Author Topic: Another case of you voted for it - Obama allows spying on finances.  (Read 441 times)

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39441
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39441
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Another case of you voted for it - Obama allows spying on finances.
« Reply #1 on: March 13, 2013, 11:59:42 AM »
NEW YORK/WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Obama administration is drawing up plans to give all U.S. spy agencies full access to a massive database that contains financial data on American citizens and others who bank in the country, according to a Treasury Department document seen by Reuters.

The proposed plan represents a major step by U.S. intelligence agencies to spot and track down terrorist networks and crime syndicates by bringing together financial databanks, criminal records and military intelligence. The plan, which legal experts say is permissible under U.S. law, is nonetheless likely to trigger intense criticism from privacy advocates.

Financial institutions that operate in the United States are required by law to file reports of "suspicious customer activity," such as large money transfers or unusually structured bank accounts, to Treasury's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN).

The Federal Bureau of Investigation already has full access to the database. However, intelligence agencies, such as the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Security Agency, currently have to make case-by-case requests for information to FinCEN.

The Treasury plan would give spy agencies the ability to analyze more raw financial data than they have ever had before, helping them look for patterns that could reveal attack plots or criminal schemes.

The planning document, dated March 4, shows that the proposal is still in its early stages of development, and it is not known when implementation might begin.

Financial institutions file more than 15 million "suspicious activity reports" every year, according to Treasury. Banks, for instance, are required to report all personal cash transactions exceeding $10,000, as well as suspected incidents of money laundering, loan fraud, computer hacking or counterfeiting.

"For these reports to be of value in detecting money laundering, they must be accessible to law enforcement, counter-terrorism agencies, financial regulators, and the intelligence community," said the Treasury planning document.

A Treasury spokesperson said U.S. law permits FinCEN to share information with intelligence agencies to help detect and thwart threats to national security, provided they adhere to safeguards outlined in the Bank Secrecy Act. "Law enforcement and intelligence community members with access to this information are bound by these safeguards," the spokesperson said in a statement.

Some privacy watchdogs expressed concern about the plan when Reuters outlined it to them.

A move like the FinCEN proposal "raises concerns as to whether people could find their information in a file as a potential terrorist suspect without having the appropriate predicate for that and find themselves potentially falsely accused," said Sharon Bradford Franklin, senior counsel for the Rule of Law Program at the Constitution Project, a non-profit watchdog group.

Despite these concerns, legal experts emphasize that this sharing of data is permissible under U.S. law. Specifically, banks' suspicious activity reporting requirements are dictated by a combination of the Bank Secrecy Act and the USA PATRIOT Act, which offer some privacy safeguards.

National security experts also maintain that a robust system for sharing criminal, financial and intelligence data among agencies will improve their ability to identify those who plan attacks on the United States.

"It's a war on money, war on corruption, on politically exposed persons, anti-money laundering, organized crime," said Amit Kumar, who advised the United Nations on Taliban sanctions and is a fellow at the Democratic think tank Center for National Policy.

SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITY

The Treasury document outlines a proposal to link the FinCEN database with a computer network used by U.S. defense and law enforcement agencies to share classified information called the Joint Worldwide Intelligence Communications System.

The plan calls for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence - set up after 9/11 to foster greater collaboration among intelligence agencies - to work with Treasury. The Director of National Intelligence declined to comment.

More than 25,000 financial firms - including banks, securities dealers, casinos, and money and wire transfer agencies - routinely file "suspicious activity reports" to FinCEN. The requirements for filing are so strict that banks often over-report, so they cannot be accused of failing to disclose activity that later proves questionable. This over-reporting raises the possibility that the financial details of ordinary citizens could wind up in the hands of spy agencies.

Stephen Vladeck, a professor at American University's Washington College of Law, said privacy advocates have already been pushing back against the increased data-sharing activities between government agencies that followed the September 11 attacks.

"One of the real pushes from the civil liberties community has been to move away from collection restrictions on the front end and put more limits on what the government can do once it has the information," he said.

(Reporting by Emily Flitter in New York, Stella Dawson and Mark Hosenball in Washington; Editing by Tiffany Wu and Leslie Gevirtz)

24KT

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 24455
  • Gold Savings Account Rep +1 (310) 409-2244
Re: Another case of you voted for it - Obama allows spying on finances.
« Reply #2 on: March 13, 2013, 12:12:41 PM »
The groundwork for this was laid through Bush's warrantless wiretaps, which GWB supporters gladly accepted.
That trial balloon went through... so of course it was expanded upon. ...after all, if you have nothing to hide,
...why are you concerned with your right to privacy? I mean, ...it's not like doxxing really exists right? ::)
...and of course, there could never be the danger of someone misinterpreting the data received and construing it in such as a way to perceive a perfectly innocent person as "suspicious" or even guilty.
...and without the right to even confront their accuser, examine any evidence against him/her, ...they could be locked up indefinitely without trial, or even charges, as an enemy combatant, ...or worse, ...droned.  :'(
w

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39441
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Another case of you voted for it - Obama allows spying on finances.
« Reply #3 on: March 13, 2013, 12:46:23 PM »
So Pelosi Reid and Obama who had two years to do whatever they wanted did not want Bush's action reversed? 

So obama in 5 years is still blaming W by outdoing W? 

24KT

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 24455
  • Gold Savings Account Rep +1 (310) 409-2244
Re: Another case of you voted for it - Obama allows spying on finances.
« Reply #4 on: March 13, 2013, 02:11:39 PM »
So Pelosi Reid and Obama who had two years to do whatever they wanted did not want Bush's action reversed? 

Why would they? It would be a reduction of their power.
How many politicians would eagerly seek to REDUCE their power?

Quote
So obama in 5 years is still blaming W by outdoing W? 

I don't know if Obama is blaming W, but I blame think there is more than enough responsibility to go around. They say people deserve the governments they elect, ...however, if memory serves me correctly, GWB was not elected in 2000, and I think it is quite questionable if he was indeed elected in 2004. Despite all this, I think if we really think about it, it wasn't really GWB calling the shots anyway, ...but where was the oversight? And what was the public's response & reaction to the very Un-American concepts proposed? Ya, there's a lot of responsibility to go around.

Still, while we may refer to certain heads of states around the world as "dictators", we have all borne witness to the fact that even puppet dictators are dictated to. The moment dictators refuse to be dictated to... they're removed from office.... one way or another, whether by violence, coercion, disruption, or getting into bed with terrorists. ie: Ferdinand Marcos, Reza Pahvlavi, Saddam Hussein, Ghaddaffi.

How do you move forward from here? Well ask yourselves this, if you can find yourselves with such a buffoon as your head of state as you did from 2000 - 2008, and then have such an intelligent Constitutional lawyer who could permit policies so clearly in conflict with the constitution, ...do you feel comfortable with any other leader having such powers? I mean... look at the spectrum you've had; from Village Idiot to Brilliant Communicator. Are you comfortable in knowing you could very well end up with a Sarah Palin as future President, a Joe Biden, ...or someone who believes a woman's body has the ability to thwart all attempts at rape. Do you really want someone like that having that degree of power?
w

George Whorewell

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7365
  • TND
Re: Another case of you voted for it - Obama allows spying on finances.
« Reply #5 on: March 13, 2013, 03:02:45 PM »
Why would they? It would be a reduction of their power.
How many politicians would eagerly seek to REDUCE their power?

I don't know if Obama is blaming W, but I blame think there is more than enough responsibility to go around. They say people deserve the governments they elect, ...however, if memory serves me correctly, GWB was not elected in 2000, and I think it is quite questionable if he was indeed elected in 2004. Despite all this, I think if we really think about it, it wasn't really GWB calling the shots anyway, ...but where was the oversight? And what was the public's response & reaction to the very Un-American concepts proposed? Ya, there's a lot of responsibility to go around.

Still, while we may refer to certain heads of states around the world as "dictators", we have all borne witness to the fact that even puppet dictators are dictated to. The moment dictators refuse to be dictated to... they're removed from office.... one way or another, whether by violence, coercion, disruption, or getting into bed with terrorists. ie: Ferdinand Marcos, Reza Pahvlavi, Saddam Hussein, Ghaddaffi.

How do you move forward from here? Well ask yourselves this, if you can find yourselves with such a buffoon as your head of state as you did from 2000 - 2008, and then have such an intelligent Constitutional lawyer who could permit policies so clearly in conflict with the constitution, ...do you feel comfortable with any other leader having such powers? I mean... look at the spectrum you've had; from Village Idiot to Brilliant Communicator. Are you comfortable in knowing you could very well end up with a Sarah Palin as future President, a Joe Biden, ...or someone who believes a woman's body has the ability to thwart all attempts at rape. Do you really want someone like that having that degree of power?

What a typically moronic response from one of the most nauseatingly inconsistent and intellectually schizophrenic people on this board. As usual, you are incapable of answering a straight forward question. Your bizarre response somehow managed to slither out of answering 333's question by pontificating about Saddam Hussein, Whether Bush won the 2000 election and by changing the subject to irrelevant nonsense.  Meanwhile, you falsely refer to Obama as a an intelligent constitutional lawyer and brilliant communicator while making the utterly tired and empty "there is plenty of blame to go around" justification argument. Plenty of blame to go around where? The question was about an OBAMA policy being implemented NOW by the OBAMA ADMINISTRATION. How is there plenty of blame to go around-- or (as most leftist retards seem to believe) is Obama immune from the stupidity and illegality of his own policies?

24KT

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 24455
  • Gold Savings Account Rep +1 (310) 409-2244
Re: Another case of you voted for it - Obama allows spying on finances.
« Reply #6 on: March 13, 2013, 03:17:24 PM »
What a typically moronic response from one of the most nauseatingly inconsistent and intellectually schizophrenic people on this board. As usual, you are incapable of answering a straight forward question. Your bizarre response somehow managed to slither out of answering 333's question by pontificating about Saddam Hussein, Whether Bush won the 2000 election and by changing the subject to irrelevant nonsense.  Meanwhile, you falsely refer to Obama as a an intelligent constitutional lawyer and brilliant communicator while making the utterly tired and empty "there is plenty of blame to go around" justification argument. Plenty of blame to go around where? The question was about an OBAMA policy being implemented NOW by the OBAMA ADMINISTRATION. How is there plenty of blame to go around-- or (as most leftist retards seem to believe) is Obama immune from the stupidity and illegality of his own policies?


I did answer his question by saying no they did not want to reverse it.
Why would they want that when it only reduces their power?

How is that irrelevant nonsense? Connect the dots.
Do you think the Obama administration could implement these policies NOW, if it weren't for the trial balloons laid out by Bush? You American citizens allowed Bush to get away with egregious violations of the Constitution and Bill of rights. Now that obama is in office, he's simply picking up where Bush left off.

As for Marcos, the Shah et al... can you not see the flaglant abuses, hypocrisy and disregard for the law in foreign policy matters will eventually spread to domestic policy, ..and you've all turned a blind eye to it, dismissed critique of it as "jealousy over the American way of life". Wake Up! This didn't happen over night. This has been a long time in the making, and your population has let it happen in your name.

Are you saying Obama is not intelligent? ...not a constitutional lawyer, ...and not a brilliant communicator?
w

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39441
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Another case of you voted for it - Obama allows spying on finances.
« Reply #7 on: March 17, 2013, 07:33:19 PM »
Bump.