while you were sleeping

[theknife]

the House voted today to make the Patriot Act permanent, 257-171, moving the bill on to the Senate. it includes things like this:

Order any person or entity to turn over "any tangible things," so long as the FBI specifies that the order is part of an authorized terrorism or intelligence investigation.

Obtain personal data, including medical records, without any specific facts connecting those records to a foreign terrorist.

Prohibit doctors and insurance companies from disclosing to their patients that their medical records have been seized by the government.

Obtain library and book store records, including lists of books checked out, without any specific facts connecting the records to a foreign agent or terrorist.

Obtain private financial records without a court order, and without notification to the person involved.

Conduct intelligence investigations of both United States citizens and permanent residents without probable cause, or even reasonable grounds to believe that they are engaged in criminal activity or are agents of a foreign power.

Investigate U.S. citizens based in part on their exercise of their First Amendment rights, and non-citizens based solely on their exercise of those rights. (Naturally, decisions about what constitutes "in part" are left to a secret court, meeting secretly.)

Those served with Section 215 orders are prohibited from disclosing that fact to anyone -- even their attorney.

feel safer?

[albed]

I was awake.


Hope that stuff doesn't make your terrorist buddies feel unwelcome.

[floydian slip]

Originally Posted by theknife

while you were sleeping

quiet knife... we're trying to sleep

everyodys got something to hide except for me and my monkey

[theknife]

some days, things don't look so bleak in this country....like yesterday, for instance:

Patriot Act nixed

WASHINGTON - The White House was handed a sharp rebuke on privacy issues yesterday when the Senate refused to reauthorize the USA Patriot Act and lawmakers demanded an investigation into whether President Bush authorized a spy agency to snoop on Americans' phone calls and E-mails.
Saying it jeopardized constitutional liberties, Senate Democrats blocked a bill that would have renewed key provisions of the anti-terrorism Patriot Act. The 52-47 vote to advance the bill was eight short of the 60 needed to overcome the Democrats' filibuster.

hehe - it's a little tricky to try to close the deal on the Patriot Act on the same day it's revealed that the Prez personally ordered ostensibly illegal eavesdropping on US citizens.

Lawmakers outraged over secret spy program

December 17, 2005
WASHINGTON -- Members of Congress from both parties expressed outrage Friday over revelations that President George W. Bush launched a secret domestic surveillance program in the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. The president personally authorized a secretive eavesdropping program in the United States more than three dozen times since October 2001, a senior intelligence official told the Associated Press on Friday.

The disclosure that the National Security Agency has been spying on domestic telephone conversations created a furor that could have far-reaching implications for the Bush presidency. Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, promised a thorough investigation into the secret program early next year.

The surveillance operation was disclosed Friday by the New York Times, which reported that the government has been monitoring phone calls and e-mail messages from the United States to foreign destinations without warrants for the past three years.

"There is no doubt that this is inappropriate," Specter said. "It's inexcusable to have spying on people in the United States without court surveillance in violation of our law."

that pesky Constitution just gets in the way of everything the Prez wants to do...Sen. Russ Feingold with the money quote of the day:

"I don't want to hear again from the attorney general or anyone on this Senate floor that this government has shown it can be trusted to use the power we give it with restraint and care."

[legion]

HAHAHAHA and here i was thinking I was living in a banana republic.

[Mazer]

You know, I may support the president on most things, but I'm gald the Patriot Act fell through. Not sure how I feel about the news that the president illegally spied on people, but if that report is what it took to prevent the act from passing then it has served its purpose, even if it turns out to be untrue.

[theknife]

via Kos:

A senior at UMass Dartmouth was visited by federal agents two months ago, after he requested a copy of Mao Tse-Tung's tome on Communism called "The Little Red Book."

Two history professors at UMass Dartmouth, Brian Glyn Williams and Robert Pontbriand, said the student told them he requested the book through the UMass Dartmouth library's interlibrary loan program.


The student, who was completing a research paper on Communism for Professor Pontbriand's class on fascism and totalitarianism, filled out a form for the request, leaving his name, address, phone number and Social Security number. He was later visited at his parents' home in New Bedford by two agents of the Department of Homeland Security, the professors said.


The professors said the student was told by the agents that the book is on a "watch list," and that his background, which included significant time abroad, triggered them to investigate the student further.

http://www.southcoasttoday.com/daily...5/a09lo650.htm

[Nicobie]

The Senate baulked.

[TankGirl]

A senior at UMass Dartmouth was visited by federal agents two months ago, after he requested a copy of Mao Tse-Tung's tome on Communism called "The Little Red Book."

Two history professors at UMass Dartmouth, Brian Glyn Williams and Robert Pontbriand, said the student told them he requested the book through the UMass Dartmouth library's interlibrary loan program.

The student, who was completing a research paper on Communism for Professor Pontbriand's class on fascism and totalitarianism, filled out a form for the request, leaving his name, address, phone number and Social Security number. He was later visited at his parents' home in New Bedford by two agents of the Department of Homeland Security, the professors said.

The professors said the student was told by the agents that the book is on a "watch list," and that his background, which included significant time abroad, triggered them to investigate the student further.

The minor privacy invasion problem of the student arose in the first place because professors are allowed to teach and students are allowed to study topics that require access to dubious literature. This root problem could be eliminated if Homeland Security was given the ultimate power to decide what can be taught and studied in universities.

[Drakonix]

his background, which included significant time abroad, triggered them to investigate the student further

The student had a lot more going for him than borrowing a library book, even if it's Mao's "Little Red Book" - guaranteed.

The NSA has been conducting limited clandestine surveillance on Americans for many more years than Bush has been President. Given certain conditions of National Security, (even without the Patriot Act) such surveillance is lawful without warrant.

President George W. Bush launched a secret domestic surveillance program in the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. The president personally authorized a secretive eavesdropping program in the United States more than three dozen times since October 2001, a senior intelligence official told the Associated Press on Friday.

In the absence of specific information on the circumstances in each case, it is not possible for anyone to fairly evaluate these actions by the President. If the President acted in the interests of National Security, his actions were probably lawful and appropriate. If he did not act in the interests of National Security, he's got some tough explaining to do. Note that the surveillance of subjects was limited to "phone calls and e-mail messages from the United States to foreign destinations".

So, approximately 36 incidents in a little over four years? The RIAA subpoena factory has Bush beat by a landslide victory in the abuse department. Obviously, the President is being questioned on these actions and is therefore being held accountable for them.

I'm not advocating limitless unquestioned power to spy on people, or power to conduct search and seizure without probable cause. I want the U.S. government to take action in protecting it's citizens against acts of terrorism. However, there must always be accountability. There is a marked difference between using authority responsibly and abuse of authority.

[theknife]

Originally Posted by Drakonix

The student had a lot more going for him than borrowing a library book, even if it's Mao's "Little Red Book" - guaranteed.

The NSA has been conducting limited clandestine surveillance on Americans for many more years than Bush has been President. Given certain conditions of National Security, (even without the Patriot Act) such surveillance is lawful without warrant.

the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 is pretty clear on this point: the Prez can authorize eavesdropping without a warrant but he is required to get one as soon as possible after the fact.

he may authorize the emergency employment of electronic surveillance if a judge having jurisdiction under section 1803 of this title is informed by the Attorney General or his designee at the time of such authorization that the decision has been made to employ emergency electronic surveillance and if an application in accordance with this subchapter is made to that judge as soon as practicable, but not more than 72 hours after the Attorney General authorizes such surveillance. If the Attorney General authorizes such emergency employment of electronic surveillance, he shall require that the minimization procedures required by this subchapter for the issuance of a judicial order be followed. In the absence of a judicial order approving such electronic surveillance, the surveillance shall terminate when the information sought is obtained, when the application for the order is denied, or after the expiration of 72 hours from the time of authorization by the Attorney General, whichever is earliest.

apparently, the Prez felt he had the perogative to skip the small detail of obtaining a warrant.

[albed]

Yep; a small detail. I got a laugh at one critic complaining about the unauthorized eavesdropping and then saying how easy it was to get warrants. So then what's the difference?

Originally Posted by TankGirl

The minor privacy invasion problem of the student arose in the first place because professors are allowed to teach and students are allowed to study topics that require access to dubious literature. This root problem could be eliminated if Homeland Security was given the ultimate power to decide what can be taught and studied in universities.

It seems to have escaped your comprehension that the investigation was triggered by the trips abroad and the request for a library book; nothing to do with any university courses. Your little hitler reference would be better used to suggest either banning books or banning foreign travel, but you amazingly picked the one thing it wasn't appropriate for.

[theknife]

Originally Posted by albed

Yep; a small detail. I got a laugh at one critic complaining about the unauthorized eavesdropping and then saying how easy it was to get warrants. So then what's the difference?

oversight and accountability.

[Drakonix]

Gee, with all the fanfare it seems to me that the President IS being overseen and IS being held accountable for his actions.

[theknife]

Originally Posted by Drakonix

Gee, with all the fanfare it seems to me that the President IS being overseen and IS being held accountable for his actions.

if there was oversight of warrantless eavesdropping on US citizens, it's news to former Sen. Bob Graham (D-FL), Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee at the time:

ABC: You were Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee at the time the President signed this executive order. Vice President Cheney met with congressional leaders — I’m sure you were among them in 2002, is that correct?

GRAHAM: There was such a meeting. And the issue, then, was whether we could intercept foreign communications when they transited through U.S. communication sites. The assumption was that if we did that, we would do it pursuant to the law, the law that regulates the surveillance of national security issues. And there was no suggestion that we were going to begin eavesdropping on United States citizens without following the full law.

ABC: You’re saying you were not briefed as the Chairman of the Intelligence Committee at the point the President signed this?

GRAHAM: I was briefed. There was no reference made to the fact that we were going to use that as the subterfuge to begin unwarranted, illegal — and I think unconstitutional — eavesdropping on American citizens.

ABC: So if the administration says that you were informed about this action, they would not be telling the truth?

GRAHAM: We were not informed that this would be a pretense for using warrantless searchs to listen in to the private conversations of United States citizens.

ABC: Sounds like you were saying you were lied to.

GRAHAM: I think there has been a selective use of information to build a case that was already determined, rather than using intelligence for its intended purpose, which is to improve the decision-making process on a judgment that has not yet been determined. - ABC's Nightline, 12/16/05

as for accountability, that moment is coming, hard and fast.

[albed]

Originally Posted by Drakonix

Gee, with all the fanfare it seems to me that the President IS being overseen and IS being held accountable for his actions.

But my god somebody was INVESTIGATED!!!


If that's not abuse by the government than I'm not a whining liberal.

[multi]

Originally Posted by albed

If there's not abuse by the government then I'm a moaning conservative.

[Drakonix]

President Clinton had a much broader surveillance program on U.S. citizens, called "Echelon". "60 Minutes" correspondent Steve Kroft did a report on it in February 2000.

Of course, Clinton did not have the events of 09/11 to use as National Security justification for the eavesdropping.

As I previously stated, NSA has been spying on Americans for a much greater period of time than President Bush's term.

During the 1990's under President Clinton, the National Security Agency monitored millions of private phone calls placed by U.S. citizens and citizens of other countries under a super secret program code-named Echelon.

On Friday, the New York Times suggested that the Bush administration has instituted "a major shift in American intelligence-gathering practices" when it "secretly authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the United States to search for evidence of terrorist activity without [obtaining] court-approved warrants."

But in fact, the NSA had been monitoring private domestic telephone conversations on a much larger scale throughout the 1990s - all of it done without a court order, let alone a catalyst like the 9/11 attacks.

In February 2000, for instance, CBS "60 Minutes" correspondent Steve Kroft introduced a report on the Clinton-era spy program by noting:

"If you made a phone call today or sent an e-mail to a friend, there's a good chance what you said or wrote was captured and screened by the country's largest intelligence agency. The top-secret Global Surveillance Network is called Echelon, and it's run by the National Security Agency."
NSA computers, said Kroft, "capture virtually every electronic conversation around the world."

Echelon expert Mike Frost, who spent 20 years as a spy for the Canadian equivalent of the National Security Agency, told "60 Minutes" that the agency was monitoring "everything from data transfers to cell phones to portable phones to baby monitors to ATMs."

Mr. Frost detailed activities at one unidentified NSA installation, telling "60 Minutes" that agency operators "can listen in to just about anything" - while Echelon computers screen phone calls for key words that might indicate a terrorist threat.

The "60 Minutes" report also spotlighted Echelon critic, then-Rep. Bob Barr, who complained that the project as it was being implemented under Clinton "engages in the interception of literally millions of communications involving United States citizens."

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2...8/221452.shtml
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2...9/114807.shtml

LOL, there is an actual product here called "Bush's Baked Beans", although I have no idea if it is actually related to the President's family. The actual product label is quite different - a lot more mundane.

[theknife]

by all accounts, there is a mechanism in place, under the FISA, to allow the government to eavesdrop on any US citizen, at a moment's notice, without a warrant. the stipulation is that the government is required to, within a set time period, go back to a judge and justify the wiretap or the results get thrown out. as albed points out above, wiretaps are approved 99.999% of the time. so what is the President's problem with obeying the law and getting the warrant, when he was almost certain to be able to do so?

Bush said the program had been effective in disrupting terrorist acts, but gave no details.

"I've reauthorized this program more than 30 times since September the 11th attacks, and I intend to do so for so long as the nation faces the continuing threat of an enemy that wants to kill our American citizens," he declared.

Bush noted that he had sworn to uphold the law. "Do I have the legal authority to do this? The answer is "absolutely"."....

he has given a variety of sweeping statements like the one above but he idoesn't ever address the legal question with anything more than the equivalent of "because i'm the Prez and i say so". could it be that the Prez was ordering eavesdropping on people that he was unable to legally justify - and therefore didn't try? or does he really just feel he has the authority to circumvent the law as he wishes?

He railed against the person, or people, who leaked the information. "It was a shameful act ... it tells our enemy exactly what we are doing and they adjust."

gee, he didn't get too worked up when his top advisors leaked a CIA officer's identity to the media - guess it depends on who is doing the leaking.

[Drakonix]

The President has Constitutional authority to order surveillance without warrant given certain conditions of national security. This authority is above the 1978 FISA.

In a Sept. 25, 2002, brief signed by then-Attorney General John D. Ashcroft, the Justice Department asserted "the Constitution vests in the President inherent authority to conduct warrantless intelligence surveillance (electronic or otherwise) of foreign powers or their agents, and Congress cannot by statute extinguish that constitutional authority."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10509407/page/2/

Therefore, the surveillance ordered by the President is lawful - as long as it was for reasons of National security.

It’s a broad power with potential for abuse. It’s scary, but it's that way for a very good reason: "to defend the national security of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic".

The President is upset about the leak because it compromises an ongoing investigation into terrorism operatives in the U.S.. Now that the terrorist groups have been made aware that they may be being monitored, they can use simple means to “work around” the surveillance.

TG posted an interesting link on the counter-measures subject a while back: http://www.crypto.com/papers/wiretapping/

The leak places U.S. citizens in increased danger as terrorists could use counter-measures against surveillance and therefore escape detection.