(Replying to PARENT post)

Source? The only records taken from Internet companies pertain to non-citizens living outside the U.S. Even then, a secret court order is needed.

👤codex🕑12y🔼0🗨️0

(Replying to PARENT post)

> The only records taken from Internet companies pertain to non-citizens living outside the U.S

As a 'non-[US]-citizen living outside the US', I'm a bit disturbed by the implication that it's somehow less bad for the US government to demand any data they like about non-US citizens (from private companies based in the US) than data about US citizens. Non-US citizens do make up 95% of the world's population, and they use Google etc. too.

Most European governments seem to recognise that the contents of 'human rights' documents, if they're to mean anything, should apply to, well, humans, not just the citizens of those countries. (Hence e.g. the ECHR blocking the deportation of illegal immigrants if they might be tortured in their home countries). It seems to be mostly just the US that has this strange idea that, despite one of its founding documents talking about 'all men being created equal' and 'inalienable rights', those rights shouldn't apply to non-US citizens.

👤SEMW🕑12y🔼0🗨️0

(Replying to PARENT post)

The FISA courts have been being essentially bypassed since the Bush Administration.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA_warrantless_surveillance_co...

This is not what you do if you're only going after call records. This is what you do if you're siphoning off communications.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A

👤notdrunkatall🕑12y🔼0🗨️0