Slashdot Mirror
DHS Monitors Social Media For 'Political Dissent'
OverTheGeicoE writes "Recently, TSA's 'Blogger Bob' Burns posted a rant against a cupcake on the TSA blog. Perhaps it made you wonder if TSA and its parent agency, the Department of Homeland Security, really understand what we're saying about them, especially online. Well, thanks to a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit from the Electronic Privacy Information Center, we now know a lot more about how they monitor online comments aside from 'Blogger Bob.' EPIC has received hundreds of pages of documents regarding DHS's online surveillance program. These documents reveal that DHS has contracts with General Dynamics for '24/7 media and social network monitoring.' Perhaps it will warm your heart to know that DHS is particularly interested in tracking media stories that 'reflect adversely' on the U.S. government generally and DHS specifically. The documents include a report summary that might be representative of General Dynamics' work. The example includes summaries of comments on blogs and social networking sites, including quotes. Then again, you might remember J. Edgar Hoover's monitoring of antiwar activists during the Vietnam War, which certainly wasn't for the protesters' benefit."
Link to some more sources people
http://cryptome.org/2012/01/0035.htm
http://www.dhs.gov/files/publications/gc_1281732303362.shtm#3
The Singularity is closer than you think
Quant
We haven't reached that point yet, but if people in general continue to accept the intrusions as necessary, I'm not sure what short of civil war will stop it.
Would it be OK if we try writing letters to our representatives first?
Here's a start
Dear Congressman Cashdrawer,
As you know, the Air Marshall service is currently patting itself on the back for scrambling fighter jets tp save us from a guy who lit a cigarette in an airplane toilet. Also, an alert screener helped prevent obesity by confiscating a cupcake with an excessive amount of "gel-like" frosting. Despite these major successes, there is reason to be concerned about how funds are being spent by TSA. Although Facebook may well be a threat to "Life as we know it" it seems that the TSA does not understand its mission. It is monitoring social media sites looking for "reports that reflect adversely on the U.S. Government, DHS, or prevent, protect, respond government activities" (sic). However, the purpose of TSA is not to protect itself or the US Government, it is to protect the American people. Please do your F***ing job.
Thank you
Apparently this ABC news report agrees with the poster you're replying to. http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/12/with-reservations-obama-signs-act-to-allow-detention-of-citizens/
Those same voters born after 9/11 will have developed their mindset in society infused with "terror awareness". To those who have never lived in a different societal norm, the incursions on our liberties will only seem natural. This group will also lack the firsthand stories, with the emotional impact from grandparents, who survived truly desperate times.
The US has a pattern of desperate times approximately every 80 years:
Revolutionary War to Civil War (four score and seven years)
Civil War to Great Depression
Great Depression to the current Great Terrorist Attacks
The continuing degradation of our Rights in bits and pieces is just part of a larger pattern and cycle the US cannot seem to escape.
Every mans' island needs an ocean; choose your ocean carefully.
Perhaps you should read it. It specifies that military detention is FORBIDDEN for Citizens, Resident Aliens, and ANYONE ELSe who is captured/arrested within the borders of the USA. Military detention is ALLOWED (but not required) for anyone who doesn't meet the above requirements.
The key section you missed was:
Note that phrase "existing law or authorities relating to the detention of..."
And "existing law" does NOT allow military detention of US Citizens unless they're engaged in an act of war against the USA outside the USA. INSIDE the USA, they're covered by normal law enforcment, absent a declaration of martial law, which hasn't happened.
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
the triumph of feelings over reality
In those few words you perfectly described the liberal Democrat voter.
Did you actually just suggest we would have greater rights if we had remained colonies of Britain?
Seems to have worked well for Canada.
Just sayin'.
You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC