Slashdot Mirror
Secret Court: Government Lied to Get Wiretaps Approved
Paersona writes "Ever wonder what Colleen Kollar-Kotelly is doing to pass the time while she waits for the next step in the Microsoft case? Apparently she is now serving as the lead justice of the FISA court that oversees intelligence agencies' requests for domestic wiretapping. Today, the Washington Post reveals that the FISA court has released a rare public report rebuking the FBI and Justice Department for their handling of wiretap requests." The New York Times also has a story about the FISA court. The court's opinion is available.
What does this have to do with anything that slashdot normally post? Certainly nothing to do with my rights online, or anything else. This is just another flamebaiting article to troll for hits and flames.
It seems, michael, a notorious government hating leftist is using slashdot once again to advance his own political agenda.
SIG:Slashdot: indymedia for nerds.
Hmmmmm....the FBI which holds american citizens without charge, denies them bail or access to a lawyer all based on secret evidence has been slapped on the hand for their tactics by....wait for it....that's right. A SECRET COURT!? Be very afraid......
More wiretap requets were approved under the Clinton administration (8 years) than under the Reagan and Bush (the first) combined (12 years).
Reagan's excuse was the War on Communism. Clinton's was the War on Drugs. GW's is going to be the War on Terrorism.
BTW, we *ARE* talking about wiretaps on U.S. citizens and on U.S. soil. The CIA has jurisdiction for foreign nationals and there is a much less stringent procedure. (i.e. -- insert tape, push "record")
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
He's absolutely correct. Slashdot spends A LOT of time doing nothing but bash Republicans. Slashdot isn't "News for Nerds", it's "Propaganda for Leftists"
Clinton. No matter what bad thing happens on this administrations watch it will be blammed on Bill Clinton. There is no sense of personal responsability, it's always Clintons fault.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/onpolitics/tr anscripts/fisa_opinion.pdf
The court rebuked the administration of WILLIAM JEFFERSON BLYTHE CLINTON, not the administration of George W. Bush :
Maybe I'm a pinko commie fag too, but I like to know this stuff. It matters to me and I want to know when government officials are falsifying information.
All pass beyond reach of medicine. None pass beyond the reach of love.
This is a good sign that Kotar-Kotelly isn't afraid to take on the current powers that be. Many people, even ones with good track records, have taken up a don't-rock-the-boat attitude since you know when. It's good to see that it hasn't hit K-K. If she's willing to stand up to the PATRIOT-enabled FBI, it bodes well for her honesty in the Microsoft case.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
This woman seems to wield a lot of power over both individual citizens and major corporations. I would like to know more about her.
For some reason, I always think of "Cake or death" when I hear that...
Pretty much always, aren't they?
Louis Freeh was far from a saint. Nothing to do with the administration: it was often pointed out that Freeh paid little heed to the desires of the president or attorney general.
There should be a moratorium on the use of the apostrophe.
Max V.
NeXTMail/MIME Mail welcome
Nobody is going to jail
Nobody will be held accountable
It was all done to protect American lives.
Sometimes I feel that the federal judiciary is the only place that "gets it" about fundamental American rights and legal traditions. Then, of course, I think of Judge Kaplan and I get depressed again.
The Mongrel Dogs Who Teach
Agreed. Many pundits* are saying that this is the most secretive administration ever, and this just adds another log on the "What are they hiding?" fire. These antics are exactly what everyone was afraid of when Ashcroft was appointed in the first place.
*Source: NPR report I heard yesterday.
Stop Continental Drift! Reunite Gondwanaland!
Found these via Drudge...
Special Court Rejects Ashcroft Rules and Secret Court Rebuffs Ashcroft (related to the main story).
And from the second story... "The department discovered the misrepresentations and reported them to the FISA court beginning in 2000.".. which means the improper actions occured before 2000.. i.e. Before Bush. So Bush/Ashcroft are not responsible for those infractions.
Having said that (and despite being a conservative), I do hope these revalations reign in some of the trampling of civil liberties Ashcroft/Bush are considering. I fully understand their desire to fight terrorism, and I understand some liberties we were used to in the past may be crimped in the process. But eliminated? Virtually removed? A number of their proposals (and some things currently put in place) are simply troubling and I hope this is a wake-up call they cannot simply trample over the Constitution in the name of protecting the public. Freedom is not without its risks, either to those who defend it or the society which enjoys it. We all simply need to be aware of that risk and vigilant in our own way to insure we don't lose our freedom to either the terrorist, the criminal or our own government.
(and no, I don't get my music via gnutella either)
-'fester
-'fester
with the fact that a secret court exists and issues wiretaps authorizations?
This has been a test. Had this been a real emergency, we would have fled in terror and you would not have been informed.
In reality, no matter what the label, they are still Poly want a dollar polititions that are crapping on John Q. Public.
Any sufficiently advanced influence is indistinguishable from control.
"We believe the court's action unnecessarily narrowed the Patriot Act and limited our ability to fully utilize the authority Congress gave us," the Justice Department said in a statement.
So, in other words, Congress (Legislative Branch) attempted to give additional (unconstitutional?) power to the Justice Department (Executive Branch), and this power was taken away by the court (Judicial Branch). Apparently the system, corrupt and ineffective though it may be, actually DOES work sometimes.
Now, if only we can get the DMCA overturned.....
Think For Yourself. Question Authority.
From the article:
"The department discovered the misrepresentations and reported them to the FISA court beginning in 2000."
The year 2000 happens to fall under the Clinton Administration.
Of course, you were just trolling and the "truth" matters nothing to a troll.
No? Really? I am so surprised.
Best Slashdot Co
Please notice the court said that they were opposing the new procedures that Ashcroft wanted, based on the previous errors and lie. It sure would have been nice if the FISA court had acted or spoken up when those lies and errors occured, instead of now. The FISA court specifically opposed allowing the FBI to share intel data with criminal prosecutors without the courts permission. I agree with the FISA court - the idea is that this prevents the FBI from using secretive intel excuses to do snooping they could not do under regular rules, then come back and use it under the regular legal rules. Thus the fact that the FBI lied or mislead in the past is good evidence why they are right.
However - liberals like the Washington Post will not make any mention that many of the lies they told occured under the Clinton Administration. Don't you wonder exactly what cases they lied about? Probably just a right wing conspiracy anyway - I am sure that the Clinton administration never used the IRS or the FBI for their own political purposes; I am sure they did not illegally use INS databases to solicit votes from illegal aliens in California.
I am a republican, but I agree completely with the FISA court here. I don't want either party to give the FBI the kind of power they had under that crackhead Hoover. It's just too bad that most knee jerk liberals will blindly go along mumbling about Bush/Ashcroft without realizing the massive abuses that already occured previously under "their guy".
...and you people have the gall to be discussing the FISA court rebuking the FBI and Justice Department???? My *god*, people, GET SOME PRIORITIES!
While I agree with you that a load of shit is going on around the world (and always has been): it's imperative that you clean things up in your own house, regardless of what the neighborhood looks like. If you want to stand for civil rights and liberties, for justice and equal opportunities and oppose the idea police/military regimes you have to follow your own ideals. Otherwise they are worthless and "The Free World" becomes another meaningless term used for propaganda, political power struggles and disposal of the opposition (as it probably is right now, anyway). If you don't pay attention to our society's very foundation then our course is meaningless. And protection from arbitrary, unchecked wiretap is part of this foundation, we call it privacy. And no, privacy is not for terrorists only.
It seems to me that the terrorist have already won, as we (the citizens of the U.S.) are so cowardly that we will give up our freedoms for a bit of safety. And anyone who thought that the government wouldn't eventually abuse its increased powers was naive.
Its only the Ministry of Justice. And, there is only one real crime...
Isn't doing interviews what got Judge Jackson removed from the MS case?
I saw a Microshaft VisualStudio 60 Day Trial link on the top of the story!!!! Oh! The Horror!!
I cant imagine how many shrinks would be swamped today by slashdot geeks who wants to "just talk"
Also I would be leaving early today to witness porky pig flying over Atlanta.
Then again, I shouldnt be surprised since CNN reported today that Osama Bin Laden got his US Passport today.
Rapid Nirvana
Y'know, if Judge Jackson had NOT given interviews, the MS case might have been finalized by now. The appellate courts didn't overturn his Findings of Facts or guilty verdit. They didn't even say that his penalty was inappropriate. They merely said that his penalty *appeared* to be biased, based soley on the fact that he given interviews before the case was over.
-- Don't Tase me, bro!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Campaign finance reform, Corporate reform, Patriot act and similar legislation, our involvement in Israel/Palestine conflict...
It's all about trust. Until issues of trust are resolved, we will never get anywhere. and remember that actions -should- speak louder than words.
I'm glad that this judge has exposed these actions of the FBI. The next time the FBI says that it's ridiculous that any agent would abuse these broad powers given to them under the Patriot Act, we can just point to this example. The next time the FBI says that these powers are necessary in order to combat terrorism, just point to this example.
-Sorry, you gotta earn my trust! and you haven't been doing a very good job (referring to this administration). Talk is cheap.
Guess that hasn't been the case.
Refreshing.
No, it was commenting on an ongoing case that got his rulings partially overturned.
Expanding a vast wasteland since 1996.
As I understand it, the "next step" in the case is for the judge to get done thinking about the case, stand up and bitchslap Micro$oft clear into the middle of next year.
Isn't all the waiting we're doing supposed to be because Judge Colleen needs time to "think about it?" As far as I'm concerned, if she's got time to work for the the FISA, she doesn't need any more time to "think about" the M$ case.
Let's have a ruling, already!
I'm sure someone will be happy to point out how very little I understand the legal system.
Vortran out
Knowledge is like ignorance.. too much can be just as bad as not enough.
at least there is a court, instead of inteligence agencies going and doing domestic taps at their own free will. Also, this court has been around pre-9/11 anyway, it's nothing new. Remember how NSA said they needed approval before domestic intelligence? This is what they were referring to. It's nothing new, other than maybe the judge who's operating it.
heh guess what....the court has no power to enforce its findings. Oh wait its the executives job to inforce the law hmmm... I just wonder how the people will feel when GW and boys decided no get rid of the court all together.
so much for the system of checks and balances.
Free Unix? Free Windows. http://www.reactos.com
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
this pretty much sums it all up.
At what point did YRO turn into "Secret Court"??
And is it realy secret if we all know about it??
And does the fact that we know about it mean that we are all unknowing participants in this secret "Society"??
This and more on the Allaldo show.
The / in
This is hardly surprising, considering the FBI and Justice Department have always seen the ends to justify the means. The Justice Department, FBI, and CIA have always looked for loopholes in the law, pushed the limits of the constitution, and flat out broken the law in attempts to circumvent our right to privacy in order to obtain information about people. They seem to think that they have a right to know anything about any person at any point in time, and that their "right" to know pre-empts people's right to privacy because it's in the best interest of the country.
If you write an email that suggests something unpopular, or that you have considered (but not taken) a particular course of action, should the government step in as a "preventative measure"? Common sense says no, but is there a case you can think of where the ends justify the means? Case in point:
If the FBI had sought the right to tap the phones of the suicide bombers 3 days before Sept. 11th, but had no real evidence or reason to do this, could you have condoned it at the time, not knowing that it could have prevented the greatest domestic disaster in our lifetimes?
Basically, government agencies have tried to prey on the fears of Americans after 9-11 in order to achieve the greater flexibility in domestic espionage that they have always sought. Are they justified? I say no, because I believe that our personal liberties are inalienable. But some people believe that the sacrifice of certain freedoms is preferable to living in fear.
Thoughts?
-AAAWalrus
Horny Dog Software is pleased to announce a "stiff" new competitor in the Open Thighs Software free-and-easy OS area: PENIX!
PENIX uses all the latest and hottest (ahem) software packages to deliver the most satisfying desktop (or bed-top) experience possible. The XXX Window Manager has been completely rewritten from the ground up, and the new PERL-Necklace 6.0 binaries are included in the install package. Also present is the newest version of the "KY" text editor, and the RAPE (Remotely-Accessed PackagE) System for installing and removing packages.
Big rock-hard ISOs coming soon to a mirror near YOU!
Oh well you people get who you vote for (unless it was Gore).
"By comparison with that existing
today, all the tyrannies of the past were half-hearted and
inefficient. The ruling groups were always infected to some
extent by liberal ideas, and were content to leave loose ends
everywhere, to regard only the overt act and to be uninterested
in what their subjects were thinking. Even the Catholic Church
of the Middle Ages was tolerant by modern standards. Part of
the reason for this was that in the past no government had the
power to keep its citizens under constant surveillance. The
invention of print, however, made it easier to manipulate
public opinion, and the film and the radio carried the process
further. With the development of television, and the technical
advance which made it possible to receive and transmit
simultaneously on the same instrument, private life came to an
end. Every citizen, or at least every citizen important enough
to be worth watching, could be kept for twentyfour hours a day
under the eyes of the police and in the sound of official
propaganda, with all other channels of communication closed.
The possibility of enforcing not only complete obedience to the
will of the State, but complete uniformity of opinion on all
subjects, now existed for the first time."
"All the beliefs, habits, tastes, emotions, mental
attitudes that characterize our time are really designed to
sustain the mystique of the Party and prevent the true nature
of present-day society from being perceived. Physical
rebellion, or any preliminary move towards rebellion, is at
present not possible. From the proletarians nothing is to be
feared. Left to themselves, they will continue from generation
to generation and from century to century, working, breeding,
and dying, not only without any impulse to rebel, but without
the power of grasping that the world could be other than it is.
They could only become dangerous if the advance of industrial
technique made it necessary to educate them more highly; but,
since military and commercial rivalry are no longer important,
the level of popu lar education is actually declining. What
opinions the masses hold, or do not hold, is looked on as a
matter of indifference. They can be granted intellectual
liberty because they have no intellect. In a Party member, on
the other hand, not even the smallest deviation of opinion on
the most unimportant subject can be tolerated."
Ummmm...
/ == 'slash'
.sig a bit off?
\ == 'backslash'
now that we have that part straight, isn't your
What is your Slash Rating?
Clinton administration. No one blamed everyone's favorite narcissist, good old buddy Bill - directly.
say "make us".
Welcome to hell. (aka Republican USofA)
Fucking idiot people in this country make me sick, although people are fucking stupid everywhere so why should we be different.
In United States v. U.S. District Court, the Supreme Court used a two-part Fourth Amendment reasonableness test. It is doubtful whether the FISA review process satisfies the Court's first measure of the reasonableness of warrantless surveillance -- whether the citizens' interest in privacy and free expression are better served by a warrant requirement.
As much as I would love to blame Bush and Ashcroft...
This is the result of a slow and steady decline of our intelegence comunity since the end of the cold war.
"I'll have a Guinness, no wait, make that a Coors Light" -Grad student I work with, who shall remain anonymous...
She's an Capricorn, a natural blond with a GSOH, and her turns ons include long moonlit walks, back rubs, and putting the fear of god into arrogant, power abusing men.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
It's free and easy. I ordered mine yesterday.
Just say you request your file under the Freedom
of Information Act.
The only cost is that you have to get the request
notarized. It takes 2-3 months to process.
I just can't wait to see how much they have,
and how much is blacked out!
Bravo and well said.
Frankly, I went to read the parent post and honestly felt ill from how short sighted and stupid the AC was.
The idea of "it doesn't matter, because I didn't do anything wrong" is all very fine and dandy until you find out that trumped up charges are being brought up against someone you care about because they managed to piss off some minor bureaucrat. And that's exactly the kind of thing that happens in totalitarian regimes, and precisely what the Constitution is supposed to protect against.
"[Chief Justice] Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it." --President Andrew Jackson.
"John Marshall has made his decision. Let him enforce it now if he can." -- President Andrew Jackson, historical precedent and general all-around tough guy.
Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and
Y'know, if Judge Jackson had NOT given interviews, the MS case might have been finalized by now. The appellate courts didn't overturn his Findings of Facts or guilty verdit. They didn't even say that his penalty was inappropriate. They merely said that his penalty *appeared* to be biased, based soley on the fact that he given interviews before the case was over.
...
... Section 455(a) of the Judicial Code requires judges to recuse themselves when their "impartiality might reasonably be questioned." ...
Actually, they overturned quite a few of his rulings, but they decided not to throw out the Findings of Fact (which MS asked them to do). They ruled that the DoJ didn't make a strong enough case for several of the 'guilty' verdicts that Jackson handed down, and that the appearance of bias was reason enough to remove him from the case, and they overturned Jackson's Final Judgment. Furthermore, of those portions that were not outright overturned, many portions of the case are 'on remand', meaning that those portions of the case must be reheard before another ruling can be made based on those portions of the case (and as of yet they have not been).
As for the penalty:
We vacate the District Court's remedies decree for the additional reason that the court has failed to provide an adequate explanation for the relief it ordered.
The District Court has not explained how its remedies decree would accomplish those objectives. Indeed, the court devoted a mere four paragraphs of its order to explaining its reasons for the remedy.
Check for yourself (PDF) It's in section V.
Followed by Section VI. Judicial Misconduct:
All indications are that the District Judge violated each of these ethical precepts by talking about the case with reporters. The violations were deliberate, repeated, egregious, and flagrant.
(emphasis added)
I really wish more people would at least get a good first-hand overview of the 125 page document before they try to state what the court did and did not say. They might also understand why the DoJ changed their tune so quickly after the appeal if they looked over the portions of the case that were thrown out or remanded.
-PainKilleR-[CE]
"Ever wonder what Colleen Kollar-Kotelly is doing to pass the time while she waits for the next step in the Microsoft case?
Umm, No I don't think so. No I can say for certain it hasn't crossed my mind.
This space intentionally left blank.
If you find out she's the judge in your case, cry. By the way she handles M$ and the DoJ, I'm guessing she wakes up every morning with the same thought on her mind: "Whose ass am I going to kick today?" Excellent work, Colleen!
-- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
you might be surprised to find out that the FBI "often" uses rational reasons for implementing such things as solitary confinement. SURPRISE! definitely be afraid... perhaps citizens should be aware of those rights they are letting go of in the name of security.
thank you colleen kollar-kotelly! judges are the ones that generally make the diffference. an FBI rubber-stamp judge is a frightening abuse of power.
An AC wrote:
> The worst terrorist attack in recorded history
> occurred nearly a year ago,
Worst terrorist attack, yes. But no where near what it could have been. Nearly three thousand died. Many more were wounded. But in a tower complex that could have had up to 50,000 people in it, it is clear that the terrorist attack is only part of the story. The other part is the wisdom, courage and compassion of those who sacrified themselves, those who died in the line of duty, and ordinary people who helped each other. That part worked a shining miracle, saving tens of thousands. Those noble, heroic hearts put those heartless monsters to shame!
> followed by a Holy War against Islam,
9/11 had nothing to do with Islam. Since we are talking about the *World* Trade Center, you might keep in mind that good followers of Islam were murdered that day as well. That isn't Allah that Bin Laden is following. I don't care who he thinks his boss is, or how many Islamic poems he mutters. I'm sure Azi Dahaka gets a big kick out of being called "Allah" though. Right up there with "Great Devil that comes from the Sky" and Nostradamus's little nickname "King of Terror".
> and now Israel and the Palestinians as well as
> India and Pakistan are teetering on the brink of
> their own war,
Which is a really novel experience for them. Not.
> Argentina is in the midst of a financial crisis,
Yes, I know. My sympathies. Most of the world is having some kind of economic problems.
> America is considering launching attacks against
> Somalia and Iraq,
I've got a unique idea: how about we take down the Al Quada organization in all 60 countries before we add new enemies to our plate. But no, we must go after Saddam at all costs because he is using the "weapons of mass destruction" we gave him on an ethnic minority inside Iraq (kinda brings back memories of the Old West and those smallpox blankets). If there was honest hope of helping the Kurds, I might be more willing. But somehow I think any real humanitarian assistance is pretty far down on the list.
> and you people have the gall to be discussing
> the FISA court rebuking the FBI and Justice
> Department????
They need a good rebuking. Ashcroft needs to take the curtain off the statue of Justice and get reaquainted.
> My *god*, people, GET SOME PRIORITIES!
>
> The bodies of the thousands of innocent
> civilians who died (and will die) in these
> unprecedented events could give a good god damn
> about the FISA court rebuking the FBI and
> Justice Department (and I'm sure if they were
> still alive, they'd thank the wiretaps that
> could have saved their lives), your childish
> Lego models, your nerf toy guns and whining
> about the lack of a "fun" workplace, your
> Everquest/Diablo/D&D fixation, the latest Cowboy
> Bebop rerun, or any of the other ways you are
> "getting on with your life" (here's a hint:
> watching Cowboy Bebop in your jammies and eating
> a bowl of Shreddies is *not* "getting on with
> your life"). The souls of the victims are
> watching in horror as you people squander your
> finite, precious time on this earth playing
> video games!
>
> You people disgust me!
You disgust me, if your solution is to sit around quaking in terror. I will not dishonor the memory of those people by bowing to the will of their murderers!!! They want us to be terrified. It is the terror, not the deaths, that is the key to the definition of the word "terrorist". Anyone who huddles up in fear, drags the flag around for a security blanket, or uses the terror of 9/11 to further their quest for tyranny is basically inviting the King of Terror to come and put up a throne for himself in Washington D.C.
The terrorists took the right to Life away from people on 9/11. I will not surrender Liberty and Happiness too.
"Lola, kindness is not enough, look for the reason of hatred and anger.
When you find and understand that, love becomes the strongest power..."
Belabera, "Mothra 3: King Ghidora Attacks"
I have been feeling very bitter of late, watching the slide of America from democracy to corporate oligarchy and, finally toward corporate faschism.
... something all too many lower courts have seemed to be willing to do in any case regarding the aformentioned media cartels. Like you, I think of Judge Kaplan, or the supreme court's repayment of political debts to The Shrub in the last election, and my moment of optomism fades.
So much so that I have been seriously considering emigration, and have been giving a lot of thought to what metric I would use to determine the "drop dead" (ie. okay, no more delays, time to go) moment.
But this ruling is a rare breath of fresh air, and restores some of my faith in our tattered civil institutions. Not a great deal, mind you, but some. It is freightening to have two of the three branches of governmetn (legislative and executive) willfully and knowingly ignore the constitution in the persuit of their goals (howerver laudable [the eradication of terrorism] or despicable [the introduction of digital prohibition to prop up the media and copyright cartels]), but not nearly as freightening as it would be if all three branches had chosen to shred that venerable document
Nevertheless, this was a courageous and important act. A few more like this and we might actually save and reclaim our democracy. The odds are long, mind you, but the goal well worth persuing anyway.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
Real geeks use ProjectBuilder and InterfaceBuilder. Extra points for doing so on an original NeXT cube.
This is also the same administration that has given you secret military tribunals with little or no constitutional protections for the accused.
This is the same administration that imprisons individuals in secret for indefinite periods of time with no evidence or charges ever presented.
This is the same administration that wants to create a roaming death squad that would travel the globe murdering 'enemies' of the US.
This is the same administration that wants a return to the days of the J. Edgar Hoover's FBI abuses of private citizens and the McCarthy era witch hunts. (Bush's daddy used the FBI to harass groups protesting his central american policies.)
Bush is quite good at wrapping himself in the flag and preaching the virtues of freedom, but the fact is he is the biggest threat to freedom and to the security of this country that has come along in our the 236 year history. His lies, double dealing, and school-yard-bully mentality is alienating even our most supportive allies and generating plenty of reasons why someone would want to launch a terrorist attack against the US.
The sooner we're get him out of office, the safer we'll be.
no matter how many times i hear arguements like this, the point is always missed. I'm gonna use an analogy here, so don't read the first sentence and think i'm offtopic. Near where I work, there's a freeway interchange being built. The thing will take 5 or more years. If it takes five or more years to build an interchange, how much longer will it take to build and debug a governmental unit? FISA is not strictly a president thing, in the same way that it's difficult to tell how a president did economically until after their first term ends, regardless of whether they are the one in office at the time or not.
Regardless of this detail, the homeland security crap going on is the fault (yes, it is sheer folly to think that it's gonna work) of the media and the Federal Government in tandem. Our present government is reactionary due to the media forcing them to react to situations after the fact rather than while they occur or before. It becomes so bogged down trying to get media coverage of "we're doing something about it" that nothing gets done save for whatever it takes to get enough positive media coverage to get reelected by showing that you're fixing the problems after the fact (or making people think things are fixed which they're usually just slapped together with spit and bailing wire, accomplishing nothign more than a PR department's dream and a totalian's wet dream). This however is different. Checks and balances show that they're working and the media tries to beat the crap out of them for it.
C'mon, people. This shows that things are working somewhat. Don't take infringements on your rights to mean more security.
To quote Thomas Jefferson: "Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one."
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
Theoretically the CIA has no domestic jurisdiction, regardless of the citizenship of the suspect. The FBI is responsible for domestic counterintelligence.
... and she's deciding whether or not to accept the DoJ's capitulation in the case against Microsoft. And Microsoft has gone on the record several times claiming that judges have no power over them. (I hear this tends to piss off judges.) Why am I starting to smile?
Nope, no sig
While I agree with you that a load of shit is going on around the world (and always has been): it's imperative that you clean things up in your own house, regardless of what the neighborhood looks like.
Very well said.
It should be pointed out that the 3,000 deaths in New York, while tragic, are hardly a blip in the population.
We have had more than 50,000 people die in car accidents since then. All horribly mutilated, some burned beyond recognition, others decapitated, some crushed within the tin can that became their automobile, some crushed beneath the wheels of an oncoming car, and so on and so forth, ad nauseum. In short, each death was horrible, left behind it a wake of trajedy and grieving, and each represents a life that ended much sooner that it should have.
Yet we live with this stark reality every year, and few if any of us fear to climb into an automobile and drive to work.
The terrorists can scare us, can knock down a couple of buildings (as can a 5.0 richter earth quake, a big forest fire, or a wopping hurricane, and we get a lot more of those than we do terrorist attacks), but they cannot do us any real, significant harm!
Even the economic damage the fear they create is minimal. The markets had recovered virtually all of their 9/11 losses and the economy was on the upswing, until Enron, WorldCom, and a whole slew of other corrupt American executives and CEOs were caught with their hands in the life savings of the middle class, pilfering the nation's wealth for their own miserly gains. In the wake of such criminal behavior the markets and the economy tanked as every thinking person recognized and chose to avoid further opportunity for the wealthy to defraud them, and as a result of this behavior, and our governments neglect in regulating and preventing it, the economy now shows no signs of recovering, an unpleasant event that is entirely self-inflicted by greedy, rich CEOs and executives whose ethics died shortly after the umbelical was cut, and the tame politicians they've had in their pockets for the last twenty years. Such subhuman filth, who represent the highest, most priveleged economic class in America, are responsible for most of our economic troubles and hardships, not Osama and his flea-ridden, filthy followers.
Indeed, the terrorists, in contrast to our own corrupt officials, aren't even relevant.
That doesn't mean we shouldn't go around the world eradicating them and their followers wherever we find them, nor does it mean bin Laden's head wouldn't look good on a pike.
It does mean we shouldn't allow Aschcroft and his cronies to ride roughshod over the constitution, and that we shouldn't allow Bush Junior to use the country's military and spend our strength fighting Daddy's unfinished, and unrelated, battles a la Iraq.
Frankly, if the choice I'm given is between freedom with a 3,000 death/year terrorist pricetag, and an Orwellian society that maybe, perhaps, reduces that number to a few hundred, or even to zero, I'll take the three thousand deaths per year and keep my freedom thankyou very much. My car is far more likely to kill me than some towel-head Saudi fanatic hiding out with his donkey in some dirty cave in Afghanistan or Pakistan, and I'm not about to stop driving because of it.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
Comment removed based on user account deletion
This is ALL about YRO. Today, it may be wiretapping, but I assure you, they are tapping other stuff. It is only a matter of time before the new McCarthyists are reading and listening to EVERYTHING we do.
Anything you say will be held against you.
OK, this is way offtopic, I'll admit.
There has been a lot of discussion about refering to the New York Times for articles (due to the required registration), and the usual response is that the stories aren't available elsewhere.
Now we have a story that is submitted coming from the WP, and Michael has to throw in an entirely gratuitous link to th NYT again. Time to stop refering to those twits!
Come to think of it, my opinion of Michael goes down every time he adds something to a story, so much so that he's down to about 4JK[1] now. Time to start focusing on delivering the stories without the added commentary, Michael!
Bah. End of rant. Thanks for reading.
[1] The JK scale is a measure of an editor's relative worth vs. Jon Katz. All unknown editors start at 10JK (ten times as relevant, readable, and rational as J.K. himself) and move up or down, depending on performance. Once an editor drops below 2JK, he or she gets ignored.
"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
My uncle worked at the Geological Survey. I don't know the details, but the state declared the building seismically unsafe, the feds thumbed their nose at the state, the workers started a union. About the same time, LBJ started a "voluntary" $100 a month war bond for fed workers (1965? start of the Vietnam buildup). This was a huge amount back then, maybe $500 equivalent now. My uncle and some others got a local news report on it, which spread to the national network, and LBJ had to back down.
Somewhere in there, his phone was wiretapped (he heard lots of funny noises, clicks, voices) and the FBI nosed around his neighbors, friends, relatives, and co-workers.
For not wanting to work in a dangerous building, for starting a union, for not wanting to pay a $100/month tax. Nice reasons.
Okay.
The source for current information is the U.S. Courts website on wiretaps. This covers 1997-2001. Archival information (pre-1997) is available through the U.S. Gov't Printing Office.
What the FBI is allowed to do is summarized on the FBi Website FAQ. I quote the relavant question:
Q. Are FBI Special Agents permitted to install wiretaps at their own discretion?
A. No. Wiretapping is one of the FBI's most sensitive techniques and is strictly controlled by federal statutes. It is used infrequently and then only to combat the most serious crimes and terrorism. Title 18, United States Code, Section 2516, contains the protocol requiring all law enforcement officers to establish probable cause that the wiretaps may provide evidence of a felony violation of federal law. After determining if a sufficient showing of probable cause has been made, impartial federal judges approve or disapprove wiretaps. The approving judge then must continue to monitor how the wiretap is being conducted. Wiretapping without meeting these stringent requirements and obtaining the necessary court orders is a serious felony under the law.
Finally, this site is a good jumping off point for further information on wiretaps and Judicial oversight.
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
So let me get this straight, the definition of "Troll" is now "anyone who shares a view opposed by the majority"?
Maybe I was wrong...maybe those in power really are just out to destroy free speech for their own benefit. Thank you, moderators...you've shown me the light.
"I strongly urge both the faint of heart and the faint of butt to leave the room at this time."
- Strong Bad
It is because of people like you the 9-11 happened. I will not forget.
So that's what they're calling perjury, lies and fabrication of evidence? Why the hell haven't these agents been prosecuted?
This is exactly why we should NEVER have secret courts and secret evidence. I can't friggin' believe this is being allowed to happen here.
We select the people in executive and legislative branches, based upon how good they are at selling out. It sounds ridiculous, but it's true: the less trustworthy they are, they more we want them. It's because we still stupidly watch TV to be marketed their candidates, and the way to get on TV is to have lots of money, and the easiest way to have lots of money is to sell out.
When there are chokepoints (I hesitate to call them "monopolies") on one-to-many communication (candidates talking to voters), then democracy is its own enemy.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
Why wait for the Judges to decide that our government agencies are out of control and stomping all over the 4th Amendment? Our legislature authorized the Patriot Act. Our legislature can repeal it.
Bravo,
:-)
Excellent post, I love it when people put down my views and sediments EXACTLY, saves me from having to type
These antics are exactly what everyone was afraid of when Ashcroft was appointed in the first place.
Everyone? Who is this "everyone"? I defy you to come up with one Senator who said "This attorney general is going to have secretive wiretaps!" during the confirmation process.
The main problem Ashcroft's opponents had during his confirmation was that he was too pro-encryption. That is why I initially supported him during the confirmation process (I DON'T support him now).
BTW, most of abuses cited in the case were during the Clinton administration. Gee, for some reason you don't have a problem with those abuses.
From the Wash Post:
----
Secret Court Rebuffs Ashcroft
Justice Dept. Chided On Misinformation
" The department discovered the misrepresentations and reported them to the FISA court beginning in 2000."
----
Who was President in 2000?
Who was Atty Gen.in 2000?
Why does the article never mention this?
and you are a troll(and coward, anonymous one at that), and because of people like you 10M people can be slaughtered, or 10M can die of starvation and it's not even noted as big thing on the history books. like, 10M africans/chinese/whatever means nothing but 3k U.S.A citizens do, not to mention that it was not only usa that the attack was laid against, however, before this usa barely cared about terrorists because "they're not our problem, even though we are migrating ourselfs into every corner of the world". (10m is under the real figures on few cases)
t _one_arms_stash. usa is just once again doing inner politics with foreign politics, this is something that stinks about politics in usa.
usa is just part of america. and america is just part of the world. you still are more likely to die by the hand of your own countrymen than 'terrorists' in usa, not some shady terrorists countrymen, but by a regular friendly neighbourhood thug, given the size of usa it's surprising you don't have more homebrewn terror (oh yeah, you do but it's not terror).
usa has been extremely hysteric, and calling everything it's got on 'war on terrorism', except this war on terrorism is just war against certain 'rogue states', or they'd be doing something more concrete to stop ira/westbank/baski/that_greek_group_that_just_los
for **** sake, i just visited spain, and read there on location on the newspaper about 'summer of terror', apparently there had been few bombings this summer, did i start screaming and take the first transportation out because 'OMG, TERRORISTS'? no. it didn't even surprise me, it's a mediterranean country after all.
to keep this post somewhat up to the original topic, usa should firstly issue wiretapping as mandatory in big corporations so that they don't go do _very_ _stupid_ _things_, you _always_ get caught of accounting counterfeiting.
on other news pakistan turned itself into dictatorship and usa didn't even blink.
if this rant won't get me to negative karma i wonder what..
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
ok great speech bravo!. getting on soapbox... so you say "it's imperative that you clean things up in your own house" fine, no problem with that but a house divided will fall and the geek community is not on the same page.
you say "If you want to stand for civil
rights and liberties, for justice and equal opportunities and oppose the idea
police/military regimes you have to follow your own ideals." good but, following your ideals wont work- good intentions is not enough maybe for that rare person who will stop at nothing and willing to pay the price. to many of us wont go that far or stick it out and when it begins to cost... well? who will stand with you?
your "worthless" statement has a point not every ideal or your own personel creed isn`t worth much if you don`t practice what you preach. however noble it sounds peoples own ideals are not all based for the good of humanity hitler proved that. so untill people can agree on what is good and hold to be the "TRUTH", what ground work are you building your decree on? a new lie built to replace an old lie is still a lie when you consider the source people are flawed and very self centered.
so who`s going to pay attention? who here hasn`t bought something made in china? so we all give them are money while they are laughing and pointing nukes at us. yeah, i shure feel secure knowing somone`s grandma is being stripped search at the airport in the name of " national security and law enforcement for the safety of the public"
do you decry what MPAA and RIAA are doing? shure you do a lot of other people posting here do as well. what are you doing about it? do you go to the movies? if so, aren`t you defeating yourself and helping make things worse? remember you have to count the cost if you want to stand on princple and be true to your word... getting of soapbox.
No need to wait 3 months. Here is your FOIA report.
Name: Anonymous Coward
Sex: M
Age: 28
Distinguishing Features: Numerous pimples
Address: His mom's basement
Number of times subject seen actual female genetalia: 0
Number of dates subject has been on: 0
Subject is a loser Lunis user. Has inflated sense of importance and intelligence. Spends all day in mother's basement. Subject seems to be "playing with his Gnome settings" the entire time. Nothing of interest here.
I just got a TV in my house beacuse a friend needed a place to store it. I've not used a T.V. since Highschool (15 years ago). Since I got cable TV with my order for high-speed internet (and they hooked it up to my TV without even asking) I started to watch a bit. It is actually quite disturbing. All this talk of Terrorism and ignoring core issues. It seems like the powers that be a priming the public.
You can not quote exceprts from historically significant literature and use them to place relevant and insightful thoughts into the brains of other people (see 1984 EULA sec 256.1.0.2.4) even if said people have a valid license (to view and store in their short term memory only) the copyrighted material in question.
You have been reported to the Book Publisher Industry Assosiation (BPIA) and will be prosecuted for copyright violations and failure to uphold corporate profits.
Please stay by your computer while we send the authorities to pick you up for reeducation.
Sad really. Just because you live in your mom's basement doesn't mean you're a loser (and it's linux not linux).
the point I was trying to make (at least 1 person read it :) was with Gore we at least had a shot at having freedoms not trampled on (note I too think it's doubtful), instead of knowing from the start we're fucked.
That is the difference.
interesting pseudonym. . . and very well-written article.
Your writing is great - you can find a compadre or two over at www.e-thepeople.org . There are quite a few folks there who write highly-considered articles and who enjoy real intellectual debate. Of course they have their trolls. . but no too many.
I don't run the site (although I've met those who do). . . it is just a suggestion - you can probably add to an already smart crowd there.
President can make a mockery of the legal system - a system which serves as the foundation for our government, spawn a generation of kids who think that oral sex isn't sex, and not but three years later be entertaining contract offers that would make him the highest paid talkshow host in the history of television, this shouldn't surprise anyone. There's far too little accountability, and with respect to Clinton, absolutely no sense of shame.
Where in the US Constitution does it decree the use of "secret courts" to rule on "sensitive materials" deemed to private for US Citizens awareness?
President can make a mockery of the legal system - a system which serves as the foundation for our government, spawn a generation of kids who think that stealing from stockholders isn't stealing, and not but a few years later be awarding huge government contracts to his crooked vice president's ex-company, this shouldn't surprise anyone. There's far too little accountability, and with respect to Bush, absolutely no sense of shame.
Wow, that was easy.
Hmmm. The bias is showing here, their legs are spread wide. How could anyone actually believe that Ashcroft had anything to do with this considering he was running for Senate re-election at that time? Come on...we all know that good 'ol Bubba Clinton and bulldyke Janet "Child Killer" Reno were still in charge in the year 2000.
I find it amusing how the ultra left publications such as the Washington Post will go to such lengths to tar and feather the current administration. The headline is a complete LIE and they know it. They must think everyone has their heads up their asses like they do.
This woman seems to wield a lot of power over both individual citizens and major corporations.
;)
I would like to know more about her.
Well, she's certainly not a MILF, if that's what you're asking.
Disclaimer: I haven't actually seen her. I just needed an excuse to use the term MILF on Slashdot.
-Ryan, with the unoriginal sig
I don't want to depreciate the fine responses here, but this troll has been posted almost every day except for a short lull at about midpoint between 9/11 and the anniversary. I expect the frequency to increase over the next two weeks.
Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly
Judge Kollar-Kotelly was appointed to the United States District Court in May 1997. She received a B.A. in 1965 from The Catholic University of America and a J.D. in 1968 from Columbus School of Law, The Catholic University of America. Following law school, she served as law clerk to Judge Catherine B. Kelly of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals. From 1969 to 1972, Judge Kollar-Kotelly was an attorney in the Criminal Division of the U.S. Department of Justice and then served as the chief legal counsel to Saint Elizabeths Hospital until 1984. She was appointed Associate Judge of the D.C. Superior Court in October 1984, and served as Deputy Presiding Judge of the Criminal Division from 1995 until her appointment to the federal bench. Judge Kollar-Kotelly has been a Fellow of the American Bar Association, a founding member of the Thurgood Marshall Inn of Court, an adjunct professor at Georgetown University School of Medicine in a joint teaching program on mental health and the law, and chair of the Board of the Art Trust for Superior Court.
Pretty impressive.
So you're advocating helping to replace the dictators willing to sell us oil with populists that would refuse on principle to sell us oil? Man, I hope you don't own an SUV... Look, we support dictators when we see them as beneficial to us. Then, when they do something to demonstrate they are not beneficial to our interests (like invading Kuwait, fer instance) then we bomb them. Got it now?
Yes, the measure of true integrity/morality is doing what is right even if it adversely affects us... but that doesn't get you re-elected. On idealistic terms, I agree with you. Unfortunately the world is corrupt and unfair and in practical terms it doesn't work that way.
"Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney
What makes you think the media is biased in favor of liberals? Oh, the media has been telling you that. For what it's worth, most liberals think the media is biased on favor of conservatives. Conservatives think the media is biased in favor of liberals. Supporters of third parties think the media is biased in favor of the major parties.
I don't think the media cares one way or the other whether democrats or republicans run the country. All they care is that the election is close. The closer the election, the easier it is for the media to shift the election one way or the other. If the media can shift the election, guess whose agenda the winning politicians will support?
The media puts this out now, hoping get the people thinking Bush/Ashcroft bad, Democrats good.
The media put this out now because it's big news and it just became public. Most newspapers left out the Janet Reno reference because they were too lazy/stupid/cheap to look it up.
Besides that, you can rest assured that as soon as a Democrat becomes president, we will hear 'confessions' about the countless abuses of the Bush/Ashcroft administration.
That of course is precisely the problem. Especially when being a member of a group peacefully protesting when another member of the group has thrown a rock winds up branding you a terrorist even though your actions are peaceful.
If throwing rocks through government office windows in order to change policy isn't terrorism, why not step up to Molotovs? Little chunks of lead? Where do you draw the line?
It's a fair question, but it is loaded in this context, since any political group can easily be branded "terrorist" by an act of violence that takes place during a protest, whether or not committed by one of its members. The problem lies in the notion of "terrorism" itself, which licenses severe responses. Should someone who violates (for example) the embargo on Cuba get 20 years in prison? The Marin County kid who joined the Taliban got precisely that, for violating sanctions on Afghanistan, not because his "crime" was worth 20 years of punishment, but because he joined a "terrorist" group. I have no argument with the Taliban being branded as such, but what about domestic nonviolent groups who participate in protests such as Seattle, where isolated acts of violence did occur. Is any act of vandalism terrorism if used in a political context? What about political graffiti? How long before Mothers Against Drunk Driving gets branded as a terrorist group when someone spray paints "Don't Drink and Drive" across a bridge?
When someone is displeased with the good fortune of others, we call this envy. What I'm curious about is why people are so envious. That's where the cultural differences thing came in.
I'm happy to pay more taxes (both monetarily and as a percentage of income) than my collegues in the next cubicle who earn less than half my salary
I don't come from a wealthy family by any means and don't have a lot of money now (I'm just out of school and am trying to figure out how to make a living) but when I hear that a tax cut benefits someone other than me, I'm happy! The rich aren't the enemy--the government is the enemy. And anytime someone gets some of their own money back from the government, I'm happy because it's a little victory for all of us.
Now, I would certainly like to have *bigger* victories; to wit, seeing *everyone's* taxes reduced. But I seriously doubt that anyone in Washington shares my opinion on that--Republican or Democrat. :-)
LOLlololoLOLOLLololololLOLOLololoLOLOlolrfolLOLrof lLOLOLroLOLOLforlfolrolforlfolroflrofllrooflLOLOLO OOL
So fukin happy i'm not an american.
LOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLLLLLLO
OK, so quick pop quiz: which of the two (Marshall and Jackson) is still cited in court cases?
Marshall. But of course nobody would cite somebody that set aside a judicial decision, when trying to make their case in court :) It's only the Executive who would refer to the Jackson precedent, and in this day and age they probably wouldn't get away with it.
Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and