Skip to main content

Two days before President Obama's revealing interview with Charley Rose, the Washington Post published an overlooked article about the many programs run by NSA. Deep in the story was this revelation about a slew of surveillance operations: http://articles.washingtonpost.com/...

"One Of Them Intercepts Telephone Calls And Routes The Spoken Words To A System Called ­NUCLEON."
That would seem to directly contradict the President's comforting assurance Sunday night that NSA doesn't listen to Americans' phones calls because, he claims, it doesn't have the voice content: http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/...
"At no point is any content revealed because there's no content," Obama explained.
- MORE BELOW-

Much of the President's credibility on this issue rides on the accuracy of his assertions made to Charley Rose that NSA's "2015 program" keeps only phone call metadata and does not collect voice content. As he put it, the NSA doesn't listen to Americans phone calls because that data isn't kept. "There is no content. " But, is that true? The Post's revelation about NUCLEON certainly contributes to the doubts about that claim.

The President's interview with Rose is excerpted at length, below:

Program 2015, (the President) said gets data from the service providers like a Verizon in bulk, and basically call pairs.

"You have my telephone number connecting with your telephone number. There are no names. There is no content in that database. All it is, is the number pairs, when those calls took place, how long they took place. So that database is sitting there," he said.

"Now, if the NSA through some other sources, maybe through the FBI, maybe through a tip that went to the CIA, maybe through the NYPD. Get a number that where there's a reasonable, articulable suspicion that this might involve foreign terrorist activity related to al-Qaeda and some other international terrorist actors.

Then, what the NSA can do is it can query that database to see did this number pop up? Did they make any other calls? And if they did, those calls will be spit out. A report will be produced. It will be turned over to the FBI. At no point is any content revealed because there's no content," Obama explained.

The WaPo report of June 15 goes into some detail about these previously unknown surveillance programs:
Two of the four collection programs, one each for telephony and the Internet, process trillions of “metadata” records for storage and analysis in systems called MAINWAY and MARINA, respectively. Metadata includes highly revealing information about the times, places, devices and participants in electronic communication, but not its contents. The bulk collection of telephone call records from Verizon Business Services, disclosed this month by the British newspaper the Guardian, is one source of raw intelligence for MAINWAY.

The other two types of collection, which operate on a much smaller scale, are aimed at content. One of them intercepts telephone calls and routes the spoken words to a system called ­NUCLEON.

For Internet content, the most important source collection is the PRISM project reported on June 6 by The Washington Post and the Guardian. It draws from data held by Google, Yahoo, Microsoft and other Silicon Valley giants, collectively the richest depositories of personal information in history.

Former NSA contractor Edward Snowden, 29, who unmasked himself as the source behind the PRISM and Verizon revelations, said he hoped for a systematic debate about the “danger to our freedom and way of life” posed by a surveillance apparatus “kept in check by nothing more than policy.”

For well over a week, he has had his wish. Startling disclosures have poured out of the nation’s largest and arguably tightest-lipped spy agency at an unprecedented pace. Snowden’s disclosures have opened a national conversation about the limits of secret surveillance in a free society and an outcry overseas against U.S. espionage.

*

Obama's statement is confusing, and appears to contradict reported facts, as it seems to say that voice content is not collected.

Read it again. He seems perfectly clear on this:

"Then, what the NSA can do is it can query that database to see did this number pop up? Did they make any other calls? And if they did, those calls will be spit out. A report will be produced. It will be turned over to the FBI. At no point is any content revealed because there's no content," Obama explained.

First, "There's no content." What did he mean by that? Does he mean to say that NSA doesn't collect content? Or, second, is he saying that NSA has no access to content, but other agencies that run their own 702 programs do - and, third, how are those two propositions really different?

His statement raises all three questions, as well as unfortunate questions about his full candor.

Finally, one wishes that Charley Rose had asked a pair of questions that follow directly from the Presidents comments:  1) Mr. President, does NSA minimize US persons data?; and 2) Does NSA use the data it has gained from foreign intercepts to perform reverse lookups on US persons?

Why would he ask that?  Because reverse lookups are illegal under 1881(b)(2), and minimization of US person data is mandatory under Sec. 1881(e).

See, Sec. 702 of the 2008 FISA Amendment, as codified at 50 USC Sec. 1881, http://www.law.cornell.edu/...

The data is being collected as part of 2015 but retained for 702. That's illegal.

Sec. 702 says it should be minimized if not collected pursuant to an individualized FISA warrant. Apparently, if we are to believe the President's statement about how the system will "spit out" terrorist calls, the voice and emails are still in there, and furthermore, Obama goes half-way to admitting that is what's happening.  Read his statement again.

___________
ON EDIT - The Guardian has released a new round of documents today that include the NSA's targeting rules and minimiization guidelines. See, http://www.guardian.co.uk/... and linked Part A. Have only briefly scanned them, but will note any significant new information in an updated version of this posting.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  It's becoming ever clearer (11+ / 0-)

    that the President is either incompetent, unintentionally misinformed, willfully misinformed, or a liar.  

    I haven't listed those in ascending order of probability, have I?

    Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

    by corvo on Thu Jun 20, 2013 at 05:17:36 AM PDT

    •  Or, he's just a clever lawyer? (6+ / 0-)

      Perhaps, he understands it so well that he can state facts like a lawyer - selectively, and with a nuance that misleads without being easily caught in an out-and-out lie, as was the unfortunate Mr. Clapper (who is just a plain-speaking Air Force guy, not a Harvard Law Review Editor.)

      •  A truly clever lawyer would avoid violating the (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        corvo, leveymg

        law. But then he or she would have to actually have practiced law.

        "There's a conceptual zone within which the romanticized historical past and the immanentizing historical future converge in a swamp of misapprehension and misstep. It's called 'the present'." - David Beige

        by Superskepticalman on Thu Jun 20, 2013 at 05:29:54 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  You forgot one: (0+ / 0-)

      governing at gunpoint.

      Laugh or mock if you will. Anyone who writes that off as "impossible" underestimates the protectors of absolute power.
       

      "The “Left” is NOT divided on the need to oppose austerity and the Great Betrayal. The Third Way is not left or center or even right. It is Wall Street on the Potomac."--Bill Black

      by lunachickie on Thu Jun 20, 2013 at 06:55:08 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Then it's his duty to tell us (0+ / 0-)

        he's governing at gunpoint.  

        Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

        by corvo on Thu Jun 20, 2013 at 07:59:58 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Maybe he relies too much on input (0+ / 0-)

      From GOP plants issuing reports?

      It's difficult to be happy knowing so many suffer. We must unite.

      by War on Error on Thu Jun 20, 2013 at 07:10:03 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  In which party are those plants? (0+ / 0-)

        Just because they're GOP plants doesn't mean they're in the GOP.

        Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

        by corvo on Thu Jun 20, 2013 at 08:00:31 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  I think the diarist is confused (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      tempu, wayoutinthestix

      but this is confusing.

      Read this again:
      "he other two types of collection, which operate on a much smaller scale, are aimed at content. One of them intercepts telephone calls and routes the spoken words to a system called ­NUCLEON."

      This is a different program from 702 and the article does not specify if a FISA warrant is needed for this information.  If there is a warrant required, or if it targets only non-US people, then Obama did not lie.

      The quote used in this diary is unclear - but then the information we have is unclear.

      •  I think the confusion is all Obama's (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        wayoutinthestix, corvo

        The President indeed described two programs, "702" (PRISM) and "2015" (VERIZON, ATT, etc.)  He claims they are separate, but in fact the NSA uses them together in the acquisition and automated analysis (datamining and profiling) of communications by virtually all US persons who make calls or search the internet or use computers on-line.

        The confusion comes in because of Obama's internally contradictory statement to Rose:

        "Then, what the NSA can do is it can query that database to see did this number pop up? Did they make any other calls? And if they did, those calls will be spit out. A report will be produced. It will be turned over to the FBI. At no point is any content revealed because there's no content," Obama explained.
        When you parse Obama's statement, you get two mutually exclusive messages: 1) there is no content in the NSA database; but, 2) the analyst with "articulable suspicion" can query the database for a "report" that pops out other calls. How can they do that if there is nothing in there?

        What Obama isn't saying is that NSA has 72 hours to seek a FISA warrant and 7 days if there are "exigent circumstances."  That's a lot of time to do what they want with all those data streams.  The thing has cost only $80 billion to build during the past decade.

        Are we getting a good Return On Investment?  They still haven't given us a solid example of a single foreign terrorist plot that was foiled by universal surveillance and profiling inside the U.S.  Lots of questions get raised when full candor isn't demonstrated.

  •  I would bet Nucleon... (7+ / 0-)

    ...is an electronic keyword scanner.  You know looking for special terrorist keywords or people speaking in certain languages.

    This is just a guess so if I am correct please don't arrest me. I love my NSA overloads and respect the efforts they go to keep me safe and snuggly in their freedom cocoon.

    Can we have a name that acronym contest for all these programs please.  

    We Glory in war, in the shedding of human blood. What fools we are.

    by delver rootnose on Thu Jun 20, 2013 at 05:20:38 AM PDT

    •  Surveilling Homeland Intenet Threats (11+ / 0-)

      there's your acronym

      We kidnap. We torture. It's our policy. Embrace it or end it!

      by Mosquito Pilot on Thu Jun 20, 2013 at 05:35:04 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Nucleon is a plum job skill (5+ / 0-)

      Job networking sites contain many resumes that reference these programs

      Here's an interesting Blog piece about that: http://front.kinja.com/...

      The profile linked by the ACLU's Soghoian lists more than two dozen intelligence programs with menacing names in the current techno-creep NSA style. This analyst also says he is responsible for NSA PowerPoint presentations to explain the massive surveillance systems to intelligence management and political leaders: "Prepared topic-specific, detailed presentations for senior leadership using Powerpoint, Word, ZapGrab, ARCMap, and SIGNAV."

      Front located many similar lists of current NSA projects on other career and networking sites, including this one on Indeed.com:

      Tools Used: Cadence/UTT, Blazing Saddles, Xkeyscore, Marina, Maui/Anchory, Sharkfinn, Agility, Mastershake, Pinwale, UIS, TKB, Target Profiler, Agent Logic, NKB/Foxtrail, Banyan, Bellview, Octskyward, Cineplex, Arcmap, Analyst Notebook/Renoir, Microsft Powerpoint, /Excel, NSLOOKUP, Traceroutes, Whois, Treasuremap, Goldpoint, Nucleon, Octskyward, Goldminer, Roadbed, RT-RG Tool Suite, Tuningfork, Pathfinder, Cloud_ABR, Airgap

      In fact, the names of these programs are all over the Internet, including lengthy descriptions of the technology and methodology included within working papers and presentations intended for NSA management. Familiar with "BROOMSTICK"? There are many Top Secret-clearance jobs available!

    •  There was a report on NPR this morning (8+ / 0-)

      California, a software program that can sort all the video captured from surveillance cameras in parks etc so one person can be tracked using facial recognition or a timeline of one area can be retrieved for viewing.

      The BIG BROTHER technology seems to be everywhere at least in cities.

      It's difficult to be happy knowing so many suffer. We must unite.

      by War on Error on Thu Jun 20, 2013 at 07:13:54 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Here is link to NPR story (4+ / 0-)

        It's difficult to be happy knowing so many suffer. We must unite.

        by War on Error on Thu Jun 20, 2013 at 07:26:44 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  phonecall content in realtime w/ location tracking (3+ / 0-)

          at the 2009 G20 conference, content received through cracked Blackberries.  A room full of analysts listens to calls in near-real time while watching the movements of conference participants on a 3x5 meter (~9x45 ft) screen.  Many were our allies.  The story reported in last weekend's Guardian.  Sorry, no link handy, but go to Guardian.co.uk, look in their 'NSA Files' archive.

          •  It's all almost too much to take in (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            CroneWit

            I thought V for Vendetta was a fantasy movie?

            It's difficult to be happy knowing so many suffer. We must unite.

            by War on Error on Thu Jun 20, 2013 at 08:49:48 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  The Leader of the Country - V for Vendetta (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              CroneWit

              Fear, fear, fear to justify government, suppression, and surveillance

              It's difficult to be happy knowing so many suffer. We must unite.

              by War on Error on Thu Jun 20, 2013 at 08:56:58 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I know; the 2009 G20 summit stuff -- (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                leveymg, War on Error

                -- it's like a Bond film.

                In real time.

                A wall-size screen -- a big wall, at that.

                Analysts with headphones listening to their guy and seeing who he's talking to and when that group breaks up and which way they walk.

                Four years ago.

                And now, tiny surveillance drones the size of bumblebees.

                This is our new reality.  And even the electrons being used to type these words are being collected.

                I had to get past the 'spookiness' -- ie my briefly toying with trying to be careful about what I write/do online -- and conclude that I just have to keep doing what I do.

                Like Standing Man in the Turkish square.  Occupy the space.

                •  So very true. I wrote this like forever ago (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  CroneWit, Onomastic

                  My personal joy has lost it's appeal
                  as I struggle and learn what is REAL.

                  I ponder the wonder of how it would be,
                  if all the money spent defensively,
                  were used to reduce the divide
                  between
                  those who have
                  and
                  those who have not.

                  It seems so easy to me.

                  Set people free
                  from the greedy,
                  lift them now
                  out of their poverty.

                  Stop raping their land
                  and stealing their resources.

                  Spend the trillions spent on war
                  to clean up the neighborhoods,
                  one family at a time.

                  I dream of a world full
                  of hearts full
                  of concern
                  for others.

                  A world sublime
                  and
                  free of
                  misguided souls' crimes.

                  So I write a catharsis of mind stuff
                  and courageously share
                  in our new brave new world,
                  requiring a large dose of DARE.

                  I think I knew back then that all we do online is not done anonymously.  That's why we have IP addresses, etc.

                  It's difficult to be happy knowing so many suffer. We must unite.

                  by War on Error on Thu Jun 20, 2013 at 11:52:02 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I've known it from experience, since 2001 (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    War on Error, Onomastic

                    but that's another story.

                    •  Oh, do tell. (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      CroneWit

                      unless you'd have to kill me/us.  If so

                      It's difficult to be happy knowing so many suffer. We must unite.

                      by War on Error on Thu Jun 20, 2013 at 12:01:42 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Well, okay -- (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        War on Error

                        Fall 2001, new to having Internet access at home, an odd circumstance brought the phrase 'Echelon5' to my mind in an unshakable way.  (At that point I had not yet been politicized, and didn't even realize that the Internet was being used politically.)  Lat that night, I had pursuing my usual innocent interests online interests when that mental image kept returning.  So I searched on it, and found 3 pages that had lots of information on the search term.  I kept clicking further and further into each site, and reading about the Aussie/US/GB intelligence program.  Whew!  I thought.  That's serious. Then went to bed, having spent about an hour or two reading those pages.

                        The next day I realized I just HAD to get a particular thing from the Food Coop that day.  That meant about 2 hours since the bus runs on a reduced schedule on Saturdays.  I walked to the bus stop had had to wait quite a while, and cop car drive by me very slowly, the driver looking at me intensely while talking on his handset.  That's odd, I thought.  I got on the bus, and during the half-hour ride, two cop cars (one each at different points)  came parallel with the bus and stayed there, the driver glancing at me while talking on his handset.

                        Got downtown, and got off the bus about six blocks from its turn-around point to go to the Coop that sits in the middle of a block at the intersection of two alleys.  I completed my transaction quickly and walked back to the main street to find a place to sit and rest for the next hour til the next bus came.  I was walking quickly, because I needed to get to the bench on the main street quickly and because I saw an acquaintance there who I wanted to talk with about a shared (non-political) interest.

                        Walking quickly, head down, as I reached the sidewalk I almost ran into a man in a bright orange shirt who was walking very quickly, looking all around scanning the passers-by in a worried, concerned way, as though he had lost somebody it was important to find.  We both had to stop suddenly to avoid a collision.  We stood, our faces no more than six inches apart, for a good ten seconds; plenty of time for me to notice the shirt, the haircut, and the square aviator glasses with the golden reflective surface.  He did not speak to say 'excuse me' or laugh it off; he just sated at me for a good ten seconds, and I stared back.  How frikin rude, I thought, and moved to the bench to sit next to my acqaintance.

                        I live in a university town (small town, big U), and that street on a Football Saturday is packed with people sauntering and strolling, eating ice cream or carrying vegetables from the Farmer's Market.  The man was out of place.  Neither his clothing or shoes, his haircut (that haircut!), his shades (!) or his mode of walking & scanning were in sync with the variety of styles one sees in that place.

                        And this man, who had been in such a hurry, and had been so anxiously scanning faces on both sides of the street before and behind him, did not scurry on.  He glanced around in a puzzled way, then gave a small shrug and just stood there in the middle of the sidewalk about four feet from me, his ear slightly inclined in toward me but keeping his eyes on me all the time.  He widened his stance and put his arms behind him in a 'parade rest' position and just plain listened as people milled around him.

                        At first I tried to ignore him, then realized that he was aiming his attentions at me, so I settled a long glare on him while my acquaintance talked non-stop (he hadn't begun taking his meds at that point).

                        The man in the shades and the orange shirt held his position for a full hour, except for two brief times.  Twice, I was able to catch my acquaintance taking a breath and say a few sentences of what I wanted to tell him.  Both times, the man moved quickly to my side and shook the handle of the newspaper box beside me, without inserting any quarters.  Both times, as soon as I stopped talking, he quickly stepped back to his placed and settled into his watchful parade rest.

                        (I was about 1/8 inch from going up real close to him and asking him who he was and did he need to talk to me?  What held me back was the physical fatigue that is part of my disability and my need to save my strength for my six-block to the bus stop.)

                        Finally I left my friend and set out for the bus.  I didn't look back to see if the man was following me.  I go in the bus and drowsed through the long ride home.

                        But wtf?  I kept asking myself later, after I was home and rested.  Not who, buy why was the orange-shirt man, why was he so plainly looking for me, trying to listen to me?

                        And why the cop by the first bus stop?  Why the two cops on their handsets beside the bus?

                        And finally it occurred to me to wonder:  was it because of that Echelon reading last night?  But how could that result in orange-shirt guy . . ...

                        And then I realized:  he had expected me to get off at the bus' final stop, not six block before.  He thought he had lost me.  He was back-tracking the bus route trying to find me.  Then there I was six inches from his face.  If I had left the  Co-op three seconds later, he might have missed me altogether.  That realization made his behaviour make sense.

                        But why was he watching that bus?  I hardly ever leave the house.  I hadn't even planned to go out until that morning, whic I realized I just had to.

                        Why the cop car by the bus stop?

                        Oh:  I get it.

                        They had to be watching my house.  They had to see me leave the house and walk toward the bus stop, and a cruiser was called and given my description, and the cruiser-cop was on his handset saying that I was sitting under a tree by the bus stop.  Th en-route cops confirmed that I was still on the bus at two locations. the Orange-shirt man was waiting at the end of that bus's line.

                        The Echelon sites.  I had accessed them around 11-1 Friday night.  I left the house about 11:20 Saturday.  Within twelve hours, orange-shirt man was prepared to move as soon as he heard that I had left the house.  (Or maybe he was the one watching, and called the cops to track me until he could reach my end-point for observation.  I never could figure out which.)

                        Oh, geez!  some will say, so some guy listened to you -- that doesn't prove anything!  This is just paranoid conjecture.

                        Well, I'm not given to paranoia. And the extreme oddness of the man's appeaser and behavior amidst the Football-Saturday crowd milling round his motionless form, the fact that he showed none of the normal unease of a person who is being not just stared at, but glared at (by a very effective glare-er) who kept shifting posture to indicate that yes, I'm glaring at you, Fella! -- His behaviour and appearance were just too far outside the norm for him to be 'just some guy'.

                        And form that night I have always know that 'they' could find me -- the person who read the Echelon pages -- by nothing more than my ISP, and could have someone watching my house within twelve hours.

                        •  Wow, that's amazing. (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          CroneWit

                          And intimidating.  Thank you for sharing this story.  Kind of makes me shudder.  The orange shirt guy sounds like so many square headed, seemingly unfeeling men that might very well find no problem shooting at his fellow citizens.  I will never understand this mind set.  Ever.

                          I wonder what they thought about you, the Echelon reader, that prompted them to case you?

                          I think I will not read up on it.

                          I hope things settled down after that.  

                          It's difficult to be happy knowing so many suffer. We must unite.

                          by War on Error on Thu Jun 20, 2013 at 09:20:04 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  He WAS square-headed! (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            War on Error

                            I can still see his face in my mind's eye, the breeze sifting his fine, straight, sandy-blonde hair -- and yes, square-headed.  The kind of skin that would freckle and burn after ten minutes of sun, a little snub-but-pointed nose.

                            Well, Echelon was/is a 'Five Eyes' program (alhtough that term is new to me), physically based in Oz, that was aimed at (capable of?) worldwide surveilliance (IIRC).  And (IIRC) it had just entered its fifth iteration/phase.  It was, of course, super-duper secret with bells attached.

                            And the fools who manged it were dumb enough to make it visible to a Internet doofus-newbie like me you just managed to yahoo-search right into it by entering the program's name.  I was a 'ping' on their system that stayed 1-2 hours and read a number of pages.  If their programs were at all competent, their computer system would have tagged me as an unknown connection and pushed out a 'find this person who's reading about a classified program'.

                            No repercussions that I know of.  Bur for years afterward, when I'd leave the house, do the spy-movie basic trick of fixing my door so I could tell if somebody had entered in my absence (feeling foolish every time, but doing it anyway.)

                            And orange-shirt's report would have been, 'Well, she 'made' me right away and stared at me the whole time; I thought she was going to get right up in my face.  Guy she met was on some self-glorifying lunatic rant the whole time.  When she did manage to butt in, all she talked about was Saturn and squares moving over houses and Jupiter and Uranus . . . ..  Just two loony-bins, I'd say.'

                            Your tax dollars at work, eh?

                          •  Too funny (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            CroneWit

                            In a disconcerting sort of way

                            It's difficult to be happy knowing so many suffer. We must unite.

                            by War on Error on Fri Jun 21, 2013 at 06:15:28 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Very disconcerting at the time (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            War on Error

                            but I got a good, long laugh at the thought of this guy going back to the office and trying to explain the conversation he heard and somebody trying to justify the personnel costs.

                            Or maybe they just chalked the expense up to OJT.

  •  ALSO these surveillance tools (5+ / 0-)

    2 other NSA programs - PERFECT CITIZEN & RIOT BY Raytheon who says PERFECT CITIZEN  is like BIG BROTHER in an email

    http://www.dailykos.com/...

    It's difficult to be happy knowing so many suffer. We must unite.

    by War on Error on Thu Jun 20, 2013 at 07:08:56 AM PDT

  •  I seriously doubt that the NSA is (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    fladem

    lying to the president. I guess it's possible. And I don't believe for a second that Obama is outright lying to the American people.

    •  Of course, doc2, we all know that Politicians (0+ / 0-)

      never lie.

      And I don't believe for a second that Obama is outright lying to the American people.

      "Who are these men who really run this land? And why do they run it with such a thoughtless hand?" David Crosby

      by allenjo on Thu Jun 20, 2013 at 07:39:22 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  To me, he's not merely a "politician". (0+ / 0-)

        Lincoln and Mandela were both politicians. They were also statesmen, and (most people believe) great men. The mere fact that a person is a politician does not automatically make them a liar.

  •  Thanks for the WaPo article! (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    greengemini, leveymg, wayoutinthestix

    I knew I had read something somewhere about intercepting of voice content, but couldn't remember where.  Good to have that, thanks!

    President Obama (and other apologists) keep pushing the meme that 'it's only the phone number', with an implied 'what could they possibly do with only the phone number?'

    Peter Berger has written an excellent thought-experiement at Wired that shows how one phone call can be used to find thousands of people in a 'network' at only two 'degrees of separation' from that number:

    http://www.foreignpolicy.com/...

    You are an analyst for a fictionalized version of the NSA, and you have been authorized to search through metadata in order to expose the fundraiser's network, armed with only a single phone number as a starting point.

    Berger runs a number through an analysis similar to the ones used by NSA.  In his experiment, the first number provided 79 other numbers in the first degree of separation -- number that recivced/sent calls to each other.  By the second degree, close to 38,000 numbers (iirc) are found to make calls to/from the 79 numbers.  Further analysis then pinpoints clusters within the second-degree pool.

     Berger makes very good use of graphics that make his non-geeky explanations make sense, and points out the questions and further analysis that would most likely be part of this process.  All in all, and important article, imo, in terms of our comprehension of how 'just one number' could entangle many innocent people in further investigations.

    (and, leveymg, is 'program 2015' actually '215', part of the Patriot Act?  I've seen/heard '215' often, and that was what I though I heard Obama say on Charlie Rose.  Thanks for  a great article!)

    •  I've seen "2015" referred to a couple places, (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      CroneWit, wayoutinthestix

      including the Economic Times report I linked to.

      Obama mentioned two programs: the 702 (Prism), the foreign targeting program, and "2015", which refers to the telco collection program involving Verizon and the other big wireless and internet providers.

      "702" is named after Sec. 702 of the 2008 FISA Amendment Act (FAA) as incorporated into law at Title 50 US Code Sec. 1818 that places limits on NSA data interception and retention of US persons. The gov't is not supposed to target US persons. If US person data is obtained in the course of monitoring foreigners, its supposed to be routinely and regularly minimized (destroyed) and not warehoused. The minimization schedule is set by Presidential Order, and is classified.

      The "2015' program is peculiarly named, as there is no Sec. 2015 of the FAA or the US Code. I believe it may be a slip of the tongue by Obama (or someone misheard what he said).  However, 18 USC Sec. 2511 is the preexisting federal criminal wiretapping code that requires that US agencies and law enforcement obtain a Title III warrant from a US Judge before wiretapping US persons inside the US. The FISA law as amended is a separate section of the US Code and is only supposed to apply to foreign persons. Nonetheless, under the "2015" program the NSA has been obtaining all metadata for all persons inside the US. Strangely, as Snowden's documents show, they in fact do this with an FISA Court Administrative Order sought by the FBI directing the telcos to deliver to the NSA the daily take of all metadata (this is acquired by all CALEA-compliant switches and ISP diverters that are mandatory under the 1995 CALEA law that modified the Telecommunications Act). This is a hybrid arrangement because some of the telcos and ISPs challenged the gov't authority to acquire all U.S. metadata without a Title III or FISA warrant. It also doesn't explain how content can "pop out" of the NSA databank unless that content was acquired previously with a warrant.

      Obama's statement raises a lot of questions.

      •  What "pops out" are foreign collects (0+ / 0-)

        NSA has for years (50) collected foreign telephone, teletype, telegram, radar, and other electronic signals, with varying success depending on the state of the technology, wittingness of the targets (we got lots on Bin Laden until the Wash Times spilled the beans on our collection on his SatPhone).

        I know that no one around here wants to believe it, but NSA does not randomly collect on US citizens. And any US collects (purposeful) are in accordance with warrants, and inadvertent US collects (US person talking to foreign target) are "minimized" when detected.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site