FBI Raids Home of Suspected NSA Leaker

During the hours that Congress was debating codifying the Bush administration's wiretapping by revising the FISA law, the Department of Justice was raiding the home of former Justice official Thomas M. Tamm to identify the person who first brought the illicit program to light: "The agents seized Tamm's desktop computer, two of his children's laptops and a cache of personal files... the raid was related to a Justice criminal probe into who leaked details of the warrantless eavesdropping program to the news media... James X. Dempsey of the Center for Democracy and Technology said the raid was 'amazing' and shows the administration's misplaced priorities: using FBI agents to track down leakers instead of processing intel warrants to close the [purported surveillance] gaps."

Comments

Phew!

[illegibledotorg]

I feel safer, already.
Thank God we're finally catching these damned terrorists. I hope he hangs.

Re:Let me correct that last sentence for you:

[Unixfreak31]

While most of the people on slashdot will agree with you. And quite possiably others who are heavy into politics and keeping up with there goverment like they should. I think a big part of the problem is joe blow average doesnt keep up with what his/her goverment is doing for/to them. Untill people do the people in office will abuuse power the temptation is VERY hard to resisit. So if you want to change things like this talk with your neighbors and get people back into politics the people can make a change.

Actions like these distinguish the system

[A beautiful mind]

Actions like these are the difference between a fascist dictatorship and a democracy (yes, even though the USA is a republic, it is also ment to be a democracy so don't bring it up thanks).

Saying that "The State" is right no matter what, is fascist. Currently the government is purging or minimalizing the non-fascist elements within the state. Of course they're doing it on the path of least resistance, so they're keeping up the veil of the justice system, but with the swampy legal system, far reaching laws and by simply ignoring basic rights (habeas corpus, etc.), without means to challenge the state it is a mere facade.

Re:Actions like these distinguish the system

[FunWithKnives]

On the contrary, Mussolini defined it rather well. He actually wrote the entry on fascism for the "Encyclopaedia Italiana" in 1932. Others have used it widely and innappropriately since then, but that doesn't change its true meaning. Here's a small excerpt from Mussolini's entry that gives some context:

... fascism combats the whole complex system of democratic ideology, and repudiates it, whether in its theoretical premises or in its practical application. Fascism denies that the majority, by the simple fact that it is a majority, can direct human society ...

The entire entry, titled "What is Fascism?", is available online in a myriad of places. It is somewhat lengthy, but I suggest reading it in its entirety.

As for this situation, and the GP's label, I would say that it fits rather nicely Mussolini's definition.

Re:Actions like these distinguish the system

[Opportunist]

Almost all fascist dictatorships in the 20th century actually rose to power through democratic means. Hitler was the appointed chancellor of the German Reich, his party won the elections of 1934. A similar process worked for Italy (Mussolini was appointed prime minister of Italy) and Austria (Dollfuß was the elected chancellor of Austria).

Don't think fascist regimes come to existance through coup d'etats or civil wars, like many communist regimes did. Most of them grew from a combination of a flawed democratic process and fear in the population that a civil war or anarchy is imminent, and the general feeling, especially in the leading classes, that a fascist regime is still better than the uncertainty of an absence of government.

Re:Actions like these distinguish the system

[Opportunist]

All fine and nice, but in this case, the apparatus is used against someone who dared to blow the whistle on illegal government activities. The message is pretty clear, if you know of anything illegal done by the feds, better shut up or we come after you.

And I doubt this is a good thing.

Re:Actions like these distinguish the system

[rbanffy]

It's been observed that any dictatorship requires a permanent state of emergency or war. Based on this, all kinds of law and basic rights can be disrespected based on the higher requirement of national security. If it lasts long enough, the whole society can also be shaped in ways that suppress as much as possible any willingness or ability to resist. While the US is not a dictatorship and many Americans can see what is wrong, what can happen (yes - it can get far worse than it is now) and take some action - organizing themselves, registering as voters and voting (please, by all means, _do_ vote - it's _your_ government, not something imposed on you)

I would recommend extreme care on the next elections.

Remember "checks and balances". You need a whole lot more of them.

Re:Actions like these distinguish the system

[arhavu]

From an outsider's point of view (I'm from Finland myself), it seems that one of the problems is that everything in the US gets turned into a dichotomy between the democrats and the republicans. It seems that every time somebody tries to bring up a valid point about the way things are run or working within the government, someone else will counter that by claiming the original argument simply stems from party affiliation. And everything is easily reduced to partisan bickering (sort of what Jon Stewart complained about on Crossfire). I see that happening here on Slashdot a lot as well. Every time there's a discussion about politics, it seems pointless to me to read it, because I know it will only degrade into two camps insulting each other and not really discussing anything. Especially with the divisive issues like gun control, etc, but also in general. There never seems to be a possibility of a third viewpoint, of a compromise. Hell, there's only two parties anyway, so naturally there can be only two possible solutions to any problem, right?

I think that's one reason why the current government gets away with so much. To an outside observer, especially from a northern European democracy, it seems really amazing that there's isn't more of a backlash, especially in the media. Even my father, whose a very mild-mannered man commented on the Scooter Libby pardon, sorry, 'commute', 'it's like it's some kind of a banana republic!'

Then again, there is the apathy. And the money. But I really do think that the two-party system and the mentality it brings is hurting the country.

An American Episode of Russian Fascism

[reporter]

The American official who leaked the warrantless wiretapping program to the media is a hero, not a culprit. Such leakers are people with conscience. The leaker was likely shocked by the gross violation of civil rights (which the warrantless wiretapping program trampled) and gave vital information about the wiretapping program to the media. The media then informed the American public.

Without the leaker, we -- the American public -- would still be in the dark. Without the leaker, our government would still be conducting warrantless wiretapping. The leaker actually helped to strengthen our democracy. He did not endanger it.

Yet, why is Washington trying to send the leaker to federal prison? This massive raid by the FBI smacks of Russian-style fascism.

Rebuilding America will take longer than that

[billstewart]

The Bush/Cheney Administration has spent the last 6+ years building an organizational, legal, and technical infrastructure for Executive Branch power, including anything from wiretap infrastructures to the Patriot Act to stuffing the courts and Justice Department with pro-executive-power people,
and getting states, banks, credit companies, airlines, etc. to do massive data collection. And it's not like it started with them - the FBI wiretap enthusiasts like Louis Freeh, the NSA anti-public-crypto people, the Echelon project, etc. all date to the Clinton or GHWBush/Reagan administrations or earlier.

It's going to take a *long* time to tear down that stuff and turn this back into America again, and most of that won't happen unless we replace the current Executive Branch with one that's actually committed to doing it. Most of the major candidates aren't talking like that - certainly Hillary and Rudy and John Edwards and McCain and Romney don't have a history of wanting to do that, and you're pretty much down to Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul before you'd get to anybody who'd talk about that kind of concept as a campaign strategy. Perhaps if the Democrats not only win the White House but also increase their control of the Senate and House they'll have some willingness to do that after a couple of years.

For now, though, Homeland Security Anonymous Spokescritters report that Enhanced Terrorist Surveillance Program has been reporting increased frequency of terrorist chatter saying "Booga Booga", so if you're even suggesting that we decrease wiretapping then you're a threat to national security and our precious bodily fluids.

Wow

[ta bu shi da yu]

I was researching the USA PATRIOT Act for Wikipedia, and all those people like Orin Kerr insisted that the changes to FISA wouldn't lead to abuses. Guess we can see what a hollow promise that was.

Re:Am I the only one

[cosmocain]

two words...

Re:Why prosecute?

[Mistlefoot]

If a secret service agent raped your sister and then the President declared his identity "classified" would it be okay for your sister to say who did it? She's be outing a CIA member and leaking information that was deemed classified?

Now, that was an extreme example. But it would be a situation that would leave one person wronged - your sister. Warrantless wiretaps left countless people wronged and in ways we will never know.

By your logic - the government can do whatever it wants whenever it wants and call it classified and if anyone talks about it they go to jail. That would be something that Saddaam would have done. Or Hitler.

What will they find ...

[Alain Williams]

Kiddie porn, music files, unlicensed software ? Who knows ? Of course no one will believe Mr Tamm when he says that this stuff was not on his PC when it left his house.

The purpose of the raid is as much to deter others who are thinking of exposing government wrongdoing as it is to punnish Mr Tamm.

Well said!!!

[Travoltus]

A totally transparent populace ruled by a totally secret Government is the perfect model of national security!

[Republican parody mode off]

Happens everywhere

[Flying pig]

After the Metropolitan Police in the UK kept us all so much safer by shooting an innocent Brazilian electrician seven times in the head while he sat in an Underground train, then claimed that they shot him while he was jumping over a barrier to escape them, wearing a nonexistent padded jacket to conceal a bomb, a journalist made the mistake of exposing this. He was promptly subjected to police harrassment, including having his girlfriend locked up without charge with no access to food or water, and given a blanket infected with lice.

However, there is a difference between the US and the UK. The last time the Met became really corrupt, the Hertfordshire Police Force was called in to investigate them. (Disclaimer: Guess where I grew up.) Even so, it happened, and a significant number of Met officers were exposed. This is one example of why separate and independent police forces with local rather that national accoujntability are such a good idea.

The problem is, who will investigate the FBI? That seems to be the fundamental weakness of the US system. In the UK, MI5 and MI6 have no powers of arrest. They have to get in regular police to arrest suspects. Although clunky, this provides a check and balance. If the FBI is corrupted or ordered by the Administration to do corrupt things, who is to stop them?

Re:Let me correct that last sentence for you:

[FunWithKnives]

That is the weakness of representative democracy. The people must be "eternally vigilant," just as Thomas Jefferson warned. As soon as the people become apathetic, and no longer care to be involved in the process, the process itself is then open to be usurped by the so-called "representatives." It really is not difficult to understand. So why is it being allowed to happen? Personally, I believe the answer lies in "Panem et Circenses."

Re:Let me correct that last sentence for you:

[joe_adk]

For those who don't know: Panem et Circense

So what's the big deal?

[chefmonkey]

What's the big deal? I mean, the last time the president hunted someone down on a political vendetta regarding a leak, he ended up commuting the sentence before a single minute of jail time was served. Or are we cynical enough to think that he did that only because Scooter Libby is a Republican?

Oh, wait. Yeah, I guess we are.

Re:Danger, Will Robinson, Danger!

[HappyEngineer]

You're missing the point. He is hardly FOR anything at all. He votes no on practically everything. Granted, his stance on abortion is scary, but one way to tell a true states rights person from an anti-abortion states rights faker is how they vote on anything to do with drugs.

See: H Amdt 674. He voted to prevent the federal government from enforcing federal anti-drug laws which conflicted with state laws.

I don't see how you could possibly consider him a neo-con. He's clearly an honest conservative. He's strongly against being in Iraq. He voted against the homeland security act and the patriot act. He voted in favor of the whistleblower protection act of 2007.

He's consistent. He voted against an act to prohibit cloning while at the same time voting against anything that would fund cloning. He's just against federal power.

Remember that it's all too easy for the federal government to gain more power. It's near impossible to force them to lose any power. If Ron Paul causes the federal government to give too much power back to the states then rest assured that future presidents will pull it back. But we should be grateful for any reprieve from the constant power grabbing that's going on in DC right now.

You can see his entire voting record at: Ron Paul voting record.

Here's a scenario for you.

[khasim]

Jack Bauer is in the super secret NSA communication intercept room along with various other people.

Unnamed extra #1: "Sir, you need to see this. It's Osama's cell phone! And the call is coming across OUR circuit!"

JB: "Dammit! He's up to something. I want that call intercepted and get me a translator! I want to know what he's saying and to whom he is saying it!"

Unnamed extra #2: "But sir, if we don't get a warrant within the next 72 hours, that will be ILLEGAL!"

JB: "No problem. I only need 24. Just tap that call!"

JB walks over to a different phone and picks it up.

JB: "Get me the FISA court! This is an emergency!"

Begin one-way telephone communication bit ...

JB: "I have an emergency and I need a warrant! No, I'm not going to wait! Yes, I will be right over! That's right, I want your Liberal judge ass sitting on that bench when I arrive!"

JB slams down the phone and walks over to unnamed extra #1.

JB: "Are you getting it all?"

UE#1: "Yes sir. Will there be a problem with the warrant?"

JB: "Not as long as I still have 3 days to get it there won't be."

JB then grabs some paper work and runs to his car. He then races across D.C. avoiding enemy mines, fighter aircraft and snipers. He screeches to a halt outside of the Court and runs up the steps. He slams open the door to the judge's chambers and throws the paperwork at him.

JB: "Listen, you have less than 71 hours and 26 minutes to sign that warrant or I'll have your terrorist loving Liberal ass!"

Unnamed Judge: "Always nice to see you, Jack. Here's your warrant. Let's see, that leaves you 71 hours and 24 minutes to get back to your secret spy base. Can you manage that this time without speeding or running over anything? Hmmmmm?"

JB: "You Liberal judges make me sick! My ass is on the line every time I have to drive over here! Good bye!"

JB then runs down to his car, notices the parking ticket on the windshield and throws it away. He then gets in and races back to work. Avoiding various mines, attacking aircraft and snipers.

Yes, the "ACLU types" are really trying to "slow down the wiretaps". 72 hours is just not enough time to get a warrant. What if JB had to take some time off to go look at swatches with his wife? What if he wanted to maybe take a couple of days in Reno when a terrorist call was coming in? Maybe there was a concert he wanted to go see! It's just too much to ask for them to process the paperwork in only THREE DAYS!

Re:Let Me Rephrase This To The Bush Haters

[syntaxglitch]

I realize most of the /. readers are far, if not radical left, wingers, but when Hillary is in the White House, I expect not to see word one going against her. You know it, I know it.

If you think /. is far left that probably means you're so far out in right field you can't see the game anymore. Let go of the partisan outlook a little bit, eh?

Slashdot has a heavy libertarian bias, particularly on social issues, and isn't particularly well represented by either mainstream party. The wannabe-fascist trend in the Republican party lately has made them particularly reviled here, but there's little love for the Democrats, especially their ties to the entertainment industry. If we have a Democrat president, expect /. bitching about the RIAA and MPAA to increase even beyond its already prodigious levels. On the other hand, the fact that Hillary is actually a viable presidential candidate is probably Bush's fault, too. ;)

Besides, honestly now. Slashdot? Not complaining about politics? Madness!

Re:Fabrication not insightfull

[GauteL]

"Read these eye witness accounts reported by the BBC and decide for your self."

You really haven't been paying attention have you? Notice that both of these articles are from the first day of the shooting, where the media was full of misinformation. Both of the articles you list are full of "facts" that are now heavily disputed and is completely at odds with the findings of the independent police complaints commission.

See the Wikipedia article or this article in the Torygraph.

1. De Menezes was wearing a light denim jacket.
2. He was given no warning that an innocent man could understand. From the IPCC commissioner: "There is no action he could have consciously taken that would have saved him".
3. De Menezes passed through the barrier normally using his pre-paid Oyster card. He did not run or jump the barrier as some eyewitnesses had claimed.

Re:Let me correct that last sentence for you:

[hey!]

As soon as the people become apathetic, and no longer care to be involved in the process, the process itself is then open to be usurped by the so-called "representatives."

It's actually worse than that. Ideally, the people should have a kind of public virtue, and virtue, as Aristotle teaches, lies in moderation. Democracy doesn't work when the people hate the government, nor does it work when they are infatuated with it. Accountability is the midpoint between paranoia and automatic trust. The government shouldn't do everything, but what it does, it should do robustly: if you stare the beast, you don't end up with good government, you end up with a ravenous beast.

People ought to be involved in government, but not to the point where it becomes an instrument of their irrational passions. And human nature being inconsistent as it is, it is quite possible to be apathetic, angry, fearful and infatuated all at the same it.

Legalities

[Tony]

Uhm... the bills signed into law determine what is "legal" and "illegal." Something isn't legal just because the president says it is.

There were laws put in place regulating surveillance. These laws are very clear in what is allowed, and what is not. This program completely ignored those laws, and sidestepped the oversight mandated by those laws. There are laws regulating what can and cannot be secret. This program fell outside the bounds of all those established laws.

It isn't partisan BS. This is between those who believe the US is based on the Constitution, and those who believe the President should hold powers above all others.

And public servants should do the "moral" thing in any administration, even the nicest, bunny-loving, thriving economy, no-war-abroad President. We should all do the moral thing, including monitoring the activities of the government (including the President), and holding them to a higher standard of ethics. They are, after all, representing all of us. Their actions reflect our own morality by proxy.

This is only a partisan issue because the PR has spun it into a partisan issue. If this had happened during the Clinton years, those who defend the current president would've been at the head of the lynch mob. Let's stop caring to which party these immoral, selfish sons-of-bitches belong, and start holding them all accountable.