Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
-- -- Pretty dangerous it is also ubiquitous it is accessible.
And not only -- certainly.
Which if -- were talking about that balance between surveillance and -- writes.
The importance of our law.
But we're also talking about other corporations.
Whether they be an Internet companies have -- net providers whether they be large bass technology and telecommunications company.
All of them sharing the very information that you've described in addition to.
The agency of the government that we rely upon to provide that surveillance and best possible knowledge and understanding of what is happening.
At least in the world of the Internet as you said in switch communications as well it becomes a very difficult.
If you will of ramble.
By and -- it.
Two to navigate.
Plus there's another real danger.
You have to be indirect talks about trust you have to trust the government.
But you also have to trust all the people in the government because they can get on maternal go into the system to look at any database -- anyone in there that they wanted.
And then you have to trust all the contractors who are maintaining that database and maintaining the communications and it and the query routines and ensuring that the whole system works.
You have to trust all them not to go into that database.
To look for things from other companies or something or competitors.
Or to look if you if you wanted to see if your wife is cheating on you could go and do that.
It's in that database and could -- relationships you may be your wife may have been you could infer a relationship there so you know it.
There's so many pet causes somebody dangers that assembling all this information about that individual.
Us today inferring relationships also seeking out we're great specificity.
Connections from which to draw.
Yet intelligent analysis and conclusions.
Which is what we want the NSA to do which is what if we walk.
Our intelligence agencies to do and I'm laughing with the trust that you talked about in a famously.
Trust but verify in my -- I would I think we would all expect certainly the NSA to verify verify verify.
Irrespective of whom the employee might be or the position he -- she my old.
But at the other end of this.
In government whom do we trust do we trust the president.
The the most recent ratings suggest not do we trust congress hardly.
There there were.
Terror the ratings are so low.
We can't write -- the midst of scandal really say that the State Department the in the Internal Revenue Service that Justice Department.
Merit our trust.
-- -- -- you can't and there's another myth that there really step -- circulating around Washington and they're claiming that that's the truth.
And that is that you have to collect all this data to get the terrorists.
That's absolutely false.
They're basically just simply -- principles that have to use in their collection of data and analysis that to do that one.
Is if you might call -- the two degree principal you have a terrorist call somebody in the United States that's the first degree.
The second degree is who that person in the United States -- -- so there's that that forms a zone of suspicion.
And you take that collectively along with I'm monitoring the -- -- advocating sites -- And those who advocate.
Violence -- the west.
And see who's accessing those.
Dave that aggregate then -- -- suspicions on the suspicion.
We would've gotten the Fort Hood bomb shooter -- Boston bombers they did that they were part of that.
In fact I do not know of anyone that wouldn't follow fallen -- -- where does the principal I was using.
Plus -- -- was -- -- -- you bring up from Boston bombing that seems to me to be clearly a failure of human intelligence that is clear communication.
Between the CIA and the Russian agencies.
Clear communication between the Russian agencies and the FBI.
I presume then communication between the CIA and FBI.
Perhaps even local warm -- and we're just speculating.
But that's human intelligence that was an abject failure don't you think.
Well I also called it a I didn't have the intelligence failure was also that's the -- part of it.
Because all those connections also showed -- -- in the call records that currently.
Nor operated I intelligence yet.
The exit the ex FBI agent Tim Clemente when he was interviewed on CNN about to the week and a half ago when he said that no digital communications work we're safe.
And that they had a way of getting back to the communications between one of the bombers and his wife.
There -- as we have.
And it's really fascinating court that yeah if it's been fascinating listening to you take us through this.
In and try as best we can to comprehend part at least of what you're talking about.
In the architecture the operations of the agency and an intelligence signal intelligence.
Let me ask you this.
Do you and around and I wouldn't you were talking about any of these nodes that are created by a series of connections.
Whether they be.
Communication between a jihadist and someone in this country whether they -- -- subsequent communications.
What do you make of an event in which the president of the United States complaining mightily about cyber attacks.
It is ends up in the California the Southern California desert with the president -- and paying.
For a two day summit.
Cyber attacks to be against United States to be a large agenda item tough talk from the president his administration.
And suddenly that two day summit is.
Bayh is someone by the name of -- snowed.
And his revelations he and his forthcoming details.
Tell me if you find a node a coincidence.
Are just random circumstance.
In intelligence terms.
Well I hated it could be simply random I wouldn't I would -- that a bit but the entire government could have avoided all this that -- have been a little more honest with everything that they're doing with the public.
And if they did it and if they have done proper job a legal job but constitutionally acceptable job no question.
But I -- didn't you -- -- heroic for the intelligence conclusion.
-- given -- almost forty years in the NSA you hear you.
Because I find myself as in -- Policy that broadcaster scratching my head at the he and marveling at -- it.
You well you could you there what there is in fact a probability of association.
The and the question would be did.
Still wouldn't know about the visit for the from the Chinese premier and that and if he did then then and he could have connected with that.
So -- certainly that's a possibility.
And lots of possibilities remain -- and will until we actually know.
William -- we thank you for being here to expand our our our knowledge.
And if I can assure you the fault lies would mean that you opponent has a broad.
We appreciate it's about.
Thank you we'll have --
Filter by section