Wrong.

If you think all this warrantless surveillance will only take place against foreigners (as if that didn’t matter, too), you’re wrong.

The warrantless surveillance system implemented by the Protect America Act of 2007 only requires the following:

`(1) there are reasonable procedures in place for determining that the acquisition of foreign intelligence information under this section concerns persons reasonably believed to be located outside the United States, and such procedures will be subject to review of the Court pursuant to section 105C of this Act;

`(2) the acquisition does not constitute electronic surveillance;

`(3) the acquisition involves obtaining the foreign intelligence information from or with the assistance of a communications service provider, custodian, or other person (including any officer, employee, agent, or other specified person of such service provider, custodian, or other person) who
has access to communications, either as they are transmitted or while they are stored, or equipment that is being or may be used to transmit or store such communications;

`(4) a significant purpose of the acquisition is to obtain foreign intelligence information; and

`(5) the minimization procedures to be used with respect to such acquisition activity meet the definition of minimization procedures under section 101(h).

So the program has to be trying to obtain “foreign intelligence information,” and as other parts of the act state, any program that is trying to do so automatically is defined as not “constituting electronic surveillance.” That’s pretty broad activity, and that doesn’t mean the surveillance has to have ONLY that purpose. The Act only says that “A significant purpose of the acquisition is to obtain foreign intelligence information.” Not “THE,” “A.” No, the surveillance without a warrant can have other purposes too. What purposes? The Act doesn’t say.

But wait, subsection (5) refers to existing “minimization procedures” in the FISA law. Those “minimization procedures” must protect Americans from the deleterious effects of surveillance without a warrant, right?

Wrong. Let’s go read section 101(h) of the FISA law to see what those “minimization procedures” are:

(h) “Minimization procedures”, with respect to electronic surveillance, means—
(1) specific procedures, which shall be adopted by the Attorney General, that are reasonably designed in light of the purpose and technique of the particular surveillance, to minimize the acquisition and retention, and prohibit the dissemination, of nonpublicly available information concerning unconsenting United States persons consistent with the need of the United States to obtain, produce, and disseminate foreign intelligence information;

(2) procedures that require that nonpublicly available information, which is not foreign intelligence information, as defined in subsection (e)(1) of this section, shall not be disseminated in a manner that identifies any United States person, without such person’s consent, unless such person’s identity is necessary to understand foreign intelligence information or assess its importance;

(3) notwithstanding paragraphs (1) and (2), procedures that allow for the retention and dissemination of information that is evidence of a crime which has been, is being, or is about to be committed and that is to be retained or disseminated for law enforcement purposes; and

(4) notwithstanding paragraphs (1), (2), and (3), with respect to any electronic surveillance approved pursuant to section 1802 (a) of this title, procedures that require that no contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party shall be disclosed, disseminated, or used for any purpose or retained for longer than 72 hours unless a court order under section 1805 of this title is obtained or unless the Attorney General determines that the information indicates a threat of death or serious bodily harm to any person.

(h)(1) means that if information about Americans is collected in pursuit of the “need of the United States to obtain, produce, and disseminate foreign intelligence information,” then c’est la vie.
(h)(3) means that information about Americans can be collected, kept, and sent on to law enforcement if there’s “evidence of a crime which has been, is being, or is about to be committed.”
(h)(4) means that if the U.S. Government is conducting surveillance without a warrant, and comes across information that indicates there has been or will be a crime in the U.S., then if the U.S. Government can obtain a court order after the fact, they can go ahead and use the information.

So what we’ve got here is a system of trolling for information across wide databases including phone conversations but also including the internet, financial transactions and other communications of information. If the system just happens to come across “evidence of a crime which has been, is being, or is about to be committed,” then the government can send it on to law enforcement for law enforcement to do what law enforcement does.

The end result, O Happy Day, is a system of watching Americans and non-Americans alike, without the warrant mandated by the U.S. Constitution. As long as the Government can come up with a justification having to do with foreigners, they can use that surveillance to catch Americans and arrest them.

Right now you may be saying to yourself, “Oh, come on now. This is the most expansive interpretation of government power under the law. That’s pushing credibility, isn’t it?” But remember, that’s exactly what the Bush administration has been doing with every law that comes their way. And now Bush has a new law to play with and push the boundaries of.

This Act isn’t just an act. It’s the law of the land now. Big Brother is watching. Watch out.