How Can We Tell Obama's NSA Reforms Are Weak? Gen. Hayden doesn't mind them

[n2doc]

President Obama detailed his NSA reforms last week and, as noted earlier, while they weren't quite as weak as some thought they might be, they were still pretty toothless. If you need any confirmation that the administration's idea of reform differs greatly from that of the NSA's opponents, you need look no further than uber-NSA-defender Michael Hayden's comments on Obama's speech.

Hayden's interview with Fox News Sunday featured this mild statement of support for Obama's reform package.
That first third [of Obama's speech] is the most robust defense of why we conduct intelligence and how we conduct intelligence that the president has made since he's been in office…

Now, when you get into the substance, what he changed, I think there's a clear pattern with both the domestic and the foreign piece. He's going to cut back on some capacities. He hopes that the margins, cutting into agility a bit, putting administrative burdens on, that could be risky. But it looks like he's willing to accept that risk in order to fundamentally preserve the programs.

As Hayden sees it, the reforms Obama announced do nothing to alter the essence of the NSA's programs. It's a haircut, at most. As the interview goes on, Hayden (and Chris Wallace) point out just how much the reform plan leaves untouched.

more

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140120/16212025933/how-can-we-tell-obamas-nsa-reforms-are-weak-michael-hayden-doesnt-have-much-problem-with-them.shtml

[Demo_Chris]

1. They don't care about the law anyway, so Obama can promise anything he likes...

It doesn't mean that they are going to actually do it.

[Scuba]

2. And the curtain is pulled back a little farther.

[JDPriestly]

3. For the record and so that people will know what is really going on at the NSA and how people

with consciences who have worked there feel about it, here is the link to the press conference of NSA whistleblowers that followed Obama's speech.


http://new.livestream.com/accuracy/nsa-rebuttal/videos/39824993

[blkmusclmachine]

4. Hope!

For!

Change!

[Vattel]

5. One reform is potentially significant.

Needing an individualized court order to look at an American citizen's phone data seems like a genuine step forward. But I agree that much much more is needed, and the President is clearly a right-winger on this issue.

[Luminous Animal]

6. Hayden is going to debate Greenwald May 2

http://munkdebates.com/debates/state-surveillance

It is the debate of the moment. In a risk-filled world, are democracies justified in turning to large-scale state surveillance, at home and abroad, to fight complex and unconventional threats? Or is the emergence of the surveillance state and the awesome powers it derives from information technology a new and pervasive threat to our basic freedoms? For some the answer is obvious: the threats more than justify the current surveillance system, and the laws and institutions of democracies are more than capable of balancing the needs of individual privacy with collective security. For others, we are in peril of sacrificing to state surveillance and exaggerated terrorist threats the civil liberties that guarantee citizens’ freedoms. To engage this global debate our spring 2014 contest will move the motion:

Be it resolved the current system of state surveillance is a legitimate defence of our freedoms...

- See more at: http://munkdebates.com/debates/state-surveillance/#sthash.Mb8hZaJ4.dpuf