Secrecy News

NSA Surveillance and the Failure of Intelligence Oversight

Recent disclosures of NSA collection of records of US telephone and email traffic have some unfortunate parallels and precedents in the early history of the Agency that were thought to have been repudiated forever.

“After World War II, the National Security Agency (NSA) established and directed three programs that deliberately targeted American citizens’ private communications,” wrote Army signals intelligence officer Major Dave Owen in a paper published late last year in an Army intelligence journal.

The three programs were Project SHAMROCK (1945 to 1975), which collected telegraph communications;  Project MINARET (1960 to 1973), which functioned as a watch list for terms, names and references of interest;  and Drug Watch Lists (1970 to 1973), which focused on communications of individuals and organizations believed to be associated with illegal drug traffic.  Information about these programs first became public in the 1970s upon investigation by the U.S. Senate Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with respect to Intelligence Activities, known as the Church Committee.

A capsule summary of the three programs was presented by Major Owen in A Review of Intelligence Oversight Failure: NSA Programs that Affected Americans, which was published in the October-December 2012 issue of Military Intelligence Professional Bulletin.

Major Owen writes that the work of the Church Committee “led to legal restrictions on the NSA’s foreign intelligence authorities, as well as robust intelligence oversight processes to ensure that NSA continued to adhere to these legal restrictions.”

But then he makes an assertion that, in light of recent revelations, can only be viewed as disingenuous or uninformed:

“These [oversight] processes have formed and continuously reinforce an NSA culture that is extremely adverse to any issue that may be construed as collecting on American citizens.”

Major Owen admits vaguely that “this culture has shifted slightly over the last decade.”  But what reader would have imagined that it could possibly extend to the collection of call records and email metadata generated by nearly every American citizen?

“In our view, the bulk collection and aggregation of Americans’ phone records has a significant impact on Americans’ privacy,” wrote Senators Ron Wyden, Mark Udall and numerous Senate colleagues in a June 27 letter to the Director of National Intelligence.

The secret bulk collection of American communication records was, among other things, a colossal error in classification judgment as well as a historic failure of intelligence oversight.

If a fair account of these intelligence collection programs “had been told to the American public at the time when Congress was debating what the scope of surveillance powers should be, it might well be that we would have less public distrust of the government, and maybe even Snowden wouldn’t have done what he did,” said Kate Martin of the Center for National Security Studies at a forum held at the Newseum on June 26.

“The American people shouldn’t be treated as idiots,” she said.

2 thoughts on “NSA Surveillance and the Failure of Intelligence Oversight

  1. With regard to Major David Owens’ article on Intelligence oversight….

    One incident I’m personally acquainted with, involving retired military intelligence officers (“old boy network”), and federal funding (?Commerce Dep’t. program to upgrade States Data Processing systems) for New Hampshire’s Data Processing Commission, took place the weekend after 1,717 people protested, and were all subsequently arrested, at the Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant. The Chair of the Data Processing Commission (also the President of N.H. State Senate), was a retired MI officer, who (had the Governor) direct those state data processing employees to work throughout the weekend to ascertain how many of the arrestees were on unemployment or public assistance (welfare). This was allegedly not a permitted use of the federal funding source, but those arrestees on public assistance and unemployment had their benefits cut… Are there any similar abuses in other states?

  2. We know of some more recent problems with the regional “Fusion Centers”, such as where peaceful/non-violent citizens in Maryland who had protested…, found themselves unable to board commercial airline flights for some time after they were identified by an undercover Maryland State Police Trooper, who had entered their names in a criminal database shared with the regional Fusion Center. Similar

Leave a Reply