General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsNYT Op-Ed: The Criminal N.S.A.
The Criminal N.S.A.
By JENNIFER STISA GRANICK and CHRISTOPHER JON SPRIGMAN
Published: June 27, 2013 - http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/28/opinion/the-criminal-nsa.html
.... The two programs violate both the letter and the spirit of federal law. No statute explicitly authorizes mass surveillance. Through a series of legal contortions, the Obama administration has argued that Congress, since 9/11, intended to implicitly authorize mass surveillance. But this strategy mostly consists of wordplay, fear-mongering and a highly selective reading of the law. Americans deserve better from the White House and from President Obama, who has seemingly forgotten the constitutional law he once taught.
The administration has defended each of the two secret programs. Lets examine them in turn. ..... Section 215 of the Patriot Act, allows the F.B.I. to obtain court orders demanding that a person or company produce tangible things, upon showing reasonable grounds that the things sought are relevant to an authorized foreign intelligence investigation. The F.B.I. does not need to demonstrate probable cause that a crime has been committed, or any connection to terrorism.
Even in the fearful time when the Patriot Act was enacted, in October 2001, lawmakers never contemplated that Section 215 would be used for phone metadata, or for mass surveillance of any sort. .......
PSPS
(13,583 posts)So all of this domestic spying is, you see, just fine and dandy after all! I think that's how it works. I'm sure there will be plenty of apologists along shortly to embellish this train of thought.