Goodlatte, Sensenbrenner, Conyers, Nadler Introduce the USA Freedom Act
FYI http://judiciary.house.gov/index.cfm/press-releases?id=8C703FBE-0A0C-4261-83... Apr 28 2015 Goodlatte, Sensenbrenner, Conyers, Nadler Introduce the USA Freedom Act <http://judiciary.house.gov/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=8C703FBE-0A0C-4261-83...> Bipartisan bill will be marked up on April 30th *Washington, D.C.* – Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations Subcommittee Chairman Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.), House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), Ranking Member John Conyers (D-Mich.), and Courts, Intellectual Property and the Internet Subcommittee Ranking Member Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) today will introduce the *USA Freedom Act <http://judiciary.house.gov/_cache/files/1cb59778-0a72-4c09-920d-0e22bf692bb4/fisa-01-xml.pdf>*. This bipartisan bill builds on the Committee’s extensive work on this issue last Congress, containing even stronger protections for Americans’ civil liberties, providing for even greater transparency for both the private sector and government, and preventing government overreach, while enhancing national security. *The House Judiciary Committee will mark up this legislation on Thursday, April 30th at 10:00 a.m. in 2141 Rayburn House Office Building.* In June 2013, unauthorized disclosures of classified information revealed to the American people that the National Security Agency had been collecting bulk telephony “metadata” under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). Following the revelation of this information, the House Judiciary Committee worked extensively last Congress to end the NSA’s bulk collection program: it conducted aggressive oversight of our nation’s intelligence-gathering programs operated under FISA and approved bipartisan legislation in Committee, which was ultimately passed overwhelmingly in the House of Representatives. However, the Senate failed to pass legislation on this issue. Crime Subcommittee Chairman Sensenbrenner, Chairman Goodlatte, Ranking Member Conyers, and Courts, Intellectual Property and the Internet Subcommittee Ranking Member Nadler praised the introduction of the bill in the joint statement below. *“As several intelligence-gathering programs are set to expire in a month, it is imperative that we reform these programs to protect Americans’ privacy while at the same time protecting our national security. The bipartisan bill introduced today builds on the Committee’s work on this issue last year. It enhances civil liberties protections, increases transparency for both American businesses and the government, ends the bulk collection of data, and provides national security officials targeted tools to keep America safe from foreign enemies. We look forward to expeditiously moving this strong, bipartisan bill through the House Judiciary Committee and then through Congress so that we rein in government overreach and rebuild trust with the American people. We thank Senators Lee and Leahy for working on this issue and introducing companion legislation in the Senate.”* *Key Components of the USA Freedom Act:* *Protects civil liberties: * · Ends bulk collection: Prohibits bulk collection of ALL records under Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act, the FISA pen register authority, and national security letter statutes. · Prevents government overreach: The bulk collection prohibition is strengthened by prohibiting large-scale, indiscriminate collection, such as all records from an entire state, city, or zip code. · Allows challenges of national security letter gag orders: NSL nondisclosure orders must be based upon a danger to national security or interference with an investigation. Codifies procedures for individual companies to challenge nondisclosure orders. Requires periodic review of nondisclosure orders to determine necessity. *Improves transparency and better information-sharing with the American people:* · Expertise at the FISA court: The bill creates a panel of amicus curie at the FISA court to provide guidance on matters of privacy and civil liberties, communications technology, and other technical or legal matters. · Declassified FISA opinions: All significant constructions or interpretations of law by the FISA court must be made public. These include all significant interpretations of the definition of “specific selection term,” the concept at the heart of the ban on bulk collection. · Robust government reporting: The Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence will provide the public with detailed information about how they use these national security authorities. · Robust company reporting: Tech companies will have a range of options for describing how they respond to national security orders, all consistent with national security needs. *Strengthens national security:* · Gives the government the tools it needs: Creates a new call detail records program that is closely overseen by the FISA court. · Contains an additional tool to combat ISIL: The bill closes a loophole in current law that requires the government to stop tracking foreign terrorists when they enter the U.S. This provision gives the government 72 hours to track foreign terrorists when they initially enter the United States (it does not apply to U.S. persons) – enough time for the government to obtain the proper authority under U.S. law. · Increases the statutory maximum prison sentence to 20 years for providing material support or resources to a designated foreign terrorist organization. · Enhances investigations of international proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. · Protects United States’ maritime activities from nuclear threats, weapons of mass destruction, and other threats by implementing the obligations of various treaties to which the United States is a party. · Provides strictly limited emergency authorities: Creates new procedures for the emergency use of Section 215 but requires the government to destroy the information it collects if a FISA court application is denied. Learn more about the *USA Freedom Act* by clicking here <http://www.judiciary.house.gov/index.cfm/usa-freedom-act>. Permalink: http://judiciary.house.gov/index.cfm/2015/4/goodlatte-sensenbrenner-conyers-... -- I speak only for myself. Sometimes I do not even agree with myself. Keep it in mind. Twitter: @andreaglorioso Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/andrea.glorioso LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=1749288&trk=tab_pro
Andrea, immagino che tu l'abbia già analizzato. Il bill protegge dal rischio della sorveglianza di massa indiscriminata anche gli stranieri? m.c. In data martedì 28 aprile 2015 17:41:00, Andrea Glorioso ha scritto:
FYI
http://judiciary.house.gov/index.cfm/press-releases?id=8C703FBE-0A0C-4261-83 B7-9FE2C860A9A0
Apr 28 2015 Goodlatte, Sensenbrenner, Conyers, Nadler Introduce the USA Freedom Act <http://judiciary.house.gov/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=8C703FBE-0A0C-4261-8 3B7-9FE2C860A9A0> Bipartisan bill will be marked up on April 30th
*Washington, D.C.* – Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations Subcommittee Chairman Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.), House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), Ranking Member John Conyers (D-Mich.), and Courts, Intellectual Property and the Internet Subcommittee Ranking Member Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) today will introduce the *USA Freedom Act <http://judiciary.house.gov/_cache/files/1cb59778-0a72-4c09-920d-0e22bf692bb 4/fisa-01-xml.pdf>*. This bipartisan bill builds on the Committee’s extensive work on this issue last Congress, containing even stronger protections for Americans’ civil liberties, providing for even greater transparency for both the private sector and government, and preventing government overreach, while enhancing national security. *The House Judiciary Committee will mark up this legislation on Thursday, April 30th at 10:00 a.m. in 2141 Rayburn House Office Building.*
In June 2013, unauthorized disclosures of classified information revealed to the American people that the National Security Agency had been collecting bulk telephony “metadata” under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). Following the revelation of this information, the House Judiciary Committee worked extensively last Congress to end the NSA’s bulk collection program: it conducted aggressive oversight of our nation’s intelligence-gathering programs operated under FISA and approved bipartisan legislation in Committee, which was ultimately passed overwhelmingly in the House of Representatives. However, the Senate failed to pass legislation on this issue.
Crime Subcommittee Chairman Sensenbrenner, Chairman Goodlatte, Ranking Member Conyers, and Courts, Intellectual Property and the Internet Subcommittee Ranking Member Nadler praised the introduction of the bill in the joint statement below.
*“As several intelligence-gathering programs are set to expire in a month, it is imperative that we reform these programs to protect Americans’ privacy while at the same time protecting our national security. The bipartisan bill introduced today builds on the Committee’s work on this issue last year. It enhances civil liberties protections, increases transparency for both American businesses and the government, ends the bulk collection of data, and provides national security officials targeted tools to keep America safe from foreign enemies. We look forward to expeditiously moving this strong, bipartisan bill through the House Judiciary Committee and then through Congress so that we rein in government overreach and rebuild trust with the American people. We thank Senators Lee and Leahy for working on this issue and introducing companion legislation in the Senate.”*
*Key Components of the USA Freedom Act:*
*Protects civil liberties: *
· Ends bulk collection: Prohibits bulk collection of ALL records under Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act, the FISA pen register authority, and national security letter statutes.
· Prevents government overreach: The bulk collection prohibition is strengthened by prohibiting large-scale, indiscriminate collection, such as all records from an entire state, city, or zip code.
· Allows challenges of national security letter gag orders: NSL nondisclosure orders must be based upon a danger to national security or interference with an investigation. Codifies procedures for individual companies to challenge nondisclosure orders. Requires periodic review of nondisclosure orders to determine necessity.
*Improves transparency and better information-sharing with the American people:*
· Expertise at the FISA court: The bill creates a panel of amicus curie at the FISA court to provide guidance on matters of privacy and civil liberties, communications technology, and other technical or legal matters.
· Declassified FISA opinions: All significant constructions or interpretations of law by the FISA court must be made public. These include all significant interpretations of the definition of “specific selection term,” the concept at the heart of the ban on bulk collection.
· Robust government reporting: The Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence will provide the public with detailed information about how they use these national security authorities.
· Robust company reporting: Tech companies will have a range of options for describing how they respond to national security orders, all consistent with national security needs.
*Strengthens national security:*
· Gives the government the tools it needs: Creates a new call detail records program that is closely overseen by the FISA court.
· Contains an additional tool to combat ISIL: The bill closes a loophole in current law that requires the government to stop tracking foreign terrorists when they enter the U.S. This provision gives the government 72 hours to track foreign terrorists when they initially enter the United States (it does not apply to U.S. persons) – enough time for the government to obtain the proper authority under U.S. law.
· Increases the statutory maximum prison sentence to 20 years for providing material support or resources to a designated foreign terrorist organization.
· Enhances investigations of international proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.
· Protects United States’ maritime activities from nuclear threats, weapons of mass destruction, and other threats by implementing the obligations of various treaties to which the United States is a party.
· Provides strictly limited emergency authorities: Creates new procedures for the emergency use of Section 215 but requires the government to destroy the information it collects if a FISA court application is denied.
Learn more about the *USA Freedom Act* by clicking here <http://www.judiciary.house.gov/index.cfm/usa-freedom-act>.
Permalink: http://judiciary.house.gov/index.cfm/2015/4/goodlatte-sensenbrenner-conyers-> nadler-introduce-the-usa-freedom-act
-- I speak only for myself. Sometimes I do not even agree with myself. Keep it in mind. Twitter: @andreaglorioso Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/andrea.glorioso LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=1749288&trk=tab_pro
Caro Marco, non ho ancora avuto modo di analizzare a fondo questa proposta di legge, ma in sintesi, le attivita` delle agenzie di spionaggio / controspionaggio degli USA relative a cittadini stranieri sono regolate dell'Ordine Esecutivo (Executive Order) 12333 del 1981 (emendato successivamente da altri ordini esecutivi, ma senza cambiarne la sostanza per cio` che riguarda la tua domanda). Questa proposta, da quel che capisco al momento, non va a toccare l'ordine esecutivo. Al tempo stesso, Mr Sensenbrenner (uno degli sponsor del "2015 Freedom Act") e` anche lo sponsor di un'altra proposta legislativa, il "2015 Judicial Redress Act", che introduce la possibilita` per il Governo degli Stati Uniti di estendere le protezioni previste dal Privacy Act anche a cittadini stranieri, cosa sinora non possibile. Il 2015 Judicial Redress Act (che, vale la pena notare, e` al momento una proposta, anche se Sensenbrenner e` un politico "di peso") e` il risultato di estenuanti negoziazioni con l'Unione Europea, che da anni pretende una reciprocita` di trattamento in questa materia e che vi ha subordinato l'accordo nelle negoziazioni sul cosiddetto "Umbrella Agreement" ( http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/files/factsheets/umbrella_factsh... ). Per completezza, il PCLOB (Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board. https://www.pclob.gov/) ha recentemente annunciato che intende analizzare l'ordine esecutivo di cui sopra: https://www.pclob.gov/events/2015/april08.html. A presto, Andrea On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 2:50 AM, Marco Ciurcina <ciurcina@studiolegale.it> wrote:
Andrea, immagino che tu l'abbia già analizzato. Il bill protegge dal rischio della sorveglianza di massa indiscriminata anche gli stranieri? m.c.
In data martedì 28 aprile 2015 17:41:00, Andrea Glorioso ha scritto:
FYI
http://judiciary.house.gov/index.cfm/press-releases?id=8C703FBE-0A0C-4261-83
B7-9FE2C860A9A0
Apr 28 2015 Goodlatte, Sensenbrenner, Conyers, Nadler Introduce the USA Freedom Act < http://judiciary.house.gov/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=8C703FBE-0A0C-4261-8 3B7-9FE2C860A9A0> Bipartisan bill will be marked up on April 30th
*Washington, D.C.* – Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations Subcommittee Chairman Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.), House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), Ranking Member John Conyers (D-Mich.), and Courts, Intellectual Property and the Internet Subcommittee Ranking Member Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) today will introduce the *USA Freedom Act < http://judiciary.house.gov/_cache/files/1cb59778-0a72-4c09-920d-0e22bf692bb 4/fisa-01-xml.pdf>*. This bipartisan bill builds on the Committee’s extensive work on this issue last Congress, containing even stronger protections for Americans’ civil liberties, providing for even greater transparency for both the private sector and government, and preventing government overreach, while enhancing national security. *The House Judiciary Committee will mark up this legislation on Thursday, April 30th at 10:00 a.m. in 2141 Rayburn House Office Building.*
In June 2013, unauthorized disclosures of classified information revealed to the American people that the National Security Agency had been collecting bulk telephony “metadata” under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). Following the revelation of this information, the House Judiciary Committee worked extensively last Congress to end the NSA’s bulk collection program: it conducted aggressive oversight of our nation’s intelligence-gathering programs operated under FISA and approved bipartisan legislation in Committee, which was ultimately passed overwhelmingly in the House of Representatives. However, the Senate failed to pass legislation on this issue.
Crime Subcommittee Chairman Sensenbrenner, Chairman Goodlatte, Ranking Member Conyers, and Courts, Intellectual Property and the Internet Subcommittee Ranking Member Nadler praised the introduction of the bill in the joint statement below.
*“As several intelligence-gathering programs are set to expire in a month, it is imperative that we reform these programs to protect Americans’ privacy while at the same time protecting our national security. The bipartisan bill introduced today builds on the Committee’s work on this issue last year. It enhances civil liberties protections, increases transparency for both American businesses and the government, ends the bulk collection of data, and provides national security officials targeted tools to keep America safe from foreign enemies. We look forward to expeditiously moving this strong, bipartisan bill through the House Judiciary Committee and then through Congress so that we rein in government overreach and rebuild trust with the American people. We thank Senators Lee and Leahy for working on this issue and introducing companion legislation in the Senate.”*
*Key Components of the USA Freedom Act:*
*Protects civil liberties: *
· Ends bulk collection: Prohibits bulk collection of ALL records under Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act, the FISA pen register authority, and national security letter statutes.
· Prevents government overreach: The bulk collection prohibition is strengthened by prohibiting large-scale, indiscriminate collection, such as all records from an entire state, city, or zip code.
· Allows challenges of national security letter gag orders: NSL nondisclosure orders must be based upon a danger to national security or interference with an investigation. Codifies procedures for individual companies to challenge nondisclosure orders. Requires periodic review of nondisclosure orders to determine necessity.
*Improves transparency and better information-sharing with the American people:*
· Expertise at the FISA court: The bill creates a panel of amicus curie at the FISA court to provide guidance on matters of privacy and civil liberties, communications technology, and other technical or legal matters.
· Declassified FISA opinions: All significant constructions or interpretations of law by the FISA court must be made public. These include all significant interpretations of the definition of “specific selection term,” the concept at the heart of the ban on bulk collection.
· Robust government reporting: The Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence will provide the public with detailed information about how they use these national security authorities.
· Robust company reporting: Tech companies will have a range of options for describing how they respond to national security orders, all consistent with national security needs.
*Strengthens national security:*
· Gives the government the tools it needs: Creates a new call detail records program that is closely overseen by the FISA court.
· Contains an additional tool to combat ISIL: The bill closes a loophole in current law that requires the government to stop tracking foreign terrorists when they enter the U.S. This provision gives the government 72 hours to track foreign terrorists when they initially enter the United States (it does not apply to U.S. persons) – enough time for the government to obtain the proper authority under U.S. law.
· Increases the statutory maximum prison sentence to 20 years for providing material support or resources to a designated foreign terrorist organization.
· Enhances investigations of international proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.
· Protects United States’ maritime activities from nuclear threats, weapons of mass destruction, and other threats by implementing the obligations of various treaties to which the United States is a party.
· Provides strictly limited emergency authorities: Creates new procedures for the emergency use of Section 215 but requires the government to destroy the information it collects if a FISA court application is denied.
Learn more about the *USA Freedom Act* by clicking here <http://www.judiciary.house.gov/index.cfm/usa-freedom-act>.
Permalink:
http://judiciary.house.gov/index.cfm/2015/4/goodlatte-sensenbrenner-conyers-> nadler-introduce-the-usa-freedom-act
-- I speak only for myself. Sometimes I do not even agree with myself. Keep
it
in mind. Twitter: @andreaglorioso Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/andrea.glorioso LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=1749288&trk=tab_pro
_______________________________________________ nexa mailing list nexa@server-nexa.polito.it https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa
-- -- I speak only for myself. Sometimes I do not even agree with myself. Keep it in mind. Twitter: @andreaglorioso Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/andrea.glorioso LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=1749288&trk=tab_pro
In data giovedì 30 aprile 2015 14:28:28, hai scritto:
Mr Sensenbrenner (uno degli sponsor del "2015 Freedom Act") e` anche lo sponsor di un'altra proposta legislativa, il "2015 Judicial Redress Act", che introduce la possibilita` per il Governo degli Stati Uniti di estendere le protezioni previste dal Privacy Act anche a cittadini stranieri, cosa sinora non possibile. whow.. viva Sensenbrenner! Speriamo bene. Sarebbe bello poter tornare a pensare (senza essere smentito dai fatti) che gli USA sono attenti al rispetto dei diritti umani su Internet. :-) m.c.
Il commento dell'Editorial Board del New York Times: *"More Excuses on the Patriot Act" * /A new bill makes some improvements but doesn’t go far enough to protect civil liberties./ http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/02/opinion/more-excuses-on-the-patriot-act.ht... juan carlos On 30/04/15 20:55, Marco Ciurcina wrote:
In data giovedì 30 aprile 2015 14:28:28, hai scritto:
Mr Sensenbrenner (uno degli sponsor del "2015 Freedom Act") e` anche lo sponsor di un'altra proposta legislativa, il "2015 Judicial Redress Act", che introduce la possibilita` per il Governo degli Stati Uniti di estendere le protezioni previste dal Privacy Act anche a cittadini stranieri, cosa sinora non possibile. whow.. viva Sensenbrenner! Speriamo bene. Sarebbe bello poter tornare a pensare (senza essere smentito dai fatti) che gli USA sono attenti al rispetto dei diritti umani su Internet. :-) m.c.
_______________________________________________ nexa mailing list nexa@server-nexa.polito.it https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa
Sempre sullo stesso argomento (ma con uno sguardo più ampio): *The Good News About Spying* /Obama, the NSA, and the Future of Intelligence/ By Timothy H. Edgar https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2015-04-13/good-news-a... juan carlos On 02/05/15 11:12, J.C. DE MARTIN wrote:
Il commento dell'Editorial Board del New York Times:
*"More Excuses on the Patriot Act" * /A new bill makes some improvements but doesn’t go far enough to protect civil liberties./
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/02/opinion/more-excuses-on-the-patriot-act.ht...
juan carlos
On 30/04/15 20:55, Marco Ciurcina wrote:
In data giovedì 30 aprile 2015 14:28:28, hai scritto:
Mr Sensenbrenner (uno degli sponsor del "2015 Freedom Act") e` anche lo sponsor di un'altra proposta legislativa, il "2015 Judicial Redress Act", che introduce la possibilita` per il Governo degli Stati Uniti di estendere le protezioni previste dal Privacy Act anche a cittadini stranieri, cosa sinora non possibile. whow.. viva Sensenbrenner! Speriamo bene. Sarebbe bello poter tornare a pensare (senza essere smentito dai fatti) che gli USA sono attenti al rispetto dei diritti umani su Internet. :-) m.c.
_______________________________________________ nexa mailing list nexa@server-nexa.polito.it https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa
_______________________________________________ nexa mailing list nexa@server-nexa.polito.it https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa
In data sabato 2 maggio 2015 15:20:23, J.C. DE MARTIN ha scritto:
Sempre sullo stesso argomento (ma con uno sguardo più ampio):
*The Good News About Spying* /Obama, the NSA, and the Future of Intelligence/ By Timothy H. Edgar Per quanto mi pare di capire, la situazione non è però migliorata nemmeno un po' per gli stranieri (come noi).
Se qualcuno vuole approfondire il tema della sorveglianza di massa da una prospettiva "Europea", suggerisco di leggere "l'evergreen" dal titolo "The US National Security Agency (NSA) surveillance programmes (PRISM) and Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) activities and their impact on EU citizens' fundamental rights" fatto realizzare dal Direttorato Generale per le Politiche Interne - Dipartimento Policy C: Diritti dei Cittadini ed affari costituzionali del Parlamento Europeo (disponibile all'URL http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2009_2014/documents/libe/dv/briefingn...) che, tra l'altro, da atto del fatto che "la portata della sorveglianza che può essere realizzata in conformità al "FISA US Amendment Act" del 2008, e le relative pratiche adottate delle autorità statunitensi hanno fortissime implicazioni per la sovranità dei dati dell'UE e la protezione dei diritti dei cittadini Europei". È auspicabile che la diplomazia UE continui ad esercitare pressione sugli USA. Noi cittadini europei possiamo aiutare la nostra diplomazia a difendere i nostri diritti umani evitando l'uso dei servizi forniti da imprese USA fino a quando questa situazione non cambia. m.c.
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2015-04-13/good-news-a bout-spying
juan carlos
On 02/05/15 11:12, J.C. DE MARTIN wrote:
Il commento dell'Editorial Board del New York Times:
*"More Excuses on the Patriot Act" * /A new bill makes some improvements but doesn’t go far enough to protect civil liberties./
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/02/opinion/more-excuses-on-the-patriot-act. html
juan carlos
On 30/04/15 20:55, Marco Ciurcina wrote:
In data giovedì 30 aprile 2015 14:28:28, hai scritto:
Mr Sensenbrenner (uno degli sponsor del "2015 Freedom Act") e` anche lo sponsor di un'altra proposta legislativa, il "2015 Judicial Redress Act", che introduce la possibilita` per il Governo degli Stati Uniti di estendere le protezioni previste dal Privacy Act anche a cittadini stranieri, cosa sinora non possibile.
whow.. viva Sensenbrenner! Speriamo bene. Sarebbe bello poter tornare a pensare (senza essere smentito dai fatti) che gli USA sono attenti al rispetto dei diritti umani su Internet.
:-)
m.c.
_______________________________________________ nexa mailing list nexa@server-nexa.polito.it https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa
_______________________________________________ nexa mailing list nexa@server-nexa.polito.it https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa
(Tenete presente che parlo a titolo puramente e strettamente personale) Il 2015 USA Freedom Act, come detto, non dice granché sui cittadini stranieri. Ma, come si può leggere nell'articolo di Foreign Policy citato da Juan Carlos (che personalmente trovo molto più equilibrato dell'articolo del New York Times - de gustibus) l'Amministrazione Obama ha già fatto passi in tale direzione, tramite la PPD (Presidential Policy Directive) 28, la creazione del blog "IC [Intelligence Community] On The Record" e altro. Un ottimo riassunto dei passi già presi è il discorso che Robert Litt, "General Counsel" del ODNI (Office of the Director of National Intelligence) ha tenuto al Brookings Institute lo scorso febbraio ( http://www.brookings.edu/events/2015/02/04-intelligence-community-surveillan...). Ne consiglio la lettura. È tanto? È poco? Ognuno ne tragga le conclusioni che crede. Io rilevo però che (1) le attività di spionaggio e controspionaggio sono, come altri hanno fatto notare, il secondo lavoro più vecchio al mondo (e spesso si combinano bene con quello più vecchio); (2) *tutti* i paesi a questo mondo vi si dedicano, quindi ogni tanto bisognerebbe guardare la trave nel proprio occhio prima di concentrarsi sulla pagliuzza in quello altrui; (3) certamente le capacità operative degli USA sono lievemente più sviluppate di, che so, San Marino, ma questa è una differenza di quantità e non di qualità o, se si vuole, di principio; (4) un'analisi davvero oggettiva delle reali misure di transparenza e di controllo parlamentare o indipendente, confrontando gli USA ad altri paesi (inclusa la maggior parte dei paesi dell'UE) dovrebbe a mio parere suggerire un po' di prudenza nel ritenere gli USA un caso isolato o persino peggiore di altri. Oltre tutto, gli scambi di dati tra agenzie di spionaggio/controspionaggio "alleate" o "amiche" (e non raramente anche tra quelle nemiche) sono pratica piuttosto comune. L'idea che boicottare le aziende americane possa in qualche modo migliorare la protezione dei diritti fondamentali dei cittadini europei (tra cui vi è pure, bisogna rilevare, il diritto alla vita e alla sicurezza personale...) è, per questo motivo, piuttosto ingenua - scusami, Marco. :) Come spero sia chiaro, almeno per chi mi conosce da un po' di tempo, non sono un "cheerleader" dei cari vecchi Stati Uniti d'America. Ma francamente, e con tutto il rispetto, devo rilevare che il dibattito sulle questioni di spionaggio è a mio parere fortemente inquinato da una dose di superficialità e, diciamolo, anti-americanismo notevole. A parte le considerazioni di cui sopra, con rare e meritevoli eccezioni (molte delle quali attribuibili a fellow di NEXA, non che la cosa mi sorprenda) vedo un'incredibile attenzione rivolta alle pratiche americane e molta meno a quelle cinesi, russe, o anche europee. Non è possibile giudicare le pratiche degli uni senza inserirle in un contesto globale e comparativo. Finché non si arriverà ad un qualche tipo di accordo globale su ciò che ammissibile o meno in questo ambito, chiedere a chicchessia di diminuire unilateralmente le proprie capacità operative è inutile e, per essere onesti, un po' ridicolo. Inoltre, e con specifico riferimento ai "leak" che hanno creato questo dibattito, mi stupisco che così poche persone sollevino domande scomode come (per esempio) chi ha interesse a indebolire le capacità operative degli USA e dei suoi alleati; o in che modo, storicamente, siano state usate le talpe e gli "utili idioti". Diciamo che mi sentirei più a mio agio e troverei intellettualmente più onesto un dibattito in cui le questioni di cui sopra venissero chiaramente messe sul tavolo. Scusate se sono stato molto diretto e, come ho detto, tutto ciò che scrivo è la mia posizione personale (e, forse, quella di Obama, ma non posso confermare: all'ultimo brunch non è venuto perché Michelle gli ha fatto 'na capa tanta che non passa abbastanza tempo con la famiglia). A presto, Andrea On Saturday, May 2, 2015, Marco Ciurcina <ciurcina@studiolegale.it> wrote:
In data sabato 2 maggio 2015 15:20:23, J.C. DE MARTIN ha scritto:
Sempre sullo stesso argomento (ma con uno sguardo più ampio):
*The Good News About Spying* /Obama, the NSA, and the Future of Intelligence/ By Timothy H. Edgar Per quanto mi pare di capire, la situazione non è però migliorata nemmeno un po' per gli stranieri (come noi).
Se qualcuno vuole approfondire il tema della sorveglianza di massa da una prospettiva "Europea", suggerisco di leggere "l'evergreen" dal titolo "The US National Security Agency (NSA) surveillance programmes (PRISM) and Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) activities and their impact on EU citizens' fundamental rights" fatto realizzare dal Direttorato Generale per le Politiche Interne - Dipartimento Policy C: Diritti dei Cittadini ed affari costituzionali del Parlamento Europeo (disponibile all'URL
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2009_2014/documents/libe/dv/briefingn... ) che, tra l'altro, da atto del fatto che "la portata della sorveglianza che può essere realizzata in conformità al "FISA US Amendment Act" del 2008, e le relative pratiche adottate delle autorità statunitensi hanno fortissime implicazioni per la sovranità dei dati dell'UE e la protezione dei diritti dei cittadini Europei".
È auspicabile che la diplomazia UE continui ad esercitare pressione sugli USA.
Noi cittadini europei possiamo aiutare la nostra diplomazia a difendere i nostri diritti umani evitando l'uso dei servizi forniti da imprese USA fino a quando questa situazione non cambia.
m.c.
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2015-04-13/good-news-a
bout-spying
juan carlos
On 02/05/15 11:12, J.C. DE MARTIN wrote:
Il commento dell'Editorial Board del New York Times:
*"More Excuses on the Patriot Act" * /A new bill makes some improvements but doesn’t go far enough to protect civil liberties./
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/02/opinion/more-excuses-on-the-patriot-act.
html
juan carlos
On 30/04/15 20:55, Marco Ciurcina wrote:
In data giovedì 30 aprile 2015 14:28:28, hai scritto:
Mr Sensenbrenner (uno degli sponsor del "2015 Freedom Act") e` anche lo sponsor di un'altra proposta legislativa, il "2015 Judicial Redress Act", che introduce la possibilita` per il Governo degli Stati Uniti di estendere le protezioni previste dal Privacy Act anche a cittadini stranieri, cosa sinora non possibile.
whow.. viva Sensenbrenner! Speriamo bene. Sarebbe bello poter tornare a pensare (senza essere smentito dai fatti) che gli USA sono attenti al rispetto dei diritti umani su Internet.
:-)
m.c.
_______________________________________________ nexa mailing list nexa@server-nexa.polito.it <javascript:;> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa
_______________________________________________ nexa mailing list nexa@server-nexa.polito.it <javascript:;> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa
_______________________________________________ nexa mailing list nexa@server-nexa.polito.it <javascript:;> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa
-- -- I speak only for myself. Sometimes I do not even agree with myself. Keep it in mind. Twitter: @andreaglorioso Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/andrea.glorioso LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=1749288&trk=tab_pro
participants (3)
-
Andrea Glorioso -
J.C. DE MARTIN -
Marco Ciurcina