Slashdot Mirror


U.S. Spy Panel Is Loaded With Insiders

schwit1 writes "After a public backlash to government spying, President Barack Obama called for an independent group to review the vast surveillance programs that allow the collections of phone and email records. The members of the review group are:
Richard Clarke, the chief counterterrorism adviser on the National Security Council for Clinton who later worked for Republican President George W. Bush
Michael Morell, Obama's former deputy CIA director
Geoffrey Stone, law professor who has raised money for Obama and spearheads a committee hoping to build Obama's presidential library in Chicago
Cass Sunstein, law professor and administrator of information and regulatory affairs for Obama
Peter Swire, a former Office of Management and Budget privacy director for Clinton

'At the end of the day, a task force led by Gen. Clapper full of insiders – and not directed to look at the extensive abuse – will never get at the bottom of the unconstitutional spying,' said Mark Jaycox, a policy analyst for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a privacy advocacy group. The panel's meetings are closed after Clapper exempted it from the U.S. Federal Advisory Committee Act, which would have required it to keep the public informed and hold open meetings, for 'reasons of national security,' according to a statement from the group sent from Clapper's office. 'While we are exempt from the FACA, we are conducting this review as openly and transparently as possible.'"

6 of 330 comments (clear)

  1. Predictable by Swampash · · Score: 5, Insightful

    “The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.”

  2. You can never get the BIG BROTHER to change itself by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    BIG BROTHERS will never change it self.

    Change does not come from within.

    Real change must be made from the outside.

    All the insiders - the careered politicians, the careered bureaucrats, the careered leeches who bled the public dry - will not change their ways.

    If we are to have a REAL CHANGE we must make sure that NONE OF THEM remain inside the government.

    Any less than that will be hot air, as usual.

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  3. Surprised? No. by girlintraining · · Score: 5, Insightful

    President Barack Obama called for an independent group to review the vast surveillance programs that allow the collections of phone and email records. The members of the review group are:

    ... Doesn't matter. You're asking the foxes to guard the hen house. If you work for the government, you can't really be expected to provide an impartial audit of government activities. The end. The only time Congress appoints actual outsiders is when the majority party is able to excert enough power to get them appointed. Of course, this is heavily politicalized as well -- they don't appoint people without knowing what their answer will be.

    This is dinner theatre for one.

    --
    #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
  4. Re:Hope and change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The problem being that 50+% of Americans actually believe Obummer's bullshit about "Hope and Change"

    Except that wasn't the case at all. Most of the people I know who voted for Obummer the second time around were quite sick of his bullshit.

    The Republicans simply had to run anyone electable, anyone fucking at all to win.

    Instead, we had fifty shades of religious insanity, a man confusing the White House with a pizza joint, and the very icon of "that sort of evil capitalist the Democrats are always going on about - holy shit, they do exist!".

    Even with the stupidity of the Republican party - Romney had a chance. But he couldn't stop running his fucking mouth, spewing shit that should not be spoken by any politician seeking election.

    Magic fucking underpants aren't going to save you when you directly insult massive fucking swaths of the voting public.

  5. Transparency, authoritarian style by istartedi · · Score: 5, Interesting

    When I worked in support, the management began taking a drift towards the overly authoritarian side. I don't think they wanted to face up to it though. One particularly absurd thing they did was place a suggestion box next to the desk where all the managers sat. What was wrong with that? It was transparent. Yep. Anybody who put a suggestion in there would be seen putting it in, and the fold size or color of the paper would be matched up with the face, subconsciously or otherwise.

    This panel is about as useful as that suggestion box. It's transparency, authoritarian style.

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
  6. Re:Give us the option to vote against someone, the by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Or else, who the fuck are we supposed to vote for ?? Most of us already know that those appearing on our ballot tickets are scumbags.

    Please explain why you consider either Gary Johnson or Jill Stein to be "scumbags". Both seem to me to be people of high integrity. Gary got my vote last year, and Jill got my respect. If neither of them got your vote, maybe you should consider that people like you are the root of the problem.