finding terrorists is more important that your phone records.

On Jun 7, 10:42 am, Travis <[email protected]> wrote:
> Scope of phone records seizure causes alarm; data collection goes beyond
> Verizon****
>
> By Dave Boyer <http://www.washingtontimes.com/staff/dave-boyer/>****
>
> The Washington Times****
>
> Thursday, June 6, 2013 ****
>
> The Obama administration on Thursday defended its secret seizure of the
> phone[image:http://images.intellitxt.com/ast/adTypes/icon1.png]<http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jun/6/white-house-defends-ph...>records
> of millions of U.S. citizens as part of counterterrorism efforts,
> while privacy advocates blasted the move as illegal and a debate erupted in
> Congress over the intended scope of a key surveillance law.****
>
> In a new development, the 
> National[image:http://images.intellitxt.com/ast/adTypes/icon1.png]<http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jun/6/white-house-defends-ph...>Security
> Agency and the FBI are tapping into the central servers of nine
> leading U.S. Internet companies in real time, obtaining audio and video
> chats, photographs, e-mails and other information, various news outlets
> reported. The program is code-named PRISM.****
>
> The revelation that the National Security Agency has been collecting phone
> records from Verizon Communications of all calls within the U.S. and to
> sources overseas raised accusations that President Obama is running a
> police state, in spite of his 2008 campaign promise to expand civil
> liberties while prosecuting the war on terror differently from his
> Republican predecessor.****
>
> On Thursday, the scope of the records seizure apparently expanded as former
> government officials familiar with the details of the domestic spying said
> more phone companies likely are involved and lawmakers said the court order
> is a routine three-month update of an ongoing program.****
>
> But a White House official said such domestic surveillance is a "critical
> tool in protecting the nation from terror threats."****
>
> "It allows counterterrorism personnel to discover whether known or
> suspected terrorists have been in contact with other persons who may be
> engaged in terrorist activities, particularly people located inside the
> United States," said White House deputy press secretary Joshua Earnest.****
>
> "The information acquired does not include the content of any
> communications or the name of any subscriber. It relates exclusively to
> call details, such as a telephone number or the length of a telephone call."
> ****
>
> The furor prompted Director of National Intelligence James Clapper to issue
> a rare statement late Thursday night in which he argued that the disclosure
> "threatens potentially long-lasting and irreversible harm to our ability to
> identify and respond to the many threats facing our nation."****
>
> "Discussing programs like this publicly will have an impact on the behavior
> of our adversaries and make it more difficult for us to understand their
> intentions," Mr. Clapper said.****
>
> *Latest civil liberties issue*****
>
> The timing of the report came as the Obama administration already taking
> fire over civil liberties issues, from the IRS targeting conservative
> groups for extra scrutiny to the Justice Department seizing the phone
> records of journalists in efforts to uncover the sources of leaks of
> classified information.****
>
> Lawmakers of both parties on the Senate Intelligence Committee said the
> wholesale domestic surveillance has been going on for seven years, and that
> it's necessary to prevent terrorist attacks.****
>
> "It's called protecting America," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, California
> Democrat, saying that the secret court order which Britain's Guardian
> newspaper posted online Wednesday night is a routine three-month renewal
> and proves that the program is carefully overseen by federal judges.****
>
> Sen. Saxby Chambliss, Georgia Republican, said the surveillance has "proved
> meritorious, because we have gathered significant information on bad guys,
> but only on bad guys, over the years."****
>
> But other lawmakers called the seizures an outrageous invasion of privacy
> and they said the Patriot Act, under which the snooping was granted, was
> never intended to allow for 
> blanket[image:http://images.intellitxt.com/ast/adTypes/icon1.png]<http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jun/6/white-house-defends-ph...>surveillance
> of Americans without any suspicion of wrongdoing.
> ****
>
> Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner Jr., who as chairman of the House Judiciary
> Committee helped write the Patriot Act after the Sept. 11 terrorist
> attacks, said the administration's massive collection of phone records is
> an "abuse" of the law.****
>
> "How could the phone records of so many innocent Americans be relevant to
> an authorized investigation as required by the act?" he wrote in a letter
> to Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr.****
>
> Sen. Ron Wyden, Oregon Democrat, also raised the possibility of
> administration officials lying to Congress in service of the program. He
> posted on his Twitter feed a video in which Director of National
> Intelligence James Clapper "specifically told me #NSA does not wittingly
> collect any type of data on millions of Americans."****
>
> "No, sir ... not wittingly," Mr. Clapper told Mr. Wyden at the March
> hearing in response to a question worded near identically to the senator's
> Thursday tweet, though he cautioned that NSA could "inadvertently collect"
> such data.****
>
> *Widening scope*****
>
> Already reeling from accusations of too much intrusion by the Justice
> Department, White House officials did not dispute that a court order signed
> by Judge Roger Vinson of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court in
> April directs Verizon Communications to turn over "on an ongoing daily
> basis" to the NSA all call logs "between the United States and abroad" or
> "wholly within the United States, including local telephone calls."****
>
> The FBI requested the court order, first reported by Britain's Guardian
> newspaper, with the surveillance to last until July 19.****
>
> A former NSA employee, William Binney, said other phone companies' records
> have been seized routinely by the agency. *USA Today reported in 2006 that
> three phone companies — Verizon, Bell South and AT&T — *had been turning
> over data on Americans' domestic phone calls to NSA, though lawmakers told
> the newspaper then that the companies' cooperation was only partial.****
>
> "NSA has been doing all this stuff all along and it's been all the
> companies, not just one," Mr. Binney said in a discussion hosted by the
> progressive nonprofit group Democracy Now!****
>
> Thomas Drake, another former NSA official, said the revelation shows that
> government secrecy has become "institutionalized."****
>
> "This isn't just a terrorist issue, this is simply the ability of the
> government in secret on a vast scale to collect any and all phone call
> records including domestic to domestic, local, as well as location
> information," Mr. Drake said.****
>
> "There is no need to call this the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.
> Let's just call it the 'surveillance court,' it's no longer about foreign
> intelligence. It's simply about harvesting millions and millions and
> millions of phone call records and beyond," he said.****
>
> Also Thursday, the Guardian revealed the five-year existence of another
> NSA-FBI surveillance program, this one getting data from America's Internet
> giants.****
>
> "The NSA access is part of a previously undisclosed program called PRISM,
> which allows them to collect material including search history, the content
> of emails, file transfers and live chats," the Guardian wrote, citing a
> top-secret Power Point presentation.****
>
> The slide show boasts of "collection directly from the servers" of
> companies such as Yahoo, Google, Microsoft, Apple. YouTube and Skype.
> Several of the companies told multiple news outlets Thursday that they had
> no knowledge of the program and that any access to their servers was
> clandestine.****
>
> *Backlash under way*****
>
> Privacy advocates reacted angrily to the news.****
>
> University of Notre Dame Law Professor Jimmy Gurulé, a former assistant
> U.S. Attorney General and former undersecretary for enforcement for the
> Treasury Department, called the program "deeply disturbing."****
>
> "It strains credulity to believe that there is probable cause to believe
> that the millions of Americans targeted by the NSA are engaged in
> international terrorism," Mr. Gurulé said. "This appears to be an abuse of
> power that threatens the civil liberties of all Americans. Further, if
> Congress is aware of these FISA warrants and has failed to act to restrain
> the NSA's overreach, it is complicit by omission."****
>
> The White House and some lawmakers said Congress is briefed regularly about
> such surveillance programs.****
>
> "The intelligence community is conducting court-authorized intelligence
> activities pursuant to a public statute with the knowledge and oversight of
> Congress and the intelligence community in both houses of Congress," Mr.
> Earnest said.****
>
> "There is also extensive oversight by the executive branch, including the
> Department of Justice and relevant agency counsels and inspectors general,
> as well as annual and semi-annual reports to Congress as required by law."**
> **
>
> But many lawmakers said they are often kept out of the loop on sensitive
> national security issues.
> "This 'fully brief' is something that drives us up a wall because often
> 'fully briefed' usually means a group of eight [members of] leadership,"
> said Sen. Barbara A. Mikulski, Maryland Democrat.****
>
> Many expressed outrage at the revelation of the phone seizures.****
>
> "If the president and Congress would obey the Fourth Amendment we all swore
> to uphold, this new shocking revelation that the government is now spying
> on citizens' phone data en masse would never have happened," said Sen. Rand
> Paul, Kentucky Republican.****
>
> The White House said Mr. Obama "welcomes" a debate about the trade-offs
> between national security and civil liberty.****
>
> "The close examination of some of these complicated issues could cause
> people to arrive at differing opinions," he said. "The president welcomes
> that debate. He has his own ideas, he's presented them."****
>
> Two weeks ago, in a speech at the National Defense University about the use
> of drones in the war on terror, Mr. Obama outlined a plan for shifting away
> from perpetual war with terrorists.****
>
> "In the years to come, we will have to keep working hard to strike the
> appropriate balance between our need for security and preserving those
> freedoms that make us who we are," Mr. Obama said.****
>
> "That means reviewing the authorities of law enforcement so we can
> intercept new types of communication, but also build in privacy protections
> to prevent abuse."****
>
> © Copyright 2013 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint
> permission.<http://license.icopyright.net/3.7280?icx_id=/news/2013/jun/6/white-ho...>
> ****
>
> About the Author****
>
> Dave Boyer <http://www.washingtontimes.com/staff/dave-boyer/>
>
> ****
>
> Dave Boyer is a White House correspondent for The Washington Times. A
> native of Allentown, Pa., Boyer worked for the Philadelphia Inquirer from
> 2002 to 2011 and also has covered Congress for the Times. He is a graduate
> of Penn State University. Boyer can be reached at [email protected]
> .****
>
> Read 
> more:http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jun/6/white-house-defends-ph...
> ****
>
>  image001.png
> < 1KViewDownload

-- 
-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to