DOJ releases completely redacted FOIA document on warrantless text snooping

The title of the OP needs to be corrected. It's not completely redacted. The page numbers are still there.
 
ravdin said:
The ACLU recently filed a FOIA request to the Department of Justice about the FBI's practice of warrantless text snooping. Here's what they got back from the most transparent administration in history:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/141222327/Totally-Redacted-FOIA-response
Click to expand...
Good. Unlike the Benghazi BS this is a real cause for concern. Who knew what and when. I wouldn't mind jail, prison, impeachment, removal from office of anyone shown to be involved.

Please GOP: Don't politicize this. Carefully investigate and do right by the American people.

IMO: The sooner Holder steps down the better.
 
It seems to me that releasing warrant-less text snooping protocol would simply undermine the point of warrant-less text snooping. I would imagine that the program exists to offer legal guidance during extraordinary circumstances when the country faces immediate terrorist threat. Releasing these protocol would simply provide terrorists the guidance necessary to avoid snooping.

I think it's reasonable to be against warrant-less text snooping in general. Without reading more on the subject, I would default to that position myself. But I don't think it's reasonable to be for warrant-less text snooping only under conditions that hamper its effectiveness.
 
Spindrift said:
The title of the OP needs to be corrected. It's not completely redacted. The page numbers are still there.
Click to expand...

Who blew the whistle on the page numbers? No worries, I'm sure the DOJ will get to the bottom of it.
 
OMGturt1es said:
It seems to me that releasing warrant-less text snooping protocol would simply undermine the point of warrant-less text snooping. I would imagine that the program exists to offer legal guidance during extraordinary circumstances when the country faces immediate terrorist threat. Releasing these protocol would simply provide terrorists the guidance necessary to avoid snooping.

I think it's reasonable to be against warrant-less text snooping in general. Without reading more on the subject, I would default to that position myself. But I don't think it's reasonable to be for warrant-less text snooping only under conditions that hamper its effectiveness.
Click to expand...

I pretty much agree with the above. If there's a serious public safety issue, some things do need to remain...unknown.
 
OMGturt1es said:
It seems to me that releasing warrant-less text snooping protocol would simply undermine the point of warrant-less text snooping. I would imagine that the program exists to offer legal guidance during extraordinary circumstances when the country faces immediate terrorist threat. Releasing these protocol would simply provide terrorists the guidance necessary to avoid snooping.

I think it's reasonable to be against warrant-less text snooping in general. Without reading more on the subject, I would default to that position myself. But I don't think it's reasonable to be for warrant-less text snooping only under conditions that hamper its effectiveness.
Click to expand...
Good post. It concerns me when there is snooping but I think you make a valid point.
 
I don't believe for a second that the DOJ has a text-interception program that doesn't get warrants or retro-active warrants for texts that originate in the USA.
 
Courier said:
I don't believe for a second that the DOJ has a text-interception program that doesn't get warrants or retro-active warrants for texts that originate in the USA.
Click to expand...

Apparently they do.

Justice Department documents released today by the ACLU reveal that federal law enforcement agencies are increasingly monitoring Americans’ electronic communications, and doing so without warrants, sufficient oversight, or meaningful accountability.

The documents, handed over by the government only after months of litigation, are the attorney general’s 2010 and 2011 reports on the use of “pen register” and “trap and trace” surveillance powers. The reports show a dramatic increase in the use of these surveillance tools, which are used to gather information about telephone, email, and other Internet communications.
Click to expand...
Link

Even when I want to trust the government, they always let me down. :(

I recall back in the 1980s the FBI was bugging the phones of members of Organized Crime without warrants or court orders. The specific conversations were inadmissible as evidence, but the FBI said it didn't matter. It was about intel. In other words, if they tapped a conversation that revealed a truck hijacking was planned, they couldn't use that to charge the talkers with conspiracy. They could however be tailing the truck to be stolen and then swoop down when the Mob guys moved in.

It was a great tool and for the first time in many years law enforcement really began to put a dent in organized crime. Civil liberty advocates warned at the time that it was bad policy. That once established, the concept of warrantless surveillance would be expanded.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom