The NSA Can Collect Everything You've Done On The Net

[Nickdfresh]

XKeyscore: NSA tool collects 'nearly everything a user does on the internet'

• XKeyscore gives 'widest-reaching' collection of online data
• NSA analysts require no prior authorization for searches
• Sweeps up emails, social media activity and browsing history
• NSA's XKeyscore program – read one of the presentations
Beta

Glenn Greenwald
theguardian.com, Wednesday 31 July 2013 08.56 EDT

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/audio/video/2013/7/31/1375276955812/XKeyscore-map-010.jpg
One presentation claims the XKeyscore program covers 'nearly everything a typical user does on the internet'

A top secret National Security Agency program allows analysts to search with no prior authorization through vast databases containing emails, online chats and the browsing histories of millions of individuals, according to documents provided by whistleblower Edward Snowden.

The NSA boasts in training materials that the program, called XKeyscore, is its "widest-reaching" system for developing intelligence from the internet.

The latest revelations will add to the intense public and congressional debate around the extent of NSA surveillance programs. They come as senior intelligence officials testify to the Senate judiciary committee on Wednesday, releasing classified documents in response to the Guardian's earlier stories on bulk collection of phone records and Fisa surveillance court oversight.

The files shed light on one of Snowden's most controversial statements, made in his first video interview published by the Guardian on June 10.

"I, sitting at my desk," said Snowden, could "wiretap anyone, from you or your accountant, to a federal judge or even the president, if I had a personal email".

US officials vehemently denied this specific claim. Mike Rogers, the Republican chairman of the House intelligence committee, said of Snowden's assertion: "He's lying. It's impossible for him to do what he was saying he could do."

But training materials for XKeyscore detail how analysts can use it and other systems to mine enormous agency databases by filling in a simple on-screen form giving only a broad justification for the search. The request is not reviewed by a court or any NSA personnel before it is processed.

XKeyscore, the documents boast, is the NSA's "widest reaching" system developing intelligence from computer networks – what the agency calls Digital Network Intelligence (DNI). One presentation claims the program covers "nearly everything a typical user does on the internet", including the content of emails, websites visited and searches, as well as their metadata.

Analysts can also use XKeyscore and other NSA systems to obtain ongoing "real-time" interception of an individual's internet activity.

Under US law, the NSA is required to obtain an individualized Fisa warrant only if the target of their surveillance is a 'US person', though no such warrant is required for intercepting the communications of Americans with foreign targets. But XKeyscore provides the technological capability, if not the legal authority, to target even US persons for extensive electronic surveillance without a warrant provided that some identifying information, such as their email or IP address, is known to the analyst.

One training slide illustrates the digital activity constantly being collected by XKeyscore and the analyst's ability to query the databases at any time.
KS1

The purpose of XKeyscore is to allow analysts to search the metadata as well as the content of emails and other internet activity, such as browser history, even when there is no known email account (a "selector" in NSA parlance) associated with the individual being targeted.

Analysts can also search by name, telephone number, IP address, keywords, the language in which the internet activity was conducted or the type of browser used.

One document notes that this is because "strong selection [search by email address] itself gives us only a very limited capability" because "a large amount of time spent on the web is performing actions that are anonymous."

The NSA documents assert that by 2008, 300 terrorists had been captured using intelligence from XKeyscore.

Analysts are warned that searching the full database for content will yield too many results to sift through. Instead they are advised to use the metadata also stored in the databases to narrow down what to review.

A slide entitled "plug-ins" in a December 2012 document describes the various fields of information that can be searched. It includes "every email address seen in a session by both username and domain", "every phone number seen in a session (eg address book entries or signature block)" and user activity – "the webmail and chat activity to include username, buddylist, machine specific cookies etc".
Email monitoring

In a second Guardian interview in June, Snowden elaborated on his statement about being able to read any individual's email if he had their email address. He said the claim was based in part on the email search capabilities of XKeyscore, which Snowden says he was authorized to use while working as a Booz Allen contractor for the NSA.

One top-secret document describes how the program "searches within bodies of emails, webpages and documents", including the "To, From, CC, BCC lines" and the 'Contact Us' pages on websites".

To search for emails, an analyst using XKS enters the individual's email address into a simple online search form, along with the "justification" for the search and the time period for which the emails are sought.
KS2

KS3edit2

The analyst then selects which of those returned emails they want to read by opening them in NSA reading software.

The system is similar to the way in which NSA analysts generally can intercept the communications of anyone they select, including, as one NSA document put it, "communications that transit the United States and communications that terminate in the United States".

One document, a top secret 2010 guide describing the training received by NSA analysts for general surveillance under the Fisa Amendments Act of 2008, explains that analysts can begin surveillance on anyone by clicking a few simple pull-down menus designed to provide both legal and targeting justifications. Once options on the pull-down menus are selected, their target is marked for electronic surveillance and the analyst is able to review the content of their communications:
KS4

Chats, browsing history and other internet activity

Beyond emails, the XKeyscore system allows analysts to monitor a virtually unlimited array of other internet activities, including those within social media.

An NSA tool called DNI Presenter, used to read the content of stored emails, also enables an analyst using XKeyscore to read the content of Facebook chats or private messages.
KS55edit

An analyst can monitor such Facebook chats by entering the Facebook user name and a date range into a simple search screen.
KS6

Analysts can search for internet browsing activities using a wide range of information, including search terms entered by the user or the websites viewed.
KS7

As one slide indicates, the ability to search HTTP activity by keyword permits the analyst access to what the NSA calls "nearly everything a typical user does on the internet".
KS8

The XKeyscore program also allows an analyst to learn the IP addresses of every person who visits any website the analyst specifies.
KS9

The quantity of communications accessible through programs such as XKeyscore is staggeringly large. One NSA report from 2007 estimated that there were 850bn "call events" collected and stored in the NSA databases, and close to 150bn internet records. Each day, the document says, 1-2bn records were added.

William Binney, a former NSA mathematician, said last year that the agency had "assembled on the order of 20tn transactions about US citizens with other US citizens", an estimate, he said, that "only was involving phone calls and emails". A 2010 Washington Post article reported that "every day, collection systems at the [NSA] intercept and store 1.7bn emails, phone calls and other type of communications."

The XKeyscore system is continuously collecting so much internet data that it can be stored only for short periods of time. Content remains on the system for only three to five days, while metadata is stored for 30 days. One document explains: "At some sites, the amount of data we receive per day (20+ terabytes) can only be stored for as little as 24 hours."

To solve this problem, the NSA has created a multi-tiered system that allows analysts to store "interesting" content in other databases, such as one named Pinwale which can store material for up to five years.

It is the databases of XKeyscore, one document shows, that now contain the greatest amount of communications data collected by the NSA.
KS10

In 2012, there were at least 41 billion total records collected and stored in XKeyscore for a single 30-day period.
KS11

Legal v technical restrictions

While the Fisa Amendments Act of 2008 requires an individualized warrant for the targeting of US persons, NSA analysts are permitted to intercept the communications of such individuals without a warrant if they are in contact with one of the NSA's foreign targets.

The ACLU's deputy legal director, Jameel Jaffer, told the Guardian last month that national security officials expressly said that a primary purpose of the new law was to enable them to collect large amounts of Americans' communications without individualized warrants.

"The government doesn't need to 'target' Americans in order to collect huge volumes of their communications," said Jaffer. "The government inevitably sweeps up the communications of many Americans" when targeting foreign nationals for surveillance.

An example is provided by one XKeyscore document showing an NSA target in Tehran communicating with people in Frankfurt, Amsterdam and New York.
KS12

In recent years, the NSA has attempted to segregate exclusively domestic US communications in separate databases. But even NSA documents acknowledge that such efforts are imperfect, as even purely domestic communications can travel on foreign systems, and NSA tools are sometimes unable to identify the national origins of communications.

Moreover, all communications between Americans and someone on foreign soil are included in the same databases as foreign-to-foreign communications, making them readily searchable without warrants.

Some searches conducted by NSA analysts are periodically reviewed by their supervisors within the NSA. "It's very rare to be questioned on our searches," Snowden told the Guardian in June, "and even when we are, it's usually along the lines of: 'let's bulk up the justification'."

In a letter this week to senator Ron Wyden, director of national intelligence James Clapper acknowledged that NSA analysts have exceeded even legal limits as interpreted by the NSA in domestic surveillance.

Acknowledging what he called "a number of compliance problems", Clapper attributed them to "human error" or "highly sophisticated technology issues" rather than "bad faith".

However, Wyden said on the Senate floor on Tuesday: "These violations are more serious than those stated by the intelligence community, and are troubling."

In a statement to the Guardian, the NSA said: "NSA's activities are focused and specifically deployed against – and only against – legitimate foreign intelligence targets in response to requirements that our leaders need for information necessary to protect our nation and its interests.

"XKeyscore is used as a part of NSA's lawful foreign signals intelligence collection system.

"Allegations of widespread, unchecked analyst access to NSA collection data are simply not true. Access to XKeyscore, as well as all of NSA's analytic tools, is limited to only those personnel who require access for their assigned tasks … In addition, there are multiple technical, manual and supervisory checks and balances within the system to prevent deliberate misuse from occurring."

"Every search by an NSA analyst is fully auditable, to ensure that they are proper and within the law.

"These types of programs allow us to collect the information that enables us to perform our missions successfully – to defend the nation and to protect US and allied troops abroad."

See The Guardian LINK (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/31/nsa-top-secret-program-online-data/print) for images and screenshots...

[jhale667]

Great, so the NSA knows I like guitars and muff... :umm:

[VetteLS5]

Great, so the NSA knows I like guitars and muff... :umm:

And enjoy polite banter with an entity known as Flappo. :biggrin:

[Never was]

Yes spy agencies actually do spy. Prisons actually take away individual freedoms. Corporations really do try to make money. The police really do try to solve crimes after the fact. Teachers do teach. Military actually kill people. Anything else obvious left out.

The NSA is designed specifically to function on grey book ops and to be out of sight of Congress. That is how it was designed. They are functioning as their purpose and intent were. If that purpose is no longer desired then the executive branch and Congress have to completely re-purpose the NSA but as is they are operating as they were created to be not because they are evil because it is what they are.

[FORD]

That single red dot in the upper left hand corner of that picture is making me a little nervous.....

[jhale667]

And enjoy polite banter with an entity known as Flappo. :biggrin:


No, but they're fully aware he's a wannabe cyber bully with a huge collection of cock pics. ;)

[Never was]

Just got back from 2 weeks in my Seattle office, dot or not love that place as a second home. Makes sense as a tech and communications hub plus atmospheric geography makes it an advantageous place to locate surveillance.

[VetteLS5]

No, but they're fully aware he's a wannabe cyber bully with a huge collection of cock pics. ;)

Maybe that's the connection then... huge collection of cock pics, huge collection of muff pics. Seems logical. Are your two signs compatible? :D

[jhale667]

Maybe that's the connection then... huge collection of cock pics, huge collection of muff pics. Seems logical. Are your two signs compatible? :D

No and I'm not his type, I like girls.

[PETE'S BROTHER]

No and I'm not his type, I like girls.

women

[jhale667]

women

18 to 80, blind, crippled or crazy...

[PETE'S BROTHER]

i bitch repped ya for that clarification :thumb:

[jhale667]

i bitch repped ya for that clarification :thumb:

Thanks for stepping off the fence long enough to do that... ;)

[Never was]

So no blind crippled 81 year olds, cool mom your safe.

[jhale667]

So no blind crippled 81 year olds, cool mom your safe.


Yes, and could you tell her to please stop calling me? ;)

[Never was]

Hey its your fault for having a 555- number

[Kristy]

The NSA knows I get high.


Oh what news.

[Dr. Love]

Yes spy agencies actually do spy. Prisons actually take away individual freedoms. Corporations really do try to make money. The police really do try to solve crimes after the fact. Teachers do teach. Military actually kill people. Anything else obvious left out.

The NSA is designed specifically to function on grey book ops and to be out of sight of Congress. That is how it was designed. They are functioning as their purpose and intent were. If that purpose is no longer desired then the executive branch and Congress have to completely re-purpose the NSA but as is they are operating as they were created to be not because they are evil because it is what they are.

The NSA was supposed to spy on entities outside of the US, not spy on our own citizens.

[Never was]

No that was the CIA's mandate not the NSA's.
NSA mandate is not geographically defined and publicly opaque by design.
In the most simply breakdown FBI is domestic, CIA is international, Secret service is functional and NSA is global collector internal supplier for other agencies.

[jhale667]

The NSA knows I get high.


Oh what news.



You forgot "legally". ;)

[Seshmeister]

I wonder if this ridiculous level of spying is going to have an impact on US tech firms.

Will people outside the US prefer not to use US companies because of this? It's not something you hear mentioned very often, people may prefer a Swedish based version of Facebook for example or a Canadian Google.

[Dr. Love]

not sure if it matters... if it goes over the net, they get it

[FORD]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-3V29E-QhY

[Kristy]

Pseudo-news done by F A T hipsters:

[Nickdfresh]

Yes spy agencies actually do spy. Prisons actually take away individual freedoms. Corporations really do try to make money. The police really do try to solve crimes after the fact. Teachers do teach. Military actually kill people. Anything else obvious left out.

The NSA is designed specifically to function on grey book ops and to be out of sight of Congress. That is how it was designed. They are functioning as their purpose and intent were. If that purpose is no longer desired then the executive branch and Congress have to completely re-purpose the NSA but as is they are operating as they were created to be not because they are evil because it is what they are.

Completely untrue. The NSA has a congressional oversight committee and it's leader has testified (and lied) numerous times to Congress. Just because we have a bunch of mindless, spineless, asslicking Stepford Wife cunts in our Congress that serve as perpetual yes-men to the erosion of civil liberties doesn't mean the NSA has no accountability to them...

[Never was]

Nope without executive order the congressional oversight can not peer into NSA budget due to grey ops and can not go beyond a category level as they can with the FBI or with subpoena the CIA. They can subpoena and ask but nope no ability to peer inside zippo. Don't like it then it must be re-purposed. Yes spies lie, its their job and yes it was need to know. Is that right I'm not saying it is however how and why it was created. Actually your civil liberties were violated way more back in the 70's just not as public, but what the hell lets pretend its new because now we "know".

[FORD]

None of this treasonous fucking bullshit has ever done one thing to actually protect the American people.

[Never was]

Oh man I'm laughing hard at that, thanks for the laugh Ford.

[FORD]

OK, then. Give me a tangible example of how the CIA or the NSA have ever done one fucking thing to help the American people.

Not the "defense" industry.

Not the Likud Zionfascist paranoid desire to be the only goddamned military in the Middle East.

Not the oil companies.

The American PEOPLE.

BTW, you seem just a little too eager to defend these criminals. Are you Agent Zimmerman's replacement, or what?

[Seshmeister]

http://www.straight.com/blogra/data-shows-patriot-act-used-more-often-justify-drug-warrants-not-terrorism-ones

How is the Patriot Act used?

http://www.straight.com/files/styles/article_vertical/public/files/images/inline/prmarginalia110905_250.jpg

Something seems wrong with this graph (courtesy New York Magazine).


New York Magazine has put out an incredibly detailed compendium of 9/11 information on the eve of the 10th anniversary of the attacks that left over 3,000 people dead. The September 11 attacks, as you're well aware, were the impetus (or used as justification, depending on how cynical you are) for pushing through the USA PATRIOT ACT, which was hurriedly signed into law on October 26, 2001.

One of the main focuses of the Uniting (and) Strengthening America (by) Providing Appropriate Tools Required (to) Intercept (and) Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (hereafter known as the Patriot Act, because that name is long and dumb) is Title II, which is all about surveillance. That's right: even though those dastardly terrorists who hate our freedom came from overseas (as was the rhetoric beaten into the collective consciousness post 9/11), the U.S. government thought it was prudent to pass a bunch of surveillance laws so it could spy on its own citizens.

Let me quote the relevant section before we procede:

SEC. 213. AUTHORITY FOR DELAYING NOTICE OF THE EXECUTION OF A WARRANT.

…(b) DELAY- With respect to the issuance of any warrant or court order under this section, or any other rule of law, to search for and seize any property or material that constitutes evidence of a criminal offense in violation of the laws of the United States, any notice required, or that may be required, to be given may be delayed if--

(1) the court finds reasonable cause to believe that providing immediate notification of the execution of the warrant may have an adverse result (as defined in section 2705);

Delayed-notice search warrants: we won't tell you we're breaking into your house to look around if we think there will be adverse results, like you calling up your terrorist buddies to let them know we're on to you.

But between 2006 and 2009, do you know how many times the Patriot Act was used to issue delayed-notice warrants relating to terrorists and related activities? That would be a whole 15 times—even though the act mentions the word terrorism 161 times and terrorism 175 times.

Aside: did you know that not a single person has been brought to justice on American soil for those deaths?

In the same time period, New York Magazine reports that 1,618 delayed-notice search warrants were issued in relation to drugs and related activity. If you had any doubts about the true mandate of the Patriot Act, doubt no longer. Congratulations America on using a senseless tragedy to justify targeting marijuana users!

And why am I concluding that these people are primarily low-level marijuana offenders and not cocaine smugglers or meth manufacturers? The statistics on arrests and imprisonment make it clear: in 2006, 829,627 marijuana-related arrests were made in the United States, 89 percent of which were for mere possession. Not for growing or selling. Just for holding onto the stuff. In 2010, 50,383 arrests were made in New York City alone for possession.

The Patriot Act: great for the War on Drugs, bad for anyone who likes to smoke a joint, laughable in regards to stopping terrorism.

[Never was]

No no Ford they are totally like storm troopers you know they fire and fire never hit a damn thing. Every op has been a total failure. Toss in a repuke reference and a few exclamation points it will make it more true.

[Never was]

Sesh that's a great piece on Patriot, the most powerful tools in the law are on money laundering so it naturally fed into the fruitless and wasteful war on drugs. Even when fighting terrorist the fed govt just can't stop with that obsessive campaign known as the war on drugs. It really has been a waste.

[Seshmeister]

Of course there are assholes out there wanting to do some terrorism against the US but it is ridiculous to go to war against an emotion and give up everything for that. Who do you accept the surrender from on the war on drugs or terror? It has to go on forever. Obama may have changed the names but apart from that he appears to be just as bad and therefor worse than Bush because by continuing Bush's 'wars' he has reset the norm and so raised the bar permanently.

[Seshmeister]

There was a thread here a few years ago, I think it was the brilliant NYC terrorist that managed to lock himself out his car bomb where I suddenly realized that the definition under the Patriot Act of a Weapon of Mass Destruction included a hand grenade.

The whole thing really is a load of shit, a complete manipulation of reality and spin.

[Never was]

Patriot really was an opportunistic grab by justice to advance agendas on war on drugs.
X-Key actually is related to the terror war because the huge flaw of allowing human intelligence capability to decline since Reagan gutted it resulted in an intelligence community that failed to connect existing dots. NSA is charged with doing that. X-Key is a direct response by creating dynamic nodes to gather and detect rather than just record. It was valuable while human intel needed to catch up much in the same way it occurred in the begining of WW 2. That process of restoring human intel historically is like a 3 year pattern and that was consistent in this war. X-Key is a response to the demand to connect dots better. That is NSA job, whether good or bad.

Ironically a connection is often made between defense industry benefiting when in fact during the early 80's when big defense spending was at a peak it came at the expense of human intel and was a costly costly error. The two compete for the same budgetary pie. Human intel expense only creates ancillary defense contracts, big systems spending actually detracts from intel community. Not defending x-key but its context is not as evil as believed, now is it in opposition to civil liberties, yes. Intel activities going back to colonial times have always been in oppositon, if the balance is off then that is where the re-purpose needs to be done but again it will be trade off.

[Never was]

My fav stupid terrorist is the 93 world trade center bombing when on a hunch the FBI guessed the idiots would go back to get their deposit and sure enough they did. Jihad is great and all but fuck I don't want to lose my deposit.
There was also the bomber who on the 2 train had his bomb go off at the Fulton station. He survived but came out the tunnel on the Brooklyn side he was easy to spot and easy to tell where the bomb was since it blew his dick clean off, he looked like a cartoon he was covered in so much residue.

[FORD]

My fav stupid terrorist is the 93 world trade center bombing when on a hunch the FBI guessed the idiots would go back to get their deposit and sure enough they did. Jihad is great and all but fuck I don't want to lose my deposit.


How the Hell do you get a deposit back when you blow up the truck?

[Never was]

Insurance. FBI took over the rental facility and called em to sign the paperwork, idiots showed up and right after picked up the sheik. Sounds ridiculous but read some of the files and you see crap like a suicide bomber picking up their dry cleaning etc and other stupid everyday crap. The forensics folks found a clean vin on the bumper of the truck in the basement.


A little tip if you are a terrorist just write off the deposit mentally.

[kwame k]

Of course there are assholes out there wanting to do some terrorism against the US but it is ridiculous to go to war against an emotion and give up everything for that. Who do you accept the surrender from on the war on drugs or terror? It has to go on forever. Obama may have changed the names but apart from that he appears to be just as bad and therefor worse than Bush because by continuing Bush's 'wars' he has reset the norm and so raised the bar permanently.

You're exactly right! You can never win a war on terrorism because all it takes is one person pissed off enough or brainwashed enough to go to the local hardware store, farm supply store, or gun store to get everything they need to do a terrorist act! It can never be stopped and random acts of violence will continue until we ruin this planet beyond the point of habitation!

What strikes me as odd is.......when all the pseudo-patriotism was going on after 9/11 (like buying American flag pins, stickers, and those annoying flags people put in their car windows all made in China.....but that's another rant altogether;)) people were OK with the Patriot Act, which is the most unpatriotic act in the history of our country! The Founding Fathers rolled over in their collective graves when that was signed into law! Yet, we as country did nothing to protest it or put pressure on or elected officials to repeal it!

Now the NSA thing had a bill on the floor, with bipartisan support, to de-fund the program and basically kill it altogether!

What happened.....the first time in Obama's tenure that he and Boehner have ever agreed on anything and it was to kill that bill:pullinghair:

This would be funny if it didn't effect us so deeply as a country! God given right to freedom? Fucking gone:(

[Nickdfresh]

Nope without executive order the congressional oversight can not peer into NSA budget due to grey ops and can not go beyond a category level as they can with the FBI or with subpoena the CIA.

That's not true. Individual members of Congress in the Intelligence Oversight Committee are "read on" yet are sworn to secrecy so they really can't say anything...


They can subpoena and ask but nope no ability to peer inside zippo. Don't like it then it must be re-purposed. Yes spies lie, its their job and yes it was need to know. Is that right I'm not saying it is however how and why it was created. Actually your civil liberties were violated way more back in the 70's just not as public, but what the hell lets pretend its new because now we "know".

Civil liberties were violated and that was the reason they created the FISA Court, not to be a rubber-stamping and serving as window dressing for the rule of law. Was Snowden really a "spy?" He was one of hundreds, thousands of "contractors" read on to this program so how 'need to know' was it?

[Nickdfresh]

Patriot really was an opportunistic grab by justice to advance agendas on war on drugs.
X-Key actually is related to the terror war because the huge flaw of allowing human intelligence capability to decline since Reagan gutted it resulted in an intelligence community that failed to connect existing dots. NSA is charged with doing that. X-Key is a direct response by creating dynamic nodes to gather and detect rather than just record. It was valuable while human intel needed to catch up much in the same way it occurred in the begining of WW 2. That process of restoring human intel historically is like a 3 year pattern and that was consistent in this war. X-Key is a response to the demand to connect dots better. That is NSA job, whether good or bad.

Ironically a connection is often made between defense industry benefiting when in fact during the early 80's when big defense spending was at a peak it came at the expense of human intel and was a costly costly error. The two compete for the same budgetary pie. Human intel expense only creates ancillary defense contracts, big systems spending actually detracts from intel community. Not defending x-key but its context is not as evil as believed, now is it in opposition to civil liberties, yes. Intel activities going back to colonial times have always been in oppositon, if the balance is off then that is where the re-purpose needs to be done but again it will be trade off.

Reagan hardly gutted HUMINT, he in fact celebrated it. The main problem was his DCI was Casey who was a complete idiot savant and believed some sort of revolutionary gibberish because he had a hard-on for the War of Independence. So HUMINT was redirected towards idiotic covert ops and funding our own terrorists like the Contras rather than actually getting enough high placed spies in the right places. The Reagan Admin certainly did bury the CIA investigation of the Beirut Marine Barracks Bombing because the agents were going placed the pols didn't like - as in Israeli cooperation with Christian Militias along with the Syrians and Iranians as they were all in bed together when they all wanted the U.S. out...

[Never was]

Actually he did cut budget and executive orders were directed to focus on satellite surveillance and navigation to feed the SDI program again all focused on a cold war threat. Entire divisions were eliminated as were language abilities and mass retirement of agents through out the 80's occurred with directive to funnel those funds into technology based nav based systems. It was a horrible illusion that was bought into and gutted human intel while making defense industry very very wealthy. It was a myth and a bluff that did work at scaring enemies because of the unprecedented steps Reagan took. Gorby's writtings about Reychavic summit and Reagan are extremely insightful if you are into that stuff. And Beirut was a direct result of the diminished view of human intel. More warnings internally about the Beirut base occurred and doctored than the neo-cons did w pre Iraq intel. Idea-logs are the worse problem for intel as witnessed w Reagan Casey and Bush2 Cheney.

The biggest mistake in aftermath of Beirut was the Israelis and US putting the PLO on boats with exiled IRA bomb makers. The result was the now famous suicide bomber and is why bomb sigs from the IRA 70's bombings and Palestinian bombs to this day are remarkably similar, same bomb maker design. Reagan was an unmitigated disaster for human intel and Bush 1 warned repeatedly about mistakes but he essentially had zero input to Reagans policies. The US retreated further into technology after Beirut and left human intel an after thought which would have dire consequences. Ironically most of the weapon systems funded by Reagan would be useless in wars just a decade later with what seemed to be old technology from Carter's admin being much more effective followed by new weapons that were developed for the actually threat we were faced with. To this day most of Reagan's follies failed to produce useful systems.

[Seshmeister]

It's kind of worrying to think about how do you get on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.

Basically you are only going to get on it if you can show yourself to be completely owned.

15 people looking after the freedom of 300 million and one of them was Harry fucking Reid...

[Never was]

Yeah all the committees are nothing but payback and favors etc..., it is a bi-product of a badly busted system regardless of POV. Unfortunately they ones who benefit are also the ones who would have to pass reform.

[Nickdfresh]

Actually he did cut budget and executive orders were directed to focus on satellite surveillance and navigation to feed the SDI program again all focused on a cold war threat. Entire divisions were eliminated as were language abilities and mass retirement of agents through out the 80's occurred with directive to funnel those funds into technology based nav based systems. It was a horrible illusion that was bought into and gutted human intel while making defense industry very very wealthy. It was a myth and a bluff that did work at scaring enemies because of the unprecedented steps Reagan took. Gorby's writtings about Reychavic summit and Reagan are extremely insightful if you are into that stuff. And Beirut was a direct result of the diminished view of human intel. More warnings internally about the Beirut base occurred and doctored than the neo-cons did w pre Iraq intel. Idea-logs are the worse problem for intel as witnessed w Reagan Casey and Bush2 Cheney.

The biggest mistake in aftermath of Beirut was the Israelis and US putting the PLO on boats with exiled IRA bomb makers. The result was the now famous suicide bomber and is why bomb sigs from the IRA 70's bombings and Palestinian bombs to this day are remarkably similar, same bomb maker design. Reagan was an unmitigated disaster for human intel and Bush 1 warned repeatedly about mistakes but he essentially had zero input to Reagans policies. The US retreated further into technology after Beirut and left human intel an after thought which would have dire consequences. Ironically most of the weapon systems funded by Reagan would be useless in wars just a decade later with what seemed to be old technology from Carter's admin being much more effective followed by new weapons that were developed for the actually threat we were faced with. To this day most of Reagan's follies failed to produce useful systems.

I'd like to see your sources on this. While I like to slag Reagan and think Carter was a much better president than he was given credit for, I think a lot of what you say applies to him. The cliche is that HUMINT was gutted in the mid-to-late 1970's due to the previous abuses such as COINTELPRO coming to light in various investigations such as The Church Commission. In a sense they went too far and convoluted HUMINT with "Covert Ops" and forgot there is a big difference between the two. The U.S. became more reliant on satellite and SIGINT and as a result the CIA simply believed everything the Shah's cunt police, SAVAK, said at face value and no one in Washington realized how volatile the situation in Iran was and how fragile the Shah's corrupt gov't had become because we didn't have agents in place to provide independent confirmation. The situation in 1983 Beirut was similar. We simply didn't have a proper intelligence network in place around the marines and we trusted our "allies" who were often double-dealing behind the scenes with our enemies as in fact the whole Middle East is an intricate system of collusion - often between bitter enemies...

[Nickdfresh]

Obama 'open to NSA surveillance reform' at meeting with lawmakers

President met key members of Congress as White House attempts to contain anger at NSA surveillance
Beta

Senator Ron Wyden, a vocal proponent of NSA reform, attended the White House meeting. Photograph: Joshua Roberts/Reuters

President Obama told key members of Congress on Thursday that he was "open to suggestions" for reforming the National Security Agency surveillance programs that have embroiled his administration in controversy.

Ron Wyden, the Oregon Democrat who is among the Senate's leading critics of the NSA's bulk phone records collection, said he left a meeting at the White House confident that "constructive" changes to the programs would soon take shape.

"The president said, and I accept what he said, that he was open to suggestions," Wyden told the Guardian after the White House meeting. "And I smiled and said, 'You all are going to get a number of them from me."

Wyden said he "just plain out said" to Obama that the NSA's bulk ongoing collection of hundreds of millions of Americans' phone records "must end".

NSA officials have described the phone-records collection as a vital intelligence tool, though deputy director John C Inglis conceded in a Senate hearing on Wednesday that at most one terrorist attack was prevented because of the bulk collection during the program's seven-year history.

"My focus was on the urgency of reform," Wyden said. "The false choices that you could either have security or liberty, I don't think, is a case that the American people would accept."

Obama called the meeting with top legislators to address the upsurge in congressional discomfort with the surveillance, particularly the bulk phone records program. Last week, the House of Representatives came a few votes short of voting to end it, despite fierce White House and NSA lobbying.

But several lawmakers at the meeting signaled that they would fight to protect the bulk phone records and other NSA surveillance programs, despite the current uproar.

After the meeting, the Republican and Democratic chairs of the House and Senate intelligence committees said the meeting was "productive". They said in a joint statement: "We will continue to work through the August recess on proposals to improve transparency and strengthen privacy protections to further build the confidence of the American public in our nation's counterterrorism programs."

The meeting came a day after the Guardian revealed details of another National Security Agency surveillance program which, according to documents, allows analysts to to search through huge databases of emails, online chats and browsing histories without prior authorisation.

The training documents provided by the whistleblower Edward Snowden suggested that the program, called XKeyscore, is the NSA's "widest-reaching" system for developing intelligence from the internet.

Hours before the Thursday meeting, Snowden left the limbo of Moscow airport after being granted permission to stay in Russia for a year.

Almost two months on from the initial NSA disclosures in the Guardian and the Washington Post, based on documents leaked by Snowden, the White House appears to have entered a new phase as it seeks to head off criticism. The president has directed intelligence officials to find ways to make the NSA programs "as transparent as possible", while senior administration officials have testified before Congress that they are open to reforming the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (Fisa), which issues orders for surveillance.

On Wednesday, the administration voluntarily declassified previously top-secret documents in an attempt to mollify critics.

Officials pointed to the documents to claim the surveillance programs are restrained, as rules imposed by the Fisa court require analysts to only search through phone data if they have "reasonable articulable suspicion" that the phone number is associated with terrorism or espionage. But on Wednesday, several senators on the judiciary committee objected during a contentious hearing that Americans' privacy is already compromised once the NSA collects their phone records in bulk without suspicion of wrongdoing.

Guardian LINK (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/01/barack-obama-congress-nsa-reform-meeting)

[Never was]

Not an endorsement of Carter or bash of Reagan but just a point the love affair with an idea does not always produce results. Reagan's clique philosophically fell in love w the big systems dismissed the human aspect. The intel on Beirut was better than reported just not listened to due to philosophy and politics. Beirut was warned about in advance, we ignored the warning as it conflicted w politics. Beirut was a loss of life and huge loss for the country due to politics not intel. The two just do not mix. The 70's was publicly a lot of show, smoke, bluster and new rules to make the public feel good about the sins of past but on the ground human intel and gathering was not impacted a lot. Some covert activities were but the community remained robust and had a new influx of talent and good networks. Headlines in the 80's were a lot of bluster and big guns but those networks got dismantled, dismissed and whithered on the vine as resources were funneled away into big dick programs that ended up bearing little fruit.

[Nickdfresh]

I really don't think the problem with the CIA under Reagan was budgets, I think it was idiots like Casey and incompetence of the ideologically predispositioned...

I recall reading that the U.S. Army had a very good network of dissident Iranian spies after the revolution there and were collecting very high level intelligence. The CIA then took over those assets and they were rolled up in a matter of months - all of them executed by the gov't there. I believe they tried to transfer a lot of the paramilitary capability of the CIA to the military. But of course that makes no sense because the whole reason is to have an undercover paramilitary capability that can't be tied easily to the U.S. military or gov't...

[FORD]

http://s3.amazonaws.com/dk-production/images/42912/large/TMW2013-08-07color.png

[FORD]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m8n44F7Imdg

[FORD]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuKgt52HMbQ

[Nickdfresh]

10644NSA broke privacy rules thousands of times per year, audit finds
By Barton Gellman, Published: August 15

The National Security Agency has broken privacy rules or overstepped its legal authority thousands of times each year since Congress granted the agency broad new powers in 2008, according to an internal audit and other top-secret documents.

Most of the infractions involve unauthorized surveillance of Americans or foreign intelligence targets in the United States, both of which are restricted by statute and executive order. They range from significant violations of law to typographical errors that resulted in unintended interception of U.S. e-mails and telephone calls.

The documents, provided earlier this summer to The Washington Post by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden, include a level of detail and analysis that is not routinely shared with Congress or the special court that oversees surveillance. In one of the documents, agency personnel are instructed to remove details and substitute more generic language in reports to the Justice Department and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.

In one instance, the NSA decided that it need not report the unintended surveillance of Americans. A notable example in 2008 was the interception of a “large number” of calls placed from Washington when a programming error confused the U.S. area code 202 for 20, the international dialing code for Egypt, according to a “quality assurance” review that was not distributed to the NSA’s oversight staff.

In another case, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which has authority over some NSA operations, did not learn about a new collection method until it had been in operation for many months. The court ruled it unconstitutional.

[FISA judge: Ability to police U.S. spying program is limited]

The Obama administration has provided almost no public information about the NSA’s compliance record. In June, after promising to explain the NSA’s record in “as transparent a way as we possibly can,” Deputy Attorney General James Cole described extensive safeguards and oversight that keep the agency in check. “Every now and then, there may be a mistake,” Cole said in congressional testimony.

The NSA audit obtained by The Post, dated May 2012, counted 2,776 incidents in the preceding 12 months of unauthorized collection, storage, access to or distribution of legally protected communications. Most were unintended. Many involved failures of due diligence or violations of standard operating procedure. The most serious incidents included a violation of a court order and unauthorized use of data about more than 3,000 Americans and green-card holders.

In a statement in response to questions for this article, the NSA said it attempts to identify problems “at the earliest possible moment, implement mitigation measures wherever possible, and drive the numbers down.” The government was made aware of The Post’s intention to publish the documents that accompany this article online.

“We’re a human-run agency operating in a complex environment with a number of different regulatory regimes, so at times we find ourselves on the wrong side of the line,” a senior NSA official said in an interview, speaking with White House permission on the condition of anonymity.

“You can look at it as a percentage of our total activity that occurs each day,” he said. “You look at a number in absolute terms that looks big, and when you look at it in relative terms, it looks a little different.”

There is no reliable way to calculate from the number of recorded compliance issues how many Americans have had their communications improperly collected, stored or distributed by the NSA.

The causes and severity of NSA infractions vary widely. One in 10 incidents is attributed to a typographical error in which an analyst enters an incorrect query and retrieves data about U.S phone calls or e-mails.

But the more serious lapses include unauthorized access to intercepted communications, the distribution of protected content and the use of automated systems without built-in safeguards to prevent unlawful surveillance.

The May 2012 audit, intended for the agency’s top leaders, counts only incidents at the NSA’s Fort Meade headquarters and other *facilities in the Washington area. Three government officials, speak*ing on the condition of anonymity to discuss classified matters, said the number would be substantially higher if it included other NSA operating units and regional collection centers.

Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who did not receive a copy of the 2012 audit until The Post asked her staff about it, said in a statement late Thursday that the committee “can and should do more to independently verify that NSA’s operations are appropriate, and its reports of compliance incidents are accurate.”

Despite the quadrupling of the NSA’s oversight staff after a series of significant violations in 2009, the rate of infractions increased throughout 2011 and early 2012. An NSA spokesman declined to disclose whether the trend has continued since last year.

One major problem is largely unpreventable, the audit says, because current operations rely on technology that cannot quickly determine whether a foreign mobile phone has entered the United States.

In what appears to be one of the most serious violations, the NSA diverted large volumes of international data passing through fiber-optic cables in the United States into a repository where the material could be stored temporarily for processing and selection.

The operation to obtain what the agency called “multiple communications transactions” collected and commingled U.S. and foreign e-mails, according to an article in SSO News, a top-secret internal newsletter of the NSA’s Special Source Operations unit. NSA lawyers told the court that the agency could not practicably filter out the communications of Americans.

In October 2011, months after the program got underway, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court ruled that the collection effort was unconstitutional. The court said that the methods used were “deficient on statutory and constitutional grounds,” according to a top-secret summary of the opinion, and it ordered the NSA to comply with standard privacy protections or stop the program.

James R. Clapper Jr., the director of national intelligence, has acknowledged that the court found the NSA in breach of the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures, but the Obama administration has fought a Freedom of Information lawsuit that seeks the opinion.

Generally, the NSA reveals nothing in public about its errors and infractions. The unclassified versions of the administration’s semiannual reports to Congress feature blacked-out pages under the headline “Statistical Data Relating to Compliance Incidents.”

Members of Congress may read the unredacted documents, but only in a special secure room, and they are not allowed to take notes. Fewer than 10 percent of lawmakers employ a staff member who has the security clearance to read the reports and provide advice about their meaning and significance.

The limited portions of the reports that can be read by the public acknowledge “a small number of compliance incidents.”

Under NSA auditing guidelines, the incident count does not usually disclose the number of Americans affected.

“What you really want to know, I would think, is how many innocent U.S. person communications are, one, collected at all, and two, subject to scrutiny,” said Julian Sanchez, a research scholar and close student of the NSA at the Cato Institute.

The documents provided by Snowden offer only glimpses of those questions. Some reports make clear that an unauthorized search produced no records. But a single “incident” in February 2012 involved the unlawful retention of 3,032 files that the surveillance court had ordered the NSA to destroy, according to the May 2012 audit. Each file contained an undisclosed number of telephone call records.

One of the documents sheds new light on a statement by NSA Director Keith B. Alexander last year that “we don’t hold data on U.S. citizens.”

Some Obama administration officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity, have defended Alexander with assertions that the agency’s internal definition of “data” does not cover “metadata” such as the trillions of American call records that the NSA is now known to have collected and stored since 2006. Those records include the telephone numbers of the parties and the times and durations of conversations, among other details, but not their content or the names of callers.

The NSA’s authoritative def*inition of data includes those call records. “Signals Intelligence Management Directive 421,” which is quoted in secret oversight and auditing guidelines, states that “raw SIGINT data . . . includes, but is not limited to, unevaluated and/or unminimized transcripts, gists, facsimiles, telex, voice, and some forms of computer-generated data, such as call event records and other Digital Network Intelligence (DNI) metadata as well as DNI message text.”

In the case of the collection effort that confused calls placed from Washington with those placed from Egypt, it is unclear what the NSA meant by a “large number” of intercepted calls. A spokesman declined to discuss the matter.

The NSA has different reporting requirements for each branch of government and each of its legal authorities. The “202” collection was deemed irrelevant to any of them. “The issue pertained to Metadata ONLY so there were no defects to report,” according to the author of the secret memo from March 2013.

The large number of database query incidents, which involve previously collected communications, confirms long-standing suspicions that the NSA’s vast data banks — with code names such as MARINA, PINWALE and XKEYSCORE — house a considerable volume of information about Americans. Ordinarily the identities of people in the United States are masked, but intelligence “customers” may request unmasking, either one case at a time or in standing orders.

In dozens of cases, NSA personnel made careless use of the agency’s extraordinary powers, according to individual auditing reports. One team of analysts in Hawaii, for example, asked a system called DISHFIRE to find any communications that mentioned both the Swedish manufacturer Ericsson and “radio” or “radar” — a query that could just as easily have collected on people in the United States as on their Pakistani military target.

The NSA uses the term “incidental” when it sweeps up the records of an American while targeting a foreigner or a U.S. person who is believed to be involved in terrorism. Official guidelines for NSA personnel say that kind of incident, pervasive under current practices, “does not constitute a . . . violation” and “does not have to be reported” to the NSA inspector general for inclusion in quarterly reports to Congress. Once added to its databases, absent other restrictions, the communications of Americans may be searched freely.

In one required tutorial, NSA collectors and analysts are taught to fill out oversight forms without giving “extraneous information” to “our FAA overseers.” FAA is a reference to the FISA Amendments Act of 2008, which granted broad new authorities to the NSA in exchange for regular audits from the Justice Department and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and periodic reports to Congress and the surveillance court.

Using real-world examples, the “Target Analyst Rationale Instructions” explain how NSA employees should strip out details and substitute generic descriptions of the evidence and analysis behind their targeting choices.

“I realize you can read those words a certain way,” said the high-ranking NSA official who spoke with White House authority, but the instructions were not intended to withhold information from auditors. “Think of a book of individual recipes,” he said. Each target “has a short, concise description,” but that is “not a substitute for the full recipe that follows, which our overseers also have access to.”

Julie Tate and Carol D. Leonnig contributed to this report.

© The Washington Post Company (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/nsa-broke-privacy-rules-thousands-of-times-per-year-audit-finds/2013/08/15/3310e554-05ca-11e3-a07f-49ddc7417125_story.html)

[Coyote]

Oh shit, the NSA knows I'm a half-decent shredder who likes T&A, Monty Python and reeks of YSL Kouros?

Colo(u)r me paranoid...

[jhale667]

Oh shit, the NSA knows I'm a half-decent shredder who likes T&A, Monty Python and reeks of YSL Kouros?

Colo(u)r me paranoid...

Hey, me too! Except for the last part: right now I only slightly reek of armani code and :bong: Weird part is I'm coming to the conclusion the latter is preferable to the former...:biggrin:

[FORD]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-OX-jnHJ74

[Hardrock69]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/22/us/2011-ruling-found-an-nsa-program-unconstitutional.html?_r=0


Secret Court Rebuked N.S.A. on Surveillance
By CHARLIE SAVAGE and SCOTT SHANE
Published: August 21, 2013


WASHINGTON — A federal judge sharply rebuked the National Security Agency in 2011 for repeatedly misleading the court that oversees its surveillance on domestic soil, including a program that is collecting tens of thousands of domestic e-mails and other Internet communications of Americans each year, according to a secret ruling made public on Wednesday.


The 85-page ruling by Judge John D. Bates, then serving as chief judge on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, involved an N.S.A. program that systematically searches the contents of Americans’ international Internet communications, without a warrant, in a hunt for discussions about foreigners who have been targeted for surveillance.

The Justice Department had told Judge Bates that N.S.A. officials had discovered that the program had also been gathering domestic messages for three years. Judge Bates found that the agency had violated the Constitution and declared the problems part of a pattern of misrepresentation by agency officials in submissions to the secret court.

The release of the ruling, the subject of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, was the latest effort by the Obama administration to gain control over revelations about N.S.A. surveillance prompted by leaks by the former agency contractor Edward J. Snowden.

The collection is part of a broader program under a 2008 law that allows warrantless surveillance on domestic networks as long as it is targeted at noncitizens abroad. The purely domestic messages collected in the hunt for discussions about targeted foreigners represent a relatively small percentage of what the ruling said were 250 million communications intercepted each year in that broader program.

While the N.S.A. fixed problems with how it handled those purely domestic messages to the court’s satisfaction, the 2011 ruling revealed further issues.

“The court is troubled that the government’s revelations regarding N.S.A.’s acquisition of Internet transactions mark the third instance in less than three years in which the government has disclosed a substantial misrepresentation regarding the scope of a major collection program,” Judge Bates wrote.

One of the examples was redacted in the ruling. Another involved a separate N.S.A. program that keeps logs of all domestic phone calls, which the court approved in 2006 and which came to light in June as a result of leaks by Mr. Snowden.

In March 2009, a footnote said, the surveillance court learned that N.S.A. analysts were using the phone log database in ways that went beyond what the judges believed to be the practice because of a “repeated inaccurate statements” in government filings to the court.

“Contrary to the government’s repeated assurances, N.S.A. had been routinely running queries of the metadata using querying terms that did not meet the standard for querying,” Judge Bates recounted. He cited a 2009 ruling that concluded that the requirement had been “so frequently and systematically violated that it can fairly be said that this critical element of the overall ... regime has never functioned effectively.”

The Electronic Frontier Foundation, a free speech and privacy rights group, sued to obtain the ruling after Senator Ron Wyden, an Oregon Democrat who sits on the Senate Intelligence Committee, fought last summer to declassify the basic fact that the surveillance court had ruled that the N.S.A. had violated the Fourth Amendment.

In a statement, Mr. Wyden — an outspoken critic of N.S.A. surveillance — said declassification of the ruling was “long overdue.” He argued that while the N.S.A. had increased privacy protections for purely domestic and unrelated communications that were swept up in the surveillance, the collection itself “was a serious violation of the Fourth Amendment.”

Mark Rumold of the Electronic Frontier Foundation praised the administration for releasing the document with relatively few redactions, although he criticized the time and the difficulty in obtaining it. But he also said the ruling showed the surveillance court was not equipped to perform adequate oversight of the N.S.A.

“This opinion illustrates that the way the court is structured now it cannot serve as an effective check on the N.S.A. because it’s wholly dependent on the representations that the N.S.A. makes to it,” Mr. Rumold said. “It has no ability to investigate. And it’s clear that the N.S.A. representations have not been entirely candid to the court.”

A senior intelligence official, speaking to reporters in a conference call, portrayed the ruling as showing that N.S.A. oversight was robust and serious. He said that some 300 N.S.A. employees were assigned to seek out even inadvertent violations of the rules and that the court conducted “vigorous” oversight.

The ruling focused on a program under which the N.S.A. has been searching domestic Internet links for communications — where at least one side is overseas — in which there are “strong selectors” indicating insider knowledge of someone who has been targeted for foreign-intelligence collection. One example would be mentioning a person’s private e-mail address in the body of an e-mail.

Most of the time, the system brings up single communications, like an e-mail or text message. But sometimes many messages are packaged and travel in a bundle that the N.S.A. calls “multi-communication transactions.”

A senior intelligence official gave one example: a Web page for a private e-mail in-box that displays subject lines for dozens of different messages — each of which is considered a separate communication, and only one of which may discuss the person who has been targeted for intelligence collection.

While Judge Bates ruled that it was acceptable for the N.S.A. to collect and store such bundled communications, he said the agency was not doing enough to minimize the purely domestic and unrelated messages to protect Americans’ privacy. In response, the N.S.A. agreed to filter out such communications and store them apart, with greater protections, and to delete them after two years instead of the usual five.

A Justice Department “white paper” released with the ruling shed new light on N.S.A. surveillance of communications streaming across domestic telecommunications networks. Such “upstream” collection, which still must be targeted at or be about noncitizens abroad, accounts for about 10 percent of all the Internet messages collected in the United States, it said; the other 90 percent are obtained from Internet companies under the system the N.S.A. calls Prism.

The administration also released a partly redacted semiannual report about “compliance” incidents, or mistakes involving the privacy rights of Americans or people in the United States. It found that there had been no willful violations of the rules, and that fewer than 1 percent of queries by analysts involved errors.

The document also showed that the government recently changed the rules to allow N.S.A. and C.I.A. analysts to search its databases of recorded calls and e-mails using search terms designed to find information involving American citizens, not foreigners — an issue that has long concerned Senator Wyden and that was mentioned in a document leaked by Mr. Snowden and published by The Guardian.

The number of “selectors” designed to filter out and store communications targeted at foreigners had gone up steadily, the document said, although the numbers were redacted. And its increase is expected to “accelerate” because the F.B.I. recently made the ability to nominate people for such collection “more widely available to its field office personnel.”

[FORD]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=izSln2PmkKg