tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post1821497503413942925..comments2024-03-28T12:50:44.466-05:00Comments on Althouse: Some clarification about what the government does with the 3 billion phone records it collects every day.Ann Althousehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01630636239933008807noreply@blogger.comBlogger94125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-45110456799344575842013-06-10T18:44:51.168-05:002013-06-10T18:44:51.168-05:00The Godfather said...
I'd have to know a ...<i>The Godfather said...<br /><br /> I'd have to know a lot more about how this all works before I'd be comfortable that the Government won't/can't abuse our liberties through access to all this data. But of course they can't tell us more because it's all a matter of national security.<br /><br /> Federalist 51, and indeed all the Federalist Papers, argued that the separation or powers between Federal and State governments, and among the three branches of the Federal government, would prevent abuse, but that doesn't work if the abuses can be kept secret.<br /> 6/9/13, 5:53 PM </i><br /><br />Even worse, the checks and balances don't work quite so well when you have at least two of the three branches demonstrating a willingness to flout the rule of law, so long as it advances the Chicago Way of our current CIC.<br /><br />A corrupt administration official can't be exposed as lying to a secret FISA court if no one else can see what's being asked of that court, and there's nothing to correlate whether the actual searches performed are constrained to only what was actually authorized.<br /><br /><br />To make matters worse, if you have a corrupt AG, there's far less disincentive to abusing the system, since you know that he won't prosecute you so long as your actions were in alignment with the goals of the administration.<br /><br />That's a recipe for disaster... but that's what you tend to get when you combine governmental corruption with a "trust us, this is all for national security" attitude.<br /><br />It doesn't matter who is in charge. We should assume that humans are subject to potential corruption, and design our systems to detect and expose abuse even when dealing with national security issues... and much more so for systems which expose everyone in the nation to infringement of their rights.VekTorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09884547607158702582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-71557146094581994682013-06-10T18:32:30.132-05:002013-06-10T18:32:30.132-05:00JackOfVA said...
...
And as far as checks and bala...<i>JackOfVA said...<br />...<br />And as far as checks and balances, one could make a fair case out that the FISA court is an updated version of a Star Chamber. 100% ex parte presentation by the government, and the judge has no independent method of verifying whether or not the argument is real or fake (See the James Rosen order for an example where AG Holder admitted the affidavit was perjured) and there is absolutely zero independent ability to establish that even the cursory safeguards from a judge sitting in the FISA court are being followed. <br />...<br />6/9/13, 3:27 PM </i><br /><br />THIS. A hundred times, this.VekTorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09884547607158702582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-32756807716676932012013-06-10T18:31:03.244-05:002013-06-10T18:31:03.244-05:00Ann Althouse said...
If your idea is that gov...<i>Ann Althouse said...<br /><br /> If your idea is that government should not be trusted with any power that can be abused, then you will have to end all government.<br /><br /> Any power can be abused.<br /> 6/9/13, 2:31 PM </i><br /><br />This a false dichotomy... it's not a binary choice of "no trust with any power" versus "the government can do whatever the hell it wants".<br /><br />It's a spectrum. A tool that offers a significantly larger potential for violation of civil liberties would seem to call for <b>more</b> oversight than a more generic tool which would not be so prone to abusability.<br /><br />Rather than more oversight, though, we seem to have much less in this case, under the rubric that it's all national security and has to be secret. So the hurdle that has to be cleared before someone could abuse this data trove if they so chose is much lower than would be expected.<br /><br />All it really takes is someone being willing to lie to the secret FISA court about the reasons for running a given query, or to simply neglect to "follow the rules" one or more times and run some queries without having first acquired the needed approval. <br /><br />Who would know that someone had lied to the FISA court? It's secret. Where is the proper set of checks and balances to make sure that any abuse is detected, exposed, and properly punished?<br /><br />But that surely won't happen with this administration, since they are on the side of the angels, after all.<br /><br />National security could be preserved and safeguards still be put in place to detect and protect against abuse of the collected data, via compartmentalized independent auditors, and extremely severe and mandatory criminal penalties for abuse of the system.<br /><br />But all the apparatus has to do is say the magic word "terrorism", and all the suspicion about the human nature of the operators of the system goes flying out the window...VekTorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09884547607158702582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-30579719969006445682013-06-10T18:20:47.418-05:002013-06-10T18:20:47.418-05:00But they're not allowed to go into that data u...<i>But they're not allowed to go into that data until they have a particular warrant signed off on by a judge</i><br /><br />... and if there's one thing that we can be sure of, it's that members of this administration will definitely not lie to a judge in order to further their agenda.<br /><br />/eyeroll<br /><br />If the AG will lie to a court with public oversight, and will lie under oath with the American public watching on live TV, what makes you think this administration will be <b>less likely</b> to lie to a set of secret FISA judges when there is no oversight, because this stuff is <b>secret</b>, dontcha know? <br /><br />VekTorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09884547607158702582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-53033573546773314272013-06-10T07:22:27.130-05:002013-06-10T07:22:27.130-05:00Let us not forget or overlook the name of the prog...Let us not forget or overlook the name of the program utilizing the data; PRISM. What does a prism do to light? It disassembles the spectrum of light into it's component parts. The program must, by it's very nature, not just study RGB (Red, Green, Blue) but all the shades bleeding over into the next. Any terrorist practicing good trade craft is engaged in a form of Chess as opposed to the Checkers analysis soothingly sold to the rubes to allay their well-founded fearsVet66https://www.blogger.com/profile/13991214729039112573noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-75207151825401703602013-06-10T07:21:13.037-05:002013-06-10T07:21:13.037-05:00jr said,
"
If the NSA is using this to target...jr said,<br />"<br />If the NSA is using this to target Tea Partiers it would certianly be an abuse of power, but as of yet, it seems they haven't done so."<br /><br />Here is the rub.<br />How do you know they haven't targeted Tea Partyers?<br />THEY get to define the parameters. They haven't disclosed what those parameters are.<br />For all we know the buzz they are looking for includes "Tea Party", Conservative", "Republican", etc.<br />We have no way of knowing.<br />However.<br />Judging by the performance f the IRS, OSHA, EPA, etc., I'm going to go with that they are. Rustyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00938263272237104128noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-73600859434314885292013-06-10T02:12:49.002-05:002013-06-10T02:12:49.002-05:00That's probably because there's nothing to...<i>That's probably because there's nothing to see here.</i><br /><br />Especially for a willfully blind man such as yourself.DADvocatehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04621021178600799126noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-61055646585147452372013-06-09T23:40:45.038-05:002013-06-09T23:40:45.038-05:00If you don't have any link to that original pr...<i>If you don't have any link to that original predicate, terrorism, your phone records are never touched.</i><br /><br />And when you have professional leftists in government declaring everyone to the right of Stalin a right-wing nazi-loving terrorist (<a href="http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/04/14/extremism.report/" rel="nofollow">Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment</a>), fit for an IRS audit, you can justify viewing anybody's phone records.Michael The Magnificenthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03820094319077676224noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-74963589695788778402013-06-09T23:31:25.084-05:002013-06-09T23:31:25.084-05:00jr, The Director of the NSA has already lied to th...jr, <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2013/06/06/watch-top-u-s-intelligence-officials-repeatedly-deny-nsa-spying-on-americans-over-the-last-year-videos/" rel="nofollow">The Director of the NSA has already lied to the Congress.</a><br /><br />Why am I supposed to trust his agency to handle yottabytes of data w/ discretion?Chip S.https://www.blogger.com/profile/13210586187250159751noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-51136883048140504712013-06-09T23:25:42.422-05:002013-06-09T23:25:42.422-05:00Saint Croix wrote:
And they go judge-shopping unti...Saint Croix wrote:<br />And they go judge-shopping until they find a judge that says, oh hell yeah, spy on Fox news, spy on the AP.<br /><br> See, now THAT is a legitmate issue that the repubs should be hammering. This one... not so much (unless you can show that Obama is using it to target conservatives and not terrorists)jr565https://www.blogger.com/profile/06250384040393259866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-3496331966241524112013-06-09T23:21:04.510-05:002013-06-09T23:21:04.510-05:00DADVocate wrote:
I saw the exchange between Hayden...DADVocate wrote:<br />I saw the exchange between Hayden and Wallace. I didn't find Hayden believable. He seemed to have a "nothing here to see, move on" attitude.<br /><br> That's probably because there's nothing to see here. <br />jr565https://www.blogger.com/profile/06250384040393259866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-88476361461692956282013-06-09T23:20:13.820-05:002013-06-09T23:20:13.820-05:00Chip S wrote:
No. The burden of proof is not on US...Chip S wrote:<br />No. The burden of proof is not on US citizens to explain why they shouldn't be spied on by their own government. <br> If your number is not triggered then are you being spied on (at least as per the NSA program).<br />If you number is brought up and a FISA warrant issued, are you suggesting that you should not be targeted? <br /><br />jr565https://www.blogger.com/profile/06250384040393259866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-6627598659065171692013-06-09T22:18:25.865-05:002013-06-09T22:18:25.865-05:00"Incredible oversight mechanisms..." &qu..."Incredible oversight mechanisms..." "Incredible continuity..."<br /><br />Incredible indeed.slumber_jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09334729807154884034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-10368466816945373992013-06-09T22:09:01.000-05:002013-06-09T22:09:01.000-05:00Those who disagree need to answer Hayden's hyp...<i>Those who disagree need to answer Hayden's hypo.</i><br /><br />No. The burden of proof is not on US citizens to explain why they shouldn't be spied on by their own government. <br /><br />The burden of proof is on Hayden to demonstrate that the only way to keep some dude in Badguyistan from getting a bomb into the NY subway system is to download every bit of info about every single American.<br /><br />That case isn't even remotely close to being made.Chip S.https://www.blogger.com/profile/13210586187250159751noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-37134287060465915022013-06-09T21:39:42.524-05:002013-06-09T21:39:42.524-05:00This is right out of 'Enemies of The State'...<i>This is right out of 'Enemies of The State'. Only no rouge CIA/NSA spook but a rouge President.</i><br /><br />You mean rogue, I think.Quaestorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13688608372863540573noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-81391196206062418922013-06-09T21:35:41.477-05:002013-06-09T21:35:41.477-05:00I saw the exchange between Hayden and Wallace. I d...I saw the exchange between Hayden and Wallace. I didn't find Hayden believable. He seemed to have a "nothing here to see, move on" attitude.DADvocatehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04621021178600799126noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-84488170180804808572013-06-09T21:17:20.011-05:002013-06-09T21:17:20.011-05:00Hahahahaha... won't touch those records. Yea l...Hahahahaha... won't touch those records. Yea like the IRS won't audit Obama's enemy's. <br /><br />Sure sucker.. just keep thinking that.<br /><br />This is right out of 'Enemies of The State'. Only no rouge CIA/NSA spook but a rouge President.Paulhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11635784352780834494noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-29388922858151768552013-06-09T20:36:30.987-05:002013-06-09T20:36:30.987-05:00For those who think the policy of collecting these...For those who think the policy of collecting these records should be reversed, how would you answer Hayden's hypo about the newly acquired cell number from BadGuy-istan? Verizon and the other telecoms don't have to all of these call records for extended periods, and will incur the expense of doing so only insofar as their own interests dictate. It's hard to connect the dots if all the dots are discarded with the vast amount of insignificant data. <br /><br />For those who worry about the possible abuse of power, it is helpful to recall the the worst abuse anyone is likel ever to suffer will come from local officials, not the Feds -- the out-of-control cop who locks you up for pissing him off, the zoning or buildings dept official who won't give you a permit, the environmental guy who decides your property is a regulated wetland because it floods eriodically, etc. <br /><br />For those who are concerned about a loss of privacy, the belief that there was any iron-clad privacy when using the digital infrastructure is and for a long time has been factually baseless. In this context privacy is a relative concept, not an absolute one.<br /><br />Given the realities ofthe world we live in, I don't see any preferable policy to the data gathering that has been a constant feature of post-9/11 America. For all the noise, there is no chance that Congress will act to change it. Those who disagree need to answer Hayden's hypo. Richard Dolanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12735773524374061429noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-54071355488412868382013-06-09T19:09:00.828-05:002013-06-09T19:09:00.828-05:00But they're not allowed to go into that data u...<i>But they're not allowed to go into that data until they have a particular warrant signed off on by a judge</i><br /><br />And they go judge-shopping until they find a judge that says, oh hell yeah, spy on Fox news, spy on the AP.Saint Croixhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17876368500159112781noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-59255293513348746582013-06-09T18:51:58.794-05:002013-06-09T18:51:58.794-05:00My major concern is with the definition of terrori...My major concern is with the definition of terrorist activity which seems to be in the sole discretion of the executive branch. DHS is continually releasing material that indicates that they are concerned about the terror activities of veterans and anti-government right wingers.There seems to be no judicial oversight on the queries to be processed and no Congressional oversight on threat assessment. I am generally in favor of these massive databases for the purpose of "connecting the dots" but there needs to be some transparency and open debate on what dots are to be connected. Leorahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14855141178189188764noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-60085951590757560232013-06-09T18:31:28.166-05:002013-06-09T18:31:28.166-05:00If it can be abused, it will be.
And the problem ...If it can be abused, it will be.<br /><br />And the problem is precisely parallel to the Rosen case, where they went to a compliant federal judge with a false affidavit as to why they wanted secret access to Rosen's phone records.<br /><br />And we still do not know for sure that the original aim was to investigate the Korean leak thing, or something else entirely - perhaps political, perhaps personal.Hagarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03653025261513705773noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-54724136700737096722013-06-09T18:03:24.183-05:002013-06-09T18:03:24.183-05:00HAYDEN: Well -- well, first of all, you have to id...HAYDEN: Well -- well, first of all, you have to identify who are the bad guys. So, let's begin the acquisition. Three billions is a big number. Keep in mind, Chris, that our telecommunications providers do that every day on their own. So, it's not impossible to do. Now you've got the data stored. <b>Here's the important part and this is the part that protects civil liberties and balances... security and our freedom.<br /><br />You ask the database a question, but the question has to be related to terrorism. I'll give you a concrete example so this is very clear. So, you roll up something in Waziristan. You get a cell phone. It's the first time you've ever had that cell phone number. You know it's related to terrorism because of the pocket litter you've gotten in that operation. Here's how it works: you simply ask that database, hey, any of you phone numbers in there ever talked to this phone number in Waziristan? I mean, you're already going into the database with the predicate, with a probable cause, with an arguable reason why you're asking for the data.</b><br /><br /><br> That is LITERALLY how you connect the dots. Something we are always told govt should have done when they didn't. Well, how do you expect them to other than with programs like this?<br /><br />If the NSA is using this to target Tea Partiers it would certianly be an abuse of power, but as of yet, it seems they haven't done so. Yet, should we remove the ability to connect the dots on matters of national security because of the fear that someone might target someone, not that someone did target someone. <br /><br />If you came up with an alternative way to connect dots, you'd run into the same exact issue and potential for abuse. It coudl be used to connect dots in ways you don't like. THen the premise becomes, we shouldn't connect the dots. And that's dangerous.<br /><br />I'm always arguing that govt should be lean and not bloated. that govt is often the problem because it does things badly. (usually that the public sector can do better) but govt is our only recourse when it comes to national security. I hope that that is the one area where they are acting responsibly. The other stuff is bullshit.<br />And if the argument is that govt works best when it has nothing in place to connect the dots when it comes to national security, then frankly anyone making the argument is an idiot.<br /><br /><br /><br />jr565https://www.blogger.com/profile/06250384040393259866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-52731069704225159462013-06-09T17:58:59.908-05:002013-06-09T17:58:59.908-05:00"there are no records of abuse under Presiden...<i>"there are no records of abuse under President Bush, under President Obama."</i><br /><br />Now I imagine Michael Hayden playing golf with Obama's head of the CIA from 2009-2011.<br /><br />Michael Hayden: "Hey, what's the record of abuse over at the CIA?"<br /><br />Leon Panetta: "No abuse. No abuse. We're doing great!"<br /><br />Michael Hayden: "That's awesome. Shit! Sand trap."<br /><br />Leon Panetta: "I was confirmed 100-0 to head up the Pentagon. Everybody loves me. <a href="http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=A9E939F1-6BB7-484D-BD67-7F9A89BF1FC7" rel="nofollow">Especially Hollywood.</a>"<br /><br />Michael Hayden: "You're a rock star. Hey, I'm going on Fox News Sunday."<br /><br />Leon Panetta: "Yeah, whatever. That's small screen. Hey, Chuck, look at my drive!"<br /><br />Chuck Hagel: "Jews. Damn Jews. Jews!"Saint Croixhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17876368500159112781noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-62222763782959612042013-06-09T17:53:24.371-05:002013-06-09T17:53:24.371-05:00I'd have to know a lot more about how this all...I'd have to know a lot more about how this all works before I'd be comfortable that the Government won't/can't abuse our liberties through access to all this data. But of course they can't tell us more because it's all a matter of national security.<br /><br />Federalist 51, and indeed all the Federalist Papers, argued that the separation or powers between Federal and State governments, and among the three branches of the Federal government, would prevent abuse, but that doesn't work if the abuses can be kept secret.The Godfatherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10575359417766667457noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-38733206514917310242013-06-09T17:46:18.254-05:002013-06-09T17:46:18.254-05:00You can always tell what Democrats are up to by wh...You can always tell what Democrats are up to by what they accuse Republicans of. They accused Bush of creating a massive database on Americans because they knew that is what they would do, and they refuse to accept that ANYONE is more ethical then they. So when they got power, they used these systems for evil, and you bet Democrats will use EVERYTHING to score political points and win. I wonder if they know if Boehner called a hooker? They would blackmail him. Don't like Petraeus trying to reign in the Obama Admin in the middle east? Blackmail him with his affair. This is Stalin meets the Chicago way, and deep in their hearts the believe everyone would do it, so it is OK.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com