Wyden, Udall vindicated: Obama Admin Caught LYING?

[kpete]

Wyden, Udall vindicated: Loophole allows for warrantless searches of phone and email records
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/08/09/1230099/-Wyden-Udall-vindicated-Loophole-allows-for-warrantless-searches-of-phone-and-email-records

The previously undisclosed rule change allows NSA operatives to hunt for individual Americans' communications using their name or other identifying information. Senator Ron Wyden told the Guardian that the law provides the NSA with a loophole potentially allowing "warrantless searches for the phone calls or emails of law-abiding Americans".

OBAMA LIED :

The authority, approved in 2011, appears to contrast with repeated assurances from Barack Obama and senior intelligence officials to both Congress and the American public that the privacy of US citizens is protected from the NSA's dragnet surveillance programs.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/09/nsa-loophole-warrantless-searches-email-calls

[ProSense]

1. Um

"Wyden, Udall vindicated: Obama Admin Caught LYING?"

...wrong. The document shows the NSA prohibits targeting Americans: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023434559

[Rex]

3. It doesn't prohibit anything, it makes it legal.

If you have permission, then you are not prohibited from information. You don't have to target anyone. Really a brilliant move.

[ProSense]

4. No, and it doesn't give permission. In the

footnote and the article, it states specifically that it's prohibited.

"While the FAA 702 minimization procedures approved on 3 October 2011 now allow for use of certain United States person names and identifiers as query terms when reviewing collected FAA 702 data," the glossary states, "analysts may NOT/NOT (not repeat not) implement any USP (US persons) queries until an effective oversight process has been developed by NSA and agreed to by DOJ/ODNI (Office of the Director of National Intelligence)."

<...>

The document – which is undated, though metadata suggests this version was last updated in June 2012 – does not say whether the oversight process it mentions has been established or whether any searches against US person names have taken place.

Also, this is the foreign program not the NSA domestic programs.

[Rex]

5. They are not targeting American citizens.

They don't need to with metadata. Again, brilliant move.

[woo me with science]

11. +1 An unfathomably slimy strategy.

Precisely that which makes it unconstitutional (sweeping, total collection of data rather than obtaining specific warrants for specific searches as required by the Constitution), in this twisted logic, is what makes it "legal."

We have truly been pushed through the police state looking glass.

[Rex]

13. All the talk about 'targeting' is like pretending there is a drone

out there spying on the individual. Nope. Nothing like that. Many people are sitting there thinking that right now. 'Targeting American citizens'...no. not. not happening. Not physical. Not something you can see outside your window. Metadata can't be watered like a plant.

Data mining in the virtual world is legal and with the Patriot Act, completely allowed. Especially if you have a company that agrees with the government. Then there is NO need for a warrant.

Read the small print folks when you sign up for things on the WWW.

Right? Who does?

[woo me with science]

15. Yup, and what's the alternative?

I always roll my eyes at the argument that people sign up for these things willingly, when, more and more, participation in our society offers little alternative, unless you want to go live in a cabin and explain to your boss why you choose not to have a cell phone or use the internet.

Last year I read the Obama administration's proposal and solicitation to the business community for plans for an internet ID. The whole thing was about how the ID would be marketed as wholly optional, but that the business plan would use financial carrots and cudgels to ensure that it would be impossible for websites to decline to require it. They want it to blanket the internet in a very short period of time and for its use to be unavoidable.

[Rex]

18. You would need an alt backbone to the WWW.

And even then you will get hacked by many nations and individuals not to mention corporations.

FIRST THING, REPEAL the PATRIOT ACT!

That would be the FIRST thing I would do!

Got to start somewhere.








Got to prove that America will not give in to hysteria.

[dkf]

34. Like TOR where they insert tracking data through malicious code?

Get real. It doesn't matter if you sign up to be tracked or not. They will find a way.

[Rex]

40. I agree, if a thief wants to steal your car

chances are they will. People are just coming around to these virtual privacy issues now, without realizing the system in place doesn't allow for privacy. It was created to transfer massive amounts of information.

[Aerows]

25. You never really loved him

have boxes in your garage, your mother was a hamster and your father smells of elderberries.

[Rex]

27. I have defenses in place to deal with the British.

[Aerows]

31. LMAO

Perfect

[Rex]

38. HEHE

Got to laugh when ya can!

[Aerows]

41. Indeed, my friend

And that was funny!

[Rex]

48. It is you, you picked the very best from the start.

I only had what you gave me to work with! What better troupe to represent this current political 'kabuki theater' than MP?

[leftstreet]

39. snort

[Rex]

42. There is NO WAY we can fit in a medieval trojan into this conversation.

Yeah... you knew it was coming...

[Aerows]

46. The facepalm

was aptly fitting for this conversation

[woo me with science]

28. Bwah!

"...your father smells of elderberries."

[Aerows]

33. :D

Have to get the laughs when I can get them

[limpyhobbler]

66. Nope. The Patriot Act requires data collection be relevant to a specific authorized investigation.

It doesn't allow for mass surveillance and dragnet collection of metadata, or non-meta data.

Under Patriot Act data collection has to be relevant to a specific authorized investigation.

The leaked Verizon FISA warrant clearly showed they were slurping in all kind of data not related to a specific investigation.

Sorry.

[Cryptoad]

45. Its not unconstitutional ,,,,,

It has the Court's blessing,

Still no eviedence of any illegal acts

just more and more speculation and conjecture

Yall sure Snowden is not a plant by the Far Right Wing?

Im starting to have my doubts

[Aerows]

49. Plants by the far right wing

wouldn't do such an embarrassing job of fucking up that they are right wing plant jobs. I don't have that much faith in the right wing that they could be as stupidly arrogant as the NSA has been.

[woo me with science]

53. "It's not unconstitutional!" "They're not lying!"

War is Peace!
Freedom is Slavery!
Ignorance is Strength!
2 + 2 = 5!
The Chained CPI is Superlative!
Drone murders are Legal, Ethical, and Wise!
Health Care is Affordable!
Edward Snowden is the Traitor!
G.H.W. Bush made the world a Kinder and Gentler Place!
Spying on the Public is in the Public Interest!
America is not spying on the Public!
It's not Unconstitutional!
Lies are not Lies!

We Love Big Brother.

[Cryptoad]

65. ummmmm

Benghazi,,,,,,,Drink!

[kelliekat44]

6. You can't win this argument with facts and truth. Thanks, anyway. nt

[Rex]

7. I just agreed, but that was funny.

Maybe knee jerk somewhere else?

[Douglas Carpenter]

8. you might as well as try to convince a "saved" fundamentalist Christian that the Bible is not the

inerrant word of God - infallible in all ways.

[woo me with science]

16. You forgot to capitalize "Truth." nt

[SomethingFishy]

9. That is 100% correct..

But Wyden and Udall say this:

"Section 702 was intended to give the government new authorities to collect the communications of individuals believed to be foreigners outside the US, but the intelligence community has been unable to tell Congress how many Americans have had their communications swept up in that collection," he said.

"Once Americans' communications are collected, a gap in the law that I call the 'back-door searches loophole' allows the government to potentially go through these communications and conduct warrantless searches for the phone calls or emails of law-abiding Americans."

Wyden, along with his intelligence committee colleague Mark Udall, have attempted repeatedly to warn publicly about the ability of the intelligence community to look at the communications of US citizens, but are limited by their obligation not to reveal highly classified information.

But in a letter they recently wrote to the NSA director, General Keith Alexander, the two senators warned that a fact sheet released by the NSA in the wake of the initial Prism revelations to reassure the American public about domestic surveillance was misleading."

There's more but I am limited to the 4 paragraph rule.

So are you saying that Udall and Wyden are lying?

[DevonRex]

14. It is absolutely IMPOSSIBLE to say who is on the other end

with 100% certainty unless you have eyes on them, know them, have some way to ID them. Do you not understand WHY NSA cannot say how many have been swept up? Even when you have a phone number or an email address you have no certainty who is on the other end.

They do their best to target non-Americans.

[SomethingFishy]

17. Yes I do understand... What I don't understand is how

people can claim that "Americans are not being spied on" in one breath and then tell me that "the NSA cannot say how many have been swept up" in another. Either it's happening or it isn't. According to Udall and Wyden is IS happening but they can't talk about it. According to section 702 it is NOT happening. So do I believe the paperwork or the men?

"They do their best to target non-Americans". That statement is false. They do their best NOT to target Americans who are not communicating overseas. But according to Udall and Wyden stuff is slipping through the cracks. According to other reports the stuff that is "slipping through the cracks" is being used by the DEA. Now there is a report that the IRS is also using the data.

[Rex]

20. People forget that it is a virtual world.

Doesn't follow the exact same rules as the real world. Like you said, unless you have 'eyes on' you really have no idea who is at the other end of that IP.

[DevonRex]

36. Way before this, and even now, in a radio frequency world,

Conversations you don't want to hear intrude on what you're targeting. Say, 1983 Soviet nuclear launch sequences. And all the sudden you get a German farmer telling his wife he's moving his herd and won't be home for lunch. You adjust the equipment, tune him out.

Just think about how much military communication relies on radio frequency. And how much listening in goes on. And how many other people rely on the airwaves. Like farmers. Truck drivers. And terrorists. It's mobile. There one minute and gone the next. A lot of people in war zones are listened to that don't matter to the mission. They're tuned out.

They've just added cyberspace. More useless chatter that doesn't matter to the mission.They weed it out.

[bvar22]

44. No they do NOT "do their best" to target non-americans.

They only have to have a 51% probability of the "foreignness" of the people they are spying on.
"That is a Coin Flip plus 1%"---john Oliver

"According to the Washington Post, the National Security Agency (NSA) project PRISM requires just 51% confidence in what NSA agents term a person’s “foreignness” to access their audio and video chats, photographs, emails, documents, and connection logs. The government’s purported authority for the program comes from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Amendments Act."

https://www.cdt.org/blogs/1006we-are-49

The 51% confidence parameter allows these government spies to collect and store insane amounts of data on American Citizens with a HUGE escape clause.
If he is EVER questioned, ALL the Government Spy has to do is state that he had a 51% "confidence" in the foreignness of his one person involved in the communication at the time the information was recorded,
and its ALL GOOD.

To state that "They do their best to target non-Americans is a HUGE exaggeration as the expose on the group entertainment eavesdropping on the personal conversations our soldiers in Iraq with their wives has shown.

[Cryptoad]

47. no they are not lying,,,,,

they are speculating..

[SomethingFishy]

51. What makes you say that? According to them they have the information

they just are not allowed to present it as it is classified.

So how is actually having the information speculating?

[Cryptoad]

64. Thats what the Tea Party

says about Benghazi and IRS...... they have the evidence but it is never revealed...... same tactics....

[DevonRex]

10. Yeah. This IS the foreign program. Not domestic. That is the section

of the law this comes from.

[ProSense]

32. Not only that, but

the document and the article makes the headline bullshit. The document states explicitly that targeting American it prohibits.

[Douglas Carpenter]

2. knr

[truebluegreen]

12. K&R.

My Senator (Udall) has been waving his arms about the secret interpretations and illegal application of the PATRIOT Act for years.

I'm glad the truth is finally coming out.

[Dustlawyer]

19. This is how they reign in the internets! They own the mass media except for the net!

Now they can check our pulse constantly. They will not be surprised by a OWS type movement again!

[annabanana]

60. ^^^ what YOU said . . . n/t

[rhett o rick]

21. k&r thanks for posting. nm

[WillyT]

22. K & R !!!

[A Simple Game]

23. The following says a lot.

This:

The previously undisclosed rule change allows NSA operatives to hunt for individual Americans' communications using their name or other identifying information.

Bold is mine. Identifying information, they are searching all communications looking for key words, they throw a few names in to make it seem legal.

I find it hard to believe there are people that still think they are sweeping up all of this data and not even analyzing it. They aren't spending all of that money to just let all of that information sit there.

[Hydra]

24. I'll add to that

Secret minimization procedures dating from 2009, published in June by the Guardian, revealed that the NSA could make use of any "inadvertently acquired" information on US persons under a defined range of circumstances, including if they held usable intelligence, information on criminal activity, threat of harm to people or property, are encrypted or are believed to contain any information relevant to cybersecurity.

So basically, they can hold on to anything they "inadvertently" find if it's even remotely useful to them, and then they can send you to jail with it if it violates even a slightly obscure law.

I'm sure they "inadvertently acquire" all of the data and keep all the goodies they find there.

Since they're working on criminalizing dissent, my post here at some point could become illegal.

[woo me with science]

30. Worse and worse.

I am constantly wanting to underline and highlight posts and put exclamation points around them.

You run out of words for the constant escalation of horror and disbelief.

[BlueStreak]

57. Right. Each word is worse than the last

The whole thing can be summed up as, "We can't use the information, unless it is useful to us."

"And of course, the only people who can say whether it is useful or not are us."

[99th_Monkey]

26. Thanks kpete for this. K&R nt

[liberal_at_heart]

29. K&R.

[lamp_shade]

35. ofercrissake, Pete...

[ProSense]

37. "Obama lied" because of a Guardian title

not supported by the document.

They should send that document and the article to Congress as evidence.

LOL!

[randome]

62. You'd think after John Lewis' recant of the Guardian headline...

...people would be able to better separate hyperbolic phrasing from the facts.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[DeSwiss]

43. Obama? Lie?

- Clearly you have no appreciation for eleventy-dimensional chess.

K&R

[BlueStreak]

58. It isn't a lie. It is just another dimension of the truth.

[marions ghost]

50. Yottabytes

[KoKo]

54. Very Cool!

[marions ghost]

59. Sometimes

only a cartoon can express the surreal insanity...

Land of the "free" and home of the Surveilled.

[KoKo]

61. I know... it took a bit of time coming "this time around"

but, glad to see they are back!

[bvar22]

52. DURec.

....and an extra rec for the post upthread that said we should be spending this time and money feeding hungry people.
THAT is the best way to make fewer "terrorists" at home and abroad,
and one I have no problem supporting.

KUDOS to the people who make friends and earn respect,
and SHAME on those who make more enemies.


You will know them by their [font size=3]WORKS.[/font]

[AzDar]

55. K & R

[avaistheone1]

56. K&R

[Cha]

63. Oh, the, fucking spinning for snowden, guardian. I trust PBO

over that shiller for snowden.

not buyin' the bullshit it's selling.