United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: Republican Controlled House Approves Sweeping, Bipartisan Warrantless Electronic Spy Powers
Source:
Wired
URL Source: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/09/house-approves-spy-bill/
Published: Sep 22, 2012
Author: David Kravets
Post Date: 2012-09-22 10:18:13 by Fibr Dog
Keywords: None
Views: 1616
Comments: 4
The House on Wednesday reauthorized for five years broad electronic eavesdropping powers that legalized and expanded the George W. Bush administration’s warrantless wiretapping program. The FISA Amendments Act, (.pdf) which is expiring at year’s end, allows the government to electronically eavesdrop on Americans’ phone calls and e-mails without a probable-cause warrant so long as one of the parties to the communication is believed outside the United States. The communications may be intercepted “to acquire foreign intelligence information.” The government has also interpreted the law to mean that as long as the real target is al-Qaida, the government can wiretap purely domestic e-mails and phone calls without getting a warrant from a judge. That’s according to David Kris, a former top anti-terrorism attorney at the Justice Department. The measure is sponsored by Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) and the Obama administration has called its passage a top intelligence priority. (.pdf) The bill generally requires the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Court to rubber-stamp terror-related electronic surveillance requests that ensnare Americans’ communications. The government does not have to identify the target or facility to be monitored. It can begin surveillance a week before making the request, and the surveillance can continue during the appeals process if, in a rare case, the secret FISA court rejects the surveillance application. The court’s rulings are not public. The vote was 301-118 in favor of passage, with 111 Democrats and seven Republicans voting no. Smith, while imploring the House to pass the measure, said the FISA Amendments Act “is one of the most important votes we cast in this Congress.” Terrorists, he added, “are committed to the destruction of our country.” Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-California) countered during a more than hour debate on the floor, urging the House to defeat the measure. “I think the government needs to comply with the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution all the time,” she said. “We can be safe while still complying with the Constitution of the United States.” Rep. Dan Lungren (R-California) demanded that his colleagues support the bill. “This is critical to the protection of the American people,” he said. Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-South Carolina), in a passionate plea, sided with Lungren. ”Intelligence is the lifeblood of our ability to defend ourselves,” he said. Moments later, he added: “Are we to believe that the Fourth Amendment applies to the entire world?” But the future of the spy powers remains murky, despite the rhetoric on both sides of the political aisle in the House. Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Oregon) has put a hold on the matching bill in the Senate. Among other reasons, he said the government should disclose how many Americans’ communications have been intercepted under the law, which was adopted in 2008 as a way to legalize the Bush administration’s warrantless wiretapping program that was initiated in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks. The intelligence services say such an accounting is not possible and may not even be legal. Though even broad outlines of the NSA’s collection program are classified, presumably the NSA is collecting a staggering amount of Americans’ conversations, but only examining a small slice of them. The House version extends the spy powers until Dec. 31, 2017. The similar bill in the Senate, which in May passed the Senate Intelligence Committee and the Senate Judiciary Committee last month, extends the powers for three years. According to one former Justice Department official, the FISA Amendments Act gives the government nearly carte blanche spying powers. Kris, who headed the Justice Department’s National Security Division between 2009 and 20011, writes in the revised 2012 edition of National Security Investigations and Prosecutions: For example, an authorization targeting ‘al Qaeda’ — which is a non-U.S. person located abroad—could allow the government to wiretap any telephone that it believes will yield information from or about al Qaeda, either because the telephone is registered to a person whom the government believes is affiliated with al Qaeda, or because the government believes that the person communicates with others who are affiliated with al Qaeda, regardless of the location of the telephone. The American Civil Liberties Union, in a letter (.pdf) signed by 20 rights groups, urged the House to oppose the measure. The groups echoed Wyden, saying if the measure is passed, lawmakers should require the Obama administration to publicize how often the act vacuums Americans’ communications and to ensure that “information collected under the FAA is not repurposed for government uses unrelated to national security.” Many Democratic lawmakers, including Rep. John Conyers (D-Michigan), were willing to extend the spy powers for three years, while adding in the safeguards that Wyden and the ACLU noted. “That’s a compromise you can’t turn from,” Conyers said. For his part, Wyden has barred the Senate from a routine vote on the bill by invoking a little-used legislative power — called a hold — to block lawmakers from taking a procedural consent vote. Instead, he demands a floor debate that can draw out the approval process indefinitely via the filibuster. Still, Wyden said he would be willing to agree to a short-term extension, instead of seeing the spy powers lapse December 31, as a way to give lawmakers more time to reach a deal. The National Security Agency told lawmakers that it would be a violation of Americans’ privacy to disclose how the measure is being used in practice. The NSA said the “NSA leadership agreed that an IG (Inspector General) review of the sort suggested would further violate the privacy of U.S. persons.”
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Fibr Dog (#0)
Absolutely despicable. More proof that both parties are utterly corrupt.
Don't you know? The leather from Republican boots taste better than the leather from Democrat boots and feels much more comfortable across the neck! Go Mitt!
Of course they have. Did ANYBODY really believe this wasn't the intention from the very beginning? When was the last time government DIDN'T seek to expand it's power? This is why we have/had the Bill of Rights. Good thing we got those 'murikan Republicas pertecktin usens,huh? The government does not have to identify the target or facility to be monitored. That way they can continue to expand their empire to the point where it's too large and powerful to ever eliminate,and the larger the empire the more money and perks the political insiders that get appointed to run this operatIon get to claim as a personal prize. AND.....,the business of stamping out terrorism is a lot like the business of stamping out racism. If you want to stay in biz and expand,you have to find it where it doesn't exist. Which is no real problem because the accused either have to plead guilty for reduced charges,or fact bankruptcy trying to prove their innocence to a system that has to find guilt to survive. Gee,THERE'S a shock,huh? Anybody remember the good old days,back when the government had to to prove your guilt instead of you having to prove your innocence to the very same people that charged you? The government does not have to identify the target or facility to be monitored. It can begin surveillance a week before making the request, and the surveillance can continue during the appeals process if, in a rare case, the secret FISA court rejects the surveillance application. The court’s rulings are not public. If Hitler,Stalin,or Mao were still alive,they would be green with envy. .” Terrorists, he added, “are committed to the destruction of our country.” Yes they are,and our elected officials and the international bankers that pull their strings absolutely HATE competition. Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-California) countered during a more than hour debate on the floor, urging the House to defeat the measure. “I think the government needs to comply with the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution all the time,” she said. “We can be safe while still complying with the Constitution of the United States.” What? The GOVERNMENT obey the law of the land that they are sworn to uphold? What a novel concept! She must be one of those radicals that think the people are the masters of the government,instead of the other way around. I'm not worried,though! I have a former Governor of the conservative state of Massuncuetts riding to the rescue! Massuncuetts Mitt is going to save us all! HEY! Would the party of the Bush Crime Family,Bob Dolt,and John McLunatic lie to me? Rep. Dan Lungren (R-California) demanded that his colleagues support the bill. “This is critical to the protection of the American people,” he said. Calling on all good Party People to support Party over Constitution! Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-South Carolina), in a passionate plea, sided with Lungren. ”Intelligence is the lifeblood of our ability to defend ourselves,” he said. Moments later, he added: “Are we to believe that the Fourth Amendment applies to the entire world?” This boy is too stupid for words. Which means he is the PERFECT representative for the alleged Republican Party People. If anybody can truly represent them,it is him. The intelligence services say such an accounting is not possible and may not even be legal. Yeah,and we all know how horrified they would be if they do something illegal,don't we? For example, an authorization targeting ‘al Qaeda’ — which is a non-U.S. person located abroad—could allow the government to wiretap any telephone that it believes will yield information from or about al Qaeda, either because the telephone is registered to a person whom the government believes is affiliated with al Qaeda, or because the government believes that the person communicates with others who are affiliated with al Qaeda, regardless of the location of the telephone. Ok,if they have evidence to support this they can't get a wiretapping warrant under the Bill of Rights because of WHAT reasons? The American Civil Liberties Union, in a letter (.pdf) signed by 20 rights groups, urged the House to oppose the measure. The groups echoed Wyden, saying if the measure is passed, lawmakers should require the Obama administration to publicize how often the act vacuums Americans’ communications and to ensure that “information collected under the FAA is not repurposed for government uses unrelated to national security.” Probably the most telling and important sentence in this whole report. I can't wait to hear the usual suspects proclaiming how "conservative" they are while damning the ACLU as s "communist front organization." I need the laughs.
"It is impossible to talk reason with those who can only parrot Party Slogans." sneakypete Sept 2011 Stay Hungry...Stay Foolish --Steve Jobs Steve Jobs,life-long Dim,and major Barry Soetoro supporter.
Of course they have. Did ANYBODY really believe this wasn't the intention from the very beginning? When was the last time government DIDN'T seek to expand it's power? This is why we have/had the Bill of Rights. Good thing we got those 'murikan Republicas pertecktin usens,huh? The government does not have to identify the target or facility to be monitored. That way they can continue to expand their empire to the point where it's too large and powerful to ever eliminate,and the larger the empire the more money and perks the political insiders that get appointed to run this operatIon get to claim as a personal prize. AND.....,the business of stamping out terrorism is a lot like the business of stamping out racism. If you want to stay in biz and expand,you have to find it where it doesn't exist. Which is no real problem because the accused either have to plead guilty for reduced charges,or fact bankruptcy trying to prove their innocence to a system that has to find guilt to survive. Gee,THERE'S a shock,huh? Anybody remember the good old days,back when the government had to to prove your guilt instead of you having to prove your innocence to the very same people that charged you? The government does not have to identify the target or facility to be monitored. It can begin surveillance a week before making the request, and the surveillance can continue during the appeals process if, in a rare case, the secret FISA court rejects the surveillance application. The court’s rulings are not public. If Hitler,Stalin,or Mao were still alive,they would be green with envy. .” Terrorists, he added, “are committed to the destruction of our country.” Yes they are,and our elected officials and the international bankers that pull their strings absolutely HATE competition. Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-California) countered during a more than hour debate on the floor, urging the House to defeat the measure. “I think the government needs to comply with the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution all the time,” she said. “We can be safe while still complying with the Constitution of the United States.” What? The GOVERNMENT obey the law of the land that they are sworn to uphold? What a novel concept! She must be one of those radicals that think the people are the masters of the government,instead of the other way around. I'm not worried,though! I have a former Governor of the conservative state of Massuncuetts riding to the rescue! Massuncuetts Mitt is going to save us all! HEY! Would the party of the Bush Crime Family,Bob Dolt,and John McLunatic lie to me? Rep. Dan Lungren (R-California) demanded that his colleagues support the bill. “This is critical to the protection of the American people,” he said. Calling on all good Party People to support Party over Constitution! Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-South Carolina), in a passionate plea, sided with Lungren. ”Intelligence is the lifeblood of our ability to defend ourselves,” he said. Moments later, he added: “Are we to believe that the Fourth Amendment applies to the entire world?” This boy is too stupid for words. Which means he is the PERFECT representative for the alleged Republican Party People. If anybody can truly represent them,it is him. The intelligence services say such an accounting is not possible and may not even be legal. Yeah,and we all know how horrified they would be if they do something illegal,don't we? For example, an authorization targeting ‘al Qaeda’ — which is a non-U.S. person located abroad—could allow the government to wiretap any telephone that it believes will yield information from or about al Qaeda, either because the telephone is registered to a person whom the government believes is affiliated with al Qaeda, or because the government believes that the person communicates with others who are affiliated with al Qaeda, regardless of the location of the telephone. Ok,if they have evidence to support this they can't get a wiretapping warrant under the Bill of Rights because of WHAT reasons? The American Civil Liberties Union, in a letter (.pdf) signed by 20 rights groups, urged the House to oppose the measure. The groups echoed Wyden, saying if the measure is passed, lawmakers should require the Obama administration to publicize how often the act vacuums Americans’ communications and to ensure that “information collected under the FAA is not repurposed for government uses unrelated to national security.” Probably the most telling and important sentence in this whole report. I can't wait to hear the usual suspects proclaiming how "conservative" they are while damning the ACLU as s "communist front organization." I need the laughs.
"It is impossible to talk reason with those who can only parrot Party Slogans." sneakypete Sept 2011 Stay Hungry...Stay Foolish --Steve Jobs Steve Jobs,life-long Dim,and major Barry Soetoro supporter.
"I am relying on my personal experience with Morons, which have been universally positive." -jwpegler
#2. To: Capitalist Eric (#1)
(Edited)
#3. To: Fibr Dog, *Bill of Rights-Constitution*, *The Two Parties ARE the Same*, *Crime and Corruption*, *Bang List*, *Hypocrisy and Hypocrites*, *Politics and Politicians* (#0)
The government has also interpreted the law to mean that as long as the real target is al-Qaida, the government can wiretap purely domestic e-mails and phone calls without getting a warrant from a judge.
#4. To: Fibr Dog, *Bill of Rights-Constitution* (#0)
The government has also interpreted the law to mean that as long as the real target is al-Qaida, the government can wiretap purely domestic e-mails and phone calls without getting a warrant from a judge.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]