Snowdon is a dummy

The NSA warrantless surveillance controversy ("warrantless wiretapping") concerns surveillance of persons within the United States during the collection of allegedly foreign intelligence by the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) as part of the touted war on terror. Under this program, referred to by the Bush administration as the terrorist surveillance program,[1] part of the broader President's Surveillance Program, the NSA was authorized by executive order to monitor, without search warrants, the phone calls, Internet activity (Web, e-mail, etc.), text messaging, and other communication involving any party believed by the NSA to be outside the U.S., even if the other end of the communication lies within the U.S. However, it has been discovered that all U.S. communications have been digitally cloned by government agencies, in apparent violation of unreasonable search and seizure. The excuse given to avoid litigation was that no data hoarded would be reviewed until searching it would be defensible. But no excuse has been offered the initial seizure of the data which is also illegal, according to the U. S. Constitution.

During the Obama Administration, the NSA has allegedly continued operating under the new FISA guidelines.[3] However, in April 2009 officials at the United States Department of Justice acknowledged that the NSA had engaged in "overcollection" of domestic communications in excess of the FISA court's authority, but claimed that the acts were unintentional and had since been rectified

In a recent essay, Judge Richard A. Posner opined that FISA "retains value as a framework for monitoring the communications of known terrorists, but it is hopeless as a framework for detecting terrorists. [FISA] requires that surveillance be conducted pursuant to warrants based on probable cause to believe that the target of surveillance is a terrorist, when the desperate need is to find out who is a terrorist."

There is a statutory procedure[160] for a "whistleblower" in the intelligence community to report concerns with the propriety of a secret program, The Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act of 1998, Pub. L. 105–272, Title VII, 112 Stat. 2413 (1998). Essentially the Act provides for disclosure to the agency Inspector General, and if the result of that is unsatisfactory, appeal to the Congressional Intelligence Committees. A former official of the NSA, Russ Tice, has asked to testify under the terms of the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act, in order to provide information to these committees about "highly classified Special Access Programs, or SAPs, that were improperly carried out by both the NSA and the Defense Intelligence Agency."[161]
Executive Order 13292, which sets up the U.S. security classification system, provides (Sec 1.7) that "n no case shall information be classified in order to conceal violations of law".

From Wiki.

Quote:

The NSA warrantless surveillance controversy ("warrantless wiretapping") concerns surveillance of persons within the United States during the collection of allegedly foreign intelligence by the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) as part of the touted war on terror. Under this program, referred to by the Bush administration as the terrorist surveillance program,[1] part of the broader President's Surveillance Program, the NSA was authorized by executive order to monitor, without search warrants, the phone calls, Internet activity (Web, e-mail, etc.), text messaging, and other communication involving any party believed by the NSA to be outside the U.S., even if the other end of the communication lies within the U.S. However, it has been discovered that all U.S. communications have been digitally cloned by government agencies, in apparent violation of unreasonable search and seizure. The excuse given to avoid litigation was that no data hoarded would be reviewed until searching it would be defensible. But no excuse has been offered the initial seizure of the data which is also illegal, according to the U. S. Constitution.

That judge who claims collection of data is legal doesn't understand the US Constitution.

Quote:

During the Obama Administration, the NSA has allegedly continued operating under the new FISA guidelines.[3] However, in April 2009 officials at the United States Department of Justice acknowledged that the NSA had engaged in "overcollection" of domestic communications in excess of the FISA court's authority, but claimed that the acts were unintentional and had since been rectified

Quote:

In a recent essay, Judge Richard A. Posner opined that FISA "retains value as a framework for monitoring the communications of known terrorists, but it is hopeless as a framework for detecting terrorists. [FISA] requires that surveillance be conducted pursuant to warrants based on probable cause to believe that the target of surveillance is a terrorist, when the desperate need is to find out who is a terrorist."

There is no "probable cause" to believe all Americans are terrorists.

Unintentional? LOL They still broke the laws of the land.

Here's some interesting info on whistle blowers.

Quote:

There is a statutory procedure[160] for a "whistleblower" in the intelligence community to report concerns with the propriety of a secret program, The Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act of 1998, Pub. L. 105–272, Title VII, 112 Stat. 2413 (1998). Essentially the Act provides for disclosure to the agency Inspector General, and if the result of that is unsatisfactory, appeal to the Congressional Intelligence Committees. A former official of the NSA, Russ Tice, has asked to testify under the terms of the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act, in order to provide information to these committees about "highly classified Special Access Programs, or SAPs, that were improperly carried out by both the NSA and the Defense Intelligence Agency."[161]
Executive Order 13292, which sets up the U.S. security classification system, provides (Sec 1.7) that "n no case shall information be classified in order to conceal violations of law".

Warrants & Probable Cause
By David Baugher, eHow Contributor
Warrants & Probable Cause thumbnail
The Fourth Amendment provides guidelines for searches and the issuance of warrants.
The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution is among the most important in the founding documents. In short, it prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures and states that warrants shall only be issued upon probable cause. It also says that warrants must specify both the place targeted in the search and the items which are to be recovered from that location.


Read more: http://www.ehow.com/about_6362927_warrants-probable-cause.html#ixzz2tjD35XIQ

In the end I imagine this will go to the Supreme Court. I am fine either way, but I wonder if you all will be? If the bulk collecting becomes the law of the land, will you all continue to say it is unconstitutional?

The words of the constitution is as clear as could be on this matter the only issue is whether the courts will or will not enforce those words at this point in history.

The judges said they accepted that the detention of Miranda and the seizure of computer material was “an indirect interference with press freedom” but they said this was justified by legitimate and “very pressing” interests of national security.

David Davis, the former Conservative shadow home secretary and campaigner on civil liberties issues, said:

"When parliament debated these laws in 2000 [the Terrorism Act] it did not consider at all these powers would be used against journalists.
Much less did it consider that it would be used dragnet fashion – 600 times a year. There can be no suggestion that Mr Miranda was a terrorist or that he was seeking to abet terrorism and it was for these purposes that this power was given to the politicians and the security agencies.
Clearly parliament has to look at the powers it has given these agencies since as with a number of other counter-terrorism powers it has been misused and over used. I suspect the supreme court and and the ECHR [European court of human rights] will overturn this judgment."

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/29/edward-snowden-nominated-nobel-peace-prize

Two Norwegian politicians say they have jointly nominated the former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden for the 2014 Nobel peace prize.

The Socialist Left party politicians Baard Vegar Solhjell, a former environment minister, and Snorre Valen said the public debate and policy changes in the wake of Snowden's whistleblowing had "contributed to a more stable and peaceful world order".

Being nominated means Snowden will be one of scores of names that the Nobel committee will consider for the prestigious award.

The five-member panel will not confirm who has been nominated but those who submit nominations sometimes make them public.

Nominators, including members of national parliaments and governments, university professors and previous laureates, must enter their submissions by 1 February.

The prize committee members can add their own candidates at their first meeting after that deadline.

Daily email
Get the Guardian's daily US email
Our editors' p