Slashdot Mirror
DNI Admits FISA Surveillance Violated the 4th Amendment
colinneagle writes, quoting Ms. Smith: "It's official; the government's spying efforts exceeded the legal limits at least once (PDF), meaning it is also officially 'unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment.' The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) sent a letter to Sen. Ron Wyden giving permission to admit that much. This started with Sen. Wyden requesting that the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) declassify some statements regarding the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act enacted by the FISA Amendments Act of 2008. Although this FISA power is supposed to sunset in December 2012, in May a new Senate bill extended the warrantless wiretapping program for five more years. That vote was regarded as the first step 'toward what the Obama administration hopes will be a speedy renewal of an expanded authority under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to monitor the U.S. e-mails and phone calls of overseas targets in an effort to prevent international terrorist attacks on the country.'"
The US has already lost it's war on terror - its government and its citizens live in terror every moment of every day.
The worst part is the government fears its citizens and the citizens fear their government.
The 9/11 terrorists were very far-sighted, and seem to have been winning ever since they died.
America has been continually digging a grave for itself from that moment....
None.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Dear Citizen,
we like our new powers. we're not giving them back. dream on.
have a nice day. (and vote quimby!)
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
SOPA/PIPA was stopped because of people writing and calling their congressmen but that seems to be the exception to the rule. Any time I write my congressman be it mail or Email, he doesn't change the way he votes, and then he sends me all sorts of campaign propaganda and asks me to donate to him. Ya right..
What you do is you write to them, and you tell them that you voted for them. Once.
Then you tell them that what they did was immoral, abhorrent, and you consider what they did a violation of their oath of office, and of the trust you put into them as your representative.
Telling them isn't enough. They have to be convinced that it could be fatal to their career.
You enumerate for them just how much you are going to work to see someone else that you do believe in is put into office. Tell the legislator the money that you gave their campaign will now be donated five fold to your new champion. Tell this person that you will be providing X hours a month of volunteer time working for another candidate. Then tell them that you will find no less than 5 friends who listen to you and trust your opinion, and they will do the same, and bring their friends along as well.
Then, email the letter to their Congressional office, with a cc to their campaign manager.
Then, go make good on your promise. Because, ultimately, if you want something to change, you will need to unfuck it yourself. Chances are, if it is a contested district, you might get a phone call back. If not, at least you know you are doing something to fix the problem created by voting for someone who would sell you out. This isn't about fighting and beating the current candidate- it is about the journey it will take *you* to become involved enough to become a good gatekeeper for the governmental process in your district.
Then you're not holding them accountable. Clicking on an email petition adding your name to a list of countless other people does little. Call their offices, ask to speak to their press secretaries or general council. Ask them with which groups they meet when they say they've met with "subject matter experts" to understand the issues. Then check on those experts. Call them. Then call the senator/congresswoman/city councilman/whatever back and give them feedback on the group. Offer your services (if you really are qualified) as an expert.
/. that show up everyday, not the least of which is the "impending death of America" (or, more often, "America is already dead"). The reality is that no, it's not. Do politicians listen to corporations that line their pockets? Yup. But they do listen to you, if you actually present an argument. And if they don't, vote them out of office. (And I don't want to hear the whole "there's only two parties" etc. etc. At the local level third-parties CAN get elected.) Democracy isn't easy. I don't think it's supposed to be. It takes more than just clicking on a link from MoveOn, PublicCitizen, etc. to get a point across.
Look folks - I know there are some memes on
Bark less. Wag more.
Almost every new day I learn of yet-another-3-letter-spook-government-agency in existence
And in the bad-old-days we were told that there were only 2 of them, FBI and CIA, and only one of them were allowed to spook against the citizens of America (that was, FBI)
Nowadays, can someone please tell me now many are out there?
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
Chances are, if it is a contested district, you might get a phone call back.
And there is the first problem!
According to this ~82% of are not even close to being contested ("In the 2000 Congressional Elections, out of the 435 Congressional districts in which there were elections, 359 were listed as "safe" by Congressional Quarterly. [4] In all of these 359, there was no uncertainty as to who would win.")
Mitreya - As do I. I'm not saying I do it for every cause, but there are some that I set aside some time to do it. I can't do it at work either but the representative's offices seem to be open late enough (EST) for me to reach someone and leave a message. I just make a point of following up when they call back (and I think I've only ever had two not call back over the years.)
Bark less. Wag more.
Will anything actually change as a result of this? Or are such concerns now quaintly archaic?
Only the rule, brother, only the rule remained
But... don't despair... the next administration will be conservative, thus "deregulation" will be the main marching order (otherwise how would the coprorations get their profit during recession times?)
Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
"government's spying efforts exceeded the legal limits at least once (PDF), meaning it is also officially 'unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment"
So the central question then is this; if the limits imposed on the federal government are not defined by the Constitution, what ARE the limits?
Doh... do you have to ask?? Whatever the "free market" allows.
Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
Yeah, and that was crap; there were several other agencies (such as the National Security Agency) and all of them spied on US citizens whether they were allowed or not.
That's classified.
Nowadays, can someone please tell me now many are out there?
Many: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Category:United_States_intelligence_agencies
Note that not all of those entries are for agencies; some are for programs, etc.
Thank you, Edward Snowden.
"Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
I don't recall "hippies and leftists" rallying to give the state all this power - the power to form secret committees to conduct warrantless surveillance on citizens. Many conservatives, on the other hand, were quite happily defending them under the guise of "fighting the enemies of our way of life" and whatnot.
Anyway, the legal limits imposed on the federal government (and the states - don't forget the 14th!) are defined by the Constitution. The practical limits, on the other hand, are defined only by what you let them get away with. Constitution is just a piece of paper unless people start actually treating it otherwise.