Slashdot Mirror
Cops Have Got Your Number
explosionhead writes "Salon has a nice article about the FBI's stretching their powers for phone taps under the 'Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act' and how this could apply to digital communication. The FCC tried to apply this 3 years ago, and it was fought off, but the article also comments that many of the Telcos were hesitant to argue this time around for fear of bad post Sept-11 publicity." We covered this when it happened, with a lot of good information if I do say so myself. Salon is now noting that no one is willing to challenge the revised FCC rules, running scared in the (dare I say it?) post-September 11 world.
We all know that if anyone makes any attempt to challenge any Post-September 11 legislation, they are anti-American, anti-patriotic and of course support and sympathize with terrorists.
///Salon is now noting that no one is willing to challenge the revised FCC rules, running scared in the (dare I say it?) post-September 11 world.///
Yes, you can say "post-Semtember 11 world" because the truth is, this event obviously had and will continue have life-changing, far-reaching effects and consequences on every American.
It is our job to make sure those effects evoke positive changes in our lifestyles, not negative ones, even in the short term.
Palaces, barricades, threats, meet promises
You know, its pretty sad when I think about this. The terrorists have won; no matter what we say. They wanted to force us to change our lives; they succeeded. They wanted us to give up our way of life; we have, or at least part of it. They wanted us to be afraid; we are, at least to some extent. If you see somebody walking down main street with a large trenchcoat now, your afraid. What might he be doing.
Terrorism will always succeed if we let them force us to change our ways, and give up some of our freedoms.
One of these days i'm going to find this 'peer' guy and reset HIS connection!
Yes, but the road to hell is paved with good intentions. You can pass all sorts of laws for the protection of the people that gives extra powers, but what then when the "bad guys" are the ones who control all this anti-citizen technology?
This isn't "commie red china" because it can't be. The laws are not (yet) in place to let it be.
Not being american i have to admit i have trouble understanding the post september 11 issue.. It amazes me that since that date the number of basic rights and civil liberties that have been ignored or thrown away in the cause of 'Patriotism' are so big.
it seems anything can be dismissed as post september 11 and be justifiable on the grounds of the war against terrorism...
meanwhile in palestine the IDF moves tanks back into refuge settlements to 'supress undesirable elements' and no one blinks ?
Tragedy that sept 11 was its no excuse to allow your rights and freedoms to be taken away from you and no excuse to not stand up for yourselves or others - America is supposed to be the land of the free and home of the brave - it seems worryinh that these days its increasingly not so free and only brave when backed by superior firepower.....
And am i the only one who thinks that the post septmeber 11 comment has been a great way for the FBI and CIA et al to get around all those niggling civil rights and civil liberties issues? just how long have they been able to do this anyway...
I refuse to argue with Anonymous Cowards - if you want a discussion get an account....
The article brings to mind organizations like the ACLU who find themselves protecting some of the worst people out there (white supremacists, drug dealers, etc) in order to fight for the Bill of Rights.
/.ers and other techies who fight for privacy will not, in the greater scheme of things, be villified for appearing to protect terrorists for the sake of safe email accounts. That's a shortsighted argument. If the FBI wants extra powers to fight the bad guys, they should have no qualms about fighting for those powers in Congress or in our Court System.
In the end, I think
That's the great thing about our system. It's supposed to have the same rules for everybody.
Neat, huh?
-FC
The only thing I can possibly think of to respond to this is the words of Benjamin Franklin. "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither libery nor safety."
If we get rid of the Bill of Rights in order to prevent terrorists (or anyone else) from damaging us, haven't they accomplished what they set out to do?
I know this is probably picking a nit, but isn't the Republican (you know the supposedly conservative party) platform based around less government in the lives of Americans? Doesn't that mean you've now redefined that platform as liberal?
"Suppose you were an idiot..... And suppose you were a member of Congress... But I repeate myself."
Someone posted a comment that more or less said "Why is this a problem? They're not after *you*, as such; they're after the *bad guys*."
Well, yes, it is a problem. I'm all for going after the bad guys, but remember, if this crisis ever ends, these powers will *not* be retracted.
Government usually only gets bigger, not smaller. And they don't easily give up powers once they've been granted. Perhaps the way Congress should be drafting these laws is that they need to come up on periodic review (kind of like the statute for Independent Counsels). At least if we have to tolerate this potential invasion now, then it could be repealed after a few years when things calm down.
I think it's important not to bind the hands of the FBI too much, but at the same time, someone needs to be looking ahead to when this crisis ends.
Another potential glimmer of hope is that the next administration might be influenced to cause a review to be done as part of his getting elected.
I guess we'll see...
"Sometimes the truth is stupid." - Lawrence, creator of Prime Intellect
How long are you going to use 9/11 as a crutch? You seem to think it's an excuse for anything, good or bad. Get over it! Innocent people die every day all over the world. Suck it up and stop letting the government walk all over you. Osama is laughing at you all.
The big deal is when Feds decide that you're partaking in certain "un-American" activities (like thinking for yourself, donating money to the ACLU, writing posts like this, etc) and decide to wiretap you. Big deal, right?--You're a good American, you go to work, pay your bills, buy stuff from Wal-Mart; there's nothing for them to find.
/. password, sorry.
But then you say something...Something controversial. It may be personal, politcal, sexual, or mildly criminal; it doesn't really matter because all it takes is a quick phone call to the local constabulary to have you hauled in front of the inquisition and black-listed for life. You'll find that certain opportunities are no longer available to you at this point.
God forbid that you're somebody important (somebody with enough money/power to matter), because it's a simple matter to convict someone in the media these days--just say the word "pedophile" and your career will evaporate.
I realize that some of this reaks of "Pinko-Liberalism" as my history professor once put it, but just remember that this has already happened before (Martin Luther King being the most prominent example with McCarthyism a close second).
Just remember that power is an end unto itself, and individuality is not a virtue in government.
I lost my
The choice you're making is between the possibility that an otherwise successful investigation might be slowed down by the necessity to obtain legal authorization, and the certainty that oversight covering scrutiny of your personal life will be removed.
Essentially, they're selling you a false dilemma.
What we call folk wisdom is often no more than a kind of expedient stupidity.-Edward Abbey
The fact is that we now live in the post 'politically correct' world of the 90s..
It is not a happy lets all get to know each other
place.. there are some seriously dangerous groups,
and people out there that we have to be careful
of.. anything else is really naive..
So after Sept 11, there are really only 2 choices..
Either:
1)We get non citizen people who are in the US from high risk groups (this means Al-quada countries, young male Muslims..etc) out, and make them re-apply their visas. If it costs the US govt $100,000K to do a real proper investigation on someone from these places, then that is the visa fee they pay, or they don't come back in. Then the investigation is done, and if they pass, they can come in. For good measure I would also have an American citizen in good standing (a fireman, police officer, town mayor) also take responsibility for them when they are here. If they cannot find anyone, then they also don't come in.
Then we won't need laws like the above in our own
country, and we won't lose our rights.
Or choice 2:
2)We let them stay, but then the govt. has to do things like this law above, to tell apart the bad guys from the good ones who are among us. But the downside is that we lose our rights in the process.
Basically, that is the dillemma our government is in right now..
Practically, those are really the only 2 things you can do. Personally, I choose (1). Neither are nice really, and hopefully sometime soon in the future, we won't need to do either... but that is just not the reality right now in today's world..
Well, that's not entirely true. Now any government around the world can follow the US's lead and exterminate any group that opposes them with impunity and call it "War on Terrorism" and say they are doing their part. Also you now have no right to be assumed innocent. You can be assumed terrorist without any real proof. Aint it grand?
Nerd: Derogatory term typically directed at anybody with a lower Slashdot ID than you.
Go ahead and mark me as a troll or redundant, but I read this piece recently and feel it is relevant. I care not for karm but would just wish more people considered this.
March 11, 2002
I think the vast differences in compensation between the victims of the September 11th casualty, and those who die serving the
country in uniform, are profound. No one is really talking about it either because you just don't criticize anything having to do with September 11th. Well, I just can't let the numbers pass by because it says something really disturbing about the entitlement mentality of this country.
If you lost a family member in the September 11th attack, you're going to get an average of $1,185,000. The range is a minimum guarantee of $250,000, all the way up to $4.7 million. If you are a surviving family member of an American soldier killed in action, the first check you get is a $6,000 direct death benefit, half of
which is taxable. Next, you get $1,750 for burial costs. If you are the surviving spouse, you get $833 a month until you remarry.
And there's a payment of $211 per month for each child under 18. When the child hits 18, those payments come to a screeching halt. Keep in mind that some of the people that are getting an average of $1.185 million up to $4.7 million are complaining that it's not enough. We also learned over the weekend that some of the
victims from the Oklahoma City bombing have started an organization asking for the same deal that the September 11th families are getting. In addition to that, some of the families of those bombed in the embassies are now asking for compensation as well.
You see where this is going, don't you? Folks, this is part and parcel of over fifty years of entitlement politics in this country. It's just really sad. "Patriotism is not a short and renzied outburst of emotion but the tranquil and steady dedication of a lifetime." --Adlai E. Stevenson, Jr.
Every time when a pay raise comes up for the military they usually receive next to nothing of a raise. Now the green machine is in combat in the Middle East while their families have to survive on food stamps and live in low rent housing. However our own U.S. Congress just voted themselves a raise, and many of you don't
know that they only have to be in Congress one-time to receive a pension that is more than $15,000 per month and most are now equal
to be millionaires plus. They also do not receive Social Security on retirement because they didn't have to pay into the system.
If some of the military people stay in for 20 years and get out as an E-7 you may receive a pension of $1,000 per month, and the very people who placed you in harms way receive a pension of
$15,000 per month. I would like to see our elected officials pick up a weapon and join ranks before they start cutting out benefits
and lowering pay for our sons and daughters who are now fighting.
Cave, wreck, and deep diver.