HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Here's the condescending ...

Wed Jun 26, 2013, 11:39 PM

Here's the condescending generic email response I got from @SenFeinstein (NSA)

Jillian C. York ‏@jilliancyork 3h

Here's the condescending generic email response I got from @SenFeinstein in response to my letter about the #NSA: http://pastebin.com/C2qTNiG0


(If you're in a rush, the short version is blah, blah, blah, 9-11, apple pie and there's a terrorist under your bed)

Dear Ms. York:

I received your communication indicating your concerns about the two National Security Agency programs that have been in the news recently. I appreciate that you took the time to write on this important issue and welcome the opportunity to respond.

First, I understand your concerns and want to point out that by law, the government cannot listen to an American's telephone calls or read their emails without a court warrant issued upon a showing of probable cause. As is described in the attachment to this letter provided by the Executive Branch, the programs that were recently disclosed have to do with information about phone calls - the kind of information that you might find on a telephone bill - in one case, and the internet communications (such as email) of non-Americans outside the United States in the other case. Both programs are subject to checks and balances, and oversight by the Executive Branch, the Congress, and the Judiciary.

As Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, I can tell you that I believe the oversight we have conducted is strong and effective and I am doing my level best to get more information declassified. Please know that it is equally frustrating to me, as it is to you, that I cannot provide more detail on the value these programs provide and the strict limitations placed on how this information is used. I take serious my responsibility to make sure intelligence programs are effective, but I work equally hard to ensure that intelligence activities strictly comply with the Constitution and our laws and protect Americans' privacy rights.

These surveillance programs have proven to be very effective in identifying terrorists, their activities, and those associated with terrorist plots, and in allowing the Intelligence Community and the Federal Bureau of Investigation to prevent numerous terrorist attacks. More information on this should be forthcoming.

On June 18, 2003, the Director of the National Security Agency (NSA) testified to the House Intelligence Committee that there have been "over 50 potential terrorist events" that these programs helped prevent.

While the specific uses of these surveillance programs remain largely classified, I have reviewed the classified testimony and reports from the Executive Branch that describe in detail how this surveillance has stopped attacks.

Two examples where these surveillance programs were used to prevent terrorist attacks were: (1) the attempted bombing of the New York City subway system in September 2009 by Najibullah Zazi and his co-conspirators; and (2) the attempted attack on a Danish newspaper that published cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed in October 2009 by U.S. citizen David Headley and his associates.

Regarding the planned bombing of the New York City subway system, the NSA has determined that in early September of 2009, while monitoring the activities of Al Qaeda terrorists in Pakistan, NSA noted contact from an individual in the U.S. that the FBI subsequently identified as Colorado-based Najibullah Zazi. The U.S. Intelligence Community, including the FBI and NSA, worked in concert to determine his relationship with Al Qaeda, as well as identify any foreign or domestic terrorist links. The FBI tracked Zazi as he traveled to New York to meet with co-conspirators, where they were planning to conduct a terrorist attack using hydrogen peroxide bombs placed in backpacks. Zazi and his co-conspirators were subsequently arrested. Zazi eventually pleaded guilty to conspiring to bomb the NYC subway system.

Regarding terrorist David Headley, he was also involved in the planning and reconnaissance of the 2008 terrorist attacks in Mumbai, India that killed 166 people, including six Americans. According to NSA, in October 2009, Headley, a Chicago businessman and dual U.S. and Pakistani citizen, was arrested by the FBI as he tried to depart from Chicago O'Hare airport on a trip to Europe. Headley was charged with material support to terrorism based on his involvement in the planning and reconnaissance of the hotel attack in Mumbai 2008. At the time of his arrest, Headley and his colleagues were plotting to attack the Danish newspaper that published the unflattering cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed, at the behest of Al Qaeda.

Not only has Congress been briefed on these programs, but laws passed and enacted since 9/11 specifically authorize them. The surveillance programs are authorized by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which itself was enacted by Congress in 1978 to establish the legal structure to carry out these programs, but also to prevent government abuses, such as surveillance of Americans without approval from the federal courts. The Act authorizes the government to gather communications and other information for foreign intelligence purposes. It also establishes privacy protections, oversight mechanisms (including court review), and other restrictions to protect privacy rights of Americans.

The laws that have established and reauthorized these programs since 9/11 have passed by mostly overwhelming margins. For example, the phone call business record program was reauthorized most recently on May 26, 2011 by a vote of 72-23 in the Senate and 250-153 in the House. The internet communications program was reauthorized most recently on December 30, 2012 by a vote of 73-22 in the Senate and 301-118 in the House.

Attached to this letter is a brief summary of the two intelligence surveillance programs that were recently disclosed in media articles. While I very much regret the disclosure of classified information in a way that will damage our ability to identify and stop terrorist activity, I believe it is important to ensure that the public record now available on these programs is accurate and provided with the proper context.

Again, thank you for contacting me with your concerns and comments. I appreciate knowing your views and hope you continue to inform me of issues that matter to you. If you have any additional questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact my office in Washington, D.C. at (202) 224-3841.


Sincerely yours,


Dianne Feinstein
United States Senator


Further information about my position on issues of concern to California and the nation are available at my website, Feinstein.senate.gov <http://feinstein.senate.gov/public/> . You can also receive electronic e-mail updates by subscribing to my e-mail list. Click here to sign up.

<http://feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/signup> And please visit my YouTube <http://www.youtube.com/Senatorfeinstein> , Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/Senatorfeinstein> and Twitter <http://www.twitter.com/Senfeinstein> for more ways to communicate with me.

http://pastebin.com/C2qTNiG0

7 replies, 2623 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 7 replies Author Time Post
Reply Here's the condescending generic email response I got from @SenFeinstein (NSA) (Original post)
Catherina Jun 2013 OP
kentuck Jun 2013 #1
Pale Blue Dot Jun 2013 #2
Narkos Jun 2013 #3
pkdu Jun 2013 #4
pkdu Jun 2013 #5
TeeYiYi Jun 2013 #6
BlueCheese Jun 2013 #7

Response to Catherina (Original post)

Wed Jun 26, 2013, 11:52 PM

1. I would have no problem with the NSA monitoring calls coming into our country...

..and calls going out of our country. They should be able to get the context in 30-60 seconds. They could dispose all calls that were deemed irrelevant. If they had direct leads to someone in this country, prosecutable evidence, then they should be able to listen to those types of domestic calls, also.

But no data base. There is no need to spy on the American people at large. Someone has to set limits with these characters. There has to be sufficient over-sight. I don't know if Feinstein's Committee is doing its job?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Catherina (Original post)

Wed Jun 26, 2013, 11:58 PM

2. Dear Senator Feinstein,

Is it your opinion that the intelligence provided to President Bush that "Bin Laden was determined to strike in the US", in addition to multiple intelligence sources that said that he planned to use planes, was inadequate? And that only the establishment of The Department of Homeland Security, The Patriot Act, and everything that Edward Snowden exposed was the only way we could have stopped 9/11? If so, please explain.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Catherina (Original post)

Wed Jun 26, 2013, 11:58 PM

3. Awww, it was a generic email? So sad

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Narkos (Reply #3)


Response to Catherina (Original post)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 12:11 AM

5. I assume you re not Jillian C York from NY/NH/VT who asked an out of state senator a question

and gt a standard email response.?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Catherina (Original post)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 12:17 AM

6. TLDR...

...blah blah blah...big finish.

Hi Cat!

TYY

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Catherina (Original post)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 12:30 AM

7. Feinstein's statement is full of hogwash.

To take the most egregious example, Feinstein's email says

First, I understand your concerns and want to point out that by law, the government cannot listen to an American's telephone calls or read their emails without a court warrant issued upon a showing of probable cause.

This is false. The government can examine the contents of phone calls or emails of people it thinks are foreigners with 51% certainty. If it turns out the people involved are Americans, it can still keep that data if they think it fits any of several categories. No warrant is needed for this.

Don't even get me started on the idea that metadata is somehow benign or that Congress really knew what was going on. Ugh.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread