republican-creole
site Search:


 
   
story category
White House Pushes For Warrantless Access To ISP Records
And expansion of heavily abused 'security letter' system
by Karl Bode Thursday 29-Jul-2010 tags: legal · privacy · world · consumers
Tipped by fAcEtIOUs See Profile
While the two administrations certainly have their differences, the Obama administration is following the Bush administration's lead on a number of fronts -- specifically in terms of surveillance and privacy in the digital age. According to the Washington Post, the Obama camp is working to make it easier for the FBI to compel your ISP to turn over your online activity records without a court order "if agents deem the information relevant to a terrorism or intelligence investigation:"

The administration wants to add just four words -- "electronic communication transactional records" -- to a list of items that the law says the FBI may demand without a judge's approval. Government lawyers say this category of information includes the addresses to which an Internet user sends e-mail; the times and dates e-mail was sent and received; and possibly a user's browser history. It does not include, the lawyers hasten to point out, the "content" of e-mail or other Internet communication.

Of course the problem has traditionally been that the FBI (and major carriers) haven't been particularly good at following the law, and the FBI has consistently faked terrorism emergencies to get access to whatever data they're looking for. As the Post notes, the government portrays these desired changes as technical clarification to resolve legal ambiguity, while privacy watchdogs and others note it's simply an expansion of government power and extended use of "national security letters," which have been abused extensively by both government and companies like AT&T.

Update: Amusingly, the Los Angeles Times today is running a related piece discussing how the FBI is being investigated for agents cheating on a test designed to help them avoid the kind of privacy and wiretap abuse the agency has been repeatedly called out for in recent years.

view: topics flat text 
Post a:
page: 1 · 2

Steve B
Premium
join:2004-08-02
Seattle, WA

Well well well.....

I don't like this at all. However, I'm wondering where are all the people that bashed Bush over warrant-less wiretapping. Will they be at the same loud point bashing Obama over this?

pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD

Re: Well well well.....

said by Steve B:

I don't like this at all. However, I'm wondering where are all the people that bashed Bush over warrant-less wiretapping. Will they be at the same loud point bashing Obama over this?
Nope.
--
"Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service.

woody7
Premium
join:2000-10-13
Torrance, CA

Re: Well well well.....

This sucks as before. I am really starting to dislike Obama, even though I voted for him. I really believe he is going to be a one term president. I don't care what good he is doing, I love what little privacy I have left.
--
BlooMe

pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD

Re: Well well well.....

Don't get me wrong. I firmly believe that had McCain won he would have continued these policies as well. And of course the usual suspects would be hooting and hollering about it, and it would be front page news every day, and we'd hear the endless "McBusHitler" wisecracks.

But yea... what a difference party affiliation makes. Now we have a Democrat doing the same thing, and outside of a few truly honest souls here, nothing.
--
"Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service.

woody7
Premium
join:2000-10-13
Torrance, CA

Re: Well well well.....

I am not afraid to squeal about Dems who do stupid stuff, I'm not a lock step Dem. and have voted for repubs periodically. I do stand corrected many a time.
--
BlooMe
WernerSchutz

join:2009-08-04
Sugar Land, TX
said by pnh102:

said by Steve B:

I don't like this at all. However, I'm wondering where are all the people that bashed Bush over warrant-less wiretapping. Will they be at the same loud point bashing Obama over this?
Nope.
YES. It is criminal in intent and un Constitutional regardless of which party is in power. Both parties follow the same line to the detriment of the citizen, increasing power of the government and the corporations they serve.
gorehound

join:2009-06-19
Portland, ME
i voted for obama and i do not like this nor other stuff he has done and not done.business as usual in washington i say.
my last statement is i do think it is time to vote indie and not vote for democrats or republicans as both of those parties are not doing a lot for us citizens.maybe an independent or new party would do a better job.

HappyAnarchy

@iauq.com

approval from:
ross See Profile

I'm calling BULL on this and every single other person that said the same thing.

As clearly stated in this thread, virtually everyone who supported Obama is extremely upset and distressed that Obama has not stood for transparency and law the way he campaigned.

Unlike the right, we actually do express disagreement with our president and don't call people anti-american for doing the same.

On the other shoe, how many people that were completely for it under Bush are now trying to find excuses as to why it is a bad thing under Obama?

S_engineer
Premium
join:2007-05-16
Chicago, IL

Re: Well well well.....

Oh man...you mean you found a politician that switched his positions after he was elected? ...Theres a first! [/sarcasm] It really doesn't matter, theres never been privacy so this is nothing new!
--
BF69~~~Please stop suffocating gerbils!

PhoenixDown
-- Wants FIOS
Premium
join:2003-06-08
Fresh Meadows, NY
kudos:1
They seem awefully quiet about this.
--
~ Insert a Funny Sig Here ~
Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
i wonder how long it will take the RIAA and MPAA to bribe their way into having this access along with the FBI.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports

LightS

join:2005-12-17
Waco, TX

Re: Well well well.....

hopefully that never occurs

roc5955
Premium
join:2005-11-26
Rosendale, NY
Yes we will! This is like, "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss."
It seems that no matter who we vote for, we get very little variation. Perhaps it's more like a class thing.
--
"Understanding is a three-edged sword."

SLD
Premium
join:2002-04-17
San Francisco, CA

1 edit

Re: Well well well.....

Uh, that's because you are voting from the same pool. They call it Democrat vs. Republican, but really it is just a side show to keep the public convinced they have a choice. The National Committies fight hard to keep third-party candidates out of the debates and castrate their platforms. So, you get what you vote for!
I voted for Nader BTW.
puck0114

join:2005-12-24
Portland, OR

Re: Well well well.....

Ain't that the truth. Republicrats really only vary in the corporate interests who've bought them off.

Welcome to the United Corporations of America.
cw30000

join:2008-07-11

Re: Well well well.....

said by puck0114:

Ain't that the truth. Republicrats really only vary in the corporate interests who've bought them off.

Welcome to the United Corporations of America.
Wait, What United Corporations of America? I thought we are in the USSA, United States of Socialist America.

roc5955
Premium
join:2005-11-26
Rosendale, NY

Re: Well well well.....

said by cw30000:

Wait, What United Corporations of America? I thought we are in the USSA, United States of Socialist America.
Yeah, it's quite the socialist welfare system, IF YOU'RE a BILLIONAIRE! They hand you more money, and you don't have to pay dime one in taxes.
--
"Understanding is a three-edged sword."

roc5955
Premium
join:2005-11-26
Rosendale, NY
I wouldn't vote for Nader, because he's too old.
I voted for Cynthia Mc Kinney!

I would have voted Democratic for Kucinich, had he been nominated. He was the best out of the bunch.

But hey, WE THE PEOPLE have been sold out to them, the corporations for quite some time now.
--
"Understanding is a three-edged sword."

Krisnatharok
Caveat Emptor
Premium
join:2009-02-11
Earth Orbit
kudos:3
The king is dead! Long live the king!

roc5955
Premium
join:2005-11-26
Rosendale, NY

Re: Well well well.....

said by Krisnatharok:

The king is dead! Long live the king!
Uh, FYI Elvis has been dead a long time now.
--
"Understanding is a three-edged sword."
moonpuppy

join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
As long as Obama only goes after those right wing nut jobs, they won't care about this.


Shamayim
I already have a Messiah.
Premium
join:2002-09-23

Re: Well well well.....

"First they came for right wing nut jobs . . . " (apologies to Pastor Martin Niemöller)
lesopp

join:2001-06-27
Land O Lakes, FL
And when the political winds change?

bionicRod
Funkier than a mohair disco ball.
Premium
join:2009-07-06
united state
Reviews:
·CenturyLink
·Mediacom
said by Steve B:

I don't like this at all. However, I'm wondering where are all the people that bashed Bush over warrant-less wiretapping. Will they be at the same loud point bashing Obama over this?
Oh, I imagine you'll hear the people who thought it was okay for Bush to do this kind of thing screaming bloody murder since it's Obama now. He's teh Hitler after all, right?

I'm starting to think the entire country is mentally retarded and we get what we deserve when it comes to our politics.
BlueC

join:2009-11-26
Minneapolis, MN
Reviews:
·Integra Telecom
·voip.ms
·T-Mobile US

Re: Well well well.....

said by bionicRod:

I'm starting to think the entire country is mentally retarded and we get what we deserve when it comes to our politics.
Agreed.

N3OGH
Yo Soy Col. "Bat" Guano
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
kudos:1

Re: Well well well.....

+1

I was going to throw the new boss old boss line out, but someone beat me to the punch.

Folks in the blue room will rant and rave about this sort of thing when Bush did it, but now that Obama is doing the same thing, all those people will do is talk about how the "wingnuts" are flipping out about it.

I'm not sticking up for any politician, but this is exactly the kind of hypocrisy that has gotten this country where it is. Bash the other guy, even if MY guy does what I'm bashing the other guy for.

People need to wake up and realize those people (the politicians) exist to make us bicker with each other. Wingnut this, moonbat that.

How about. 1: We're all Americans, and we're in this one together, like it or not, and 2: The politicians are liars and thieves, and we need to get rid of them before we can move forward.
--
Petty people are disproportionally corrupted by petty power

Shamayim
I already have a Messiah.
Premium
join:2002-09-23

1 edit

Re: Well well well.....

said by N3OGH:

How about. 1: We're all Americans...
That's just the trouble. We're not all Americans any more. Lots of marxists, communists, Stalinists, MILLIONS of illegal foreign invaders, and millions more to come...

N3OGH
Yo Soy Col. "Bat" Guano
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
kudos:1

Re: Well well well.....

Ahh, see but Americans are free to be Marxists, Communists, and or Stalinists, if they so choose. Heck, you can be a Nazi, a Black Panther, or a Liberation Theologist if you want.

As far as the millions of illegal invaders, what can I say? We're screwed on that one.....
--
Petty people are disproportionally corrupted by petty power

Shamayim
I already have a Messiah.
Premium
join:2002-09-23

1 edit

Re: Well well well.....

said by N3OGH:

Ahh, see but Americans are free to be Marxists, Communists, and or Stalinists,
Yes, but how much longer will they be free to be Americans? Patriotic, constitutional, liberty loving Americans? The regime and its drones are already trying to demonize and legislate them out of existence.

N3OGH
Yo Soy Col. "Bat" Guano
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
kudos:1

Re: Well well well.....

Not long, sorry to say.

As they saying goes, keep your powder dry....

People in general don't give a shit about being free anymore. They would rather have the latest lickable whiz gadget and access to infinite online porn than be able to travel from state to state with no papers...
--
Petty people are disproportionally corrupted by petty power

CookiePuss3

@ptd.net

approval from:
N3OGH See Profile

Re: Well well well.....

Aye, fight and you may die. Run, and you'll live... at least a while. And dying in your beds, many years from now, would you be willin' to trade ALL the days, from this day to that, for one chance, just one chance, to come back here and tell our enemies that they may take our lives, or our freedom, but they'll never take... OUR PORN!
Desdinova
Premium
join:2003-01-26
Gaithersburg, MD
"MILLIONS of illegal foreign invaders, and millions more to come..."

Huh...I bet the native Americans said something very similar. Just make sure that you don't get hooked on their fire water and you don't take any smallpox-infected blankets and you should be fine!

Shamayim
I already have a Messiah.
Premium
join:2002-09-23

Re: Well well well.....

That smallpox blanket garbage is a liberal myth.
Desdinova
Premium
join:2003-01-26
Gaithersburg, MD

Re: Well well well.....

Really?

»www.nativeweb.org/pages/legal/am···eff.html

Shamayim
I already have a Messiah.
Premium
join:2002-09-23

Re: Well well well.....

Really.
"The only documented case of smallpox blankets being given to Indians was by Captain Ecuyer of the British army. I challenge anyone to offer documented proof, except for the two blankets given out by Captain Ecuyer [again, who was NOT an American] at Fort Pitt, of smallpox infected blankets being deliberately given to Indians as a means of spreading smallpox."

--
Liberalism is a spiritual disorder.
---
Who is Jesus? and Why it matters (to YOU).
Desdinova
Premium
join:2003-01-26
Gaithersburg, MD

Re: Well well well.....

Fair enough. Except for the small detail that at the time the events in question occurred, the U.S. did not exist as an independent nation, we were still a collection of British colonies and were British citizens. There were no Americans (except the ones dying off).

But we're getting off subject here and I doubt either of us will ever see eye to eye on the issue (which is fine). My point was regardless of how why or who introduced these diseases into the new world, we brought 'em over and did the damage of record. I'm sure we had no intention of causing such harm, just as I'm sure the majority of the huddled masses yearning to breathe free (from that Statue of Liberty thing) have no intention of destroying the thing they're struggling so hard to get to and be a part of.

That's my final thought!
amigo_boy

join:2005-07-22
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
said by Shamayim:

said by N3OGH:

How about. 1: We're all Americans...
That's just the trouble. We're not all Americans any more. Lots of marxists, communists, Stalinists, MILLIONS of illegal foreign invaders, and millions more to come...
That's what's always funny about these discussions. As soon as someone wants to be ecumenical and find common cause, there's always someone eager to drive a wedge. "Outing" those who don't pass a litmus test of being a "true" American.

That's why we can never amend the 14th Amendment's definition of "person" or citizenship. Why we can never redefine corporations. Or, preferential voting. Things that most people can agree upon turn into impossible goals because there's always someone who's mission it is in life to identify who's "us" (and, more important, who's "them").

Shamayim
I already have a Messiah.
Premium
join:2002-09-23

1 edit

Re: Well well well.....

said by amigo_boy:

said by Shamayim:

said by N3OGH:

How about. 1: We're all Americans...
That's just the trouble. We're not all Americans any more. Lots of marxists, communists, Stalinists, MILLIONS of illegal foreign invaders, and millions more to come...
That's what's always funny about these discussions. As soon as someone wants to be ecumenical and find common cause, there's always someone eager to tell the truth.
FIFY
--
Liberalism is a spiritual disorder.
---
Who is Jesus? and Why it matters (to YOU).

roc5955
Premium
join:2005-11-26
Rosendale, NY
said by Shamayim:

said by N3OGH:

How about. 1: We're all Americans...
That's just the trouble. We're not all Americans any more. Lots of marxists, communists, Stalinists, MILLIONS of illegal foreign invaders, and millions more to come...
We haven't been "Americans" since the Europeans landed in the Western Hemisphere back in 1492.

You want to talk about foreign invaders, how's about those first foreign invaders?
--
"Understanding is a three-edged sword."

bionicRod
Funkier than a mohair disco ball.
Premium
join:2009-07-06
united state
Reviews:
·CenturyLink
·Mediacom
How true. The right screams at the left, the left screams at the right, and in the meantime nobody pays any attention to the fact that the corporations continue to write laws with campaign contributions in amounts that voting Americans can never hope to match. Money and power have always been synonymous, but it seems like it's getting worse for the evaporating middle class every year. And I don't see a thing we can do about it.

SLD
Premium
join:2002-04-17
San Francisco, CA
Unfortunately, those of us who know (and vote) better get dragged down as with the rest.

banditws6
Shrinking Time and Distance
Premium
join:2001-08-18
Frisco, TX
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable

Re: Well well well.....

Yep...my third-party vote was mostly a protest vote, and I knew it going in...but I vote my conscience. The funny thing is, if more people did the same, it wouldn't just be a protest vote anymore.

But no...all we have now is people voting for Party A so they can keep Party B from power...not even because they necessarily agree with Party A. Ridiculous.
--
"I'll follow the law until it's just stupid." -Ted Nugent

SLD
Premium
join:2002-04-17
San Francisco, CA

1 edit

Re: Well well well.....

You hit the nail on the head. People vote for a candidate they don't want because they don't think the candidate they do want will win.
My Dad did exactly this - he voted for Obama because he said Nader couldn't win.
Well, that is a self-fulfilling prophecy. My Dad didn't vote for his choice, he voted for what he assumed were other peoples' choice.
And following Game Theory, these parties take full advantage of it.
rradina

join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO
They did in massive numbers during the 92 elections. Remember Perot? A sitting president who won a war, but lied about taxes (oops!), was defeated by a voting minority.
dlewis23

join:2005-04-18
Boca Raton, FL
Thats because Stupid People, Keep putting stupid people in office.

If people would stop being so PC and actually listen to what these people are saying when they run for office they might not get voted in.

digitalfreak
Premium
join:2005-12-09
Blacklick, OH
said by bionicRod:

I'm starting to think the entire country is mentally retarded and we get what we deserve when it comes to our politics.
No, just the majority of the country is retarded.

BlubberBob

@sbcglobal.net
They also snuck in a provision in the so-called financial "reform" bill that exempts the SEC from FOIA requests.
Pv8man

join:2008-07-24
Hammond, IN
Right here...

I was there criticizing bush, and here I am criticizing obama for doing the same thing.

I am a patriot, but I am not a blind patriot.

Sabre
Di relung hatiku bernyanyi bidadari

join:2005-05-17
Yes, as a matter of fact, I will be. I still think it's wrong and I'm still mad. I had hoped he knew better.
Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
even worse is even if you do vote for who you want to win, once they do win there is no telling that they wont be the same kind of person as the one they replaced. the political world is a living example of Power corrupts.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports

digitalfreak
Premium
join:2005-12-09
Blacklick, OH
I sure as hell will be.
UncleDirtNap

join:2006-08-26
Pittsburgh, PA
No the Obama supporters lack the moral or intellectual integrity to hold their messiah to this standard, but here's what I find curious; agree with them or not at the very least the Bush administration could argue they needed these tools in their war on terror which was pretty pro-active by all accounts. The Obama administration however has essentially ended the forward motion in this area, fallen back into a defensive position and heck can't even bring itself to use the word terrorism or terrorists... so exactly what do they need all these things for anymore?

I guess all those military veterans, people who want lower taxes and opposed their takeover of healthcare must be keeping them up at night.

Wonder if the FBI will be getting my information from my ISP for posting this... not really, I know they will.

OldschoolDSL
Premium
join:2006-02-23
Indian Orchard, MA
Reviews:
·Comcast
·voip.ms
·America Online
·Dish Network
said by Steve B:

I don't like this at all. However, I'm wondering where are all the people that bashed Bush over warrant-less wiretapping. Will they be at the same loud point bashing Obama over this?
YES.

I normally support Obama ... But have to disagree with this & think he is going about things wrongly on this matter.
--
HP Pavilion a6750f (tweaked)
Windows 7 Ultimate 64 * Ubuntu 10.04 64 * SuSe 11.2 64 * Mac OS Snow Leopard

"I could always tell you the truth, but would you believe?"

dib22

join:2002-01-27
Kansas City, MO
kudos:2
said by Steve B:

I don't like this at all. However, I'm wondering where are all the people that bashed Bush over warrant-less wiretapping. Will they be at the same loud point bashing Obama over this?
I have not been too happy with them letting the current warrant-less wiretaps stand ... and this doesn't make me any happier.

What are they doing that they are afraid to have judicial oversight of it?

I fear that no matter who the president is the system is really in control... and the system has no time for the 4th amendment.
amigo_boy

join:2005-07-22
Reviews:
·magicjack.com

Re: Well well well.....

said by dib22:

What are they doing that they are afraid to have judicial oversight of it?
Maybe the question is: what are they aware of that we're not?

I'll never forget when Obama was elected and given his first Presidential briefing (included into then-President Bush's briefing). The camera's showed him leaving, and he looked like something had taken a toll on him. It looked like things had been disclosed to him that he hadn't anticipated.

dib22

join:2002-01-27
Kansas City, MO
kudos:2

Re: Well well well.....

said by amigo_boy:

Maybe the question is: what are they aware of that we're not?
Yes, I saw it too... you could actually see it on bush's face as well.

I still don't understand why that gives them an excuse to ignore a fundamental freedom.
amigo_boy

join:2005-07-22
Reviews:
·magicjack.com

1 edit

Re: Well well well.....

said by dib22:

I still don't understand why that gives them an excuse to ignore a fundamental freedom.
Freedom isn't absolute. The protection of freedom isn't a suicide pact. If unimpeded freedom (for example, open borders; the ability to pollute despite its affect on your neighbors, etc.) could diminish everyone's enjoyment of freedom (i.e., the exercise of "ordered liberty"), is impeding freedom (with immigration laws, environmental protection, etc.) a bad thing?

To me, the real question about the ISP information being requested is whether it's inherently "private." It's all information that is transmitted openly, without encryption.

If I go to a friend's house, it would be a matter of public record that I left my house, traveled on certain streets and parked in her driveway. Would I have any legitimate cause of complaint if someone saw me?

IMO, using the internet is akin to what I described above. Anyone who expects privacy on the internet is starting from a false presumption.

Maybe there should be an encrypted and proxied internet for anonymous use. But, as long as people use the internet "as is," it's far from private. I don't see how anyone could expect otherwise.

dib22

join:2002-01-27
Kansas City, MO
kudos:2

Re: Well well well.....

said by amigo_boy:

To me, the real question about the ISP information being requested is whether it's inherently "private." It's all information that is transmitted openly, without encryption.
This is not what they are trying to get... they ALREADY watch everything you do on the internet (part of the original warrant-less wiretapping setup at AT&T). You are right they technically don't need a warrant to watch clear text on the internet.

They are wanting to be able to get an ISP to hand over information and or cooperate in placing a spoofed SSL cert for example so they can watch all your private activity that they can't currently see - all without a warrant.

This is my problem... why don't they want the oversight. What are they up to? If they are just after the 'bad guys' then why not follow the law and let a judge see what they are up to?

asdfdfdfdfdf

@1dial.com
Yes, they will.

The president should not be seeking clarification on these issues, he should be dismantling the Patriot act and the logic behind this free and easy snooping.
Maintaining the status quo only provides the groundwork for the next round of ratcheting up the level of snooping when a new threat occurs or national security state obsessives regain power.

The intent was to expedite information gathering in dire emergencies where there was good reason to believe an attack was imminent and there wasn't time to get a court order.
The enormous number of these letters indicates that they are a routine way of avoiding court oversight. The rules should be greatly tightened up and there should be severe punishment for casual disregard of rules.

192,000 letters in a period of 3 years?
If we are so surrounded by conspirators that there is such a nonstop minute by minute threat of imminent terrorist attack then we are all doomed anyway, but this is nonsense. The government isn't foiling imminent attacks one minute after another.

fatness
subtle
Janitor
join:2000-11-17
fishing
kudos:13
Host:
Bright House Netwo..
Earthlink DSL
TekSavvy
Forum Feature Requ..
Need Site Help
said by Steve B:

I don't like this at all. However, I'm wondering where are all the people that bashed Bush over warrant-less wiretapping. Will they be at the same loud point bashing Obama over this?
I will. It stinks. Once the government takes power unto itself it isn't going to give it up. I said that back when the extent of the warrantless wiretapping starting coming out.

A lot of Bush supporters disagreed back then, saying the government needed that power and that if people had nothing to hide they had nothing to fear. I don't remember your position on it at that time.
--
I don't have a problem!

fatness
subtle
Janitor
join:2000-11-17
fishing
kudos:13
Host:
Bright House Netwo..
Earthlink DSL
TekSavvy
Forum Feature Requ..
Need Site Help

1 edit

Re: Well well well.....

Here's a news article from 2006, when a judge ruled the wiretapping program by the Bush administration unconstitutional. »/forum/news,77···ays=2000

pnh102 See Profile wanted the judge to be impeached. »Impeach the Judge!


fAcEtIOUs See Profile was in favor of the program: »Re: So there is a system of checks and balances
and
»Re: So there is a system of checks and balances


There are over 500 replies there; have fun digging through them.
--
I don't have a problem!
amigo_boy

join:2005-07-22
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
said by fatness:

Once the government takes power unto itself it isn't going to give it up.
The only problem I have with the "ratchet" argument (that government power only increases, never decreases) is that it often discounts the same benefit we citizens experience as technological advances give us more power against tyranny, essentially improving the nature and quality of our rights.

The way the "ratchet" argument is usually used, you'd get the idea that people in the late 1800s would refuse to live in our world. But, would they?

- Instantaneous global communications. (Even for no cost!).
- A free Gutenberg press (the web) in every home, capable of reaching billions of people.
- Worldwide travel in a matter of hours.
- Travel 20 miles across town in 30-40 minutes compared to an all day horse ride.
- Advances in medical treatment, increasing average lifespan. (What could be a greater improvement to rights than to exercise them longer?).

With such improvements of the individual's power come challenges (flying planes into buildings, medical quackery, etc.). I think it's perfectly understandable there would be a concomitant increase in regulatory/police power. If/when there is, it doesn't take negate the very real improvements in individual power.
rradina

join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO
No because we have a spin master in the white house and for some reason people seem to believe him and trust him much more than Bush.

While I'm sure both men don't deserve our trust, Obama has a bit of Bill Clinton's ability use words that sound meaningful but when unpacked, are meaningless. Perfect politician but this is not unexpected from Chicagoland.

badlaw

@sbcglobal.net
This law will be abused! We already know from past experiences the FBI and law enforcement will use this law for purposes it was never intended for and our privacy and rights will be violated. They have already done this numerous times and have been caught! Bad Idea!

danham

@comcast.net

FBI cheating too

Add in the fact that FBI agents were caught cheating on an exam designed to test their knowledge of the proper limits of domestic snooping (see today's NY Times) and this is pretty scary stuff.

The implication is that the agents couldn't pass the test without cheating. An FBI spokesman even got the law wrong in his response, trying to defend the agents.

shadow

@bellaliant.net

...

my fellow Americans i mean Comrads, that certainly sucks
axiomatic

join:2006-08-23
Tomball, TX

Oppose

I opposed this when Bush did it illegally under the table and I still oppose this now that Obama is trying to do it above the table. From what I understand those FISA warrants are easy to get and the process to get them is short. Stop being lazy.

Privacy, it's whats for breakfast.

See 10 replies to this post

gatorkram
KaBOOM Baby
Premium
join:2002-07-22
Winterville, NC
kudos:2

Giving it all up...

If we don't watch out, we are going to give everything away that the terrorists hate us for.
--
Give me bandwidth or give me death!
»/testhistory/661871/4f240

elios

join:2005-11-15
Springfield, MO

Re: Giving it all up...

said by gatorkram:

If we don't watch out, we are going to give everything away that the terrorists hate us for.
Shhhh thats the whole plan...
macman4hire

join:2009-03-30
Port Saint Lucie, FL

Don't turn around, oh oh Der Kommissar's in town, oh oh

All I could think was the chorus from the 80's song Der Kommissar by After the Fire

Don't turn around, oh oh Der Kommissar's in town, oh oh

Noah Vail
Son made my Avatar
Premium
join:2004-12-10
Lorton, VA
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Bright House
·Sprint Mobile Br..

According to Candidate Barack Obama:

It looks like the Obama Administration will continue the Bush era practice of using National Security Letters, and will use them to acquire that ISP data.

Senator Obama, once had this to say on the matter.
said by Senator Obama, Senate Floor, 12/15/05 :

Once a business or a person receives notification that they will be searched, they are prohibited from telling anyone about it, and they are even prohibited from challenging this automatic gag order in court. Even though judges have already found that similar restrictions violate the First Amendment - this Conference Report disregards the case law and the right to challenge the gag order.

If you do decide to consult an attorney for legal advice - you have to tell the FBI that you have done so. This is unheard of - there is no such requirement in any other area of law, and I don't see why it is justified here.

And 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 library books they've read and phone calls they've made - this legislation gives people no rights to appeal the need for such a search in a court of law. No judge will hear their plea, no jury will hear their case.

This is just plain wrong.
.

Senator Obama added these statements a couple of years later.
said by Senator Obama at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars; on August 1, 2007 :

This Administration also puts forward a false choice between the liberties we cherish and the security we demand. I will provide our intelligence and law enforcement agencies with the tools they need to track and take out the terrorists without undermining our Constitution and our freedom.
That means no more illegal wire-tapping of American citizens. No more national security letters to spy on citizens who are not suspected of a crime. No more tracking citizens who do nothing more than protest a misguided war. No more ignoring the law when it is inconvenient. That is not who we are. And it is not what is necessary to defeat the terrorists. The FISA court works. The separation of powers works. Our Constitution works. We will again set an example for the world that the law is not subject to the whims of stubborn rulers, and that justice is not arbitrary.

This Administration acts like violating civil liberties is the way to enhance our security. It is not. There are no short-cuts to protecting America
.

And then a year later, Senator Obama answered the following questions put to all the leading Presidential Candidates.
said by the Boston Globe questionnaire to Senator Obama :

Q: Does the president have inherent powers under the Constitution to conduct surveillance for national security purposes without judicial warrants, regardless of federal statutes?

A: The Supreme Court has never held that the president has such powers. As president, I will follow existing law, and when it comes to U.S. citizens and residents, I will only authorize surveillance for national security purposes consistent with FISA and other federal statutes....
Warrantless surveillance of American citizens, in defiance of FISA, is unlawful and unconstitutional.


Q: Under what circumstances, if any, would you sign a bill into law but also issue a signing statement reserving a constitutional right to bypass the law?

A: ...While it is legitimate for a president to issue a signing statement to clarify his understanding of ambiguous provisions of statutes and to explain his view of how he intends to faithfully execute the law, it is a clear abuse of power to use such statements as a license to evade laws that the president does not like or as an end-run around provisions designed to foster accountability.

I will not use signing statements to nullify or undermine congressional instructions as enacted into law. The problem with {the Bush} administration is that it has attached signing statements to legislation in an effort to change the meaning of the legislation, to avoid enforcing certain provisions of the legislation that the President does not like, and to raise implausible or dubious constitutional objections to the legislation.
I admit to having some trouble reconciling Candidate Obama's words with President Obama's actions.

NV
--
In my perfect religion, a giant hole appears and sucks up all the lousy people.
I call it the Crapture.

See 10 replies to this post

CrazyFingers

join:2003-10-01
Columbia, MO

Insert Stereotypical Conservative Response Here

[Begin Response]
Well gosh golly, if yall ain't got nuthin to hide, yall ain't got nuthin to worry about. Why come yall want to protect the turrists anyhow?
[End Response]

*In the interest of green computing, this response recycled from period 2001-2008
bdon78
I didn't do it

join:2009-05-18
Decatur, GA

Re: Insert Stereotypical Conservative Response Here

Interesting that you assume that most conservatives have country accents. I know a few who are highly educated and could've put together a response to this post that was actually a well thought out response versus some attempt to be witty that fails miserably.

I for one am not conservative or liberal, but smack in the middle (like most Americans). This action by the administration shows one thing, what politicians say and actually do are often two completely different things. President Obama is not immune to "politician syndrome" and despite a lot of promises he made prior to taking office, he in fact in many ways isn't much different then any of his predecessors. (except he goes on the View and has Twitter)

Comments like yours outline the divide that has been created in this country between three groups:

1. Super Liberals (Harry Reidettes)
2. Super Conservatives (Palinettes)
3. The rest of us (normal people)

See if you can come up with something original outside of a country accent. Until you come up with an original thought, I would stick with your day job.

CrazyFingers

join:2003-10-01
Columbia, MO

Re: Insert Stereotypical Conservative Response Here

It's cute how you completely missed the point.
--
Burrow owl...burrow owl...

Metatron2008
Premium
join:2008-09-02
Stockbridge, GA

Re: Insert Stereotypical Conservative Response Here

Oh I think he got your point completely.

IsItDoneYet
Bugger off already

join:2009-07-11
Thunder Bay, ON

What difference?

Actually Karl, nothing changed. Wars, deficits and debt, erosion of liberties, Bankers and Wall St., and on and on.

cabana
Department of Adjustments
Assistant
join:2000-07-07
New York, NY
Host:
AT&T Southeast
56k Lookout! (broa..

storage storage storage

There is no turning back - clearly. There are certainly hackers out there who prolly outnumber the "talent" we currently have at FBI/CIA - which does not anyone give warm fuzzy feelings. I think it would not take much to bring our economy to its knees for example - through viral "oh my god the sky is falling in chicken little" to "an ooops did I just say million when I meant billion" at the stock exchange.

I want the FBI/CIA to have the tools that they need - but what a slippery slope when you throw in the mix Larry, Curly and Mo at an ISP and "scary" FBI men knocking at the ISP saying you must or else ... I am not exactly inspired with confidence that the ISP is going to say "stop, wait, let's discuss this". Of course, is the FBI interested in average Joe or Jane? prolly not ... but then again ... you just never know where the crossroads may lie. Your email somehow gets on some list because you picked up a chain email that said if you did not send that to 14 people you will be hit by a big ole bus ... so you forward

Many people think that "stop and frisk and ask questions later" policy on the streets of a city is not big deal ( unless you of course are an innocent person who finds themselves constantly stopped and frisked).

Different issue all together ... storage ...

Flipside...from the ISP standpoint ... how long to save a gazillion emails and browsing? - how much to save? - what if there is an ooops factor and storage poof happens? Equitable for small ISP and Large ISP alike? What compels an ISP to protect your privacy? (ie. perhaps not only will the ISP give the FBI the "transactional data and browsing" ... but just say "take it all" ... it's easier on the ISP )

Noah Vail
Son made my Avatar
Premium
join:2004-12-10
Lorton, VA
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Bright House
·Sprint Mobile Br..

Re: storage storage storage

One problem is the Automatic Gag Order.

For those who've been served a NSL, it removes most of their ability to initiate any sort of check on the investigatory action.

How does having the Feds never be questioned about any NSL, protect you and me?

NV
--
In my perfect religion, a giant hole appears and sucks up all the lousy people.
I call it the Crapture.

Ioweyou

@comcast.net

Ahhh Privacy and Freedom......

I'm sorry but what is that again? I am not surprised by this at all. In fact I felt it comiing. Didn't I just hear that there are like 10,000 security agencies in the united states? And didn't that news report say they literally get tens of thousands of documents, communications, broadcasts and tips on a weekly basis? How does the administration think they will be able to deal with millions upon millions of electronic communications a day? Even with voice processors, keyword catchers and other hi-tech devices it will be an immpossible task. And they will waste millions trying to succeed.

IIIBradIII
Comm M-E-L Instr

join:2000-09-28
Greer, SC
Reviews:
·T-Mobile US

Re: Ahhh Privacy and Freedom......

said by Ioweyou :

I'm sorry but what is that again? I am not surprised by this at all. In fact I felt it comiing. Didn't I just hear that there are like 10,000 security agencies in the united states? And didn't that news report say they literally get tens of thousands of documents, communications, broadcasts and tips on a weekly basis? How does the administration think they will be able to deal with millions upon millions of electronic communications a day? Even with voice processors, keyword catchers and other hi-tech devices it will be an immpossible task. And they will waste millions trying to succeed.
They don't care to process it all - they just want unfettered, untracked, and unquestionable access to their targets.
--
»www.FlightSimWorld.com
Remember, there are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but there are no old bold pilots.
Flight Simulator

Murdoc
Premium
join:2009-02-08
Manitowoc, WI
Reviews:
·Comcast
·AT&T DSL Service

apparently everyone in this country is a terrorist..

Why does the goverment think every citizen in this country is a terroist?

Is it because someone might smarten up to what the government is shoveling? Instead of them accusing law abiding people maybe they need to check themselves. Since the FBI cheats and can't follow laws. and who knows what other corrupt cheating 3 letter agencies out there are doing.

The united corporate police states of elites. Wonder when it will be changed to that. I have no idea why these mystery people want to destroy this country and its freedoms.
bdon78
I didn't do it

join:2009-05-18
Decatur, GA

YES WE CAN

Act like every president before.

Ted Sheckler
Monster Rain
Premium
join:2009-01-17
00000
kudos:3

Hope & Change

Way to go liberal douchebags, this is the "change" you voted in.......

captnhook

join:2001-02-20
NY

Deja Vu

Welcome to reality.
We are all terrorists in their eyes if we fail to fall in lock step with their agenda.. does goose step and chants "yes we can yes we can yes we can.."

Want to change this BS from continuing then vote for any candidate other than the Democrat and Republican party put ups. How many times are you going to listen to and buy into the same 'ol political drivel and empty promises before you wake up America?
You all have a brain ..USE IT.
fldiver
Premium
join:1999-12-27
Jacksonville, FL

Re: Deja Vu

I did exactly that; I dropped any party affiliation, after years of being a lumbering elephant
MySay

join:2008-04-08
Mansfield, TX

I never understood the warrant issue...

Couldn't somebody who "needs" a warrant get a judge who's in the person seeking the warrant's "special interest group" (whether the judge be a friend, a payout, etc.) just to make one up anyhow? People with power (ie. The Government) can pretty well do what the hell they want... the whole warrant issue is kind of vague when it's this far up the chain. Am I wrong?
amungus
Premium
join:2004-11-26
America
Reviews:
·AT&T DSL Service

FLIP, FLOP, FRAK.

Well, before Obama was elected shoed-in, he "flip flopped" on the immunity for telecom companies (notably AT&T).

He'd said he was opposed to such immunity at first. His vote said otherwise, and the topic was basically dropped and nobody seemed to even care. This is where he lost all hope of ever getting my vote. How anyone paying any attention to that lie still voted for him, I do not understand.

If it isn't obvious, this is yet another waste of time, money, and resources. It's been reported several times that most info gathering like this is a waste, and sets a disturbing precedent for future generations. Has very little to do with stopping actual crime or terror, and by its very nature can not since it is a wasteful approach.

(There is a very good chance that)
In two generations, nobody will care because nobody will remember what things used to be like.

However, I'm wondering where are all the people that bashed Bush over warrant-less wiretapping. Will they be at the same loud point bashing Obama over this?
Still here, but I do imagine some of them have been successfully brainwashed and/or hypnotized into believing that he can do no worse than GWB.

Most people I've talked to about Obama "flip flopping" on immunity give me a blank stare, but some of the same folks instantly bash GW for things less trivial.

Point is, we've been divided and are one step closer to being conquered by our own divisions, most of which are contrived for no other real or useful purpose.

Look what happened to Ron Paul during the "debates." He was laughed at - nobody bothered to address anything seriously, except when it was convenient to get a gradeschool level jab in. People (seem to) hold many things higher than truth or justice - they have been fully trained to accept popularity over truth.
andre2

join:2005-08-24
Brookline, MA

laws are useless

It doesn't matter what's legal. The Bush administration proved that. The only reasonable expectation of privacy comes from technology (end-to-end encryption), not laws. At least that way, people have to be targeted individually (to intercept the communications before encryption/after decryption), instead of just being able to suck everything up like a vacuum cleaner.
SlyLoK

join:2007-10-19
Sugar Grove, VA

It doesnt matter..

Who is put in office.. They are all bought and paid for.

cpsycho

join:2008-06-03
HarperLand

Governments

People are slowly getting angry. They need a way to monitor decent channels.

I think most governments fear V for Vendetta.

The people in power, the very few the very rich have a huge paranoia of the general populace. They want more ways of watching for these disturbers of their empire.

These people have already seen what a organized campaign can do on the internet. What better way to watch those who wish to bring you down?

Thursday, 24-May 05:49:28 Terms of Use & Privacy | feedback | contact | Hosting by nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo
over 12.5 years online © 1999-2012 dslreports.com.