New York federal judge rules NSA phone surveillance is legal

Status
Not open for further replies.

Dima007

Level 23
Thread author
Verified
Well-known
Apr 24, 2013
1,200
A federal judge in New York has ruled that the National Security Agency's massive collection of American citizens' telephone records is both legal and useful.

U.S. District Judge William Pauley wrote in his opinion issued Friday that the program "represents the government's counter-punch" to eliminate al-Qaeda's terror network.

Pauley raised the specter of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and how the phone data-collection system could have helped investigators connect the dots before the attacks occurred.

"The government learned from its mistake and adapted to confront a new enemy: a terror network capable of orchestrating attacks across the world. It launched a number of counter-measures, including a bulk telephony metadata collection program — a wide net that could find and isolate gossamer contacts among suspected terrorists in an ocean of seemingly disconnected data," he said.

The ruling dismisses a suit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union against James Clapper, the director of the NSA, and the Justice Department.

The ACLU said Friday that they plan to appeal their case to the Second Circuit in Manhattan.

“We are extremely disappointed with this decision, which misinterprets the relevant statutes, understates the privacy implications of the government’s surveillance and misapplies a narrow and outdated precedent to read away core constitutional protections,” Jameel Jaffer, ACLU deputy legal director, said in a statement.

But the Justice Department and political supporters of the program praised Pauley’s decision.

"We are pleased the court found the NSA's bulk telephony metadata collection program to be lawful," Justice Department spokesman Peter Carr said.

Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., a member of the House Homeland Security Committee, called Pauley’s decision a “victory for the patriotic men and women of the NSA.” He said in a statement that he hopes the ruling will lessen the “adulation” for NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden, who remains a fugitive from the U.S. in Moscow.

Earlier this month, Snowden had spoken out in favor of a ruling on Dec. 16 by U.S. District Court Judge Richard Leon, who granted a preliminary injunction against the collecting of phone records of two men who had challenged the surveillance program.

Pauley’s decision appears to conflict with Leon’s, which said the program likely violates the U.S. Constitution's ban on unreasonable search.

Leon said that the government was acting in an “understandable zeal to protect our homeland,” and acknowledged that there were national security interests and new constitutional issues in play.

He batted away the government’s argument that removing certain people from the NSA database would degrade the program.

"I am not convinced at this point in the litigation that the NSA’s database has ever truly served the purpose of rapidly identifying terrorists in time-sensitive investigations," he wrote, "and so I am certainly not convinced that the removal of two individuals from the database will ‘degrade’ the program in any meaningful sense.

Snowden had praised the implications of Leon’s decision, saying “a secret program authorized by a secret court was, when exposed to the light of day, found to violate Americans’ rights.”

Read more: http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/201...l-judge-rules-nsa-phone-surveillance-is-legal
 

Nico@FMA

Level 27
Verified
May 11, 2013
1,687
Here in the Netherlands a news source posted: http://www.nu.nl/internet/3663404/nsa-wil-privacy-opheffen.html
According to Greenwald a judge might find it legal, but that does not make it legal yet.
There are a increasing amount of sources out there who confirm that Judges are being selected based upon their usefulness to help NSA and other government agencies legalizing their actions. Obviously many people do have their own opinions and ideaś about it.
But there is a equal amount of respectable citizens who are being hit by these actions who do not do anything wrong.
One should ask himself the question: Is total control over your actions, and total monitoring of the US population useful enough that privacy worldwide should be removed.

Does monitoring your personal email, business email and all other communications and behaviours really contribute to the US security considering the fact, that real terrorists stay away from "online" communication means.
Does monitoring your allies and trading partners, and international companies really contribute to stopping another 9/11.
Does monitoring the rest of the world in every way possible really help the US in any shape or form, or does it just piss everyone off who is affected by this?
Why is the US pointing fingers to the international community about their intelligence networks and the use of it, while the US has been breaking every rule in the book since IBM. Recently a judge found some actions by the NSA legal. But prior to that it was a direct violation of the constitution and of US law and international law.
The paranoid behaviour by the NSA and its partners will create even more problems internationally as other capable agencies will step up their game to counter NSA efforts.

Imo there is not a single reason that could justify the outrageous actions by the NSA and its sub departments, however if they limit their surveillance tactics to US territory only then as a EU based person i cannot say much. This is something the US population and its government have to work out.
And yes i do realize that certain key elements need "extra" attention and thats ok, but since when should the NSA monitor every single person who has internet and a cellphone?
Imo the US has lost it totally and i would not be surprised if this will increase terrorism overtime.
Ask your self the question: Why does the world HATE the US so much? While other nations around the world with less respectable status do not have any trouble with terrorist networks.
So really imo protecting yourself is ok, securing your interest is ok as well, but doing what the US is doing sort of creates terrorism.
Not to mention that it has been proven that such Intel gathering is plausible at best at stopping a dedicated terrorist cell. The international Intel community has warned the US for decades now, that focussed efforts work best, while global efforts only create static and interference in the interpretation of the gained Intel.
Its ineffective, costly, illegal and does not obtain the level of security that it would seem to give.
With respect 9/11 has proven that, the search for WMD in Libia, Syria, Iraq and the search for bin laden have all one thing in common: It was the biggest Intel mess in the world.

Taken into account that it has been proven that individual assets across the globe did have all the Intel prior to 9/11.
So really who are they trying to fool?

But thats me saying that... its a person thing.

Working with international partners while staying in your own territory works well and much better then spying the whole world and pissing everyone off. I mean if it works for the EU and other continents then i am sure it will work for the US as well.
That said what the NSA does in the US is pretty much a US problem and it should not be "our" problem.
I do realize that our government does do its fair share of monitoring and i am ok with that, but i would not be ok with the fact that they would monitor the whole world and thus would create havoc.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

About us

  • MalwareTips is a community-driven platform providing the latest information and resources on malware and cyber threats. Our team of experienced professionals and passionate volunteers work to keep the internet safe and secure. We provide accurate, up-to-date information and strive to build a strong and supportive community dedicated to cybersecurity.

User Menu

Follow us

Follow us on Facebook or Twitter to know first about the latest cybersecurity incidents and malware threats.

Top