draypresct: BullBearMS: Obama claimed he had his own secret interpretation of the Patriot Act that allowed him to spy on everyone.For more than two years, a handful of Democrats on the Senate intelligence committee have warned that the government is secretly interpreting its surveillance powers under the Patriot Act in a way that would be alarming if the public - or even others in Congress - knew about it.On Thursday, two of those senators - Ron Wyden of Oregon and Mark Udall of Colorado - went further. They said a top-secret intelligence operation that is based on that secret legal theory is not as crucial to national security as executive branch officials have maintained.I don't think your link supported your interpretation that Obama thought he could spy on everyone. I thought the article said that there was two uses of the section 215 orders from the FISA court - one obvious, and one that is "apparently not obvious from a plain text reading of the provision." While two senators are making a lot of noise,* it sounds like the surveillance is taking place under the oversight of the FISA court, which is a step up from how things were under Bush. Also note that these are supposed to only apply to "tangible things . . . that are deemed 'relevant' to a terrorism or espionage investigation." In other words, the NSA has to convince the FISA court that what they're after will help them in an investigation. Also, "terrorism or espionage" doesn't really make it seem like their primary focus is domestic.*I don't know anything about these senators. Are they whackadoodles like Bachmann? Or pretty level-headed people?
Outrageous Muff: Do you tinfoil-wearing internet pirvacy people understand the logistical problems that arise from recording that much data? Much less the time and manpower it would take to look at at and catalog it for anything?
BullBearMS: Obama has since been forced to release his secret interpretation of the Patriot Act, which indeed has nothing whatsoever to do with the actual text of the act.
draypresct: I don't believe that there's been any serious suggestion that they're data-mining the content of the calls.
draypresct: If there was no oversight whatsoever, then the NSA would have had no motivation to keep track of the 3000+ (mostly accidental) violations that have occurred.
draypresct: By the way - while I've concentrated on the aspects of your responses that I've disagreed with, I've liked your posts. They've been informative and have forced me to try to educate myself to write responses.
BullBearMS: So yes, they were collecting communications and not just metadata, and they weren't just lying to us about it. They were also lying to the FISA court they claim has the power to act as a check on them.
BullBearMS: This is a very important issue, and we all should be paying attention to it.
STORAGE JARS: If you truly value your privacy that much, smash your smartphone, disconnect your computer and never leave your house.
If you like these links, you'll love
The next best thing to UltraFark
Sign up for the Fark NotNewsletter!
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2018 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Jan 23 2018 10:05:10
Runtime: 0.497 sec (496 ms)