Wyden & Udall to Alexander: Why Do You People Keep Lying?
According to a letter Ron Wyden and Mark Udall sent Keith Alexander, the NSA is still lying publicly. At issue are two inaccuracies in the information sheet the NSA released about Section 702 implementation.
We were disappointed to see that this fact sheet contains an inaccurate statement about how the section 702 authority has been interpreted by the US government. In our judgment this inaccuracy is significant, as it portrays protections for Americans’ privacy as being significantly stronger than they actually are.
While I’m not certain what inaccuracy they’re talking about here, I suspect it has to do with the US person contact info collected along with targets. Even a comparison of the minimization order and the NSA’s claims make it clear US person communication can be swept up more easily than they claim.
Then there’s this complaint, which explicitly objects to the suggestion that the government manages to purge US person data, which of course they also claim they don’t track.
Separately, this same fact sheet states that under Section 702, “Any inadvertently acquired communication of or concerning a US person must be promptly destroyed if it is neither relevant to the authorized purpose nor evidence of a crime.” We believe that this statement is somewhat misleading, in that it implies that the NSA has the ability to determine how many American communications it has collected under section 702, or that the law does not allow the NSA to deliberately search for the records of particular Americans. In fact, the intelligence community has told us repeatedly that it is “not reasonably possible to identify the number of people located in the United States whose communications may have been reviewed under the authority” of the FISA Amendments Act.
They make it clear the claim this information gets purged is false.
Good for them.
To answer the question your title asks, “because it’s what they do and have done for their entire careers.”
Lying is what this government does. It is their job. It is their reason for being…well lying and stealing.
In among all the silly hoo ha ha about our hero Snowden we seem to have missed that journalist Michael Hastings has been murdered by the same government that is now making idiots of themselves about Snowden.
There is another lying sack of crap on the Twitter, Tommy Vietor. He is in the secret government because all the government spokesliars are, such as Vickie Nuland, and Georgie Little.
Tommy says it is incredibly irresponsible to suggest the obvious. And the most consequential policy of the President will be announced tomorrow. I predict the President will approve the XL Pipeline and Tommy will approve. And Tommy probably has money invested in Black Tar.
How dare Richard Clarke suggest that the US government assassinates reporters.
In view of Bloch’s sentence: because they know they can get away without any consequences to themselves, their careers, or their pensions.
Who Said It?
“I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it! I would rather you just said “thank you”, and went on your way.”
NSA Director Gen. Keith Alexander
Director of National Intelligence James Clapper
Former NSA Director (for Bush Administration) Michael Hayden
Marine Colonel Nathan R. Jessup (the Jack Nicholson character in the movie “A Few Good Men”)
Insomnia? A dose of post-WWII surrealism should at least make it interesting.
The Chase (1946)
“While I’m not certain what inaccuracy they’re talking about here, I suspect it has to do with the US person contact info collected along with targets. Even a comparison of the minimization order and the NSA’s claims make it clear US person communication can be swept up more easily than they claim.”
I think the way they go about vacuum this stuff up is the same way they define ‘imminent’ and ‘terrorist’…everyone picked up in the sweep is considered ‘foreign’ unless there is affirmative proof otherwise AKA guilty until proven innocent. Look at how Obama defines ‘terrorist’ as anyone who is killed by a US drone strike unless there is affirmative proof otherwise that they aren’t a terrorist. I think this has actually come out somewhere, just I don’t remember where the ‘guilty until proven innocent’ part is for this.
I was cynical about assertions that their letter would have to have been answered. But in any case, maybe they have after a fashion. HuffPo has it that they just deleted the fact page concerning section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act; it now takes you to a Server Error page.