Skip to main content

President Obama spoke with Charlie Rose in an wide-ranging interview discussing Syria, Iran, security and surveillance that will air tonight. The video of the entire interview is below, followed by some transcribed excerpts about the National Security Agency. The NSA discussion begins at 26:41.


CHARLIE ROSE: Let's turn to the NSA. You famously talked about what you called "the wrong choice" between security and freedom. Where do you put what NSA is doing, in that balance, between security and freedom? A false choice is what you called it.

PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: Let me start with, the fact that, at National Defense University several weeks ago--when most of the focus was around the drone program and my plans in Afghanistan and the need for us to move away from a perpetual war footing--that I specifically said that one of the things that we need to debate and examine is our surveillance programs.

Because those were set up right after 9/11. It's now been over a decade and we have to examine them.

ROSE: And what should the debate be?

PRESIDENT OBAMA: : Well, what I’ve said, and I continue to believe, is that we don’t have to sacrifice our freedom in order to achieve security. That’s a false choice. That doesn’t mean that there are not tradeoffs involved in any given program, in any given action that we take. So all of us make a decision that we go through a whole bunch of security at airports, which when we were growing up that wasn’t the case, right? You ran up to the gate

ROSE: Exactly.

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  You know, five or six minutes to catch a plane. You're running on. It's been a while since I took a commercial plane but I get the experience is not the same.

ROSE: It's not. It's gotten worse.

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Right. And so that’s a tradeoff we make, the same way we make a tradeoff about drunk driving. We say, 'Occasionally there are going to be checkpoints. They may be intrusive.' To say there’s a tradeoff doesn’t mean somehow that we’ve abandoned freedom. I don’t think anybody says we’re no longer free because we have checkpoints at airports.

ROSE: But there's a balance here.

PRESIDENT OBAMA: There is a balance. So I'm going to get to your question. The way I view it, my job is both to protect the American people and to protect the American way of life, which includes our privacy.

And so every program that we engage in, what I’ve said is “Let’s examine and make sure that we’re making the right tradeoffs.” Now, with respect to the NSA, a government agency that has been in the intelligence gathering business for a very long time —

ROSE: Bigger and better than everybody else.

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Bigger and better than everybody else, and we should take pride in that because they’re extraordinary professionals; they are dedicated to keeping the American people safe. What I can say unequivocally is that if you are a U.S. person, the NSA cannot listen to your telephone calls, and the NSA cannot target your emails … and have not. They cannot and have not, by law and by rule, and unless they — and usually it wouldn’t be “they,” it’d be the FBI — go to a court, and obtain a warrant, and seek probable cause, the same way it’s always been, the same way when we were growing up and we were watching movies, you want to go set up a wiretap, you got to go to a judge, show probable cause….

So point number one, if you’re a U.S. person, then NSA is not listening to your phone calls and it’s not targeting your emails unless it’s getting an individualized court order. That’s the existing rule.

There are two programs that were revealed by Mr. Snowden, allegedly, since there’s a criminal investigation taking place, and they caused all the ruckus. Program number one, called the 2015 Program, what that does is it gets data from the service providers like a Verizon in bulk, and basically you have 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.

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 any of the — 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.

Talking Points Memo has a "face off" between Edward Snowden and President Obama, namely the President's quotes from the Charlie Rose interview vs. Snowden's interview with the Guardian.

Here's an excerpt from that article:


This disclosure provides Obama an opportunity to appeal for a return to sanity, constitutional policy, and the rule of law rather than men. He still has plenty of time to go down in history as the President who looked into the abyss and stepped back, rather than leaping forward into it. I would advise he personally call for a special committee to review these interception programs, repudiate the dangerous “State Secrets” privilege, and, upon preparing to leave office, begin a tradition for all Presidents forthwith to demonstrate their respect for the law by appointing a special investigator to review the policies of their years in office for any wrongdoing. There can be no faith in government if our highest offices are excused from scrutiny - they should be setting the example of transparency.

[President] Obama:

So, you asked, what should we do? …What I’ve said is — is that what is a legitimate concern — a legitimate critique — is that because these are classified programs — even though we have all these systems of checks and balances, Congress is overseeing it, federal courts are overseeing it — despite all that, the public may not fully know. And that can make the public kind of nervous, right? Because they say, “Well, Obama says it’s okay — or Congress says it’s okay. I don’t know who this judge is. I’m nervous about it.” What I’ve asked the intelligence community to do is see how much of this we can declassify without further compromising the program, number one. And they are in that process of doing so now so that everything that I’m describing to you today, people, the public, newspapers, etc., can look at because frankly, if people are making judgments just based on these slides that have been leaked, they’re not getting the complete story. Number two. I’ve stood up a privacy and civil liberties oversight board, made up of independent citizens including some fierce civil libertarians. I’ll be meeting with them. And what I want to do is to set up and structure a national conversation, not only about these two programs, but also the general problem of data, big data sets, because this is not going to be restricted to government entities.
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

  •  Tip Jar (24+ / 0-)

    "I am not interested in picking up crumbs of compassion thrown from the table of someone who considers himself my master. I want the full menu of rights." (From "You Said a Mouthful" by Bishop Desmond Tutu - South African bishop & activist, b.1931)

    by FiredUpInCA on Tue Jun 18, 2013 at 09:52:25 AM PDT

  •  Are they recording emails and phones? n/t (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ffour, Shockwave
  •  If all they have is a number (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    detroitmechworks, Shockwave, Rizzo

    how do they know it's an  American or not?

    Be the change you want to see in the world. -Gandhi

    by DRo on Tue Jun 18, 2013 at 10:01:27 AM PDT

  •  "Listening" is not the point. (12+ / 0-)

    And "not listening" sounds like weasel talk.

    Computers don't "listen".

  •  President's response is very misdirecting... (16+ / 0-)

    ...and patently FALSE. What happens is this: If you're a U.S. citizen and you're talking with someone on the "hot list," internationally, they may listen into your calls. And, the rest are "referred" to the FBI and local/state law enforcement, per this: DNI: NSA can't spy on Americans without a warrant
    ...and this: NYT Lead: U.S. Law Enforcement Made 1.3 Million+ Surveillance Requests Of Cell Carriers In 2011 ...and this: NYT Lead: ACLU Documents Rampant, Warrantless Phone-Tracking By Police Throughout U.S. ...and this: NYT's Orwellian Lead: AG Holder Officially Signs Off On "Total Information Awareness" For All.

    But, don't let the FACTS get in the way of perfectly good propaganda!

    "I always thought if you worked hard enough and tried hard enough, things would work out. I was wrong." --Katharine Graham

    by bobswern on Tue Jun 18, 2013 at 10:10:42 AM PDT

    •  And there's "conflicting info" via WaPo on 6/15... (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Mr Robert, allenjo, Eric Nelson, KenBee

      Article includes a description of 3 more of the data and live communications (landline and cellphone and internet) collections programs, above and beyond "PRISM"...

      U.S. surveillance architecture includes collection of revealing Internet, phone metadata
      By Barton Gellman
      Washington Post
      June 15, 2013

      On March 12, 2004, acting attorney general James B. Comey and the Justice Department’s top leadership reached the brink of resignation over electronic surveillance orders that they believed to be illegal.

      President George W. Bush backed down, halting secret foreign-
      intelligence-gathering operations that had crossed into domestic terrain. That morning marked the beginning of the end of STELLARWIND, the cover name for a set of four surveillance programs that brought Americans and American territory within the domain of the National Security Agency for the first time in decades. It was also a prelude to new legal structures that allowed Bush and then President Obama to reproduce each of those programs and expand their reach.

      What exactly STELLARWIND did has never been disclosed in an unclassified form. Which parts of it did Comey approve? Which did he shut down? What became of the programs when the crisis passed and Comey, now Obama’s expected nominee for FBI director, returned to private life?

      Authoritative new answers to those questions, drawing upon a classified NSA history of STELLARWIND and interviews with high-ranking intelligence officials, offer the clearest map yet of the Bush-era programs and the NSA’s contemporary U.S. operations.

      STELLARWIND was succeeded by four major lines of intelligence collection in the territorial United States, together capable of spanning the full range of modern telecommunications, according to the interviews and documents...

      ...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...

      "I always thought if you worked hard enough and tried hard enough, things would work out. I was wrong." --Katharine Graham

      by bobswern on Tue Jun 18, 2013 at 11:13:32 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  software surveillance not 'intrusive' and need no (0+ / 0-)

        warrant is my bet....the SoftMachine™

        The electronically/software surveilled content can be flagged for attention of a human 'with a warrant' and we don't know if any of the secret FISA court rulings have said that or not, but it would match the general outline from the bacobits we have been following.
            That's my guess, and you have added the part about the voice recognition programs being widely used on Wall Street...add that to the 'needs no warrant, not intrusive' machine surveillance SoftMachine.

        It is all weasel words all the time..the Slow Reveal™.

        At a national level, this doesn't concern me as much as The Next Step which is the local PD getting it's hands on all this stuff, access being run thru, both directions thru the Fusion Centers.

        Yesterday there was a link in the blizzard of material here about the thousands and thousands of requests from local pd for criminal...oh, wait, 'serious' criminal activity. And the way stuff is being parsed at the national level there is every reason to believe that these Fusion Centers are going to be the new overlords. Watch for more on this aspect, we are still at the Red Herring/Squirrel! stage of the event.

        This machine kills Fascists.

        by KenBee on Tue Jun 18, 2013 at 04:00:01 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Can anyone imagine Bush having this conversation? (6+ / 0-)

    I can't.

    He'd have said,

    Heh, heh. If people don't like it, that's tough. I'm the decider.

    -4.75, -5.33 Cheney 10/05/04: "I have not suggested there is a connection between Iraq and 9/11."

    by sunbro on Tue Jun 18, 2013 at 10:12:37 AM PDT

    •  Hmm (5+ / 0-)

      May be it's better to be upfront about it if you are going to do it anyway.

    •  Well Matt Lauer interviewed him about (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Eric Nelson

      CIA secret facilities

      Bush Interview

      "If you don't sin, then Jesus died for nothing!" (on a sign at a Mardi Gras parade in New Orleans)

      by ranger995 on Tue Jun 18, 2013 at 10:42:44 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Better than Bush... Pretty low bar, (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      allenjo, OldDragon, Rithmck

      don't you think?

      And while we're on the subject of the prior regime, it's interesting that Dick Cheney is a big fan of the NSA data-mining... and, like so many Kossacks, not really an admirer of Snowden...

      don't you think?

      When you triangulate everything, you can't even roll downhill...

      by PhilJD on Tue Jun 18, 2013 at 11:11:41 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  It's O.K., Snowden donated funds to Ron Paul in (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Eric Nelson, S F Hippie

        hopes that the anti-Civil Rights Act gentleman would become President. Yup, Ron Paul, who is not only against Civil Rights, but against the poor and many progressive environmental issues....

        This would have been, Snowden's choice for PreZ.


        •  The data is what's important. Snowden's political (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          allegiances are of less interest. I've addressed this elsewhere:

          It doesn't much matter if Snowden is a "hero." The data is what's important.

          Snowden's motivations are unknowable and his hero status is a decidedly secondary consideration.

          The ability of the government to data-mine is an irreversible fact.

          The ability of the state to use that data to effectively stifle dissent is still evolving though. Forceful and widespread resistance now has the potential to shape the outcome. Massive data dumps like Snowden's and Manning's are an effective weapon in the struggle against the surveillance state... perhaps the only real weapon we have.

          Snowden's actions are indeed heroic.

          When you triangulate everything, you can't even roll downhill...

          by PhilJD on Tue Jun 18, 2013 at 03:25:13 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  i don't know, (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      they sound similar

      “I'll repeat to you, even though you hear words, ‘domestic spying,’ these are not phone calls within the United States. This is a phone call of an al-Qaeda, known al-Qaeda suspect, making a phone call into the United States.” G.W. Bush Jan. 23, 2006 speech at Kansas State University

      "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." T. Roosevelt

      by Lowgun on Tue Jun 18, 2013 at 11:48:33 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I love this passage: (3+ / 0-)
      What I can say unequivocally is that if you are a U.S. person, the NSA cannot listen to your telephone calls, and the NSA cannot target your emails … and have not. They cannot and have not, by law and by rule, and unless they — and usually it wouldn’t be “they,” it’d be the FBI — go to a court, and obtain a warrant, and seek probable cause, the same way it’s always been, the same way when we were growing up and we were watching movies, you want to go set up a wiretap, you got to go to a judge, show probable cause….
      The President is definitely unlike Bush in so many ways, especially in terms of his grasp of the issues.

      Thanks for this post FiredUpInCA, nobody can slap back at those who spend their days accusing this President of doing wrong as effectively as this President.

      I can guarantee you that if this was diary purporting to show where the President had broken the law, there would be a frenzy of activity, and hundreds of recommends, but, as it is...Obama stating his case and doing it effectively....

      Shhh, let's read and just move on....

  •  When you have to translate what was said... (13+ / 0-)

    There's a very good chance you weren't supposed to understand it.


    I don't blame Christians. I blame Stupid. Which sadly is a much more popular religion these days.

    by detroitmechworks on Tue Jun 18, 2013 at 10:16:41 AM PDT

    •  I find that happens when Obama speaks, along (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      with select other politicans, in trying to ascertain, what they really meant. Early on I found with Obama, you had to wait for his actions, because what he was saying was not what he was doing all too often.

      There must be a "secret" class that politicans attend to learn the art of doublespeak, the art of telling the people pretty nothing of substance or truth.

      "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 Tue Jun 18, 2013 at 11:39:10 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  What is a "US person"? (nt) (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DRo, Gooserock

    Stop the NRA and the NSA
    Repeal the Patriot Act and the 2nd Amendment

    by dream weaver on Tue Jun 18, 2013 at 10:16:42 AM PDT

  •  51% probability of foreignness (9+ / 0-)

    Bombshell Report: NSA and FBI 'Tapping Directly' Into Tech Companies' Servers

    Analysts who use the system from a Web portal at Fort Meade key in "selectors," or search terms, that are designed to produce at least 51 percent confidence in a target's "foreignness." That is not a very stringent test.
    Do they have a similar algorithm for phone calls to determine "US personness"?

    Daily Kos an oasis of truth. Truth that leads to action.

    by Shockwave on Tue Jun 18, 2013 at 10:37:30 AM PDT

  •  This bit was amazing (17+ / 0-)
    Charlie Rose: Should this be transparent in some way?

    Barack Obama: It is transparent. That’s why we set up the FISA court.

    Whatever you want to say about secret courts governing secret programs, for or against, they surely aren't transparent.
    •  secret laws, secrets courts, but hey..... (9+ / 0-)
      It is transparent. That’s why we set up the FISA court

      "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 Tue Jun 18, 2013 at 11:04:41 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  but but but... (8+ / 0-)

      we told you there is a secret court! See? Transparency!!

      {what's wrong with you people?! whaddya want, a pony?!?!}

      If I can't dance I don't want to be part of your revolution. ~ Emma Goldman

      by Lady Libertine on Tue Jun 18, 2013 at 11:05:59 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  We have a pony already... (8+ / 0-)

        We just can't see it, since it's transparent and all.

        When you triangulate everything, you can't even roll downhill...

        by PhilJD on Tue Jun 18, 2013 at 11:13:58 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  And we told you about it (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        allenjo, OldDragon, Garrett

        only after a whistleblower (whom we now want to prosecute) leaked the information.

        Obama's patented 11th Dimensional Transparency™.

        She said that she was working for the ABC News
        It was as much of the alphabet as she knew how to use

        by Paolo on Tue Jun 18, 2013 at 11:24:32 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  "I welcome the debate" (6+ / 0-)

          For the most open, transparent administration ever, Obama should be most grateful to Snowden in opening the dialogue so that we can be "informed" and debate, if one would believe that his administration is open and transparent......

          Perhaps there are enough people backing these programs that the country is fine with them, those willing to sacrifice every civil liberty, every bit of privacy, the protections afforded by the constitution. I certainly hope that is not the case, but we all deserve to know what is being done.

          I am still chilled just thinking about the government being able to legally go inside your home while you are not there, to thru all your "stuff" and you are not allowed to know that even after the fact.

          What kind of free country is that? It is more a repressive regime, not a democratic society.

          "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 Tue Jun 18, 2013 at 11:50:00 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Yeah, that bothers me. (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            allenjo, Garrett, KenBee

            If he really wanted to the "the debate", why did he wait until his cover was blown to have it?

            Much as I like Barack Obama the person, I increasingly find Barack Obama the President to be purely reactive, rather than proactive.

            •  why did he wait? (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Rithmck, Paolo

              .........because his cover was blown.

              "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 Tue Jun 18, 2013 at 12:23:14 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  I would bet he wants this debate (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              he is obviously informed and involved and I sure haven't seen anybody better who could be president.

              So, in spite of the damage this raw surveillance not only can but WILL inflict on society, especially and widely I believe at a local level, I am glad at least that he is the President. know, given that Mr. Pure Drop McPony can't and won't ever be elected to this position.

              As annoying as that is, the phrase 'it could be worse ' really is true.

              And furthermore, as President, think how far he would get if he just up and announced a dismantling of this apparatus he inherited. With his executive orders and his grasp of details and readiness to engage on the issue, no matter how parsed it sounds, I am still hopeful some of the worst can be rolled back.

              But at a local level, we are f****d with local pd falling all over themselves with the federal grants and military surplus..and now The Machine™ available to any local pd and DA Junior bullshit artist.

              This toothpaste is out of the tube.

              This machine kills Fascists.

              by KenBee on Tue Jun 18, 2013 at 04:14:35 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  It do boggle my mind, LL (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Garrett, Rizzo, Lady Libertine
        secret court! See? Transparency

        "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 Tue Jun 18, 2013 at 11:40:52 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Secret Courts Where ONLY (5+ / 0-)

      prosecutors appear, no defense possible.

      (although I guess that should be obvious since it's secret, it needs to be said)

  •  Nothing against the President (6+ / 0-)

    but his word alone doesn't reassure me.  One thing I've learned in observing politics is that you should never rely on the word of a politician or government official.  Not saying the President is lying, but it's quite possible he might simply be wrong.  We already know of one incident where a collector used the program to snoop on his ex-wife.  And that's just someone who was caught.  

    Basically, given the potential abuse inherent in a program this expansive and secretive, and given the questionable benefits - I have grave doubts about just how large a role this program played in foiling plots (the Zazi case for instance seems due more to old fashioned police work than the NSA program) - I don't think the program is worth it.

    "Those who have wrought great changes in the world never succeeded by gaining over chiefs; but always by exciting the multitude." - Martin Van Buren

    by puakev on Tue Jun 18, 2013 at 10:57:07 AM PDT

  •  I think of it with Cheney in charge. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    There's that Verizon fishing expedition, where they got everything for three months (that hasn't been debunked, has it? Did I miss that?).
    I think of Cheney in charge, and simply move that three-month window to cover the last three months of a national election. In that scenario, even call pairs provides tactical info; where is the concentration of campaign organizers (which swing state precincts), who are they talking to (reporters and media), and campaign logistics (events coordination). Know that much in advance, and it
    could change an election outcome. Indirectly, btw, this has already been tried-remember the timing of the terror alert color codes?
    I don't think NSA procedural rules could be that radically trashed right now.
    But later? With a Cheney type in power?
    I'm convinced there's real danger in the capture and storage of a Verizon level of information, and I can't think of any way to conduct oversight that wouldn't
    conclude with some version of "trust us."

    •  yes, and the Fusion Centers are also the conduit (0+ / 0-)

      for this so predictable abuse. PD has got a lot of Federal money and training and networking in recent years...these skimpy feel good checks and balances are worthless...actually harmful as deceit.

      Well detailed comment, thanks.

      This machine kills Fascists.

      by KenBee on Tue Jun 18, 2013 at 04:19:39 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  This part is false (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    " NSA is not ltargeting your emails unless it’s getting an individualized court order. "

  •  TIA = Total Information Awareness. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    allenjo, ukit

    Poindexter (remember him?  he was CONVICTED in Iran/Contra) showed that you could make a connection map of someone to all of his/her associates, just from the metadata.  There is no way on god's green earth that they're not doing that.

    Sorry, Mr. President, but I cry bullsh*t.

    Happy little moron, Lucky little man.
    I wish I was a moron, MY GOD, Perhaps I am!
    —Spike Milligan

    by polecat on Tue Jun 18, 2013 at 11:42:15 AM PDT

    •  Exactly. It's called Total Information Awareness, (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      polecat, KenBee, Eric Nelson

      not Partial Information Awareness.

      The Pentagon already laid out their goal for the project, the only question is how much has been achieved.

      The Information Awareness Office (IAO) was established by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) in January 2002 to bring together several DARPA projects focused on applying surveillance and information technology to track and monitor terrorists and other asymmetric threats to U.S. national security, by achieving Total Information Awareness (TIA).

      This would be achieved by creating enormous computer databases to gather and store the personal information of everyone in the United States, including personal e-mails, social networks, credit card records, phone calls, medical records, and numerous other sources, without any requirement for a search warrant.
  •  Thanks for posting this conversation.. (6+ / 0-)

    ..with the President. The Patriot Act and all the rest that followed is a conversation long needed imo

    I'm not in favor of this massive surveillance program PRISM - 'total information awareness..' and the waste paying the jacked up price for private surveillance contractors milking the system.

     ..Also am in complete agreement with Bernie Sanders; that the 'Patriot Act', especially  section 215 (the "tangible" business provision) has got to go

     So when fiercely independent  Charles Pierce who has shown his skills at calling BS when he sees it starts asking questions about Sowdens latest claims - I listen.

    Kossack BruinKid put together @ 'Open thread for Night Owls', links from Charles Pierce and other links questioning where Snowden is coming from and where he's going in all this.

    Too many times I've seen people use the very real concerns of progressive Democrats to forward a completely different agenda that is not made public - usually something dicovered later rather than sooner unfortunately

    Thx FiredUpInCA

  •  The air rushing out of this balloon is ... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SaintC, freakofsociety

    ... a fucking typhoon.  

    And, folks, if you've been making accusations and wild hyperbolic analogies all week and don't yet know what a "US person" is, then shame on you. Information first, then accusations (if merited).

    Thanks for the diary.

    I would tip you, but the man took away my tips.

    by Tortmaster on Tue Jun 18, 2013 at 11:53:18 AM PDT

  •  I have two problems (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Rithmck, freakofsociety

    with what the president said.

    First was that the process was "transparent" because we set up the FISA court.  That's silly.

    Second isn't really a problem, but more of a clarification of
    "if you are a U.S. person... the NSA cannot target your emails" without a court order.  This is true in terms of pure truth value, but he is talking about intentionally targeting emails of US persons without a court order.  As has been shown, the NSA can unintentionally target emails of US persons because the NSA algorithm relies on a 51% chance that a person is foreign.  Then the information that we didn't intend to receive gets culled through minimization procedures that we still don't know much about.

    Otherwise, it's an important interview to read.  Thanks for posting.

  •  So Obama's taken the Will Rogers defense (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    He never met-a-data he didn't like.

  •  This interview reminds me why I voted for Obama (6+ / 0-)

    I'll be blunt:  The NSA, Guantanamo Bay and other related issues (even Chained CPI which I'm totally against) make me very concerned and I'm critical of Obama in those instances.  And everyone on Kos has a perfectly legitimate reason to be frustrated with Obama as of lately.

    However, looking at the whole interview beyond just simply being about the NSA situation, I'm still reminded of why I voted for Barack Obama for President in 2008 and in 2012 (with absolute confidence).  Unlike President Bush, Obama is very articulate and from what I can sense, smart as hell.  His decisions aren't always going to please me but I'm sure grateful he's not stupid and arrogant like President George W. Bush.  Eight years having him as president, not to mention being a big punching bag for The Daily Show, Colbert Report and others all around was painfu, almost too painful for me and I hope we never have to return to those days again.

    In truth, I voted for Obama in 2008 and in 2012 because, well, I wanted a more intelligent leader running the White House as opposed to people who talk out of their ass (Bush) most of the time.  I'm in complete agreement with a number of criticisms that have been leveled on Obama as president but we should be very grateful we didn't get Mitt Romney elected.  VERY grateful.

  •  How the hell can we debate something we don't (0+ / 0-)

    know exists?

    I'm sorry big O but that just bull shit logic, or pablum for the masses.

    In either case its insulting.

    If it weren't for Snowden you would be holding, and you already have, a debate with you on the pro side and total silence on the con side.

    Even the propagandistically named over sight committee didn't know al lot of this Uncle Sam virsus the American Citizen existed.

    So if you want a debate, fine, open up the process so the debate will be based on equal knowledge on all sides.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site