Comments on: Undisciplined spending in the name of defense

By: robertsgt40

robertsgt40 — Wed, 26 Jan 2011 21:14:43 +0000

Still feel safe?

By: Hatesstupidity

Hatesstupidity — Wed, 26 Jan 2011 14:22:16 +0000

I absolutely love when people that have no idea what a government agency does tries to pretend like they do. I wouldn’t sleep well at night if NGA wasn’t doing what they did, because it just isn’t maps!! If you want to attack wasteful spending programs, attack the programs that pay lazy people or illegals to sit on their butt and do nothing – to include pay taxes!! Thank you to NGA and the other intelligence community professionals that work to keep us safe every day!

By: jaglowsd

jaglowsd — Tue, 25 Jan 2011 06:44:15 +0000

The author overlooks the most obvious and fundamental reason why this agency does more than Google or Microsoft. The data it provides is in real time, or at least very, very new. Google and Microsoft offer photos that are months old at best. It is also likely that the NGA provides images of much, much higher resolution.

By: Realist99

Realist99 — Tue, 25 Jan 2011 04:40:24 +0000

This goes to show Reuters will publish even the most baseless, unsupported drivel someone will sling at the US government. The author’s assertion “Put a tarp or tent above anything you do outdoors that you don’t want to run the risk of this agency having photos of, because there’s no privacy-protection cross-check” is demonstrably false. Executive Order 12333 and DoD Regulation 5240.1-R lay out elaborate procedures to protect the privacy of “US Persons” (people in the US or even people outside the US who are connected to the US in one of the defined ways). There is layer upon layer of oversight all the way up to Congress. But the author of this piece clearly doesn’t feel he should let facts get in the way of a good story. Reuters apparently agrees.

By: AdamSmith

AdamSmith — Tue, 25 Jan 2011 00:50:19 +0000

There are many free countries in the world. Switzerland is free. France is free. Brazil is free. The so-called patriots in uniform here in America that tell us they are fighting for our freedom — I don’t trust them, because they are in the military business, the business of killing humans.

Isn’t that what the military trains to do? They learn the science of killing humans, and revel in that science. They extract a huge paycheck to boot, and then expect me to be grateful to them. Corruption on a gigantic scale.

My freedom comes from people who are not in uniform. My freedom is threatened by people in uniform. Look at the greatest calamities of mankind. They’re always committed by people in uniform. When a man puts on a uniform he gives up his soul.

By: asdddud

asdddud — Mon, 24 Jan 2011 22:15:18 +0000

Please, author and people – there is a reason we cannot know everything about this and other similar agencies. Americans need to put their paranoia and distrust of the U.S. Government caused by the few becuase there are many other patriots who are working hard to defend everyone’s freedom.

By: stonewall54

stonewall54 — Mon, 24 Jan 2011 22:04:01 +0000

The author of this article has no clue what the government capabilities actually are in the area of satellite imagery. It extends much further than what Google or Bing or any of the commercial satellite imagery services offer. Nor should he know unless he was directly involved with the work being done. This is another lame attempt to attack an agency that is providing a valuable service to our war fighters. As to waste in defense spending?? Yes, of course there is, and through responsible cuts where justified and cancellation of programs where justified we can rein in some of these wastes. Get off the soap box man!

By: coyotle

coyotle — Mon, 24 Jan 2011 21:45:40 +0000

Evidently no one is aware of privately owned satellites. There are hundreds of satellites in orbit and they do not all belong to the United States. Some belong to other countries and others to media corporations. The first one that comes to mind is Viacom which contracts with our government for gps and air traffic control through their satellites and equipment.

You all need to check your facts before you spout off. Many readers are inclined to believe you over Reuters.

By: tk2

tk2 — Mon, 24 Jan 2011 21:04:47 +0000

I agree with those who say that it is actually not google competing with government but government subsidizing google. Nice. But wait a minute! Is this company the one we usually praise, as a proof of the fact that some American companies can still compete? And what about the whole Chinese vs. google story? It looks like the Chinese were pretty much right back then.

By: bufford

bufford — Mon, 24 Jan 2011 19:29:59 +0000

This is the same argument made by a US Senator back in the late 90′s. On the floor of the Senate he wailed that we shouldn’t be paying for NOAA (weather satellites) when the local television stations provided it “for free”. He was clueless that these “free services” were piggy backing on the public domain nature of US satellite imagry (just like Google and MS).

When there was a budget stall that sent NOAA employees on furlough, it was less than a week before all those “free” local images switched to cartoon graphics as the flow of data from federal sources dried up.

I have yet to hear of either Google or Microsoft launching their own satellites.