PDA

View Full Version : Feinstein promotes bill to strengthen NSA's hand on warrantless searches



baru911
11-15-2013, 06:16 PM
How come you have to read about this in papers outside of the US? Could it be that the American press doesn't want the Democratic party to look bad? How come nobody in the Democratic party (which was all over Bush and Cheney) are suddenly so freakin' quiet when their own party member is pushing this draconian pile of shit? It was wrong under Bush and now the Democrat Party leaders have doubled down to totally screw everyone.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/15/feinstein-bill-nsa-warrantless-searches-surveillance

Feinstein promotes bill to strengthen NSA's hand on warrantless searches

Fisa Improvements Act, advanced as surveillance reform, would make permanent loophole known as 'backdoor search provision'

Spencer Ackerman in Washington
theguardian.com, Friday 15 November 2013 10.02 EST


Senator Dianne Feinstein. Feinstein’s bill passed the Senate intelligence committee on an 11-4 vote on 31

A Senate bill promoted as a surveillance reform would codify the ability of the National Security Agency to search its troves of foreign phone and email communications for Americans’ information, and permit law enforcement agencies to search the vast databases as well.

The Fisa Improvements Act, promoted by Dianne Feinstein, the California Democrat who chairs the Senate intelligence committee, would both make permanent a loophole permitting the NSA to search for Americans’ identifying information without a warrant – and, civil libertarians fear, contains an ambiguity that might allow the FBI, the DEA and other law enforcement agencies to do the same thing.

“For the first time, the statute would explicitly allow the government to proactively search through the NSA data troves of information without a warrant,” said Michelle Richardson, the surveillance lobbyist for the ACLU.

“It may also expand current practices by allowing law enforcement to directly access US person information that was nominally collected for foreign intelligence purposes. This fourth amendment back door needs to be closed, not written into stone.”

Feinstein’s bill passed the committee on an 11 to 4 vote on 31 October. An expanded report on its provisions released by the committee this week added details about the ability of both intelligence and law enforcement to sift through foreign communications databases that it accumulates under section 702 of the Fisa Amendments Act of 2008.

Section 6 of Feinstein’s bill blesses what her committee colleague Ron Wyden, the Oregon Democrat and civil libertarian, has called the “backdoor search provision,” which the Guardian revealed thanks to a leak by Edward Snowden.

The section permits intelligence agencies to search “the contents of communications” collected primarily overseas for identifying information on US citizens, resident aliens and people inside the US, provided that the “purpose of the query is to obtain foreign intelligence information or information necessary to understand foreign intelligence information or to assess its importance.”

Section 6 bills itself as a “restriction,” but it would not stop the NSA from performing the warrantless search, merely requiring intelligence agencies to log their queries and make them “available for review” to Congress, the Fisa court, the Justice Department and inspectors general inside the executive branch.

Additionally, the report on Section 6 explicitly states that the provision “does not limit the authority of law enforcement agencies to conduct queries of data acquired pursuant to Section 702 of Fisa for law enforcement purposes.”

There is ambiguity surrounding whether the FBI can currently search through the NSA’s foreign communications databases, or is reliant on the NSA to pass on information from the databases relevant to the bureau.

A declassified Fisa court document from 2011 refers to “FBI minimization procedures,” but it is unclear what those procedures are. A copy of the FBI minimization procedures from 2009, acquired by the ACLU under the Freedom of Information Act is almost completely redacted.

So is the section in the government’s most recent report on its Section 702 collection dealing with the FBI’s role, though it contains references to how the FBI “receive[s] … unminimized Section 70 acquired communications” from the NSA.

Feinstein’s bill “seems to imply there is currently some authority for law enforcement to query the database, which [intelligence community] officials have not mentioned in any of their remarks on Section 702,” said Alan Butler, an attorney with the Electronic Privacy Information Center.

The provision is also unclear about whether law enforcement agencies can search through the foreign communications databases for information on US persons. Feinstein’s office did not respond to a request for clarification by deadline.

The ambiguity concerns civil libertarians, as it opens a door for law enforcement agencies to sidestep warrant requirements.

“If Senator Feinstein or other congressional supporters of this bill believe that it would in fact expand law enforcement access to the database, that would be an unjustified expansion of surveillance over Americans,” Butler said.

“Intelligence community leaders and those in charge of the congressional oversight committees have stressed many times that Section 702 is supposed to be about collecting foreign communications, and the law should make clear that is so.”

The surveillance blogger Marcy Wheeler first noticed the controversial provisions, and highlighted another on Thursday: the bill would permit contractors access to the NSA’s foreign communications databases. “The committee believes that, to the greatest extent practicable, all queries conducted pursuant to the authorities established under this section should be performed by federal employees,” according to the bill.

"Nonetheless, the committee acknowledges that it may be necessary in some cases to use contractors to perform such queries. By using the term ‘government personnel’ the committee does not intend to prohibit such contractor use.”

Wyden has sounded vague warnings about the existing “backdoor search” provision, and said in a statement released by the committee that the Feinstein bill “would give intelligence agencies wide latitude to conduct warrantless searches for Americans’ phone calls and emails under Section 702.” The statement was joined by Mark Udall, a Colorado Democrat, and Martin Heinrich, a New Mexico Democrat.

Feinstein’s bill is a direct competitor to a different surveillance bill in the Senate taken up by the judiciary committee. Sponsored by the committee’s chairman, Vermont Democrat Pat Leahy, and supported by Wyden and Udall, the bill would require a warrant to search of any NSA foreign communications database for any specific US person information.

Nickdfresh
11-15-2013, 08:11 PM
How come you have to read about this in papers outside of the US? Could it be that the American press doesn't want the Democratic party to look bad?

Or maybe you're just a dolt that draws completely irrational conclusions largely out of ignorance?

Like, the guy who broke the whole Snowden story is an American ex-Washington Post reporter named Barton Gellman (http://www.npr.org/2013/09/11/221359323/reporter-had-to-decide-if-snowden-leaks-were-the-real-thing) who extensively covered the Iraq War intelligence debacle and is now a freelance writer. The Guardian has always been a good paper and I'll give you some kudos for at least posting something interesting...

His interview on "liberal" NPR is here: http://www.npr.org/player/v2/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=221359323&m=221413468


How come nobody in the Democratic party (which was all over Bush and Cheney) are suddenly so freakin' quiet when their own party member is pushing this draconian pile of shit? It was wrong under Bush and now the Democrat Party leaders have doubled down to totally screw everyone.

I couldn't agree more actually. But where the fuck are the Republicans on this? Oh yeah, completely lock step with the Administration...

cadaverdog
11-15-2013, 11:54 PM
I couldn't agree more actually. But where the fuck are the Republicans on this? Oh yeah, completely lock step with the Administration...
As I've said before it's them against us. No politician gives a flying fuck what you want unless you got some green to persuade them to do your bidding.

Nitro Express
11-16-2013, 12:14 AM
Having two major opposing political parties makes it easy for banking interests to play divide and conquer. They get the two parties fighting and blaming each other and that distracts the masses while they pick our pockets dry. The corruption is universal. Each party has a few decent politicians but your probably could count them on one hand.

Nitro Express
11-16-2013, 12:17 AM
The Democrat Party did nothing to undo the corruption of the previous Republican rule. They just took the baton an ran the same game and added in more corruption. They managed to beat Ronald Reagan in big spending. It's not even worth arguing about. The Democrats run a slicker marketing game than the Republicans but it's all the same shit.

cadaverdog
11-16-2013, 12:17 AM
Fienstein promotes bill to strengthen NSA's hand on warrantless searches

Fisa Improvements Act, advanced as surveillance reform, would make permanent loophole known as 'backdoor search provision'


I've had more than my share of back door searches already.

Nitro Express
11-16-2013, 12:19 AM
When the TSA singled me out and took me in a room and gave me a full cavity search, I was wondering, do I tip this guy?

Nitro Express
11-16-2013, 12:22 AM
I say we give Senator Feinstein the honor of being the first American to be sent to Mars. Of course it will be a one way trip.

Satan
11-16-2013, 01:14 AM
Diane Feinstein is no worthy representative of the Demoncratic party.

She's a right wing, war profiteering Israel-firster who literally built a political career on the corpses of Harvey Milk and George Moscone.

I can't believe she's managed to get re-elected as many times as she has in a supposedly "liberal" state like Collieforneea.

Nickdfresh
11-16-2013, 08:26 AM
11229

From the above journalist Barton Gellman's series in The Washington Post: NSA Broke Privacy Rules Thousands of Times Per Year Audit Finds (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/nsa-broke-privacy-rules-thousands-of-times-per-year-audit-finds/2013/08/15/3310e554-05ca-11e3-a07f-49ddc7417125_story.html)

What's disturbing is how flippant they are about it all...

baru911
11-17-2013, 10:27 PM
Like, the guy who broke the whole Snowden story is an American ex-Washington Post reporter named Barton Gellman (http://www.npr.org/2013/09/11/221359323/reporter-had-to-decide-if-snowden-leaks-were-the-real-thing) who extensively covered the Iraq War intelligence debacle and is now a freelance writer.

The paper that published the first story that Snowden provided the information was the Guardian on June 5. The reporter was Glenn Greenwald. The article was in reference to the NSA collecting Verizon phone records. Gellman starts to publish on June 6, 2013 in the Washington Post. As with most of your post you got your facts incorrect or did Wikipedia get the facts incorrect? Better run over there and correct that Nick if they did.

Link to the article:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/nsa-phone-records-verizon-court-order


Both the Post and the Guardian publish articles on NSA’s Prism program on June 6.
Link to articles:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/us-tech-giants-nsa-data and
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/national-security-agency-surveillance


http://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/us-intelligence-mining-data-from-nine-us-internet-companies-in-broad-secret-program/2013/06/06/3a0c0da8-cebf-11e2-8845-d970ccb04497_story.html



Both of these links provide a time-line on the above:
http://www.csmonitor.com/layout/set/r14/USA/Foreign-Policy/2013/1117/Key-moments-in-NSA-spy-saga

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/06/nsa-leaker-shopped-his-story-around.html


Glenn Greenwald’s reporting in The Guardian on the NSA was far more extensive than any other reporter’s work. The Guardian was and is the paper of record for reporting on the NSA. Link to his stories pages 1 – 5 hold his NSA work:
http://www.theguardian.com/profile/glenn-greenwald

Greenwald’s life partner was detained at Heathrow for 9 hours by the British Government in an attempt to gain information on what files Greenwald had. President Ego’s administration knew about the detention before it occurred and allowed it to happen. http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/19/world/europe/greenwald-partner-detained/index.html

Greenwald has left The Guardian to start a site where he has hinted he would be publishing more information that Snowden provided him in the future. I look forward to whatever information he brings to light on the subject.

Nickdfresh
11-19-2013, 09:34 PM
The paper that published the first story that Snowden provided the information was the Guardian on June 5.

Firstly, that has fuckall to do with any of your idiotic contentions regarding supposed "liberal bias". We weren't talking about who posted and scooped whom first. We're talking about your patently absurd and baseless comments. But okay:

Gellman broke the PRISM program, fuckstick. You know, the hacking of Google and Yahoo by the NSA? That was the story broken on the 6th in the Washington Post. You know, the things you actually don't read? like newspapers? Actually, the Guardian printed a story about Verizon records being deciphered and mined by the NSA and their British equivalent a day earlier. But Gellman had access to that information but he claimed Snowden stopped taking to him about it when he couldn't guarantee a quick publishing date and he didn't what to run with a story without fact checking....


The reporter was Glenn Greenwald. The article was in reference to the NSA collecting Verizon phone records.

Actually, much of the story was about the British equivalent of the NSA, GCHQ, and their using the NSA methodologies...


Gellman starts to publish on June 6, 2013 in the Washington Post.

Right! Where he broke the PRISM story, which is far in excess of even the data-mining of phone records. And both reporters are in a slap-and-tickle catfight over what Snowden said to whom first. But both Gellman and Greewald used him as a source, but the Post's story on PRISM was actually far deeper and more controversial. So fuckstick, how blindingly obvious how fucking petty and stupid you are? Thank you for proving my point! The WASHINGTON POST and the American media HAVE in fact reported on this scandal extensively since the beginning. Furthermore, they can't get enough of what this following article terms "The NSA Scandal Sweepstakes". Barton Gellman, Glenn Greenwald feud over NSA leaker (http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/edward-snowden-nsa-leaker-glenn-greenwald-barton-gellman-92505.html)


As with most of your post you got your facts incorrect or did Wikipedia get the facts incorrect?

Which facts are wrong? You said:
How come you have to read about this in papers outside of the US? Could it be that the American press doesn't want the Democratic party to look bad?

But you just admitted that they posted articles on this that far exceeded the "British" newspaper. Where do I get MY FACTS? Retard, where do you get your facts? Your fat fucking asshole you finger as you Google for negative stories about Obama?


Better run over there and correct that Nick if they did.

I'm too busy correcting you, hick. Maybe you should take some reading comp courses? Your shitty high education is failing you...



http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/nsa-phone-records-verizon-court-order

Both the Post and the Guardian publish articles on NSA’s Prism program on June 6.
Link to articles:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/us-tech-giants-nsa-data and
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/national-security-agency-surveillance

http://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/us-intelligence-mining-data-from-nine-us-internet-companies-in-broad-secret-program/2013/06/06/3a0c0da8-cebf-11e2-8845-d970ccb04497_story.html

Congratulations! Thanks for admitting you're wrong! Again. Was it that tough?


Both of these links provide a time-line on the above:
http://www.csmonitor.com/layout/set/r14/USA/Foreign-Policy/2013/1117/Key-moments-in-NSA-spy-saga

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/06/nsa-leaker-shopped-his-story-around.html

Glenn Greenwald’s reporting in The Guardian on the NSA was far more extensive than any other reporter’s work.

Define "more extensive!" It's in fact NO MORE EXTENSIVE than other reporter's work...


The Guardian was and is the paper of record for reporting on the NSA. Link to his stories pages 1 – 5 hold his NSA work:
http://www.theguardian.com/profile/glenn-greenwald

Which means fuckall in all of this, because that's not what you originally said!

Those links only show what an idiot fake you are, because they're "American media" clearly writing extensively about events embarrassing to the Obama Admin, dummy. So, it looks like your pedestrian "liberal media" ploy is sort of making you look like, well, a stupid cliche...


They're the first to record the NSA hacking Verizon,

Information the Post had, and was going to publish. The Guardian beat them on that scoop, then the Post beat the Guardian on the PRISM program, which is actually far more damaging. But you wouldn't get that, though...


Greenwald’s life partner was detained at Heathrow for 9 hours by the British Government in an attempt to gain information on what files Greenwald had. President Ego’s administration knew about the detention before it occurred and allowed it to happen. http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/19/world/europe/greenwald-partner-detained/index.html

President "Ego" orchestrated all that and it was on CNN, dummy911? The British were pissed as much as we were because he exposed their SIGNIT organization, as stated above. Which goes to show that all Western gov'ts are doing this, not that that makes it right or mean that we should be doing it...


Greenwald has left The Guardian to start a site where he has hinted he would be publishing more information that Snowden provided him in the future. I look forward to whatever information he brings to light on the subject.

Good for him! Gellman is working on a book with Snowden, also, and hasn't been full time with the Post since 2010. But again, that has fuckall to do with any of this. The point is that you're an idiot that makes stupid, tired old "liberal media bias" claims when in fact both the Washington Post and The Guardian are in a bloodfeud over who scooped what, making your first sentence this thread pretty imbecilic. You don't have the first clue of what you're talking to Google-assclown. Now go shove some Wal-Mart porkrinds up your fat fucking asshole. There's a rollback!!..

ELVIS
11-19-2013, 11:50 PM
Hahahahahahaha...

What a waste of bandwidth....

Satan
11-19-2013, 11:53 PM
Hahahahahahaha...

Infowhores.com

What a waste of bandwidth....

About time you admitted it.