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!!!
you're probably above the law too.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
Well, phone companies have never had the greatest track record on upholding the rights of their customers, so it's no wonder the FBI tells its agents they don't have to fill out any paperwork. The companies just bend right over.
Some attitudes replaced or by cgi optimizes
I pick and choose the laws I obey as well, and after reading this, I feel even more vindicated when I do so.
Blar.
... bitch at your phone companies.
This isn't wire taps, this is getting your phone records. This is social engineering.
You could do this too, you don't have to be a federal agent.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
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
Don't worry citizens, all you have to do is trust your government and obey the law. Then you can be assured that when the government asks questions, it's not about you. Because, as we all know, the FBI only makes requests about Bad Guys. The are from the Executive Branch, after all, and it's only the Judicial branch that feels you are "innocent until proven guilty".
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
That summary is completetly out of touch with the actual article. If you RTFA there is no mention of the Patriot Act, equally the /.summary doesn't even bother to mention the unconstitutional provisions of the Patriot Act in question.
Thanks for that completely useless and misleading article summary.
>
>
Hey, we're all pseudonymous here. Maybe FatSean is an elected official, in which case it'll work fine.
All they need to do now is start cracking down on dissent, intimidating, bringing false charges, etc, and we will be living in a real police state. Who said it couldn't happen here? Maybe next time I make a post like this it will be as an anonymous coward from a car parked in front of a starbucks.
Libertarian Leaning Political Discussion Forum.
How did they find out about this? Interviews?
on CSPAN radio. (What a life, eh?) Long story short - one rep said in response to the FBI saying "they'll do their best" to clean up the situation, was "If you don't clean it up, you won't have these NSO/NSL letters to worry about any more." (Taking them away).
The FBI counsel came back to that whole "in an emergency" thing, but they cannot gaurantee that it's an emergency. They couldn't even gaurantee it was part of an investigation (a requirement). What a mess we've created these last six years.
Leave the gun, take the cannoli -- Clemenza, The Godfather
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.
Short answer to your last question: No.
"I, a concerned citizen of this country, was left feeling unsatisfied and betrayed by the very government I am forced to pay to support."
Welcome to - the nature of the state. You have just learned what every OTHER citizen of every OTHER country in the entire history of the world has learned at some point.
"I'm growing tired of hearing about how the democratic process will repair these evils. How? When?"
Never. No democracy ever has and no democracy ever will. Because democracies that reach this point are no longer democracies - if they ever were.
When you reach this point, revolution or destruction by outside attack are the only solutions left.
It's a tossup which one - or both - will occur to the US and when, but it is inevitable.
And you haven't seen anything yet. Wait until the war on Iran starts, and car bombs start going off all over the place here as the US economy sinks into the sunset due to quadruple oil prices and the Chinese dumping the US dollar. The Constitution is history. Fergeddaboutit.
The only thing you need to understand is: the people really running this country WANT THIS TO HAPPEN. To paraphrase the "feel good" movement, everything that happens happens for a reason - and it serves them (not us.)
But if you're smart enough (which I apparently am not), you can make it serve you, too...
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
Yeah, the real irony is that this is more your non-government employed neighbour propping up the oligarchy rather than "Teh Evil Government".
The private sector holds the influence, does the favours, and the government takes all the blame. Its the perfect oligarchy.
"Old man yells at systemd"
Why am I not surprised at this development?
I can't blame citizens for rolling over when the word from the government is "comply or be watch your stock hit the floor due to bad press over audits".
the NPG electrode was replaced with carbon blac
Much wiretapping in the US is actually outsourced to Verisign. Verisign's NetDiscovery center provides a full-service wiretapping service, with hooks into telcos, cellular networks, VoIP providers, cable TV systems, wireless data networks, and ISPs. Verisign's proprietary back door into the SS7 telephone signaling control network makes this not only possible, but allows Verisign to offer wiretapping services at a lower cost.
Verisign is extending their wiretapping network internationally. Italy is already hooked up.
So if Congress or the press wants to look into this matter, the place to go is Verisign's Network Security Office. Also, attending Intelligence Support Systems for Lawful Interception, Cybercrime Investigations and Intelligence Gathering Conference and Expo in May, in Washington, DC. "Now that most nations of the world require lawful interception support of VoIP and other IP-based services, ISS World Spring 2007 is a must attend event." Talks include "Best Practices for Successful Deployments of Word Spotting Technology" and "Content and P2P Monitoring and Filtering". Major topics for this year include inteconnecting multiple intercept systems to allow easier remote access.
Still free!
I was being sarcastic. I think anyone who abuses authority granted to them by the people of the USA should be shot in the face, and a bill for the bullet sent to their family. Corrupt cops and any other cops covering up for them, corrupt politicians and the people who cover for them, etc...
It'll never happen tho.
Blar.
Then this whole law thing has become a bit of a joke hasn't it?
Hahaha!
Sorry to have offend your sensibilities. However, being polite, which I have made a point of doing for a long time, doesn't seem to be getting us anywhere. It's time to start applying sarcasm and rudeness to the tender parts of those who've gotten us into this situation.
Just my $.02,
Ron
Impeach Barack Obama for violating the Constitutional requirement to be a "natural born" citizen to hold the office of P
If he had it this good, he would have been able to cross-dress in public, and he wouldn't get a second glance.
What?
I think you are being overly pessimistic - it's just sabre rattling they are not stupid enough to do it even for big bribe from extremists in Israel. It just like the fools that want a cold war with China which would turn the USA into an isolated economic basket case within a couple of years.
I agree completely. Even George W. Bush and his sycophantic advisors -- and realize I'm making a very strong statement here -- even they are not stupid enough to invade Iran. Even they can picture what a huge fucking disaster that would be.
The sad part is that it's pretty clear that Iran knows that, which is why they keep calling our bluffs. Yes, that is a vastly better outcome than war, which is why Bush is and will continue to let them get away with it.
The enemies of Democracy are
The problem with the phone companies, the Federal Reserve, and, as I understand it, even the IRS, is they are privately owned and controlled interests. They are not owned by US voters. They are not transparent. Heck, many of the phone companies are not even in US hands!
Additionally, the US has a government (both sides of politics) which pays no regard to international norms or even the interests of their voters (such as health, education, housing), nor its own laws. So how can anyone expect the FBI which answers to a power which itself doesn't take any notice of the constitution or laws, to act within its own laws? Whilst there is no doubt a vast majority of FBI employees who are dedicated and truly patriotic - the institution isn't.
The same problem is found around the globe with privatization being rife.
The fewer assets a democratic government has, the less power it has. If a government does not control the nation's infrastructure, then, when you vote, your vote counts for very little, as everyone in government ends up totally compromised and at the whim of those who control the nation's infrastructure.
How can anyone trust such a system?
Do it yourself, because no one else will do it yourself. [beta blockade 10-17 Feb]
Even if wiretapping is a teensy bit OT from TFA, the Verisign stuff is still very interesting and consistent with the drift of this thread.
I share many of your fears but not your complete lack of hope. You are right on about the terrible consequences of a possible war with Iran. Such would most definitely result in the collapse of US global hegemony and domestic security.
These problems both domestic and foreign, stem from our current neo-conservative, ultra-nationalist world view (at least among our elected representatives, both Dem. and Rep., legislative and executive). I would point out that we put too much emphasis on the platitude "democracy" and not on freedoms (speech/expression, religion, from want) and rule of law. Autocracies and constitutional monarchies can sometimes provide these freedoms better than democracies (e.g. Wiemar Germany, the French Revolution, the current Iraqi "democracy"). Viewed in these terms, the global condition is nowhere nearly as dire as we now all think: the massive increase in quality of life in China, Russia, and many parts of the Middle East, though their regimes are not as "democratic" as the West.
Further establishing "democracies" or other governments that provide the freedoms and rule of law does not ensure that either the government or the people governed will agree with all US policy, contrary to the neo-conservative understanding that all "democracies" toe the US policy line. US citizens and their elected representatives are no exception with respect to the policy of the executive branch. And understanding that this disagreement is natural and may be completely innocent (i.e. one need not be an Islamic Fundamentalist to disagree with the government but could have a conflict of interest that is economic or social) will lead to less hard-line, no-holds-barred domestic and foreign policy.
When we think of things practically and take into account the other side's point of view, we begin to realize the benefit of more restrained policy both to ourselves and others. The more we can get others to think rationally, the more who will buy into it, including our own government and those of the Arab nations we are currently needlessly threatening (i.e. not all Arab nations hated the US before the Iraq, and still many depend on us to maintain a world order that makes them wealthy). We need fear mongering among neither the conservatives (i.e. "The whole united Muslim world wants to destroy the West") nor the liberals (i.e. "Put on your tin foil hat"), because both are equally hyperbolic and lead to dangerously extreme, reactionary behavior. I shared both your fear of Muslim reprisal and of Right Wing conspiracy. However, a careful, rational examination shows that the Muslim world is as fragmented and complex as the West, it has age old feuds and religious scisms as does the West (e.g. Al Qaeda/the Taliban and Iran almost went to war in the late 90s!). Further, right wing neo-conservative philosophy is less about conspiracy and more about a knee-jerk mass hysteria, ultra-nationalism, and near infinite greed. Simple, deliberate changes could begin to heal the rifts that we currently think are beyond repair. Just look at examples in history: France and England, the US and China.
I just recently read Ethical Realism: A Vision for America's Role in the World by John Hulsman and Anatlo Lieven (ISBN: 0375424458), and most of my opinions above are influenced by an Ethical Realist worldview. Though the book is more focused on foreign policy, its tenets of Ethical Realism could easily be applied to domestic policy as well. It was a fascinating read, and it illustrates the dangers of our current ultra-nationalist/fascist neo-conservative course, but also outlines some relatively sensible changes we could make to salvage both our foreign relations and our affairs at home.
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.
If the feds didn't follow up with the required paperwork, then does this even qualify as a patriot-act request? Seems like the companies could follow up in next month's phone bill:
Dear Customer,
On Jan 1, 2007 the FBI invoked the patriot act to ask for the records of John Q Smith, saying they would provide us with a subpoena in a timely fashion to keep this request confidential.
The subpoena was never brought to us. We thought you might like to know.
Sincerely,
Phone Company
I am not a sig.
You know, even on the best of computers, sometimes you just have to reset. Memory leaks, background processes fail to exit entirely but leave no warning trail, Windows needs an update...
Can someone find the "reset" button on the U.S. Government and hit it on the way out? Thanks.
"Why shouldn't he be on my phone - he's on everybody else's!"
They have rendered the Constitution irrelevant.
It's a legal loophole. In most states, you do not own your CDR, the phone company does. Since they own it, they can do whatever they want with it.
These days, our government seems to be doing everything they can to realize the wettest of the wet dreams of our enemies. Want a way to recruit Muslim extremists? Here you go! Want a way to solidify flagging support for your nutty-extremist presidency? Pick a fight with the US and get Bush & Company to saber rattle and rally your base behind you! Want a way to stimulate your softening oil driven economy? Act the ass, get the US to threaten you, and cause oil prices to increase due to uncertainty without cutting back supply and get a shot in the arm! Want somebody to take out the dangerous neighbor who kept you from being a dominant power in your region? Taken care of! The list of things that nobody (until now) was stupid enough to do goes on and on.
This whole administration has been dream after dream come true for Iran because they seem to have no problem taking their eyes off the strategic ball in favor of short-term blunt-instrument ideology-driven fireworks. I used to think that they were too smart to make idiotic decisions like invading Iran, but I've learned to set aside my doubts and just wait and see. Either way it's a win-win situation for Ahmadinejad and the powers that be, all thanks to years of complete mismanagement of our foreign policy and military resources.
An interesting anagram of "BANACH TARSKI" is "BANACH TARSKI BANACH TARSKI"
"I can't blame citizens for rolling over when the word from the government is "comply or be watch your stock hit the floor due to bad press over audits"."
I think you've found it ...
Qwest communications told the government to "sod off" and they were soon investigated and embroiled in an insider trading case.
Jail the agents? On what grounds?
/.).
The concept here is very simple. The memo defines situations where the FBI will ask the phone company for a voluntary disclosure of information. They are not forcing the phone company to comply through some draconian legal provision- the phone company can easily deny the request if they do not agree with the exigency of the circumstances, and there is nothing that the FBI can do about it.
Accountability has not been removed. According to the article, there will still be an audit trail involved, and in case you missed it, these types of audit trails are doing a pretty good job of keeping law enforcement in check (in spite of the rabid anti-Bush hysterics that qualifies as "mainstream" here on
"The defense of freedom requires the advance of freedom" - George W Bush
Actually, it's a public company, not a private one. If it were private, it would not be publicly traded.
Also, even private companies have to adhere to the constitution. The fact they are a company does not exempt them from they law.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
don't respect nothin'. - Santino 'Sonny' Corleone
What?
"A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy." --Theodore Roosevelt
The article reads ...
New rules from the FBI general counsel's office tell agents they are to limit emergency requests for phone records to the most dire situations, in which the loss of life or bodily harm is believed to be imminent. They are to document carefully the circumstances surrounding the request.
So assuming the rules are followed there should be no problem as there will be a paper trail? If the rules are not followed who cares what the rules are anyway.
]{
President George W. Bush == 'My fraternity bought my way through PoliSci'.
In light of his membership at Yale, that's in the ballpark.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
I didn't vote for Clinton, but the current admin makes me nostalgic for him.
Even with Nixon's corruption, he's starting to look comparably cleaner than his Ivy-loving contemporary.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
If FBI agents don't need to get proper authorization and follow due process before they ruin someone's life over a hunch, then how long before they start executing people ? There's not much of a difference at that point. If they ignore constitutional rights whenever it is "deemed appropriate", might as well go all the way and start erasing people in bulk. After all, they're acting to protect the common, law-abiding citizen so that makes it all right ? :P
The fun part is that the FBI's shady practices probably went through some sort of approval process, but clearly the board members voting on the issue failed to serve their clients' best interests (that'd be you and me - well for now actually just you, I'm Canadian). The problem with democracy is that there's a significantly larger number of dumb people than smart. You just mention Al-Qaeda, Islam or even dare speak any language that isn't English, and all of a sudden you have an army of scared americans ready to give up everything to shoo the "terrorists" away. The bad guys aren't the ones with the holy books and bad facial hair The real terrorists live within our borders, they run companies, they run the government, and control the media. They are the ones who want to take over the country, to satisfy their lust for power and wealth. A suicide bomber might blow up few dozen people, but an out-of-control government will make everyone's lives miserable, everyone who isn't part of the clique that is.
-Billco, Fnarg.com
I'm not saying I'm offended, but that your argument would be more effective if it weren't laden with that level of sarcasm.
Revive the Constitution.
... even they are not stupid enough to invade Iran. Even they can picture what a huge fucking disaster that would beBeta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
Before you all go criticizing FBI is like Gestapo, please stop.
Gestapo, for all its flaws, followed the WRITTEN laws of Reich at that time meticulously.
They NEVER violated the law of the land, and always had paperwork done. Always.
That is why it was easier in Nuremberg trials to convict so many of them, since they left such thick paper trials.
In FBI case, it simply wants to avoid all that...
In way FBI is worse...
"Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer
But who Investigates the Bureau of Investigation?
CfkRAp1041vYQVbFY1aIwA== RV/hBCLKKcSTP5UFK3kqsg==
Ring, ring. Hi, I'm from HP, er... I mean the FBI and I'd like you to look up some phone records for me.
Home fucking is killing prostitution.
Even if they are morally wrong.
It all hinges on certain words whose definition in the Constitution are taken for granted: liberty, search and seizure. It may be time to reexamine the constitution to bring it into agreement with the liberties Americans presume they have.
Due process under the fifth and fourteenth amendment is defined as deprivation of "life, liberty or property." So the question arises: does being investigated based on unfounded suspicion count as a deprivation of liberty? Most people would say yes. If, for example, you are constantly subjected to searches at the airport because the government can't manage it's terrorist watch list, most people would consider that a deprivation of liberty.
However, technically speaking being investigated is not considered a loss of liberty. In fact quite the opposite. Investigation is seen as a good thing, so long as it consists of actions which fall within bounds of legality, because it theoretically should tend to exonerate the innocent. There may have been some practical validity to this argument in the eighteenth century, given the lack of technology and state snooping apparatus, the ability of the government snooping to interfere with the life of a citizen was much more limited.
Given this precedent under antiquated notions of technology and society, we can't use a due process argument against the practice of collecting phone records.
So the question is, is the request for phone records itself illegal? If so, under what law?
It is not unconstitutional, although it skirts unconstitutionality in some unexpected ways. In 1979, the SC held in Smith v. Maryland that individuals do not have an expectation of privacy in their phone records, since the fact that A called B is known to a third party, the phone company. Generally speaking, anybody who discloses anything to anybody else undertakes the risk that the other party will reveal that fact (excepting certain special relationships such as doctor/patient, lawyer/client). Since A reveals to the phone company he is calling B, he risks the phone company disclosing this fact, and in fact the phone company can be compelled to reveal this information, just like any other business records it has. This is not a violation of A's fourth amendment rights because nothing of his is being searched or seized (unless he has a proprietary interest in his personal information which is another can of worms). It is not a violation of his fifth amendment rights because he is not being asked to incriminate himself -- its the trail of data he leaves behind that does this.
So far, we have determined that requesting phone information is neither a violation of due process (in a technical sense), nor is it unconstitutional. If it is illegal, it must be because of some statute.
Congress reacted to Smith v. Maryland by passing the Pen Register Act, which is supposed to protect precisely this information. But it's not clear to me that it protects the information at all, it merely proscribes a means of obtaining that information: the installation of a device which intercepts phone numbers is prohibited without a court order. However, if that information already exists in some other form, it doesn't prevent the FBI from simply asking for it. The law is technologically obsolete.
The FBI may be in trouble for misusing their emergency powers, for demanding information under emergency provisions that in the proper sequence of events would be backed up by a court order or national security letter. This, in effect, misrepresented their authority to compel the disclosure of the information.
But going forward, they can probably simply ask the phone companies for this information, saying there's a really, really important reason they need to have it; possibly even an emergency. If the phone companies decide to give them this information, it probably is not in violation of any laws, nor is it technically in violation of any enumerated rights in th
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
"I'm growing tired of hearing about how the democratic process will repair these evils. How? When?"
Never. No democracy ever has and no democracy ever will. Because democracies that reach this point are no longer democracies - if they ever were.
"Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time." - Winston Churchill, 11/11/1947.
Ceci n'est pas un sig.
I'm as cynical and pessimistic as the next /.er (check my posting history), but that's one point I can't figure out.
Why would those running the country want the economy and/or the rule of law to collapse? If you assume it's "American corporate executives" running the country, as I do, the market for their products would collapse. The world economy is still (even in this post-offshoring world) interdependent enough that a collapse of the USA would cause at least a major recession worldwide, so jumping to "other markets" might not even help.
Certainly the oil industry would benefit from quadruple oil prices as first, but the resulting economic collapse would seriously eat into their profits. Everything sells better in a society where there are more than a few people with money to spend, and those people don't have to worry about getting shot for the food in their pantry by roving mobs of starving poor people.
Do The Powers That Be(tm) think this won't happen? Why, otherwise, would we go down that course? How would They benefit?
the NPG electrode was replaced with carbon blac
It's not a "large-scale conspiracy".
It's a "small-scale conspiracy". A small number (relative to the population of this country or even the people in government) are actually influencing this country far more than they should.
It's like AIPAC and their support for Israel and war in Iraq and Iran. A small number of rich Jews in this country are pushing a policy which is rejected by probably 87% of the Jews living here, based on the polls. There's been a considerable discussion of this over at Talking Points Memo and articles elsewhere.
Another example is the neocons. A REALLY TINY handful of people in the US government and thinktanks outside it basically did a coup d'tat in this country. They were able to direct the course of this country for the last six years with virtually no opposition or analysis by the mainstream media and no control by Congress.
And after six years of utter disaster for this country on all fronts - military, economic, geopolitical, and even natural disasters - they are STILL IN CHARGE. While a few of them are facing problems in court and in Congressional investigations, they are still in office in the White House, the State Department, the Defense Department, and the intelligence community - and they are still planning in detail another war which will certainly be FAR more of a disaster than the Iraq war.
Is that a "conspiracy?" Depends on your definition.
REAL "conspiracies" don't work like in the movies or fiction. They work in full view of everyone and rely on lack of comprehension and inertia and collusion in self-interest to enable their success.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
"democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."
Exactly my point.
What hasn't been tried (except in small-scale or tribal conditions in the past) is NO government.
Actually, as a Transhumanist I have now accepted that NO social form of organization can work with humans, due to human nature - not EVEN anarchism.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
Many of these people don't make their money selling "products". Many of these people already have plenty of money, and while they will always want more, they want POWER more than they want money.
Besides, when you have power, it is both true that you can always get money - and what's money when you already have what you really want?
THAT is why the rich are never concerned about "economy collapse" - first because there never is such a thing: there is always a way to make money regardless of the general economic conditions of everyone else - and if you engineered the collapse, you will know how to make that money.
And in the end, there is still the question of whether humans will cut their own throats rather than give up the ability to screw other humans. And I'd say that question is answered in the affirmative daily everywhere.
FEAR makes humans do really stupid things. And that fear frequently translates into greed and power lust. The rest follows.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
"Autocracies and constitutional monarchies can sometimes provide these freedoms better than democracies (e.g. Wiemar Germany, the French Revolution, the current Iraqi "democracy")."
Did you really want to include the "current Iraqi 'democracy'" in that list?
The problem with your thesis that "Simple, deliberate changes could begin to heal the rifts" is that NOBODY is making them. Without at the very least an immediate impeachment of Bush and Cheney, and the firing of every neocon at the State Department, the Defense Department, the intelligence community, and then a radical retrenchment of the financial interests of most members of the US Congress, it simply isn't going to happen.
And none of the things I listed are going to happen, either. An impeachment trial of Bush would take six to 12 months to go to completion - and then they'd have to start on Cheney. The reverse would be the same. By that time, we're into the election season. Worse, by that time, Bush and Cheney can rev up the heat on Iran and start a war - unless Congress explicitly prevented them - which Congress has ALREADY REFUSED TO DO.
Not to mention that all Israel has to do to derail all of this is get permission from Bush to attack Iran itself. Israel would take a few missile hits and have to fight Hizballah again - so what? None of that threatens Israel's existence. Meanwhile, the US is dragged into the war with Iran and accomplishes Israel's aim of bombing Iran into the Stone Age - with all the comcomitant results I've listed elsewhere.
Meanwhile, none of that would have any impact on the continued efforts of the neocons inside and outside government, financed by Israeli backers, to continue to destabilize the world for their own ideology and war profiteering.
Face it - the system is too far screwed up. The wrong people have too much influence - and the rest of the country either doesn't understand HOW badly things are screwed up, or has too much self-interest in the current system to change it.
You want to tell everybody working for defense contractors that America's military budget is too big and we're starting too many wars?
Good luck with that.
Their jobs come first.
And if they don't, you can be damn sure their Congressman's campaign contributions come first. You want to start changing things? Ban ALL campaign contributions. Finance campaigns equally out of a fund.
How many years have people been trying to get THAT little bit done?
Our problems do not "stem from our current neo-conservative, ultra-nationalist world view" - that worldview is merely the current expression and logical outcome of the systemic problems inherent in the very notion of the state and in human nature.
And the historical consequences of that are known and inevitable.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
Unless a "huge fucking disaster" is what they have in mind ...
Well I don't buy the whole "Bush wants to bring about the Second Coming" theory; he's only a fundamentalist when he needs to be to rally his "base".
Which leaves the regular motivations of desire for continuing wealth and power for him, his family, and his friends, and that pretty much depends on the U.S. continuing to be a world power politically and economically. Both of which would be in serious jeopardy if we invaded Iran, and he and his advisors know it.
The enemies of Democracy are
Agreed. However, many of his backers do appear to be working to create such a scenario. I'm weak on mythology, but it seems that by doing so, they may be guaranteeing their place in slightly warmer afterlife than their rhetoric seems to seek. But none of that is what I had in mind.
I was thinking more along the lines of smoke and noise to distract from the fact that "deflation is no longer a threat", unemployment, and other domestic policy catastrophies. You also need to distract from the foreign policy disaster that Cheney / Rumsfeld / Haliburton created by screwing up the attack plans for Iraq to create a little profitable chaos (which got out of hand like a wildfire). Invading Iran would probably be a fatal over extension of the US remaining power, even after a draft. Even then, a draft would not be feasible until after the 2008 elections.
Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
Indeed, the Gestapo was evil by design, but it adhered to its own charter. They knew what they were mandated to do, and did exactly that. The FBI on the other hand, they know what they're doing is wrong, not just morally wrong but legally wrong, as it is in direct contradiction to their established practices, they just do it because they can get away it.
-Billco, Fnarg.com