If you were in charge of govt surveillance, what would be your rules and guidelines?

[Super_Lantern]

Just curious on everyones thoughts and ideas

And for people who feel if you have nothing to hide, what does surveillance matter. Do you feel the same way about unannounced and unwarranted police stop-ins at your property? If you feel different about that, what's the difference?

 

[waltky]

Granny don't like it when dey peek inna bathroom winda when she takin' a shower...

White House Trying To Prevent Ruling On NSA Surveillance
December 22, 2013 ~ The Obama administration acknowledges for the first time that the NSA's collection of data on American's Internet and phone activity was authorized by President Bush in 2001.

The Obama administration has filed papers to prevent a federal judge from issuing a ruling on whether the government's warrantless surveillance programs are constitutional.
In a pair of filings late Friday with court for the Northern District of California, the White House acknowledged for the first time that NSA's bulk data collection on American's Internet and phone activity was authorized by President Bush in the weeks after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. "President Bush issued authorizations approximately every 30-60 days," wrote James R. Clapper Jr., the director of national intelligence. "Although the precise terms changed over time, each presidential authorization required the minimization of information collected concerning American citizens to the extent consistent with the effective accomplishment of the mission of detection and prevention of acts of terrorism within the United States. NSA also applied additional internal constraints on the presidentially authorized activities."

The government argued, that despite recent leaks by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden, further revelation's about the NSA's surveillance and data collection programs could put the government's security at risk if they were divulged in court, he wrote. "Disclosure of this still-classified information regarding the scope and operational details of N.S.A. intelligence activities implicated by plaintiffs' allegations could be expected to cause extremely grave damage to the national security of the United States," Clapper wrote.

Arguing that it can continue to assert its state secrets privilege to block information from being used in a court, the Justice Department has asked US District Court Judge Jeffrey S. White to dismiss the case without ruling on whether the programs violated the First or Fourth Amendments of the Constitution. The court had earlier ordered the government to evaluate how Snowden's leaks had affected it invocation of the state secrets privilege.
Plaintiffs in the cases, including the Electronic Freedom Foundation, have until late January to respond.

"The government seems to be trying to reset the clock to before June 2013 or even December 2005," EFF Legal Director Cindy Cohn said in a statement. "But the American people know that their communications are being swept up by the government under various NSA programs. The government's attempt to block true judicial review of its mass, untargeted collection of content and metada by pretending that the basic facts about how the spying affects the American people are still secret is both outrageous and disappointing."

MORE

 

[Kosh]

Well the far left wanted us to be more like Europe, so why would they oppose this?

 

[waltky]

Granny says dey better not be peekin' at her love emails...

Web companies give first look at secret government data requests
3 Feb.`14 - Facebook, Microsoft, Yahoo and Google on Monday began publishing details about the number of secret government requests for data they receive, hoping to show limited involvement in controversial surveillance efforts.

The tech industry has pushed for greater transparency on government data requests, seeking to shake off concerns about their involvement in vast, surreptitious surveillance programs revealed last summer by former spy contractor Edward Snowden. The government said last month it would relax rules restricting what details companies can disclose about Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court orders they receive for user information. Several companies, including Google and Microsoft, sued the government last year, seeking the ability to disclose more of that data.

Microsoft General Counsel Brad Smith said on Monday the latest data showed that the info the government has asked online companies to turn over has not been as vast as some feared. "We have not received the type of bulk data requests that are commonly discussed publicly regarding telephone records," Smith said. "This is a point we've publicly been making in a generalized way since last summer, and it's good finally to have the ability to share concrete data." Between 15,000 to 15,999 Microsoft-user accounts were the subject of FISA court orders requesting content during the first six months of 2013, the company said.

Still, Smith cited media reports - based on Snowden's leaked documents - that the government may have intercepted user information without tech companies' knowledge or cooperation, by tapping into communications cables that link Google and Yahoo datacenters. "Despite the President's reform efforts and our ability to publish more information, there has not yet been any public commitment by either the U.S. or other governments to renounce the attempted hacking of Internet companies," he said on Microsoft's blog. "We believe the Constitution requires that our government seek information from American companies within the rule of law."

BREAKDOWN

 

[RandallFlagg]

Just curious on everyones thoughts and ideas

And for people who feel if you have nothing to hide, what does surveillance matter. Do you feel the same way about unannounced and unwarranted police stop-ins at your property? If you feel different about that, what's the difference?

Well, as someone who served in the Intelligence community for 22 years, allow me to explain the law to you.

CIA - Against Federal Law to Surveil ANY American on American soil.

DIA - Against Federal law to Surveil ANY American on America soil.

FBI - Is allowed to Surveil American citizens suspected of federal crimes on American Soil AND Foreign soil.

NSA - Against Federal Law to Surveil ANY American on American soil.

NRO - Nobody knows EXACTLY what they are allowed to do - pretty much anything they wish.

Secret Service (Treasury) - Again, pretty much whatever they wish to do in building a federal case against an individual.

Military Intelligence (Army, Air Force, Navy) against federal law to surveil any "non-member" of the UNITED STATES military within the bounds of the Military jurisdiction.

All of these organizations (as well as all police agencies - to include local Sheriffs) are allowed to lie to a suspect while building a case.

What do all these organizations have in common? The Patriot Act that (pretty much) abolishes all the above. Bush opened "Pandora's box" and now Obama refuses to even attempt to "close" it.

Funny, but for a guy (Obama) who was going to "change" - he sure seems to have forgotten what he promised during his campaign. Comes in handy right now, doesn't it?

 

[bripat9643]

Just curious on everyones thoughts and ideas

And for people who feel if you have nothing to hide, what does surveillance matter. Do you feel the same way about unannounced and unwarranted police stop-ins at your property? If you feel different about that, what's the difference?

I would abolish whatever I was in charge of. Government shouldn't be conducting surveillance of anyone, let alone American citizens.

 

[Mr. H.]

Upskirts.

Lots of Upskirts...