Warrantless Wiretapping Cases At the 9th Circuit

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Warrantless Wiretapping Cases At the 9th Circuit

Posted by Unknown on Thursday September 1, 2011 @04:21AM from the no-good-peaceniks-causing-trouble dept.

sunbird writes "The EFF argued several critical cases yesterday before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Both Hepting v. AT&T and Jewel v. National Security Agency raise important questions regarding whether the NSA's warrantless wiretapping program (pdf summary of evidence), disclosed by whistleblower Mark Klein and implemented by AT&T and other telecoms, violates the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The full text of the Klein declaration and redacted exhibits are publicly available (pdf). ... The Klein evidence establishes that AT&T cut into the fiber optic cables in San Francisco to route a complete copy of internet and phone traffic to the 'SG3' secure room operated by the NSA. The trial court dismissed the Hepting lawsuit (pdf order) based on the 2008 Congressional grant of immunity to telecoms. Similarly, the trial court in Jewel dismissed (pdf order) the lawsuit against the government agencies and officials based on the state secrets privilege. Both cases were argued together before the same panel of judges. The audio of the oral argument will be available after noon PDT [17:00 GMT] today."

95 of 126 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by Jeremiah+Cornelius · 2011-09-01 04:24 · Score: 1

Are at war with the people of the US. The lickspittle courts are their puppets.
End allegiance to this so called "America" right now. It's like a being a convict, with allegiance to his penitentiary.

--
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
1. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by Anonymous Coward · 2011-09-01 04:31 · Score: 1, Interesting
  
  Not that the Democrats are much better, but if we elect a Republican president next year we are completely at the mercy of corporate America. Even the small privacy protections we have now will be gone, a victim of the quest to control and profit from all data.
2. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by Kjella · 2011-09-01 04:31 · Score: 1
  
  The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys are at war with the people of the US
  That TLA is taken by another TLA, try again.
  
  --
  Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
3. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by SilverHatHacker · 2011-09-01 04:35 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  but if we elect a president next year we are completely at the mercy of corporate America.
  FTFY. Unfortunately, the only viable form of government I can think of that's not subject to human corruption is SkyNet.
  
  --
  Funny may not give karma, but +5 Informative never made anyone snort coffee out their nose.
4. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by Nadaka · 2011-09-01 04:37 · Score: 1
  
  America has never really lived up to its ideals, but we have worked hard to make progress in that direction against enemies both foreign and domestic. We are currently loosing that battle against the corporatists, classists and authoritarians. Why do the American patriots have to abandon our country to those who have corrupted it and blasphemed against liberty and justice? Why not fight back, and put our nation back on the path towards a better America?
5. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by Jeremiah+Cornelius · 2011-09-01 04:42 · Score: 1, Informative
  
  That is exactly the game they will have you play, to keep you unempowered and in stasis.
  The first President was a Freemason. His Treasury Secretary was an Agent of The Bank of England. This has ALWAYS been a puppet-show.
  Wake up.
  
  --
  "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
  Never been known to fail..."
6. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by ArcCoyote · 2011-09-01 04:44 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  Sorry, your ID must be 1,2,or 6 digits for me to give a fsck what you say. There are approximately 99,899 kooks on ./, and I'm fairly sure where they are clustered.
  IF you have a 7+ digit ID, get off my lawn.
7. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by Jeremiah+Cornelius · 2011-09-01 04:46 · Score: 1
  
  The Matrix.
  
  --
  "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
  Never been known to fail..."
8. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by flaming+error · 2011-09-01 04:46 · Score: 1
  
  That depends how you define "America".
  If it's the federal gov't, I agree with you.
  But I prefer to think of "America" as an ideal, a people who historically have seen themselves as a beacon of freedom, a generous benefactor of those in need, an enlightened trailblazer.
  To that vision I am an ally, even if many of the people I see around me personify the opposite.
9. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by Anonymous Coward · 2011-09-01 04:51 · Score: 1
  
  You clearly don't get it. There are no Republicans or Democrats in politics. Those are farcical institutions designed to keep the populace at each other's throats.
10. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by h4rr4r · 2011-09-01 04:55 · Score: 1
  
  That ideal is a ration of shit sold to keep the masses quiet. Sure it sounds great, but never happened.
11. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by ColdWetDog · 2011-09-01 04:55 · Score: 1
  
  I'd love to agree with you but your nic is disturbingly accurate here.
  
  --
  Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
12. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by Jeremiah+Cornelius · 2011-09-01 04:57 · Score: 2
  
  Somehow, you correspond chronology and opportunity with credibility and veracity? :-)
  Bruce Perens has a 4-digit UID. I don't know if that either confirms or invalidates your thesis. Oh.
  I almost forgot. "TIMECUBE"!
  Meept
  
  --
  "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
  Never been known to fail..."
13. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by X0563511 · 2011-09-01 04:58 · Score: 1
  
  So, you don't mind my staying? Really!?
  
  --
  For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
14. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by dkleinsc · 2011-09-01 05:04 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Why do the American patriots have to abandon our country to those who have corrupted it and blasphemed against liberty and justice? Why not fight back, and put our nation back on the path towards a better America?
  The major reasons this doesn't happen are closely related to characteristics of true patriots that differ heavily from corporatists, classists, and authoritarians. Here are some of the bigger ones:
  1. The patriots aren't willing to completely wreck the country if they don't get what they want.
  2. The patriots aren't willing to cheat, and in most cases aren't willing to commit violent or property crime, in order to gain power.
  3. Patriots who are not authoritarian are much less organized than authoritarians, who by their very nature are able to move in lock-step.
  4. Patriots are aware that if the authoritarians turned the US military, or military contractors like Xe, on the US citizenry, the authoritarians would likely win, even if they lost would wreck the place in the process (see point 1).
  
  --
  I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
15. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by KiloByte · 2011-09-01 05:04 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Dubya at least tried to hide his treason (hard to call that a different name), Barrack Hussein says wiretapping is the right thing to do.
  But hey, they're respectively 2nd worst and the worst US president in history. Look at other pretenders to these titles: Nixon, almost impeached for wiretapping a single freaking hotel while Dubya and Barrack H. do this to the whole nation. Buchanan who screwed an important task but at least tried. Harding, whose biggest sin was giving an oil company preferential access to a single facility. On the other hand, our present heroes went to multiple wars under knowingly false pretenses, threw away more taxpayer money than all other presidents in history and ensured a dominance of their buddies at Big Finance.
  
  --
  The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
16. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by msauve · 2011-09-01 05:10 · Score: 1
  
  Three Letter Acronyms are at war with the US people? I'd have to agree.
  
  --
  "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
17. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by Jeremiah+Cornelius · 2011-09-01 05:19 · Score: 1
  
  Agencies. ;-)
  
  --
  "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
  Never been known to fail..."
18. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by Anonymous Coward · 2011-09-01 05:20 · Score: 1
  
  You don't get it. There's not 2 parties dismantling government infrastructure and intentionally bleeding our finances in order to raise the gap between rich and poor. There is only 1 party doing any serious attempt at that. Dems will sometimes acquiesce or contribute to that problem but the scale is not nearly as grand. Your explanation is a weak excuse for not having paid attention. Look at the voting records, what Congress does and who votes for and against before making these lazy comments.
  The Dems are not nearly the leftist iconoclasts that I wish they were, but they are more reasonable than what you see on the other side by far. The Republicans are harrrrrrd right. They have become more so with every election since I've been paying attention to politics. Maybe what you're saying could have been said decades ago -- that the parties were essentially the same. But today there are huge differences in terms of positions on economics and income distribution. Huge. You can say they're not there but that just tells me you haven't been paying attention to the last few decades of US politics.
19. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by flaming+error · 2011-09-01 05:23 · Score: 1
  
  > it sounds great, but never happened.
  That's probably the definition of an "ideal."
  But America has done those things, from time to time. Not as consistently as we'd like, and not without doing evil too, but there's no law of the cosmos that says a generally benign culture can't exist and flourish. They did it in Star Trek...
20. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by Hatta · 2011-09-01 05:34 · Score: 2
  
  Why do the American patriots have to abandon our country to those who have corrupted it and blasphemed against liberty and justice? Why not fight back, and put our nation back on the path towards a better America?
  How? What can anyone do that has a chance of turning this country around? Anyone with radical enough ideas to really change this country will never be taken seriously by the media. Therefore you will never have a chance of getting elected, and never have a chance to make a change working with the system.
  The other alternative is to work outside the system. Revolution. I'm ready today, but we can't pick up arms until we have a realistic chance of winning. Otherwise we'll just be treated like Loughner. Of course, we can't build a revolutionary army without getting our message out there. So we run into the same problem we see above.
  Anyway you look at it, I see no light at the end of this tunnel.
  
  --
  Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
21. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by digitig · 2011-09-01 05:38 · Score: 2
  
  Perhaps you've forgotten: During 1979, Carter deregulated the American beer industry by opening access of the home-brew market back up to the craft brewers, making it again legal to sell malt, hops, and yeast to American home brewers for the since the effective 1920 beginning of Prohibition in the United States.. (Don't blame me for the grammar.)
  
  --
  Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
22. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by cforciea · 2011-09-01 05:48 · Score: 1, Informative
  
  FYI, bringing up that Obama's middle name is Hussein at every opportunity makes you sound like a racist cunt and probably goes a long way towards making people not listen to you.
23. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by betterunixthanunix · 2011-09-01 05:50 · Score: 1
  
  Clearly we are doomed, since we don't have any choice other than "democrats" or "republicans."
  
  --
  Palm trees and 8
24. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by Nadaka · 2011-09-01 05:56 · Score: 1
  
  And Garfield.
25. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by Anonymous Coward · 2011-09-01 05:57 · Score: 1
  
  Uh.. If (1) is true, the "patriots" you are speaking of are not patriotic. Rebellion that has any chance of success also risks completely wrecking the country. This is an unavoidable risk of rebellion, even when the rebels are strictly non-violent. It may be a small risk, and they may work to minimize the risk, but it exists. If they are unwilling to take it, they cannot succeed.
  If (2) is true, you are again not speaking of patriots. They have not learned the lessons that the populace of this country taught when creating this country. Violent overthrow is, a last resort to be sure, sometimes necessary. If you are unwilling to go to this extreme, you are willing to suffer the atrocities of a government that is happy to use violence to maintain the status quo. They may "work within the system" to try to stop abuses of government power; but even if they never succeed, your "patriots" will never be willing to go to the mat for what is right. And I cannot in good conscience blame them. People have children to look after, lives to live. But they are not patriots.
  (4) may be partly true. But it is also partly false. There is no guarantee, or even any real indication that any "authoritarian" move to turn federal military or domestic mercenaries on the citizenry would result in an authoritarian win. In the first place, the federal military is a cross-section of the US populace. If it comes to civil war, the military is going to split heavily. In the second place, not even authoritarians want to end up ruling the trash heap. You can't drink your $5 lattes when Starbucks is a smoking ruin courtesy of the tank batallion that rolled through.
26. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by jafiwam · 2011-09-01 06:06 · Score: 1
  
  There IS light at the end of the tunnel, we as a nation as a whole and singly just need to realize it is us. The country does not need "turning around", it needs a few adjustments in some very important areas that is all.
  Taking up arms in revolution is only legit if the means to change from within through the normal process are no longer valid. You can't just "disbelieve" in those means and gain validity for your revolution.
  You will gain no friends with that type of talk, you sound like an embittered old bible thumping douchebag with it.
  If it comes to revolution, you'll find me, a Constitutionalist (and therefore both conservatively and liberally bent) willing to pretend to take up arms with you, but then proceeding to shoot you in the back with them. Revolution would lose us the Constitution, bank on it. If we cannot change from within, then we have already lost the Constitution.
27. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by LibRT · 2011-09-01 06:08 · Score: 1
  
  That was just a payoff to brother Billy...
28. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by Anonymous Coward · 2011-09-01 06:13 · Score: 1
  
  Newsflash: Paying attention inevitably leads to an informed opinion.
29. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by wizkid · 2011-09-01 06:19 · Score: 2
  
  Yes, It starts at the ballot box. Quit closing your mind and selecting democratic or republican candidates. They've developed a duopoly that locks out anyone working for the people. And we need to find a way to take the power away from the lobbyists. They're the ones writing the bills that get put before congress. IMHO we should get the people to put a amendment to the constitution to increase terms by 50%, and eliminate getting re-elected in office, and make all elections publicly funded and audited. This will cut off at least some of the flow of money to re-election slush funds, of which I suspect are slushed out of elections, and slipped into politicians pockets. You'll never see congress put a amendment out to do this. The only way it will get done is to get a group of people in each state to put the same constitutional amendment on the state ballot box.
  Remember that the Constitution starts with "We the People". If we leave it to congress and the White House, they're going to change it to "We the Corporations".
  
  --
  I take no responsibility for what I say. Even though I'm never wrong :)
30. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by flaming+error · 2011-09-01 06:33 · Score: 1
  
  > Revolution would lose us the Constitution
  The Constitution was lost long ago. It has become glaringly obvious since 9/11, to anybody who reads it.
  > shoot you in the back
  You will gain no friends with that type of talk
  > bank on it
  An ironic recommendation, given that our fractional reserve banks are hardly a dependable bastion of security
31. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by Megane · 2011-09-01 06:36 · Score: 1
  
  Indeed. I suggest "Barack Dubya Carter" instead, since he's so full of the chewy goodness of both of those other two presidents.
  
  --
  #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
32. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by imric · 2011-09-01 06:53 · Score: 1
  
  Nah you are just looking for an excuse not to vote.
  
  --
  Paranoia is a Survival Trait!
33. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by Jeremiah+Cornelius · 2011-09-01 07:01 · Score: 1
  
  There are Catholic churches everywhere. It's easy to be confirmed, and take regular communion.
  There's also a Vatican, a Vatican bank - and circles-within-circles of secret initiation and lineage, some with "occult pretensions".
  The presence of the former is not a disqualifier of the latter, nor does it dilute - but rather conceals.
  If you can't tell the difference, or don't wish to investigate the difference between the neighbourhood ring-and-fez lodge from, say "Propaganda Due" - then you are perfectly within your rights.
  And the top-level aprons are pleased with you exercising them.
  I think that it is at least worthy of consideration, the historical connection that people like MacGregor Mathers and Aleister Crowley made, between the Golden Dawn, OTO and freemasonry.
  This guy was probably just looking for better connections with local business leaders, and a sense of belonging with purpose:
  http://img.ibtimes.com/www/data/images/full/2011/07/23/136344-anders-behring-breivik.jpg
  
  --
  "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
  Never been known to fail..."
34. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by Jeremiah+Cornelius · 2011-09-01 07:07 · Score: 1
  
  Jon was the power behind the throne.
  
  --
  "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
  Never been known to fail..."
35. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by Jeremiah+Cornelius · 2011-09-01 07:14 · Score: 1
  
  In fact, "Star Trek" despite its desirability and delightfulness, is really just propaganda for an impossibility: The peaceful yet militarised, multilateral society that resorts to force only to enforce its ethical vision.
  It is the story an elite wants its liberal, middle classes to believe, as it pursues a globalist agenda. It has the fantastical elements of unlimited vistas of frontier, with no barrier to resource consumption or constraint on availability.
  Star Trek is the wet dream for the New World Order.
  
  --
  "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
  Never been known to fail..."
36. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by Jeremiah+Cornelius · 2011-09-01 07:17 · Score: 1
  
  To bring it back home?
  "We'll never get to the world of Star Trek, without bombing Belgrade and Tripoli! We need humanitarian intervention!"
  http://a2.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/264006_137311913016487_100002130376882_282364_1460330_n.jpg
  
  --
  "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
  Never been known to fail..."
37. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by Hatta · 2011-09-01 07:22 · Score: 1
  
  If we cannot change from within, then we have already lost the Constitution.
  Yes, that's my point. The US government is wholly illegitimate, and has been for years. You simply haven't been paying attention.
  
  --
  Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
38. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by imric · 2011-09-01 07:32 · Score: 1
  
  Hatta - is that for the Palestinian village? Or Mohammad Hatta? Or Hatta in the United Arab Emirates?
  Just curious.
  
  --
  Paranoia is a Survival Trait!
39. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by element-o.p. · 2011-09-01 07:49 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  What, exactly, have you been smoking for the last three years? The Dems are no different than the Neo-Cons. Both sides lie, cheat and steal to hold on to their power. Obama campaigned on "Hope and Change", but what, exactly, has he done differently than his predecessor? Bush authorized warrantless wiretapping and Obama promised to vote against telecom immunity for that...until he was elected president, and then, as one of his last actions while still he senator, he voted for the very bill he promised to oppose. Bush (rightfully) got raked over the coals for the Iraq War; Obama now is dodging the War Powers Act so we can get involved in Libya. Under Bush, TSA/DHS was created; under Obama, TSA initiated the AIT scanners/pat-downs at the airports.
  
  Yeah, you can nitpick social issues like abortion and stem-cell research, but when push comes to shove, there really isn't a lot of difference between the two parties. Both of them are eager to drive the country to insolvency. Both endorse handouts to their corporate backers. Neither one is willing to make the hard choices that will get this country out of the hole we have dug for ourselves. Both parties are busy wiping their backsides with the Constitution while making the federal bureaucracy as bloated as possible, and neither party really gives a rip about how badly they trample the average joes like you and me in the mean time. If you think the Democrats are even remotely interested in making your life better, then, my friend, YOU are the one who hasn't been paying attention lately.
  
  --
  MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
40. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by GameboyRMH · 2011-09-01 07:54 · Score: 2
  
  Good points about the difference in policies between the two, however it seems that having the Dems in power doesn't stop the Republicans from doing exactly what they want, it only slows them down slightly.
  
  --
  "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
41. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by element-o.p. · 2011-09-01 07:55 · Score: 1
  
  Carter may have been a screw-up, but he, at least, wasn't flat out evil. On the worst-presidents-of-all-time scale, I'd say Nixon, Bush and Obama easily surpass Carter.
  
  --
  MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
42. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by element-o.p. · 2011-09-01 08:02 · Score: 1
  
  ...and Odie?
  
  --
  MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
43. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by Omestes · 2011-09-01 08:10 · Score: 2
  
  Judging from 99% of of people I've heard bandying about the term "revolution", I'd probably be on the street fighting against you, an in favor of our absolutely corrupt, somewhat evil, ELECTED, representative government. You might be a different type of revolutionary than most, for all I know, so don't take it personally.
  Most of the would-be revolutionaries I've mean, read about, etc... fall into two camps. Lunatics or Authoritarians who are mad that things aren't they way they perceive as the singular, a priori, truth. Most of the lunatics are white-supremacy types, and i sure as well would fight to keep them from recieving any small modicum of control. The latter bit are mostly (these days) Libertarian Utopians, and Tea partiers, and both of their versions of Utopia sound more like hell to me (and probably around 50% of everyone else). In the 60's 70's, this also included the far-left lunatic fringe, but they've all pretty much died off now. I say authoritarian, for these two groups, since they have their panties in a twist because voters voted for people who don't agree with their personal philosophy (as such) of governance. So it would be okay to force their views on people, but not for others to do the same to them. Worse, they (and the lunatics) hold ideals above the real world, and real people, and are will to make people suffer for mere subjective ideas. They, in other words, know better.
  Nothing good has ever come from people who claim to "know better", who subsequently force their will on others. Right now, in America, to be a "revolutionary", is actually just wanting to be a tyrant.
  No, we are not perfect. Yes, there are tons of things I would change. Yes, we're probably at the brink of decline. Yes, we have TONS of things to be ashamed of. But... All of our faults fall onto the people. Sure, politicians are the people who do the actions, but we voted them in, watch as they do evil, and then, this is the important bit, vote them in again. We, the people, willfully refuse to acknowledge third parties or affiliated candidates. We the people listen to the media uncritically, and always vote for whoever spent the most money on advertising. We the people hate the educated ("damn elitists"), we hate intellectuals (to the point of making it an inexplicable slander), we want to vote for "normal" people who are as moronic, myopic, and uneducated, as us. Hell, we would NEVER even vote for a person who doesn't look good on T.V., they have to look like they escaped from a daytime soap opera.
  We have the government we deserve. If you don't like it, become an activist. If it really looks like a tyranny (which would be ironic, since we're talking of revolution without the fear of ours doors being kicked in, or disappearing in the night), then pick up arms. But only if all other non-violent options have been exhausted. And after you evaluate WHY yu want to rain misery down on the innocent, non-caring, civilians of our country... is it because your not getting your way, or because we're living in a genuine (thing chunks of Africa) tyranny.
  
  --
  A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
44. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by element-o.p. · 2011-09-01 08:15 · Score: 2
  
  For the most part, I agree with you. However, there is one thing that trumps the Constitution on my list of priorities. When the government, whether democratically elected or not, begins to sufficiently persecute my family and loved ones unjustly, I will take whatever action I can to put an end to it, including, if need be, violent revolution.
  
  The Constitution is indeed very, very important to me, but ultimately it is only a means to an end (namely, justice and liberty).
  
  --
  MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
45. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by Omestes · 2011-09-01 08:17 · Score: 1
  
  Long live Ghadaffi?
  I don't get your point.
  
  --
  A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
46. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by element-o.p. · 2011-09-01 08:29 · Score: 1
  
  I've spent a lot of time thinking about this lately, and you are, of course, somewhat correct but you are also somewhat wrong.
  
  In what time period would I rather have lived? At what point in history was America a better country than it is today? Well...when founded, slavery was rampant and women were only marginally better off, so the first 100 years or so is pretty much out. Even after slavery was abolished, we were still a highly racist country for roughly another hundred years so that wasn't much better, either. We won't even talk about "Manifest Destiny", the Marshall Plan or McCarthyism. Yet despite those problems, the '80s weren't any better. By then, we believed our own BS and were busy bringing "liberty" and "democracy" (by force, if need be) to Panama, Grenada and Nicaragua. Yep, that was a shining beacon for our ideals... </sarc, if that wasn't obvious> By the '90s, we were starting to implode. Greed, corporatism, and such was setting the stage for the economic mess that we are in now. After 9/11, the entire nation started goose-stepping into line behind the military-industrial machine, leaving us where we are now.
  
  So yeah, you're right. We've set lofty goals for ourselves and consistently failed to reach them.
  
  Nevertheless, the fact that our government and even our society has always proved to be considerably less than perfect does not disprove the fact that our culture still embraces the ideal of a fair, just, and honorable society. Just because we haven't yet reached that goal in no way diminishes the value of that ideal.
  
  --
  MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
47. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by Jeremiah+Cornelius · 2011-09-01 08:43 · Score: 1
  
  This is the result of "humanitarian intervention".
  Ghadaffi is less evil than NATO. By an order of magnitude.
  
  --
  "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
  Never been known to fail..."
48. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by ShakaUVM · 2011-09-01 08:46 · Score: 1
  
  >>Carter may have been a screw-up, but he, at least, wasn't flat out evil. On the worst-presidents-of-all-time scale, I'd say Nixon, Bush and Obama easily surpass Carter.
  You're forgetting Martin Van Buren.
49. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by Pharmboy · 2011-09-01 08:52 · Score: 1
  
  here are Catholic churches everywhere. It's easy to be confirmed, and take regular communion.
  Not to nitpick, but you can't just get confirmed and be instantly converted to Catholic, at least in the eyes of the Church. You become a Catechumen to convert to Catholocism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catechumen for starters.
  
  --
  Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
50. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by Hatta · 2011-09-01 08:58 · Score: 1
  
  Most of the would-be revolutionaries I've mean, read about, etc... fall into two camps. Lunatics or Authoritarians who are mad that things aren't they way they perceive as the singular, a priori, truth.
  I agree with you actually. This is why I'm not in favor of revolution at the moment. There's no popular movement in any direction that would make us more free. This makes me equally pessimistic about our chances for change inside and outside the system.
  Nothing good has ever come from people who claim to "know better", who subsequently force their will on others.
  I agree. But this is what our government seems to think it's supposed to do.
  But... All of our faults fall onto the people. Sure, politicians are the people who do the actions, but we voted them in, watch as they do evil, and then, this is the important bit, vote them in again
  Have you considered that maybe, we can't help it? That the system is rigged to produce a predetermined outcome? For instance, it's not "the people's" fault that we have a two party system. It's an inevitable mathematical consequence of the winner take all electoral system we have. In other countries with proportional representation third parties have a lot more influence.
  American politics is a lot like a card trick. When a magician asks you to "pick a card, any card", do you think he cares what card you pick? No, no matter what card you pick, he can manipulate you, or the deck, to make the trick work. It's the same in politics. The electorate is vulnerable to misdirection and sleight of hand.
  Look at Obama. The American people wanted change so badly they elected a half black one term senator, overcoming prejudices against race, inexperience, and foreigners. Even after overcoming all those hurdles, what did we get? We got another corporate puppet. You can't blame "the people" for that one.
  Or look at Ron Paul this year. He got 2nd place in the Iowa Straw Poll, less than a percentage point behind Bachmann. Still, the media refuses to talk about him as if he were a serious candidate. It's obvious that what the people want simply doesn't matter.
  Or lets go a few more elections back and talk about Ralph Nader. In 2004 and 2008 Nader faced a media blackout even more severe than that against Ron Paul today. Here's a guy who can draw crowds of 10000 strong, and can't get a mention in the local newspaper.
  How can "the people" be faulted for any of this? How do we have a chance when the deck is stacked against us?
  since we're talking of revolution without the fear of ours doors being kicked in
  I don't know about you, but I live in fear of having my doors kicked in. This country has been waging war on its own citizens for half a century now.
  
  --
  Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
51. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by Jeremiah+Cornelius · 2011-09-01 09:05 · Score: 1
  
  Yes. But it's a private ritual, not heavily vetted or gate-kept, especially with a sponsorship or introduction.
  As a 35-year lapsed Catholic, without confirmation, I could easily take communion in this city. I will never get an invitation to see the Pope, or witness the real dealings of the Vatican bank.
  Likewise, because there are garden variety freemasons, that doesn't disprove the secret society as an actor in crypto-politics and crypto-economics. In fact, these things are a part of established record.
  
  --
  "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
  Never been known to fail..."
52. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by gknoy · 2011-09-01 09:05 · Score: 1
  
  On the other hand, you can do it by the simple act of being born, too.
53. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by KiloByte · 2011-09-01 09:37 · Score: 1
  
  I intentionally insulted both bozos. And note that "Barrack Hussein" is the unmodified first and middle name, way more respectful than "Dubya" -- a corruption of the middle name only, which somehow did not cause you to protest. Perhaps you're irrationally biased towards a representative of one wing of the NeoCon party but not the other?
  Speaking of insults, I resent being called "racist", as that's a specific allegation. You can call me a "cunt" all you want, it's a pure insult, no one is going to assume I'm an organ I happen to not possess.
  
  --
  The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
54. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by mikelieman · 2011-09-01 09:41 · Score: 1
  
  "History's Greatest Monster!"
  
  --
  Technology -- No Place For Wimps! Grateful Dead and Jerry Garcia Chatroom -- http://www.wemissjerry.org
55. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by flaming+error · 2011-09-01 10:02 · Score: 1
  
  > resorts to force only to enforce its ethical vision.
  I don't remember TOS Federation using force for anything but self-defense. I can't speak to the spin-offs.
  > an impossibility: The peaceful yet militarised,
  Switzerland doesn't think that's impossible.
  > Star Trek is the wet dream for the New World Order.
  Just out of curiosity, what's the future you hope for?
56. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by fyngyrz · 2011-09-01 10:07 · Score: 1
  
  Remember that the Constitution starts with "We the People". If we leave it to congress and the White House, they're going to change it to "We the Corporations".
  Already done. They did it by having the supreme court define corporations as "people."
  
  --
  I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
57. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by Pharmboy · 2011-09-01 10:10 · Score: 1
  
  Sort of correct, but that isn't the same at converting. Even being born a Catholic (as I was) you must be Baptized, receive Communion and Confirmation to "be" Catholic as an adult. You are welcome to hang out in the pews, but you aren't officially a part of the Church. Can you lie? Sure, but that's not the point. The point is you don't just sign up, go to a couple weeks of Confirmation classes and "become" Catholic, according to the dogma of the church.
  I know many people who went through being Catechumen to become Catholic. It took a lot of classes and a several months. Of course, this was almost 20 years ago, back when I was a Catholic. Leaving the Catholic Church was much easier than joining it.
  
  --
  Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
58. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by Hatta · 2011-09-01 10:23 · Score: 1
  
  No, it's a literary reference.
  
  --
  Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
59. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by nog_lorp · 2011-09-01 10:24 · Score: 1
  
  Where are the mod points!? Sad that spot-on comments like this get no points and only get troll replies.
  
  Anyways... they aren't just there to keep people fighting and distracted, but also to exploit basic human nature. Sectarianism is always a powerful tool - you can't get a leg up by telling people to vote for the other guy, or to be unified.
60. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by element-o.p. · 2011-09-01 10:44 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, that I did...
  
  --
  MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
61. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by flaming+error · 2011-09-01 10:55 · Score: 1
  
  If none of the characters exist, then where do all the historical documents come from? I sense a clever deception...
62. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by cavreader · 2011-09-01 12:11 · Score: 1
  
  "they're respectively 2nd worst and the worst US president in history" You evidently have not taken a good look at presidential history. The public feelings toward the Presidents in the past make today's criticisms look like love letters. Some of the Presidents we consider great today were despised when they actually held the office.
63. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by Anonymous Coward · 2011-09-01 12:59 · Score: 1
  
  "We have the government we deserve."
  I haven't voted Democrat or Republican in a long time. If you have any suggestions for getting the sheeple to vote for third party candidates when they don't like either the Democrats or Republicans, I'd love to hear it.
64. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by Thing+1 · 2011-09-01 15:30 · Score: 1
  
  Nice to rant with you.
  
  --
  I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
65. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by imric · 2011-09-02 01:47 · Score: 1
  
  ROFL so asking a question is an ad-hominem? Curiousity has to be regulated and 'politically correct'? Sounds like you 'lost' it a long time ago.
  
  --
  Paranoia is a Survival Trait!
66. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by imric · 2011-09-02 01:48 · Score: 1
  
  Cool! And thanks!
  
  --
  Paranoia is a Survival Trait!
67. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by lsatenstein · 2011-09-02 01:50 · Score: 1
  
  Patriots see that they are too few in number to win. It is much easier to change countries and citizenships than it is to remain. As I see it, the USA is where Germany was in the beginning of the 1930's.
  Eventually you will have a one party system (republican with big corporate dollars to keep them there). One party leads to dictatorship.
  
  --
  Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
68. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by imric · 2011-09-02 01:50 · Score: 1
  
  ROFL the 'all parties are the same' error?
  You COMPLETELY gave that impression.
  
  --
  Paranoia is a Survival Trait!
69. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by black+soap · 2011-09-02 01:54 · Score: 1
  
  I don't know; lots of SkyNet plans seem to end up failing due to human interference.
70. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by black+soap · 2011-09-02 01:59 · Score: 1
  
  Since slavery is prohibited, does that mean corporations can't be traded? Or that they can't really be owned?
71. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by fyngyrz · 2011-09-02 02:19 · Score: 1
  
  No, no. Read the 13th amendment. Slavery is perfectly ok -- as long as the government does it as punishment for a crime. And as we all know, all corporations are criminals, and furthermore the legal system is so overweight and complex no one can really be sure they're acting completely in accordance with the law at any point, so...
  
  --
  I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
72. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by Omestes · 2011-09-02 03:39 · Score: 2
  
  Or look at Ron Paul this year. He got 2nd place in the Iowa Straw Poll, less than a percentage point behind Bachmann. Still, the media refuses to talk about him as if he were a serious candidate. It's obvious that what the people want simply doesn't matter
  This does annoy me. In the last primary Dennis Kucinich was my favorite (Holy Cow, the last remaining liberal!), and even though he had zero chance of being elected, the media still either ignored him, or basically made him a laughing stock for things not at all related to politics ("zomg, he saw a UFO!"). Or Howard Dean, who basically got kicked out because of a single out of context clip of him being enthusiastic at a rally (which everyone does), a clip that the media decided was more important than anything else in the universe, and played ad naseum sans all context. This election, I already know who is going to win the Republican primary (Rick Perry), based wholly on media enthusiasm. He is the favorite of the media, thus will get more exposure, and thus will win the primary (at least). Unless, of course, he does something to loose favor with the media or their boards of directors.
  But... the fact that people vote for who the media (or anyone) wants them to vote for is a deeper problem. I'm fully aware I'm using the term "the media" in a sense that could be confused for a conspiracy. I don't mean it this way. I largely mean it in the context of annoying 24 hour cable news networks, where gaining ratings, holding viewers, and maintaining a brand image are more important than actual social utility. Our politicians are chosen by their potential for spectacle, over their actual useful attributes. This is fine, the market wants this, so... The sad thing is that we take them seriously.
  Why? We lack the desire, or will, to educate ourselves. Beyond that, we lack the basics of education that allow a vast majority of us to be able to freely, and independently, evaluate claims. Basic critical thinking skills. This is one thing that annoys me about the current state of the political right. The country will never get better unless voters get better, and voters will never get better without cheap, ubiquitous, education. Democracy depends on "informed voters", not just voters. Voters who are willing, at times, to not get their way for the good of the country as a whole. Voters who realize that America means more than them getting their petty wishes. We might also realize that ignorance (ala Bachmann and Palin) is not a desirable characteristic for those in power, even if we like the sound of their baseless mumbling.
  We should also realize that our current state of moronic, petty, partisan bickering is not, NOT, desirable, or entertaining. It almost completely killed our (already ill) economy. And there was a contingent cheering it on, which made me sick.
  Obviously there is more to this than just education. Power is also stacked against us (the people). Power is money, and money is the ability to get your message across. This leaves a vast majority of us silent and invisible. What are my desires and wishes against multi-billion dollar corporations?
  All of this is inevitable. Especially based on the American form of capitalism, and the unique aspects of our character. I'm not attacking capitalism, mind. I'm just saying that we have needed, for a long time, checks to keep it from gobbling up our ability to control our government. Basically a way to limit the ways for money to translate in to political capital. Oddly, we're working in the opposite direction now.
  I do think if someone like Ron Paul won a clear majority (which would require voters to evaluate him on their terms and not just take what the media feeds them), he would be president. I don't think our system is that broken, yet. If only for the (tin foil hat time) reason that the system is already shored up from below, so no one saw, or prepared for that eventuality. Once in office he might be slagged constantly, though.
  I've been pondering a "citizens pac", or lobby group for a long time. Us little folk really need to organize on the same scale as corporate interests.
  Sorry for being ranty, its better than packing.
  
  --
  A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
73. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by thePuck77 · 2011-09-02 03:43 · Score: 1
  
  > it sounds great, but never happened.
  That's probably the definition of an "ideal."
  But America has done those things, from time to time. Not as consistently as we'd like, and not without doing evil too, but there's no law of the cosmos that says a generally benign culture can't exist and flourish. They did it in Star Trek...
  That's what I've been saying. We all know what the right ideals are, otherwise these stories wouldn't resonate with us, they wouldn't be so inspiring and powerful. Maybe those values have only manifested in a moment here and a moment there so far, but we aspire towards them with every tale we tell, and America, if nothing else, is a land of tales. We can start to tell a different one.
  
  --
  "We live as though the world were as it should be, to show it what it can be." - Joss Whedon via Angel
74. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by cforciea · 2011-09-02 04:07 · Score: 1
  
  Calling somebody "Dubya", while moderately disrespectful and not an idiom I commonly use, is not a transparent attempt to capitalize on people's racism. When you go out of your way to highlight a middle name which the man himself never uses, the only rational conclusion I can make is that you think it has some special meaning, and in this particular case, the only potential meaning in bringing it up would be to link him to other people with the same name. Hussein is a very common Arabic surname, and the likelihood that you are trying to associate Obama with a man who was dead before he even began his bid for the presidency seems much less likely than the idea that you are acting as part of the long, ongoing campaign to associate him with his alleged Muslim ties.
  
  It's lame, petty, and not in the least bit clever. It might elicit ass slapping among your like-minded friends, but it causes the rest of us to write you off as either bigoted or at the very least willing to exploit the bigotry of others.
75. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by Hatta · 2011-09-02 04:15 · Score: 2
  
  basically made him a laughing stock for things not at all related to politics ("zomg, he saw a UFO!").
  This is fair. If I can ridicule Perry for his sky wizard bullshit, Kucinich deserves the same.
  But... the fact that people vote for who the media (or anyone) wants them to vote for is a deeper problem.
  The problem is, this is an inherent part of the human condition. Your reality is shaped as much by what people tell you is true as by what is actually true, if not more. People are not going to wake up someday and be immune to propaganda. I see no rational basis to hope this will change.
  Why? We lack the desire, or will, to educate ourselves. Beyond that, we lack the basics of education that allow a vast majority of us to be able to freely, and independently, evaluate claims. Basic critical thinking skills.
  Of course, education is run by the government which has no interest in giving the people basic critical thinking skills. It's a catch 22. You can't get good critical thinking skills without a good government, and you can't get a good government without good critical thinking skills. I see no rational basis to hope this will change.
  I do think if someone like Ron Paul won a clear majority (which would require voters to evaluate him on their terms and not just take what the media feeds them), he would be president. I don't think our system is that broken, yet.
  He would be president in name, but he would get nothing accomplished. Even less than Obama. Anything he tried to do would be locked up in committee or by legal challenges for years, until his term was over and he was voted out for being ineffectual. You can't just elect a president and expect things to change, we have to throw out the entire D&R machine. I don't see any rational basis on which to hope this could happen.
  I've been pondering a "citizens pac", or lobby group for a long time. Us little folk really need to organize on the same scale as corporate interests.
  They tried that. It was instantly co-opted by the republican party. Any independant party or PAC will either be coopted by the existing party structure, or it will be ignored. This has been the fate of every attempt so far, and I dont' see any rational basis on which to hope any other attempts will fare any better.
  I know there are people out there who believe we can still change things by working through the system. Why? Where do you get that hope? I can't imagine any plausible scenario where the political situation in America gets better. Are you seeing opportunities I do not? Please prove me wrong.
  
  --
  Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
76. Re:The TLAs and Corporate Lackeys by cforciea · 2011-09-02 04:29 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, that must be it. Overt racism makes me cringe, ergo I must want Obama's dick inside of me.
I want your clothes your boots and your motorcycle by Tsingi · 2011-09-01 04:42 · Score: 1

but if we elect a president next year we are completely at the mercy of corporate America.
FTFY. Unfortunately, the only viable form of government I can think of that's not subject to human corruption is SkyNet.
ROFL! We all know how that ends up.
Still, it might be the better choice.
Re:I want your clothes your boots and your motorcy by X0563511 · 2011-09-01 04:57 · Score: 1

Stepping back from the sillyness, it's a scary idea. That said, it's scary because it's an unknown. It may well actually be the best choice!

--
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
Lawsuits Cost Money by bughunter · 2011-09-01 05:02 · Score: 5, Insightful

Unfortunately, it seems like the only way to defend our constitutional rights these days is with lawyers, and lawyers cost money, even EFF's lawyers. And therefore, you and I and anyone who is not either a billionaire or a fictional legal person is at a severe disadvantage, almost impossible to overcome.
Therefore, if you have any money to donate, even if it's only $5, please follow the link in my sig and contribute to the few people who are really, truly fighting for your rights.

--
I can see the fnords!
1. Re:Lawsuits Cost Money by imric · 2011-09-01 06:59 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah wait until corporations buy shares in YOU. When they have a majority, they have a slave. Hell, all they have to do is require said shares as part of payment for medical procedures.
  
  --
  Paranoia is a Survival Trait!
2. Re:Lawsuits Cost Money by ShakaUVM · 2011-09-01 08:43 · Score: 1
  
  Or spend the couple hundred bucks to incorporate yourself in whatever state you live in.
  Then you can just take advantage of all the benefits of being a corporate person, and absolve your real person of the responsibilities thereof.
  Here in California it's on the order of $800/year for a LLC, and a bonus 1.5% income tax if you're an S-Corp.
Let's Impeach the Prseident by Anonymous Coward · 2011-09-01 05:14 · Score: 2, Interesting

"Let's impeach the President for spying
On citizens inside their own homes
Breaking every law in the country
By tapping our computers and telephones"
- Neil Young
1. Re:Let's Impeach the Prseident by Megane · 2011-09-01 06:38 · Score: 1
  
  ...currently in his third term, it would seem.
  
  --
  #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
2. Re:Let's Impeach the Prseident by element-o.p. · 2011-09-01 08:30 · Score: 1
  
  Because Obama put an end to that nonsense the minute he set foot in the Oval Office.
  
  Oh, wait...
  
  --
  MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
Private Sector Loophole by Anonymous Coward · 2011-09-01 05:17 · Score: 1

It is illegal for the government to directly collect this information, but it is not for a private company... This should be fixed.
1. Re:Private Sector Loophole by Nadaka · 2011-09-01 05:42 · Score: 1
  
  The closure of the loophole is that the government can not ask the private person/company to collect that information. Doing so creates a chain of authority and requires a warrant. That is why this is called illegal warrantless wiretapping. The loophole doesn't exist, but they are getting away with it anyway.
..like a Swedish rape.. by scorilo · 2011-09-01 05:27 · Score: 1

David Leigh of The Guardian may have sodomized Assange of Wikileaks. Assange said "no" but Leigh kept on pressing. Now Assange is suing for rape, but it all depends on the rape laws in UK.

--
"One of the symptoms of an approaching nervous breakdown is the belief that ones work is terribly important." -BRussell
The full text of the Klein declaration by Mirey · 2011-09-01 05:28 · Score: 1

The full text of the Klein declaration
Audio of argument available by sunbird · 2011-09-01 06:52 · Score: 1

The audio recording of the oral arguments are now available (.wma).
1. Re:Audio of argument available by sunbird · 2011-09-01 06:53 · Score: 1
  
  Erm.... the audio recording ... is available. Doh!
Re:Audio of argument available - Hepting is here by sunbird · 2011-09-01 07:01 · Score: 1

The above link is the argument in Jewel. Here is the audio of the arguments in the Hepting case (wma).
Re:I saw the room and fiber by AliasMarlowe · 2011-09-01 08:02 · Score: 1

...they're a phone phreak's dream to tour.
Learn to spell "fone", dammit!

--
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
Due Process? by ausrob · 2011-09-01 10:41 · Score: 1

Looks like a pair of "you're on a need to know basis, and you don't need to know" cases. How sad that (for the most part, this is par for the course) even the judicial circles are plagued with decision makers who are undoing the very transparency and due process which was designed to keep "the powers that be" honest.
1. Re:Due Process? by black+soap · 2011-09-02 02:12 · Score: 1
  
  The government is probably going to argue that since they aren't using evidence obtained illegally for actual criminal prosecutions, they don't need a warrant. Sad, that anybody thinks anybody should buy that argument.