Skip to main content

View Diary: Was criticism of Obama's directive on NSA review group justified? (272 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Confusion resolved - we have 2008 EO 13470 (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dharmafarmer, Joieau

    Okay, I think I have it now.  Sorry for my confusion among documents.  Here's how I got confused --

    I looked at the 2008 Amendment page (EO 13470), saw that it was not the full document (amendments only), and found a full version, which I linked to.  I thought this full version was EO 13470.  What it really is (I understand now) is (1) Regan's EO 12333 (2) as amended by Bush's 2008 EO 13470.  So the pdf I found and linked to is the current version.  (I checked the Amendment language against the current version of EO 12333, and the 2008 Amendment language is incorporated.)

    The page for Amendment EO 13470 links to the current version of EO 12333 here --

    FAS Note: The resulting text of Executive Order 12333 as amended by Executive Order 13470 is available here (pdf).

    [the word 'here' links to ]

    I hope I've clarified the confusion I created.  So sorry.

    But all this checking back and forth between versions made me notice this from the current version of EO 12333 --

    PART 1 Goals, Directions, Duties, and Responsibilities with Respect to United States Intelligence Efforts

    1.1 Goals. The United States intelligence effort shall provide the President, the National Security Council, and the Homeland Security Council with the necessary information on which to base decisions concerning the development and conduct of foreign, defense, and economic policies, and the protection of United States national interests from foreign security threats. All departments and agencies shall cooperate fully to fulfill this goal.


    (b) The United States Government has a solemn obligation, and shall continue in the conduct of intelligence activities under this order, to protect fully the legal rights of all United States persons, including freedoms, civil liberties, and privacy rights guaranteed by Federal law.

    •  That's very helpful to me. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Joieau, CroneWit

      Thank you very much.  I noticed they cited the 1978 FISA law, too, so this must be typical citation protocol.

      I think the words "under this order" in that passage you've cited are pretty critical.  He could have said "in all instances" or "under all laws and this order" or some such.  It's an important distinction when there is other operational law that governs collection of intelligence, especially foreign. And there is.  I'll be publishing a diary about this in the next couple days.  I hope it will find you.  :-)

      •  MUCH parsing to be done on EO 12333! (0+ / 0-)

        And the next document to find is the FISA Act of 1978, as amended.

        Say, if I don't show up in your diary, would you kosmail me?  I'd hate to miss it.

        The comment threads on all related diaries are getting so LOOOONG and I just feel obligated to read and participate.  And then the last day or so there are meta-diaries in response to the New Rules -- which end up being All About the Trolls.  I've spent several hours tonight it two such threads.

        •  Too late to rec your comment, CroneWit, (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          so you'll know I've seen it but it seems you look for responses and, hopefully, you'll see this one.  I "finished" my diary last night.  I put finished in scare quotes because I am the Queen of Revision and it's hard for me to ever consider anything I've ever written "done."  At some point, though, you've just gotta let 'er rip, right?  I'm undecided about whether that will be this evening or Monday evening.  I will Kosmail you, yes.  I appreciate your interest in "connecting the dots" and there's some of that in my diary.

          •  Great! More on EO 12333 at Guardian (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:


            Damn!  Something's wrong with my browser.  Its clipboard will not let go of a piece of text and keeps inserting it when I try to cut-paste a link.

            Guardian headline --

            NSA revelations of privacy breaches 'the tip of the iceberg' – Senate duo
            Leading critics of NSA Ron Wyden and Mark Udall say 'public deserves to know more about violations of secret court orders'

            Executive order 12333 is one of the foundational texts of modern US intelligence. A decades-old presidential order, it is an informal guide to the rules and regulations of American spycraft, such as the nominal ban on assassinations. It lacks the force of law in name if not in practice; lawyers in the intelligence agencies keep copies on their desks. "It is the Bible," said Vicki Divoll, a former legal counsel for the CIA and the Senate intelligence committee.
            'Nominal ban on assassins' -- well, good point.  Yet these are the Chief Exec's instructions to his Exec Staff,  thus (as I see it) related to Prez' Constitutional duty/authority to Implement the Laws.  (we need an expert here.)

            Also in that article -- DiFi and Rogers still defending NSA, but DiFi says they are not getting full reporting and she will change that (a non-position-change position-change, imo).  Nancy goes farther: due to Audit reporting --

            The Democratic leader of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, a former senior member of the House intelligence committee, criticized the NSA on Friday, saying reports that it had overstepped its boundaries "extremely disturbing."

            "Congress must conduct rigorous oversight to ensure that all incidents of non-compliance are reported to the oversight committees and the FISA court in a timely and comprehensive manner, and that appropriate steps are taken to ensure violations are not repeated," Pelosi said.

            Pelosi was one of very few legislators briefed about the expansions of NSA surveillance activities after 9/11. She became a vocal critic of them when they were partially exposed under the Bush administration, yet once Barack Obama took office, her criticism ceased. She and the rest of the Democratic leadership worked hard last month to quash a legislative effort to end the bulk collection of Americans' phone records.

            New messaging from Nancy gives party Faithful permission (instructions?) to be 'extremely disturbed' by NSA actions.  Good to know.

            Sorry for telegraphic style.  Time pressures.  Best to you.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site