Vooral de NSA en FBI maken zich
schuldig aan het afluisteren van gesprekken tussen mensen die op geen
manier een bedreiging vormen...... Ook aan het publiek in de VS is
meermaals voorgehouden dat met metadata verzameling hun privacy niet
geschonden zou worden, wel dus.......
Overigens bleek eerder al, dat de
geheime diensten in de VS (waartoe ik in deze ook de FBI reken) foto's en
filmpjes uit internet bestanden van mensen plukken en bekijken........
'Onafhankelijke' rechters besluiten achter gesloten deuren wat wel of niet is toegestaan en daarover is geen enkele openheid...... In Nederland wil de regering met de Sleepwet die stap zelfs achterwege laten bij het verzamelen van data en reken maar dat men wel degelijk telefoongesprekken zal beluisteren, ook al is daar geen enkele reden toe...... De toestemming mag met de Sleepwet in werking, ook achteraf worden gevraagd en gegeven >> de dood in de pot voor ons recht op privacy, onze privacy waar al niet teveel meer van over is........
'Onafhankelijke' rechters besluiten achter gesloten deuren wat wel of niet is toegestaan en daarover is geen enkele openheid...... In Nederland wil de regering met de Sleepwet die stap zelfs achterwege laten bij het verzamelen van data en reken maar dat men wel degelijk telefoongesprekken zal beluisteren, ook al is daar geen enkele reden toe...... De toestemming mag met de Sleepwet in werking, ook achteraf worden gevraagd en gegeven >> de dood in de pot voor ons recht op privacy, onze privacy waar al niet teveel meer van over is........
Zie in de VS waar wij naar toe gaan met de
nieuwe Sleepwet, die Rutte 3 van plan is erdoor te drukken...... Geloof maar niet dat het referendum, zelfs als de grote meerderheid tegen de Sleepwet stemt, daar enige verandering in zal brengen....... We hebben immers niet voor niets een 'constitutionele democratie', met een volksvertegenwoordiging, uh ik bedoel een bedrijven- en welgesteldenvertegenwoordiging.......
Newly Released Documents Prove the US Gov’t Is Spying on Innocent Americans
February
26, 2018 at 7:39 am
Written
by Derrick
Broze
(AP) — The
Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has acquired formerly classified court
orders from the controversial Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court
(FISC) which detail how the court violates the privacy of innocent
Americans caught in the crossfire of federal surveillance. The
documents are the result of Freedom of Information Act requests filed
by the EFF as part of an effort to shine light on the inner workings
of the secret court.
The
EFF writes:
These documents raise larger questions about whether the government can meaningfully protect people’s privacy and free expression rights under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which permits officials to engage in warrantless mass surveillance with far less court oversight than is required under the “traditional” FISA warrant process.[…]
Although many of the 13 opinions are heavily redacted — and the government withheld another 26 in full — the readable portions show several instances of the court blocking government efforts to expand its surveillance or ordering the destruction of information obtained improperly as a result of its spying.
The
documents provided to the EFF detail several cases where
conversations of people not targeted by federal authorities were
swept up in the course of surveillance investigations. Specifically,
the documents show the National Security Agency (NSA) and the Federal
Bureau of Investigations (FBI) spying on innocent people and
attempting to conceal the practice. A 40-page court opinion from 2004
or 2005 details how FISC Judge Harold Baker declined a proposal from
FBI to save these conversations, often known as incidental
collection. “The opinion demonstrates both the risks of
over-collection as part of targeted surveillance as well as the
benefits of engaged, detailed court oversight,” The EFF notes.
Under
the standards set by section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Act (FISA), the FISC approves digital surveillance for
federal agencies who are supposed to follow certain procedures to
prevent the accidental interception of innocent people’s
communications. The new documents highlight how the FBI used
incidental collection to capture the communications of a number of
innocent people.
The
FBI attempted to argue to Judge Baker that the practice has “minimal,
if any” impact on the Fourth Amendment protections against
invasions of privacy. The FISC apparently actually did their job by
attempting to prevent this practice from continuing and becoming
normalized. The surveillance court appeared to admonish the FBI for
expanding the use of incidental communications, rather than deleting
the communications of individuals unrelated to ongoing
investigations.
The
EFF notes that the court “faulted the FBI for failing to account
‘the possibility that overzealous or ill-intentioned personnel
might be inclined to misuse information, if given the opportunity.’
As the court put it, ‘the advantage of minimization at the
acquisition stage is clear. Information that is never acquired in the
first place cannot be misused.’”
The
surveillance court was originally created under the the Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA) in response to reports
produced by the 1975 Church Committee. The Senate panel was tasked
with investigating the foreign and domestic surveillance operations
by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), NSA, and FBI during the
1970s. The Church Committee also released detailed reports on the
governments Counter Intelligence Programs (COINTELPRO) that were used
against activists and influential voices of opposition during the
1950s and ’60s.
These
newly released documents offer the latest example of how the secret
surveillance court is ripe for abuse. Although this example shows one
judge working to maintain some level of accountability, the vast
majority of the documents were redacted so there is no way to see if
this case is the exception or the norm. Further, this court order is
thirteen to fourteen years old. Take a moment to consider the massive
growth of the U.S. surveillance state and the FISC specifically.
There is simply no way to trust that this single judges effort to
hold the federal government accountable represent the status quo.
Much
of the issues surrounding the secret surveillance court related to
Section 702 of the FISA bill. According the EFF, Section 702 “allows
the NSA to collect emails, browser history and chat logs of
Americans. Section 702 also allows other agencies, like the FBI, to
search through that data without a warrant. Those searches are called
‘backdoor searches.’” As revealed by whistleblower Edward
Snowden in 2013, Section 702 also authorizes two Internet
surveillance programs known as PRISM and Upstream.
PRISM
gathers messaging data sent via Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Apple,
and other tech companies, while Upstream taps into the so-called
backbone of the Internet to gather data on targets. The NSA began
collecting Americans’ international phone calls and emails without
a warrant immediately after the 9/11 attacks as part of the Stellar
Wind program. Once the public became aware of the program in 2008,
Congress codified the program into law by passing section 702 of
FISA.
The
FISA Court is a glaring example of The Deep State. A secret court run
by secret judges who interpret the law behind closed doors and who
refuse to publicly release their findings or their interpretation.
Zie ook: 'Volkskrant en Nieuwsuur Fake News over 'Russische hacks.....''
Via Artwave Art de volgende link: 'Hoe zit het precies met die 'sleepwet'? In deze vier podcasts leggen we het uit' (door de Volkskrant, dus let op en geloof vooral niet alles wat je verteld wordt, zo zouden wij ook voordelen hebben van de sleepwet..... ha! ha! ha! ha! Alsof ze je had eraf hakken en dan stellen dat je nu veel beter gebruik van je andere hand zal gaan maken....)
