Slashdot Mirror
House Votes To End Spy Agencies' Bulk Collection of Phone Data
An anonymous reader writes with this excerpt from a story at Reuters that gives a rare bit of good news for the Fourth Amendment: The U.S. House of Representatives approved a bill on Wednesday that would end spy agencies' bulk collection of Americans' telephone data, setting up a potential showdown with the U.S. Senate over the program, which expires on June 1. The House voted 338-88 for the USA Freedom Act, which would end the bulk collection and instead give intelligence agencies access to telephone data and other records only when a court finds there is reasonable suspicion about a link to international terrorism.
For every program we discover there's probably 3 or 4 that we haven't yet.
For every agency we know about, there's probably at least 1 or 2 more.
NSA gets all the news. When's the last time anyone mentioned the NRO?
Does this include DOD, DOJ, all branches of the military, private contractors used to skirt the laws, etc...?
They've invested billions if not trillions in the surveillance networks and infrastructure.
Is anyone going to really believe it's all been mothballed at the stroke of a pen?
I won't.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
So Snowden is going to be pardoned by Obama now, right? Because he's been proven to be correct time and time again, and congress continues to validate his position by voting to approve these counter-spy bills.
But what about the rest of the world.....
NSA to the people:
PFCHFHFCHFHF! Yeeeeah. We'll "stop" "wiretapping."
Have you actually read the text of the bill? The bulk collection of phone data is not only still allowed, they give legal protections and guidelines for monetary compensation to the businesses they order to collect the data.
Oh yeah, and at the very bottom of the bill? They reauthorize another section of the Patriot Act.
Top NSA officials held "closed door" briefings with senators yesterday to scare them into voting to continue their massive illegal spying program.
It's a sham "reform" bill that extends the controversial surveillance state provisions of the "Patriot" Act set to expire June 1.
The reason you are hearing this "Wonderful News" is because the CIA issues press releases to all of their CIA assets (news agencies like NBC, FOX, CBS, CNN, et all) to make sure they highlight 1 good thing they are attempting to remove from their illegal spying programs - the unfettered access to record any phone conversation whenever they like without a warrant.
Except nothing else has changed. Top NSA officials are making sure this gets passed quick by threats, intimidation, lies, everything they can to keep their illegal spying powers in tact. The bill is still the patriot act, except they named it the "freedom act" when it really the "slavery act".
Now back to your favorite news networks reporting the same exact story verbatim so you can get your mind control like good little slaves.
I guess everything's wrapped up in a neat little package.
Really, I mean that. I'm sorry if it sounded sarcastic.
Does Starlight promise blackjack and hookers?
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
*John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!*
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
"The revised bill that makes its way to the House floor this morning doesn't look much like the Freedom Act.
This morning's bill maintains and codifies a large-scale, unconstitutional domestic spying program. It claims to end "bulk collection" of Americans' data only in a very technical sense: The bill prohibits the government from, for example, ordering a telephone company to turn over all its call records every day.
But the bill was so weakened in behind-the-scenes negotiations over the last week that the government still can order—without probable cause—a telephone company to turn over all call records for "area code 616" or for "phone calls made east of the Mississippi." The bill green-lights the government's massive data collection activities that sweep up Americans' records in violation of the Fourth Amendment."
--- Justin Amash
"Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
--- Jerry Garcia
388 to 88. That's pretty much a consensus that crosses party lines. I'd say it's a dead program.
I'd say it's a dead program.
No, it's a 'dark' program.... again... kinda-sorta..
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
388 people who don't matter.
General Alexander did his program with ZERO and once he'd done it it took years before even the tiniest part of it is possibly starting a process that might lead to its dissembly!
He even got around the one court that was supposed to keep a check on him. Simply by telling them he needed access to {all records} to search for {terrorist record} and neglecting to tell the court that he intended to store {all records} and search it freely however he pleased for whatever purpose he pleased outside of the court order and that they already knew the data was basically useless for anti-terror work because it was all noise and no signal.
The bare faced lies told to Congress have never been prosecuted either.
Any vote from the house, from it's very definition, should have no affect on the 4th amendment, save for a vote on a constitutional amendment. The very idea that a vote on a law by the house would give power or remove power from the 4th is an insult and an attack not on the 4th, but on the constitution its self.
Harper's government, helped by the Liberals, forcefully pushes bill C-51 to make such government spying legal.
Want to bet a lot of U.S.A. communications are going to go through Canada's carriers before reaching their destination? (even within the U.S.A.)
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
The bare faced lies told to Congress have never been prosecuted either.
Where's the incentive?
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
In fact, it may be too much.
The EFF just withdrew support of the Freedom Act after the 2nd Circuit decision that said Section 215 of the Patriot Act doesn't authorize ANY data collection of Americans. The Freedom Act is a step back from current collection efforts, but actually codifies some that could possibly be overturned without it!
...even though this isn't an election year, per se.
Sad that we can only hope for some semblance of our lawmakers actually doing their jobs for the barest fraction of time we pay attention to them doing it.
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
I'm with you on that. The telecoms companies got immunity back in 2007, so even if its illegal, they will hand over the data just as they did when it was illegal-illegal, because they get paid to do it, and they get backing from the spooks in regulatory matters/competition matters.
As long as they get their backs scratched and have immunity, they will do it.
We have a similar situation in the UK with GCHQ, they have immunity from UK law if they spy on people as long as they have an order from the Secretary of State (i.e. a politician), so they've interpreted away any limits on their surveillance to spy on brits for the NSA or spy on brits for political purposes. If they can't be prosecuted they can't be stopped.
If a spy agency stops collecting data on you...how do you actually know?
Strangely enough, having a bunch of politicians say "We voted against it, so we won't collect data on you, promise!" really doesn't seem too compelling to me.
I think I will be keeping my tinfoil hat on with chin strap secured, thank you very much.
Left MS Windows for Linux Mint and never looked back!
Vote for Bernie in 2016!
meh. I say that the section 215 of the patriot act as written is not necessarily a violation of the 1st, 4th and 5th amendments. it authorizes the collection of business records relevant to a terrorist investigation. it only became unconstitutional when "business records" was interpreted to mean "anything we want" and "investigation" was interpreted to mean "eternal vigilance." Section 215 could very easily be implemented in a way that is constitutionally sound, and thus the provision itself is not unconstitutional.
Given the options on the table i would take the improvement. this legislative improvement, along with a bitch-slapped NSA who would stay within the intent of the law, is much better than what we had before.
So that means they have been breaking the law all this time? How many years in prison for how many people?
This is a meaningless distraction from the real, underlying issues. Does anyone really believe this will matter at all? First, the spy agencies will likely continue to do whatever they want, just like they always have. Second, this little token doesn't even put the slightest dent in the collection of sensitive data.
It is appalling we even have the need for a so-called "USA Freedom Act".
I can feel the winds of change already.
Last I checked, a court found that no law existed that allowed bulk collections. Not even the Patriot Act: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05...
This is a law that makes something illegal that was already illegal. More congressional theater.
Wake me up when the people who broke the law start seeing some time. Let me know when the guy who exposed this illegal activity is allowed back into the country with his liberty intact.
Revolution is the opium of the intellectuals.
they will likely have "qualified immunity" because at the time they were breaking the law they had implicit/explicit approval from the FISA court.
No court can authorize an inherently illegal action. The Supreme Court of the United States can approve me murdering schoolchildren all it wants, but my ass will still fry for it (and rightfully so).
-- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
Also -- why the focus on a tiny subset (just Metadata) of a dying communiation system (phone).
It'd be far more interesting if they'd do something about far more invasive (not just metadata, but content too) that's being captured from (presumably) all internet traffic (skype, email, etc).
Wake me up when the people who broke the law start seeing some time. Let me know when the guy who exposed this illegal activity is allowed back into the country with his liberty intact.
Good night Mr. van Winkle. We'll wake you in a thousand years.
So Snowden is going to be pardoned by Obama now, right?
If by "pardoned", you mean "Drone Strike", then yes, Snowden will be "pardoned".
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
388 to 88. That's pretty much a consensus that crosses party lines.
Why guess that its a consensus that crosses party lines when you can know for a fact how the vote went?
I see this again and again here on slashdot. Supposed computer nerds averse to the simple act of looking at how exactly a vote went. Often times they guess, and guess wrong. This time you guessed correctly, but thats no excuse for you guessing something so fucking trivial to look up. Every vote in both the House and Senate are documented on their respective websites.
REPUBLICAN yeas 196 nays 47 nv 1
DEMOCRATIC yeas 142 nays 41 nv 5
Its as if you fucks think the information is impossible to get, rather than the exact fucking opposite. For the House its as easy as going to http://clerk.house.gov/ and clicking on the fucking calendar, or entering a query in the search box.
Even my grandmother can do it. But no, not fucking slashdot people.
"His name was James Damore."
Inherently illegal isn't really a thing. Maybe you mean immoral?
In any case, courts in the US have been just fine with authorizing the killing of schoolchildren. None of the involved parties fried for it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...
I think Mauve has the most RAM. --PHB (Dilbert Comic)
Hey, you know, "befehl ist befehl". That worked so well at the Neurenberg trials after WW2 so why not now?
There is none. The White House lies to Congress AND the American public. As long as mainstream media glosses it over then there is no incentive.
The incentive has to come from the American public, otherwise nothing will happen.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
He wanted a link. And we're "fucks" for not Googling it for him.
Why in the world would you think the NSA is going to actually follow the law? They've not exactly given any signs they give a shit about doing so lately. Rather the opposite, in fact.
As long as no one, except whistle-blowers, are getting any jail time, don't expect any actual change. They'll just rename the programs and do a better job of hiding what they're doing.
Actually, that's the entire point of a warrant: it's the state's written grant of immunity for people to do things that would otherwise be illegal. Ordinarily, it's illegal for anyone to forcibly restrain you and hold you against your will. But with an arrest warrant, it's legal.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
Section 215 could very easily be implemented in a way that is constitutionally sound, and thus the provision itself is not unconstitutional.
All evidence to the contrary... limitless authority is unconstitutional whether it is acted upon or not. And in this case we know the government is using that blank check authority to carry out dragnet searches of all Americans communications and business records. Phone records are a drop in the bucket.
The USA Freedom Act is an Orwellian attempt to extend unlimited surveillance of all Americans. In spirit, in word and in action the USA Freedom Act is a complete and total violation of the US Constitution. The so called limitations on phone record searches are merely symbolic limitations and don't address the unlimited number of non-phone call records that are being collected and doesn't even adequately address limitation on the collection of phone records. The USA Freedom Act will be used to destroy freedom in the US.
388 to 88. That's pretty much a consensus that crosses party lines. I'd say it's a dead program.
The only thing almost dead in the US is Freedom itself. This is a shameful vote to extend a shameful program without any meaningful limitations.
Even a modicum of common sense could tell you the Ayes crossed party lines. Neither party even has 388 seats. In fact, anything where the Ayes are 285+ or the Nays are 150- would be pretty safe to assume that it crossed the aisle in significant enough numbers.
"Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
Or maybe, just maybe, knowing that there are only 245 Republican congressman and 188 Democrats the gp was just commenting on the fact that a vote of 388 indicates exactly what he/she stated, that the bill has bipartisan support and is more likely than not to stand up to any challenges (at least in the House).
The word "guess" doesn't even appear in their comment.
Of course that's just my opinion...... you could be wrong!
your ass probably wouldn't fry for it. You may be convicted in trial court, but the conviction would likely be overturned in the appellate courts because of supreme court precedent saying that in your particular circumstances it's legal to do what you described.
I was past caring that bulk collection happens back when it was called Carnivore. I care much more now about oversight.
Populus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur...
"Force shits upon Reason's back." - Poor Richard's Almanac
FYI, at least one Congressman thinks the NSA isn't collecting ENOUGH:
http://thehill.com/policy/nati...
Who put this thing together? Me, that's who.
Eric Holder was held in contempt of congress, look what happened to him (nothing).
Only charges that matter are from DOJ. They have the prisons that you go to if found guilty. Last I knew, Congress didn't have prisons.
Does anyone know of something along the lines of a GitHub type of public repo that folks have used to put in the texts of these bills and then updated them with the line changes so that we can see how the bills have changed over time more easily?
I'm not a nerd. I'm a geek. Nerds make more money.
Every vote in both the House and Senate are documented on their respective websites
Actually, not quite. There are a number of voice votes, where they don't even take an exact count. They're supposed to be used only when it's unanimous or nearly unanimous, though every once in a while somebody will play silly buggers and put things to a voice vote just to hide who said what. (Usually, when both parties want to avoid having the exact count known, since in theory anybody can request a division, which requires an exact count which will be published.)
Most votes are actually voice votes. They're generally on workaday issues without a lot of controversy, so it doesn't actually matter all that much. So it is true that all of the *important* votes should be documented on the web sites, but I thought the distinction was worth pointing out.
That's why we need to elect Scott Walker. The Media will gloss over nothing with him.
Also section 215 is not even dead - if you look at section 705 of the USA Freedom Act:
705.Sunsets
(a)USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005
Section 102(b)(1) of the USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005 (50 U.S.C. 1805 note) is amended by striking June 1, 2015 and inserting December 15, 2019.
(b)Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004
Section 6001(b)(1) of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (50 U.S.C. 1801 note) is amended by striking June 1, 2015 and inserting December 15, 2019.
So they just voted to extend the Patriot Act provision for domestic spying instead of letting it die June 1.
I agree - it seems to actually allow more data to be sucked up, too (like VoIP calls) and removes legal responsibility from corporations that give this data to the government.
Subject should read: House votes to extend Patriot Act, and changes some cosmetics when it comes to telephone meta data collection.
1.) Without the act, the Patriot Act, which is what allows the intelligence agencies and LE to collect way to much data, would be again illegal and/or practically much harder. The Freedom Act extends the Patriot Act so the agencies can continue legally to collect the data heaps.
2.) So, the data will be stored at the provider, and they need a court order. And FISA is known to reject at least one request per year (well, most of the years, one cannot be so hostile to our protectors, right), and has never allowed unspecific over broad warrants to be issued, right?
There are things the state cannot grant or authorize because they would violate the rights of the people. The US Constitution recognizes some of that (at least on paper; in practice...). The government lacks the requisite authority to authorize those rights to be denied or revoked.
When they do it anyway, all involved should be hauled off to prison, even if it takes an army of the people to do so.
-- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
Inherently illegal isn't really a thing. Maybe you mean immoral?
No, I mean illegal. The US Constitution recognizes that there are things beyond the reach of any government's authority and by their very nature, such things cannot emanate from the government. Ergo, violation of such rights is inherently illegal regardless of what laws or judges or kings and queens might say or do.
In any case, courts in the US have been just fine with authorizing the killing of schoolchildren. None of the involved parties fried for it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...
Regardless of the unfortunate case you cited and the suspicions that a grave injustice was done, capital punishment is not murder by its very definition. To clarify my example, the Supreme Court cannot order or authorize me to go out and kill random schoolchildren. They can order or authorize the capture and punishment of a person convicted of a capital crime, but they lack the requisite authority to allow or require that I go kill innocent people.
-- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
yes, they believed they were doing the Lord's work, therefore, by definition, it could not be illegal.
Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!