NSA's Talking Points On Snowden Leaks Say To Emphasize 9/11

from the these-sound-very-familiar dept

If you've been following all the NSA stuff, you're used the regular claims from the NSA's defenders. The folks over at Al Jazeera were able to get the talking points that the NSA has been using in response to the Snowden leaks, and they're exactly everything we've been hearing -- with extra emphasis on playing up 9/11. My favorite talking point, described as a "sound bite that resonates" is:
I much prefer to be here today explaining these programs, than explaining another 9/11 event that we were not able to prevent.
You'll also note an awful lot of "we need to connect the dots," though they leave out the part about how having more data actually makes it harder to connect the dots. They also play up the "over 50 cases" of dealing with "terrorist events" -- a number that has since been totally debunked.

The documents are the basic talking points that Keith Alexander, James Clapper and others have been using in their various Congressional hearings. If you watched the hearing yesterday, for example, you'd notice that Clapper especially was almost always reading off the talking points even when asked questions (Alexander appears to feel more comfortable "winging it"). Given that, there's not much that's totally surprising -- we've heard all of this. But it's still fascinating to see it in black and white.
Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: ed snowden, james clapper, keith alexander, nsa, nsa surveillance, talking points

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

  1. identicon
    SourDove, 30 Oct 2013 @ 6:30pm

    Pre-9/11 coverage

    Anyone who followed the prosecution of Ramzi Yousef for blowing up the WTC with a bomb bought by the FBI read the targets and method of the 9/11 plot in the New York Times in 1998.

    It was 1980 when I first heard about the plan to let Poppy use Supreme Court appointments to ensure a Bush dynasty. The person who told me approved, because, she felt, Congress wants to please voters and can't be relied on to do the "unpopular things" necessary to keep the US standard of living higher than the rest. With a CIA family in power, spy agencies could get the party started quickly and hand Congress the bill, precluding debate.

    After watching that plan for a daylight coup develop for two decades, I read the list of 9/11 targets in the NYT. The prosecution team who put Yousef away spoke off the record, saying they suspected that his friends were already living and training on secure US military bases.

    By 1999 I was able to determine, by logic and strategy, when the attacks would have to happen in order to divert attention from the final public vote count.

    I am neither smarter nor better informed than our intelligence, law enforcement, and military agencies. They read the Times, too.

    FBI fought NSA for access to KSM's phone calls for years. Finally they built their own platform in the ocean to listen for themselves.

    Thus both agencies knew everything I knew and more. That's why, in 1999, I realized that if 9/11 were an inside job, that enabled anyone to figure out when it would happen. Were it a sneak attack by foreigners only, that would not have been possible.

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter

Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Special Affiliate Offer

Essential Reading
Techdirt Insider Chat
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.