I'm posting here since I cannot post in posse comitatus
Hello all! Today I'm providing open source information regarding the current myths about the NSA and surveillance. Yes, much of it is myth passed down
from media storytelling and false interpretation mixed with word of mouth and no direct knowledge or participation, as are most things in life. Please
don't take it personally. If you had me discuss the modern combustion engine or the NFL you'd find I'm a sucker for all the jokes, myths and
misconceptions. Except blinker fluid, I know that one. And yes I'm a man, all man, except during football season and when jiffy lube is closed. Btw
I'm from Seattle originally so Suck It Denver!
Let's jump right in
I find it interesting the belief of how conducting operations in accordance with law for over 35 years equates rogue, over reaching, to powerful yada
yada yada. I get it, most just don't really know, they believe. I don't personally fall in the belief category in this particular situation because as
previously stated this thread is not about the NFL. I have been invited to the Wednesday night show and will likely be asked about my credentials at
that time so I will keep you in S U S P E N S E.
Let's start with the legal system and the Foreign Intelligence Survillance Act (FISA) and its courts.The FISA court only serve to authorize warrants,
not collection methods. This court has nothing to do with determining what's legal, just what justifies warrants. It is also important to note what
requires and does not require a warrant by law, and warrants are issued only for surveillance and searches not collection. Now not all cases legally
require warrants. Additionally the court is ex parte and is presented with requests for warrants from the Dept of Justice, not the intelligence
agencies. The agencies goes to the DOJ just like a cop would go to a district attorney and in turn the DA goes to the judge. And if the NSA is
conducting surveillance, its a different organization requesting the warrant because this different organization is requesting the surveillance. Why?
The NSA is not an independent agency, only one of them is, the CIA. As SIGINT their missions are in support of other intelligence and military assets,
not their own. SIGINT doesn't drive anything, it's a support role. Human intelligence and counterintelligence are the driving forces for intelligence
operations. Think CIA, DIA and FBI. So it's really the other organizations that give them their mission, maybe one and usually in coordination and
support of several. Despite popular opinion what they do is in accordance with FISA. Which speaks to the baseless rogue concept. But wait there's
Despite some claims the chains of command for DOD agencies (DIA, NSA, NGIA, NRO and four others) have not been questioned or met with congress at any
point in time, only the directors meet with congress. Also what the public sees is really for show. It's the classified information and actions that
are scrutinized, which is done by classified committees for intelligence, one in each part of congress and is closed doors, decided and authorized
before any director is questioned publicly. Congress tells them what's legal because congress writes the law. Nobody convinces a court what is legal
because courts exist to adjudicate disputes and to carry out the administration of justice e.g. Warrants. But this gets better.
FISA was implemented in 1978 after six years of hearings to clarify what could be in the act and it wasn't USI that had input, they actually never
really do. If you don't know USI is United States intelligence, referring to the entire umbrella of 16 agencies. Eight of which fall under the DOD.
All of this so far is referred to as the pre FISA era. Because that era only had FISA as the driving force regarding, well, the acronym itself -
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance. We are now in the post FISA era as FISA is no longer the only document. The Terrorist Surveillance Act, Patriot
Act, Protect America Act and the separate FISA Ammendments Act (not an all inclusive list) all have had some change, addition, ammendment or update in
regard to FISA. Welcome the terms U.S. Person and changes to internal collection and surveillance of said person.
So in reality the question still remains who is really at fault, authorized all this, wrote most of it and says what can and can't be done? Is it the
particular agency using the method? Is it the agency that requested to have the NSA use the method to support their mission? Is a subordinate Army
intelligence agency that all powerful? Who really did all this? That's answer is simply the senate. Most recently in 2012 the senate voted to extend
The acts for five years, as they do every single time. At the last minute if it is on the news, just like the debt ceiling. That's the short answer.
Throughout its history FISA has been challenged for its constitutionality in several courts. Even a classified special court equivalent to the circuit
court of appeals. Each time it has passed muster. With one exception that does not address constitutionality the way you might be thinking as you
read. The special review court took issue with FISA "where it might limit the Presidents inherent authority for warrantless searches in the area of
foreign intelligence." They determined that FISA is unconstitutional where it might encroach on the President's existing constitutional power. I know,
shocker for both sides of the fence.
Now it has been said quite a bit about this connection a person must have contact with an overseas terrorist to be monitored. That's a jumbled
misnomer at best. The president has mentioned words to that affect, as have others. However, whether the public realizes it or not they were speaking
specifically to the individual program that regards the specific question at that time. There are at least three programs I know of for sure that this
NSA media coverage falls under, all with different purvue as they are all different. Some parts of some programs sometimes don't require warrants or
this connection as it is commonly understood.That's why there is an ammendment regarding non state sponsored terrorist and the lone wolf provision.
As a side bar, I don't care for the administration or many of these surveillance methods either.
And breath... Break. c(_) Mmmm coffee
edit on 2014211 by bonecrusher321 because: (no reason given)
edit on 2014211 by bonecrusher321 because: (no reason
edit on 2014211 by bonecrusher321 because: Typos, the other white meat
edit on 2014211 by bonecrusher321
because: (no reason given)
edit on 2014211 by bonecrusher321 because: (no reason given)