Exception Expands Domestic Surveillance

drDugan writes "The Washington Post is reporting the next phase of American progress authorizing intelligence agencies to spy on law-abiding citizens without oversight. Primarily, new legislation allows an 'intelligence exception' to the privacy act 'allowing the FBI and others to share information gathered about U.S. citizens with the Pentagon, CIA and other intelligence agencies, as long as the data is deemed to be related to foreign intelligence. Backers say the measure is needed to strengthen investigations into terrorism or weapons of mass destruction.'"

Comments

The funny thing about McCarthy...

[daveschroeder]

...was that there actually were high ranking US government officials who were Soviet spies, including some paid by the Soviets.

If you think that's a good thing (or that ignoring it is a good thing), then we probably won't see eye to eye...

I mean, if you shouldn't try to stop people who are paid by your national enemies, or who espouse the core political and ideological ideals of your national enemies, then why even have nations and borders? If any national government is legitimate, it stands to be protected, else, what is its purpose?

Re:The funny thing about McCarthy...

[daveschroeder]

I agree with everything you said about the Red Scare. The oaths, and associated similar crap, do NOTHING. I wasn't arguing they did.

And I'm not trying to use a strawman argument. But your implication with your McCarthy statement ("bend over") was clear. How else should that be taken? And the thing always ignored about McCarthy was that he was *right*. I'm NOT saying that the ensuing methods and madness were appropriate.

But once we found and suspected paid Soviet spies in government and press, including some high posts, what should our reaction have been?

Effective oversight

[nuggz]

The problem isn't with the power given to the government. They already have the power, they can take everything you think you own and kill you, your family and every aquaintance you've ever had.

All legally and within their rights.

The only thing protecting you is effective and independant oversight. The thing that I think is becoming more important globally is having bodies capable of proper oversight and supervision.

I think the government can effectively do this themself, given the proper tools and an understanding of the grave importance of proper oversight.

Part of this oversight is proper supervision by management of the actual participants, internal auditing. (Think police, their management structure and internal affairs)
Secondly there is a second layer of outside supervision. think courts for both convicting criminals, and for supervising the use of special powers ie search warrants.
Thirdly elected officials.
Last (but not least) the freedom of speech & press to monitor and expose problems.

Remove too much oversight and you have a potential problem.

The real problem can never be fixed...

[jferris]

It doesn't matter who is in office, or what you think about him/her/collective them. The complete lack of centralization of any intelligence leaves much to be desired. The fact that each agency has its own watch lists, own covert operations, own data is both good and bad.

Each form of intelligence/law enforcement body exists because it has a purpose - or at least was intended to. Over time, excessive amounts of secrecy made some of these agencies "mini-governments" of their own accord - most likely driven by the Cold War. The problem is that there is information that should be shared, but placing this data in a culture nuetral, yet protected form is next to impossible. Why? A definite lack of communication between agencies. At least President Bush wanted to make a singular head that would be accountable for coordinating this information and cooperation between agencies. That plan was struck down quickly by elected officials who must have taken their stance on party lines, since no one could come up with a reason why it was bad other than "it is bad". Granted, it would have been a "band-aide TM", at best.

For the conspiracy theorists out there, Kennedy had thought of disbanding the CIA. Look what happened to him. ;-) Seriously, the problem is not that these agencies do not have enough power. The problem, often is the case, that they have too much power and no ways of communicating the intelligence that they have gathered. It would be nice if there was a way to start over at square one and create a singular agency, or group of limited power agencies to operate in today's world - but I don't see it happening any time soon.

Hold on a sec. Be right back. There are some guys in black suits pulling up to the office... Hey, wait! ;-)

wtf is all the buzz about

[routerguy666]

The FBI isn't being granted any new authority to spy on people. The headline here is misleading/provoking/a lie.

If you wipe the froth from your mouth and slowly read the article to yourself, you'll see this is more a logisitcal maneuver allowing the sharing of info between intelligence bodies. Wasn't this something everyone was yammering for after 9/11?

So what if Congress wasn't allowed to discuss the matter. Congress has had decades to discuss all sorts of ways to improve this nation and have done nothing more than feather there own beds. If the FBI finds some domestic intel that would benefit the DoD in what they are doing overseas what's the problem. Again, nowhere in the article do I see that either agency gained new powers or has had the borders of their operational jurisdiction changed.

Re:Civil War

[Reziac]

My 11th grade American History teacher was big on digging up dirt on various Famous Americans, among them Lincoln. While Dilorenzo's material is somewhat overblown, my teacher did state that Lincoln was notorious for being unable to make up his mind, and for being easily led by his advisors. She also told us that while the rhetoric behind "freeing the slaves" was great for inspiring public support, Lincoln's real goal was destroying the South's economic base (which depended on slave labour), for the benefit of the Yankee industrialists who were Lincoln's backers and advisors.