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: This message was self-deleted by its author [View all]think
(11,641 posts)34. I support the 22 Dem Senators who signed a letter to the NSA with concerns & demands:
It's pathetic they even have to ask the questions they must but that is where we are in regards to the NSA, law violations, and Secret Law.
(Bold added for emphasis.)
Bipartisan Group of 26 Senators Seek Answers from DNI Clapper on Bulk Data Collection Program
Friday, June 28, 2013
Washington, D.C. The recent public disclosures of secret government surveillance programs have exposed how secret interpretations of the USA PATRIOT Act have allowed for the bulk collection of massive amounts of data on the communications of ordinary Americans with no connection to wrong-doing. Reliance on secret law to conduct domestic surveillance activities raises serious civil liberty concerns and all but removes the public from an informed national security and civil liberty debate.
In order to foster that debate, 26 senators sent a letter organized by U.S. Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) asking Director of National Intelligence Clapper to publicly provide information about the duration and scope of the program and provide examples of its effectiveness in providing unique intelligence, if such examples exist.
We are concerned that by depending on secret interpretations of the PATRIOT Act that differed from an intuitive reading of the statute, this program essentially relied for years on a secret body of law, the senators wrote in the letter. This and misleading statements by Intelligence officials have prevented our constituents from evaluating the decisions that their government was making, and will unfortunately undermine trust in government more broadly. The debate that the President has now welcomed is an important first step toward restoring that trust.
The senators expressed their concern that the program itself has a significant impact on the privacy of law-abiding Americans and that the PATRIOT Act could be used for the bulk collection of records beyond phone metadata. The PATRIOT Acts business records authority can be used to give the government access to private financial, medical, consumer and firearm sales records, among others. In addition to raising concerns about the laws scope, the senators noted that keeping the official interpretation of the law secret and the instances of misleading public statements from executive branch officials prevented the American people from having an informed public debate about national security and domestic surveillance.
The senators are seeking public answers to the following questions in order to give the American people the information they need to conduct an informed public debate.
How long has the NSA used PATRIOT Act authorities to engage in bulk collection of Americans records? Was this collection underway when the law was reauthorized in 2006?
Has the NSA used USA PATRIOT Act authorities to conduct bulk collection of any other types of records pertaining to Americans, beyond phone records?
Has the NSA collected or made any plans to collect Americans cell-site location data in bulk?
Have there been any violations of the court orders permitting this bulk collection, or of the rules governing access to these records? If so, please describe these violations.
Please identify any specific examples of instances in which intelligence gained by reviewing phone records obtained through Section 215 bulk collection proved useful in thwarting a particular terrorist plot.
Please provide specific examples of instances in which useful intelligence was gained by reviewing phone records that could not have been obtained without the bulk collection authority, if such examples exist.
Please describe the employment status of all persons with conceivable access to this data, including IT professionals, and detail whether they are federal employees, civilian or military, or contractors.
The Senators signing the letter are: Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Mark Udall (D-Colo.), Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Tom Udall (D-N.M.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Jon Tester (D-Mont.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Dean Heller (R- Nev.),Mark Begich (D-Alaska), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Al Franken (D-Minn.), Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Max Baucus (D-Mont.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.) and Mike Lee (R-Utah).
http://www.wyden.senate.gov/news/press-releases/bipartisan-group-of-26-senators-seek-answers-from-dni-clapper-on-bulk-data-collection-program
Friday, June 28, 2013
Washington, D.C. The recent public disclosures of secret government surveillance programs have exposed how secret interpretations of the USA PATRIOT Act have allowed for the bulk collection of massive amounts of data on the communications of ordinary Americans with no connection to wrong-doing. Reliance on secret law to conduct domestic surveillance activities raises serious civil liberty concerns and all but removes the public from an informed national security and civil liberty debate.
In order to foster that debate, 26 senators sent a letter organized by U.S. Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) asking Director of National Intelligence Clapper to publicly provide information about the duration and scope of the program and provide examples of its effectiveness in providing unique intelligence, if such examples exist.
We are concerned that by depending on secret interpretations of the PATRIOT Act that differed from an intuitive reading of the statute, this program essentially relied for years on a secret body of law, the senators wrote in the letter. This and misleading statements by Intelligence officials have prevented our constituents from evaluating the decisions that their government was making, and will unfortunately undermine trust in government more broadly. The debate that the President has now welcomed is an important first step toward restoring that trust.
The senators expressed their concern that the program itself has a significant impact on the privacy of law-abiding Americans and that the PATRIOT Act could be used for the bulk collection of records beyond phone metadata. The PATRIOT Acts business records authority can be used to give the government access to private financial, medical, consumer and firearm sales records, among others. In addition to raising concerns about the laws scope, the senators noted that keeping the official interpretation of the law secret and the instances of misleading public statements from executive branch officials prevented the American people from having an informed public debate about national security and domestic surveillance.
The senators are seeking public answers to the following questions in order to give the American people the information they need to conduct an informed public debate.
How long has the NSA used PATRIOT Act authorities to engage in bulk collection of Americans records? Was this collection underway when the law was reauthorized in 2006?
Has the NSA used USA PATRIOT Act authorities to conduct bulk collection of any other types of records pertaining to Americans, beyond phone records?
Has the NSA collected or made any plans to collect Americans cell-site location data in bulk?
Have there been any violations of the court orders permitting this bulk collection, or of the rules governing access to these records? If so, please describe these violations.
Please identify any specific examples of instances in which intelligence gained by reviewing phone records obtained through Section 215 bulk collection proved useful in thwarting a particular terrorist plot.
Please provide specific examples of instances in which useful intelligence was gained by reviewing phone records that could not have been obtained without the bulk collection authority, if such examples exist.
Please describe the employment status of all persons with conceivable access to this data, including IT professionals, and detail whether they are federal employees, civilian or military, or contractors.
The Senators signing the letter are: Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Mark Udall (D-Colo.), Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Tom Udall (D-N.M.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Jon Tester (D-Mont.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Dean Heller (R- Nev.),Mark Begich (D-Alaska), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Al Franken (D-Minn.), Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Max Baucus (D-Mont.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.) and Mike Lee (R-Utah).
http://www.wyden.senate.gov/news/press-releases/bipartisan-group-of-26-senators-seek-answers-from-dni-clapper-on-bulk-data-collection-program
Cannot edit, recommend, or reply in locked discussions
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
128 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
And dont you love those that compare Obama to Cheney and they say they are Democrats?
Vietnameravet
Jul 2013
#1
So says the name calling right? Seems so? Or do you prefer 'name calling center'?
Bluenorthwest
Jul 2013
#18
What is the 'emo' left? The only other place I have ever seen that reference is on a site
sabrina 1
Jul 2013
#44
People who want to impeach innocent Dem Pres while leaving free a GOP Pres guilty of worse crimes
baldguy
Jul 2013
#85
AND, OP YELLED AT A WHOLE BUNCHA PEOPLE WHO HAVE NO WAY TO CHANGE THEIR DISTRICTS FROM RED
silvershadow
Jul 2013
#64
when it comes to administrative powers over the Clandestine services - the Executive branch has
Douglas Carpenter
Jul 2013
#22
POTUS said he "welcomes this debate" -- not sure why you're projecting/transferring this anger
nashville_brook
Jul 2013
#23
Well if we lived in a closed society, and many do, that would be good advice. Iow,
sabrina 1
Jul 2013
#51
Peeping Toms are sneaky. But what they do is illegal so the best way to deaal with them
sabrina 1
Jul 2013
#91
I don't want it both ways, i want it the right way. The right way means keeping up with
sabrina 1
Jul 2013
#106
I support the 22 Dem Senators who signed a letter to the NSA with concerns & demands:
think
Jul 2013
#34
I Voted For Obama Twice - Disillusionment All Around - What More Needs To Be Said
cantbeserious
Jul 2013
#36
Roger That - Check Out This Young Turks Video - States The Case Against Mass Surveillance Well
cantbeserious
Jul 2013
#72
He was better than his opponents and with optimal support he would be closer to your expectations.
The Wielding Truth
Jul 2013
#124
1) THE SPYING IS ILLEGAL 2) oBAMA IS THE MAN IN CHARGE OF DOING THE SPYING SO I GUESS IT SEEMS OK TO
limpyhobbler
Jul 2013
#39
I am a political moderate. Although I won't be and wasn't happy, I can live with
bluestate10
Jul 2013
#43
It is strange all the corporate-surveillance defenders keep claiming poor Obama is getting bashed,
Civilization2
Jul 2013
#57
OBAMA OWNS THIS DEBACLE OF THE HANDLING OF SNOWDEN WHETHER SHOWDEN IN JUSTIFIED
Purveyor
Jul 2013
#108