Slashdot Mirror
FBI Says Paper Trails Are Optional
WerewolfOfVulcan writes "According to this Washington Post article, the FBI says that it doesn't have to comply with even the unconstitutional provisions of the Patriot Act when asking for phone records. Apparently that whole due process thing doesn't include them. Funny thing is, they've apparently already been doing it for years." Quoting: "Under past procedures, agents sent 'exigent circumstances letters' to phone companies, seeking toll records by asserting there was an emergency. Then they were expected to issue a grand jury subpoena or a 'national security letter,' which legally authorized the collection after the fact. Agents often did not follow up with that paperwork, the inspector general's investigation found. The new instructions tell agents there is no need to follow up with national security letters or subpoenas. The agents are also told that... they may make requests orally, with no paperwork sent to phone companies. Such oral requests have been made over the years in terrorism and kidnapping cases, officials said."
Funny thing is, they've apparently already been doing it for years.
Oh yeah, that's funny. it's almost a real riot.
The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
Well the committee for State Security, (Russian translation KGB) is alive and well in the USA. It now comes out what I have been posting for some time that this was an effort to trounce the constitution.
Never Politically Correct ~ I prefer the facts If you don't like what I say, get a life, or comment yourself.
I'd make a funny about "In Soviet Amerika", but it just ain't funny anymore.
We need to step on these bastards necks NOW.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
I pick and choose the laws I obey as well, and after reading this, I feel even more vindicated when I do so.
Blar.
The Constitution is the ultimate "law of the land". So change "probably" to "definitely" :(
Well, of course it doesn't. What are you gonna do, call the cops? Oh, wait, the FBI are the cops!
Silly citizens.
Well yeah. If you were going to use the powers of the USAPATRIOT act inappropriately, why would you keep a paper trail? That way the worst you can be accused of is not keeping the record, not whatever it is you actually did.
Insufficient accountability morphs directly into a complete lack of accountability. Who is surprised by this? Who did not anticipate this over five years ago? Those who were blinded by fear. Everyone else was either outraged by the potential -- and thus innevitable -- abuse, or lying and appealing to the fearful. Don't worry, there doesn't need to be any safeguards because we promise to use our powers wisely and justly, and besides, don't you hate Terrorists?!
The enemies of Democracy are
Hmm. That law they cite provides a justification for a telephone provider to turn over records; it does not provide a justification for law enforcement to request the records. Semantics, but important.
That the law clarifies under what kind of emergency such requests can be made is good-with-a-capital-G. What remains to be seen is if the old definition of emergency ("I can't be bothered with paperwork") will continue to be the de facto reason for a subpoena-less request.
IMO, any federal agent who acts outside the law wrt information requests should be prosecuted. They've broken the law no less than someone who smoked a joint -- and the cumulative negative effects on society are probably far worse for those who act outside the law in the name of the law.
"Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
No, this is abuse of authority.
This is about removing accountability.
We don't need a paper trail just for a paper trail. We need one to make sure that the requests are legitimate and fair.
All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.
eleven plus two / twelve plus one
the submitter seems to have his pants in a knot over the FBI's misconduct, but he fails to realize that all police in all countries try to pull dirty tricks like that, and have done so for many decades. The difference between a free society governed by the rule of law and a dictatorship is that, in a free society, telcos have the liberty and *duty* to tell the police to sod off and come back with a proper warrant.
That US telcos comply to such oral requests alone should tell you something of the state of this country, which is the merging of the corporate world and the state. As in country that have this other form of government...
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
is anybody actually surprised by things like this anymore? I can honestly say that when the warrantless wiretapping first came to light, I was shocked by how little press the story received compared to other things and by its subsequent all-but-disappearance from the public eye. Perhaps there is a legal loophole somewhere that purportedly allows corrupt politicians to do whatever the hell they want in Washington, but I haven't seen it. As far as I was aware, on the day of his inauguration, President Bush swore to uphold the Constitution. He broke his oath. It doesn't matter whether or not he believes working around the Constitution was good for America; the simple fact of the matter is that he broke his oath, which is an act of high treason, as far as I'm concerned. Clinton's affair did not undermine the foundation of all of our freedoms that Bush speaks so highly of out of one side of his mouth while he hands out instructions to the Great American Wrecking Co. from the other.
I was pleased when the Democrats took Congress, because I (perhaps naively) thought that they would order an investigation and discuss impeachment. Nope, didn't happen. There was no trial, and nobody went to jail. I, a concerned citizen of this country, was left feeling unsatisfied and betrayed by the very government I am forced to pay to support. I'm growing tired of hearing about how the democratic process will repair these evils. How? When? How many of our freedoms will we lose before America wakes the fuck up and takes its dream back from these greedy, power-hungry criminals?
Why do we stand here idly watching while it seems like almost weekly some new affront on everything America used to stand for appears in the news? The USA is dying a slow, agonizing death, and "we the people" appear powerless to stop it. Is there anything we can do?
You're just as bad as the Blender developers who use 3d Studio Max as their scapegoat for everything. "Blender isn't user friendly!" "Yeah, but how user friendly is 3ds max?" It's not about holding yourself to the same standard as the competition, it's about holding yourself to a gold standard.
How we know is more important than what we know.
How did they find out about this? Interviews?
If you read his post, you'll realize that he is not defending Bush's actions. He's countering the partisan hacks who believe that their side is significantly less corrupt and abusive of power than the current administration. Both major parties suck.
Slashdot: You will never find a more wretched hive of spam and zealotry. We must be cautious.
This is a story about the FBI calling up and making a request that doesn't have the force of law. If you want to do something about this call up your phone company and ask what the policy is regarding oral requests from the FBI. If you don't like it, use a different one.
And we're not talking about wiretaps, here. We're talking about records of who you call. The courts have ruled, over the years, that this data is not yours. It belongs to the phone company. In fact, those court rulings are probably what prompted the change in policy.
There, fixed that for you.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Then this whole law thing has become a bit of a joke hasn't it?
Hahaha!
I sure do see a lot of arguments that boil down to "the other side is worse". What is the point of that argument? Personally, I think W is worse than Clinton, but I don't see how that is relevant to an argument about whether something should or should not be done. I'm not sure "if nothing else, at least it's different" does a whole lot to advance the discussion, since "different" can be worse, by definition. If you have specific reasons making it actually better, or less worse, that would be a much more credible argument.
BTW, I "get" the frustration angle; I even share it; I just don't think your response to it makes any sense.
"Why shouldn't he be on my phone - he's on everybody else's!"
They have rendered the Constitution irrelevant.
Don't get me wrong: I don't think it's unreasonable for people to expect better of the telcos.
I'm just telling you why it's not going to happen. In a nutshell, they were handed a golden goose by the government. In order to keep that money-train rolling, they've willingly cooperated with government requests -- including unlawful ones.
Yes, nowadays there's more of a duopoly between them and the cable companies. But don't think they are any better. One reason the government is scrutinizing VOIP is because they want the same level of oversight that they've had with the telcos for years prior.
So when you see members of Congress pass bills such as the Patriot Act and others, granting overreaching powers to the FBI, think carefully for a moment. Considering that the average age of Congress members is 55 for Representatives and 60 for Senators, most of them should be familiar with J. Edgar Hoover. That should be required history for the younger generation as well. Substitute "terrorist" for "radical", with superior surveillance technology, and that's what you have today.
When your elected representatives express shock and disbelief that the FBI could ever abuse its power, don't believe them. They know damn well what they are voting for from the start.
They could, but that would generate no profit while pissing off the government. So why would they?
Unfortunately, the bootup process is powered by blood.
Last post!
"Don't get me wrong: I don't think it's unreasonable for people to expect better of the telcos.
I'm just telling you why it's not going to happen..."
I have to grudgingly respect your point. I think there was a time in very recent American history ( i.e. before 9/11 ) when people would have raised a huge outcry is this story had broken. I think it was probably that way for the past 100 years. But like they kept telling us, "9/11 changed everything". I guess they were trying to hypnotize us with a mantra. It worked.
So now, you are right. After torture, extraordinary renderings, illicit war, warrantless wiretaps, FBI sneak-and-peaks, nobody is surprised that telcos are sharing information with the government. I hope someday I'll be able to return to the country that I grew up in.
Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
-- Pablo Picasso
"I think there was a time in very recent American history ( i.e. before 9/11 ) when people would have raised a huge outcry is this story had broken."
nope....america has been apathetic for years.....