No Subject

[Aimee Farr]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-cypherpunks at lne.com [mailto:owner-cypherpunks at lne.com]On
> Behalf Of citizenQ
> Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 5:54 PM
> To: cypherpunks at lne.com
> Subject: No Subject
>
>
> Reading the discussion I see that the amendment calls for
> inclusion of 'terrorist activies' into Title III which allows
> wiretapping under Court order, not anything about warrantless
> wiretapping.  I did not perform all the text substitutions of the
> amemdment itself though.  However in the language of the
> amendment all references that I read are to activities under
> court order.
>
> Please indicate the wider circumstances, particularly the
> warrantless circumstances, that this amendment allows
> cybertapping under, for those of us without your time or acumen
> in editing the existing Title III language.


    (c) EMERGENCY INSTALLATION.--

    (1) AUTHORITY FOR UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS.--Section 3125(a) of that
title is amended in the matter preceding paragraph (1)--

    (A) by striking ``or any Deputy Assistant Attorney General,'' and
inserting ``any Deputy Assistant Attorney General, or any United States
Attorney,''.

    (2) EXPANSION OF EMERGENCY CIRCUMSTANCES.--Section 3125(a)(1) of that
title is amended--

    (A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``or'' at the end;

    (B) in subparagraph (B), by striking the comma at the end and inserting
a semicolon; and

    (C) by inserting after subparagraph (B) the following new subparagraphs:

    ``(C) immediate threat to the national security interests of the United
States;

    ``(D) immediate threat to public health or safety; or

    ``(E) an attack on the integrity or availability of a protected computer
which attack would be an offense punishable under section 1030(c)(2)(C) of
this title,''.



> You also did not quote this:
> "One of the most effective investigative tools at the disposal of law
>      enforcement agencies is the ability to go to a Federal judge and get
>      wiretapping authority. It is critical in matters such as
> this. That is
>      the ability to intercept oral or electronic conversations
> involving the
>      subject of a criminal investigation. The legislative scheme that
>      provides this authority, and at the same time protects the
> individual
>      liberties of American citizens to be secure against unwarranted
>      government surveillance, is referred to in the criminal code
> as Title
>      III. Among the many protections inherent in Title III is
> that only the
>      investigations of certain criminal offenses, those judged to be
>      sufficiently serious to warrant the use of this potent
> crime-fighting
>      weapon, are eligible for wiretapping orders. The law lays
> out a number
>      of crimes deemed by Congress to be serious enough to warrant
> allowing
>      the FBI to intercept electronic and oral communications.
>        Title III currently allows interception of communications in
>      connection with the investigation of such crimes as mail fraud, wire
>      fraud, and the interstate transportation of stolen property.
>        Inexplicably, however, the Federal terrorism statutes are not
>      currently included in Title III. I have been complaining
> about this for
>      a long time and this is the time to correct it."

This is somewhat of a mistatement considering the breadth of 2516.>