NSA loophole allows warrantless search for US citizens' emails and phone calls
Source: Guardian
The National Security Agency has a secret backdoor into its vast databases under a legal authority enabling it to search for US citizens' email and phone calls without a warrant, according to a top-secret document passed to the Guardian by Edward Snowden.
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 the NSA's authorities provide loopholes that allow "warrantless searches for the phone calls or emails of law-abiding Americans".
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.
The intelligence data is being gathered under Section 702 of the of the Fisa Amendments Act (FAA), which gives the NSA authority to target without warrant the communications of foreign targets, who must be non-US citizens and outside the US at the point of collection.
The communications of Americans in direct contact with foreign targets can also be collected without a warrant, and the intelligence agencies acknowledge that purely domestic communications can also be inadvertently swept into its databases. That process is known as "incidental collection" in surveillance parlance...
<snip>
Read more: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/09/nsa-loophole-warrantless-searches-email-calls
hlthe2b
(101,729 posts)denials and obfuscations.
like more speculation and conjecture,,,,,,, seems Snowden is like Issa ,,, he has no evidence!
villager
(26,001 posts)But your satirical reply in the style of the apologentia is absolutely accurate!
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)who seem to ALL be part of the apologencia. Ain't that a coinkidink? I can't put them on Ignore fast enough.
villager
(26,001 posts)...lecturing down to anyone who dares disagree (newbies, other posters coming out of the woodwork for the occasion, etc.!)
Check out similar posts in the same vein "downthread!"
Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)to make your argument that since a person has not spent most their lives posting on DU , they have nothing to say , heh? But keep beating that drum...!
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Why would he lie?
Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)he has presented any evidence of any illegal act. Tea Party would be Proud!
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Welcome to the ignore file!
Th1onein
(8,514 posts)And enjoy your stay on my Ignore list!
Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)argue the Truth,,,, you can always ignore it! another Tea Party edict!
JoeyT
(6,785 posts)had you actually told any truth. You compared Wyden to the Tea Party, a patently moronic statement if ever there was one.
The only Tea Party edict I've seen so far in this thread is "Say something profoundly stupid and pretend to be vindicated when people call you on it.", and it wasn't Wyden that did it.
Edited to add: And further adding to the silliness, you didn't really even make any claims that could be argued. Other than demanding evidence, and at this stage demands for evidence are pretty much ranking up there with Climate Change denial: It doesn't matter how much is presented, it's never going to be enough because the people doing the asking are being intellectually dishonest. A tactic delightfully referred to as JAQing (Just Asking Questions) off. It's not an attempt to question or disprove a theory, or a demand to evaluate evidence. It's a derailing tactic, nothing more.
Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)I compared you to the Tea Party not Wyden.
btw that is another Tea Party trait, lack of Reading skills
Ash_F
(5,861 posts)Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)dissertation , i worried about such things! But if there is something you are unable to understand in my post I will gladly clarify!
JoeyT
(6,785 posts)In response to "Senator Ron Wyden told the Guardian the NSA's authorities provide loopholes that allow "warrantless searches for the phone calls or emails of law-abiding Americans". "
You wrote:
"But to date ,,,,
he has presented any evidence of any illegal act. Tea Party would be Proud!"
So either your writing ability is so awful you can't write coherently, or you can't remember what you wrote yesterday. My reading is fine. Your writing is so incoherent not even you can tell who it's directed at.
Ash_F
(5,861 posts)Why are the crazy ones always so crazy?
Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)that you dont understand about my post?,,,,,,,,,
uhnope
(6,419 posts)This says that if a US citizen is in contact with someone in another country who is being investigated, then those "communications" or "database" might be saved. It is unclear throughout whether this is the metadata, like just the list of numbers called or email addresses, or not.
But no word whether it contradicts this from a hearing back in June from the same article:
Looks like the Guardian is milking this to sell papers.
lark
(23,003 posts)Rinse and repeat
Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)that Snowden is no more than a Tea Party Plant !
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Off to the ignore list for you!
uhnope
(6,419 posts)I need to update my CT scorecard
Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)if you dont like the Truth, ignore it!
Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)hlthe2b
(101,729 posts)leveymg
(36,418 posts)Last edited Fri Aug 9, 2013, 03:28 PM - Edit history (1)
content collection. This is accurate (and it's technically legal), in contrary to the claims that have been made to the general public that there's "no spying on Americans," most recently by Obama to Leno the other night.
snappyturtle
(14,656 posts)---------------
I wonder if DF lies awake at night composing strings of meaningless answers or if they
just come naturally? I bet the Justice Dept. and intelligence agencies are 'mindful' of
our privacy....they just figured we weren't.
villager
(26,001 posts)"You've never really supported Democrats! Or else you'd know they are sufficiently mindful of privacy, Constitutional rights, and all that other Firebagger stuff!"
snappyturtle
(14,656 posts)Yes, it will be used....even when sufficiently mindful of privacy means with
the intention of violating the 4th Amendment...just doesn't seem so nefarious
that way.
lark
(23,003 posts)She usually shills for companies from which we earns mega-bucks.
frylock
(34,825 posts)Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)off of these wars that SHE voted for, I'm sure she has her servants do it. "Oh, piss boy!"
ConcernedCanuk
(13,509 posts).
.
.
well - I'm surprised as hell!
NOT !!
CC
NoMoreWarNow
(1,259 posts)NoMoreWarNow
(1,259 posts)this is ridiculous--
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/08/08-0
KoKo
(84,711 posts)should be interesting.
Rex
(65,616 posts)A legal loophole indeed.
Qutzupalotl
(14,230 posts)You have to communicate with an overseas target of an investigation.
Wyden is right to call for reform of the loophole:
"I believe that Congress should reform Section 702 to provide better protections for Americans' privacy, and that this could be done without losing the value that this collection provides," he said.
In other words, Wyden sees the value of the collection, but is pushing for reform of the loophole to protect privacy of any (again, not "all" Americans inadvertently swept up in this.
On edit: It is still illegal for an American to be THE target of this kind of investigation.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)the collection of data is performed on the target of the investigation, and anyone with which the target communicates, and anyone with which those persons communicate.
So yes, data on ordinary Americans is being collected when they are not the target of the investigation.
Dustlawyer
(10,493 posts)I acknowledge that they will never give it up. We will get a bunch of talk about how they have our privacy as their utmost concern as they monitor us to stop protest before they can get organized.
PSPS
(13,512 posts)Turbineguy
(37,212 posts)we get the "wait, but there's more!" routine.
Igel
(35,197 posts)It *may* say that while the information of certain US citizens ("Americans" is allowed to be used under the minimization procedures but nobody's allowed to do so until the proper oversight's established.
It may *also* simply say that while the information of certain legal US residents who are foreign citizens is allowed to be used under the minimization procedures ....
"US persons" =/= "US citizens."
The article writer has no idea what that nice adjective "certain" means but extends "US persons" to include any American citizen. That's either sloppy and shows disregard for understanding before venting or it constitutes demagoguery. If you don't understand what you're reading, you have no business telling people what it invariably must mean in order to outrage them.
My respect for the Guardian has taken a bit of a downturn. Shoddy reporting.
villager
(26,001 posts)...must mean."
Indeed.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)ronnie624
(5,764 posts)but they won't use it because they are all upstanding people, with an over-riding respect for our constitution and the spirit of democracy.
Besides, if you're not a terrorist, you shouldn't have anything to worry about.
villager
(26,001 posts)ronnie624
(5,764 posts)But I may or may not like it when the government is completely dominated by Republicans at some point in the future. It just depends on the direction of the political winds at that time, or whatever event is being actively thrust upon my consciousness by the media establishment. We'll see.