Slashdot Mirror


Electronic Surveillance Up 500% In DC Area Since 2011, Almost All Sealed Cases (washingtonpost.com)

schwit1 quotes a report from Washington Post: Secret law enforcement requests to conduct electronic surveillance in domestic criminal cases have surged in federal courts for Northern Virginia and the District, but only one in a thousand of the applications ever becomes public, newly released data show. The bare-bones release by the courts leaves unanswered how long, in what ways and for what crimes federal investigators tracked individuals' data and whether long-running investigations result in charges. In Northern Virginia, electronic surveillance requests increased 500 percent in the past five years, from 305 in 2011 to a pace set to pass 1,800 this year. Only one of the total 4,113 applications in those five years had been unsealed as of late July, according to information from the Alexandria division of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, which covers northern Virginia. The report adds: "The federal court for the District of Columbia had 235 requests in 2012, made by the local U.S. attorney's office. By 2013, requests in the District had climbed 240 percent, to about 564, according to information released by the court's chief judge and clerk. Three of the 235 applications from 2012 have been unsealed. The releases from the Washington-area courts list applications by law enforcement to federal judges asking to track data -- but not eavesdrop -- on users' electronic communications. That data can include sender and recipient information, and the time, date, duration and size of calls, emails, instant messages and social media messages, as well as device identification numbers and some website information."

26 of 41 comments (clear)

  1. The Police State expands by judoguy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Thanks, Obama.

    --
    Peace is easy to achieve, just surrender. Liberty is much harder get/keep.
    1. Re:The Police State expands by wyHunter · · Score: 1, Troll

      And "privacy experts are concerned!" And the useful idiots think that Mrs. Clinton is their friend.

    2. Re:The Police State expands by BlueStrat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And "privacy experts are concerned!" And the useful idiots think that Mrs. Clinton is their friend.

      For decades it's been: "But if we vote 3rd-party/write-in the wrong lizard might get in! We'll just keep voting for the same 2 parties...one of them will eventually listen to us!"

      "Doing the same thing over and over yet expecting different results is one definition of insanity."

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    3. Re:The Police State expands by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      And "privacy experts are concerned!" And the useful idiots think that Mrs. Clinton is their friend.

      Well, she wipes hard drives when she's done with them. That's S.O.P. for privacy, right?

    4. Re:The Police State expands by davester666 · · Score: 2

      No, voting 3rd party is totally legit. Well, it would be, except this election, issue X is really super-really important, in that if you don't vote for one of the two established parties, your vote doesn't count and someone will be forced to come to your home and rape you and your wife. And probably your children as well.

      This time around, it's supreme court justices. The world will come to an end if we don't have the right SC justices. And only D (or R) can hope to find the right candidates that will prevent the Earth from suddenly being thrown out of the Solar System.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    5. Re:The Police State expands by Kiuas · · Score: 1

      And the useful idiots think that Mrs. Clinton is their friend.

      As a European I'm not a fan of either of the candidates, but do we have any reason to assume Trump is any better?

      Seriously I have not seen Trump make any statements about privacy/mass surveillance/whistleblowers/etc that'd give me a reason to believe that he will somehow change or improve America's status quo when it comes to surveillance. In fact, a quick googling tends to reveal the exact opposite of that:

      "I tend to err on the side of security, I must tell you," Trump told conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt when asked about the metadata program.

      "When you have the world looking at us and would like to destroy us as quickly as possible, I err on the side of security," - -

      Trump said his position in favor of the NSA data collection had been the same since before last month's terrorist attacks in Paris, which stoked fears of international terrorism and revived debate over government surveillance measures. - -

      Trump said Tuesday that he would be "fine" with restoring provisions of the Patriot Act to allow for the bulk data collection, something candidates such as former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush have also called for that was banned with the passage of the USA Freedom Act, which Cruz supported.

      "As far as I'm concerned, that would be fine," Trump said.

      The problem with this candidates is that both sides of this debate are so heavily polarized that the fanbase of both seems to assume their candidate is better on a given issue simply because the opposing candidate has a bad stance on it.

      You may think Trump is the lesser of two evils, but make no mistake: Trump is no champion of civil liberties. If this is your reason for voting him, I suggest re-thinking about it.

      --
      "It is the business of the future to be dangerous" -Alfred North Whitehead
    6. Re:The Police State expands by DeVilla · · Score: 1

      And the useful idiots think that Mrs. Clinton is their friend.

      As a European I'm not a fan of either of the candidates, but do we have any reason to assume Trump is any better?

      Well, for starters, please don't mistake this as an endorsement. Though I know I can't vote for her, I don't think I'll be able to vote for him when I'm standing in the booth. I'd have to look in the mirror the next morning and I'll need to explain to my kids how I could do that and still have principles.

      That out of the way, if Hillary gets elected she will be corrupt. I base that on past behavior. She will not meet meaningful resistance from the Legislature or Judicial. I base that on prior, recent observations. She won't have any resistance from federal investigators and will likely be shielded by them. I base that on recent observations and the fact that they will answer to her. Misdeeds will not be investigated or meaningfully be reported by the major media outlets. Most likely the worst details will be buried. I base that on prior, recent observations.

      Trump has no friends in the Legislature. The Democrats do not like him. Many Republicans can't even tolerate him when pinching their nose. (Again, I'm referring to the Legislature, not the voting public.) I doubt the Judicial will give in to Trump's feeble "Reality Distortion Field" either. The press despise him and will be ready to report every misdeed, misstatement, breach of etiquette, fashion faux pas, inopportune sneeze, twitch and blemish non-stop around the clock. Trump will not be able to get away with picking his nose while standing in front of a window at the White House.

      tl;dr Trump might be better because he will not be allowed to get away with anything. He would probably even make impeachment fashionable again. In contrast, Hillary is the favorite daughter of the Illuminati.

      I still don't think I could vote for either of them.

    7. Re:The Police State expands by wyHunter · · Score: 1

      You're absolutely right - but he IS the lesser of two evils. Mrs. Clinton - the woman who thought we should have rigged the Palestinian elections and 'droned' Julian Assange is NOT someone who should be trusted with executive power - or, indeed, any power larger than that to switch on a light bulb.

    8. Re:The Police State expands by wyHunter · · Score: 1

      Context - no, not in this one.

  2. Rs could have run Mufasa against these guys by raymorris · · Score: 2

    The Republicans could have run Mufasa and beat these Democrats who have been running things the last 8 years, despite the fact that Mufasa is a cartoon character. They did nominate a cartoon character, but somehow they ended up choosing the one who polls worse than Hillary.

    1. Re:Rs could have run Mufasa against these guys by liquid_schwartz · · Score: 1, Troll

      You're assuming that the Republicans actually wanted to win. It makes more sense if you think of it as being a more sophisticated version of pro wrestling. The outcome is predetermined but the two "wrestlers" still have to go put on a show for the fans, or voters in this case. Because Hillary is *so* unelectable they had to get Trump. Every time Wikileaks shows just how corrupt, untruthful, and disconnected she is Trump saves her by doing something even more outrageous. I recall thinking that the 2008 election had a circus feel to it. That was a mere warm up for this go around. Expect even worse in the future.

  3. Role Reversal by jxander · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The entire default stance for Private citizens and Public officials has been flipped.

    We, as private citizens, are supposed to have our lives kept private, except in extreme cases where surveillance is required and granted sparingly and meticulously.

    They, as public officials, are supposed to operating publicly, except in extreme cases of national security.

    Somewhere along the lines, these roles were reversed. I'm not sure if we're ever going to get things back.

    --
    This signature is false.
    1. Re:Role Reversal by Solandri · · Score: 2

      Somewhere along the lines, these roles were reversed.

      I think it happened right after the end of the Cold War. During the Cold War, we had a bogeyman - trumped up but still a bogeyman. We would point to things that happened in the Soviet Union like excessive government intrusion into people's private lives, and proudly proclaim that that sort of thing could never happen here. Anyone in our government who even breathed a suggestion of it would be branded a commie and instantly torpedo their career.

      The Cold War ends, the poster child for an authoritative government run amok disappears, and suddenly everyone in our government who always those authoritarian powers but were too scared to try to ask for them come crawling out from the shadows.

    2. Re:Role Reversal by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      Drama queens. Based on the email leaks we have seen, Public officials are under more scrutiny than ever. You guys don't even know what an authoritarian government is.

    3. Re:Role Reversal by BlueStrat · · Score: 1

      Public officials are under more scrutiny than ever.

      By a foreign government and not our own 4th-estate or oversight, and current US leaders are willing to rattle the thermonuclear sabres over it...but not Crimea, Ukraine, Syria, etc etc...oh, no! Those little Russian military faux-pas are not sufficient reason to threaten reprisals. But, just release some emails that were supposed to be "polished...with a cloth" and suddenly it's 1962 Cuba.

      Kinda tells one where their priorities and loyalties lie, doesn't it?

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    4. Re:Role Reversal by gweihir · · Score: 2

      History would indicate that it will require a full cycle up to fascism and eventual complete economic collapse, before freedom is restored. Of course, most fascisms in history were established relatively fast and hence fell fast, so we cannot be entirely sure the eventual collapse will happen in what the US is currently establishing.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  4. East Germany equals America by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    Except we have no rights in America

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    1. Re:East Germany equals America by AHuxley · · Score: 2

      It gets better. Even when laws are presented to slow the domestic spying down, reform is used as a legal gateway to perfect domestic spying.
      "NSA Can Access More Phone Data Than Ever" (Oct 20, 2016)
      http://abcnews.go.com/US/nsa-p...
      Welcome to the "USA Freedom Act" that gave the NSA 100% of all US domestic telecommunications companies.
      "As a result, the NSA no longer has to worry about keeping up its own database ... the percentage of available records has shot up from 30 percent to virtually 100."
      "Rather than one internal, incomplete database, the NSA can now query any of several complete ones."
      All telcos are helping at so many levels now. NSA, federal, state, city.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  5. 240% ?? Come on ... by ve3oat · · Score: 3, Informative
    Sorry, but a change from 235 requests to 564 is an increase of only 140%, not 240%. Doesn't anyone at the Washington Post know how to calculate percentage changes correctly? I find this is a common problem with journalists. Maybe they have a point about the nature of the problem, but to claim an increase of 240% when it is only really 140% is just hype. Incorrect and preventable errors of journalism.

    ... had 235 requests in 2012 ... By 2013, requests in the District had climbed 240 percent, to about 564 ...

  6. Ahhhh by wbr1 · · Score: 1

    Yet more secret, carte blanche "warrants". Our founding fathers would be so proud.

    --
    Silence is a state of mime.
  7. Re:240% ?? Come on ... by Kozar_The_Malignant · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If you demonstrate that you can't do basic math, I'm probably not going to pay much attention to the conclusions in your article. As I recall from helping my kids, this is fourth, or at most fifth, grade math.

    --
    Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
  8. Re:240% ?? Come on ... by jxander · · Score: 2

    Minor syntax error.

    It increased to 240% of the previous year.
    It did NOT increase by 240% from the previous year.

    --
    This signature is false.
  9. Apologist. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Apologist.

  10. I've heard this song before by Vinegar+Joe · · Score: 2

    "My Administration is committed to creating an unprecedented level of openness in Government. We will work together to ensure the public trust and establish a system of transparency, public participation, and collaboration. Openness will strengthen our democracy and promote efficiency and effectiveness in Government." - President Barack Obama

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/the...

    --
    "The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
  11. That is what a GeStaPo is.... by gweihir · · Score: 2

    The most extreme problems with government power always happen in secret (as long as a society is still somewhat free), because "law" enforcement universally runs amok when nobody watches them. By its very nature, the field primarily attracts people that value control and surveillance a lot more than freedom. The progression this causes is first to a police-state (the US is already there, still on the milder end though) and then eventually full-blown fascism. Of course, fascism is about the worst thing you can do to an economy, so collapse follows a few decades later.

    It is like the US, the Brits, and some others that never had Fascism now want to try it out as well. And the Germans apparently want it back.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  12. How much does this cost the taxpayer? by MrKaos · · Score: 1

    Discussions of police state, freedom and spying aside, which are the most important considerations - how much is all this spying on me, costing me? These are direct costs foisted onto the taxpayer with questionable value in terms of service it provides.

    Then there is the secondary cost via the fraud it enables that has no impact on the state and only impacts the population. The convenience of a phone in your pocket has morphed to include an array of tools to gather intelligence on you. Gathered into infrastructure paid for by internet users to telecommunications companies doing the bidding of the government acting on your behalf.

    These secrets must be expensive to maintain and I wonder what burden it places on the budget provided by the taxpayer to government, to provide services? What services are underfunded as a result of these agencies maintaining this apparatus?

    --
    My ism, it's full of beliefs.