Last Week Tonight with John Oliver: Government Surveillance (HBO)

Our main story tonight

is government surveillance.

And I realize most people

would rather have a conversation

about literally any other topic.

Including: 'Is my smartphone

giving me cancer?

To which the answer is: probably.

Or: Do goldfish suffer from depression?

To which the answer is:

Yes, but very briefly.

But the fact is, it is vital that we

have a discussion about this now.

Because an important date is just around the corner.

"One big day to circle on the calendar,

when it comes to a very controversial subject.

The re-authorization of the Patriot Act,

and all of the controversial

provisions therein.

June 1 they've got to come to an agreement

to re-authorize or curttail those programs.

Yes. Some controversial provisions within

the Patriot Act are to expire on June 1.

So circle that date

on your calendars, everyone.

And while you're at it:

Circle June 2 as well.

Because that's Justin Long's birthday.

You all forgot last year...

and he f*cking noticed.

Now, over the last couple of years,

you've probably heard a lot about

strange-sounding programs. Such as:

X-Keyscore, Muscular, Prism, and Mystic.

Which are, coincidentally, also the names

of some of Florida's least popular

stripclubs.

"Welcome to X-Keyscore!

Our dancers are fully un-redacted

and Tuesday is wing-night!"

But if you don't mind, I would like to

refresh your memory over some of this.

And let's start our focussing on the most

controversial portion of the Patriot Act,

that is up for renewal. Section 215.

Which, I'm aware, sounds like the name

of an Eastern European boy-band.

"We are Section 215.

Prepare to have your hearts...

throbbed."

There's the cute one, the bad-boy,

the one who strangled a potato-farmer,

and the one without an eye-deficiency.

They're incredible.

But the contentst of the real Section 215

is actually even more sinister.

It's called Section 215.

Nicknamed: the library records provision.

Which allows the Government to require

businesses to hand over records of any

"any tangible things"

including: books, records, documents,

and other items.

If that sounds broad, that's because

it was very much written that way.

Section 215 says the Government can ask

for "any tangible things" so long as it's

"for an investigation to protect

against international terrorism".

Which is basically a blank cheque.

It's letting a teenager borrow the car,

under the strict condition that they

only use it for 'car-related activities'.

"Okay, mom and dad, I'm gonna use this

for a hand-job in the Wendy's parking lot,

but that is car-related,

so I think I'm covered."

Section 215 is overseen

by a secret intelligence-court,

known as the Pfizer-court.

And they've interpreted it to mean

the Government could basically

collect and store phone-records for

every American.

The vast majority of whom, of course, have

no connection to terrorism.

Unless, Aunt Cheryl has been greatly

mis-characterized the activities

of her needle-point club.

"It's a sleeper-cell!

Isn't is, Aunt Cheryl?"

"You are hanged for this, Aungt Cheryl.

You're a traiter and a terrible aunt.

Not in that order."

Now, the Government will point out

that under 215, they hold phone-records,

and not the calls themselves.

What the intelligence-community is doing,

is looking at phone-numbers,

and durations of calls,

they are not looking at peoples names,

and they are not looking at content.

Yes, but that's not entirely reassuring.

Because you can extrapolate a lot

from that information.

If they knew that you'd called your ex

12 times last night, between 1 and 4 AM,

for a duration of 15 minutes each time,

they can be fairly sure that you've left

some pretty pathetic voice-mails.

"I don't care whose monitoring this call,

Vicky, we should be together!

Pick up the phone, dammit!

I'm a human being, not an animal!"

Now, the Patriot-act was written,

just after 9-11.

And for years,

it was extended and re-authorized

with barely a passing thought.

In fact, it became so routine,

that when it was extended in 2011,

one newscaster just tacked it

onto the end of a report

about a Presidential trip abroad.

Chip Reemes. CBS-news is travelling

with the President in Dovell, France.

Also in France, by the way,

President Obama signed in

the law 4- year extension

of the terrorism fighting Patriot-Act.

Also in France, by the way?

By the way?

He threw that in,

like a mother telling her young daughter

that her childhood pet just died.

"Oh, nice talking to you, sweety.

Also, by the way, Mr. Peppers is dead,

see you at Christmas." BANG

But all of that,

was before the public was made aware

of what the Government's capabilities

actually were.

'Cause that all ended in June of 2013.

Edward Snowden has just

taken responsibility for one of the

biggest Government leaks in US history.

We learned that the Government has the

capacity to track virtually every American

phone-call, and to scoop up

impossibly vast quantities of data

across the Internet.

Revelations that the NSA eavesdropped

on world leaders.

Have you've ever been to the Bahamas,

the NSA could've recorded your phone-calls

and stored them up to a month.

All that information was exposed

by Edward Snowden.

And it is still kind of incredible,

that a 29-year old contractor,

was able to steal top-secret documents

from an organization

that LITERALLY has the word 'security'

in it's name.

Clearly, that was not great for them.

Because the only place where it should

be that easy for employees in their 20-ies

to steal, is a Lids store.

"Dude, you sure we should take this?"

"Relax, dude, it's a Miami Marlins-cap,

we're not exactly selling

Fabergé eggs here."

It is still unclear,

exactly how many documents

Edward Snowden stole.

Although he is consistently trying

to re-assure people that he put them

in good hands.

Honestly, I don't want to be the person

making the decisions about what should

be public and what shouldn't.

Which is why I, rather than publishing

these on my own or putting them openly,

I'm putting them through journalists.

Well, that sounds great.

But of course it's not a fail-safe plan.

As was proven when the New York Times

published this slide,

but did such a sloppy job of blocking out

redacted information, that some people

were able to read the information behind

that black bar,

which concerned how the US was monitoring

Al-Qaida in Mosul,

a group now known as ISIS.

So essentially,

a national security secret was leaked,

because no-one at the Times knows

how to use Microsoft Paint.

And look, you can think

that Snowden did the wrong thing, or

did it in the wrong way.

But the fact it,

we have this information now,

and we no longer get the luxury

of pleading ignorance.

It's like you can't go to Sea World and

pretend Sha-Mu's happy anymore.

When we now know,

at least have the water in her tank

is whale-tears.

We know that now.

You can't un-know that information.

So you have to bear that in mind.

But here's the thing:

It's now 2 years later,

and it seems like we've kind of

forgotten to have a debate

over the content of what Snowden leaked.

A recent Pew-report found that nearly

half of Americans say they're

'not very concerned', of 'not at all

concerned' about Government surveillance.

Which is fine.

If that's an informed opinion.

But I'm not sure that it is.

Because we actually sent a camera-crew

to Times Square to ask some random

passers by who Edward Snowden was,

and what he did.

And there are the responses that we got.

I have no idea who Edward Snowden is.

Have no idea who Edward Snowden is.

I've heard the name, I just can't picutre

right now exactly what it is.

Edward Snowden...

No. I do not.

Just for the record, that wasn't

cherry picking.

That was entirely reflective of everyone

we spoke to.

Although, to be fair, some people

did remember his name,

they just couldn't remember why.

He sold some information to people.

He revealed some information

that shouldn't have been revealed.

I think from what I remember,

is that the information that he shared

was detrimental to our military secrets?

And keeping our soldiers

and our country safe?

He leaked documents what the Army's

operations in Iraq.

Edward Snowden revealed a bunch

of secrets, I guess, or information

into Wiki, Wikileaks?

Edward Snowden leaked...

he's in charge of Wikileaks?

Edward Snowden revealed a lot of

documents through Wikileaks...?

Okay, so here's the thing:

Edward Snowden is NOT the Wikileaks guy.

The Wikileaks guy is Julian Assange.

And you do not want to

be confused by him.

Partly because he was far less careful

than Snowden with what he released,

and how.

And partly because he resembles

a sandwich-bag full of biscuits while

wearing a Stevie Knicks-wig.

And that is, that is ciritical.

Julian Assange is not a like-able man.

Even Benedict Cumberbatch could not

make him like-able.

He's un-Cumberbatch-able.

That was supposed to be

physically impossible.

I don't blame people for being confused.

We've been looking at this story

for the last 2 weeks,

and it is hard to get your head around.

Not just because there are so many

complicated programs to keep track of,

but also because

there are no easy answers here.

We all naturally want perfect privacy,

and perfect safety.

But those 2 things cannot coexist.

It's like how you can't have

a badass pet falcon...

and an adorable pet vole named Herbert.

Either you have to lose one of them,

which obviously you don't want to do.

Or you have to accept some reasonable

restrictions on both of them.

Now to be fair, the NSA will argue

that just because they can do something

doesn't mean they do do it.

And, that there are restrictions on their

operations, such as the Pfizer-court,

which, must approve requests for

foreign surveillance.

But.

In 34 years, that court has approved

some 35000 applications,

and only rejected 12.

Yes. Much like Robert Durst's second wife.

The Pfizer-court is alarmingly accepting.

"Listen, Robert, I'm not gonna

ask you too many questions.

I'm just gonna give you the benefit of the

doubts that you clearly don't deserve."

At least tell him to blink and burp less.

The burping might be the most troubling

thing about that show.

So, so maybe there's time for us to talk.

About where the limits should be.

And the best place to start would be

Section 215.

Not just because it's the easiest one

to understand,

but there is wide-spread agreement

it needs to be reformed.

From the President, to Ted Cruz,

to both the ACLU and the NRA,

to even the guy who wrote the thing

in the first place.

I was the principal author

of the Patriot Act.

I can say that without qualification

Congress never did intend to allow

bulk-collections when it passed

Section 215.

And no fair reading of the text would

allow for this program.

Think about that.

He was the author.

That's the