FBI's INTERNET Surveillance Violates Federal Law & The Constitution

[kpete]

FBI’s ‘full-pipe’ surveillance may be illegal
Government technology Law enforcement Privacy

In an initiative that is reminescent of the National Security Agency's widespread Internet monitoring and seems to exceed the much-criticized Carnivore surveillance system, the FBI is compiling huge databases of Internet users' online behavior, two law professors charged Friday at syposium at Stanford Law School.

News.com reports that the approach is utilized when the FBI obtains a subpoena for an individual's records and the ISP can't isolate the individual or IP address.
http://news.com.com/FBI+turns+to+broad+new+wiretap+method/2100-7348_3-6154457.html

........................

If the FBI is doing what Ohm claims, it would seem to clearly violate the federal law. But the DOJ's Downing emphasized that the law also states that if the communications are in a foreign language or in code, agents may record all communications and sort the relevant from the non-relevant later.

....................

EFF's Kevin Bankston said that the FBI is "collecting and apparently storing indefinitely the communications of thousands–if not hundreds of thousands–of innocent Americans in violation of the Wiretap Act and the 4th Amendment to the Constitution."

...................

more at:
http://government.zdnet.com/?p=2885

[Stalwart]

1. Compile it now, look at it later

I believe that the government plan is to compile all possible information now from the internet, without a court order, to be looked at later with a court order (or without one after a terrorist act). The logic being that there is no problem with compiling information if nobody looks at it until they get a court order. A terrorist act, of course, automatically suspends all rules.

"I smoked but did not inhale" logic. At what point does the violation take place? Easily twisted by Gonzalez. National security being the overriding dictate to compile. Reason to look being established later.

Think about it. Unknown terrorist might at this moment be using the internet, or other means of communication, to plan acts of terrorism. It might not be discovered until their act of terrorism is made. Names, places, etc will be known after an attack. After the fact leads to terrorists would certainly emerge and some of those would relate to prior internet communications.

If all possible internet information was not compiled now, that info would not exist to be examined after the fact when leads emerge.

Would the government let that opportunity to compile go un-taken? If not done now then it would never be available when the stuff truly hits the fan.

I expect that the only limitation on what the government is now compiling is the ability to store it. Simple open source intelligence on the capacity of the government to store and analysis of increased capacity would probably indicate increased capacity far beyond that implied by reasonable government data storage requirements necessary for "normal" government business. What might not be revealed is order of magnitude increase in government capacity to store data made possible by new technologies of storage such as holographic, etc.

On the other hand it could well be that government use of break through storage technology might be a government secret that is even more important and protected than our atomic secrets.

Nothing justifies government to violate our constitutional privacy rights. Those rights and any desire or action by the government that would even infringe upon them must be open to public examination. We really don't know what the government is doing. That is the problem , we must know. I think that it is entirely likely that the government has constructed logical arguments to itself that convince it that we do not need to know, if we did we would approve and we cannot know if the government is to do its job to keep us safe and secure.

Our government has probably convinced itself there is nothing wrong with compiling information now without any control on simply gathering it in order to be looked at later in accordance with the law. Whatever that law or triggering situation may be now or may become in the future. Since it has convinced itself then it does not have to convince us or even tell us. Telling us would make us less safe and secure.

Just my guess on what the situation is.