Bush signs new warantless electronic eavesdropping legislation into US law

06/08/2007 10:38:00 - by Martyn Warwick

The seemingly inexorable drift by the United States into incipient totalitarianism continues. Yesterday, President Bush signed into law legislation that increases the federal government’s authority to place surveillance, without warrant, on international telephone calls and e-mail messages made from and to US citizens.

What is worrying many is that the legislative change, that has the most profound implications for the rights and privacy of the individual in what is supposed to be the world's most open and democratic nation, was rushed through both the House and the Senate in the last couple of days before the long summer holiday (that is the long holiday traditionally enjoyed by US politicians if not those that they represent) when few were in the chambers to debate the matter properly.

Analysts in Congress say the impact of the new law goes "far beyond" beyond the "few and small" changes that the Bush administration had said were necessary to glean information about alleged or suspected foreign terrorists. The result is a big change in the latitude the US government now has to eavesdrop on tens of millions of phone calls and e-mail messages going in and out of the US.

The new law also provides a necessary but highly contentious legal framework for the bulk of the surveillance without warrant that already was being undertaken in secret by the National Security Agency (NSA) in defiance of the terms of the US Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. This law, in existence since 1978, is/was supposed to determine just how when and why the federal government can eavesdrop on the private communications of US citizens.

Hitherto, to place surveillance on telephone calls being made between individuals within the US and others overseas, the government was required to apply for individual search warrants that were granted (or refused, but not very often) by a special court. The new law effectively alters the definition of what constitutes "electronic surveillance" and thus allows the US government to eavesdrop on conversations or email traffic without warrants as long as the target is “reasonably believed” to be overseas. ("But I'm in Peoria." Oh, really, we thought you were in Afghanistan.")

A White House spokesperson, Tony Fratto, in an attempt to assuage rising public unease at the possibility, indeed likelihood, that the new law will be used to target US citizens at home insisted that the new powers have been provided to allow the authorities to "focus on foreign suspects overseas." In answer to some very sceptical press questions he said, “It’s foreign, that’s the point.

What you want to make sure is that you are getting the foreign target.”

And, of course, the new law puts telecoms carriers right in the firing line, requiring them to "co-operate" (ie comply or else) with orders issued not by a court open and subject to judicial review and oversight but by the politically-appointed Attorney General or the Director of National Intelligence.

US telcos have a strong lobby in Washington and have long been expressing the view that court-approved warrants relating to specifically names individuals is a better way to operate rather than blanket requirements to eavesdrop on many citizens.

Sounds altruistic doesn't it? Don't be fooled. Several US carriers are facing major lawsuits alleging they secretly co-operated with the NSA's illegal warrantless eavesdropping programme and are concerned that they will be saddled with more trouble unless the law is made very explicit.

The result was that the courts were suddenly inundated with tens of thousands of applications for search warrants in reference to named individuals. The Bush administration then quickly deemed the process to be putting the judicial system under strain and therefore decided to turn to new laws that would "free-up" the system. So now, instead of one particular person being named on a warrant, the authorities can place surveillance on huge swathes un-named members of the population more or less at will. How very democratic.

Imagine the outcry there would be by the Bushites if this sort of thing was going on elsewhere. Well, blow me down, so it is.

source : telecomtv.com