Obama Administration Asserts Broad Surveillance Powers

[Purveyor]

By Ellen Nakashima and Robert Barnes, Published: August 9

The Obama administration on Friday asserted a bold and broad power to collect the phone records of millions of Americans in order to search for a nugget of information that might thwart a terrorist attack.

In a 22-page “white paper,” the Justice Department for the first time detailed its legal rationale for a massive National Security Agency data collection program that it claimed is both constitutional and subject to federal oversight.

The report, which echoes assertions the administration has made to Congress, said the law and subsequent court decisions bestow broad power on the government to seek telephone records “relevant” to investigations of suspected terrorism.

“Relevance,” the paper stated, is “a broad standard that permits discovery of large volumes of data in circumstances where doing so is necessary to identify much smaller amounts of information within that data that directly bears on the matter being investigated.”

The release of the white paper appeared to do little to allay the concerns of critics in Congress and the civil liberties community who say the surveillance program violates Americans’ right to privacy. Last month, the House narrowly defeated a proposal to terminate it. The closeness of the vote, 217 to 205, was surprising but gave fresh momentum to lawmakers who have been trying to rein in the collection effort.

MORE...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-administration-asserts-broad-surveillance-powers/2013/08/09/ff429504-0134-11e3-96a8-d3b921c0924a_print.html

[msongs]

1. the current administration out-bushes the bush crowd, but "it's the law" so all is forgiven nt

[Th1onein]

2. They're losing all credibility with this argument.

Fuck them.

Repeal the Patriot Act, Obama.

[spin]

3. Not going to happen. ...

Congress will never vote to repeal the law as you can damn well bet that the alphabet agencies have a file on every congressman and the President. The agencies have the ability to absolutely ruin any politician's life and career if they chose.

J. Edgar Hoover was called the most powerful man in Washington for good reason.

J. Edgar Hoover

Late in life and after his death Hoover became a controversial figure, as evidence of his secretive actions became known. His critics have accused him of exceeding the jurisdiction of the FBI.[1] He used the FBI to harass political dissenters and activists, to amass secret files on political leaders,[2] and to collect evidence using illegal methods.[3] Hoover consequently amassed a great deal of power and was in a position to intimidate and threaten sitting Presidents.[4] According to President Harry S Truman, Hoover transformed the FBI into his private secret police force; Truman stated that "we want no Gestapo or secret police. FBI is tending in that direction. They are dabbling in sex-life scandals and plain blackmail. J. Edgar Hoover would give his right eye to take over, and all congressmen and senators are afraid of him".[5]
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=post&forum=1002&pid=3440451

If J. Edgar was a bad ass imagine how powerful the alphabet agencies are today with all their computer power to gather data on everybody and everything. You don't mess with the big boys.

[Th1onein]

4. If their careers depend on it, it WILL happen.

And we need to make sure that their careers DO depend on it.

[spin]

7. All it would take is a few votes to preserve the Patriot Act. ...

So a Senator or a member of the House of Representatives who opposes the Patriot Act is in his office when a couple of FBI agents walk in. One tells the politician that the agency has uncovered evidence of his (insert scandal here such as an affair, use of prostitutes or taking bribes). The agent then tells the politician that he needs to be more careful in the future.

The vote to repeal the Patriot Act comes up the next week. It fails by just a few votes. Eventually a 10,000 page bill revising the Patriot Act does pass and the President signs it into law. The problem is that this bill contains loopholes that allow the alphabet organizations to continue to abuse the privacy rights of American citizens.

The bottom line is that when a Republican administration takes over once again (if that happens), you best be careful what you say here on DU. In fact it might be wise to be careful what you say even when a Democratic administration is in power.

[Th1onein]

8. So let's just give the fuck up, shall we, Spin?

Yeah, you go ahead and do that. Me? I'm going to continue to fight for my rights.

[spin]

10. It's worth the effort but I fear it is already too late.

We elected Obama and he was opposed to the Patriot Act.

Posted: September 16, 2009 01:34 AM
Did Obama Break His Campaign Promise to Scrap the Patriot Act?

Then-Senatorial candidate Obama in 2003 branded the Patriot Act "shoddy and dangerous" and pledged to dump it. He made the pledge in response to a candidate's survey by the National Organization for Women. Obama reneged on the pledge. But he did work to shave off some of the more blatantly outrageous constitutional abuses in the Act by imposing some civil liberties protections in the gathering and use of intelligence, on the use of torture in interrogations, and requiring at least some semblance of due process in court proceedings. But that paled in significance when Obama in a letter and with little fanfare and comment routinely let stand most of the still noxious provisions in the Act.

***snip***

Obama justifies keeping nearly all of Bush's terror war provisions in place with the standard rationale that the government must have all the weapons needed to deal with the threat of terrorism, even legally and constitutionally dubious weapons. That, of course, was the Bush and Cheney stock line. The one small difference between them and Obama is that Obama has sought to put a softer casing around those illicit weapons. That's no consolation for those who took candidate Obama and later Senator Obama at his word that he'd scrap or at least radically overhaul the Act.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/earl-ofari-hutchinson/did-obama-break-his-campa_b_288112.html

I will join you in the fight for our rights but realistically short of a revolution there's little chance that we can succeed. At this time our government is not dictatorial or tyrannical enough to justify an uprising and hopefully it never will be. If we continue down the same path we are on we may be under the thumb of a dictator in 20 or 30 years.

I just can't realistically figure out how we win this fight. Hopefully I am wrong. One positive note is that many Americans of all political backgrounds are upset at our loss of rights caused by our War on Terror.

[Warren DeMontague]

5. But no one is spying on Americans, silly!!!!!!!!!!!!1211111!!!!

[Warren DeMontague]

6. "thwart a terrorist attack" = "stop granny from eating a pot brownie to ease her chemo nausea"

[sabrina 1]

9. Repeal the cynically named Patriot Act, it was bad right from the beginning and

every prediction made about the dangers it posed to this democracy, have come true.