General Discussion

DallasNE

(8,013 posts)

173. What Is Not Said

Fri Jun 21, 2013, 04:07 PM

Jun 2013

Must be considered as well. For instance does "evidence" imply a court order has been issues specific to this individual? If that is the case then they have a tap on that individual and this simply allows them to also look at the history, even for Americans inadvertently dragged into the database. If that is the case then that would make my "false" true. What you are implying is a data mining operation that is not specific to an individual but is used to identify that individual based on "evidence" obtained from the mining operation. If that is the case then my "false" would be false. And, yes, a data mining operation would obliterate the 4A. Likewise, if this is a data mining operation then we are right back at where we were under Bush and I find that extremely troubling. Right now I don't know because there is so much not yet said on the subject. Do you have anything that is more definitive on the subject that shows it to be a data mining operation?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

186 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Revealed: the top secret rules that allow NSA to use US data without a warrant [View all] Catherina Jun 2013 OP

So, it is over a broader scope than just "Terra" Pholus Jun 2013 #1

+1 n/t Catherina Jun 2013 #27

False DallasNE Jun 2013 #144

That depends on your interpretation of 3(b)(4), 5(2) and 6(b)(8) of the document. Pholus Jun 2013 #145

You're Changing The Subject DallasNE Jun 2013 #154

I should have been more direct. Your "False" is false. Pholus Jun 2013 #165

What Is Not Said DallasNE Jun 2013 #173

Obviously no. Pholus Jun 2013 #175

Good Exchange DallasNE Jun 2013 #180

Yes, it was worthwhile. Pholus Jun 2013 #181

Every attorney who gives a shit about his or her ethical obligations to clients should HardTimes99 Jun 2013 #146

Section 4 says the right words Pholus Jun 2013 #149

is it a bird, is it a plane, no its supercatherina Monkie Jun 2013 #2

Sorry my friend. I just logged into my twitter feed and there it was Catherina Jun 2013 #10

this is _it_ there is no escaping this now, this is willful misinterpretation of the intent Monkie Jun 2013 #12

Wyden said this in '11: "secret interpretation" of the law MisterP Jun 2013 #156

And, I guess, some of the analysts work for Booz Allen which I hear is owned by the Carlyle byeya Jun 2013 #3

You nailed that part of it. We are paying for all of this and Bushco makes the profit n/t Catherina Jun 2013 #4

Thanks for the corroboration, as bad as the truth makes me feel. byeya Jun 2013 #7

In other words RobertEarl Jun 2013 #5

Or where John Edwards was going to meet his mistress, and Ellitiot Spitzer, and and and Catherina Jun 2013 #11

Not sure why these items would be that big a concern. randome Jun 2013 #6

I've decided to look on the bright side. Soviet jokes *were* falling out of fashion. Pholus Jun 2013 #8

I would bet the Bill of Rights would not apply to that parrot. randome Jun 2013 #13

Is extraordinary rendition off the books yet? Pholus Jun 2013 #15

"So. What're you in for, kid?" randome Jun 2013 #16

You asked for it... and it is old and crusty! Pholus Jun 2013 #18

Only two hours? The CIA advisor probably said, "Let's wrap this up." That always works with a mummy. randome Jun 2013 #20

:) Pholus Jun 2013 #22

so you two doing the classic derailment or you actually going to say anything on topic? Monkie Jun 2013 #25

Seriously, it's just gallows humor. Pholus Jun 2013 #30

yes malokvale77 Jun 2013 #53

Yep...clasic hijack zeemike Jun 2013 #78

I guess you'll have to explain that. Pholus Jun 2013 #98

Rationalizations are meant to be sufficient. zeemike Jun 2013 #102

I'll have to take that under advisement then. Pholus Jun 2013 #103

Re: Gallows Humor--its understandable KoKo Jun 2013 #123

Yup, that's the point. Pholus Jun 2013 #147

I accept your explanation as I have been iemitsu Jun 2013 #137

LOL Marrah_G Jun 2013 #143

because 3 of the points make a circular argument, breaking the seeming intent of the law Monkie Jun 2013 #9

Sure, 'inadvertently' could be claimed at any time, used as a loophole. randome Jun 2013 #14

data/content from a US machine, im sorry, if you cant see this there just is no hope for you Monkie Jun 2013 #19

"For the purposes of ceasing surveillance." randome Jun 2013 #24

"unless they contain usable intelligence" Monkie Jun 2013 #33

No, I don't. "Inadvertently acquired" is a key phrase. randome Jun 2013 #37

so this "Inadvertently acquired" is that a key phrase or a loophole? Monkie Jun 2013 #58

It can be both. randome Jun 2013 #61

You're much more optimistic than I am Jarla Jun 2013 #69

They aren't all saints. But they aren't all monsters, either. randome Jun 2013 #84

Are you sure they are not all monsters? iemitsu Jun 2013 #138

your bet on that chain of command, is that a 51% coin toss? Monkie Jun 2013 #75

I would think that very question is asked by a supervisor. randome Jun 2013 #85

Have you considered writing fo rthe Onion? Jackpine Radical Jun 2013 #104

Every email you send or receive is probably encrypted at some point MannyGoldstein Jun 2013 #106

Read some of the other posts on this thread. randome Jun 2013 #110

It's the "oversight" and "chain of command" in the wild world of the internets KoKo Jun 2013 #125

Hell, yes, too much is being privatized and outsourced. randome Jun 2013 #126

Try Reading the things giftedgirl77 Jun 2013 #17

ohoh, our debunked anonymous "expert" has arrived Monkie Jun 2013 #23

That's the difference between you & me giftedgirl77 Jun 2013 #29

i never used the word bullshit, or called constitutional lawyers with harvard education a joke Monkie Jun 2013 #31

Yes, I called Greenwald a joke giftedgirl77 Jun 2013 #35

so the ACLU lawyer that exposed the bush torture docs is just spinning Monkie Jun 2013 #38

I provided the link that actually has the giftedgirl77 Jun 2013 #49

Amen. BenzoDia Jun 2013 #47

The domestic communication section in the doc states that inadvertent collections are BenzoDia Jun 2013 #21

like i said earlier today, spying on americans is the job of the FBI Monkie Jun 2013 #26

Well then the Guardian needs to produce some FBI docs to back up their claims of abuse. BenzoDia Jun 2013 #28

The Guardian doesn't seem to be in the business of producing anything concrete railsback Jun 2013 #40

With their painfully long walls of text to beat their average readers into agreement. BenzoDia Jun 2013 #46

Either ignore is working nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #32

You're forgiven. randome Jun 2013 #34

im wrestling with one or two stubborn people. Monkie Jun 2013 #36

This is not about coomies (the original reason) or terrorists. nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #44

And to protect the self many are in denial. malokvale77 Jun 2013 #65

Mine is working beautifully. Catherina Jun 2013 #43

Perhaps mine s working too nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #45

talking points have arrived!oh boy are they weak Monkie Jun 2013 #48

Wow, that is weak sauce! nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #50

i missed one other one, that one is comedy gold Monkie Jun 2013 #55

I guess the actual documents are nothing nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #56

those are suddenly part of "painfully long walls of text" Monkie Jun 2013 #60

Yeah, but when they are into personal attacks nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #63

i can relate to that, for me its not the personal attacks, its the casual racism and Monkie Jun 2013 #73

Were you ProSense Jun 2013 #51

Yes, but to be fair, Snowden said he "saw things". randome Jun 2013 #52

I don't think they can see you. zeemike Jun 2013 #86

Have any Military Intel Lawyers arrived yet? They're all over twitter blowing a gasket Catherina Jun 2013 #68

we had/have a pretend lawyer here, not sure if they were intel or not, stupid yes Monkie Jun 2013 #72

That't what it boils down to in Authoritarian states: "This is the law" Catherina Jun 2013 #95

right now its like the twilight zone in here? Monkie Jun 2013 #97

Lol! Cute. There's a concerted effort, from on high down, to play this down Catherina Jun 2013 #101

the bbc is ignoring this too, so similar, but without advertising or captain crunch Monkie Jun 2013 #107

Unflattering is putting it kindly Catherina Jun 2013 #111

This reminds me that it is illegal to use Psy-Ops on iemitsu Jun 2013 #140

good point, the dead reporter did a piece on this issue? Monkie Jun 2013 #158

Yep, he is the one who exposed the "military experts" iemitsu Jun 2013 #182

i deliberately havent commented on the accident Monkie Jun 2013 #183

Yep. I have not commented on the crash before either, iemitsu Jun 2013 #184

If accurate, that's much better than I had worried Recursion Jun 2013 #39

No kidding. If it wasn't a Guardian article, I'd suspect that the NSA purposely leaked those to BenzoDia Jun 2013 #54

So ProSense Jun 2013 #41

Odd that this is secret rather than TS. (nt) Recursion Jun 2013 #42

So what are the "limitations on NSA's ability to filter communications"? Jarla Jun 2013 #57

They admit to 51% foreignnerness nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #59

Do you know the source for that figure? Jarla Jun 2013 #62

Alexander's testimony nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #64

so basically a coin toss to see if your foreign? Monkie Jun 2013 #74

Nope, and if your call went through Mexico or Canda nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #76

i bet you remember the US to US calls that were routed through canada Monkie Jun 2013 #80

Yup, and in southern borders nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #82

Information Week. randome Jun 2013 #67

That refers to 51% confidence in a target's foreignness. randome Jun 2013 #66

in the real world 51% confidence interval means, im guessing Monkie Jun 2013 #90

Eh. Law enforcement often depends on guesswork, instinct, chance. randome Jun 2013 #91

a day ago it was, we never target americans by accident to, oh well, we guess and go by a 51% chance Monkie Jun 2013 #92

You are missing the point, Monkey, along with a lot of other people. Th1onein Jun 2013 #115

i think i am way ahead of the point personally Monkie Jun 2013 #119

Thank you, Monkie! Th1onein Jun 2013 #121

Somewhere in heaven Kafka smiles ruefully - nt HardTimes99 Jun 2013 #153

This needs to be its own OP, imo. Very powerful stuff you've written here and it HardTimes99 Jun 2013 #152

if you mean Th1onein, he does have a OP where he discusses this Monkie Jun 2013 #185

Yeah, I saw it and am glad he made it an OP. Thanks for the heads-up! - nt HardTimes99 Jun 2013 #186

This is disturbing: Maedhros Jun 2013 #70

I think the NSA lied to the President. kentuck Jun 2013 #81

That's how I want to see it marions ghost Jun 2013 #112

I would like to see it that way, also.... KoKo Jun 2013 #127

Yep, needs the light of day marions ghost Jun 2013 #133

THis is J Edgar Hoover territory AngryAmish Jun 2013 #118

And...just like during Hoover there was fear in the Press...fear everywhere.. KoKo Jun 2013 #128

The key phrase is still "inadvertently acquired". randome Jun 2013 #87

The only rational thing to do at this point Maedhros Jun 2013 #88

I can't see anyone advocating for MORE secrecy. randome Jun 2013 #89

The recent memories of the "Starr Commission" put off any "special or outside" KoKo Jun 2013 #120

That's depressing. randome Jun 2013 #124

the nsa does the encryption questionseverything Jun 2013 #94

I don't think so. Maedhros Jun 2013 #136

where do you see the word user? questionseverything Jun 2013 #139

This excerpt refers to the status Maedhros Jun 2013 #160

i think what it is saying is questionseverything Jun 2013 #171

"heaviest users of PGP-encrypted email are lawyers handling confidential, privileged attorney-client Catherina Jun 2013 #117

K&R Katashi_itto Jun 2013 #71

HUGE K & R !!! - Thank You !!! WillyT Jun 2013 #77

Bookmarked! kentuck Jun 2013 #79

That information is not available at this time. randome Jun 2013 #83

"exceptionally grave damage" v "serious damage" if made public and means of collection Catherina Jun 2013 #93

K&R marions ghost Jun 2013 #113

K & R AzDar Jun 2013 #96

Was this leaked by the NSA to make them look better? JaneyVee Jun 2013 #99

As far as conspiracy theories go, yours is a more likely one. randome Jun 2013 #100

WaPo and the NYT: ProSense Jun 2013 #105

better than what? the romanians under Ceausescu? Monkie Jun 2013 #108

Probably. kentuck Jun 2013 #109

What about dual nationals? JDPriestly Jun 2013 #114

If they're contacting overseas they're fair game, even if a reasonable suspicion. Catherina Jun 2013 #116

Another racist hater bumming out the worshipper zombies. L0oniX Jun 2013 #122

No, I am not a racist hater. I am a self-hating Black hater. Whatever the fuck that is Catherina Jun 2013 #129

You get your Klan robes and pointy hat in the mail yet? backscatter712 Jun 2013 #132

Lol for the video! Naw, I'm still picking the cotton to weave my own n/t Catherina Jun 2013 #134

Everyone needs a hobby! backscatter712 Jun 2013 #135

"Canadian sympathizers" LMFAO +1 L0oniX Jun 2013 #148

Calling fellow Democrats Racist is the new "Commie Baiting" from the past. KoKo Jun 2013 #130

Government & corporate shills ...and plain ol zombie worshippers. L0oniX Jun 2013 #150

B-b-b-but SNOOOOOWDEN!!! backscatter712 Jun 2013 #131

Stop This Nonsense DallasNE Jun 2013 #141

Now that Snowden's resume has been found to be full of holes... randome Jun 2013 #142

So How Did Snowden Land A Job At CIA Before This Gig DallasNE Jun 2013 #151

All good questions. I think the unraveling of Greenwald/Snowden has begun. randome Jun 2013 #155

You mean like the unravelling of OWS? Lol! When you make predictions like this I sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #161

We Are Totally On The Same Page n/t DallasNE Jun 2013 #164

will you please stop you character assassination and the "good german" act Monkie Jun 2013 #157

Who Are You DallasNE Jun 2013 #162

i said nothing of the sort to you? Monkie Jun 2013 #163

My Bad DallasNE Jun 2013 #168

no worries, and yes it was pretty harsh, but you arent being called a racist either? Monkie Jun 2013 #170

You aren't being called that by me. Maybe you need a scorecard. randome Jun 2013 #176

LOL! backscatter712 Jun 2013 #167

Inadvertently! Well, that covers a lot. It gives a perfect excuse to those who are caught sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #159

Funny, "We didn't mean to" doesn't work for us peons. backscatter712 Jun 2013 #166

They should just term it "unprosecutably" Coyotl Jun 2013 #169

Not to worry, soon they won't have to hide anything anymore. With some on the 'left' now joining the sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #174

Is "Inadvertantly" like "Collateral Damage"? "Unfortunate Civilan Deaths"? "Acts of God"? Tierra_y_Libertad Jun 2013 #172

K&R avaistheone1 Jun 2013 #177

K&R idwiyo Jun 2013 #178

We can hear you now (and a whole lot more!) blkmusclmachine Jun 2013 #179