4 ms·

> This is conspiracy theory nonsense. No. This publicly goes back to Clapper telling congress that the NSA doesn't "collect" data on Americans. The lie was exc

> This is conspiracy theory nonsense. No. This publicly goes back to Clapper telling congress that the NSA doesn't "collect" data on Americans. The lie was excused on the grounds that "collection" isn't them saving the data, but rather querying it later.

lern_too_spel 3y ago
> This publicly goes back to Clapper telling congress that the NSA doesn't "collect" data on Americans. The lie was excused on the grounds that "collection" isn't them saving the data, but rather querying it later. More conspiracy theory nonsense. The lie was that they don't collect any data on Americans, when they did collect phone metadata. The reason he made that mistake was that the previous question was about making dossiers of Americans, which they do not do, not having the content of any Americans' communications.
- smolder 3y ago
  You're wrong. Go read about it in this article by Bruce Schneier. And don't accuse people of being conspiracy theorists when you haven't checked your facts. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/10/why-the-nsas-defense-of-mass-data-collection-makes-no-sense/280715/ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/10/why-the...
  - lern_too_spel 3y ago
    You're wrong. The only person who claimed that the NSA doesn't believe it has collected data until it looks at it is Schneier in this article. No US government agency has ever made this claim because it is obviously false, and none of Snowden's leaked documents claim the NSA has collected American communications. https://apnews.com/article/business-33a88feb083ea35515de3c73e3d854ad https://apnews.com/article/business-33a88feb083ea35515de3c73... explains that Clapper was previously being asked about collecting actual communication data of foreigners (Section 702), while this question jumped to "any data" about Americans, which would include the telephone metadata collected by Section 215. This admission that Clapper does consider the defunct phone metadata program to be collection was made 7 months before Schneider wrote that article, so he should have known better. > Don't accuse people of being conspiracy theorists when you haven't checked your facts. I will continue to call people conspiracy theorists when they say hundreds of conspirators in the US government are doing something obviously illegal without any evidence, especially when someone who leaked other programs could have leaked that evidence but did not.
    - smolder 3y ago
      > The only person who claimed that the NSA doesn't believe it has collected data until it looks at it is Schneier in this article. Him, and the EFF, and I'm sure others. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/06/director-national-intelligences-word-games-explained-how-government-deceived https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/06/director-national-inte... > JAMES CLAPPER: when someone says "collection" to me, that has a specific meaning, which may have a different meaning to him.
      - lern_too_spel 3y ago
        This definition does not match any of the leaked documents or the unclassified documents, so you'll have to do better than that. It was a definition made up out of whole cloth to match what Snowden thought the documents he leaked said, which is entirely different from what the documents actually said. At the time the EFF wrote that article, Snowden's claim is what they were working on. Now they know it is untrue.

lern_too_spel 3y ago

> This publicly goes back to Clapper telling congress that the NSA doesn't "collect" data on Americans. The lie was excused on the grounds that "collection" isn't them saving the data, but rather querying it later. More conspiracy theory nonsense. The lie was that they don't collect any data on Americans, when they did collect phone metadata. The reason he made that mistake was that the previous question was about making dossiers of Americans, which they do not do, not having the content of any Americans' communications.

smolder 3y ago
You're wrong. Go read about it in this article by Bruce Schneier. And don't accuse people of being conspiracy theorists when you haven't checked your facts. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/10/why-the-nsas-defense-of-mass-data-collection-makes-no-sense/280715/ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/10/why-the...
- lern_too_spel 3y ago
  You're wrong. The only person who claimed that the NSA doesn't believe it has collected data until it looks at it is Schneier in this article. No US government agency has ever made this claim because it is obviously false, and none of Snowden's leaked documents claim the NSA has collected American communications. https://apnews.com/article/business-33a88feb083ea35515de3c73e3d854ad https://apnews.com/article/business-33a88feb083ea35515de3c73... explains that Clapper was previously being asked about collecting actual communication data of foreigners (Section 702), while this question jumped to "any data" about Americans, which would include the telephone metadata collected by Section 215. This admission that Clapper does consider the defunct phone metadata program to be collection was made 7 months before Schneider wrote that article, so he should have known better. > Don't accuse people of being conspiracy theorists when you haven't checked your facts. I will continue to call people conspiracy theorists when they say hundreds of conspirators in the US government are doing something obviously illegal without any evidence, especially when someone who leaked other programs could have leaked that evidence but did not.
  - smolder 3y ago
    > The only person who claimed that the NSA doesn't believe it has collected data until it looks at it is Schneier in this article. Him, and the EFF, and I'm sure others. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/06/director-national-intelligences-word-games-explained-how-government-deceived https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/06/director-national-inte... > JAMES CLAPPER: when someone says "collection" to me, that has a specific meaning, which may have a different meaning to him.
    - lern_too_spel 3y ago
      This definition does not match any of the leaked documents or the unclassified documents, so you'll have to do better than that. It was a definition made up out of whole cloth to match what Snowden thought the documents he leaked said, which is entirely different from what the documents actually said. At the time the EFF wrote that article, Snowden's claim is what they were working on. Now they know it is untrue.