Glenn Greenwald’s Fish Tale

[reusrename]

3. There are two types of useless information, and each is gathered for a different purpose.

Apples


The concern about metadata collection is completely new, and it has to do with the use of this information. Metadata is used to create the targets for a counterinsurgency operation. Sometimes (or according to research, in most cases) the most influential person in a social network (or insurgency) is not the most high profile or the most vocal individual in the group. With very large groups (OWS for example), this new technology identifies those individuals who's participation in the group is the most critical.

That, in a nutshell, is the purpose for which the metadata is being used. It should be obvious how this information can be used/misused to affect our first amendment freedoms, specifically our right to peaceably assemble. There are a couple of stories floating around today about how the MIC is targeting opponents of the keystone pipeline. This counterinsurgeny technology and training is being used against law-abiding citizens right here in America.

Because the algorithms being used are easily handled by computers, and because no errors are introduced by trying to decode or translate any communication content, the system can create a very precise mapping of our social networks. Only actual metadata associated with each communication is logged into the software, and from that the algorithms sort out the social connections.

Almost everything about this particular type of surveillance is new. The science behind the algorithms that are used and the computers that store and sift the data are new. The idea behind controlling the pubic is not new, however. It has been done before, and very effectively, even without this new weapon.

This all fits into the bigger picture of the subject of this OP. Remember that our country was founded by insurgents. Many, if not all of our heroes, would have been easily thwarted under this type of surveillance regime and folks have written about how Paul Revere could have been stopped.


For some basic info about how the science is implemented, google the keywords: thesis+insurgent+social+network



Oranges


This use of the metadata to undermine our right to peaceably assemble seems to be the more dangerous issue. This is an unmistakable mark of tyranny. The eavesdropping on content, OTOH, can be used to disrupt/detain/dissuade/discredit a target. It is the scientific selection of targets which is what thwarts our (the ones who are trying to change things) ability to properly organize any resistance. This is serious. Without organization we have no idea at whom to aim our pitchforks.

Let’s look at the individual warrants required to monitor individual communications. By this I mean the opening of recorded emails or the listening in on digitally recorded phone conversations. Can we figure out what the policy is, and if so, from that can we discern what the uses for this other system might be?

There seems to be a lot of confusion about the order of things. The analysts can look at anything in their database (which includes recordings of all our conversations and emails) with little or no oversight. I think it works something like this:

1) Yes, they do need a separate warrant in order to access content of individual phone calls/emails.

2) Yes, the analyst has legal authority to access content of individual phone calls/emails of anyone, on his own, without first getting a separate warrant.

These are consistent statements. The FISA law allows 72 hours after the fact to seek the warrant.

My understanding is that the analyst has legal access, on his own authority, once he has been verbally authorized by either the Attorney General or the Director of National Intelligence. I think the analyst only need fill out a form in order to take a peek at anything.

At least this is my current understanding of the law and the policy. These analysts, once verbally approved, might might be compared to the robosigners we found in the banking fraud.

There is one important difference; unlike the illegal robosigners for the banks, Congress, the Adminstration, and the Courts all seem to have made this process perfectly legal.

If you start to parse the Q&A information with this timeline in mind, it starts to reveal an amazing consistency. Many of the contradictory claims evaporate.

Basically, we are racing toward future where you either support the 1% or else you are a terrorist. This path leads to fascism and the restoration of slavery. There is no doubt about it.