Edit: Misunderstood the parent's comments. Yes, this is what happened.
So they went to someone's house because of "suspicious internet searches". The fact that the search wasn't detected using an automated system doesn't diminish my point that they think it's ok to turn up on your doorstep if they don't like the searches you're making.
But this has always been true. If your neighbor gets robbed, you're going to get a knock on your door to see if you saw anything. They could stop by and ask for a glass of lemonade. Who cares? You seem to imply that there was some intimidation, but I read nothing to indicate that.
If anything it is a stark foreshadowing of how we will be shamed and mocked into the status quo not by our government but by our peers, eased into it like an old man gently lowering his body into an uncomfortably warm bath.
The reason her story was denounced by a few people is because those people had not let their ability to think critically be clouded by the current NSA/Snowden frenzy.
Remember the story of the Child Who Cried Wolf.
Point taken though.
Here we have another win for tptacek in the "common sense and reason" column.
'Common Sense and Reason' belongs only to those who read the story and waited to hear more before posting. But I'm biased. :-D
I also didn't comment on the thread as I didn't know what exactly was going on. But I was very sure that it would be something along the lines of what tptacek himself predicted so why say anything anyways? I just upvoted and moved on.
Do you have to search something like "I want to _____ (insert terrorist action) on _______ (insert date) at ______ (location)" in order to actually trigger something?
From there you can determine "who's who in the zoo" of extremist cells for use in other intelligence collection schemes. E.g. if someone receives messages from known intermediaries of an AQ bomb makers and then 'drops off the grid' it may be a good time to step up to video/satellite surveillance.
Simply doing random searches isn't tracked by PRISM (though it might be from systems that use wiretap features). But even random searches like those are likely to simply be filtered out outright by the NSA, they are simply too common (even without pranksters who run the search thinking they're Sticking It to The Man) to be worth following up individually.
Even the NSA doesn't have infinite resources after all, and they are still dependent on other agencies for follow-up activities, and those other agencies are certainly more resource-constrained than NSA is.
My company does the same thing, turns out one of the managers had been downloading porn onto their computer for months and the first time we installed it we noticed. When we checked out his computer he had over 200 Gb of the stuff... so yeah, he was fired, clearly he wasn't doing his job to the best of his performance.
[1] http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130611/11122823408/senato...
[2] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-naiman/obama-syria-cong...
[3] http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/07/02/national-inte...
Common sense indicates that this was not part of a dragnet of people searching pressure cookers and backpacks. If it was: where are the reports of the certainly dozens (hundreds/thousands?) of people who have made similar searches?
The police have no right to "ask" you for permission to search your home, as there is an implied threat of deadly force. (Cf everybody who gets shot for flinching while in view of a cop.)
Sadly, the old white rich person judges pretend that this doesn't happen, and allow this unconstitutional activity to continue.