IP: 2 on NSA counsel says agency does not do illegal spying

[Dave Farber <farber@cis.upenn.edu>]

>
>From: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
>********
>
>http://wired.lycos.com/news/reuters/0,1349,32941,00.html
>
>                      Reuters
>                      7:05 a.m. 7.Dec.1999 PST
>                      WASHINGTON -- The National Security
>                      Agency, which uses spy satellites and
>                      foreign listening posts to monitor threats
>                      to US security, denied on Monday that it
>                      intended to begin spying on Americans at
>                      home.
>
>                      Newsweek magazine in its Dec. 13 issue
>                      said the NSA was drafting a memorandum
>                      of understanding to clarify ways in which
>                      it could help the FBI track terrorists and
>                      criminals in the United States.
>                      [...]
>
>
>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/1999-12/07/005l-120799-idx.html
>
>NSA Obeying the Law
>Tuesday, December 7, 1999; Page A30
>
>   In his Nov. 14 Outlook article, "Loud and Clear," James Bamford wrote
>   that he is "certain that NSA is not overstepping its [legal] mandate," then
>   spent the bulk of his article speculating that the agency might do so 
> in the
>   future.
>
>   As the general counsel of the National Security Agency, I wish to make
>   clear that the agency does not violate the Constitution or the laws of the
>   United States. NSA operates under the eyes of Congress, the executive
>   branch and the judiciary, and an extensive oversight system regulates and
>   limits its activities.
>
>   Mr. Bamford wrote that the laws regulating NSA's activities need to be
>   updated in light of the communications revolution, but the laws are based
>   on the Fourth Amendment and do not need to be changed every time
>   technology changes.
>
>   Mr. Bamford said that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act's
>   provisions regarding the interception of "wire or radio communications" are
>   inapplicable because the communications involved have changed from
>   telephone to e-mail, fax or cell phone. This is false. The privacy
>protections
>   remain applicable.
>
>   Mr. Bamford also suggested that NSA uses foreign countries to conduct
>   surveillance that NSA is prohibited from conducting. That activity has been
>   prohibited since 1978. NSA does not ask other countries to do what it is
>   prohibited from doing.
>
>   Mr. Bamford also incorrectly said that NSA "stonewalled" a request for
>   documents by the House Intelligence Committee. Discussions between the
>   committee and my office focused on the proper balance between the
>   committee's need to conduct oversight and the need to give sound legal
>   advice to NSA employees. But there was no intent to withhold the
>   substantive information requested by the committee, and, as Chairman
>   Porter Goss has publicly noted, NSA is currently providing documents
>   responsive to the committee's requests.
>
>   NSA obeys the law; Mr. Bamford's speculations serve only to fuel the fires
>   of uninformed debate.
>
>   ROBERT L. DEITZ
>   Fort George G. Meade, Md.
>   The writer is general counsel of the National Security Agency.
>
>
>
>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/1999-12/03/032l-120399-idx.html
>
>Checking Up on the NSA
>Friday, December 3, 1999; Page A40
>
>   James Bamford [Outlook, Nov. 14], in his expose of the National Security
>   Agency's worldwide eavesdropping network, points out that he really
>   doesn't believe the NSA is a bad guy. From his privileged demi-insider
>   position, he can be "certain that the NSA is not overstepping its bounds."
>   He just wants to protect us from what might happen if the NSA decides to
>   break or evade laws. After all, back in the old days the agency had acted
>   "as though the laws which applied to the rest of government did not apply
>   to it."
>
>   As one who was involved during the Church-Pike episode in the '70s, I
>   would point out that the NSA appeared both publicly and in closed session
>   before Congress and demonstrated that it had every respect for the laws of
>   this country. It took extraordinary internal measures to meet the
>   requirements of Congress then and adopt a course of cooperation with the
>   select committees on intelligence, which were created thereafter. Even as
>   an outsider now, I cannot believe that the NSA would even tell Congress
>   to "take a hike" or any like denial.
>
>   Mr. Bamford is correct in observing that our rights to privacy are at risk,
>   but he is crying out at the wrong wolf.
>
>   JACK HARNEY
>   New Carrollton
>   The writer was an NSA official from 1951 to 1980.
 >Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 12:52:18 -0400
 >To: declan@well.com
 >From: David Sobel <sobel@epic.org>
 >Subject: Re: FC: NSA counsel says agency does not do illegal spying
 >
 >
 >> NSA obeys the law; [. . .]
 >>
 >> ROBERT L. DEITZ
 >> Fort George G. Meade, Md.
 >> The writer is general counsel of the National Security Agency.
 >
 >But how do they INTERPRET the law? That's precisely the issue
 >that NSA dodged earlier this year when the House Intelligence
 >Committee sought internal NSA legal memoranda addressing the
 >Agency's authority to conduct surveillance in new communications
 >media. NSA stonewalled the committee.
 >
 >EPIC filed suit last week seeking the public disclosure of
 >those memoranda (see press release below). This is clearly an
 >issue of great public interest that can't be left to the off-hand
 >assurances of NSA officials.
 >
 >- David
 >
 >===================
 >
 >FOR RELEASE: CONTACT:
 >Friday, December 3, 1999 David Sobel
 >10:00 a.m. ET EPIC General Counsel
 > 202-544-9240
 >
 >
 > LAWSUIT SEEKS MEMOS ON SURVEILLANCE OF AMERICANS;
 > EPIC LAUNCHES STUDY OF NSA INTERCEPTION ACTIVITIES
 >
 >WASHINGTON, DC - The Electronic Privacy Information Center
 >(EPIC) today asked a federal court to order the release of
 >controversial documents concerning potential government
 >surveillance of American citizens. EPIC's lawsuit seeks the
 >public disclosure of internal National Security Agency (NSA)
 >documents discussing the legality of the agency's intelligence
 >activities.
 >
 >NSA refused to provide the documents to the House Intelligence
 >Committee earlier this year, resulting in an unusual public
 >reprimand of the secretive spy agency. Rep. Porter J. Goss,
 >chairman of the oversight panel, wrote in a committee report in
 >May that NSA's rationale for withholding the legal memoranda was
 >"unpersuasive and dubious." He noted that if NSA lawyers
 >"construed the Agency's authorities too permissively, then the
 >privacy interests of the citizens of the United States could be
 >at risk." Soon after the release of the Intelligence Committee
 >report, EPIC submitted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
 >request to NSA for the documents. Despite the FOIA's time limit
 >of 20 working days, the agency has not responded to EPIC's
 >request.
 >
 >EPIC Director Marc Rotenberg said "the charter of the National
 >Security Agency does not authorize domestic intelligence
 >gathering. Yet we have reason to believe that the NSA is engaged
 >in the indiscriminate acquisition and interception of domestic
 >communications taking place over the Internet."
 >
 >The surveillance activities of the NSA have recently come under
 >increased scrutiny, with published reports indicating that the
 >agency is coordinating a massive global interception initiative
 >known as ECHELON. The current issue of the New Yorker magazine
 >reports that it took NSA only 11 months to fill three years'
 >worth of planned storage capacity for intercepted Internet
 >traffic.
 >
 >The legal basis for NSA's interception activities is a critical
 >issue that EPIC plans to evaluate in a comprehensive study to be
 >released early next year. That study will be conducted by
 >Duncan Campbell, a Scottish investigative journalist and TV
 >producer. Earlier this year, Campbell was appointed a
 >consultant to the European Parliament and prepared a technology
 >assessment report on ECHELON and communications intelligence
 >which contained the first public documentary evidence of the
 >global surveillance system. Campbell will be working with EPIC
 >as a Senior Research Fellow for several months to produce
 >a report for presentation at anticipated congressional hearings
 >on the topic of signals intelligence agencies, the Fourth
 >Amendment and human rights.
 >
 >More information on ECHELON is available at the EchelonWatch
 >website, which is administered by the American Civil Liberties
 >Union:
 >
 > http://www.echelonwatch.org
 >
 > - 30 -
 >
 >
 >
 >.......................................................................
 >David L. Sobel, General Counsel * +1 202 544 9240 (tel)
 >Electronic Privacy Information Center * +1 202 547 5482 (fax)
 >666 Pennsylvania Ave., SE Suite 301 * sobel@epic.org
 >Washington, DC 20003 USA * http://www.epic.org
 >.
 >