General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSecrets Exposed: How the NSA Rubber-Stamps Warrentless Spying
Published on Sunday, July 14, 2013 by Common Dreams
Secrets Exposed: How the NSA Rubber-Stamps Warrentless Spying
by Christopher Brauchli
If we are to regard ourselves as a grown-up nationand anything else will henceforth be mortally dangerousthen we must, as the Biblical phrase goes, put away childish things; and among these... the first to go, in my opinion, should be... the search for absolute security...
George Kennan, The Sources of Soviet Conduct, in Foreign Affairs (1947.)
Now we know what they so badly wanted to tell us but couldnt and what a revelation it is. I refer to the exciting and long-awaited news reported in the Wall Street Journal as to what it was that Senators Mark Udall and Tom Wyden have been dying to tell the American public about the operations of the NSA but were unable to disclose because the information was of such a top-secret nature.
According to the WSJ, the secret information that the senators had that was so confidential they could only hint at it was an interpretation of one word in the Patriot Act by the FISA Court. The super super secret word was relevant. To the non-lawyer this may seem like a secret that was hardly worth keeping and, indeed, it may even seem so to the legal mind. To understand the true importance of this revelation, a bit of history is called for. The word relevant has become important because of two other words, special needs.
In legal parlance special needs has referred to two different things. In one context it refers to individuals who, because of abilities and related issues, are described as having special needs. In another context, and the one that concerns us today, it refers to situations thatbecause of their great importanceare used to justify the government obtaining court orders permitting it to conduct searches without first obtaining a warrant as would normally be required by the 4th amendment to the Constitution.
<snip>
According to a report in the Guardian, in 2012 the court received 1,856 requests for surveillance, which was a 5% increase over the number of requests received in 2011. Although there was a slight increase in the number of requests received, there was one number that neither increased nor decreased during those two years. The unchanged number was zerothe number of requests for surveillance that the FISA court, applying the rigorous scrutiny described by Judge Walton, turned down. Zero does not help us understand the meaning of rigorous review. The requests for surveillance that were approved, however, help us understand the meaning of special needs and relevant.
..more..
cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
Laelth
(32,017 posts)-Laelth
kentuck
(111,098 posts)If medical records cannot be kept secret, why should we expect the NSA to keep secrets?
I see that Kim Kardashian's medical records were viewed by six unauthorized individuals when she was in the hospital giving birth.
My wife worked at a place where 3 people were dismissed for looking at medical records without a need to know.
I guess if the NSA doesn't expect people to secure their own individual information, they should not be surprised when they cannot secure the information they confiscate either?
Waiting For Everyman
(9,385 posts)By that I mean these "legal professionals", lawyers and judges, who so blithely make the word "relevant" mean the same thing as "irrelevant" just so they can make the law serve their own purposes. There's nothing unintentional about that. Every one of them who had a hand in this should be banned from the profession, and prosecuted for breaking their oath of office.
I read on a tech site that the original screwed up reasoning used in this came from John Yoo, which wouldn't surprise me.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)FISA requests are rejected for one or more reasons, they are modified then resubmitted according to former judge James Robertson in the above link.
It would be nice to know the percentages of resubmittals but it does not sound like a rubber stamp process.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]