The Sections of the Patriot Act "spying authorizations," by the way ...
Which one works and which one simply pretends to ... ?
Senate Judiciary Committee Holds Oversight Hearing On Government Surveillance Programs
enewspf.com -- 31 Jul 2013
Senator Patrick Leahy:
I asked General Alexander about the effectiveness of the Section 215 phone records program at an Appropriations Committee hearing last month, and he agreed to provide a classified list of terrorist events that Section 215 helped to prevent. I have reviewed that list. Although I agree that it speaks to the value of the overseas content collection implemented under Section 702, it does not do the same with for Section 215. The list simply does not reflect dozens or even several terrorist plots that Section 215 helped thwart or prevent -- let alone 54, as some have suggested.
These facts matter. This bulk collection program has massive privacy implications. [...] If this program is not effective, it must end. And so far, I am not convinced by what I have seen.
[...]
Here's a few more 'success rate' stats -- and their mix-master conflation by the Intelligence chairman --
who refuses to acknowledge any difference between them ...
Electronic snooping
by Walter Pincus, Washington Post, union-bulletin.com -- August 3, 2013
[...]
An NSA official told the House Judiciary Committee on July 17 that more than 90 percent of some 50 terrorist disruptions came from 702 information.
[...nevertheless ...]
The House intelligence chairman, Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich., used his time to defend the 215 program. Nonetheless he pledged that this fall he “would work to find additional privacy protections with this program” to attach to the fiscal 2014 intelligence authorization bill.
He said 702 and 215 had 54 times “stopped and thwarted terrorist attacks both here and in Europe -- saving real lives. This isn't a game. This is real ... This is hard.”
The Pompeo amendment passed 409 to 2. We all know Amash-Conyers failed, 217 to 205.
[...]
Besides those amazing stats of "90% disruptions" due to the 702 provisions (and 215's next to Nada) --
What's the "targeted" difference between Sections 215 and 702 ?
Well read that 2nd link above, or read this 'compare and contrast' recap, to see who zooming who:
Pop Quiz: Which Section of the Patriot Act has actually stopped Plots: Section 215 or 702
by jamess -- Aug 04, 2013
Pop! Goes the weasel!
And which Patriot Act program (215 or 712) do you conjecture, likely intercepted this -- assuming intercepted "electronic" communications where involved at all?
Terror attack message intercepted
stuff.co.nz -- 06/08/2013
An intercepted secret message between al Qaeda chief Ayman al-Zawahri and his deputy in Yemen about plans for a major terror attack was the trigger that set off the current shutdown of many US embassies, two officials say.
[...]
The intelligence official said the message was sent to Nasser al-Wahishi, the head of the terror network's organisation, based in Yemen, known as al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula.
[...]
Unless Ayman al-Zawahri suddenly
moved to the USA -- Chalk another 'RBI' up for 702.
215 must be playing in a whole other league ... or something.
-- in a league of extra-ordinary citizens.