

fvrghl 13y ago

Why are they doing student recruiting right now? I imagine all sessions would go like this.

PavlovsCat 13y ago
Then I hope they get recorded and posted as well, because this made my heart sing with joy. "I mean, I think the question here is, do you actually think about the ramifications of the work that you do, which is deeply problematic, or do you just dress up in costumes and get drunk?"
DanBC 13y ago
Sales of horse meat rose after food contamination scares in UK. Also, we want ethical people working for them, because then there's more people to say "Is this legal?" when an order for intelligence comes in.
- jlgreco 13y ago
  Horse meat was not the issue; the issue was mislabeled cow meat. What did cow meat sales do after the cow meat contamination news in the UK? I don't buy the classic "change the organization from within" line. If that were the proper thing to encourage then we should all be running out looking for the most despicable corporations to work for and the most horrendous governments to pay taxes to.
  - DanBC 13y ago
    While many people avoided cheap cow meat products there were a few people intrigued by the idea of horse meat. I agree the "change the organisation from within" line is weak. But I also think that there are many people who still think "You only need to worry if you have something to hide" and who don't see a problem with what NSA does. I guess those people will believe the NSA obeys the law. I could understand people thinking the GCHQ box is "just a cache". Collecting the data isn't a problem; looking through the data for targeted information (grepping the specific name of a terrorist, for example) is ok; it's only a problem if they start to look at everything. And those people won't think that collection is the same as looking. It's not something I believe myself, but I can see how others might. Also, as has been mentioned, cognitive dissonance. People rationalise and justify weird things all the time. I don't see that being different when they're looking for work. I'm not saying that not a single person has decided to not work for NSA! Obviously, there's probably many people who would have been fine with spying on foreign nations but very uncomfortable with the idea of spying on citizens.

martin_k 13y ago

Some background on the event and recording: http://mobandmultitude.com/2013/07/02/the-nsa-comes-recruiting/ http://mobandmultitude.com/2013/07/02/the-nsa-comes-recruiti... edit: Cached version http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://mobandmultitude.com/2013/07/02/the-nsa-comes-recruiting/&rlz=2C5CHFA_enDE0538DE0538&strip=1 http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://...

hkmurakami 13y ago

I have some sympathy for the recruiters since they really have no say in the high level decision making in the organization. They may not even be involved with domestic spying of citizens. But on the other hand they continue to stay at the organization so while I do feel some sympathy for their predicament,I guess it's really just up to each person to figure out whether they're really okay with staying there, given all the pros and cons involved.

malandrew 13y ago
I hate to invoke Godwin's Law because it never helps any discussion, so instead I'll refer to the discussion of Death Star politics and the impact on contractors: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQdDRrcAOjA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQdDRrcAOjA
martin_k 13y ago
I found this part particularly interesting: "Our business is apolitical, okay? We do not generate the intelligence requirements. They're levied on us. And so if there is a requirement for foreign intelligence concerning this issue or this region or whatever, then that is [...] what we are going after. That is the intelligence target we are going after because it is the requirement." I think as engineers, we have a certain degree of responsibility for how our work is used. To say your work is apolitical when you're in the business of spying on people is quite the statement, especially if "people" is basically everybody. (I am aware that the speaker is probably not an engineer and it wasn't an engineering recruiting program, but the same can be said about their field, I'd assume.)
- meowface 13y ago
  Quite true. The policy makers and intelligence directors can't have huge spying apparatuses if they have no engineers willing to build them.
- angersock 13y ago
  "Once the rocket goes up, who cares where it comes down? That's not my department", says Werner von Braun.

blantonl 13y ago

NSA Recruiting sessions are staffed by NSA recruiters - i.e. sales people. There might be the token engineer on hand to answer in very generic terms about technology etc, but to think that any questions would be met with useful responses is like asking the President's press secretary information on details of classified operations. You'll get nothing more than spin at best.

PavlovsCat 13y ago
You'll still get "the requirements are handed down to us" though, which is the classic Eichmann defense.

c0ur7n3y 13y ago

I have to imagine their recruiting is going to suffer greatly due to the recent revelations. Very few smart people are going to want to join an organization that spies on their fellow citizens. Plus, the NSA is going to have to be even more skeptical of anyone they do recruit.

TallGuyShort 13y ago
I spoke to the NSA at a career fair. They weren't full-time recruiters, so I asked them how much they ran into brick walls of politics and bureaucracy in their day-to-day work. Their response was "well... not all of the time". I walked to the next booth.
dromidas 13y ago
The TSA hardly has a shortage of employees. Why would the NSA have problems? I have more disgust for TSA than NSA currently, albeit by a very small margin.
- coryl 13y ago
  I would assume NSA roles have much higher requirements in education and training.
  - mpyne 13y ago
    Requirements like having a high school diploma? ;)
DanBC 13y ago
A lot of people just don't care. They want a job with other smart people and neat technology where they can do math in peace and quiet. See also "You don't need to worry if you don't have anything to hide" etc.
- angersock 13y ago
  Truly it is a wonderful thing that the most anti-social and introverted people get to deploy technology affecting the common man.

Camillo 13y ago

Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrOZllbNarw http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrOZllbNarw

codeulike 13y ago
Its a good speech. I transcribed it a while back: Why shouldn't I work for the NSA? That's a tough one. But I'll take a shot. Say I'm working at the NSA, and somebody puts a code on my desk, something no one else can break. Maybe I take a shot at it and maybe I break it. And I'm real happy with myself, 'cuz I did my job well. But maybe that code was the location of some rebel army in North Africa or the Middle East, and once they have that location, they bomb the village where the rebels are hiding. Fifteen hundred people that I never met, never had no problem with, get killed. Now the politicians are saying, "Oh, send in the marines to secure the area", 'cuz they don't give a shit. It won't be their kid over there, getting shot. Just like it wasn't them when their number got called, 'cuz they were pulling a tour in the National Guard. It'll be some kid from Southie over there taking shrapnel in the ass. He comes back to find that the plant he used to work at got exported to the country he just got back from. And the guy who put the shrapnel in his ass got his old job, 'cuz he'll work for fifteen cents a day and no bathroom breaks. Meanwhile he realizes the only reason he was over there in the first place was so that we could install a government that would sell us oil at a good price. And of course the oil companies used the little skirmish over there to scare up domestic oil prices. A cute little ancillary benefit for them but it ain't helping my buddy at two-fifty a gallon. They're taking their sweet time bringing the oil back, of course, maybe even took the liberty of hiring an alcoholic skipper who likes to drink martinis and fuckin' play slalom with the icebergs, it ain't too long till he hits one, spills the oil and kills all the sea life in the North Atlantic. So now my buddy's out of work. He can't afford to drive, so he's walking to the fuckin' job interviews, which sucks because the shrapnel in his ass is giving him chronic hemorrhoids. And meanwhile he's starving 'cuz every time he tries to get a bite to eat the only blue plate special they're serving is North Atlantic scrod with Quaker State. So what did I think? I'm holding out for something better. I figure: fuck it, while I'm at it why not just shoot my buddy, take his job, give it to his sworn enemy, hike up gas prices, bomb a village, club a baby seal, hit the hash pipe and join the National Guard? I could be elected President.

calebhc 13y ago

That was fantastic! Thanks for sharing this. Hope to see more stuff like this arising.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

Gorpus 13y ago

Wow I bet this girl is real proud of herself. But why is she trying to have this debate with recruiters? How immature. I hope NSA switches up their recruitment a little bit, make it easier for technically qualified people who aren't exactly choir boys to get a job there. I'd love to work for them. Surveillance isn't going away, and I bet the technology side of it is fascinating, full of interesting problems.

Osmium 13y ago
I'm sure you realise you're been obtuse, but here it goes: I really do hope this girl is proud of herself! She should be. For all we know, she might be an excellent candidate for an NSA job and have a real interest in working for them, provided that in doing so she doesn't have to sacrifice her integrity as an American. Given what we currently know from the press, her questions seem to be entirely reasonable. And if they aren't, that's not her fault, because she can only ask questions based on what she believes to be true. In short, don't shoot the messenger.
md224 13y ago
I hate when comments people disagree with get downvoted, because now nobody's going to see this and we're missing a great opportunity to debate with someone who shares a drastically different viewpoint than the rest of us. > "technically qualified people who aren't exactly choir boys" I'm curious, are you referring dismissively to people with a steadfast commitment to their own ethical compass? And if so, why? Edit: I think Gorpus is dead now. I misinterpreted his comment about choir boys though, he was just saying they only hire people with completely spotless records, drug testing, etc.
- Gorpus 13y ago
  What I meant was that they have requirements for employment (regarding drug use, travel history, etc.) that disqualify otherwise qualified individuals.
adammil 13y ago
Anyone who represents the NSA in public is absolutely the appropriate person to confront about their organization's illegal activities. They are civil servants after all.

nugget 13y ago

As Federal employees, the men and women who work at the NSA swear an oath which dates back to 1884: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God." Rather than instantly pass the buck about the scope, context and impact of their domestic surveillance work, perhaps the recruiters on this clip should re-read this oath and think about what it really means; what their responsibilities are to the citizens of the United States; and what kind of country they want their children and their children's children to live in.

ajuc 13y ago
Even atheists must do the part with God?
- mjn 13y ago
  As far as I know, it may usually (always?) be omitted. Oddly enough, it didn't require a Supreme Court decision, because the precedent was set with the first such oath: the Judiciary Act of 1789 was the first to specify a legal oath ending with "so help me God", and it at the same time explicitly included an opt-out clause, after which that has been accepted practice. See Sec. 7 here: http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=001/llsl001.db&recNum=199 http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=00... The fact that this accommodates atheists, however, is a bit of a coincidence: such opt-out clauses were initially included because Quakers objected to swearing oaths to God.
  - calebhc 13y ago
    "So help me God" should be omitted since it doesn't even make any coherent sense. Might as well say "So help me snorkleflurp". Edit: The reason I say that phrase doesn't make any sense is because "God" has so many inconsistent, incoherent definitions that it seems nonsensical to request help from it. No idea what "God" even is.

zachrose 13y ago

Is this at University of Wisconsin-Madison? The image in the SoundCloud sidebar suggests this happened at Ingraham Hall.

RDeckard 13y ago
Yes. See http://mobandmultitude.com/2013/07/02/the-nsa-comes-recruiting/ http://mobandmultitude.com/2013/07/02/the-nsa-comes-recruiti...

droopyEyelids 13y ago

I have a trick I feel would make a confrontation like this better. Always speak under the assumption that the other person is 'good'. That means not calling them a liar. Instead, ask the questions that you feel would expose the inconsistency. That way they show everyone the point you're trying to make. Also it prevents personal animosity from obscuring the real content you might discover. Furthermore, it allows a 3rd party who hears the discourse more freedom to make up their mind, whereas they might naturally go against your point of view because it's being pushed down their throat.

dhimes 13y ago
This is very wise advice, and has served me well also. Always give the benefit of the doubt and let them show why there should be no doubt- either way.
lisper 13y ago
+1. It is very important always to keep in mind that the person you are talking to is a human being. And if you're talking to someone at a recruiting fair, they don't make policy. They're just trying to do their jobs so they don't get fired and they can continue to pay the mortgage and put food on the table. Which is not to say that you should not call them out, just that you should do it respectfully and with compassion for a fellow human who might be in a very difficult position.
griffordson 13y ago
According to one of the students involved[1], the confrontation wasn't premeditated so they probably weren't really considering how it might look to outside observers. But there is value in making NSA employees feel bad about what their organization is doing and whether they are personally accountable for it. In fact, this seems like a spontaneous incident of "Haunting" officials from Gene Sharp's list of 198 methods of nonviolent action. I hope others learn from this example and make the jobs of all NSA recruiters difficult everywhere they go. This incident reminded me of the scene from Good Will Hunting where Will explains why he might not want to work for the NSA after all[2]. Everyone who works for the NSA should be asking themselves that question every single day. [1] http://mobandmultitude.com/2013/07/02/the-nsa-comes-recruiting/ http://mobandmultitude.com/2013/07/02/the-nsa-comes-recruiti... [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrOZllbNarw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrOZllbNarw

gmisra 13y ago

It's rarely actually impressive to observe somebody attack lesser proponents of the ideas they disagree with. Sure, none of the actual decision makers will come within ten miles of an open forum, but this comes off mostly as just bullying.

jlgreco 13y ago
They are publicly (mis)representing their organization, the line of questioning is more than fair. They are not somehow entitled to only receive questions that they planned for.

malandrew 13y ago

Posted in the other thread about this[0]: "This was a fun read and it seams like many people could just DDoS the recruiting efforts of the NSA and CIA by showing up to recruiting sessions and playing devil's advocates. If you are well informed and good at internet arguing, you are well equipped to attend these recruiting sessions. At the very least it would plant the seeds of cognitive dissonance in the minds of everyone recruiting for the NSA and CIA. e.g. "Why do so many of the citizens we are trying to protect not agree with our decision to do a job where we trade liberty for security?" To be clear, my suggestion here is not meant to prevent either the CIA or NSA from doing their jobs, but to help them remember that their job is clearly spelled out in the US Uniformed Services Oath of office, which AFAIK the CIA and NSA also swear to. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5983709 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5983709

rbanffy 13y ago
> my suggestion here is not meant to prevent either the CIA or NSA from doing their jobs Quite the contrary. The conclusion of your suggestion is the CIA and the NSA actually doing the job they need to do rather than making more enemies to a country that has already amassed an impressive amount of them.

gasull 13y ago

This is so great. This is the only thing that has made me feel some hope since all of this started. Thank you!

dlss 13y ago

Can we organize a list of time + locations for NSA recruiting sessions, maybe with GPS based email alerts? 1. I think that if this kind of questioning become the norm, we'd have a significant impact on their ability to recruit. 2. Maybe some startup founders in the area could go poach the talent :p

downandout 13y ago

While I happen to agree with her views, I think it was unfair to other students for her to unleash her rant during a recruiting session. She went there to intentionally cause conflict, evidenced by the fact that she recorded it. Everyone in attendance was well aware of the NSA scandal - they didn't need her to fill them in. While she may have the financial resources to take the moral high ground on such matters, most college kids need jobs when they graduate. She took away valuable time that those kids may have wanted to interact with a potential employer.

sliverstorm 13y ago

Sounds to me like this girl is doing her best to dig for a confrontation. She alternates between questions and barely-veiled insults targeted at the recruiters.

valugi 13y ago

these students are gold!

dmead 13y ago

i'm having flashbacks to a recruiting session i attended at my school in like 2005/6. shiver.

leke 13y ago

I was watching a documentary last night on youtube about the lulzsec hackers that got caught. A British woman with some government credentials made the point that the hacking of companies and organisations had real knock on effects that affected the jobs and careers of people in those targeted areas. This is why it was wrong, and this is why hackers must be punished fro their crimes. Now, if the NSA are spying for US global corporations, the intelligence gathered is to benefit the US corporations and negatively effect the corporations being spied on. This means people affiliated with those corporations/organisations targeted by the spying will be negatively affected by the hacking/spying. Of course, nobody will prosecute NSA affiliated hackers (or those in charge) that destroy or affect the livelihoods of people they have targeted.

DevX101 13y ago

I don't think they called her back.