General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsBig Brother is Big
I suspect that Glenn Greenwald is correct that this kind of massive sweep is what Senators Mark Udall and Ron Wyden have been concerned about.
The law on which the order explicitly relies is the so-called "business records" provision of the Patriot Act, 50 USC section 1861. That is the provision which Wyden and Udall have repeatedly cited when warning the public of what they believe is the Obama administration's extreme interpretation of the law to engage in excessive domestic surveillance.
In a letter to attorney general Eric Holder last year, they argued that "there is now a significant gap between what most Americans think the law allows and what the government secretly claims the law allows."
"We believe," they wrote, "that most Americans would be stunned to learn the details of how these secret court opinions have interpreted" the "business records" provision of the Patriot Act.
To be clear, these are not wiretaps. And it doesn't cover the content of emails or text messages. But it is a record of every American Verizon user's calls, texts, emails, and locations of where those messages were sent from and received. Since this is a leaked court order, I think we can safely assume that all the other phone carriers received a court order, too. We don't know if this is a one-off thing or something that is re-upped every three months.
Whatever is going on, the judge is not supposed to grant the request unless he determines that the government has "reasonable grounds to believe that the tangible things sought are relevant to an authorized investigation (other than a threat assessment)."
So, somehow, every use of a phone in this country is relevant to an authorized investigation?
http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2013/6/5/23122/85905
handmade34
(22,757 posts)dkf
(37,305 posts)This allows retroactive tracking of movements since location data is provided if the govt knows where you were every time you called or texted someone since '06. That's a lot of data points for me.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022954991
http://m.guardiannews.com/world/2013/jun/06/phone-call-metadata-information-authorities
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)marmar
(77,088 posts)....... regardless of how indefensible those actions are.
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)The leverage of the security agencies is considerable.
When the agencies make arguments about the dangerous downsides of not following their advice the politicians inevitably give some slack to those who want more power to provide more security. Sometimes it's a little slack and sometimes it's a lot. It bit by bit erodes liberty and often seems to provide less security than originally promised
Response to HereSince1628 (Reply #4)
davidn3600 This message was self-deleted by its author.
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)hunter
(38,325 posts)(I just wanted that on my permanent record.)
tavalon
(27,985 posts)Total Information Awareness. We screamed bloody murder then and we had damn well better scream bloody murder this time!!
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)Your business is our business. Thank you for your cooperation.