No. Not until after it gets laundered. 702 collection is always 702 collection and treated as such. What is the basis for your laundering theory?
What I'm saying is it is not credible to claim those TI orders did not derive from 702.
-
-
(Note: it's also impossible to claim that given NSA use of Chinese New Years for roamer spike in 2012).
-
I don't know what you're talking about in this one so I can't respond.
-
I'm telling you that NSA has pointed to Chinese New Year to explain a big spike of roamer incidents, under a variety of authorities including 702, in the US. No need to respond. It is public record.
-
Ok, I'm just not seeing what this has to do with our discussion.
-
It is your claim that given a larger number of Chinese 702 targets who travel to the US to visit family would never lead downstream to TI orders against their US interlocutors?
-
I never say never, but I don't think you should assume that happens a lot. If it did, it would be derived from -> notice. When a 702 target enters the US, surveillance is stopped and any collection that may have come in before the target's presence in US was discovered is purged.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.