| Cryptome DVDs are offered by Cryptome. Donate $25 for two DVDs of the Cryptome 12-years collection of 46,000 files from June 1996 to June 2008 (~6.7 GB). Click Paypal or mail check/MO made out to John Young, 251 West 89th Street, New York, NY 10024. The collection includes all files of cryptome.org, jya.com, cartome.org, eyeball-series.org and iraq-kill-maim.org, and 23,000 (updated) pages of counter-intelligence dossiers declassified by the US Army Information and Security Command, dating from 1945 to 1985.The DVDs will be sent anywhere worldwide without extra cost.

Web | cryptome | jya.com | eyeball-series.org | cryptome.cn

25 May 1999

    See full bill and floor discussion: http://jya.com/hr1555-yak.txt

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------

    [Congressional Record: May 13, 1999 (House)]
    [Page H3112-H3141]
    From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
    [DOCID:cr13my99-42]

              INTELLIGENCE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000

    [Excerpt]

                 Amendment No. 2 Offered By Mr. Barr of Georgia

      Mr. BARR of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
      The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
      The text of the amendment is as follows:

           Amendment No. 2 offered by Mr. Barr of Georgia:
           At the end of title III (page 10, after line 2), insert the
         following new section:

         SEC. 304. REPORT ON LEGAL STANDARDS APPLIED FOR ELECTRONIC
                       SURVEILLANCE.

           (a) Report.--Not later than 60 days after the date of the
         enactment of this Act, the Director of Central Intelligence,
         the Director of the National Security Agency, and the
         Attorney General shall jointly prepare, and the Director of
         the National Security Agency shall submit to the appropriate
         congressional committees a report in classified and
         unclassified form describing the legal standards employed by
         elements of the intelligence community in conducting signals
         intelligence activities, including electronic surveillance.
           (b) Matters Specifically Addressed.--The report shall
         specifically include a statement of each of the following
         legal standards:
           (1) The legal standards for interception of communications
         when such interception may result in the acquisition of
         information from a communication to or from United States
         persons.
           (2) The legal standards for intentional targeting of the
         communications to or from United States persons.
           (3) The legal standards for receipt from non-United States
         sources of information pertaining to communications to or
         from United States persons.
           (4) The legal standards for dissemination of information
         acquired through the interception of the communications to or
         from United States persons.
           (c) Inclusion of Legal Memoranda and Opinions.--The report
         under subsection (a) shall include a copy of all legal
         memoranda, opinions, and other related documents in
         unclassified, and if necessary, classified form with respect
         to the conduct of signals intelligence activities, including
         electronic surveillance by elements of the intelligence
         community, utilized by the Office of the General Counsel of
         the National Security Agency, by the Office of General
         Counsel of the Central Intelligence Agency, or by the Office
         of Intelligence Policy Review of the Department of Justice,
         in preparation of the report.
           (d) Definition.--As used in this section:
           (1) The term ``intelligence community'' has the meaning
         given that term under section 3(4) of the National Security
         Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 401a(4)).
           (2) The term ``United States persons'' has the meaning
         given such term under section 101(i) of the Foreign
         Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1801(i)).
           (3) The term ``appropriate congressional committees'' means
         the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the
         Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives,
         and the Select Committee on Intelligence and the Committee on
         the Judiciary of the Senate.

      Mr. BARR of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I had the honor of serving this
    great land back in the 1970s, including those years in which the
    government of our country, in an effort to institutionalize proper
    oversight of our intelligence agencies, enacted public laws that
    established the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and
    the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.
      In the intervening generation, these committees, including under the
    current leadership of the gentleman from Florida (Chairman Goss), have
    provided very, very essential oversight of the intelligence activities
    of our government.
      Hopefully in so doing, we have avoided any excesses that have given
    rise to some of the incidents in the past that have troubled our
    intelligence gathering capabilities and hurt the credibility of these
    great institutions such as the CIA.
      However, Mr. Chairman, the oversight with which the gentleman from
    Florida (Mr. Goss) and many others have worked so diligently to both
    implement and then preserve over the last 24 years is under attack
    right now, and the survivability of that oversight mechanism is
    threatened.
      I speak particularly, Mr. Chairman, of efforts by the intelligence
    community to deny proper information for the House Permanent Select
    Committee on Intelligence to conduct oversight, meaningful oversight
    responsibilities.
      For example, in recent communications between the chairman and the
    NSA, the general counsel of the NSA interposed what, by any stretch of
    the imagination, is a bogus claim of attorney/client privilege in an
    effort to deny the chairman and the committee members proper
    information with which to carry out their oversight responsibilities.
      In particular, the gentleman from Florida (Chairman Goss) was seeking
    very important information that goes to the standards whereby the
    intelligence community and the agencies comprising the intelligence
    community gather intelligence and gather information on American
    citizens.
      One such project in particular that has recently come to light, Mr.
    Chairman, is a project known as Project Echelon, which has been in
    place for several years and which, by accounts that we have recently
    seen in the media, engages in the intercession of literally millions of
    communications involving United States citizens over satellite
    transmissions, involving e-mail transmissions, Internet access, as

    [[Page H3130]]

    well as mobile phone communications and telephone communications.
      This information apparently is shared, at least in part, and
    coordinated, at least in part, with intelligence agencies of four other
    countries: the UK, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia.
      As part of our effort here in the Congress, both on the Select
    Committee on Intelligence, which the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss)
    chairs, as well as others of us, while not serving on that committee,
    are concerned about the privacy rights for American citizens and
    whether or not there are constitutional safeguards being circumvented
    by the manner in which the intelligence agencies are intercepting and/
    or receiving international communications back from foreign nations
    that would otherwise be prohibited by the prohibitions and the
    limitations on the collection of domestic intelligence.
      We have been trying to get information with regard to Project Echelon
    and others. The amendment that I propose today simply would require the
    intelligence community, and that is specifically the Department of
    Justice, the National Security Agency, and the CIA to provide to the
    Congress within 60 days of the enactment this Intelligence
    Authorization Act a report setting forth the legal basis and procedures
    whereby the intelligence community and the agencies comprising
    intelligence community gather intelligence.
      This will enable the intelligence community and the Committee on the
    Judiciary of both Houses to properly evaluate whether or not these
    procedures are being implemented properly according to proper legal and
    constitutional standards.
      It would be very interesting to see, Mr. Chairman, if the
    administration or the Senate opposes this very straightforward
    amendment, which simply requires a report on the legal basis for such
    interceptions to be furnished within 60 days to the Select Committee on
    Intelligence of both Houses and to the Committee on the Judiciary of
    both Houses.
      I ask Members on both sides of the aisle to support this very
    straightforward amendment, which not only will help guarantee the
    privacy rights for American citizens, but will protect the oversight
    responsibilities of the Congress which are now under assault by these
    bogus claims that the intelligence communities are making. I ask for
    the adoption of the amendment.
      Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
      Mr. Chairman, I want to say I very much appreciate the remarks of the
    distinguished gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Barr). He has characterized
    an ongoing vigilance of oversight matters that we carry on every day. I
    am certainly prepared to accept his amendment. I think it is useful and
    indeed helpful to some problems we are having directly now.

                                  {time}  1245

      I also think that it is helpful in the area of the very delicate
    balancing act that we have to do on HPSCI, and I hope we do it well. I
    think we do it well.
      It is, on the one hand, absolutely accepting no compromise on the
    rights of American citizens and, on the other hand, not tying the hands
    of our law enforcement people who are trying to catch people who are
    trying to work mischief against the United States of America. And it is
    not always as clear as it might be which it is at the beginning of a
    process involving individuals.
      So this is a very difficult judgment area for us. Nobody would want
    us, particularly in light of the news coming out of the weapons labs
    today, to release or relax our efforts to catch people who are trying
    to steal our secrets or penetrate our appropriately applied security
    arrangements. On the other hand, it is intolerable to think of the
    United States Government, of big brother, or anybody else invading the
    privacy of an American citizen without cause.
      I believe that the amendment offered by the gentleman from Georgia
    (Mr. Barr) will help in that debate, and I am prepared to accept it. I
    know that it is offered in that spirit, and I know that it will also be
    helpful to me in my current problems, making sure the intelligence
    community understands that penetrating oversight is here to stay. I
    think most of them are getting the message.
      Mr. DIXON. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
      The minority will accept this amendment.
      The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
    gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Barr).
      The amendment was agreed to.