From: daniels@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Daniel R. Sawyer)
Subject: Re: Some facts about the NSA, whee.
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 23:32:27 GMT

cmi@oracle.com (Jon Barron) writes:

>In article <BtqxtG.6oo@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, daniels@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Daniel R. Sawyer) writes:
>> 
>> scratch+@pitt.edu (Steven J Owens) writes:
>> 
>> 
>> >	Last I heard the NSA gets about 95% of the intelligence budget - 
>> >the CIA , DIA, etc, all put together only get 5%.  Perhaps it's time
>> >to rethink your concept of scale?
>> 
>> On the contrary, I would say.  Although the NSA does have a lot of respons-
>> ibility, I think the major intelligence agency is the CIA.  As it is, I think
>> the CIA spends $30 billion dollars a year.  I would find it hard to believe
>> (If that figure is in the ballpark) that the NSA would be getting far over
>> $300 billion per year.  
>> 
>> So THATS where the deficit is!!!  :-)
>> 
>> Daniel at UIUC
>> >Steven J. Owens
>> -- 
>> Daniel R. Sawyer

>Au contriare again. Although the NSA's exact budget is black, intelligence
>experts believe that the yearly budget for the NSA is between 200 and
>250 BILLION dollars, and that the NSA has more computing power than
>the CMI, FBI and NASA combined.

>The NSA's sole purpose is eavesdropping, electronic and otherwise.
>This includes domestic and international snooping into microwave,
>landline, sattelite and just about every form of cummunication known
>to man. My book also states from rumors about the NSA:

>* In the Cessna flight into Red Square incident (1987?), the NSA knew what
>was happening before the Kremlin.
>* NSA receives raw intel from most intelligence gathering missions
>involving communication equipment i.e. Air Force Cobra Belle missions
>and CIA Lacross intel

>Food for thought.

>Jon Barron
>CMI

There is *NO* way that the NSA could have a 200 billion dollar budget. With
that kind of money one could expect the NSA to have computers decades more 
advanced than the general public has now and an immense number of facilities
and employees.  $200 billion is A LOT of money, the Defense Dept has to scrape
by with $290 billion or so and you're saying the measly NSA gets almost as
much? What does the NSA have to show for all this money? If an agency spent 
that kind of money in a year, there would HAVE to be immense evidence of that
organization. There would have to be large facilities, etc. It would HAVE to 
be public knowledge.
The whole idea is ludicrous. I bet the NSA has a good number of computers, 
although not much better than what IBM has for itself, it has a number of
satellites and communications listining posts.  That kind of stuff does not
cost $200 billion a year.
When did the NSA come into existence? Did taxes suddenly go up to feed the NSA 
or did the government start borrowing more than usual? You can't hide that
much money. It has to come from somewhere. (The govt certainly didn't just 
print the money, don't even tell me that!) Nothing personal, but this is just
too conspiracy theorist for me.  I suppose the NSA shot JFK and Bush flew to
Paris as a vp canidate in '80 on an NSA Blackbird to arrange an October 
surprise? :)

is being thrown down the toilet, which I am sure it is not, 
-- 
Daniel R. Sawyer
daniel-sawyer@uiuc.edu

--
Newsgroups: rec.games.mud.misc