Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2012 9:00:24 GMT -5
Denny, I recently read a long article on the construction of a BIG new facility in the US to do just that - EVERY WORD! SJ SJ, I haven't heard about it but I can almost guarantee you that the mission is NOT to monitor US conversations. To be clear, there is a major distinction between monitoring communications between US citizens emanating from the US and "wiretapping". One is forbidden by law and the other is strictly regulated by law as to who can do it, when, what circumstances, etc. It may sound like a minor difference but it isn't. Organizations such as NSA can literally vacuum up every SIGNAL existent and then process it when they want depending on the priority. In many cases, that may not be for years after the fact. In others, it may be real time. Denny
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2012 9:01:43 GMT -5
I've seen on some news show maybe 20 20 not sure where I saw this but our phone calls, computer use ( especially overseas calls etc) are being monitered. Thanks to the Patorit Act . Well, if you saw it on TV or read it on the internet it MUST be true! What is your objection to the Patorit Act?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2012 9:08:42 GMT -5
D>>After working for more years than I can remember in ASA and NSA, I'll tell you that monitoring a US citizen's conversation - in the US - is against the law. I'll leave it at that. << Come on Denny. It was just stated in the Petraeus case that E-mail messages were monitored and used against the subjects. I also know that this kind of operation has been going on for at least ten years. All very hush hush. As I mentioned above, that is an entirely different set of circumstances. I'd bet you a dollar to a doughnut that the NSA had zero to do with it. There is a big difference between monitoring and wiretapping. To my knowledge, the NSA does not wiretap US citizens in the US. That is left to other agencies. I need to brush up on the provisions of the Patriot Act as I've forgotten what most of them are.
|
|
|
Post by bluejay77 on Nov 19, 2012 11:46:14 GMT -5
I do know that many DX listeners indeed are spies. That's a rash generization if I ever saw one. After working for more years than I can remember in ASA and NSA, I'll tell you that monitoring a US citizen's conversation - in the US - is against the law. I'll leave it at that.[/quote] It may seem like a rash generalization; but some of my DX listener friends later on turned out to be Finnish state intelligence men; and some of my QSL cards conspicuously seem like they came from some kind of an intelligence organization. (Of course I'm not a professional at estimating that point.)
|
|
|
Post by jerryfmcompushaft on Nov 19, 2012 16:52:17 GMT -5
May I suggest that there are a lot more lucrative sources for intelligence than DX.... Why waste the time and resources listening to someone chatting about how won what football game?
|
|
|
Post by boxcar on Nov 19, 2012 16:52:27 GMT -5
An organization that monitors and reports on privacy issues wants to see of copy of a “secret law” announced by Barack Obama regarding the National Security Agency and its reach into private Internet communications.
“This (Freedom of Information Act) request involves information on the National Security Agency’s authority to invade civilian networks,” a letter from the Electronic Privacy Information Center to the NSA headquarters in Fort George G. Meade, Md., says.
“On Nov. 14, 2012, the Washington Post reported President Obama had signed Presidential Policy Directive 20 … in October. According to the Washington Post, the directive ‘enables the military to act more aggressively to thwart cyberattacks on the nation’s web of government and private computer networks.’ The text of the directive has not been made public,” the letter explains.
But the letter said the Post reported previous attempts by the president to expand the military’s cybersecurity authority had been rejected as posing “unacceptable risks” and potentially “harmful consequences.” Further, EPIC wrote, the directive “may violate federal law that prohibits military deployment within the United States without congressional approval.”
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2012 17:04:06 GMT -5
Just for S&Gs, I checked out the highlights of the Patriot Act and it confirmed what I thought. Domestic intel (monitoring, wiretaps etc) may be done by the FBI and other agencies but not by the NSA.
Don't get me wrong about this. I'm not saying that the NSA can't, doesn't or won't collect data domestically. I'm saying that if they do and are caught at it, there would be federal ramifications. There is no doubt in my mind that elements of the NSA have in the past, and probably still do, provide training, equipment and personnel to other agencies when the occasion arises.
|
|
|
Post by Sir John on Nov 19, 2012 23:26:27 GMT -5
Cannot the FBI do the listening on behalf of the NSA?
Wheels within wheels.
SJ
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2012 8:49:02 GMT -5
Cannot the FBI do the listening on behalf of the NSA? Wheels within wheels. SJ Not legally. Their missions aren't nearly the same and ususally don't have any need for intel from the other. A good example of when they might need intel from the other, is when NSA intercepts comms from overseas that directly impacts possible events in the states. That info is passed on to the FBI for action. Since the NSA isn't actionable, I can't imagine the FBI sharing info with the NSA other than in the sense of requesting intel gathering from an overseas source.
|
|
|
Post by boxcar on Nov 20, 2012 13:40:57 GMT -5
A Senate proposal touted as protecting Americans' e-mail privacy has been quietly rewritten, giving government agencies more surveillance power than they possess under current law. CNET has learned that Patrick Leahy, the influential Democratic chairman of the Senate Judiciary committee, has dramatically reshaped his legislation in response to law enforcement concerns. A vote on his bill, which now authorizes warrantless access to Americans' e-mail, is scheduled for next week. A Senate proposal touted as protecting Americans' e-mail privacy has been quietly rewritten, giving government agencies more surveillance power than they possess under current law.
|
|
|
Post by mcnoch on Nov 20, 2012 14:41:35 GMT -5
Ahm..ich you weren't do it, we were doing it for you.
|
|
|
Post by dontom on Nov 21, 2012 22:42:05 GMT -5
After working for more years than I can remember in ASA and NSA, I'll tell you that monitoring a US citizen's conversation - in the US - is against the law. I'll leave it at that. That depends on many factors. For an example, it's perfectly legal for anybody anywhere to listen and monitor my ham radio conversation with another US citizen, even withOUT our knowledge. And I know of no countries that prohibit such monitoring. Telephone conversations and such are a much different set of rules. -Don- SSF, CA
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2012 9:04:37 GMT -5
Don,
I can assure you that as of the last date I had access (1999), it was ILLEGAL for the NSA to monitor conversations emanating from US citizens in the US. No ifs, ands, or buts. That may have been altered by the events of 9/11, but if so, not much.
Anyone can listen in on the conversations of others. It's what they do with that info. The NSA (and others) process that info in intel and anything that is actionable is passed on to the appropriate agency.
Denny
|
|
|
Post by dontom on Nov 23, 2012 6:25:59 GMT -5
Don, I can assure you that as of the last date I had access (1999), it was ILLEGAL for the NSA to monitor conversations emanating from US citizens in the US. No ifs, ands, or buts. Even conversations that are considered public? You make it sound like you might not even be able to watch TV or listen to the radio. -Don-
|
|
|
Post by mcnoch on Nov 23, 2012 6:33:05 GMT -5
Don, he wrote it was illegal, not that it wasn't done.
|
|