Monitored Alarm Systems

In the last year we have been covering the efforts of Senator Ron Wyden for Obama administration officials to come public with his secret interpretation of the Patriot Act. Wyden, of course, I can not say how they are interpreting the Patriot Act, although there was evidence, which suggests an extremely broad interpretation, which effectively allows to spy on Americans, in direct contrast how most people (including many members of Congress) believe that the law allows. In the past, intelligence officials have said basically he would not reveal how they interpret the Patriot Act, unwilling, and could reveal some details of how to spy on people.



course, to keep secret details of specific operations risk control is reasonable. However, an interpretation of the law on secrecy that seems to go against what the law says directly? This is not acceptable. If the government can come up with how it interprets the laws, so keep secret interpretations, we do not have representative democracy at all. We have a joke of government.

Given all this, the New York Times and the ACLU sued the government for not revealing his interpretation of the law under a Freedom of Information Act. The administration is seeking the two rejected applications ... Senators Wyden and important to send a header Udall more direct and forceful of the Attorney General to question this movement. I will include a large number of fragments below, but a small key in the letter, which I think is new is the recognition that additional information that Wyden and Udall have found suggest that the covert surveillance operation that uses this secret interpretation of the law is not yet effective:

also tells us that in recent months have become increasingly skeptical about the real value of "intelligence-gathering operation" discussed the recent introduction of the Court in the Department of Justice with respect to pending lawsuits. It was a surprise for us, as he bent to take claims from the Executive on the importance of this "operation" at face value. We will provide more details on this correspondence skepticism ad.

This is a very strong statement, and certainly shows another reason why the government is fighting so hard against revealing secret interpretation. They know that when people realize how much they are tracking people under the false interpretation of the law, not only people upset, but the government will not even be able to demonstrate that these efforts do nothing to prevent terrorism in the country. In some other spots of the letter:

It is well known that Article 215, which is a public right has been interpreted legal secrets. Stocks of these interpretations, which are contained in the views displayed by the Intelligence Surveillance Court Foreign Affairs (or "FISA Court") has been repeatedly recognized by the Department of Justice and other executive branch officials .

think most Americans are surprised to learn the details of how such secret judicial opinions have interpreted section 215 of the Patriot Act.

As we see, now there is a significant gap between what most Americans think

the law allows and what the government

said quietly permitted by law. This is a problem because it is impossible to have an informed public debate on what the law should say that the public does not know what their government thinks the law says. that seems too short. Really makes you wonder what country we live in today. I'm fine with the government to keep secret certain things - but it's something that should never be kept secret

the law itself

. This is not democracy at all, an issue raised in the letter, thus:


In a democratic society - in which the government derives its powers from the consent of people - citizens rightly expect their government does not arbitrarily keep information from their part. Americans expect their government to act within the limits of public law, and understood that voters who have a need and right now on how the law is interpreted so that they can ratify or reject decisions its name. In other words, the Americans know that government will prosecute some covert operations, but do not think government officials should be submitted in writing secret laws. how the government interprets the law:
Find best price for : --Patriot----ACLU----Times----Obama--