NSA Still Funded To Spy On US Phone Records

Reader turp182 notes that the Amash Amendment (#100) to HR 2397 (DOD appropriations bill) failed to pass the House of Representatives, meaning it will not be added to the appropriations bill. turp182 writes "The amendment would have specifically defunded the bulk collection of American phone records." Americans can see how their representatives voted here.

Comments

Americans no better than foreigners

[Anonymous Coward]

Spy on everyone. Karma is a bitch, folks.

Re:Americans no better than foreigners

[PolygamousRanchKid]

It's watchers . . . all the way down.

Sadly, this isn't even funny, but rather the reality.

Re:Americans no better than foreigners

[interkin3tic]

What karma? We didn't vote for the spying. We knew, or rather some of us knew, that Obama wasn't going to change much when it came to national security theater and control, but at no point was that a question that was put to us. We brought it up with the patriot act and others, those efforts were obviously unsuccesful, and looking back, I'm still not sure how that campaign could have succeeded. Seriously. If I had to go back to before 9/11, I STILL wouldn't know how to keep it from happening. Let alone how to turn it back now.

Not to say I'm giving up, and hopefully neither is anyone else, but this seems like saying to someone who lost their house to a tsunami "Karma's a bitch: you should have prevented the tide from coming in."

It's A Start

[some old guy]

Not bad for a first try to rein in rogue agency.

We need to keep the pressure on, and support organizations and officials who think the principles of Constitutional government are more important than fear-mongering.

If we don't, the fight is over. The terrorists and our fascist "protectors" have won.

Re:It's A Start

[Joining Yet Again]

Rogue? Seems complicit to me.

What I wonder about right now are the NSA employees who - some surely being geeks who read Slashdot - are reading this comment. How do they sleep at night?

Do they speak like so many mid-20th century "soldiers", absolving themselves because they're only following orders? Have they been brainwashed into thinking that there's suuuuuuch a threat from terrorists to the American Way Of Life that what they do is essential? Or do they just enjoy the power trip in a dying empire? At least one such NSA employee will be reading this, and their conscience will twinge, just for a second.

Re:It's A Start

[drinkypoo]

At least one such NSA employee will be reading this, and their conscience will twinge, just for a second.

No, no it won't. Cognitive dissonance will prevent it. They have convinced themselves that they are good people on no basis whatsoever, and in order to protect that belief they will convince themselves that there is no way to achieve their goal but to ride roughshod over the constitution. Then they'll tell themselves that it's OK to violate the constitution as long as you're doing it to protect the constitution. Unfortunately, holding such a clearly contradictory belief is a kind of insanity.

Re:It's A Start

[DeathToBill]

Perhaps it did for one - his name was Edward Snowden.

Re:It's A Start

[asylumx]

Given that Pelosi and Boehner both voted against this bill, I'd say this is a much bigger problem than most of the others we've talked about around slashdot. When those two agree, you know something is severely wrong with the world.

Re:It's A Start

[GameboyRMH]

People in the "defense" industry typically respond with "I sleep just fine on a giant pile of money" or a slight variation of it, I'd expect the same from NSA stooges.

Re:It's A Start

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think, at least in their mind, there's any moral issue at all.

People in all law enforcement branches have the following two facts constantly being reinforced in their minds:

1. They're trying to catch bad guys.

2. No matter what they do, sometimes the bad guys get away.

Imagine working in such an environment. You're only human, so naturally you begin to think, "If only I had a little more power, I could do so much good with it."

So you make a grab for a little more power, and guess what? It does help to nab a few more bad guys. But it's still not enough. So you start to grab for a little more, then a little more, then a little more. There's nothing wrong with it, because you have the best intentions, right?

That's what's happened. The NSA has simply grabbed for more power, a little at a time, all in the name of trying to catch the bad guys. No one is telling them, "This steps over the line." The only results of their power grab, at least that they can see, is that they're more effective at doing a good thing.

So yes, it is possible that a decent, honest person could have no moral qualms about working at the NSA and recording all the communications of all Americans.

It doesn't mean they're right, of course. There are some lines they shouldn't cross. The problem is that all they can see are the reasons to cross those lines, never the reasons not to.

Re:It's A Start

[Em Adespoton]

I think many want to look at people in these situations in a very black-and-white way. If they're working for NSA then they must know how the information they are handling is being used. And since "we" consider it a bad thing, it must rest heavily on their conscience.

However, I would imagine more people are like myself than not. We come to work, make our widgets, and go home to our families. We don't spend any time worrying about the work itself as long as everything is functioning the way we are being paid to make it function. Using myself as an example, I get paid well with benefits and retirement packages to manage a small network. What the company does is irrelevant. I make my widgets and go home to my family. I'll leave the conscience decision-making for the armchair quarterbacks.

It's not privilege. It's not super pay scales. It's not patriotism. It's a job.

Indeed... if we expand the "How can they sleep at night" a bit, think about the following:
How can we sleep at night knowing that our "convenience" possessions are produced with the blood of impoverished nations?
How can we sleep at night knowing that our food choices are causing animal suffering, massive deforestation and health problems for the poor?
How can we sleep at night after playing the stock market and making a profit at the expense of someone who now has to default on their mortgage?
How can we sleep at night knowing that our clothing is made with forced child labor?
How can we sleep at night knowing that by wasting a large portion of the natural resources we have access to, we're really gumming things up for future generations?
How can we sleep at night when there are people in our area with no social security, no home, no friends, and no help?

And yet we seem to sleep at night just fine. Compared to these issues, some government employees supporting other government employees who have access to metadata about our daily communications seems a bit bland, and easy to sleep on.

Re:It's A Start

[Hatta]

Someone calls you out as wrong, the first instinct isnt "AM i wrong?", but "how can I refute him".

How else do you determine whether you are right or wrong except by attempting refutation? If someone publishes a mathematical proof, doesn't everyone immediately search for mistakes? If I can't refute your argument, then I'll happily admit I'm wrong. If I can refute your argument, what reason do I have to believe that I'm wrong?

The important part is that you base your refutation in facts and logic, and not character assassination or misdirection.

Im currently in a Poli Sci class, and there was a video on "realism" where the speaker described it as basically what you said-- a cynical worldview that everyone is NOT intrinsically good, but intrinsically self-interested and self-justifying. This idea seems to be foreign to a lot of folks I know that I assume to be more to the left-- certainly a number of students in the class appear to never have even thought of the world in those terms.

Socialism is necessary not because everyone is good, but because everyone *is* self interested and self justifying. Without some sort of correcting mechanism(e.g. redistribution of wealth by the government), self-interest compounds upon self-interest, amplifying inequality and leading to atrocities that no one will admit are atrocities because of their self justifying nature.

Re:It's A Start

[steelfood]

More than one. More than one.

Re:It's A Start

[amicusNYCL]

his name is Edward Snowden.

In death, members of Project Mayhem have a name.

My congressman will be getting a call today.

[intermodal]

It's shameful. My district borders on two of my previous districts, and both of those districts voted aye. Both of those representatives are men I voted for in prior elections, and proudly so. My current congressman, on the other hand, has brought disgrace upon himself by voting against this amendment. To be fair, I voted against him...

Re:My congressman will be getting a call today.

[intermodal]

*shrug* Doesn't matter, really. Unless I let my voice be heard, I may as well be a serf.

NSA sez...

[ackthpt]

I'll know who you called this Summer.

but I still can't sort out my own emails

Re:wait a minute

[Joining Yet Again]

If you don't know your representative's name in a representative democracy, something's very broken.

Re:wait a minute

[dkleinsc]

Whoops, broken link. Try this instead: Official House vote

113th congress

[MickyTheIdiot]

113th congress is the worst in history, which is sadly impressive given how bad the 112th was.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acts_of_the_113th_United_States_Congress

There have been a total 13 bills make it into law so far this Congress... and the ones that have made it into law are about items such as "Freedom to Fish".

It's at a complete stand still folks. You're representatives have finally dropped to the point they aren't even pretending to represent interests of voters over the interests of their corporate donors.

How bad does it have to get before something is done?

Re:113th congress

[drinkypoo]

Actually, them doing nothing is probably better, otherwise they will screw things up even more.

False dichotomy. There's a third option: Undoing things. They can be invaliding prior acts, which is what we really need. We don't need to "fix" the U SAP AT RIOT act, we need to eliminate it. Examples abound.

Re:113th congress

[Anubis IV]

There have been a total 13 bills make it into law so far this Congress... and the ones that have made it into law are about items such as "Freedom to Fish".

Clearly you and I have different opinions on what qualifies as "worst" Congress. Considering all the harm they've been causing, them being completely ineffective in getting anything done is a marked improvement over what we've seen in previous years.

Re:Jury maundering at its finest.

[robinsonne]

I think you mean Gerrymandering http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering/

Re:Still don't get it...

[Hatta]

Does the name COINTELPRO mean anything to you? Decades ago the government used illegal surveillance to attempt to quash the civil rights movement. What assurances do we have that they won't do this again? Why should we believe they have good intentions at all when they cannot comply with the 4th amendment?

I did my part

[Yevoc]

Now that we all know we're being surveilled, I can understand why others may not make similar posts, but I'm going to risk it and say it anyway. I read the previous slashdot article on the amendment. I immediately called my representative. He voted YES! Even if the ship sinks, I still feel very good about this moment. The system may be dysfunctional, but at least some of us are still doing the right thing. The worst thing we can do is succumb to despair. It may take some really tough times to happen, but we WILL eventually emerge on the other side with a better system. It's what life always manages to do, no matter how dark the times become.

Re:The people have spoken

[scarboni888]

Thanks guys. Hey - listen my external USB drive got corrupted last night and I can't seem to repair it.

Can you direct me to the request form for an NSA restore of my data, please?

Re:Of Course

[swan5566]

The amendment vote was 205-217. That's not losing by too much.

This will never happen.

[emil]

Having acquired these powers over decades, no amount of voter insistence will be effective in removing them.

What needs to happen now is at the state level - the legislatures must be convinced to grant themselves greater oversight and control over federal activities.

Article. V. - The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

Our representative democracy was designed in an era where (horse-drawn) transportation was problematic, and the decisions of a few were practical. These conditions no longer exist, and the few are now too easily swayed by money and power. More people need to participate in federal decisions if we wish to (re)establish the consent of the governed.

Next Election

[sahuxley]

I see 217 people that need to lose their jobs in the next election.

Re:Of Course

[jfengel]

That's true, but you need to take the tally with a grain of salt. Everybody knows what the outcome will be before the vote is taken, so they each get to plan their votes according to what they think will get them re-elected. You could switch your vote when it's actually taken, but lying to the party whip is a good way to get yourself shut out of important meetings.

There were probably some who would have switched votes each direction if the tally were taken entirely in secret. I can't really say whether it would have gotten closer or further from passing, though I suspect the whips could take a stab at it.

That kind of works for math, but only math

[raymorris]

>. How else do you determine whether you are right or wrong except by attempting refutation? If someone publishes a mathematical proof, doesn't everyone immediately search for mistakes? If I can't refute your argument, then I'll happily admit I'm wrong. If I can refute your argument, what reason do I have to believe that I'm wrong?

That works for math, some extent, because you can have objective, irrefutable proof. When someone says to me "you're being selfish", I can ALWAYS refute that and come up with some justification, no matter how right they are. The wise thing for me to do is to pause and ask "do they perhaps have a valid point?". "Am I indeed being selfish in some way?" Most of the time, they are at least half right, and my excuses don't change that fact.

The second half of your post is a great example. No matter how many times socialism fails, you can ignore the facts and "refute" the conclusion by reasoning abstractly within your own world of ideas, by mental masturbation. By the same token, no matter what success socialist regimes may have, I can refute your conclusion by pointing to their many failures. If I were wiser, I'd instead look to see what I can learn from your point of view. I might say "though your method of achieving the goal has always failed, perhaps the goal itself is worth pursuing". Indeed, that's often the case - leftists have lofty goals, worthy goals, but little to no knowledge of what actually works and what doesn't, what can actually be accomplished and how. Conservatives look at what actually works and end up with "let's stick with doing what has always worked". Better that they look at where each other have a good point they are making. Putting their viewpoints together, you get "let's dream big dreams, then figure out how to actually accomplish some of them".

Rather than refuting each other all day, how about I look for the nuggets of gold in your ideas, and you look for where what I am saying makes sense. Then we can learn from each other and work together to implement your dreamy ideals in a way that actually works in the real world.