If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Wired)   The government needs approval of a secret court to be able to spy on you. Luckily for the government, the court approves every single request   (wired.com) divider line 84
    More: Obvious, secret polices, intelligence assessment, Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, FISA Amendments Act, security division, legal standing, secret room  
•       •       •

2057 clicks; posted to Politics » on 06 May 2013 at 2:54 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



84 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-05-06 01:35:00 PM
cdn.uproxx.com

They'll be bored....
 
2013-05-06 01:36:39 PM
It's so secret, there really IS no court

/they just said that to make us feel better
//but that's a secret, too
 
2013-05-06 01:50:13 PM
They should start using this to conduct background checks on people who own guns.

For great lulz.
 
2013-05-06 01:54:40 PM

Aarontology: They should start using this to conduct background checks on people who own guns.

For great lulz.


Dick Cheney's 1 Percent Doctrine dictates that we'd be foolish to NOT do that.
 
2013-05-06 01:55:57 PM
what exactly will you have to do to get a request denied by this court?  Someone should submit a request that strains credulity if it were approved and see what happens.
 
2013-05-06 02:00:26 PM
I have nothing to hide, so I am not worried.
 
2013-05-06 02:05:50 PM

Three Crooked Squirrels: I have nothing to hide, so I am not worried.


Yes, if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear citizen.

I'm sure you never do ANYTHING illegal.

While we're at it... have you heard of a thing called bitTorrent?  What about copyright?  What about the Alien and Sedition Act?  What about that Eugene V. Debbs was imprisoned for saying that he supported anti-war lawyers that were trying to get people off from the draft?

Do you really believe you'll never stand against the government?
 
2013-05-06 02:08:52 PM
1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-05-06 02:09:27 PM
They're almost 100% approved, and can even be issued retroactively.  Given those two facts I'd like to know why the "secret" wiretapping program was necessary.  Been asking that since it was revealed, and never got a good answer from anyone.  What was insufficient about the existing process?
 
2013-05-06 02:13:06 PM

NostroZ: Do you really believe you'll never stand against the government?


And what if they're in error?

Take the No Fly List for example.  You can be put on in error and  1) you'llnever know why and 2) never be able to appeal.

Obamacare istyranny, but programs like this are A-OK to many teabagger patriots because "I have nothing to hide."  Well farking hooray for you, but it misses the point entirely.
 
2013-05-06 02:13:55 PM

Diogenes: Dick Cheney's 1 Percent Doctrine dictates that we'd be foolish to NOT do that.


It kept us safe for 7.25 years!

Diogenes: What was insufficient about the existing process?


The level of secrecy and transparency. IE: If people knew exactly how extensive and systematic the violations of their rights were, people might start asking questions. Which is kind of stupid, because people will go along with anything as long as it's to "fight terrorism"
 
2013-05-06 02:21:34 PM

NostroZ: Three Crooked Squirrels: I have nothing to hide, so I am not worried.

Yes, if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear citizen.

I'm sure you never do ANYTHING illegal.

While we're at it... have you heard of a thing called bitTorrent?  What about copyright?  What about the Alien and Sedition Act?  What about that Eugene V. Debbs was imprisoned for saying that he supported anti-war lawyers that were trying to get people off from the draft?

Do you really believe you'll never stand against the government?


I was being sarcastic.  Didn't mean to rile you up.
 
2013-05-06 02:49:29 PM

basemetal: [cdn.uproxx.com image 568x640]

They'll be bored....


They will just make something up or mix you with up with someone else.
 
2013-05-06 02:49:44 PM
So don't do anything.

I'm actually being serious here.

If you are really worried about it,  don't use the phone.  Don't even use a 'burner' phone:  All phones regularly transmit their location to the cell phone companies, even when they aren't being actively used.  Don't use e-mail or texting or Twitter or Facebook. Stay off the internet.  Avoid using computers altogether, if strict security is your goal.

If you must communicate, use a more primitive method, like low power short range radios, or even physical transfer of data like a brush pass, dead drop, or even a simple letter.  If you need to encrypt, use a one-timepad system.   Make it hard for them to intercept without detection, and impossible for them to read if they do manage to intercept it.
 
2013-05-06 03:00:00 PM

Three Crooked Squirrels: I have nothing to hide, so I am not worried.


I remember when this was an actual right wing talking point.
 
2013-05-06 03:01:31 PM
Freedom isn't free. Sometimes our freedom is the cost of being free.
 
2013-05-06 03:02:56 PM

dittybopper: So don't do anything.

I'm actually being serious here.

If you are really worried about it,  don't use the phone.  Don't even use a 'burner' phone:  All phones regularly transmit their location to the cell phone companies, even when they aren't being actively used.  Don't use e-mail or texting or Twitter or Facebook. Stay off the internet.  Avoid using computers altogether, if strict security is your goal.

If you must communicate, use a more primitive method, like low power short range radios, or even physical transfer of data like a brush pass, dead drop, or even a simple letter.  If you need to encrypt, use a one-timepad system.   Make it hard for them to intercept without detection, and impossible for them to read if they do manage to intercept it.


I'd do it, but unfortunately I have to communicate with people who don't live in NealStephensonland.
 
2013-05-06 03:06:11 PM

MFAWG: Three Crooked Squirrels: I have nothing to hide, so I am not worried.

I remember when this was an actual right wing talking point.


And if you disagreed you were giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

Still kind of astounded that George farking Bush was the figure that was rewarded with such fealty.
 
2013-05-06 03:09:48 PM
The best part of this disucssion will be all th epoeple who are so self-deluded that they tnink they are interesting enough for the Government (or anyone else) to want to spy on them in the first place.

Dear average American:
No one wants to microchip/barcode you to monitor your every move.  You're not worth the bother.
No one wants to gas you with chemtrails.  You're not worth the bother.
No one wants to steal your DNA.  You're not worth the bother.
No one wants to analyze your library book history.  You're not worth the bother.
No one wants to control you with satellite rays.  You're not worth the bother.

Privacy is important, and the Government should be the guardian of that, not the usurper, but let's not pretend that suddenly some beaurocrat in Washington is gong to give 2 shiats about your conversations with Aunt Millie on Sunday nights and run out and get a wiretap order.

Perspective, people, perspective..

By and large, 99.999% of us are pretty boring, even in the eyes of the most zealous Government minions.
 
2013-05-06 03:12:24 PM

dittybopper: If you are really worried about it, don't use the phone. Don't even use a 'burner' phone: All phones regularly transmit their location to the cell phone companies, even when they aren't being actively used. Don't use e-mail or texting or Twitter or Facebook. Stay off the internet. Avoid using computers altogether, if strict security is your goal.


My goal isn't security; my goal is freedom.  Freedom to do what I want without the Government watching me.

Why do you hate freedom?
 
2013-05-06 03:14:31 PM

Diogenes: They're almost 100% approved, and can even be issued retroactively.  Given those two facts I'd like to know why the "secret" wiretapping program was necessary.  Been asking that since it was revealed, and never got a good answer from anyone.  What was insufficient about the existing process?


Last one out get the lights.

// came here to say almost exactly that - FISA's been around since most of us were in short pants
 
2013-05-06 03:15:03 PM
Highroller48: ..........

Which part of what you wrote makes any of this okay?
 
2013-05-06 03:15:27 PM

HotWingConspiracy: MFAWG: Three Crooked Squirrels: I have nothing to hide, so I am not worried.

I remember when this was an actual right wing talking point.

And if you disagreed you were giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

Still kind of astounded that George farking Bush was the figure that was rewarded with such fealty.


Damndest thing I ever saw, really. It was the beginning of the end of post-modern conservatism as a viable ideology for the GOP.
 
2013-05-06 03:15:59 PM

Highroller48: Privacy is important, and the Government should be the guardian of that, not the usurper, but let's not pretend that suddenly some beaurocrat in Washington is gong to give 2 shiats about your conversations with Aunt Millie on Sunday nights and run out and get a wiretap order.

Perspective, people, perspective..

By and large, 99.999% of us are pretty boring, even in the eyes of the most zealous Government minions.


Then there is no reason for the government to not lift the veil of secrecy around their 'Citizen Monitoring' programs.
 
2013-05-06 03:18:36 PM

HotWingConspiracy: MFAWG: Three Crooked Squirrels: I have nothing to hide, so I am not worried.

I remember when this was an actual right wing talking point.

And if you disagreed you were giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

Still kind of astounded that George farking Bush was the figure that was rewarded with such fealty.


Some people just love jack-booted thugs if they're folksy.
 
2013-05-06 03:18:49 PM

Muta: dittybopper: If you are really worried about it, don't use the phone. Don't even use a 'burner' phone: All phones regularly transmit their location to the cell phone companies, even when they aren't being actively used. Don't use e-mail or texting or Twitter or Facebook. Stay off the internet. Avoid using computers altogether, if strict security is your goal.

My goal isn't security; my goal is freedom.  Freedom to do what I want without the Government watching me.

Why do you hate freedom?


He only likes certain ones.
 
2013-05-06 03:18:59 PM

Highroller48: The best part of this disucssion will be all th epoeple who are so self-deluded that they tnink they are interesting enough for the Government (or anyone else) to want to spy on them in the first place.

Dear average American:
No one wants to microchip/barcode you to monitor your every move.  You're not worth the bother.
No one wants to gas you with chemtrails.  You're not worth the bother.
No one wants to steal your DNA.  You're not worth the bother.
No one wants to analyze your library book history.  You're not worth the bother.
No one wants to control you with satellite rays.  You're not worth the bother.

Privacy is important, and the Government should be the guardian of that, not the usurper, but let's not pretend that suddenly some beaurocrat in Washington is gong to give 2 shiats about your conversations with Aunt Millie on Sunday nights and run out and get a wiretap order.

Perspective, people, perspective..

By and large, 99.999% of us are pretty boring, even in the eyes of the most zealous Government minions.


What an asinine defense of totalitarianism. "Yeah, you handed over unlimited power to law enforcement. So what, no one is going to bother hassling you"
 
2013-05-06 03:21:25 PM

Highroller48: The best part of this disucssion will be all th epoeple who are so self-deluded that they tnink they are interesting enough for the Government (or anyone else) to want to spy on them in the first place.

Dear average American:
No one wants to microchip/barcode you to monitor your every move.  You're not worth the bother.
No one wants to gas you with chemtrails.  You're not worth the bother.
No one wants to steal your DNA.  You're not worth the bother.
No one wants to analyze your library book history.  You're not worth the bother.
No one wants to control you with satellite rays.  You're not worth the bother.

Privacy is important, and the Government should be the guardian of that, not the usurper, but let's not pretend that suddenly some beaurocrat in Washington is gong to give 2 shiats about your conversations with Aunt Millie on Sunday nights and run out and get a wiretap order.

Perspective, people, perspective..

By and large, 99.999% of us are pretty boring, even in the eyes of the most zealous Government minions.


Very true.  But it misses the very real progression these things always seem to have.  People believe it's not a big deal because they're law abiding and certainly not worth the government's trouble.  But what about mistakes?  Or what happens when they decide to expand its use?  Once that power and privacy is forfeited, it is nearly impossible to get it back.

And that doesn't even address the transgressions of the Constitution.  Do we allow such transgressions to go unchallenged simply because, right now, it ain't no big deal?
 
2013-05-06 03:27:24 PM
DAs don't make requests for search warrants unless they already know they will be approved. It's a rubber stamp even in public courts, and being a "secret" court doesn't change that.
 
2013-05-06 03:28:08 PM

Highroller48: By and large, 99.999% of us are pretty boring, even in the eyes of the most zealous Government minions.


I don't like those odds, even if it wasn't a violation of my rights defined by the foundation of our country.
 
2013-05-06 03:29:32 PM
Our freedoms are apparently worth less than the effort required to take a stand. Everyone is too busy doubling up trying to recoup their losses (i.e. fantasy money that really never existed) to The Game to realize it is becoming evermore rigged in favor of the house (banks and too-bit-to-fail corporations).
 
2013-05-06 03:31:27 PM

Draq: DAs don't make requests for search warrants unless they already know they will be approved. It's a rubber stamp even in public courts, and being a "secret" court doesn't change that.


Damn straight!  That's while I always argue for warrantless wiretapping.  And, indeed, all arrest warrants without judicial review.  Judges are just uppity folks anyhow.
 
2013-05-06 03:33:33 PM
It's long been established (mostly in gun threads) that we can't stand up to the government anyway, so why bother trying?
 
2013-05-06 03:34:09 PM

Dr Dreidel: Diogenes: They're almost 100% approved, and can even be issued retroactively.   Given those two facts I'd like to know why the "secret" wiretapping program was necessary.  Been asking that since it was revealed, and never got a good answer from anyone.  What was insufficient about the existing process?

Last one out get the lights.

// came here to say almost exactly that - FISA's been around since most of us were in short pants


It's simple...the Constitution says the gummint needs a warrant, so the court exists to give them one. Full stop.
 
2013-05-06 03:36:24 PM

Stone Meadow: It's simple...the Constitution says the gummint needs a warrant, so the court exists to give them one.


A concept rendered completely useless when the search takes place before the warrant is issued.
 
2013-05-06 03:38:15 PM

MFAWG: Three Crooked Squirrels: I have nothing to hide, so I am not worried.

I remember when this was an actual right wing talking point.


My all-time fave: "Your civil liberties don't do you any good if you're dead!" Don't remember which Repub used that one but he was a US rep or senator, IIRC...
 
2013-05-06 03:38:42 PM
I was in the mood for some really old news, so I enjoyed this article.

///FISA court has worn out many many rubber stamps by now
 
2013-05-06 03:38:42 PM

Three Crooked Squirrels: NostroZ: Three Crooked Squirrels: I have nothing to hide, so I am not worried.

Yes, if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear citizen.

I'm sure you never do ANYTHING illegal.

While we're at it... have you heard of a thing called bitTorrent?  What about copyright?  What about the Alien and Sedition Act?  What about that Eugene V. Debbs was imprisoned for saying that he supported anti-war lawyers that were trying to get people off from the draft?

Do you really believe you'll never stand against the government?

I was being sarcastic.  Didn't mean to rile you up.


Yeah, I was thinking, when the name is "Three Crooked Squirrels," look for the hook in that juicy worm.  But I know lots of people who say it for realz.
 
2013-05-06 03:38:54 PM

Dr Dreidel: Diogenes: They're almost 100% approved, and can even be issued retroactively.  Given those two facts I'd like to know why the "secret" wiretapping program was necessary.  Been asking that since it was revealed, and never got a good answer from anyone.  What was insufficient about the existing process?

Last one out get the lights.

// came here to say almost exactly that - FISA's been around since most of us were in short pants


This.

I used to be at the pointy end of the FISA spear, as an intercept operator.

As for the "warrantless wiretapping" part of it, here is my take on it based upon my working knowledge of how FISA was interpreted back when I was in, and my "reading between the lines" of the various poorly written news stories about it.

First, you need to know that a warrant is required to intercept the communications of a "United States Person".  There is a specific definition of what constitutes a "United States Person" under the FISA law:

(i) "United States person" means a citizen of the United States, an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence (as defined in section 1101 (a)(20) of title 8), an unincorporated association a substantial number of members of which are citizens of the United States or aliens lawfully admitted for permanent residence, or a corporation which is incorporated in the United States, but does not include a corporation or an association which is a foreign power, as defined in subsection (a)(1), (2), or (3) of this section.

Note that some people who would be covered under the Fourth Amendment (foreign nationals on vacation, for example, or those on a student visa) for wiretaps that would be used for criminal prosecution aren't covered under FISA, because FISA is about gathering national intelligence, not about criminal prosecution.

Anyway, even after the 'warrantless wiretapping' program started, you still needed to get a FISA warrant to intercept the communications of a United States Person.

I think the assumption flipped from "If a communication originates or terminates in the United States, it involves a United States Person" to "If a communication originates or terminates in a foreign country, it doesn't involve a United States Person until proven otherwise".

The first assumption made sense back in the day:  There were no pay-as-you-go cell phones, anonymous e-mails, or even unknown phone numbers:  The phone company knew who you were because they billed you, so you could associate every call with a real address and person.

Back then, the *ONLY* anonymous communication method was via radio, and the aether was patrolled by people like me, especially the HF (long distance) part of the spectrum.

With the rise of widespread anonymous communications methods, though, that assumption became, if not invalid, much more tenuous.  Is that person on the Tracphone in Baltimore calling Saudi Arabia a legal resident alien or US citizen (thus a FISA warrant is needed), or is it someone else for whom a warrant to intercept isn't necessary?

That's what I *THINK* happened, that the assumption that a communication from or to the US from or to another nation that isn't explicitly associated with a United States Person is treated as a legitimate foreign interception until we know that it's a United States Person, at which point a FISA warrant is needed for further interception.
 
2013-05-06 03:39:34 PM

Laocoon: I'd do it, but unfortunately I have to communicate with people who don't live in NealStephensonland.


Not really.

And Neal Stephenson is a hack.
 
2013-05-06 03:42:02 PM

GoldSpider: Stone Meadow: It's simple...the Constitution says the gummint needs a warrant, so the court exists to give them one.

A concept rendered completely useless when the search takes place before the warrant is issued.


It's just a farking piece of paper, ya know!? Like what ya wipe yer arse with!
 
2013-05-06 03:42:20 PM

Highroller48: Dear average American:
No one wants to microchip/barcode you to monitor your every move.  You're not worth the bother.
No one wants to gas you with chemtrails.  You're not worth the bother.
No one wants to steal your DNA.  You're not worth the bother.
No one wants to analyze your library book history.  You're not worth the bother.
No one wants to control you with satellite rays.  You're not worth the bother.


All this is true until you *ARE* worth the bother.  And if you haven't worried about it before then, it's too farkin' late.
 
2013-05-06 03:48:16 PM
The FISA court has rejected only 11 requests in THIRTY FOUR YEARS.

It's an abomination. Fark you, Congress, for creating such an obscenity.
 
2013-05-06 03:55:58 PM

Stone Meadow: It's just a farking piece of paper, ya know!? Like what ya wipe yer arse with!


Not sure I get the reference...
 
2013-05-06 03:57:15 PM

Cubicle Jockey: The FISA court has rejected only 11 requests in THIRTY FOUR YEARS.

It's an abomination. Fark you, Congress, for creating such an obscenity.


Either that, or the government is nearly flawless in its ability to select surveillance targets.
 
2013-05-06 03:57:15 PM
Slightly friendlier than the rubber stamp used to hand out H-1B visas while college grads can't get the required experience without lying about already having it.
 
2013-05-06 03:59:09 PM
I was outraged by this blatant violation of constitutional rights, but then someone said the word "terrorist" and I shat myself and immediately called my congressman to beg him to take away more of my freedoms if he will only keep me safe from the scary bad guys.
 
2013-05-06 04:00:09 PM

dittybopper: Highroller48: Dear average American:
No one wants to microchip/barcode you to monitor your every move.  You're not worth the bother.
No one wants to gas you with chemtrails.  You're not worth the bother.
No one wants to steal your DNA.  You're not worth the bother.
No one wants to analyze your library book history.  You're not worth the bother.
No one wants to control you with satellite rays.  You're not worth the bother.

All this is true until you *ARE* worth the bother.  And if you haven't worried about it before then, it's too farkin' late.


How does that old poem go? First, they came for the Communists...
 
2013-05-06 04:00:24 PM

MFAWG: Three Crooked Squirrels: I have nothing to hide, so I am not worried.

I remember when this was an actual right wing talking point.



Yeah. The way I remember it, it was very popular when it looked like GWB was going to start a Stasi-like corps of unpaid "patriot" volunteers to report anything that looked like potential terrorism. There were posts from freepers just itching to join up for the express purpose of making life miserable for people they knew & didn't like.

Thank god that idea died quickly. Of all the stupid and frightening ideas that came out of that administration, this was the one that really scared me.
 
2013-05-06 04:05:13 PM

phaseolus: MFAWG: Three Crooked Squirrels: I have nothing to hide, so I am not worried.

I remember when this was an actual right wing talking point.


Yeah. The way I remember it, it was very popular when it looked like GWB was going to start a Stasi-like corps of unpaid "patriot" volunteers to report anything that looked like potential terrorism. There were posts from freepers just itching to join up for the express purpose of making life miserable for people they knew & didn't like.

Thank god that idea died quickly. Of all the stupid and frightening ideas that came out of that administration, this was the one that really scared me.


Yeah all of this while screaming at people that disagreed that they hate freedom.

All for George Bush. Now none of them will admit they even voted for the guy.
 
Displayed 50 of 84 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report