FBI: Citizens Should Have No Secrets That The Government Can’t Access

Keep in mind the S. Res. 1705: Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 compromises free expression and privacy rights already gravely eroded, and will be coming up for vote soon as the Senate returns. Under that backdrop, let’s take a look at what this administration has in mind. FBI Comfy recently testified at a Senate hearing. Not only are his words chilling, let us take a second look at his background. Here we go:

.. like a frog sitting idly in a pan of steadily-warming water, too many Americans still seem unaware that the slow boil of big government is killing their constitutional liberties.

The latest sign of this stealth takeover of civil rights and freedom was epitomized in recent Senate testimony by FBI Director James Comey, who voiced his objections to civilian use of encryption to protect personal data – information the government has no automatic right to obtain.

As reported by The New American, Comey testified that he believes the government’s spy and law enforcement agencies should have unfettered access to everything Americans may store or send in electronic format: On computer hard drives, in so-called i-clouds, in email and in text messaging – for our own safety and protection. Like many in government today, Comey believes that national security is more important than constitutional privacy protections or, apparently, due process. After all, aren’t criminals the only ones who really have anything to hide?

In testimony before a hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee entitled “Going Dark: Encryption, Technology, and the Balance Between Public Safety and Privacy” Comey said that in order to stay one step ahead of terrorists, as well as international and domestic criminals, Uncle Sam’s various spy and law enforcement agencies should have access to available technology used to de-encrypt protected data. Also, he believes the government should be the final arbiter deciding when decryption is necessary.More over at  Zero Hedge

Just who is FBI Director Comfey?James B. Comey, new F.B.I. nominee is not what you think 

What you will not hear from the Obama-friendly media, and our somnolent members of Congress, is this: Not only was the Patriot Act expanded under the supervision of Comey, Mueller and Ashcroft, when Comey left the AG’s office in 2005 he went to work as the top lawyer for…wait for it…”Big Brother” himself – Lockheed Martin.

When most people hear Lockheed Martin they think military contracts. Well, welcome to 1984. “Big Brother” is another name for Lockheed Martin, and security and surveillance is their game. They’ve been working closely with the National Security Agency (AKA: NSA, as in No Such Agency) for many years.

So ask yourself: Why would the Obama regime appoint a new FBI Director who works for a prime contractor that sells NSA the technology to spy on Americans? Would PETA hire a fur coat distributor?

Oh, by the way, where’s John Ashcroft today? Why he’s on the Board of Directors of Blackwater USA,which now goes by the harmless sounding name – Academi – conjuring up images of ivy-covered buildings and lounging intellectuals.

So in the days ahead, when the media and politicians tell you that James B. Comey will stand up for your civil liberties as FBI Director (citing a hospital room performance over the Patriot Act), remember: If Comey didn’t support spying on Americans, why would he work for a leading company that sells the government the tools to spy on Americans?

Are the manufacturers of hunting rifles against hunting?

Comey and Ashcroft – Lockheed Martin and Blackwater: Defenders of our civil liberties?

FBI Director: I have to check to see if Obama can kill citizens on U.S. soil January 26, 2013

FBI Director Robert Mueller on Wednesday said he would have to go back and check with the Department of Justice whether Attorney General Eric Holder’s “three criteria” for the targeted killing of Americans also applied to Americans inside the U.S.
Pressed by House lawmakers about a recent speech in which Holder described the legal justification for assassination, Mueller, who was attending a hearing on his agency’s budget, did not say without qualification that the three criteria could not be applied inside the U.S.
“I have to go back. Uh, I’m not certain whether that was addressed or not,” Mueller said when asked by Rep. Tom Graves, R-Ga., about a distinction between domestic and foreign targeting. Graves followed up asking whether “from a historical perspective,” the federal government has “the ability to kill a U.S. citizen on United States soil or just overseas.”
“I’m going to defer.

Warrantless spying passes with GOP- vote tally count.

GOP and Feinstein join to fulfill Obama’s demand for renewed warrantless eavesdropping

H.R. 5949: FISA Amendments Act Reauthorization Act of 2012 (On Passage of the Bill) Vote and Bill for individual votes here

Tthe Senate on Friday morning passed the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) by a vote of 73-23 and will send it to President Obama’s desk for signature.

No surprise is there? Feinstein makes the remark that there is not enough time to debate the bill. Typical progressive logic. Forget that the Senate has done nothing for months. Barely a ripple in the news. The Obama agenda continues without so much of many GOPer complaints. A few mild amendments were quickly dispatched with. I looked for a good recent video of the event while I still have the right to look at it. .The choices for comments were a piece from Russian news, Young Turks and Rand Paul. Paul gives us a bit of history on the matter. So here we go:

The worst of Dick Cheney while advancing Obama’s agenda.

Wyden yesterday had two amendments: one that would simply require the NSA to give a general estimate of how many Americans are having their communications intercepted under this law (information the NSA has steadfastly refused to provide), and another which would state that the NSA is barred from eavesdropping on Americans on US soil without a warrant. Merkley’s amendment would compel the public release of secret judicial rulings from the FISA court which purport to interpret the scope of the eavesdropping law on the ground that “secret law is inconsistent with democratic governance”; the Obama administration has refused to release a single such opinion even though the court, “on at least one occasion”, found that the government was violating the Fourth Amendment in how it was using the law to eavesdrop on Americans

But the Obama White House opposed all amendments, demanding a “clean” renewal of the law without any oversight or transparency reforms. Earlier this month, the GOP-led House complied by passing a reform-free version of the law’s renewal, and sent the bill Obama wanted to the Senate, where it was debated yesterday afternoon.

 The Democratic Chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Dianne Feinstein, took the lead in attacking Wyden, Merkley, Udall and Paul with the most foul Cheneyite accusations, and demanded renewal of the FISA law without any reforms. And then predictably, in virtually identical 37-54 votes, Feinstein and her conservative-Democratic comrades joined with virtually the entire GOP caucus (except for three Senators: Paul, Mike Lee and Dean Heller) to reject each one of the proposed amendments and thus give Obama exactly what he demanded: reform-free renewal of the law (while a few Democratic Senators have displayed genuine, sustained commitment to these issues, most Democrats who voted against FISA renewal yesterday did so symbolically and half-heartedly, knowing and not caring that they would lose as evidenced by the lack of an attempted filibuster).

The Guardian


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,133 other followers

%d bloggers like this: