Slashdot Mirror
DOJ To Claim National Security in NSA Case
deblau writes "Wired is reporting that the federal government intends to invoke the rarely used 'State Secrets Privilege' in the Electronic Frontier Foundation's class action lawsuit against AT&T. The case alleges that the telecom collaborated with the NSA's secret spying on American citizens. The State Secrets Privilege lets the executive branch step into a civil lawsuit and have it dismissed if the case might reveal information that puts national security at risk."
Such an action could only be seen as a flat out admission that the EFF allegations are at least as bad as they claim, and quite possibly worse. There you go, Citizens, your Government is spying on you. Now lets watch as the major media outlets all ignore the story.
The examiner would, of course, be bound to secrecy other than answering the above question.
Need to get right: 1) who chooses the examiner (we don't want a gov't stooge); 2) who drafts the wording to the question to be answered.
OK: the above is a nice idea, but it won't happen - governments don't like their workings scrutinised.
I think it is in the best intrest to let the case go on. The approval rating of the administration is very low and we are talking atomic bomb low. While I voted for Bush, this issue should not be covered up. The Bush administration's approval rating will drop either way, but the effects may not be as damaging if the truth is told instead of covered up. BTW: I wish Bush was censured, spying on American Citizens is wrong without just cause.
sudo mod me up
Agreed. Where there's smoke, there's fire. I hope people keep after government spying. It brought down one administration, and it can bring down another. Once it starts to unravel, we're going to find out more about the vast conspiracy that is the neo-con movement, from rigging the ballot to treason to war profiteering and on and on. It will shake the republic to its very roots. But once we excise them from the body politic and expunge their backers (the ultra-wealthy who are behind it all), we'll be a much stronger country. See, those people think they're born with the divine right of kings and think they can command the rest of us like sheep. What they fail and have ever failed to understand is that America's strength is in her people.
Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.
Unless the Prisident is going to try to claim that he secretly declared martial law, there is no law in the land that will stop this from progressing. The best they can realistically hope for is a closed courtroom and sealed documents.
The road to tyranny has always been paved with claims of necessity.
Under the US constitution power is divided between three branches of government. The central issue in this case is whether the power to conduct this kind of surveillence falls within the powers reserved to the executive branch. If that is the case then it doesn't matter what laws congress has passed, or what they appear to say. The only way to take this power away from the executive would be to ammend the constitution.
Nixon did of course get smacked down for doing something that looks similar, but in that case the spying was strictly domestic. In spite of what everyone keeps saying about the current case, it is not domestic spying. One end of every communication intercepted is in another country, and the court that decided the Nixon case specifically noted that their ruling did not apply to international communications.
Has everyone forgotten the events that led to April 9, 1865 in the Appomattox Court House in Appomattox County, Virginia?
Civil rebellion. Poorly-armed and -trained volunteers. Leadership that, while exemplery and genius, was against the industrial might of an entire nation. Seizing of lands, property, wealth, and persons without due process, warrants, or a fair trial. A legacy of bloodshed, hatred, contempt, mistrust, lawlessness, and general horror that lasted beyond the shooting war to become a silent specter to this very day.
These things happened because men thought "we have the Second Amendment, we can protect ourselves from the Federal government". And those men all died in vain. Despite the insipid reasonings that led to that particular revolt and civil war, the very real facts stand that a large body of dedicated individuals attempted to simply remove themselves from the union and it ended very badly. An outright attempt to overthrow and usurp the government would likely be met with even greater violence and tyranny.
Men are fools to believe a piece of paper can service their needs. In the end humanity answers to only one law: might makes right. It is something humankind has still not clued into, and this silly Second Amendment and Constitution worshipping is a symptom of it. It's a symbolism of men and women who continually live with just-world bias in their hearts. There is no such thing as a just world.
The Federal Republic concept was tried and it failed on that cold April morning of 1865. The Federal government is simply a facade for the tyranny of the powerful, the wealthy, the strong, the cruel, the wicked, and the insane. Religions, businesses, and political parties exist to misdirect the common fool from these truths. The only self-evident truth is that man is either master or slave.
Welcome to the result of millions of years of inborn, violent, heirarchical instincts.
Does the "if you got nothing to hide..." line work with the government too or is FOX news going to spin it some other way for all of us?
Neither! It seems FOX news, along with all other major media organisations, are not going to cover this case at all. When the DOJ sued Google because "Google won't give us information about people searching for porn" that was big news. This seems like even bigger news, but strangely, it isn't in the news.
Why?
Erm, the allegations are based a story that entered the public domain in an NYT story in December 2005 which alleged that President Bush signed a secret order shortly after September 11th 2001 to conduct warrantless wiretaps of US citizens. This is backed up by the testimony of one Mark Klein, an AT&T tech who was approached by the NSA in 2002 to do some of the work. Clinton had absolutely nothing to do with the current allegations of illegal domestic spying. This is GWB's crime all the way.
Now I wouldn't call you a liar if you said that Clinton had perhaps done something similar sometime, but the reason people didn't complain about Clinton doing this is because there was, and AFAIK still is, no real evidence that he did so, and there was certainly no major news outlet or civil rights group making any allegations of domestic wiretapping when he was in power. If you remember, the US media jumped all over Clinton for all sorts of personal scandals when he was in power (Whitewater, Lewinsky, etc); if there wasn't an outcry over Clinton, it's because there wasn't an allegation to cry about.
Why should people complain about things that they've probably not heard of, and for which there appears to be no evidence?
"But the armed forces..."
Will be just as divided as the citizens are. During the last Civil War, the leadership of the Armed Forces divided almost evenly between the North and the South. I can name 5 generals who would not follow Mr. Bush, although they still might remain loyal.
Believe it or not, the moderate majority is beginning to get upset with our government. 70% of the nation now disagrees or is unsure of our leadership. Historically speaking, a President with less than 65% approval is considered ineffective. Mr. Bush is at 30%. Do you think the people don't see the unending corruption in the Legislature by big business and special interests? That they don't see the repeated illegal acts of the Executive and his officers, and his failure to lead the military effectively?
The road to tyranny has always been paved with claims of necessity.
Agreed. Where there's smoke, there's fire.
I agree with you, but that same attitude is why the government is spying in the first place, and leads to paranoid trends. However they have a problem of confusing fog for smoke.
The FBI secretly sought information last year on 3,501 U.S. citizens and legal residents from their banks and credit card, telephone and Internet companies without a court's approval, the Justice Department said Friday.
And how many of these 3,501 where arrested as a terrorist? I suspect none or very , very few so how many of these where violated?
Got Code?
That was my first thought too. However, it is just possible that it could also mean "we're not doing that, but in order to prove it we'd have to tell you stuff that we simply can't tell you - ie, the real reason why all those packets are coming to us. We're not spying on you, but the truth (and proof of that) is classified."
The cynic in me says "that proves it!". The scientist in me says that we can't be certain of that.
It's official. Most of you are morons.
And after all this Osama is still alive.
Of course he's still alive. Can you imagine Bush doing what he does if bin Laden were captured? He'd never get away with it. The public wouldn't let him.
As long as bin Laden is free, Bush is free to rule however he wants.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
Whether or not the executive branch believes it can ignore the Fourth Amendment is beside the point. The State Secrets Privilege is all about dismissing lawsuits before they even get to a point at which such a thing can be discovered.
This can be used to cover up abuses of power, but that doesn't mean precedents can be set making the abuses of power legal. That doesn't make sense. To set such a precedent would mean that the lawsuit wasn't dismissed but went ahead anyway.
Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
I don't think the USSR ever had a propaganda machine approaching the efficiencu of the US one. It's no wonder people react that way, they've been conditionned to do so since the craddle.
;) ).
I mean just look at the people with flags on their houses. Try finding a single other country worldwide where people feel compelled to do something odd like that. The very concept of the US has been turned into a godlike entity. Hosting critical thoughts is akin to criticizing the prophet in an islamic country (although you won't be lapidated just yet
What's interesting though is that elsewhere the people that are adamant when you criticise the county, party, whatever, are those that are in power. The common people will more or less maintain appearances but in private will very clearly take the propaganda for what it is. In the US, it's the common people who hold no power that seem to be the most thourougly brainwashed.
This has always struck me as being both very odd and very unique. But then since don't visit very often and see things from a distance, I might get the wrong impression.
May contain traces of nut.
Made from the freshest electrons.
While your argument is logically-true, it is not reasonable or rational. You are ignoring incentive.
What incentive is there for the FedGov to issue the State Secrets Act -- or become involved in any way with any case -- unless it involves them somehow? Unless the Federal Government has something to hide, why would it become involved?
If our government has nothing to hide, then it wouldn't use this act. But it does, and it did...
Is Capitalism Good for the Poor?
You americans deserve all you get as a result of electing dubya a second time.
I have neither sympathy nor concern for you guys who are stupid enough to vote for an idiot, thief, AWOL president a second time.
"Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer
I think it's pretty obvious that everyone needs get excited.
A. Vote in the upcoming election
B. Send a letter to their congressperson/senator
C. Donate $10-100 to the EFF or OTHER reputable HUMAN RIGHTS ORGANIZATION (don't have starbucks for 2 days and SEND MONEY.)
DO IT! DO IT! DO IT! If you don't, you're a piece of shit.
Cool! Amazing Toys.
Flying the flag isn't bad. Flying it everyday isn't bad either. I love the US Flag and what it stands for. But it's my choice whether to fly it or not.
What I hate is the type of patriotism which isn't simply the love for one's country, but the type of patriotism that makes people follow others (leaders) with blind obedience or never question the policies of their government. Of course, critical thinking is discouraged today, it goes against groupthink. Yet, you didn't hear the neo-cons screaming about "following your president" when Clinton was in office, did you?
What people don't realize is that the founding fathers weren't peace-loving, follow the leader, etcetera type of people. They were rebels and terrorists almost to the point of anarchy. They hardly agreed with each other, much less blindly others, until it came to standing united against a common enemy. And that's what I like about them. Somehow, that spirit has been squashed in this country like nobody's business.