Slashdot Mirror
Congress Is About To Vote On Expanding the Warrantless Surveillance of Americans (vice.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Motherboard: On Tuesday afternoon, a handful of U.S. Representatives will convene to review an amendment that would reauthorize warrantless foreign surveillance and expand the law so that it could include American citizens. It would, in effect, legalize a surveillance practice abandoned by the NSA in 2017 in order to appease the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which found the NSA to have abused its collection capacity several times. If it passes Tuesday's review, the bill may be voted on by the U.S. House of Representatives as early as Thursday. Drafted by the House Intelligence Committee last December, the FISA Amendments Reauthorization Act of 2017 is an amendment to Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). It is one of six different FISA-related bills under consideration by Congress at the moment, but by far the most damaging to the privacy rights of American citizens.
FISA was enacted in 1978, but Section 702, referred to by former FBI Director James Comey as the "crown jewels of the intelligence community," wasn't added until 2008. This section allows intelligence agencies to surveil any foreigner outside the U.S. without a warrant that the agency considers a target. The problem is that this often resulted in the warrantless surveillance of U.S. citizens as well due to two loopholes known as "backdoor searches" and "about collection." Backdoor search refers to a roundabout way of monitoring Americans' communications. Since intelligence agencies are able to designate any foreigner's communications as a target for surveillance, if this foreigner has communicated with an American this means this American's communications are then also considered fair game for surveillance by the agency.
FISA was enacted in 1978, but Section 702, referred to by former FBI Director James Comey as the "crown jewels of the intelligence community," wasn't added until 2008. This section allows intelligence agencies to surveil any foreigner outside the U.S. without a warrant that the agency considers a target. The problem is that this often resulted in the warrantless surveillance of U.S. citizens as well due to two loopholes known as "backdoor searches" and "about collection." Backdoor search refers to a roundabout way of monitoring Americans' communications. Since intelligence agencies are able to designate any foreigner's communications as a target for surveillance, if this foreigner has communicated with an American this means this American's communications are then also considered fair game for surveillance by the agency.
The government absolutely needs to the legal ability to keep the 99% under constant surveillance in order to ensure that they don't rise up against the 1%, after all.
You're going to be surveilled, whether it's legal or not, so you might as well just legalise it and give up the pretence that you live in a free country.
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
Stupid little thing called the 4th Amendment... Any conflicts?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
Bring it on.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
[Filter error: That's an awful long string of letters there.]
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Well, I tried.
I used to work with a few Syrian expatriates who were nominally Muslim. They were shocked at the level of Saudi influence in the mosques in our region and had to really bounce around to find one that was not on the take. That's their word, not mine. They could not believe that we'd spend so much time and money on "surveillance," but allow what would be the equivalent of open KGB recruitment (as in uniformed Soviet officers at career fairs) on college campuses during the Cold War.
I have a much simpler and less constitutionally dangerous solution:
1. Pass a law forbidding the funding of any domestic organization by a foreign government except the Vatican.
2. Authorize the use the corporate death penalty and full asset forfeiture for any organization convicted of intentionally accepting that funding.
3. Pass a law that amends immigration law to provide for the banishment of any foreigner who is convicted of espionage or sedition.
4. Prosecute all extremist preachers (like Wahabis and Salafists) under the Sedition Act.
5. Pass a law providing the courts with the discretionary power to remove the citizenship of any foreign-born person who is convicted of sedition or espionage
I think it's hilarious that they don't realize that it's their own insatiable desire to spy on everyone that is the primary driving force behind the spread of encrypted communications. That they don't realize this truth makes it all the more funny.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
Donald Trump is not Hussein Obama
Donald Trump isn't interested in knowing everything every American does every second of every single day
Donald Trump did not ask for those draconian measures
It was the *DEMONCRAPS* who tagged on all those draconian stuffs
The bill is sponsored by Devin Nunes, a Republican
Donald Trump is not Hussein Obama
Donald Trump isn't interested in knowing everything every American does every second of every single day
Donald Trump did not ask for those draconian measures
It was the *DEMONCRAPS* who tagged on all those draconian stuffs
This actually started under the Bush Administration. Just sayin'
"What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
Donald Trump isn't interested in knowing everything every American does every second of every single day
Then I guess we can expect him to refuse to sign such a law and protect our freedoms and liberties. Which is, by the way, pretty much part of his job...
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
"The buck stops with my predecessor."
"The buck stops with my predecessor."
At this point.... Yes, it does....
Once the bill shows up on the Donald's desk, THEN the buck stops with him, but not before.
How about it boys and girls of the democrat caucus? You going to let this out of the Senate? I believe you can easily stop it from gaining cloture by just voting as a block. What are you going to do?
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
The United States and its people, are who is responsible for enforcing the limits of the US government's power in China, North Korea, North America, and on the planet Mars. If the US Congress tries to pass a law that abridges the freedom of the press on the moon, or a law that infringes the right to bear arms on Alpha Centauri colony 3, we are responsible for striking down or otherwise nullifying that law.
The purpose of the Bill of Rights is to protect people's freedom. But the mechanics of the Bill of Rights is to deny power to an entity considered particularly at risk of violating peoples' freedom. To enforce the Bill of Rights is to enforce the limits of US government power. You can do that to the US government, no matter where the victim happens to be. It's just a question of whether or not we want to, is a good idea, is practical, etc.
That last part is what it's really about: you can enforce the law which limits the US government's power to infringe peoples' rights in China, but doing so doesn't have a really practical effect on how freely Chinese citizens can exercise their rights. So of course, we all have reason to be lax about enforcing the law, despite our responsibility as US citizens.
"Believe me!" -- Donald Trump