There isn't a lot of foreign surveillance I can imagine having a problem with allocating to the problem of nuclear proliferation.
This would be an excellent priority for our intelligence agencies. Do any of the practices revealed recently seem designed to address that priority? An adversary capable of obtaining, maintaining, and deploying nuclear weapons would probably be capable of secure communications even in the face of PRISM, whether here or overseas. The most likely vector would be something like a submarine or a well-shielded shipping container, but if the plan did require agents in this country I doubt those would be discussing their plans on Facebook or over the phone.
Yes; the FAA 702 extensions that were passed a few years ago specifically mentioned terrorism, proliferation, and espionage.
The set of skills required to carry out an atomic attack and the set of skills required to evade surveillance by NSA are disjoint and seem unlikely to get more correlated. But that's just speculation on my part.
My only point here was that "terrorism" isn't the only threat that NSA is tasked with dealing with.
This would be an excellent priority for our intelligence agencies. Do any of the practices revealed recently seem designed to address that priority? An adversary capable of obtaining, maintaining, and deploying nuclear weapons would probably be capable of secure communications even in the face of PRISM, whether here or overseas. The most likely vector would be something like a submarine or a well-shielded shipping container, but if the plan did require agents in this country I doubt those would be discussing their plans on Facebook or over the phone.