Full Version: Dealing with overseas foreign agents
During our current pursuit of overseas agents and powers who are seeking to attack our country we monitor their communications as much as is possible.
I want to explore the conduct governing this surveillance.
If US agents (CIA, NSA) are monitoring an al Qaeda operative in Cairo (or Islamabad or anywhere else), including tapping his phone, what should be the procedure if that agent contacts someone in the US? The surveillance is targeted at the overseas agent.
What should be the procedure?
Do the US agents have an obligation to know who the operative is talking to before they monitor the conversation?
Does monitoring enemy activity end when it crosses the border (electronically) into the US?
I want to explore the conduct governing this surveillance.
If US agents (CIA, NSA) are monitoring an al Qaeda operative in Cairo (or Islamabad or anywhere else), including tapping his phone, what should be the procedure if that agent contacts someone in the US? The surveillance is targeted at the overseas agent.
What should be the procedure?
Do the US agents have an obligation to know who the operative is talking to before they monitor the conversation?
Does monitoring enemy activity end when it crosses the border (electronically) into the US?
What should be the procedure?
The procedure should be that they listen in to any conversation that they operative has but Especially those conversations that are had with those within the U.S.. I think that is a no brainer. Regardless, the survellience would still be targeted at the overseas agent. However, if they are contacting someone in the U.S. this should be an even greater red flag to pay close attention.
Do the US agents have an obligation to know who the operative is talking to before they monitor the conversation?
I don't really understand this questions? What obligation? Why would anyone that would be in contact with al Qaeda, especially those within the U.S...al Qaeda's main target, be given any benefits in regards to survellience.
Does monitoring enemy activity end when it crosses the border (electronically) into the US?
Of course not.
The procedure should be that they listen in to any conversation that they operative has but Especially those conversations that are had with those within the U.S.. I think that is a no brainer. Regardless, the survellience would still be targeted at the overseas agent. However, if they are contacting someone in the U.S. this should be an even greater red flag to pay close attention.
Do the US agents have an obligation to know who the operative is talking to before they monitor the conversation?
I don't really understand this questions? What obligation? Why would anyone that would be in contact with al Qaeda, especially those within the U.S...al Qaeda's main target, be given any benefits in regards to survellience.
Does monitoring enemy activity end when it crosses the border (electronically) into the US?
Of course not.
QUOTE(Amlord @ Jan 24 2006, 07:40 AM)
If US agents (CIA, NSA) are monitoring an al Qaeda operative in Cairo (or Islamabad or anywhere else), including tapping his phone, what should be the procedure if that agent contacts someone in the US? The surveillance is targeted at the overseas agent.
What should be the procedure?
Do the US agents have an obligation to know who the operative is talking to before they monitor the conversation?
Does monitoring enemy activity end when it crosses the border (electronically) into the US?[/b]
What should be the procedure?
Do the US agents have an obligation to know who the operative is talking to before they monitor the conversation?
Does monitoring enemy activity end when it crosses the border (electronically) into the US?[/b]
What should the procedure be? The regulations governing foreign intelligence surveillance are laid out in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. The answer to your questions can be found by reading it. If these regulations are not sufficient, they have always been open to amendment.
QUOTE(entspeak @ Jan 24 2006, 01:09 PM)
What should the procedure be? The regulations governing foreign intelligence surveillance are laid out in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. The answer to your questions can be found by reading it. If these regulations are not sufficient, they have always been open to amendment.
FISA does not cover surveillance done outside of the United States. It also does not cover surveillance when the intended target is not a United States person:
QUOTE
(f) “Electronic surveillance” means—
(1) the acquisition by an electronic, mechanical, or other surveillance device of the contents of any wire or radio communication sent by or intended to be received by a particular, known United States person who is in the United States, if the contents are acquired by intentionally targeting that United States person, under circumstances in which a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy and a warrant would be required for law enforcement purposes;
(2) the acquisition by an electronic, mechanical, or other surveillance device of the contents of any wire communication to or from a person in the United States, without the consent of any party thereto, if such acquisition occurs in the United States, but does not include the acquisition of those communications of computer trespassers that would be permissible under section 2511 (2)(i) of title 18;
(3) the intentional acquisition by an electronic, mechanical, or other surveillance device of the contents of any radio communication, under circumstances in which a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy and a warrant would be required for law enforcement purposes, and if both the sender and all intended recipients are located within the United States; or
(4) the installation or use of an electronic, mechanical, or other surveillance device in the United States for monitoring to acquire information, other than from a wire or radio communication, under circumstances in which a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy and a warrant would be required for law enforcement purposes.
(1) the acquisition by an electronic, mechanical, or other surveillance device of the contents of any wire or radio communication sent by or intended to be received by a particular, known United States person who is in the United States, if the contents are acquired by intentionally targeting that United States person, under circumstances in which a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy and a warrant would be required for law enforcement purposes;
(2) the acquisition by an electronic, mechanical, or other surveillance device of the contents of any wire communication to or from a person in the United States, without the consent of any party thereto, if such acquisition occurs in the United States, but does not include the acquisition of those communications of computer trespassers that would be permissible under section 2511 (2)(i) of title 18;
(3) the intentional acquisition by an electronic, mechanical, or other surveillance device of the contents of any radio communication, under circumstances in which a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy and a warrant would be required for law enforcement purposes, and if both the sender and all intended recipients are located within the United States; or
(4) the installation or use of an electronic, mechanical, or other surveillance device in the United States for monitoring to acquire information, other than from a wire or radio communication, under circumstances in which a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy and a warrant would be required for law enforcement purposes.
link
EDIT: to include all of subsection (f)
QUOTE(Amlord @ Jan 24 2006, 10:31 AM)
FISA does not cover surveillance done outside of the United States.
I stand corrected on that point. You are right, it doesn't. There are no obligations when the target of the surveillance is a non US person outside of the US -- meaning that the surveillance occurs by tapping an individual outside the US.
QUOTE
It also does not cover surveillance when the intended target is not a United States person
Not true:
QUOTE
(2) the acquisition by an electronic, mechanical, or other surveillance device of the contents of any wire communication to or from a person in the United States, without the consent of any party thereto, if such acquisition occurs in the United States, but does not include the acquisition of those communications of computer trespassers that would be permissible under section 2511 (2)(i) of title 18;
(3) the intentional acquisition by an electronic, mechanical, or other surveillance device of the contents of any radio communication, under circumstances in which a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy and a warrant would be required for law enforcement purposes, and if both the sender and all intended recipients are located within the United States; or
(4) the installation or use of an electronic, mechanical, or other surveillance device in the United States for monitoring to acquire information, other than from a wire or radio communication, under circumstances in which a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy and a warrant would be required for law enforcement purposes.
(3) the intentional acquisition by an electronic, mechanical, or other surveillance device of the contents of any radio communication, under circumstances in which a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy and a warrant would be required for law enforcement purposes, and if both the sender and all intended recipients are located within the United States; or
(4) the installation or use of an electronic, mechanical, or other surveillance device in the United States for monitoring to acquire information, other than from a wire or radio communication, under circumstances in which a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy and a warrant would be required for law enforcement purposes.
These three definitions do not require the person to be a "United States person" -- as defined by FISA.
So, in regards to your scenario. The US agents would have no obligations regarding the monitoring of that communication. The obligations would come into play depending on what they wanted to do with the information from that communication. If it was decided that the individual within the US was to be subsequently targeted for surveillance, then FISA would regulate the conduct of the agents.
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.