2 votes

Rep. Rogers: 'NSA Not Listening To Americans' Phone Calls, Not Monitoring Their Emails' - VIDEO

Rep. Rogers: 'NSA Not Listening To Americans' Phone Calls, Not Monitoring Their Emails' - VIDEO

http://sotu.blogs.cnn.com/2013/06/16/rogers-nsa-not-listenin...

Jeff Poor | Media Reporter
2:08 PM | June 16, 2013

On Sunday’s “State of the Union” on CNN, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers, a Republican from Michigan, insisted that although there have been allegations made to contrary, the National Security Agency isn’t listening in on Americans’ personal communications.

“I can’t tell you how strong we need to make this clear,” Rogers said. “The NSA is not listening to Americans’ phone calls, and it is not monitoring their emails. If it did, it’s illegal. It’s breaking the law.”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/06/16/rogers-nsa-not-listening-t...

http://www.breakingnews.com/item/ahZzfmJyZWFraW5nbmV3cy13d3c...




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Does anyone in the government or under government contract

Does anyone in the government or under government contract listen.

These weasel words remind me of Bill Clinton tesitying and making the definitions "clear".

Could the Intelligence Committee chairs target political enemies to help them win elections.

Free includes debt-free!

Rogers and his wife, "Mrs. CISPA"

need to be getting measured for prison uniforms.
Traitors and thieves.

Real Deal Right Here
“Give a man a gun, he can rob a bank. Give a man a central bank, and he can rob a country and the world.”
www.dailypaul.com/donate

Language is important. They

Language is important. They don't consider a call "collected" until it is actively listened to. But this does NOT preclude the idea that they are indeed and in fact storing the content of every single call made by every single person.

Indeed, once more, and I imagine quite intentionally, I suspect they are being "too cute by half" with their answers.

Aren't they always.

Someone needs to ask them this question directly: "Are the contents of American phone calls being obtained or stored for potential future collection if and when a specific warrant is issued for that purpose?"

And then if they get a cute answer, or a direct no, they need to restate the question 100 different ways again. Otherwise they will continue to avoid addressing the real issue: that they are scooping up and storing our content indefinitely, as a means of "looking backward' if/when a specific warrant is issued. This continues to be the obvious reality, and yet continues to go unaddressed.