Slashdot Mirror
EFF Tells Court That the NSA Knowingly and Illegally Destroyed Evidence
An anonymous reader writes in with this latest bit of EFF vs NSA news. 'We followed the back and forth situation earlier this year, in which there were some legal questions over whether or not the NSA needed to hang onto surveillance data at issue in various lawsuits, or destroy it as per the laws concerning retention of data. Unfortunately, in the process, it became clear that the DOJ misled FISA court Judge Reggie Walton, withholding key information. In response, the DOJ apologized, insisting that it didn't think the data was relevant — but also very strongly hinting that it used that opportunity to destroy a ton of evidence. However, this appeared to be just the latest in a long history of the NSA/DOJ willfully destroying evidence that was under a preservation order.
The key case where this evidence was destroyed was the EFF's long running Jewel v. NSA case, and the EFF has now told the court about the destruction of evidence, and asked the court to thus assume that the evidence proves, in fact, that EFF's clients were victims of unlawful surveillance. The DOJ/NSA have insisted that they thought that the EFF's lawsuit only covered programs issued under executive authority, rather than programs approved by the FISA Court, but the record in the case shows that the DOJ seems to be making this claim up.'
The key case where this evidence was destroyed was the EFF's long running Jewel v. NSA case, and the EFF has now told the court about the destruction of evidence, and asked the court to thus assume that the evidence proves, in fact, that EFF's clients were victims of unlawful surveillance. The DOJ/NSA have insisted that they thought that the EFF's lawsuit only covered programs issued under executive authority, rather than programs approved by the FISA Court, but the record in the case shows that the DOJ seems to be making this claim up.'
that excuse always works for me.
Destruction of evidence makes the NSA guilty.
- EFF, 2014
1) Is posting AC really Anonymous?
2) Has Slashdot ever received a FISA letter?
In general I think that destroying evidence should result in the assumption that they're hiding a worst case scenario. So I agree with the EFF. Destroying evidence = automatically guilty of accusations. Have a nice day.
I don't read AC A human right
The NSA could admit that they break the law every day of the week, murder Americans on american soil, steal millions of dollars, destroy companies and even the entire economy, and do you know what will happen?
Absolutely nothing.
They believe they are above the law. And heck, most of the legislative branch believes they are above the law. The judicial and executive branches are more than willing to look the other way, so as a result, the NSA gets a free pass to do whatever they want.
Because.... national security... and boogyman terrorists... and something, something mumble mumble. Whatever the fear flavor of the week is. 1984 was an instruction manual.
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
The biggest DUH ever.
http://stapledthedesignlife.fi...
Things are going to slide, slide in all directions
Won't be nothing
Nothing you can measure anymore
The blizzard, the blizzard of the world
has crossed the threshold
and it has overturned
the order of the soul - Leonard Cohen "The Future"
These are not isolated events anymore. Everything is being turned upside down.
These fucking people are out of control and need some serious jail time.
Look where all this talking got us, baby.
I know this is a troll, but people would do well to remember that being unable to hold the government accountable for their actions is a much greater threat to national security than any outside entity could muster against the people.
Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
Keeping the US safe is a clear and compelling interest that takes priority over a measly civil claim.
Ah, yes, "The ends justify the means". The trouble with that is that the means determine the end. If your means are corrupt, lawless and arbitrary, just what sort of outcome do you expect?
I believe this has been discussed previously: Matthew 7:16, 1 Samuel 24:13, Matthew 12:33, Luke 6:43, James 3:12
Protoplasm. Quiet Protoplasm. I like quiet protoplasm.
Watch THIS.
It blew my friggen mind. Michael Hayden is an evil motherfucker.
I wonder what kind of light does this shed on the US if a state agency of the US destroys evidence in a legal process?
I dont know but what kind of criminal or legal status does destroying evidence in a legal process have in the US?
Keeping the US safe is a clear and compelling interest that takes priority over a measly civil claim.
Ahh, ColdFjord, so "nice" to hear from you again.
Just remember, we're watching you too, motherfucker.
"America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter, or lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves"
- Abe Lincoln
Evidence. That's what matters. Not insistence.
If you want to understand how our country came to this, it is quite well summed up in 260 or so pages in a book called "The Authoritarians" by Bob Altemeyer.
Download the book here: http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/
This is written from extensive research into right wing authoritarian personality (right wing is not a political aspect here). If you want to know why the entire globe seems to be following this destructive (destructive from a majority point of view) read this. It becomes easy to see why politicians can kill their own citizens. How can someone let Wall St bankers off the hook yet throw someone in jail for possessing one joint and throw away the key.
Enjoy...it is very enlightening. And FREE!
the EFF gets a charitable contribution from me every year
// and Helen Woodward
/// the rest of em can fark off
/ As does the Alzheimer's foundation
That "measly civil claim" is the US Constitution. The US Constitution vs new lines and added paragraphs adding extra "national security" color of law?
If any gov can just say evidence does not exist, that no court can see it, that no paper work can be found - the legal system stops for an entire cadre of gov workers.
How long before more gov agencies, bureaucracies and well connected contractors try the same color of law trick? All they have to do is spin up a "national security" story and at a federal level, state or city level your access to any court is reduced to a very expensive request?
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Ah, yes, "The ends justify the means". The trouble with that is that the means determine the end. If your means are corrupt, lawless and arbitrary, just what sort of outcome do you expect?
Thank you for my newest retort to the Snowden apologists who claim that all the foreign intel information he took and released (and will probably release some more) is justified because of the domestic stuff that was revealed, i.e., the ends justifying the (lawless and arbitrary) means.
Colossians 3:22
Inter arma enim silent leges?
Sorry but that idea was bullshit back in Ancient Rome and it is bullshit now. If the country cannot follow the rule of law in wartime how can they expect the citizens to respect it?
Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the (supposed) good of its victims may be the most oppressive
Actually, I agree with all of the leaks and believe their foreign spying was immoral.
What about the bandwagon fallacy that many authoritarians spew forth in an effort to justify the spying? "Everyone is doing it, so it's okay!" Well, no, it's not, because everyone has rights, and we shouldn't violate even the rights of foreigners without a damn good reason (i.e. evidence that they're enemies).
Even if you find some miraculous way to win (which you won't) you're dealing with organizations which have proven time and again that they're not just above the law, but they own it, and can manipulate it in any way they see fit.
Which is why I refer to Lincoln as an authoritarian asshole.
Tell you what Federal Government... if you consider this a defense against destroying evidence, then certainly you'd be okay with lowly citizens that are supposed to be EQUAL to you before the law to use the same defense when you bring us to trial...
Right? Or are we the only ones that have to follow the rules?
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
True. The NSA, as a government agency, is obliged to follow the rules, in spirit as well as letter. Well said.
Protoplasm. Quiet Protoplasm. I like quiet protoplasm.
I don't think they destroyed anything, it's all just hidden away.
If you want anonymous posting (as well as better comments and better stories), check out soylent news. That's the onion link, which is through tor (end-to-end anonymous and encrypted). Where is slashdice's onion url? Exactly. Half the time, you can't even *read* slashdice with tor (pink banned page much?)
... nothing. Rubber stamps are never wrong.
Yes, being honest (snowdens means) should clearly be a criminal offence, and is a terrible way to do business..
Freedom is slavery and all that.
For all those saying "nothing will be done".
Loosing this court case will almost certainly lose the NSA their budget.
And by destroying evidence they took one giant leap towards loosing the case.
The alternative would have been to remain complicit in keeping such crimes secret. That's even more lawless and arbitrary.
I used to financially support the NRA, under the assumption that they defended the 2nd amendment. A while age I realized that was not actually correct,
The EFF is the best example of an entity that defends *all* amendments. I now financially support them, every month. When NPR comes begging for money I'm happily able to refuse, secure in the knowledge that EFF is far more effective in their use of funds than NPR when it comes to presevring the Constitution.
There are a ton of relatively affluent people here on Slashdot. It certainly wouldn't hurt you to allocate a small amount of money to EFF annually, and we know their results.
To repeat from what I posted for another AC troll.
The law has procedures and methods to allow the court to review the evidence without making it public.
That is why it will NOT compromise national security.
IANAL and even I know that.
So anyhow, where do they keep digging up ignorant or lying cretins like you from?
I wonder if someone is trying to astroturf us.
the bad guys are from middle east, they are making viruses....
If that dog only ate your homework the consequence is limited between that dog and you
But in the reality is that the dog, aka, the Government of the United States of America, has eaten the Constitution
The Constitution of the United States of America used to be the HIGHEST LAW OF THE LAND, used to be , no longer, because the way that motherfucking dog is behaving, it not only ignores the Constitution, it goes directly AGAINST what the United States of America is all about !
We call ourselves a "democracy", we call ourselves "the land of the free, home of the braves" ?
Well ... the only FREE thing is the freedom of that fucking dog in destroying the country, and the BRAVERY of the government to LIE UNDER OATH !!
It's not that I like to swear, it's not that I enjoy using vulgar words, but as an American, I simply can't stand any longer what is going on !!
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
"I used to financially support the NRA, under the assumption that they defended the 2nd amendment. A while age I realized that was not actually correct"
Um, no... the NRA is still the only organization that FIGHTS for the 2nd amendment. Gun Owners of America IMHO is a fig leaf for people who want to claim they care about the 2nd while being ineffectual in doing it. I personally wish there was an NRA-equivalent (that had members of the House and Senate quaking in their boots) for EACH of the 10 amendments that form the Bill of Rights. For example, we need a well-funded RUTHLESS grass-roots organization dedicated to JUST the 4th amendment that will tolerate NO politician who would support ANY search of a person, his home, his papers (information, "meta" or not) and his "effects" (other possessions) that would be comitted without a specific narrowly-drawn sworn-out under-oath search warrant. The NRA should NOT be the only organization with that zeal for the constitution and the 2nd amendment should NOT be the only amendment that has such a zealous supporter. And, no - the ACLU is not there for any of that (they get all tangled-up in favorite left-wing social and fiscal causes, let their politics drive them to weighing whether to enter any particular fight over any particular amendment, and have been far too willing to go mushy on the 1st and 2nd when their left-wing friends are stomping on them.)
"...the knowledge that EFF is far more effective in their use of funds than NPR when it comes to presevring the Constitution. "
Yikes! NPR is government-run pro-government propaganda; they're NO example of ANYTHING positive - the equivalent of Pravda, or some Goebels-run outfit. The American left USED to shout slogans AGAINST "the man"... now the left that used to burn draft cards and THINK the evil federal government MIGHT be spying on it, turns to the central government for EVERYTHING (food, clothing, shelter, healthcare, news, entertainment, etc.) even KNOWING that government is spying on them! So much for things like "never trust anyone over 40" and "Hey Hey LBJ, How many kids did you kill today?". If the government resumed the draft today, I suspect there'd be a lot of left-wing Obama supporters who'd SUPPORT the draft and turn-in anybody trying to escape to Canada!
NPR should NEVER have been created in the United States, should never have been funded or licensed, and should have been shut down long ago. For all you left-wingers who love it (thereby exposing just how completely left-wing it has become while funded by ALL taxpayers) you should ask yourselves a serious question: Would "Air America" have survived and been forced to become better and more-competative if NPR had not been there as a place for liberal listeners to go to? That's the free market, and IF liberal ideas really ARE good, then they should succeed and prosper in such a market. Without NPR (which, as a government mouthpiece, has to live within certain bounds) I'd bet a MORE liberal commercial radio network WOULD HAVE succeeded (and liberals on Capitol Hill would not always be having to fight for NPR funding and worry that the GOP might succeed in cutting it).
"We tried that already with the Occupy movement. It ended up being judo'd into supporting those rat bastard "Tea Party" conservixtremists.
Sorry, but there's simply NO WAY you were not on SOME drug when you typed that!
The "Occupy Movement" was synthetic - it was setup by organizers affiliated with the Democrats who recruited and/or encouraged a bunch of losers to "take to the streets" and "occupy" a few parks - but was NEVER intended to succeed in doing ANYTHING to the Wall St. Bankers who FUNDED Barack Obama. "Occupy Wall Street" was an attempted leftist-populist SMOKESCREEN sponsored in many ways by the Democrats who, you will note, spoke glowingly about the movement and refused to enforce many laws against its actions (for as long as it was useful). It was an attempt to create a counter-balance to the TEA partiers on newscasts through an election cycle (originally, to get Obama through 2012, but now bits are trying to re-ignite for 2014). The "occupiers" were "useful idiots" who undoubtably stood for many OPPOSITE THINGS from the TEA Party, but did not understand that their true masters would never let them be effective; that was NOT the plan. They were NOT "judo'd into supporting" the TEA Party. .. the individual "occupiers" were just used by the politicians and their friends at ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC etc for an election cycle and then were discarded when the tactic failed to convince middle America that the TEA PArty was equally synthetic and obnoxious. Every polluted park, drug overdose, rape, smashed window, etc just further highlighted the complete CONTRAST with the TEA Partiers who did no none of those things.
"The problem is that it is angry average Joe against teams of highly intelligent, highly motivated, professional weasels working for the big two parties"
No. The problem is [1] that the many "angry average Joe" characters you cite are angry about DIFFERENT THINGS and want to go in ENTIRELY different directions for solutions, and [2] that the government is now SO big and involved in EVERYTHING that polititians can easily create a myriad of "wedge issues" to get various "angry average Joes" to support them (beacause of those "wedges") as they harm those Joes with other policies. The "Angry Average Joe" who goes to "occupy" thinks the solution is Marxism (even though that has NEVER worked). The "Angry Average Joe" who joins the TEA Party wants to go back to the small government with limited authority our founders gave us (which DID work). These positions CANNOT be merged; they are POLAR OPPOSITES. This gets gamed by politicians who then argue over things like abortion, gay marriage, global warming, etc as a way to drag people to their sides REGARDLESS of issues of Marxism vs Freedom (and, yes, those two are OPPOSITES... you CANNOT re-distribute wealth without first STEALING it at gunpoint)
Here's a new sneaky approach, less destructive but so far effective: U.S. Marshals Seize Cops’ Spying Records to Keep Them From the ACLU
Belief is the currency of delusion.
That is an unbelievably stupid argument by the DOJ. It's common sense that when the court orders you to preserve documents, you hold on to any documents which may remotely be affected at all. This is a clear cut case of contempt of court and ought to be prosecuted as such.
The DOJ is setting a fine example for all other law abiding citizens out there. I expect to see more "I misunderstood the scope of discovery" excuses in forthcoming civil and criminal cases.
I find from past experience that people who feel the need to shout to make their point (especially in caps over the internet) invariably have nothing worth listening to.
Yes, being honest (snowdens means) should clearly be a criminal offence
No other means were available. If you don't accept the means he used you are in a position where it is illegal to report crime.
Now that is a mindfuck and a half.
We already know, thanks to Snowden, that the NSA commits billions of felony wiretaps as a matter of routine. They have no regard at all for the law, why would they comply with their duty to preserve evidence in an ongoing investigation?
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Backups. There's usually a backup somewhere that still contains the data.
This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Is that you John Galt?
Oh good, let's bring the Bible into this. It's just what this conversation needs. All we need now are some 9/11 conspiracies, and we've got the full spectrum of right wing crazy town.
we've known for years that the NSA was a wholly illegal organization run by hardened criminals.
The question is... why do they still get funding?
make no mistake about it... when a politician talks about national security... they're talking about THEIR security... not YOURS.
They dont give two shits about YOUR security.
Same goes for the phrase "family values"
Yeah, I bet that wasn't important or relevant.
I know it did not work out for OWS, but maybe there are more americans that agree with protesting against pervasive surveillance. ... who knows
I know, too, that since the lesson of Vietnam war, US government has limited the chance for universities to become breeding ground for social movements. But take a look at the rest of the world: Chile has a quite recent example of university students becoming the spearhead of political change, much against its oligarchy, with most media backing the -then president- richest man in the country.
You could, if you were willing to sacrifice the small things, but you most of you are not even willing to sacrificy a semester, or a pay day or anything. Or maybe it's that your communications are so filtered that the powers that be prevent you from gaining critical mass...
Maybe there are thousands of facebook event invitations "protest NSA" that just get filtered to the bottom of the feed
And that's accurate. We are the dog.
Talk to people, or shit, just read Slashdot. In general, most people think the Constitution has bad some things in it, that We The People disagree with, and that the country would be better off without.
We don't all agree on which parts of the Constitution are bad ideas and shouldn't really be in the Constitution, but we're nearly unanimous in that there's stuff in there that we want to get rid of (but are too pussy to formally amend).
Then we turn our disagreements in a democratic strength, for trade. I'll look the other way when you undermine that part if you'll look the other way when I undermine this part. "Trade ya a fourth amendment for a second. Deal? Yay, we both win!"
Lots of people say that, but on November 5, 2014 let's have a look at the election results and see if a significant fraction of voters have even tried (I'm not even going to discuss the silly idea of actual victories) to vote out the Democrats and Republicans. I predict that approximately 99% of the people who say they can't stand it, will be proved to have been blowing hot air.
(Proved. I won't be waxing philosophical or speculating or spouting vague "social science." I'll be pointing at cold hard election numbers which conclusively show an objective truth. Just like in 2012 and 2010 and 2008 and 2006 and 2004 and ...)
If you're the one person in a hundred who actually follows through, good for you. But you understand that any betting person, would be pretty justified in saying that you're lying about not being able to stand it anymore, don't you? Even if they're wrong that you're lying about not being able to stand it, don't you agree that all the numbers will suggest that most people who say that, are lying?
Put up or shut up, America. You do have a democracy, and you just don't like how you constantly make such awful decisions, like a sorority girl who gets drunk every single night.
The outcome I expect is at Daniel 2:44. You'll know when it's about to happen by watching for the events of 1 Thessalonians 5:3.
Only, they don't go to jail, they just carry on as normal.
Here's a new sneaky approach, less destructive but so far effective: U.S. Marshals Seize Cops; Spying Records to Keep Them From the ACLU
So, although disobeying a direct order, the police seize the spying records of the police and respond with "We do not discuss pending litigation". Lol. These former bathroom bad boys are a real laugh riot. If they aren't doing anything wrong, what do they have to hide? More than likely, it would be discovered they were practicing their sexual predator skills, including pedophilia.
This is the kind of attitude one gets when the minimum requirement for being employed in the security sector is being a school yard football faggot with a gym yard GED. Extra points if someone in your family is already a member of the union.
It's time to seriously consider constitutionally defined police powers spread into several well defined (non-crippling) checks and balances derived from mainstream representation independently diverse enough to be valid.
I find this case particularly amazing - in just three paragraphs you'll find a dozen reasons to be outraged -- or to dispair. After the first sentence you wonder if it is a parody, but it gets even better:
I hope I didn't brain my damage.
Oh, EFF. How I love thee. Looks like the donations generated from Humble Bundles are turning in to results.
If we colonize Mars, it won't be the World Wide Web anymore. UWW?
LOL you! I like you. O master of trollkwondo.
What the NSA doesn't get with "legal" court orders, they obtain with good 'ol black hat hacking.
I dare say they do. But only to the extent you're around long enough to lay down your life to protect them. That's what they mean by the phrase "national security".
"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire