Slashdot Mirror
Pentagon Seeks A Loophole In The Privacy Act
CygnusXII writes "As reported over @ wired.com. It seems that Homeland Security isn't the only govermental body wanting to keep a database on the good old U.S. population. 'The bill would allow Pentagon intelligence agents to work undercover and question American citizens and legal residents without having to reveal that they are government agents. That exemption currently applies only to law enforcement officials working on criminal cases and to the CIA, which is prohibited from operating in the United States.' Kinda adds a whole new meaning to 'We want you!', or should it be 'We want all your secrets'?"
That exemption currently applies only to law enforcement officials working on criminal cases...
Which is to say that the DoD is trying to get into the subject area that is presently the property of the FBI along with state and local police forces. It's not that this kind of work can't be done by the US Government, but that the wrong division is asking to do it.
The DoD runs our armed forces... they are not designed for law enforcement and when they are asked to do so they usually do a poor job of it. This provision in the law should be stricken and replaced with more funding to the FBI and other police forces so that the people who should be gathering info on US soil can continue to do so correctly.
Uhm..
-They set us up the database!
-All your secrets are belong to us
Slashdot Sig. version 0.1alpha. Use at your own risk.
Secrets? I haven't had any secrets for 3 years now.
Because /. hasn't gotten around to renaming the category to "Rights you used to think you had". *ducks*
First the start taking over foreign policy, now law enforcement...?? What's next for the DoD? (Patriotic) education? Will American kiddies have to start going to camp wearing red, white, and blue scarves?
People say I'm crazy, I got diamonds on the soles of my shoes...
Pentagon officials say the exemption would not affect civil liberties and is needed so that its agents can obtain information from sources who may be afraid of government agents, such as a green-card-holding professor of nanotechnology who formerly lived under a repressive government.
We're getting there....
"There is no teacher but the enemy."-Mazer Rackham
"...to question American citizens and legal residents without having to reveal that they are government agents"
So some asshole comes up to you and starts questioning you about Al-Qaeda, but doesn't say he's FBI. Either its blindingly obvious that he is, or you tell him to fuck off.
I can see it now:
"As you can see, Mr. Anderson, we've had our eye on your for some time now. Ignore the shades, and the earpieces, and the official-looking, unnaturally clean sedan we're driving, we're NOT government agents. We need your help to find a certain "individual". You want to waste your day talking to us, since of course we cannot compel you to, since we're not government agents, don't you, Mr. Anderson? Since we're not government agents, you're more likely to tell us what you know, since we're just regular guys who happen to have cornered you, dragged you into our car, and want to chit-chat about Al-Qaeda. m-kay?"
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
But if that doesn't scare you, what about the prospect of a United States getting what is effectively yet another intelligence agency in the middle of a war between the existing two?
I dismissed this article, about the author of this book as a little overstretched last week - but the more I look around the more real it seems.
Ok, so now I'm being hattish...
I'm sorry, but if someone wants to ask me questions, and they A) aren't wearing a police uniform or B) identify themselves as law enforcement/criminal investigators, I'm not saying jack.
Well, We have this, traffic light cameras, security cameras everywhere, probably tracking via cell phone and GPS, personal and rental cars with built in GPS, grocery store coupon cards, etc... Where will it end? I guess it probably won't ever stop. Data mining is becoming the hot feature of buisnesses and goverments. Is it still worth the fight for privacy? If you abide by the laws, then there shouldn't be any problems.
I'm sure there are people out there that detest all the personal surveillance, but if a crime is committed and caught on tape, I think it should be used to prosicute the criminal. I personally don't want to be tracked everywhere I go, but if I was mugged in an alley, I would hope a camera would catch the criminal. It would bring some justice to me and *help* to justify the big brother tactics.
--
Please submit any spare Gmail invitations that you might have
"Pentagon officials say the exemption would not affect civil liberties and is needed so that its agents can obtain information from sources who may be afraid of government agents, such as a green-card-holding professor of nanotechnology who formerly lived under a repressive government."
And this is supposed to make him feel better how? By HIDING the fact that he's talking to a government agent?
You're right. The DoD is not designed for law enforcement. And there is no reason for the DoD to have undercover agents checking on US citizens (and legal residents).
Do you really want Military Intelligence officers spying upon US citizens on US soil?
From the article:
"In February, Army intelligence agents improperly sought information about attendees at a University of Texas law school conference about Muslim women. Conference organizers refused to provide a videotape of the event to the officers and publicized the request, leading to an apology by the Army."
The only way to keep the government honest is to keep it open.
Well, they probably understand the concept of privacy very well. It's just that they want to want to cover their asses legally. As an example of this, look at the current US administration (and Pentagon) handling of the concept of torture :
When one starts examining the defence of convicted war criminals in order to avoid prosecution, I think someone should be paying attention.
Namely keeping records of their civilians.
Stasi (former Eastern Germany) / Gestapo (former 3rd Reich)
Of course all in the name of security.
Privacy is terrorism.
...or the KGB, eh?
The problem with your "the more the merrier" claim is that you have cooperation problems, turf wars, etc...
We already have turf wars between the FBI and the CIA. Do we really want to add in a third party? Is that also a case of "the more the merrier"?
Be a PATRIOT--because the only thing we have to fear is the lack thereof.
What needs to be done is very active campaigning regarding privacy and civil rights, and why it is so important to preserve these rights and never ever give them up, especially now that there is this "war against terrorism." And it has to be done in a way that the above-mentioned people can understand.
People say I'm crazy, I got diamonds on the soles of my shoes...
How about one day you're hanging out at a bar, and you meet a girl who seems really friendly, you get along, and you start to go out. You happen to be a writer, and one day your typewriter breaks, and guess what? she happens to have a typewriter she can give you! Then you find out a year from now that the typewriter is bugged and records everything you write ...
This is what happened to Philip Agee, CIA defector, in Paris. A long and elaborate ruse involving gaining his trust and a series of 'accidental' occurrences seemingly unrelated. But that was done outside of the US, where warrants aren't necessary and it's basically just espionage.
Do you really want this kind of thing to be able to happen domestically? No constitution, no bill of rights, no need for warrants, no need for transparency--just all out domestic espionage operations.
The rich who rule over and dictate our lives fear that you are a terrorist and will possibly cause harm to beverly hills.
You are now a suspect because you are poor and have no voice (no money)
Vote the Republicans out of office based on their ACTIONS.
Does this look like LESS GOVERNMENT?
I cant beleive the amount of brainwashed republicans out there who go fuck crazy over their $300 tax return. "its your money" Yeah well "It's your country" and look at what these folks are doing to it!!!
These are not republicans.
Vote Bush Out!
And the dems are just as currupt, but i think they're learning a little.
Frankly in an ideal world we would have a 3rd party president win this election. Someone like Nader. Someone who is completely seperate from the two party system that is bought and paid for buy the enrons, the fords, the mcis, the halleburtons, krafts, aols, etc...
I'd vote for a fucking steel worker from PA if he was running. Oh yeah we dont really manufacture much of that anymore here in america.
...and I have plenty to hide.
People say I'm crazy, I got diamonds on the soles of my shoes...
It really is quite sad.
The government can raid my house, throw me in prison, and ruin my life - all in the name of national security. It's an extremely disturbing thought.
Big government / brother is not science fiction anymore, it is a reality. It's disturbing, to say the least. RFID imbedded in to everything you buy, is just the next step. This database doesn't suprise me in the least. They've kept records for years, it's what they do.
I live in illinois, it's a police state. I've already been fined several hundreds of dollars for jaywalking, and owning a NOT USED, CLEAN, TOBACCO pipe. You are guilty until proven innocent, around here.
I'm 24, an american, and I want to leave. This is a nightmare. A law may come in to fruition, that if I leave and a draft is reinstated, I will be sent back here and possibly thrown in jail, or be forced to serve for a country I don't believe in. We aren't all greedy capitalist pigs, you know. Some of us are actually decent human beings.
I hate to be such a pessimist, but if you live in the states, your life is going to be more difficult, and if anything - MORE dangerous than it is now. Throw a wrapper out of the window of your car? You could be signaling terrorists that are on the side of the road planting IED's. Think i'm joking? Just wait. It's a pretty far fetched example, but with this administration, would you expect anything else?
How can anyone fail to understand the massive threat we are under? We don't have time to consider the consequences - this is a time for ACTION! We are at WAR!
"But wasn't there only one attack, and wasn't that three years ago?" you say?
"Are you a freaking communist?!" I say!
Pansy countries like England, who faced IRA terrorist attacks from the IRA for decades, never managed to secretly detain suspects for years. Wimps. They never even bothered to monitor the books and magazines their citizens were reading!
As usual, America is showing how to do things right!
"If you abide by the laws, then there shouldn't be any problems."
That is correct, citizen.
Only those who oppose the government seek "privacy" and they only want "privacy" so they can plot to overthrow the government.
The government is your friend.
The government takes care of you.
Good citizens trust the government.
The government would never support a bad law.
(slavey)
The government respects all of its citizens.
(women's sufferage)
Only terrorists oppose the government.
Only terrorists seek "privacy".
Only terrorists oppose the Law.
"If you abide by the laws, then there shouldn't be any problems."
The government welcomes the support of good, concerned citizens such as yourself.
"We need to stop looking at terrorism as a crime issue and realize it is a National Security/War issue."
That's right! Everyone! Please REMEMBER to NOT VOTE FOR OSAMA IN NOVEMBER. Terrorist forces are only MONTHS away from overthowing the US government and forcing ALL US CITIZENS to attend Islamic schools!
"He is fighting a war, not shoplifting."
The same as various mafia families fight "wars".
The same as various drug gangs fight "wars".
More US citizens die from drug-related crime than from terrorists.
Terrorism can be reduced by simply applying the same techniques that law enforcement does. Track the money. That's how all of those other terrorist cells have been found in Europe.
There is a reason why under the Geneva conventions, it is illegal for a soldier to operate dressed as a civilian. Because the laws and customs of war are based on the assumption that war is carried out by combatants who make themselves obvious in one way or another as combatants. In guerrilla war, people become obvious combatants when they attack, or when they are searched in a known war zone and found likely to be combatants based on having lots of grenades or whatever.
A 'terrorist' on the other hand, is defined as 'anyone who the State Department says is a terrorist'. If we were to use your logic and treat terrorists as 'enemy soldiers', then that would mean the ability of the authorities to shoot on sight anyone classified by the Department of State as a terrorist. But how do you identify a terrorist--unless he is packing weapons or you find out about his plans?
The fact is this is *not* a war. The USA is *not* a combat zone, any more than London was a combat zone when IRA attacks were frequent. Terrorism is political crime, but it is crime nonetheless--not carried out by a sovereign state subject to treaty law, not carried out by centralised organisations with clearly defined hierarchies, and most importantly it is damn near impossible to identify a terrorist 'combatant' until it is obvious that they are going to actually carry out an act of terrorism.
And the State Department has already decided that loads of people are terrorists who do not fit this criterion--for example anarchists, like a 14-year-old kid I knew who was arrested and interrogated by the FBI because he had an anti-war leaflet in his bag at the airport, and added to the 'terrorism list' before they let him off.
Who is an enemy soldier is a very clear question. Who is a 'terrorist' however is an extremely subjective judgement. And by your logic my 14-year-old friend should have been shot on sight, or at least taken to a POW camp for indefinite detention and military trial.
The world is not different to what it was before 2001, terrorism has existed for hundreds of years, the difference is that it's being used as an excuse for the biggest crackdown on opposition in the west and in fact in the larger world since the 1930s.
First, I applaud you having the guts to say something that is going to almost certainly get you modded down: slashdot isn't a haven for posts that suggest that privacy isn't the primal need in the world. Its just a need, to some degree or another.
However, the problem you're discussing is massively more complex than you're realizing: true, terrorists think they're fighting a war. However, they are most certainly not. A war is a conflict between nations - political entities that not only make themselves available for communication, but who hold physical territory. Terrorists such as Al-Queda hold no land which is their nation, but rather are hosted by friendly nations such as Saudi Arabia (our partner in peace, of course). As such, terrorists are able to engage in 'military' attacks which cannot be reciprocated (find me a tower full of civilian al-queda, please...). In a war, all attacks are potentially reciprocal (within the limitations of comparative wealth, size, obviously). This reciprocity serves as a form of restraint on the actions of nations, limiting their willingness to commit atrocities*.
Because terrorists by definition need not fear reciprocation, nor [in the case of Islamic extremists] do they fear suicidal missions, they cannot be dealt with by traditional or by-and-large existing military methods. Rather, they must be approached in the same manner as which domestic terrorists [a la the Unabomber] are: a combination of military and police intelligence and effort.
While I don't agree with the need for this ability for the CIA (since the FBI and local law enforcement have can fulfill this function so long as they're properly trained/breifed), I do agree with their reasoning for the nature of the 'war'.
*: Yes, obviously Russia, Italy, Germany and the rest of the Axis committed atrocities [purges of all types], as some would argue we did [Japanese internment, Dresden, Nagasaki]. However, those nations who knew they were atrocities kept them hidden, while those 'atrocities' which are debateable are obviously excempt.
"Stumble before you crawl"
Not again.... Look, that's just fucking retarded. Should everyone open their lives to gevernment scrutiny? How about the motherfucker who doesn't have a SS number and isn't trackable? How do you propse to spy on him if he "doesn't exist?" Come on. Any system like this is flawed and only harms the law-abiding. Criminals are not stupid. Terrorists are not stupid. They will find a way to do their business regardless of the magnitudes of purported anti-terrorist systems we employ. How about solving the real problem? The United States should stop fucking around in other countries back yards for a change. Stop pissing off people, and maybe they won't come back and blow your shit up.
Slashdot is proof that Sturgeon's Law applies to mankind.
Unless you are ordered to by a judge under agreement of protection, you dont have to say boo to anyone...
So.. i suggest that if ANYONE asks you questions, you politly decline. If they turn out to be feds, then they will have to take you to court to get anything out of you.
Cant trust anyone.. BB is watching..
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Man, Victoria's going to be pissed.
Oh well, I guess her secret has been out of a while now anyway:
Victoria's Secret Revealed (big pic)
Matt Fahrenbacher
James Tiberius Kirk: "Spock, the women on your planet are logical. No other planet in the galaxy can make that claim."
The Posse Comitatus Act is what currently prevents the military from being used for law enforcement purposes.
Go not unto/. for advice, for you will be told both yea and nay (but have nothing to do with the question)
Really just a natural extension to
...
Poindexter's TIA (Total Information
Awareness) project (which lives!)
I could have sworn that the only
military arm that has ANY LEGAL
DOMESTIC charter is the Nat. Guard.
Once DoD gets involved in domestic law
enforcement investigations, the next
step is assigning "political officers"
to each brigade, just like the Nazis
and Stalinists, as well as "Cuban-style"
neighborhood watch/informers
Oh, wait, we already have that bit with
the establishment of the HSA, via phone,
letter, or website. (Amaze your friends,
and strike fear into your neighbors:
file a suspicious report against them
and watch the fun ensue as various Fed
agencies trip all over themselves trying
to "score" the next "big terrorist plot".)
Don't think that the Patriot Act & HSA
are not being used to counter domestic
political opposition: that has already
happened when FAA, FBI, & HSA got involved
in the search for the "missing" Texas
Democratic legislators, as well as the
computer server "breakins" at the US
Senate.
These bastards that have taken over the
government all swore an oath to protect
the US Constitution and Bill or Rights.
Their actions already qualify them (IMO)
for impeachment and trial (and prison).
How hard is it going to be to get these
"national socialists" voted out of office?
(Especially considering their $6 billion USD
initiative for "upgrading to eVoting" ?
If someone stops me for questioning under the color of law, I immediately ask for ID, even if it's a police officer in uniform in his squad car. I've gotten a lot of hostile responses to that, even though I'm well within my rights. In these days of ID theft, I'm sure as hell not going to hand over my ID to any shmoe that says he's law enforcement.
A friend of mine has an even more interesting time: he has no ID. He doesn't even have an SSN. When it comes down to federal goons breaking down doors, he'll be the toughest one to find.
There is a difference between "insightful" and "inciteful" other than spelling.
... the do so at their peril. Just following orders is no excuse to engage in supporting despotism. The possee comitatus act allows for the military to be used in extreme circumstances inside the united states, so it becomes a matter of interpretation on a case by case basis. You are required to follow orders, but not illegal orders. The commander in chief does not have a blank check in these matters, although current thinking and actions by the military tend to indicate they don't understand this very well,(don't *want to understand it* is more my opinion), and your two examples ARE examples of it being abused, yet the orders got followed. Pity. Bad precedents after bad precedents. Following illegal orders puts you outside your oath, because if the person issuing you the order is doing so illegally, you must not follow it, and any citizen being persecuted by this illegal order has the moral and legal remedy of resisting whatever is being forced upon him. that's in the laws as well as all the other stuff.
Anecdotal but a few years ago my nephew, a career army nco, quit. He refused to re up despite being offered a huge amount of cash to do so. He is not very political,never was as far back as I can remember, but he told me he simply refused to go along with what he knew was coming, martial law,dictatorial military rule, and especially he didn't agree with what they were trying to brainwash him into, which is that the second amendment is only a government granted privelege, not a born with right, and that only regular military, the guard, and selected civilian police have any "right" to keep and bear. He also said it was rare to hear the term "civilian" without it being part of "fingcivilian" to help get that mindset established, part of a demonisation processs, similar to what police are undergoing today. The stories he related to me indicated that that is an on-purpose aspect, an indoctrination they are carrying out for the future. My personal opinion is that it is an accurrate assessment of his,because I haave heard correlating anecdotals based on talking to a number of other individuals I know who were serving. He was instructing at west point at the time, and I tell you, I was shocked. Here's a young man who liked baseball, girls, 4 wheel drives and hunting, and it was his interest in guns and hunting and being exposed to some gunrights information, etc, before he joined that clued him into what was going down. He did NOT want to quit, he had purposely gone in directly out of high school,just like his father way back, my BIL, but he stuck to his principles and did, he wanted nothing to do with todays new "follow any orders no matter what" army.
I think the trends are ominous, and I am not exaggerating when I will state I feel the USA in 2004 has more parallels with mid 30's germany than most people want to admit to right now.
It seems that for some strange reason I've been using the word "Orwellian" allot in the last three and a half years. I'm not going to venture a guess as to why...
Seriously though, it's funny how utterly apathetic people are these days. People bandy about the term "freedom" but as long as they have the "freedom" to buy things people don't seem to care about the rest of it. A minority talk about what rights are slipping away, but still cast the valiant few who take to the streets as hippies and whackos. It's sick really.
What is it going to take for it to be too much? Seriously, stop and think about what exactly the government would have to do for you to be willing to do more than talk. Then think about how effective your protest will be if it gets bad enough for you to protest at all. Will you wait for a total suspension of civil liberties? Mass arrests? Until there are turrets on the street corners and "papers" required to move across state lines? Seriously. I want to say that people need to do something now, but the truth is that people needed to do something a year and a half ago. I'm not talking about revolution or anything... just make the dissenting voices impossible to ignore by adding your own.
The current administration isn't ready (yet) to start ignoring elections and the army wouldn't follow orders from people who lost elections. So go out and freaking VOTE! And then make it clear to the people you get put in that they're there to fix things. Politicians want job security because it takes more than a couple of terms in office to really secure the personal fortune. Make them fix things or throw the buggers out.
In 1981, then President Reagan signed Executive Order 12333, which reverses a number of the controls that were put in place in 1973.
Here is a link to the text of the executive order:
http://www.tscm.com/EO12333.html
- AC
Wouldn't such a bill that allows government agents to not reveal their government employment also help crooks? Now they too could question potential victims and obtain very sensitve data and go under the disguise of a government agent saying "I'm sorry I can't reveal that. Its clanssified". And how would we be able to verify their identity? We can't even complain in some situations. If this bill is passed to law it would really help social engineering, and screw the rest of us. What are the repercussions for Canada? Will we have to comply through our various pacts and treaties?
--
Registered .sig quotient : 1337
hi,
Why can't we just start keeping tabs on the as many official in the DoD that we can? Keep our own open databases and what-not? Have it open and published on the internet. If it's legal to obtain certain records, then we should obtain them and post them.
A similar event occured in California. The CA DMV did not restrict who was allowed access to its driver license database and did not restrict what could be done with the information. Well, some individuals obtained records on the entire state legislature and published it to the net. They changed the laws after that.
sTc
Most things worth doing are worth doing twice. -- me I think or was that my boss' methodology?