Get PJ Media on your Apple

Congress Told That NSA Can’t Count Number of Americans in Its Data Grab

Intelligence community officials warn against throwing off balance between transparency and national security.

by
Rodrigo Sermeño

Bio

November 19, 2013 - 12:22 am
Page 1 of 2  Next ->   View as Single Page

WASHINGTON – Obama administration officials told lawmakers that while they support providing more information about surveillance programs to the public, they object to legislative proposals that could undermine national security and divert intelligence resources at the expense of greater transparency.

A subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee debated last Wednesday legislation that would force the government to release statistics on how many Americans have had their data collected under various surveillance programs.

The legislation proposed by Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) would require the National Security Agency (NSA) to disclose publicly how many people targeted were Americans, and allow companies to report more information about the surveillance requests they receive and the number of users whose information is turned over.

The Surveillance Transparency Act would also require the government to annually report on the number of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court orders issued under various surveillance laws, the general categories of information collected, the number of U.S. persons whose information was collected under the categories, and the number of U.S. citizens whose information was actually reviewed by government agents.

The legislation comes at a time a divided Congress is considering whether to ban practices like the wholesale collection of data on Americans’ telephone calls or to implement limited changes that would effectively put some of the data collection on a stronger legal footing.

Recently, the Senate Intelligence Committee sent to the full Senate a measure, sponsored by chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), that would strengthen the legal authority of the NSA’s bulk collection of domestic telephone data.

“What we’re trying to do is create a framework where people have a little bit more confidence and understanding,” Franken said at the hearing. “Or can decide for themselves whether they should have confidence.”

Robert Litt, general counsel for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, said it is possible to reveal information on the number of targets of collection activities, but there is no reliable method to find out the number of U.S. people whose data is actually collected, even if they are not the target.

“Counting the number of persons or of U.S. persons whose communications are actually collected, even if they’re not the target, is operationally very difficult,” he told the Judiciary Committee’s privacy subcommittee. “This kind of information simply cannot be reasonably obtained.”

Litt said it took six NSA analysts over two months to determine how many Americans’ communications were swept up in an NSA collection mistake in 2011. Compiling these statistics on a larger scale would be time consuming, if not impossible, and take resources away from NSA’s mission of uncovering terrorist plots.

“[NSA] mathematicians have other things that they can be doing in protecting the nation…rather than trying to go through and count U.S. persons,” Litt said, referring to published statements that NSA is the nation’s largest employer of math experts.

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
The National Security Agency looks at literally millions of phone records. It captures millions of e-mails. It sifts through millions of megabytes of private data. And it does this all without following the requirements of the Fourth Amendment, which makes it a criminal organization or crime syndicate, with every one of it's employees therefor a member of a criminal organization or crime syndicate, and one that is very much like the protection racket Mafia with it's threat of harm coming to you and your children if you don't support it. There is no doubt in my mind that the Founding Fathers, to a man, would oppose it, and violently oppose it if necessary.

But their countries were not free, nor can any country remain free under such despotic power. Some of the current worship of powerful executives may come from those who admire strength and accomplishment of any sort. Others hail the display of Presidential strength … simply because they approve of the result reached by the use of power. This is nothing less than the totalitarian philosophy that the end justifies the means…. IF EVER THERE WAS A PHILOSOPHY OF GOVERNMENT TOTALLY AT WAR WITH THAT OF THE FOUNDING FATHERS, IT IS THIS ONE
- Barry Goldwater
36 weeks ago
36 weeks ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (5)
All Comments   (5)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
my co-worker's mom makes $77 hourly on the laptop. She has been fired from work for 7 months but last month her pay check was $15344 just working on the laptop for a few hours. his explanation>>>>>>>>>>> www.jobs35.com
36 weeks ago
36 weeks ago Link To Comment
>>> Obama administration officials told lawmakers .....

C'mon! Let's admit it. Even IF Obama administration officials pulled a number out of thin air, would anybody believe them?

You know, Obama telling more outrageous whoppers after another outrageous whopper. ("... 'more than 100 MILLION Americans' have enrolled in Obamacare", "Porkulus created 100 MILLION American J-O-B-S", "most ethical and transparent administration" yada yada yada....)

No need for media to cover for him. Citizens learn to deal with what ever "news" they want to print/air. Just like citizens under totalitarian regimes learn to deal with the official propaganda.
36 weeks ago
36 weeks ago Link To Comment
You can be sure that every member of federal, state, county, city, and school executive, legislative, and judicial branches and their families and their aides and their families would be in that count. Those are the people who can impede or enable the enactment of the policies of this administration and therefore have some power that can be enhanced or diminished by releasing the collected data. That's the real threat. What would this regime stop at to attain their goals? Absolutely nothing. And any charges brought as a result of the data would be based on secret data in a secret court that will not be revealed. It sounds a whole lot like a modern day Inquisition to me.
36 weeks ago
36 weeks ago Link To Comment
The National Security Agency looks at literally millions of phone records. It captures millions of e-mails. It sifts through millions of megabytes of private data. And it does this all without following the requirements of the Fourth Amendment, which makes it a criminal organization or crime syndicate, with every one of it's employees therefor a member of a criminal organization or crime syndicate, and one that is very much like the protection racket Mafia with it's threat of harm coming to you and your children if you don't support it. There is no doubt in my mind that the Founding Fathers, to a man, would oppose it, and violently oppose it if necessary.

But their countries were not free, nor can any country remain free under such despotic power. Some of the current worship of powerful executives may come from those who admire strength and accomplishment of any sort. Others hail the display of Presidential strength … simply because they approve of the result reached by the use of power. This is nothing less than the totalitarian philosophy that the end justifies the means…. IF EVER THERE WAS A PHILOSOPHY OF GOVERNMENT TOTALLY AT WAR WITH THAT OF THE FOUNDING FATHERS, IT IS THIS ONE
- Barry Goldwater
36 weeks ago
36 weeks ago Link To Comment
Quotation marks?
36 weeks ago
36 weeks ago Link To Comment
View All