Slashdot Mirror
Surveillance Watchdog Concludes Metadata Program Is Illegal, "Should End"
An anonymous reader writes "Three out of five PCLOB board members are in agreement: The NSA spy programs are illegal.. Unfortunately, these lawyers are not in a position to act or make any changes, only to advise congress and the president. Could this be the start of change to come? 'According to leaked copies of a forthcoming report by the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board (PCLOB), the government's metadata collection program "lacks a viable legal foundation under Section 215, implicates constitutional concerns under the First and Fourth Amendments, raises serious threats to privacy and civil liberties as a policy matter, and has shown only limited value As a result, the board recommends that the government end the program.'" Not surprisingly, the Obama administration disagrees.
Also submitted by me 4 hours earlier... but who's keeping track :)
http://slashdot.org/submission...
Some people die at 25 and aren't buried until 75. -Benjamin Franklin
Surveillance Watchdog Concludes Metadata Program Is Illegal, "Should End"
Any rational person with half a brain would come to the same conclusion.
Brave Sir Robin ran away. ("No!") Bravely ran away away. ("I didn't!")
So it's illegal. So I guess someone's going to go to prison for the crime then.
Uh...
ba-dum-tschhh....?
It's really sad that the idea of widespread illegalactivities by the government yielding prison sentences for those involved is a joke. But that half ounce of pot you got caught with...
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Those who run this will continue to say it's legal, and even if it isn't legal, it's Too Important to stop doing it.
And then they'll just have to find more creative ways to hide that people are being charged on the basis of illegal spying -- why no your honor, this was a routine traffic stop, and his laptop fell open.
Because, I'm pretty sure I've seen stories about how the spy agencies have been briefing law enforcement in how to cover up the involvement of the three-letter-agencies.
So, they'll continue to break the law, and then they'll just lie about where the information came from.
The comparisons to the Stasi get more relevant every day, and many of us are old enough to remember the old "papers please, comrade" jokes.
Sadly, we're heading there, to the applause of some, and horror of others.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Since it has already passed muster with the courts, Congress, and President, I doubt there will be much outcome. They are advisors, not "deciders."
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
Indeed. Expect the government to replace one PCLOB member.
Liberty in your lifetime
From a higher level, metadata, who calls whom, and when, would have been used to round up the Founding Fathers. Had they still managed to be successful, they would have forbidden that to government without warrant.
It's really that damned simple, people.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
There are many who will despair that reports like this will get ignored. What I think we can learn from history is that big legal and social changes in the United States don't happen overnight. It takes a long time to build the political will to fix a broken system. We saw that with the civil rights movement, we're seeing it now (in my humble opinion) with marijuana legalization and same-sex marriage.
Even though the agency that issued this report has no authority, it's one more source of media coverage, one more expert opinion saying the surveillance programs are un-American. What we need are years, not months, of frequent and critical media coverage. That is what change looks like.
I know the NSA's abuses can't end soon enough. The democratic process makes wise decisions slowly and foolish decisions instantly. Keep the pressure on, and give it time.
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
Consider for a moment your standard, run of the mill credit report that is easily obtainable by just about anybody. It contains an actual chronological record of anything you do from a financial standpoint, but the metadata that is able to be gleaned from it tells a much more invasive story about you than just who you called and when. It tells me the kind of car you drive, the amount of money you make, the kind of neighborhood you live in, I know where you work, where your kids go to school. I can even make a pretty good estimate on if you are having marital problems. This data collection has been going on for decades, without your consent, and there is nothing you can do to stop it. You can't even own the data about yourself, and others are both allowed and encouraged to make money off said information, mostly be way of penalizing you if they don't like what it says. Where is the outrage? Where is the oversight? Is it because one dataset is owned by corporate pimps and the other is owned by the government? I personally don't give a shit if the NSA knows who I called. The furniture store down the street can spend $7 and find out all about my medical procedure from 2007, and absolutely anything else about my life they care to look into within about 30 seconds. We conceded privacy for the sake of convenience a long, long time ago.
A thing like this ought to be legal or illegal regardless of whether it is useful or not... So, though I'm glad they've reached this conclusion, I'm hesitant to rejoice — if these are the standards to apply, we may have something horribly invasive coming in the future, which will survive legal scrutiny because it will be useful, even if otherwise illegal...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Yeah, you already know the response White House, Obama isn't agreeing with the finding.
Back in 2005 then Senator Obama complained about the Patriot Act, which he's now defending.
“This is legislation that puts our own Justice Department above the law.If someone wants to know why their own government has decided to go on a fishing expedition through every personal record or private document, through the library books that you read, through the phone calls that you made, the emails that you sent, this legislation gives people no rights to appeal the need for such a search in a court of law. No judge will hear your plea. No jury will hear your case. This is just plain wrong.Giving law enforcement the tools that they need to investigate suspicious activities is one thing. And it’s the right thing. But doing it without any real oversight seriously jeopardizes the rights of all Americans, and the ideals America stands for.”
So by his own statements he's jeopardizing the rights and ideals of all Americans.
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
Only if you choose to ask the furniture store to give you furniture without you paying for it can they pull your credit. If you ask them to front you some furniture, they can see what happened to other people who loaned you money. My credit report is almost empty, it lists a car loan and that's about it. Nobody sees my report because I don't go around asking people to let me spend money I don't have.
Contrast this with the government. They have thousands of records on me, every phone call I've ever made or received. All of my emails. There's no way to opt out. If I tried hard enough to get away from their prying, they have squadrons of heavily armed men to send after me.
See the difference?
IMO, the reason that these things don't conflict is not because you don't have the right to bear arms everywhere you go, but rather because you don't necessarily have the right to go into the White House.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz