It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Secret Text in Senate Bill Would Give FBI Warrantless Access to Email Records

page: 1
7

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 27 2016 @ 06:43 PM
link   
(another article I haven't seen in the forums, but if someone has already posted please delete)


Jenna McLaughlin
May 26 2016, 3:31 p.m.

A provision snuck into the still-secret text of the Senate’s annual intelligence authorization would give the FBI the ability to demand individuals’ email data and possibly web-surfing history from their service providers without a warrant and in complete secrecy.

If passed, the change would expand the reach of the FBI’s already highly controversial national security letters. The FBI is currently allowed to get certain types of information with NSLs — most commonly, information about the name, address, and call data associated with a phone number or details about a bank account.

Since a 2008 Justice Department legal opinion, the FBI has not been allowed to use NSLs to demand “electronic communication transactional records,” such as email subject lines and other metadata, or URLs visited.

The spy bill passed the Senate Intelligence Committee on Tuesday, with the provision in it. The lone no vote came from Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., who wrote in a statement that one of the bills provisionswould allow any FBI field office to demand email records without a court order, a major expansion of federal surveillance powers.
...

theintercept.com...

So only one Senator, a Democrat, noticed the provision which would allow the FBI to access anyone's email without a court order?...

What in the world?...

The fact that this "secret bill" is giving such unrestricted access to the FBI to all emails without a court order is bad enough, but that it seems only one Senator, a Democrat, read it and noticed the provision being slipped in the bill is even worse. Either the rest of the Senators didn't even bother to read the bill, or they simply agreed with the provision being Constitutional, which it isn't.




posted on May, 27 2016 @ 06:53 PM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Republicans control both the house and senate at this point! Like I have always said, "Two wings on the same bird!". Come hell or high water, the sovereignty of the US is the last bastion of defense against the NWO! Look at the EU and the fact they are with holding information on the new EU army until after the BREXIT vote! I surely hope our friends across the pond rebel and get the hell out!

Welcome to the Orwellian nightmare!



posted on May, 27 2016 @ 06:55 PM
link   

A provision snuck into the still-secret text of the Senate’s annual intelligence authorization would give the FBI the ability to demand individuals’ email data and possibly web-surfing history from their service providers without a warrant and in complete secrecy.


Not so secret:
www.govtrack.us...
I couldn't find anything like what is claimed. Maybe someone else can?

edit on 5/27/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 27 2016 @ 06:56 PM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

...and to think our elected representatives take an oath to uphold and defend the constitution of the United States. These representatives don't do the job we elect them to do. A lot of them don't show up to vote on bills let alone read them. No wonder many of our representatives are in their 60's and 70's. Why retire when you're not doing anything on the job?




posted on May, 27 2016 @ 07:12 PM
link   
Hmmm...

The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides, "[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

It seems incredible that the proposed power to access a persons internet usage does not violate their rights.

The Police State....

Just a mouse click away.




posted on May, 27 2016 @ 07:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage

Not so secret:
www.govtrack.us...
I couldn't find anything like what is claimed. Maybe someone else can?


Bills are continuously being amended, with new provisions being implemented and when this happens the bill number can change.

That link you gave is for the bill as it was amended at the time it was published, on 4/27/2016.

Senator Wyden states there is a provision in the bill that has been included which according to him will :


...
Tuesday, May 24, 2016

Washington, D.C. –Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., today voted against the 2017 Intelligence Authorization Act in the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. The bill includes provisions to expand warrantless government surveillance and takes aim at a valuable independent oversight board.

“This bill takes a hatchet to important protections for Americans’ liberty,” Wyden said following the vote. “This bill would mean more government surveillance of Americans, less due process and less independent oversight of U.S. intelligence agencies. Worse, neither the intelligence agencies, nor the bill’s sponsors have shown any evidence that these changes would do anything to make Americans more secure. I plan to work with colleagues in both chambers to reverse these dangerous provisions.”

Wyden opposes multiple provisions to the bill, including;

-Allowing the FBI to obtain Americans’ email records with only a National Security Letter. Currently, the FBI can obtain email records in national security investigations with an order from the FISA Court. The bill would allow any FBI field office to demand email records without a court order, a major expansion of federal surveillance powers. The FBI can currently obtain phone records with a National Security Letter, but not email records.

-Narrowing the jurisdiction of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board (PCLOB), for the second consecutive year. The bill would limit the PCLOB to examining only programs that impact the privacy rights of U.S. citizens. Wyden has supported the PCLOB’s focus on the rights of US persons. Wyden opposed this provision, however, since global telecommunications networks can make it difficult to determine who is an American citizen, and this provision could discourage oversight of programs when the impact on Americans’ rights is unclear. Furthermore, continually restricting a small, independent oversight board sends the message that the board shouldn’t do its job too well.
...

Link

It is more than possible the bill has been amended again and it is not in the public domain "yet". This has happened in the past.

Are you saying the senator is lying? How do you prove that? Do you have a copy of the "currently amended bill"?


edit on 27-5-2016 by ElectricUniverse because: correct comment.



posted on May, 27 2016 @ 07:59 PM
link   

Are you saying the senator is lying?
I said I can't find anything like what is claimed.


Do you have a copy of the "currently amended bill"?

You didn't see the link in the page I linked? It's the version which passed.

The text of the bill below is as of May 24, 2016 (Passed the House (Engrossed)).

www.govtrack.us...

edit on 5/27/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)

edit on 5/27/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 27 2016 @ 08:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Did you fail to read this section?...


Text of the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017

The text of the bill below is as of May 24, 2016 (Passed the House (Engrossed)).

This is not the latest text of this bill.
...

www.govtrack.us...

The latest version is this.


Text of the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017

The text of the bill below is as of May 25, 2016 (Referred to Senate Committee).
...


www.govtrack.us...

So i was right, it was amended again. Reading it at the moment.



posted on May, 27 2016 @ 08:40 PM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse


So i was right, it was amended again. Reading it at the moment.

I showed you the version which passed the House. Which is the version your OP is talking about.
Don't you read your own sources?

The spy bill passed the Senate Intelligence Committee on Tuesday, with the provision in it.

What was the date on Tuesday? Never mind that it did not "pass the Senate Intelligence Committee."
edit on 5/27/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 27 2016 @ 08:53 PM
link   
Humm, the following is one of the sections the Senator stated he was against.


...
Sec.307.

Information on activities of Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board

Section 1061(d) of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (42 U.S.C. 2000ee(d)) is further amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
(5)

Information
(A)

Activities

In addition to the reports submitted to Congress under subsection (e)(1)(B), the Board shall ensure that each official and congressional committee specified in subparagraph (B) is kept fully and currently informed of the activities of the Board, including any significant anticipated activities.
(B)

Officials and congressional committees specified

The officials and congressional committees specified in this subparagraph are the following:
(i)

The Director of National Intelligence.
(ii)

The head of any element of the intelligence community (as defined in section 3(4) of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 3003(4)) the activities of which are, or are anticipated to be, the subject of the review or advice of the Board.
(iii)

The Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives and the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate.
...

www.govtrack.us...

So, the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board has to inform several officials of "any significant anticipated activity" by the PCLOB?... Sounds dubious enough. Why would the PCLOB have to inform all those officials about anticipated reports on Privacy and Civil Liberties?

Congress, I understand, but other officials are also given an oversight over reports and anticipated activities from the PCLOB?

Why would the Director of National Intelligence need to be informed on the "anticipated activities" dealing with privacy and civil liberties among other officials?.



edit on 27-5-2016 by ElectricUniverse because: add and correct comment.



posted on May, 27 2016 @ 09:11 PM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Why would the Director of National Intelligence need to be informed on the "anticipated activities" dealing with privacy and civil liberties among other officials?.
Um. The director is to be notified of what the PCLOB is working on. It's called coordination of efforts. Makes sense to me.


2) To ensure that liberty concerns are appropriately considered in the development and implementation of laws, regulations, and policies related to efforts to protect the Nation against terrorism.

www.pclob.gov...
edit on 5/27/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 27 2016 @ 09:34 PM
link   
Another section at first looks to be benign but when read within the context of the people and groups that the current administration has labeled as "extremist groups", leaves open a door for this program being used against "law abiding people".


...
Sec.605.

Report on counter-messaging activities
(a)

Report

Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Under Secretary of Homeland Security for Intelligence and Analysis, consistent with the protection of sources and methods, shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report on the counter-messaging activities of the Department of Homeland Security with respect to the Islamic State and other extremist groups.
(b)

Elements

The report under subsection (a) shall include the following:
(1)

A description of whether, and to what extent, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in conducting counter-messaging activities with respect to the Islamic State and other extremist groups, consults or coordinates with the Secretary of State, regarding the counter-messaging activities undertaken by the Department of State with respect to the Islamic State and other extremist groups, including counter-messaging activities conducted by the Global Engagement Center of the Department of State.
(2)

Any criteria employed by the Secretary of Homeland Security for selecting, developing, promulgating, or changing the counter-messaging approach of the Department of Homeland Security, including any counter-messaging narratives, with respect to the Islamic State and other extremist groups.
(c)

Appropriate congressional committees defined

In this section, the term appropriate congressional committees means—
(1)

the congressional intelligence committees; and
(2)

the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate.
...

www.govtrack.us...

They mention in that section of the bill counter-messaging activities against Islamic State and "other extremist groups". But they never specify what other extremist groups they are referring to.

As we know Assistant Attorney General John P. Carlin considers groups like the SPLC "an important voice on the wide range of extremist groups throughout this country."

www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.justice.gov...

Except that the SPLC labels people, and groups as "extremists" based on ideology, and not based on any violent tendency.

The SPCL has gone so far as to label people like Ron Paul as an "extremist".


by Ryan Lenz
April 26, 2013


Ron Paul, the libertarian former Texas congressman whose hard-line views are widely admired on the radical right but who claims to reject racism, has started a new organization stacked with a hodgepodge of far-right extremists.
...
And just who are the far-right luminaries helping guide Pauls new endeavor?

One is Lew Rockwell, Pauls former congressional chief of staff who now heads the Ludwig von Mises Institute, an Auburn, Ala., think tank with deep ties to the neo-Confederate movement. There’s Judge Andrew Napolitano of Fox News and journalist Eric Margolis, both 9/11truthers” who suspect that the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks may have been orchestrated by the government.
...

www.splcenter.org...



posted on May, 27 2016 @ 09:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
Um. The director is to be notified of what the PCLOB is working on. It's called coordination of efforts. Makes sense to me.


The Director of National Intelligence. Why would he/she among other officials need to be notified of anticipated activities of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board?...

Let's take a look at what exactly the PCLOB does...


What is the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board?

The Board is an independent, bipartisan agency within the executive branch established by the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act, Pub. L. 110-53, signed into law in August 2007. Comprised of four part-time members and a full-time chairman, the Board is vested with two fundamental authorities: (1) To review and analyze actions the executive branch takes to protect the Nation from terrorism, ensuring the need for such actions is balanced with the need to protect privacy and civil liberties and (2) To ensure that liberty concerns are appropriately considered in the development and implementation of laws, regulations, and policies related to efforts to protect the Nation against terrorism.
...

www.pclob.gov...

This group does not pass any laws... They are just an oversight agency that assures the protection of Privacy and Civil Rights...



posted on May, 27 2016 @ 10:48 PM
link   
There is actually one thing Senator Wyden was wrong about. There were other Senators who also voted against this bill on May 24th 2016. 30 Senators in total voted against it.

www.govtrack.us...
edit on 27-5-2016 by ElectricUniverse because: add comment.



posted on May, 27 2016 @ 11:47 PM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse



They mention in that section of the bill counter-messaging activities against Islamic State and "other extremist groups". But they never specify what other extremist groups they are referring to.
Where's the part about the FBI being able to bypass FISA?





Let's take a look at what exactly the PCLOB does...
Yes, I know. I posted that very link.





Why would he/she among other officials need to be notified of anticipated activities of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board?...

Are you in favor of government agencies not talking to each other?

edit on 5/27/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)

edit on 5/27/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 27 2016 @ 11:48 PM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

There is actually one thing Senator Wyden was wrong about.

And it will have to pass the Senate and be signed by the President before it can take effect.

And your source is wrong about it being "secret."

edit on 5/27/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 27 2016 @ 11:56 PM
link   
LINK
One search can clarify much in this regard. Anyone who thinks any of this isn't already occurring....well, I don't know quite what to say about that. After reading that, just take a look at some of Apple's patents in the last several years, especially in regards to iPhone tech.

Anyone here watch VICE, on HBO, news doc show? Their most recent offering is about surveillance. Surely most of us have known this stuff for years, no?




top topics



 
7

log in

join