One of the most incendiary revelations from the documents released by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden suggests that the NSA’s mass collection of phone records isn’t confined to the United States. Reports in Le Monde (10/21/13) and El Mundo (10/28/13) say the NSA is involved in collecting such data in France and Spain, too—millions of phone records in a one-month period from December 2012 to January 2013.
Those revelations sparked outrage across Europe. But then another storyline emerged: According to anonymous sources, those reports were wrong, the result of Snowden and/or the journalists writing the stories misunderstanding the documents. According to this new line, the NSA was merely receiving the phone call information from those countries.
That was the line in a Wall Street Journal article (10/29/13):
Millions of phone records at the center of a firestorm in Europe over spying by the National Security Agency were secretly supplied to the U.S. by European intelligence services—not collected by the NSA, upending a furor that cast a pall over trans-Atlantic relations.
Gen. Keith Alexander (photo: DoD/Cherie Cullen)
The We-Didn’t-Do-It defense was seemingly confirmed by NSA chief Keith Alexander, who testified before the House Intelligence Committee. As the Washington Post reported it (10/30/13)
The director of the National Security Agency on Tuesday dismissed as “completely false” reports that his agency swept up millions of phone records of European citizens, and he revealed that data collected by NATO allies were shared with the United States.
Gen. Keith Alexander said foreign intelligence services collected phone records in war zones and other areas outside their borders and provided them to the spy agency—an operation that was misunderstood by French and Spanish newspapers that reported that the NSA was conducting surveillance in their countries.
“This is not information that we collected on European citizens,” Alexander told the House Intelligence Committee. “It represents information that we and our NATO allies have collected in defense of our countries and in support of military operations.”
The Post granted anonymity to some government officials to talk about their frustration:
The failure of the French government to challenge a report in Le Monde that accused the NSA of conducting a widespread surveillance effort on French soil has vexed the Obama administration, which has felt hamstrung to respond, the official said. “We have wrestled with how you correct a story that’s wrong about classified operations—particularly operations that are not yours.”
Between the anonymous sources and Alexander’s testimony, some reporters seemed to think that the upshot was that the Snowden reporting was misleading. USA Today (10/30/13) reported that Alexander’s comments
appeared to confirm a report Tuesday by the Wall Street Journal, citing anonymous U.S. officials, that intelligence agencies in France and Spain cooperated with NSA efforts in those countries.
But look closely at what Alexander is saying. As Marcy Wheeler (Emptywheel, 10/29/13) points out, Alexander’s comment was this:
The sources of the metadata include data legally collected by NSA under its various authorities as well as data provided to NSA by foreign partners. To be perfectly clear, this is not information that we collected on European citizens. It represents information that we and our NATO allies have collected in defense of our countries and in support of military operations.
In plain English, “data legally collected by NSA” and “information that we and our NATO allies have collected” does not mean the NSA was not involved in collecting this data.
As Glenn Greenwald (10/30/13) wrote in response to the criticisms of his work:
The fact some of this data is collected by virtue of cooperation with a country’s own intelligence service does not contradict our reporting. To the contrary: The secret cooperation between some European intelligence agencies and the NSA has been a featured part of our reporting from the start.
It is dangerous to grant government sources anonymity in this context, since it is very difficult to find a reason one should believe what they’re saying. It’s equally troubling that anyone would trust the word of NSA director Keith Alexander, who has lied about some of the very metadata collection programs in question. But as is too often the case in elite US journalism, government officials are almost always considered inherently trustworthy—even when the record shows you shouldn’t believe what they’re saying.
What a load of spaghetti shitballs.
“this is not information that we collected on European citizens.”
That’s what the man said. Culling the two statements before and after it and saying that they don’t say that does not change the fact that that statement does say that. So Marcy Wheeler is torturing the man’s testimony to pretend he’s avoiding the truth, when he’s doing the opposite.
Greenwald’s statement at the end is even more tortured and diversionary. No, revealing the fact that allies share things doesn’t make a claim that any one of them acquired a certain thing false. But that wasn’t what was to be proved false.
The US didn’t collect the data. It got the data from its allies. Greenwald reported that the US collected the data. Alexander says the US did not collect the data. So Greenwald is wrong. Greenwald refuses to admit he is wrong.
And the whole article is a botch. The NSA director is coming forward with facts. Who is supposed to have a problem with that, other than people whose lies are being exposed by those facts?
I wondered why the Obama official needed anonymity and why the Post decided to quote that source, since all s/he did was parrot Alexander. Then I wondered who approved the talking points — Alexander or Obama?
@Blair, following “[t]he sources of the metadata include data legally collected by NSA under its various authorities as well as data provided to NSA by foreign partners” with “this is not information that we collected on European citizens” is straight up contradictory. This is a common mechanism used to allow one to lie at the same time that they tell the truth.
The secret is to figure out which side is the lie and which is the truth. Given the NSA’s history, is there really that much doubt?
I think in all fairness the headline “NSA ….” should be “Obama Administration….”
I am disturbed by liberal media (Alternet, FAIR, etc) failing to emphasize how far right the Obama Administration is; how retrograde its foreign, military, and domestic policies are.
Was Keith Alexander and James Clapper sworn it before they gave their testimony? Sibelius was sworn in when she was testifying. But when it comes to the NSA they can lie through their teeth the same way Clapper did a few months back, because he wasn’t sworn in then either.
Rupert Murdock was probably working with the NSA.
Two things…It is not the NSA.It is Obama.Everything they do is at his behalf.Number two……Glen Beck was saying all of this three years before Snowden and was called a nut.
The NSA doesn’t seem to have heard of many of the guarantees of our Constitution. Does, the NSA lie? To quote one of their number,
“Not wittingly.” Not the response anyone wants to hear. Conclusion? The NSA is Witless.
Gloriana one more time…..Obama IS the NSA.He is briefed every day .If they are witless so is he.If they are not good wards of our constitution…it is because he is not.
@Carrol and michael e – Haven’t you figured out by now that it doesn’t matter who sits in the oval office? He (or she) is just a puppet of the REAL powers-that-be: the wealthy elite. To blame Obama personally is to not see the bigger picture.
Teejay Im not playing that game.This lame duck president is not afraid of anyone who lent him money to get elected.He is getting no calls from the luminosity in the dead of night.His pressures are many Im sure.From poor and rich alike.I see nothing that has changed the course of how he does things from his earliest days.American business is paying 36% in taxes.The highest anywhere.AND they are getting excoriated as he does it.No this falls under the category of stupid human tricks.He does stupid things, and the trick is to let his constituents blame somebody….anybody else.Yeah its the guy over the hillAlways the guy over the hill.Never the dunce right in front of you.Now if you were to say we have been badly served by the last few men who have sat in office….Im with ya.I worked for Clinton…bt knowing what I know he would never get my vote.Bush….nope.Obama ….never.The problem is knowing what many know…it would not change their vote.
The failure of the French government to challenge a report in Le Monde that accused the Obama administration of conducting a widespread surveillance effort on French soil has vexed the NSA.
For some insight on the NSA watch Jacob Applebaum on YouTube.
especially: