The officials wouldn't go into details on how they know this
C'mon guys, put a little more effort into your disinformation campaign! I mean, even Bloomberg carried this the other day:
U.S. Surveillance Is Not Aimed at Terrorists
NSA has been taking lessons, it seems.
All things considered, including economic, terrorist, military industrial complex mega over reach, etc, I feel like our government's actions are making us much less safe. Just my personal opinion.
And this "The officials spoke anonymously because they were not authorized to speak about the intelligence matters publicly."
Shouldn't that be "traitorous leakers"?
I'm sure that, prior to the leak, terrorists were having Skype conferences from their living rooms, while posting their activities on Facebook and exchanging bomb recipes on Gmail....
And then of course, the Boston bombing suspects were identified to the US government by Russian agents, and they couldn't prevent that attack. Either the NSA, CIA and FBI are staffed by imbeciles, or someone's lying to the people...
It is the first time intelligence officials have described which groups are
reacting to the leaks. The officials spoke anonymously because they were not
authorized to speak about the intelligence matters publicly
The cognitive dissonance required to justify these programs is just staggering.
Action and reaction.
[...]the NSA will catch up eventually, he predicted, because there are only
so many ways a terrorist can communicate. "I have every confidence in
their ability to regain access."
When the CIA stopped(?) waterboarding suspects, I bet they got fewer terrorism leads, too.
There are some lines we never should have crossed.
Yeah, Al Qaeda didn't know that NSA listens and reads to their communications. That's why Bin Laden used couriers to personally deliver thumbdrives and had no telephone or internet.
Why grant these people anonymity, when all they're doing is spouting out government-serving platitudes with zero evidence or justification for keeping their identities secret?