Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Wednesday December 05 2018, @12:14PM   Printer-friendly

A federal appeals court in New York will hear oral argument on Tuesday in the ACLU's lawsuit fighting for the public's right to know the legal justifications for government spying.

The Freedom of Information Act suit seeks the release of secret memos written by government lawyers that provided the foundation for the warrantless surveillance of Americans' international communications. In essence, these memos serve as the law that governs the executive branch. By withholding them, the government is flouting a core principle of democratic society: The law must be public.

The memos cover the government's legal interpretations of Executive Order 12333 [(EO 12333)], which was issued by President Ronald Reagan in 1981. It's the primary authority under which the NSA [(National Security Agency)] conducts surveillance, and it encompasses an array of warrantless, high-tech spying programs. While much of this spying occurs outside the United States and is ostensibly directed at foreigners, it nonetheless vacuums up vast quantities of Americans' communications. That's because in today's interconnected world, communications are frequently sent, routed, or stored abroad — where they may be collected, often in bulk, in the course of the NSA's spying activities.

For example, the NSA has relied on EO 12333 to collect nearly 5 billion records per day on the locations of cell phones, as well as hundreds of millions of contact lists and address books from email and messaging accounts. It also intercepted private data from Google and Yahoo user accounts as that information traveled between those companies' data centers located abroad.

https://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/privacy-and-surveillance/government-trying-keep-key-nsa-spying-rules-secret

Related: DOJ Made Secret Arguments to Break Crypto, Now ACLU Wants to Make Them Public


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 06 2018, @05:28AM (8 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 06 2018, @05:28AM (#770500)

    khallow, yet again with the alt-facts rationalizing lying and deceit as long as it supports his alternate reality

    your bubble must be awfully comfortable

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   -1  
       Flamebait=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Flamebait' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   -1  
  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday December 06 2018, @07:17PM (7 children)

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Thursday December 06 2018, @07:17PM (#770789) Journal
    Sounds like you're not comfortable! Did the pacifier roll out of reach again?

    I was merely discussing where a lot of quotes come from, perhaps even a majority. Not I who tried to turn it into something political.
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 06 2018, @09:09PM (6 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 06 2018, @09:09PM (#770850)

      I was merely discussing where a lot of quotes come from, perhaps even a majority. Not I who tried to turn it into something political.

      Lol, the entire premise of your "explanation" was something political because your explanation was total bullshit and you would have never made it unless you were enthralled by the quote in question. You think you are a clever genius, but you are just pathetically transparent and utterly predictable.

      • (Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday December 06 2018, @09:59PM (5 children)

        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Thursday December 06 2018, @09:59PM (#770885) Journal

        because your explanation was total bullshit

        What was bullshit about it? Do a little research on any famous quote that supposedly came from a dead speaker and more often than not, it came from somewhere else often many decades after the alleged speaker's death. I guess the US is famous for it with so many of its leaders and other famous people attributed with all kinds of stuff.

        George Washington didn't chop down the cherry tree or say that government was a fearsome master and dangerous servant. Abraham Lincoln didn't prophecy [snopes.com] that corporations would be scary or that he'd be shipping Ulysses Grant's favorite brand of whiskey to the rest of his generals so they'd fight better.

        What I find really bizarre is your assertion that my post was somehow "political". You got brain rot.

        • (Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday December 06 2018, @10:04PM

          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Thursday December 06 2018, @10:04PM (#770888) Journal

          What I find really bizarre is your assertion that my post was somehow "political".

          Sorry, I misread the thread. I refer to the stupid claim of "alt-facts" when a cursory researching of quotes indicates misquoting or even making things up is a problem.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 07 2018, @11:23AM (3 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 07 2018, @11:23AM (#771102)

          What was bullshit about it? Do a little research on any famous quote that supposedly came from a dead speaker and more often than not,

          You just answered your own question. This premise of yours is just autofellatio. That's NOT how it works. Well, it is how it works if you spend most of your time in the stupid part of the internet. Which you clearly do. But in the real world, no, that's not what happens "more often than not."

          As the actual quote from Anaïs Nin says, “We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are.”

          • (Score: 1) by khallow on Friday December 07 2018, @04:16PM (2 children)

            by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Friday December 07 2018, @04:16PM (#771181) Journal

            hat's NOT how it works. Well, it is how it works if you spend most of your time in the stupid part of the internet.

            They were making up [pothos.org] quotes for classical Greek and Roman notables. One reference for the tales of Alexander weeping goes back to the early 17th century, almost four centuries ago. Folks the internet wasn't around all that long.

            Take a chill pill or something.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 07 2018, @04:48PM (1 child)

              by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 07 2018, @04:48PM (#771194)

              You don't understand do you? Yes there have always been people making quotes. ITS IS NOT THE NORMAL CASE. Just like there have always been people murdering. But murder is no the normal case. Capiche? You utter dumbfuck.

              • (Score: 1) by khallow on Friday December 07 2018, @05:00PM

                by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Friday December 07 2018, @05:00PM (#771204) Journal

                ITS IS NOT THE NORMAL CASE.

                Why in the world are you still ranting? I haven't done a scientific study of this, but it is true.

                I found out the hard way when I decided to put some cool quote into some post which I had heard when I was a teenager. Looked it up and it was a fake quote. Same thing happened a few days later with a different quote. It's happened a bunch since. Now, you can type into your favorite search engine, said famous person's name and "apocryphal", and find many of these things.

                People like to make up shit because it makes their writing more interesting to the reader. It's not them spinning the quote, it's Albert Einstein or Emperor Caligula. Then once it's done, people recycle the quote without questioning where it came from, except sometimes to attribute it to someone else.

                But murder is no the normal case. Capiche? You utter dumbfuck.

                Unlike murder, this is commonplace. You'll just need to get over this.