Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
National Security
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="moreluck" data-source="post: 1150020" data-attributes="member: 1246"><p><strong>“friend” In FISA Means Foreign</strong></p><p></p><p style="text-align: center"></p><p>At one point in his somewhat disjointed justification, President Obama, in his remarks, said that this data mining was not applied to Americans, that it’s about foreign intelligence, it’s not spying on Americans.</p><p>“friend” in FISA means foreign, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. You can read a copy of the act here. The purpose of the act is to gather information on foreign terrorists, the purpose was never meant to target or gather information on Americans, particularly if they had no association with terrorists.</p><p>The purpose of the National Security Agency(NSA) is also not to be spying on Americans. Their mission as set forth in Executive Order 12333 :</p><p style="margin-left: 20px">is to collect information that constitutes “foreign intelligence or counterintelligence” <strong>while <em>not</em> ”acquiring information concerning the domestic activities of United States persons”</strong>. NSA has declared that it relies on the FBI to collect information on foreign intelligence activities within the borders of the USA, while confining its own activities within the USA to the embassies and missions of foreign nations.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p><p>So how do we get then to the “secret” “Foreign Surveillance Court” authorizing a massive dragnet of data of domestic phone calls to give to the NSA, who isn’t supposed to be collecting it to be begin with, according to its mission?</p><p>Anyone can appreciate the need to go after foreign terrorists, even that some information might cross over to some Americans who might be in league with foreign terrorists.</p><p></p><p>Yet the order that allowed this massive NSA grab didn’t even give that as a justification, the order says the following:</p><p style="margin-left: 20px">IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, the Custodian of Records shall produce to the</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">National Security Agency (NSA) upon service of this Order, and continue production</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">on an ongoing daily basis thereafter for the duration of this Order, unless otherwise</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">ordered by the Court, an electronic copy of the following tangible things: all call detail</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">records or “telephony metadata” created by Verizon for communications (i) between</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">the United States and abroad; <strong>or (ii) wholly within the United States, including local</strong></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"><strong>telephone calls.</strong> This Order does not require Verizon to produce telephony metadata</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">for communications wholly originating and terminating in foreign countries.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p><p>Note, no requirement that there be any terrorist connection at all, no requirement that it even originate from overseas, just grabbing data of all local calls.</p><p>How is that foreign?</p><p></p><p>President Obama, in his remarks, was almost dismissive, saying snidely, “No one is listening in on your calls”, clearly disturbed that he would even have to justify this, raising a “strawman” that had never been raised.</p><p>But it isn’t foreign, isn’t terrorist connected (according to the order) despite what you said.</p><p></p><p>So pray tell, sir, what is your justification? And how might one trust what you have to say on this matter?</p><p></p><p>How do you justify going after server information and credit card information?</p><p></p><p>A “court order” would be needed to get more info beyond the metadata? Oh you mean, like the warrant your administration got when Eric Holder lied about James Rosen? Right, no issue, no problem here.</p><p></p><p>As we reported earlier, Jim Sensenbrenner, who helped write the Patriot Act said this is not in accordance with the act. Rand Paul calls it an all out assault on the Constitution.</p><p></p><p>The “don’t worry, trust us” excuse doesn’t work anymore, Mr. President…</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="moreluck, post: 1150020, member: 1246"] [B]“friend” In FISA Means Foreign[/B] [CENTER][/CENTER] At one point in his somewhat disjointed justification, President Obama, in his remarks, said that this data mining was not applied to Americans, that it’s about foreign intelligence, it’s not spying on Americans. “friend” in FISA means foreign, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. You can read a copy of the act here. The purpose of the act is to gather information on foreign terrorists, the purpose was never meant to target or gather information on Americans, particularly if they had no association with terrorists. The purpose of the National Security Agency(NSA) is also not to be spying on Americans. Their mission as set forth in Executive Order 12333 : [INDENT]is to collect information that constitutes “foreign intelligence or counterintelligence” [B]while [I]not[/I] ”acquiring information concerning the domestic activities of United States persons”[/B]. NSA has declared that it relies on the FBI to collect information on foreign intelligence activities within the borders of the USA, while confining its own activities within the USA to the embassies and missions of foreign nations. [/INDENT] So how do we get then to the “secret” “Foreign Surveillance Court” authorizing a massive dragnet of data of domestic phone calls to give to the NSA, who isn’t supposed to be collecting it to be begin with, according to its mission? Anyone can appreciate the need to go after foreign terrorists, even that some information might cross over to some Americans who might be in league with foreign terrorists. Yet the order that allowed this massive NSA grab didn’t even give that as a justification, the order says the following: [INDENT]IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, the Custodian of Records shall produce to the National Security Agency (NSA) upon service of this Order, and continue production on an ongoing daily basis thereafter for the duration of this Order, unless otherwise ordered by the Court, an electronic copy of the following tangible things: all call detail records or “telephony metadata” created by Verizon for communications (i) between the United States and abroad; [B]or (ii) wholly within the United States, including local telephone calls.[/B] This Order does not require Verizon to produce telephony metadata for communications wholly originating and terminating in foreign countries. [/INDENT] Note, no requirement that there be any terrorist connection at all, no requirement that it even originate from overseas, just grabbing data of all local calls. How is that foreign? President Obama, in his remarks, was almost dismissive, saying snidely, “No one is listening in on your calls”, clearly disturbed that he would even have to justify this, raising a “strawman” that had never been raised. But it isn’t foreign, isn’t terrorist connected (according to the order) despite what you said. So pray tell, sir, what is your justification? And how might one trust what you have to say on this matter? How do you justify going after server information and credit card information? A “court order” would be needed to get more info beyond the metadata? Oh you mean, like the warrant your administration got when Eric Holder lied about James Rosen? Right, no issue, no problem here. As we reported earlier, Jim Sensenbrenner, who helped write the Patriot Act said this is not in accordance with the act. Rand Paul calls it an all out assault on the Constitution. The “don’t worry, trust us” excuse doesn’t work anymore, Mr. President… [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
National Security
Top