<div dir="ltr">
<div class="">
<div class="">
<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/"><img src="http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/misc/nytlogo153x23.gif" alt="The New York Times" align="left" border="0" hspace="0" vspace="0"></a>
</div>
<div class="">
</div>
</div>
<br clear="all"><hr align="left" size="1">
<div class="">June 7, 2013</div>
<h1>Intelligence for Dummies</h1>
<h6 class="">By
<span>
<a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/opinion/editorialsandoped/oped/columnists/gailcollins/index.html" rel="author" title="More Articles by GAIL COLLINS"><span>GAIL COLLINS</span></a></span></h6>
<div id="articleBody">
<p>
Question for the day: Do you feel more secure or less secure, now that
you know the government is keeping a gargantuan pile of information
about everybody’s telephone calls in the name of national security?
</p>
<p>
You have heard, I’m sure, that the National Security Agency has been
mining Verizon’s records for information, such as numbers called and the
location where the call was made. This is known as “telephony
metadata,” and the very fact that we now have a term like “telephony
metadata” is perhaps reason enough to be against the entire concept.
</p>
<p>
“Nobody is listening to your telephone calls,” President Obama assured
the American people on Friday. Well, probably nobody. And, if they are,
it’s under an entirely different part of the program. </p>
<p>
We’ve had a passel of these stories this week. (It also appears that the
N.S.A. is sucking personal e-mails and other data from the servers of
the giant Internet companies.) Security issues are very tough to figure
out. One side is always saying, as Obama did on Friday, that whatever is
going on will “help us prevent terrorist attacks.” </p>
<p>
The phrase “help us prevent terrorist attacks” is sort of a conversation-stopper. </p>
<p>
The other side is worried about privacy, but the public is resigned to
the idea that some Big Brother is monitoring their communications. After
all, we live in a world where you can e-mail your husband about buying
new kitchen curtains and then magically receive an online ad from a
drapery company. </p>
<p>
Let’s start with the real basics. Does the N.S.A. really need all the
stuff it’s collecting? Ever since the attack on the World Trade Center,
the agency has been exploding. It has an enormous operation outside of
Washington, and it is building another million-square-foot complex in
the Utah desert. It collects an estimated 1.7 billion pieces of
communication a day. </p>
<p>
“When you have the ability to get more and more data, the natural
inclination is to get as much as possible,” said Representative Henry
Waxman, the former chairman of the House oversight committee. </p>
<p>
Those of us who have seen the show “Hoarders” know that more is not
always better, and “as much as possible” is sometimes covering up a pile
of dead cats. After all, the government didn’t fail to stop the attack
on the World Trade Center because of a lack of data. It had lots of
information about Al Qaeda and its plan to stage an attack on America.
The problem was with follow-up. </p>
<p>
And the N.S.A. has been known to go overboard. During the administration
of George W. Bush, it decided to drop a modest in-house plan for data
analysis in favor of a gargantuan program called Trailblazer, which
funneled more than $1 billion to private consultants and turned out to
have the additional liability of not working. The official who fought
most vigorously against it was rewarded in 2010 by being charged with
violating the Espionage Act when he released information to a reporter.
</p>
<p>
That was only one incident, but we do seem to have an ominous
combination: an agency with a bad record on thriftiness, and practically
everything it spends money on is secret. “It’s a tough balancing act,”
an Obama administration official told me. “It’s incumbent on us and
Congress to do the job of scrutinizing the budget, both in terms of cost
and efficacy.” </p>
<p>
Yeah, what about Congress? The president keeps saying that “Congress is
continually briefed” about security issues. In reality, the briefing is
pretty much confined to the members of the House and Senate intelligence
committees, who are sworn to secrecy. Many of them also have a
longstanding record of being in the pocket of the intelligence
community. A few of the others had been desperately trying to warn their
colleagues about the telephone-call program without breaking their vow
of silence. Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon did everything but tap dance the
information in Morse code. </p>
<p>
“Does the N.S.A. collect <em>any type of data at all</em> on millions or
hundreds of millions of Americans?” he asked James Clapper, the
director of national intelligence, at a public hearing. </p>
<p>
“No sir,” said Clapper. </p>
<p>
I wouldn’t rely on Congress to keep things under control. It’s really up
to the president. As a candidate, Obama looked as if he would be great
at riding herd on the N.S.A.’s excesses. But if he has ever seriously
pushed back on the spy set, it’s been kept a secret. Meanwhile, the
administration scarfs up reporters’ e-mails and phone records in its
obsessive war against leaks. </p>
<p>
And without the leaks to reporters, we would never be having discussions
about whether it’s a good idea for the government to collect piles of
records about our telephone calls every day. </p>
<p>
“I welcome this debate,” Obama said Friday. “I think it’s healthy for
our democracy.” Under further questioning, he said that he definitely
didn’t welcome the leaks. Without which, of course, there would be no
debate. </p>
<p>
Do you remember how enthusiastic people were about having a president
who once taught constitutional law? I guess we’ve learned a lesson.
</p>
<div class="">
</div>
</div>
<br>
<center>
</center>
<div id="upNextWrapper"><div style id="upNext"><div class=""><br style="clear:both"></div></div></div><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Art Deco (Wayne A. Fox)<br><a href="mailto:art.deco.studios@gmail.com" target="_blank">art.deco.studios@gmail.com</a><br>
<br><img src="http://users.moscow.com/waf/WP%20Fox%2001.jpg"><br>
</div>