Slashdot Mirror
National Intelligence Director Seeks Expansion of Spy Powers
Erris writes "The Bush administration is seeking even less judicial oversight for their spying efforts both here and abroad. An AP story is discussing proposed changes to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act proposed by National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell. 'The changes McConnell is seeking mostly affect a cloak-and-dagger category of warrants used to investigate suspected spies, terrorists and other national security threats. The court-approved surveillance could include planting listening devices and hidden cameras, searching luggage and breaking into homes to make copies of computer hard drives.' One of their specific goals is prosecution immunity for communications companies who comply with the program, a sheild for groups that violate privacy laws in turning over information to the NSA. The article notes that 'Critics question whether the changes are needed and worry about what the Bush administration has in store, given a rash of allegations about domestic surveillance and abuse of power.'"
...fuck you Bush, get the hell out of office. I want my country back.
FanFictionRecs.net
I've often wondered - suppose they surveil a house, assume nobody's home, and break in ("legally", if not justifiably). Now, if you were home, just sleeping when they broke in, and you snuck up and attacked the person you thought was an intruder - are you guilty of assaulting a police officer? I fear that the answer would be yes...
Proud neuron in the Slashdot hivemind since 2002.
Intelligence Director wants more spy powers.
IRS wants fewer tax exemptions.
Pope is Catholic.
Really, what do you expect someone in that position to want? Something to make his job harder? Not that I think he should get what he wants, I'm just not surprised he's asking for it.
From TFA:
Give the NSA the power to monitor foreigners without seeking FISA court approval, even if the surveillance is conducted by tapping phones and e-mail accounts in the United States.
"Determinations about whether a court order is required should be based on considerations about the target of the surveillance, rather than the particular means of communication or the location from which the surveillance is being conducted," NSA Director Keith Alexander told the Senate last year.
Clarify the standards the FBI and NSA must use to get court orders for basic information about calls and e-mails -- such as the number dialed, e-mail address, or time and date of the communications. Civil liberties advocates contend the change will make it too easy for the government to access this information.
Triple the life span of a FISA warrant for a non-U.S. citizen from 120 days to one year, allowing the government to monitor much longer without checking back in with a judge.
Give telecommunications companies immunity from civil liability for their cooperation with Bush's terrorist surveillance program. Pending lawsuits against companies including Verizon and AT&T allege they violated privacy laws by giving phone records to the NSA for the program.
Extend from 72 hours to one week the amount of time the government can conduct surveillance without a court order in emergencies.
You are believing the fallacy. These laws do not increase security. The government and police already have all the tools that they need. These new laws will do one thing - They will decrease my security as well as my privacy.
--jeffk++
ipv6 is my vpn
Wow, that's a first. The Bush administration usually just assumes expanded powers with less oversight, and then claim that they had those powers in the first place (followed by blaming the whistle blowers).
Anyway, I sure hope that they don't get expanded powers with less oversight. Maybe it's based on my predisposition to distrust the Bush administration, but they sort of earned that on their own over time. It seems to me that these guys are the reason why we have oversight. Actually, if you look at history, FISA was designed to protect us from the Bush administration (indirectly, of course). Some of Bush's cabinet members also served in President Nixon's cabinet. Many of FISA's provisions were written because of the Nixon administration's abuses against American citizens. The same guys that were screwing us over then are running the show now, and are claiming that we don't need to be protected anymore -- the same guys. I sure hope that they don't get what they're asking for.
-Turkey
What was I thinking?
I know the bumper sticker that says "Freedom Isn't Free" refers to wars and the cost of defending our country. But I think the saying is MUCH more appropriate for garbage like this. If having freedom means I'm slightly more vulnerable to a terrorist attack, FINE. To all the cowards out there who will sacrifice anything for the slightest illusion of safety, I say "Freedom isn't Free", move somewhere else.
Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. - Benjamin Franklin I think that sums it all up.
Warning: Corny karma killing post above.
Too late. You didn't respond when they used Terrorism to erode many of your own rights. You didn't respond when they commenced a war against consensual, victimless "crime." You didn't respond when they redefined the commerce clause as meaning "anything we want it to mean." You didn't respond when they implemented FISA, the true beginning of legal "we don't need no warrant." You didn't respond when they put people on you-cannot-travel lists. You didn't respond when they put people on you-cannot-sell-to lists. You didn't respond when they violated the sex offender's rights, and the gun owner's rights, by imposing ex post facto punishment. You didn't respond when they began to sponsor religion. You didn't respond when they decided they could torture. You didn't respond when they put domestic internment camps into place. You didn't respond when martial law became valid for "anything the executive says it is." You didn't respond when warrants became secondary and the police became able to break and enter.
Too late. Now any response you make will separate you from your comfort, your property, your family. And you won't do that. Too late.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
It was made LAW for the purpose of fighting organized crime. Opponents claimed that it could and would be used against others. They were right. Now, RICO is used about 10,000 times per year, primary to add additional funding to law enforcement budgets around the country. In one episode of "COPS", featuring the sheriff who went on to make police videos for TV, they met before hand to discuss how they were going to divide the "loot"...i.e., the property of the family they had targeted with the act. Even if it later turns out that they raided the wrong house the "police" aren't required to return the property they stole using RICO. In more than one instance the home
owner being raided at 3:30AM thought buglers were invading his home and were shot dead when they brandished a pistol in hopes of scaring off the "buglers".
The RICO act is being abused as badly as the police at the South Denver precinct abused their power, a couple decades ago. The police would roll up to a block in force, cordon it off to prevent pedestrian or car traffic, then proceed to a building in the middle of the block. There, they'd start hauling out property and putting it into the police van. Afterward, the owner was called and notified of the "theft". The property usually appeared in pawn shops later on, but no one was ever caught until someone with a movie camera filmed the whole thing from a third floor apartment across the street from the target building.
Reducing accountability for using FISA will only INCREASE its abuse. Public prosecutors like Mike Nifong, and even politicians, would use the added spy powers to further their own goals and political ambitions.
No one is safe from RICO abuse. No one will be safe from FISA abuse.
The Constitution? What's that?
Running with Linux for over 20 years!
I remember the Florida recounts, that Democrats were whining, and "Dear God, when will this END!?"
I remember 9-11, and flying the biggest damn flag I could find.
Then I remember rumors of war with Iraq, and thinking we'd never do that--it was just about the stupidest thing we could do right then.
Then I remember them doing it, anyway.
Then I remember Kerry vs. Bush, no great candidate on either side. I remember thinking it was his mess, and he should clean the damn thing up. Neither one was that great, right?
Then I remember more Diebold scandals. I still feel like they're frauds.
Then I remember Haliburton, we're paying them HOW MUCH!? As if we aren't far enough in debt.
Then I remember oil companies posting record profits while the rest of us were suffering. I didn't buy the "War for Oil" bit at first--Saddam was a bad guy--but damn if the oil companies weren't out to screw us over. I still think he got what he deserved in the end, but I don't think it was worth it in terms of the lives lost, let alone the way we went about it.
Then I remember Abu Garib... since when is America allowed to torture people!?
Then I remember hearing that they were holding American citizens and suspending habeus corpus. Isn't that illegal? If not, it sure ought to be. Even terrorists deserve a fair trial. NO government should be allowed to lock people up and throw away the key. Although I admit that I might be inclined to bend that rule if the people who originally did it were charged with treason and thrown in prison without trial...
Then I remember hearing that our own country was spying on us for no reason and suing to make sure we didn't hear about it.
Then I remember them blowing up lite brites in Boston, and getting even stupider, rather than calming down with respect to stupid security theater measures. Mind you, I've only flown twice since 9-11 and NOT because I'm scared. At this point, I'd almost rather walk than deal with airport "security" that's stupid, reactive and pointless.
Then I remember a few other things, but mostly I remember getting so pissed at the Republican party that I turned my back on it and helped vote their ass out of congress in the mid term elections.
I suspect other people may have similar stories.
Oh yes, many of us DID respond. They called us names like "unpatriotic" and some even went as far to call us traitors. Our Senators buckled at the first sign of resistance and failed to represent the voice of their dissenting voters. A two party system fails to work when both parties are on the same side.
I went to eat some animal crackers and the box said, "Do not eat if seal is broken." I opened the box and sure enough..
Considering "people" was Osama Bin-fucking Laden, I'd say good for him.
"At least it's mostly Bush voters suffering in Iraq"
I don't think Iraqis can vote in US elections.
Shit, Cheney was on Rush's show regurgitating that old lie about Iraq having Al-Quieda connections just last week.
If you cling to something in the face of evidence against it...you are complicit.
I understand WHY some people willfully delude themselves into thinking the excuses for war are still valid...but that doesn't make it right.
Blar.
Yes. I bitched a blue streak in numerous directions.
No. We don't need secret police, extra-national or otherwise. The doings of other nations are not our business until they are made to happen on our own soil, and then we don't need spies, we need heavy weapons. Of which we have plenty, as well as the means and will to deliver them.
No. I wasn't aware of it. I would have, though, as I consider religion and religious groups to be one of the most dangerous and poisonous - and unavoidable - elements of any nation that wants to embrace freedom. Of course, I would have insisted that without warrants issued for cause, the FBI had no right to "focus" on anyone.
Yes. I thanked the ACLU for protecting the rights of one of our minorities. Homophobia is a disease, specifically a mental disorder, one you apparently have in spades. You should seek help.
I am pro-immigration. We are all immigrants, or the children of immigrants some generations removed. My own paternal ancestors immigrated here in 1634. That doesn't make me any better - or worse - than someone who immigrated here yesterday, or across the land bridge millennia ago. I have no objection to immigration; I don't consider it a threat on any level. I do consider the blue-collar knee-jerk response to immigrants to be one of the defining characteristics of uneducated trash. I still think of "I lift my lamp beside the golden door" as something beautiful. You might want to look that up.
To the extent that the president manages to have a sex life, I think that should between the president and the president's partners. I consider any questions by the public or any arm of the government in that regard of any citizen of the country, unemployed or employed in the public or private sectors, as a blatantly unconstitutional, unethical and immoral invasion of consensual and victimless activities.
Regarding his use of cruise missiles, it is my impression that he was making very limited, very strategic attempts to precisely hit terrorists in direct response to hits they had made against us. I don't expect all such attempts to be successful; I do expect the executive, in its role of CinC, to attempt to defend the country and I much prefer a limited response such as a few cruise missiles, than I do the invasion of an entire country at the expense of American soldier's lives.
Yes, Mr. AC, they certainly do.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.