Even Senate Intelligence Committee Admits That NSA Oversight Is Often A Game Of 20 Questions

from the look-at-that... dept

Tue, Oct 15th 2013 11:58am — Mike Masnick

We just recently quoted Rep. Justin Amash talking about how Congressional "oversight" of the NSA tended to be this bizarre game of 20 questions, where briefings would be held, but you wouldn't be told any information unless you asked precisely the right questions:

But Amash said that intelligence officials are often evasive during classified briefings and reveal little new information unless directly pressed.

"You don't have any idea what kind of things are going on," Amash said. "So you have to start just spitting off random questions. Does the government have a moon base? Does the government have a talking bear? Does the government have a cyborg army? If you don't know what kind of things the government might have, you just have to guess and it becomes a totally ridiculous game of twenty questions."

It would appear that sense goes beyond just folks like Amash, all the way up to the head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Dianne Feinstein. While she's still a strong supporter of the NSA's surveillance programs, the latest revelations about the NSA's collection of buddy lists and email address books pointed out that those issues weren't covered by Congressional oversight, since they happened overseas. When the Washington Post questions Feinstein's office about this, a senior staffer seemed unconcerned, mentioning that perhaps they should be asking questions about it:

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said in August that the committee has less information about, and conducts less oversight of, intelligence-gathering that relies solely on presidential authority. She said she planned to ask for more briefings on those programs.

“In general, the committee is far less aware of operations conducted under 12333,” said a senior committee staff member, referring to Executive Order 12333, which defines the basic powers and responsibilities of the intelligence agencies. “I believe the NSA would answer questions if we asked them, and if we knew to ask them, but it would not routinely report these things, and in general they would not fall within the focus of the committee.”

That, ladies and gentleman, is the kind of "oversight" that Congress conducts.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: buddy lists, congress, inboxes, nsa, nsa surveillance, oversight, senate intelligence committee

13 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Ninja (profile), 15 Oct 2013 @ 11:57am

I believe the NSA would answer questions if we asked them, and if we knew to ask them

I am contemplating the madness of this line. So if the senate doesn't ask questions about any clearly bad program then it's green light? Let us hope the right questions are asked before it's too late eh? Or maybe we can, you know, put the NSA under very strict reins or even better, CLOSE THE DAMN THING since it's corrupted beyond fix?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Oct 2013 @ 12:02pm

those involved in the so-called 'Oversight' need to lose their jobs and have the Committee shut down along with the NSA!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Oct 2013 @ 12:14pm

This is what is called "Oversight"? This is what passes for a check and balance? No. This is why the NSA is so over the line. This is why they are now concerned about various officials speaking up for them now that their tail is in a crack over it.

As has been mentioned, we haven't heard all of the abuses that the NSA has done. In fact, Greenwald says...well how about you read it for yourself?

http://world.time.com/2013/10/14/greenwald-on-snowden-leaks-the-worst-is-yet-to-come/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Oct 2013 @ 12:15pm

But...
If you DO happen to ask the RIGHT questions, you get either answers to completely different questions or answers with the English language so twisted that they are of little value.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
delia ruhe, 15 Oct 2013 @ 12:19pm

important study of intel community
If anyone's interested, Steven Aftergood has written a review of an important dissertation on the American intelligence community by sociologist Bridget Nolan (who had to quit the CIA in order to publish it as a book). The review is called "To Fix U.S. Intelligence, Shrink It?":

http://blogs.fas.org/secrecy/2013/09/nctc-nolan/

and the dissertation is available for download as a pdf:

http://media.philly.com/documents/Nolan_Dissertation.PDF

It backs up a lot of what's being reported now about too much data being swept up and too big a bureaucracy crippling the effectiveness of intelligence.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
stryx, 15 Oct 2013 @ 12:24pm

Answers
Well? Does the government have a cyborg army? I already know they have a talking bear.

I'm sure the answer would involve things like, not technically an army, not actually cyborgs, it depends on the definition of have....but if you ask again the Psybourg Battalion will laser fry all your metadata. And by metadata they mean children.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Zem, 15 Oct 2013 @ 12:52pm

So if we asked, "Are you animal, vegetable or mineral?"

my bet is on vegetable.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anon E. Mous (profile), 15 Oct 2013 @ 12:53pm

Oh Please. Anyone who has ever watched a senate committee panel do any questioning of a government agency even when there is a political and public firestorm knows they will watch the senators on the committee pound the table and raise their voice when asking something, but that's about it.

The senate committees will have already worked out the outcome behind closed doors as always, the rest is just a dog and pony show for the public and the media.

From the White House to the various government agencies that go before the senate and house committees have and always will make the back room deals as they always have.

The senate and house reps get an IOU to pull out at a later date or they will get some support for some pet project of theirs.

The Potomac two step is still alive in Washington and will be for years to come and the U.S. citizens are always the one left on the hook.

You can bet is a senator or congressman was having their calls/emails scooped up that there would be heads rolling, but since it just your everyday citizen, well sorry but were expendable.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Oct 2013 @ 12:55pm

Something tells me even if a committee bothered to ask a pertinent question of the NSA, they would respond exactly as Feinstein does when queried about an uncomfortable truth...
she goes from being intolerably obtuse to explicitly threatening. Just like every other literally Reactionary insider. There is no left-right on the inside, only the powers-that-be.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Oct 2013 @ 1:09pm

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said in August that the committee has less information about, and conducts less oversight of, intelligence-gathering that relies solely on presidential authority.

So much for checks and balances.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Oct 2013 @ 1:23pm

Re:
Keep in mind, the Senate Intelligence Committee includes Ron Wyden and Mark Udall who have been asking some pointed questions for years, and generally been attempting to raise red flags as best as they were legally able to do.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Muck Ciley Fyrus, 15 Oct 2013 @ 5:07pm

Re:
What's the worst thing about eating a vegetable?
Getting her out of the wheelchair!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Muck Ciley Fyrus, 15 Oct 2013 @ 5:10pm

Re:
Checks and balances is nothing but a charade anyway. One part of the government "checks and balances" another? Gimme a break!
[ link to this | view in thread ]