advertisement

SSN on Facebook SSN on Twitter SSN on YouTube RSS Feed

2 Comments
Columns

Extend Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act for More Security

December 1, 2015 - 10:15am

On Monday, U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., took to the Senate floor to make the following speech on national security and data collection:

I want to speak about the National Security Agency and the bulk telephone metadata collection program that basically the new law took over that there was a reform of it.

Now, let me explain what the old law was and what the new law that just took effect yesterday is. The old law that had been in effect for I don’t know the exact number of years, but something in excess of five and less than eight, the old law said that by going to the approved court that handles classified information called the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court, the FISA, known by its acronym, that the government could ask for these records to come into the possession of the government by showing good cause as to why those records would be held.

So it was pursuant to a court order. But what were the records to be held?

These are business records of the telephone company. This is not content of the telephone call. This is the business record that says on such and such a day at such a time that telephone numbers such and such called telephone such and such. That’s called metadata. That’s it. No content.

And for the last almost a decade, ever since we had 9/11 attacks and we passed the PATRIOT Act to try to make it much more efficient for our national security agencies to protect us, those records, if the telephone company complied with the order, would be in the database, but it’s not the content. It’s only the business record stating what I just said. Call number such and such called such and such.

Why was that important? Because when we suddenly got an indication that we had a terrorist that was going to strike either here or abroad, and if that the terrorist had a link to a number, we could see what calls that potential terrorist had made to what number and what numbers that that number then called, and you could go down several different calls, and it was through that that we were able to track down and prevent a number of terrorist acts, including in this country.

So earlier this year along comes the reform of this. Now the choice that this senator which supports the old law was given was either the old law is going to expire and there’s not going to be any law that governs the collection of these business records — nothing — or go with the reform.

And the so-called reform was you had to go into the FISA court to get an order as to a specific number and a specific reason why that number was something that you wanted.

Now that sounds harmless enough except when you’re dealing in some cases seconds, minutes, a few hours that you might be looking for this person that we suddenly got a tip maybe from a human source that they’re about to try to do us damage.

So how long is it going to take to go into court? Is it going to take months? Is it going to take weeks? Days? All the time the potential terrorist is well ahead of us.

I know our intelligence agencies are trying to be prepared so that they can do it in the shortest possible time, but a judge has to be there, has to hear what are the facts, the probable cause in order to then render an order to allow the intelligence agencies — in the case domestically it would be the FBI– to go get those business records.

If you get the business record and you see that it goes one hop to another number, but maybe that goes another hop to another number, and that goes another hop to several other numbers under the so-called reform of the USA Freedom Act, there’s a limitation on the number of hops.

This senator feels that we shouldn’t limit those hops if we’re trying to find out who the bad guy is and who it is, what he’s about to do.

Once we have that determined, then you go in to the court again if it is an American citizen or a person that is legally in the United States, you have to obtain another court order in order to be able to get the content of either listening to those calls or in the case of e-mail records, what is the content of the call.

We always said that there ought to be this continuous tension between our right to privacy and protecting our country and ourselves. We want that tension to be there because our right to privacy is what makes us different in this country. And therefore, that’s why we had the protections of having to go into court in order to get, in order to get the contents of the communications.

Well, all you have to do is look to Paris and you can see that these guys are out to really do some mayhem. If in any way we are slowed down, then I think it is a considerable hindrance on us.

Now, I bring this to the attention of the senate simply because the new act superseded the old act this past weekend.

Naturally, when these records were spread about publicly by Edward Snowden intentionally, recklessly and I might say illegally, when he leaked these records existence more than two years ago, naturally there’s a fear. It made it seem like that Big Brother was gathering up all of our information. That’s why on the initial PATRIOT Act, we were so careful to keep this right of privacy protected by court order for the business records and then of course for content, a court order.

I believe that that program was lawful, I believe it was court approved, and I believe that it has helped protect us from terrorist attack in the past. And I think the confusion about in the land is so much because what was the bulk record, it wasn’t content. It was business record. The dates, times, length, the numbers dialed, but not their content.

So we have this new law, it’s in place. The National Intelligence Director Jim Clapper and NSA director Admiral Mike Rogers assured us that the new law preserved a critical counterterrorism capability, but these Paris attacks remind us just how brutal ISIS really is and that the terrorist threat persists.

Now, Madam President, something that we ought to look at is as you look at who were the terrorists in Paris, there were four of them that we knew of and that we had on our no-fly list and were citizens of European countries. What does that mean?

That means that they didn’t have to go into the embassy to get a visa so their background could be checked. They are one of the visa waiver countries, but there was another one of their citizens who was one of those terrorists that in fact was not on our no-fly list.

I think the fact that the administration has already started clamping down doing the extra checks, we certainly want to keep the visa waiver program going, but it is a considerable potential threat if we’re not checking and rechecking, and I think from what we learned out of Paris that in fact if European countries will be more forthcoming to share their intelligence information with us about the potential terrorists so that that will build our no-fly list for their citizens, that will be very helpful.

Madam President, we ought to permanently extend section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act, which is going to expire in another two years. This crucial tool provides access to electronic communications of suspected terrorists and other foreign persons located outside of the U.S., and so as we redouble our counterterrorism efforts, we must maintain what works and make the necessary changes as the threat evolves.

And that means remaining vigilant and using all the tools in our toolbox, including intelligence collection, homeland security protections in the fight against ISIS on the battlefield.

Madam President, I yield the floor.

U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., was first elected to the U.S. Senate in 2000. 

Comments

Bill Nelson ?... The Senator Bill Nelson ?... Is he STILL alive ?... Is he up for re-election ALREADY ?... Is Nelson doing another "ride along rocketship ride" ?... IF anyone knows where he hides out, please tell him to make himself available to his constituents and please stop the 'franked' "boilerplate" mailings that are only good for lining the bottom of my canary's cage. Been trying to contact him for about ten years now, to no avail,..He's more secretive and protected than Obama. (I think I'll have to seek employment as a Lobbist; or join a "special interest" group like the "Sierra Club" so maybe I'll be able to hunt ducks along side the "Senator" on the "Club's" private land..). VOTE HIM OUT at first opportunity (2018) Folks,..He's been "dead weight" for too long !

Senator Nelson: In the 3rd para - FISA is NOT Florida Intelligence Surveillance Act. It is the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. There are many other awkward sentences contained in this script for your talk to the Senate. Your stuff should be easy to read not difficult. Ya got a ton of writers but no proofers? You don't proof your own written speech before delivery? I think that you need to move out of the Senate. I think our Reps and Senators need to be younger, less than age 66, and sharper.

Comments are now closed.

columns
advertisement
advertisement
Live streaming of WBOB Talk Radio, a Sunshine State News Radio Partner.

advertisement