Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Yet Another NSA Program Raises Questions About Obama's Statements to Charlie Rose [View all]temmer
(358 posts)42. ACLU: Calls and Emails can't be "targeted" under FISA, but certainly collected
But all of these defenses ignore a simple, basic point: Communication is a two-way street. And if an American is communicating (however innocently) with a foreign "target" under the FAA, the law allows the government to collect, inspect, and keep the content of that communication. As Glenn Greenwald clarified on Tuesday, under the FAA, "no individualized warrant is needed to listen in on the calls or read the emails of Americans when they communicate with a foreign national whom the NSA has targeted for surveillance."
And what it does it take for the NSA to "target" a foreigner for surveillance? Not much. The target need not be a suspected terrorist or even suspected of any kind of wrongdoing. The FAA allows the government to target any foreigner when it wants to collect "foreign intelligence," which includes information about "foreign affairs." In other words, the statute allows the government to sweep up essentially every foreigner's communications, including those with Americans.
In fact, it's likely much worse than that. While official defenses have flatly stated that targets under the FAA must be both foreign and abroad, the statute only requires that the government "reasonably believe" those things to be true. And The Washington Post's report on PRISMone government content-surveillance program authorized by the FAAindicates that the government's "reasonable belief" need only be made to "51 percent confidence." (As The Daily Show's John Oliver put it, the rigor of that constraint amounts to the surveillance equivalent of "flipping a coin, plus one percent."
Read more:
http://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/under-fisa-amendments-act-your-calls-and-emails-cant-be-targeted-they-can
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
96 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Yet Another NSA Program Raises Questions About Obama's Statements to Charlie Rose [View all]
leveymg
Jun 2013
OP
We at least deserve not to be further confused by contradictory official statements.
leveymg
Jun 2013
#2
Or, perhaps, he understands it so well that he can state facts like a lawyer - selectively,
leveymg
Jun 2013
#5
I think Obama was parsing words as instructed and will claim that this wasn't "listening" to calls
cascadiance
Jun 2013
#7
What's the importance of whether the NSA keeps voice and email content, or just metadata?
leveymg
Jun 2013
#8
Here's the rub: Sec. 702(e) requires the NSA to minimize US person data - they aren't. It's illegal
leveymg
Jun 2013
#58
Yes - LinkedIn, the job networking site, contains many resumes that reference these programs
leveymg
Jun 2013
#12
No, I'm not conflating. But, Obama's statement is confusing as it seems to say that voice content
leveymg
Jun 2013
#13
No. The data is being collected as part of 2015 but retained for 702. That's illegal.
leveymg
Jun 2013
#15
You are misreading the information and taking the President's statements out of context. n/t
ProSense
Jun 2013
#16
Explain that, please. I've provided the context because the context makes it clear he's
leveymg
Jun 2013
#17
There are also "exigent circumstances" that give them another week to obtain a warrant.
leveymg
Jun 2013
#57
Bill Binney says it's based in profiling and terrorism potential scoring software.
leveymg
Jun 2013
#74
I have to agree with about 99% of that. However, they have much more than metadata on which to
leveymg
Jun 2013
#77
this is the person that was measuring that bush droned more people to protect their hero
Monkie
Jun 2013
#47
Acton also said something about the consequences of failure to learn from history.
leveymg
Jun 2013
#29
exactly, to think that a "nerd" like snowden, and a lawyer like greenwald are stupid
Monkie
Jun 2013
#48
Ths OP is nonsense, but people are determined to make up stuff to call Obama a liar.
ProSense
Jun 2013
#54
You had your chance to argue that last night, and failed. Unless you bring any new facts or
leveymg
Jun 2013
#59
So assuming he is telling the truth, this 'collection' of theirs would be useless and the
sabrina 1
Jun 2013
#45
I wish that Rose had asked: 1) Do you do reverse lookups? 2) Do you minimize the data? Because
leveymg
Jun 2013
#51
But if NUCLEON is only recording and storing phone calls that take place in other countries
Jarla
Jun 2013
#87
NSA analysts, and the MAINWAY/MARINA systems have access to virtually all gov't databanks
leveymg
Jun 2013
#89
"Every government is run by liars and nothing they say should be believed." ~I.F. Stone
DeSwiss
Jun 2013
#83
The "Presidents credibility" was in doubt from the get go with his appointments
xtraxritical
Jun 2013
#91