Some US Congressmen say getting straight answers from the intelligence community on issues it does not wish to discuss — such as surveillance of Americans — is extremely difficult without knowledge of the community’s internal workings.
Intelligence officials have scheduled several closed briefings
with lawmakers this week amid heightened media interest in data
collection by the NSA and FBI. Former NSA contractor Edward
Snowden has leaked details of alleged widespread domestic
surveillance to the press.
Officials from the DoJ, FBI, NSA, and office of the Director of
National Intelligence discussed the leak with members of the house
on Tuesday, though many lawmakers were unsatisfied with the
discussions. A confidential briefing to the Senate is scheduled
for Thursday.
Some officials have been on the defensive amid the public furor
over the allegations, citing the security benefits of
surveillance. NSA Director and US Cyber Command head General
Keith Alexander said during a hearing on cyber security in the
Senate that it has “helped thwart dozens of terrorist events.
“When I say dozens, what I’m talking about here is that these
authorities complement each other in helping us identify
different terrorist actions and help disrupt them,” he added.
As officials offer clarity on the scope of PRISM and other
surveillance programs, and deal with public outrage over its
revelations, they insist that the public had oversight on the
controversial practice via legislators.
The Obama administration has said that members of Congress were
filled in on the programs 22 times in the 14 months to December
last year. Those sessions included hearings, meetings with
individual members, and meetings of the judiciary and
intelligence committees.
However, some of representatives are saying that the intelligence
community is complicating their task. “One of the most
important responsibilities a senator has is oversight of the
intelligence community. This job cannot be done responsibly if
senators aren’t getting straight answers to direct
questions,” said Senator Ron Wyden as cited by Reuters.
Wyden was among the senators who questioned National Intelligence
Director James Clapper during a hearing in March. When asked
whether the government had collected data on millions of US
citizens, he answered “not wittingly.”
After the exposure of PRISM, Clapper referred to the question as
a “when are you going to start – stop beating your wife”
kind of question, adding that his negative answer was the
“least untruthful” he could give at the time.
Evasive tactics, of which this episode could be said to be an
example, are frowned upon by some legislators.
“Sometimes these briefings are a game of 20 questions. If you
don’t ask exactly the right question, you don’t get the
answer,” former Representative Jane Harman said when
describing the situation.
Things are complicated by the secretive nature of such meetings,
which exclude experts advising lawmakers from participating.
Without the help of tech-savvy staffers, many lawmakers are
simply not capable of asking the right questions.
Intelligence officials appear to have had second thoughts before
disclosing details of their work to Congress.
“In the aftermath of 9/11, I got the impression that they were
telling us as little as they could without perjuring
themselves,” said former senator Bob Graham, who chaired the
Senate intelligence committee from 2001-03.
Edward Snowden, the whistleblower behind the scandal, remains in
Hong Kong. In his latest interview with the local newspaper The
South China Morning Post, he reiterated that he plans to expose
more US intelligence secrets.
In the interview, Snowden accused the US of using its cyber
capabilities to hack targets in China, and particularly Hong
Kong, as well as using “bullying” to force his extradition back
to the US. He added that he trusts the autonomous city’s
authorities to “do the right thing.”
This article originally appeared on: RT