NSA Defends Global Cellphone Tracking as Legal

[Indi Guy]

Last edited Sat Dec 7, 2013, 03:27 AM - Edit history (1)

Source: AP via NBC News

The National Security Agency on Friday said its tracking of cellphones overseas is legally authorized under a sweeping U.S. presidential order. The distinction means the extraordinary surveillance program is not overseen by a secretive U.S. intelligence court but is regulated by some U.S. lawmakers, Obama administration insiders and inspectors general...

Vines (NSA spokeswoman) said the collection of the global cellphone location data is carried out under the White House order that governs all U.S. espionage, known as Executive Order 12333. That means congressional committees and relevant inspectors general can oversee the program, but the secret court established under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act would not. It also makes it less likely that the NSA cellphone tracking would be affected by legal changes under consideration on Capitol Hill — most of which would involve changes to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

A frequent justification for the NSA programs by President Barack Obama and top U.S. intelligence officials is that they are overseen by all three branches of government. "The NSA claims its collection is incidental, but there is no question it's deliberately engaging in the mass collection of cell phone location data that it knows will inevitably sweep up information on a huge number of innocent Americans," said Catherine Crump, American Civil Liberties Union staff attorney in a statement. "And, all of this is happening without any supervision by a court."

The NSA spokeswoman, Vines, said legal restrictions under the intelligence law still apply to the cellphone tracking... But an intelligence lawyer also told the Post that when U.S. cellphone data are collected, the data are not covered by the Fourth Amendment, which protects Americans against unreasonable searches and seizures...

Read more: http://www.nbcnews.com/technology/nsa-defends-global-cellphone-tracking-legal-2D11708514

[MannyGoldstein]

1. "If the President does it, it's legal"

- Richard M. Nixon

[awoke_in_2003]

3. Scary, isn't it? nt

[Indi Guy]

5. Ah yes, Nixon - the first "unitary president." Recognize these members of his staff...

...later to prop up the 2nd unitary pres???

[billhicks76]

15. This Is Scary

Barack Nixon Bush? Say it ain't so

[24601]

20. Intelligence Collection - why, other than that governed by the FISA court because of the specific

statutes, would it not be governed by presidential direction? I found EO 12333 and it's not unique to NSA but is the overall guidance for the conduct of US Intelligence activities. It includes the not so obvious Intelligence organizations like parts of the Treasury & Energy Departments.

http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/codification/executive-order/12333.html

What president goes into the day without an intelligence briefing of things important to the US? And where would that information come from if you don't have a federal intelligence community? You gonna outsource it to Wal-Mart or Exxon-Mobile?

Edited to add - "There are some things that are legal only when authorized/delegated by the President."

[Indi Guy]

21. Where would you say the Constitution...

...falls into all of this?

[24601]

23. That's a good question and there are two answers depending on the type. The easiest

to define is FISA-type collection because it's constrained by statute. Passing Laws falls under Article I, implementing them Article II, and authorizing Article III. Significant to note that the courts determine what may be done, and then the President, through the DNI, establishments for what will be done as a subset of what the courts authorized. The courts determine whether FISA intelligence activities are reasonable and, if an activity also requiring a warrant (about 13 types of searches do not), that the warrant is issued after establishing probable cause.

The conduct of EO 12333 Intelligence would be primarily an Article II executive activity.

[reACTIONary]

22. +10 (nt)

[On the Road]

24. Is That What You Believe the Justification Is?

.

[Demeter]

2. EEEEH! Wrong answer, bonehead!

[bemildred]

6. So all at that stuff about the FISA court was just bullshit? Or what?

Can we say at this point they don't even have their story straight? "Raygun said we could", that's the argument. They never expected to have to defend what they are doing.

Can you imagine how hilarious it would be to get Cheney and the other Neocons up there in front of Congress trying to justify this? Think of the tortured logic.

[Indi Guy]

14. The FISA court is a laughable rubber stamp in the first place...

...and the NSA has consistently flouted its oversight. Now it appears that there's not even a nominal judicial review of the agency, and what they are collecting doesn't fall under the protection of the 4th amendment.

In what universe can all this be considered legal?

I guess this is just life in the post Patriot Act world. The Patriot Act -- the gift that keeps on giving away our Constitutional rights to the MIC. ...The legacy of an illegitimate president which should have been uprooted by his legitimate successor.

[another_liberal]

7. I still say that building looks like something "The Borg" would live in.

Appearances are not where the similarities between our NSA and "The Borg" end, not by any means.

[MsLeopard]

8. Resistance is futile

All your information and money will be assimilated!

[Deny and Shred]

9. So if the Order is rescinded,

does that mean the NSA will stop because its illegal? Highly doubtful.

[On the Road]

25. if it is Declared Illegal

It will stop. This is not the out-of-control CIA of half a century ago.

[randome]

10. "...tracking of cellphones overseas..."

Right in the very first sentence. The whole point of the NSA is to monitor foreign communications. Maybe it's not right but it's certainly legally permissible, I would think.

All this "Oh my God, the NSA is tracking all of us!" doesn't pay heed to the actual words in the article.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"If you're bored then you're boring." -Harvey Danger[/center][/font][hr]

[ronnie624]

11. Every cell phone on earth is being "tracked".

Whatever data is not collected by the NSA, is being collected by its allies -- the UK and Australian governments, for example -- who then share it with the NSA. The net result is exactly the same as the NSA dong the "tracking" itself: an increase in power and control over the lives of the working class by the global elites.

I think your lack of understanding is a pretense.

[randome]

12. I was going by what the article says.

I understand things quite well and I never 'pretend' to anything.

You're right, the collection of data by other countries that is shared with the NSA is much more worrisome. We know about the kinds of rules that are in place to prevent abuse of the metadata but we don't know if similar -or any- rules exist for this data 'sharing' between countries.

And we should know. And then stop it if that's warranted.

For instance, if data is collected by another country but only shared with the NSA upon receipt of a formal request, I would be okay with that. But we know too little about how this sharing process works.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Precision and concision. That's the game.[/center][/font][hr]

[billhicks76]

16. Wrong

Wow. Rationalization knows no end.

[cantbeserious]

13. Caught With Their Hands In The Cookie Jar - What Else Would They Say

eom

[blkmusclmachine]

17. They've written themselves around the law since 9/11, so yeah I guess their BS is "legal."

Sickos.

[sendero]

18. It's legal..

... because they say it is. But YOU are expected to respect the "rule of law".

[debunkthis]

19. And yet

they get all butt hurt over Snowden. Payback's a bitch, eh?