"In Secret, Court Vastly Broadens Powers of NSA"

First thread ever! Not sure if it's been posted. If it already has, I apologize.

In more than a dozen classified rulings, the nation’s surveillance court has created a secret body of law giving the National Security Agency the power to amass vast collections of data on Americans while pursuing not only terrorism suspects, but also people possibly involved in nuclear proliferation, espionage and cyberattacks, officials say.

www.nytimes.com...

It's funny how they are now admitting they take all data like it's yesterday's news. Now they are focused on broadening the scope of who gets targeted, it seems.

Yikes.

Terrorists, Hackers, and Spies, OH MY!

reply to post by introV


...and nobody will do a damned thing about it until we're all wearing jumpsuits behind a razor wire fence. Then we'll just reminisce about the good ol' days.

reply to post by introV
This is nothing but to make you feel safe as to why they are doing it, go against it, or complain... Then you must be against themfor they will be looking at you , the same way they will look at the others to them your just a named number waiting to be look at. Feel safe now?

Sickening!!! The very idea of any kind of "secret court" is completely in violation of the
constitution IMHO.

The New World Order takeover is complete. We have a completely lawless government and no one can or will stop them.

Originally posted by introV
First thread ever! Not sure if it's been posted. If it already has, I apologize.

In more than a dozen classified rulings, the nation’s surveillance court has created a secret body of law giving the National Security Agency the power to amass vast collections of data on Americans while pursuing not only terrorism suspects, but also people possibly involved in nuclear proliferation, espionage and cyberattacks, officials say.

www.nytimes.com...

It's funny how they are now admitting they take all data like it's yesterday's news. Now they are focused on broadening the scope of who gets targeted, it seems.

Yikes.

Terrorists, Hackers, and Spies, OH MY!

edit on 7-7-2013 by introV because: (no reason given)

Pretty unsurprising...

Terrorism
Nuclear proliferation
Cyber Security

That's pretty much the headline topics of any national security estimate.

Originally posted by Rockerchic4God
Sickening!!! The very idea of any kind of "secret court" is completely in violation of the
constitution IMHO.

The New World Order takeover is complete. We have a completely lawless government and no one can or will stop them.

It's not of course. Secret courts and monitoring private correspondence are as old as America itself.

The only thing that changed is outrage, and that's a "flavour of the month" thing driven by the media... in a few more months no one will remember or care...

reply to post by introV


Nice, Intro. I was just going to post this story and found you .

And here is something just as interesting:

Chief Justice Roberts Is Awesome Power Behind FISA Court

To use its surveillance powers -- tapping phones or reading e-mails -- the federal government must ask permission of the court set up by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. A FISA judge can deny the request or force the government to limit the scope of its investigation. It’s the only plausible check in the system. Whether it actually checks government surveillance power or acts as a rubber stamp is up to whichever FISA judge presides that day.

The 11 FISA judges, chosen from throughout the federal bench for seven-year terms, are all appointed by the chief justice. In fact, every FISA judge currently serving was appointed by Chief Justice John Roberts, who will continue making such appointments until he retires or dies. FISA judges don’t need confirmation -- by Congress or anyone else.

Man, I read something a week or so ago that talked about how the FISA court judges had all been compromised in one way or another, that is how they "qualified" for their appointments. I am gonna go look and see if I can find that.

Originally posted by GrantedBail
reply to post by introV

 

Nice, Intro. I was just going to post this story and found you

.

And here is something just as interesting:

Chief Justice Roberts Is Awesome Power Behind FISA Court

To use its surveillance powers -- tapping phones or reading e-mails -- the federal government must ask permission of the court set up by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. A FISA judge can deny the request or force the government to limit the scope of its investigation. It’s the only plausible check in the system. Whether it actually checks government surveillance power or acts as a rubber stamp is up to whichever FISA judge presides that day.

The 11 FISA judges, chosen from throughout the federal bench for seven-year terms, are all appointed by the chief justice. In fact, every FISA judge currently serving was appointed by Chief Justice John Roberts, who will continue making such appointments until he retires or dies. FISA judges don’t need confirmation -- by Congress or anyone else.

Man, I read something a week or so ago that talked about how the FISA court judges had all been compromised in one way or another, that is how they "qualified" for their appointments. I am gonna go look and see if I can find that.

Considering that at least one justice PERSONALLY opened private mail in the past, are you surprised??

The US Justice system works like this... and ALWAYS has.... in fact it's much much better than it used to be (google: J Edgar Hoover).

The only reason you need a Secret Supreme Court is if you plan on using the power of the state against the interests of the people and you need trappings of legality to get people to participate.

Fundamental rulings redrawing the relationship between state and individual in favour of the state cannot be made in secret. If they are you are living in a tyranny, you just don't see it yet.

This is why confidence in politics and in the state itself is at an all time low. Why participate in the theatre when the real power is wielded in the dark by people with unaccountable agendas.

Reply to post by DeadSeraph

We already are.

If you behave yourself you can have a pseudo private cell, pick your cell mates and travel the yard with appropriate papers but youre still regulated and subjegated.

We all live in minimum security lockup.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

Originally posted by justwokeup
The only reason you need a Secret Supreme Court is if you plan on using the power of the state against the interests of the people and you need trappings of legality to get people to participate.

Fundamental rulings redrawing the relationship between state and individual in favour of the state cannot be made in secret. If they are you are living in a tyranny, you just don't see it yet.

This is why confidence in politics and in the state itself is at an all time low. Why participate in the theatre when the real power is wielded in the dark by people with unaccountable agendas.

First: It's not a "secret Supreme Court".
Second: The court was created NOT to give people new power - the executive used the power BEFORE the court - the court was created to LIMIT power. A quick perusal of a history book would explain it all to you, but in plain terms, you KNOW about the court and it's decisions. If it didn't exist, the same things WOULD be happening, without any oversight, and you wouldn't know.

reply to post by superannoyingreality


I have read a couple of books about J Edgar. I am well aware of his "filing system" as well as his surveillance of political figures. I know how he used to get down by writing to these politicians with veiled threats.

The technology is so much more advanced. The surveillance that is taking place now would make Hoover cream himself.

I can't stand that guy. He was such a punk.

Originally posted by GrantedBail
reply to post by superannoyingreality

 

I have read a couple of books about J Edgar. I am well aware of his "filing system" as well as his surveillance of political figures. I know how he used to get down by writing to these politicians with veiled threats.

The technology is so much more advanced. The surveillance that is taking place now would make Hoover cream himself.

I can't stand that guy. He was such a punk.

Absolutely a punk.

The point is that he was COMPLETELY unaccountable. And a complete sociopath.

We don't live in that reality any more. Imagine if he'd had to go to FISA. You might think it wouldn't have changed anything, but I say at least there'd be a proper history of his craziness... and that proper history IS a kind of accountability.

It CAN ALWAYS be better... but the irony is that we live in a time of MORE oversight, of less government secrecy, than in the past...

Originally posted by DeadSeraph
reply to post by introV

 

...and nobody will do a damned thing about it until we're all wearing jumpsuits behind a razor wire fence. Then we'll just reminisce about the good ol' days.

Daddy?

Yes Son?

I heard one of the Dads talking through the fence to his Daughter today...

That's nice Son, what did you hear?

I Heard him telling her that he was SO sorry he didn't do anything.

Do anything? Do anything about what Son?

I don't know Dad, but he was crying and said a word i didn't understand...he said he was so sorry he didn't do anything to save his daughters 'free-dom'...what's free-dom Daddy?

...it was something wonderful Son, from the olden days way back before we were made to live in this work camp.

It's gone now though..so just forget about what you heard. If the enforcers hear you talking about it, you'll be taken away and we'll never see you again.

I'm frightened Daddy!

I know Son, i know...now better get back to work, if we make our quota this week, we should be able to meet again next month.

OK Daddy, i'll work hard so we can see each other next time.

Goodbye Son.

reply to post by superannoyingreality


Yes he was unaccountable, and unassailable. He had something on everyone. He was THE most powerful person in our government for quite some time. The only one who ever challenged him was JFK. He knew his number was up and once he reached 70 years old, JFK was going to force him to retire. He hated the Kennedy brothers, and to this day I believe that he had some participation in John Kennedy's assassination, or at least he knew it was going down. J. Edgar knew everything. He was also tight with Johnson.

I don't know that I would agree with your accountability statement. Our country has really capitulated towards an imperial presidency in the last 40 years.

Originally posted by superannoyingreality

Originally posted by justwokeup
The only reason you need a Secret Supreme Court is if you plan on using the power of the state against the interests of the people and you need trappings of legality to get people to participate.

Fundamental rulings redrawing the relationship between state and individual in favour of the state cannot be made in secret. If they are you are living in a tyranny, you just don't see it yet.

This is why confidence in politics and in the state itself is at an all time low. Why participate in the theatre when the real power is wielded in the dark by people with unaccountable agendas.

First: It's not a "secret Supreme Court".
Second: The court was created NOT to give people new power - the executive used the power BEFORE the court - the court was created to LIMIT power. A quick perusal of a history book would explain it all to you, but in plain terms, you KNOW about the court and it's decisions. If it didn't exist, the same things WOULD be happening, without any oversight, and you wouldn't know.

From the article

"The rulings, some nearly 100 pages long, reveal that the court has taken on a much more expansive role by regularly assessing broad constitutional questions and establishing important judicial precedents, with almost no public scrutiny."

Broad constitutional questions....like what the supreme court is supposed to do.

We don't know about the court and its decisions. The findings are not published in nearly all cases. We only know some of the meat because its been leaked by whistleblowers so your argument is bogus.

In a correctly functioning society the relationship between the state and the individual is defined in public. If people in power go beyond the defined bounds journalists and whistleblowers should out them leading to them being jailed. Thats the purpose of a free press. Thats why its important.

Historic abuse of power is not a good reason to institutionalise abuse of power.

reply to post by introV


Sorry to sound defeatist, but I think it's too late.
The definitions they can now use can get you on a watch list simply for daring to question these practices. The most prolific members of ATS are probably on lists already, watched and monitored, their opinions scrutinized and recorded for use later.

Your elected have failed to hold these people accountable, and it's grown so out of control that even they are on lists, their emails read, their phone calls listened to, their searches recorded. Your elected representatives have all been compromised because none of them bothered to actually do their jobs before and stop this from happening.

I've said it so many times now, you have no democratically accountable government, because there is now a more powerful agency above all of them. There cannot be a functioning democratic government when a secretive group of agencies holds power above them while remaining in the shadows and unaccountable to the people.

What part of this are people not understanding? Just the capability of the NSA and other agencies to have more power than your elected officials renders your government incapacitated. The fact that people don't seem to understand this basic fact shows how far our nations have sunk.

We all talk about the apathy of the voting public, but this is truly shocking. Democracy in America has theoretically ended already, and so few Americans seem to even realize that this has happened.

reply to post by GrantedBail


Interesting how all the FISA Judges are appointed by the CJ.

Many people don't know that.

I think the whole FISA law was signed into law by Carter in 1978.

Senator Ted Kennedy was the one who introduced the bill.

FISA has been around a long time.

Originally posted by xuenchen
reply to post by GrantedBail

 

Interesting how all the FISA Judges are appointed by the CJ.

Many people don't know that.

I think the whole FISA law was signed into law by Carter in 1978.

Senator Ted Kennedy was the one who introduced the bill.

FISA has been around a long time.

It was introduced so that Americans couldn't be spied on by their government , without oversight. It was a reaction to Watergate. It didn't start the spying, but was an effort to keep everyone honest.

reply to post by justwokeup


You're conflating things.

It's not above the Supreme Court and MANY courts intentionally take on constitutional issues, which eventually end up in front of the Supremes.

But the way, Ben Franklin personally opened private mail and took part in secret courts - I'm pretty sure he had a grasp on what was "American".