Court Rules That Mass Surveillance of Americans is Immune From Judicial Review

[kpete]

Source: Electronic Frontier

January 21st, 2010
EFF Plans Appeal of Jewel v. NSA Warrantless Wiretapping Case

Court Rules That Mass Surveillance of Americans is Immune From Judicial Review

San Francisco - A federal judge has dismissed Jewel v. NSA, a case from the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) on behalf of AT&T customers challenging the National Security Agency's mass surveillance of millions of ordinary Americans' phone calls and emails.

"We're deeply disappointed in the judge's ruling," said EFF Legal Director Cindy Cohn. "This ruling robs innocent telecom customers of their privacy rights without due process of law. Setting limits on Executive power is one of the most important elements of America's system of government, and judicial oversight is a critical part of that."

In the ruling, issued late Thursday, U.S. District Court Chief Judge Vaughn Walker held that the privacy harm to millions of Americans from the illegal spying dragnet was not a "particularized injury" but instead a "generalized grievance" because almost everyone in the United States has a phone and Internet service.

"The alarming upshot of the court's decision is that so long as the government spies on all Americans, the courts have no power to review or halt such mass surveillance even when it is flatly illegal and unconstitutional," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Kevin Bankston. "With new revelations of illegal spying being reported practically every other week -- just this week, we learned that the FBI has been unlawfully obtaining Americans' phone records using Post-It notes rather than proper legal process -- the need for judicial oversight when it comes to government surveillance has never been clearer."

Read more: http://www.eff.org/press/archives/2010/01/21

---

For the judge's full order:
http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/jewel/jeweldismissal12110.pdf

[havocmom]

1. OK, NOW is it official?

America is not ours anymore.

[SomeGuyInEagan]

49. Not sure America ever was ours ... but was always hopeful

[Mithreal]

149. Imagine how that sounds to a Native American.

[dotymed]

62. We have the same

Civil Rights as the people of China.

[RedCloud]

101. Except the Chinese don't buy our defective crap

[Socal31]

120. Ill take hyperbole for 500, Alex

[Mithreal]

151. Sure there is some hyperbole, but care to comment on these two stories particularly?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/22/world/asia/22iht-beijing.1.19590543.html?_r=1

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/12/business/worldbusiness/12iht-unions.3141929.html

[valerief]

161. You're right. They have more rights. nt

[Mithreal]

147. Isn't China set to get National Health Care?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/22/world/asia/22iht-beijing.1.19590543.html

Health Care is a civil right in my sight despite the excuses from elected officials who throw around the word codified.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/12/business/worldbusiness/12iht-unions.3141929.html

And look at this story that is pro-union in the face of Walmart no less.

CHINA is making progress.

[whatacountry09]

75. don't think it really ever was.

[NashVegas]

200. The Bad Guys Won

In 1980.

[havocmom]

206. They got into striking distance then. And we stopped playing defense against the ground game.

They have been moving the ball down steadily ever since. When bush got to finish selecting the referees.... game over

edited for typo

[ixion]

2. Our corporate overlords despise us...

I believe they've made that very clear.

[EFerrari]

71. Yes. Their contempt is palpable every day. n/t

[ShortnFiery]

3. Oh Goody! Now we can ask agents Mike and Mary, "Can you hear me now?!?"

:evilgrin:

[Coventina]

4. And the hits just keep coming....

I have no words...

[wizstars]

5. "We hold these truths to be self-evident:..."

"...that whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, IT IS THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO ALTER OR ABOLISH IT, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness..."
"...But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, IT IS THEIR DUTY, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. --Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies..."


Anyone up for Revolution II???

[Harry Monroe]

56. "We hold these truths to be self-evident:..."

"...that it is all a lie now!!"

[No Elephants]

82. Things are different now than they were in the days of the slaveholder who authored that document.

Now, we have huge state militias and a massive military. I have no doubt they'd mow everyone down in a second. Not that I mind dying for my beliefs. I just mind dying for no result.

So, I'd say, I'd take to the streets for demonstrations, but I am not up for a revolution.

Yet.

[peace frog]

202. "I just mind dying for no result"

You posted the thought right out of my head. :fistbump:

[lagavulin]

205. The way to revolt against this system is by withdrawing your support for it!

Of course you don't want to wave a gun at these people...they'll destroy you and make you an example for others.

If you support this system but you don't feel it is supporting you, then you need to withdraw that support. If you hate the bankers, you need to get out of debt -- debt is only a sophisticated form of slavery (you can keep a checking account, though, since banks make next to nothing on them except as cross-selling accounts).

Do you pay taxes? Real revolution would require "tax revolution". Personally I'd never go that route or advise anyone else to -- you have no idea how fascist this system really is until you get audited or fingered for tax fraud/non-payment. But what you COULD do is downsize your life to the point you can live off so little income that you actually receive tax credits each year! That might well require the suffering and dedication of a true revolutionary.

Or if you're in private business you could work to structure your finances to the point you pay little or no taxes (which is what most of the wealthy do). Set up non-profits with your children at the helm as a way to funnel charitable donations to them tax free, that sort of thing (ever wonder about all these children that seem to be out there so desperately requiring cosmetic lip surgery...?) Great tax advisers have a slew of schemes in this respect.

Get off welfare programs. The more you rely on the system, the more you become tied to it.

And most important: stop buying from corporations that are working actively against you! Buy as locally as possible, from smaller family-owned enterprises. Barter and trade.

And remember that revolution won't happen just by waving our tiny little fist on the internet.

[OnyxCollie]

6. I feel like Bruce Willis at the end of "The Sixth Sense."

I'm dead. It all makes sense now.

[Frank Cannon]

35. At least Bruce Willis was able to say goodbye peacefully

It's not going to be quite so easy for the rest of us.

[OnyxCollie]

42. More like Mickey Rourke in "Angel Heart", I guess.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

45. no, groundhog day. but without the cute babe he gets at the end.

just a repeat of bad and worse news.

[OnyxCollie]

7. K&R. nt

[flyarm]

8. what i want to know is did Obama's DOJ fight for NSA rights or ours?

if anyone knows please let me know. thanks

[OnyxCollie]

9. Since Senator Obama voted to expand domestic surveillance

and give immunity to telecoms, I think I can guess...

[PSPS]

10. I assume that's a rhetorical question.

[No Elephants]

79. Here you go....

"In April, the Obama administration moved to dismiss Jewel, claiming that litigation over the wiretapping program would require the government to disclose privileged "state secrets,” and that they were immune from suit. These are essentially the same or worse arguments than those made by the Bush administration when it first set out to dismiss EFF’s case against the AT&T back in 2006. On July 15, 2009, the court heard arguments on the government's motion to dismiss Jewel."

http://www.eff.org/cases/jewel


AFAIK, in almost every instance in which Bushco was sued and the case was still pending on Inauguration Day, Obamadmin took over the case, Obamadmin took the same position as Bushco had, or went even beyond Bushco.

Altogether now, in unison:

Democrats are nothing like Republicans! Obama is nothing like Bush! What the eff is wrong with you anyway?

[W T F]

11. U.S. District Court Chief Judge Vaughn Walker appointed by Bush Sr.

[SpiralHawk]

38. "Smirk." - Poppy 'Skull & Boner' Bush (R - Elitist)

[Harry Monroe]

57. And brought to you by Carl's Jr.!!

[Solly Mack]

12. K&R

The court has decided that breaking the law is immune from review by the courts.

Great!!

Let the law breaking commence!

Unreal...and yet.

[No Elephants]

76. No, the court held that government may ignore the 4th Amendment to the Constitution.,

That's lawlessness by government.

The court's decision does not give citizens the right to break the law. Duh. Citizens get nothing anymore.

[Solly Mack]

80. Yes, I know it doesn't apply to Jane and John Public

I was being as absurd as the ruling was

[No Elephants]

123. I knew you knew. I just wanted to spell out how stinky the court's decision is..

:toast:

[DeSwiss]

13. "Okay! So now if you're scoring at home......

...that's "Corporations are persons," "money is free speech" and you may now add "government spying on its citizens isn't a particularized injury".


- I'm not sure if we've reached Fascism yet, but it seems close.....



K&R

[Goldstein1984]

27. We haven't reached fascism yet

but all of the pieces are in their positions, and the government and corporations can call, "Check," anytime they decide it's necessary.

[JDPriestly]

67. We have reached Fascism.

The War in Iraq was a fascist war. That was the whole point.

[Goldstein1984]

89. You might be right

I've always just thought of it as an illegal war, but if you view it as an illegal war by a pseudo-democratic nation (Remember when Cheney responded to the fact that the majority of Americans opposed the war with, "So what?...") to install a pseudo-democratic government, then it could be viewed as fascist. I'll have to think about that.

I don't know at what point imperialism become fascism, or if one implies the other, but I do know that I feel fascism creeping up on us here in the "Homeland."

One one hand, I listen to President Obama and I still like the man and consider him better than the alternative. But as far as his administration goes, I see continued policies leading to abandonment of the Constitution, continuing militarism resulting in what I believe are war crimes, a foreign policy that still favors financial interests over democracy (e.g. Honduras; Cuba; Venezuela).

What I do know is that I worry about the futures of my children and grandchildren, and I live in Alaska because, among many positive reasons, it's a place where Liberals also stockpile ammunition.

[Goldstein1984]

95. By the way...

I know that even mentioning something like "stockpiling ammunition" on DU puts one at risk of being TSed. If you want an example of fascism, one needn't look much further than a message board where one is subject to the judgment of Big Brother, and can be tried and executed without due process, and where a bunch of loyalist gather around to celebrate "pizza delivery" around a picture of tombstone. Metaphorical--true. But also telling.

I've decided that I'm just going to speak my mind, which does not include advocating violence, but could include an academic discussion of the potential for violence, and if I cross the line, so what?

It's ironic that the Founders of this nation would have been TSed on DU if they had had the technology and this forum to use in 1776.

On edit: Typo and grammar.

[defendandprotect]

105. Direct line : McCarthyEra/HUAC ...COINTELPRO....HOMELAND SECURITY

[Goldstein1984]

107. Okay. You've convinced me.

The slope was more slippery than I thought.

[defendandprotect]

131. And, don't forget the right wing political violence along the way...assassinations, etal ...

Actually, I don't want to take credit for that info --

Reading a new book on the 60's leaders . . .

that connection was made by Casey Hayden, the then wife of Tom Hayden.

[Mithreal]

152. We have a choice of alternative now? Do tell?

Just messing with ya. I can't stand that stinky old meme.

:hi:

[Goldstein1984]

158. Meme's seem to be the rule

I think of them as platitudes or cliche's, but when oft-repeated and integrated into the narrative--memes.

[defendandprotect]

104. Agree . . . patriarchy is fascism....

male supremacist religions are fascism --

and their economic system of capitalism is, IMO, fascism --

Anyone played a game of "Monopoly, Inc." lately??

[Goldstein1984]

157. I never liked Monopoly

The one who gets Boardwalk and Park Place ends up running the show.

[defendandprotect]

162. Yep . . . pretty much where we are now -- !!

[L. Coyote]

100. HELLO!!

Start reading the OP from the beginning, slowly this time :rofl:

[Goldstein1984]

102. Read it the first time. Understood it the first time.

I guess I'm still influenced by the stories told by my Aunt Hedi about why my grandfather moved his family from Germany to the U.S. That was fascism, and even what we see in the U.S. today, which is bad and getting worse, doesn't compare. Nobody has come to my door--yet--and reviewed the contents of my library. (Although I may have been sneak-and-peaked, who can tell?)

I still don't believe that we've crossed the line into fascism yet, but one look at the following list suggests we're just a few moves away. One could argue that if fascism exists on a continuum, we have entered Fascism Lite and are on a slippery slope.

I would never argue that where we are now is acceptable, or that we shouldn't fight it.

Source of the following: http://www.ratical.com/ratville/CAH/fasci14chars.html

Political scientist Dr. Lawrence Britt recently wrote an article about fascism ("Fascism Anyone?," Free Inquiry, Spring 2003, page 20). Studying the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia), and Pinochet (Chile), Dr. Britt found they all had 14 elements in common. He calls these the identifying characteristics of fascism. The excerpt is in accordance with the magazine's policy.

The 14 characteristics are:

Powerful and Continuing Nationalism
Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.


Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights
Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.


Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause
The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.


Supremacy of the Military
Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.


Rampant Sexism
The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high, as is homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy.


Controlled Mass Media
Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.


Obsession with National Security
Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.


Religion and Government are Intertwined
Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.


Corporate Power is Protected
The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.


Labor Power is Suppressed
Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed .


Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts
Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts is openly attacked, and governments often refuse to fund the arts.


Obsession with Crime and Punishment
Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.


Rampant Cronyism and Corruption
Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.


Fraudulent Elections
Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.

[proudohioan]

111. A very slippery slope, indeed. Watch your footing!

:scared:

[No Elephants]

125. Maybe the contents of your library haven't yet been checked, but

the Patriot Act allowed government to check what you read at any library. It can also know what you do on the phone or online. Also to search you whenever you enter a public building, airport, etc.

And this decision says, in essence, if the government goes to a lot of folks' homes and checks the contents of their libraries, no one can get heard about it in court because the harm or injury is general, rather than specific.

So, we are not all that far away from the scenario you posited.

[Goldstein1984]

129. TRUE STORY

I was in Fairbanks, Alaska on business last October, and I was purchasing several books by Noam Chomsky, as well as "Guerrilla Warfare" by Che Guevara. When I went to the kiosk, I was asked if I wanted to use my Barnes & Noble membership to get my discount, and I said that I would rather pass on the discount and pay cash for these books. She replied, "Okay. You would be surprised how many people are paying cash for books like this."

These were not books that I consider controversial, but I could imagine a world not too far in the future where they might be. Turns out, I wasn't alone. Now, here is why I decided to pay cash...

I live in Anchorage, Alaska, and one of my coworkers' husbands is a manager at the Anchorage Barnes & Noble. I always say hello to him if he's there while I'm shopping. Not too long before my trip to Fairbanks, he had seen me waiting in line and and opened a register to help me. As he was ringing up my books, he set one aside and said, "May I suggest you pay cash for this one and not leave an electronic record of your purchase?" I asked him why, and he said, "Mr. Bush may be gone, but the USA Patriot Act is not." So I did.

This is the kind of country we now live in. I have no idea if my book purchase records have ever been accessed, but I have proof that I live in a country were educated and enlightened people no longer trust their government.

So, I defer to the better judgment of those who have corrected me in this thread. We are probably sliding along that slippery slope.

[fascisthunter]

143. now THAT is creepy

[boppers]

155. Just FYI:

Disclosing that records have been accessed via a NSL is a crime.

Thus, you don't need to worry when they advise you to buy with cash.... you need to worry when they stop.

[Goldstein1984]

164. He never told me my purchase records were accessed

The only reason I can think of why my records would be accessed is that I have a son in Army Intelligence. He holds high-level security clearances. When he enlisted, his recruiter warned us that his MOS would make the entire family subject to investigation during his background check.

When I was in the Marines I had a Secret clearance because I worked on avionics equipment, including encryption. For a short-term project, I was given a Top Secret clearance (For work on that project only), and in the course of the background check I was asked questions about my high-school associations with several people with juvenile criminal records. They were very thorough, even back in the 70s. I imagine that in the digital age a much more thorough investigation can be done from a single computer terminal.

My friend at B&N did tell me that B&N customer purchase records had been the subject of investigations--didn't say who, didn't say where, didn't say when, only that my types of purchases were best paid for with cash, and even better paid for with cash at the used bookstore down the street.

My only point was that American citizens now fear their government, or, at least, no longer trust their government.

[boppers]

165. No longer trust their corporations.... ?

Barnes and Noble is not the government.... though it's telling to equate the two.

On a related note, for giggles, I tend to trade "shopper cards" when I can.

[Goldstein1984]

195. It's "Rollerball"

There is barely a line between corporations and government, especially with the SCOTUS decision making corruption and free expression equivalent.

[N_E_1 for Tennis]

203. We are living that scenario as we breathe today

The member card that you use at the grocery store to get your discounts ...
link you and your purchases, they know what you buy.

The member card you use at your bookstore ...
They now know what you read. That leads to assuming knowing your beliefs.

The member card you use at your drug store ...
They now know a little about your health.

Your library card ...
Use the computer there? Check out any books or videos lately? Trackable, assumable of your beliefs.

They DO NOT need to "knock on our doors" anymore. We freely and willingly give them all our information.

All that and then beside checking our personal internet use at home, cell phones, texts, tweets, etc.

We are transparent.

This is real. This is now, today.

[rhett o rick]

168. I vote we are there. nt

[Enthusiast]

194. We see all 14 to

one degree or another.

[Liberation Angel]

210. Very useful analysis: everyone should read this...and furthermore...

In fact I recommend you post it as a stand alone OP.

My father worked with the Jewish underground in WWII and many of his friends were killed.

He schooled me on the wall street (read: Bush, Dulles, Rockefeller, Morgan, Ford, IBM, etc) financing and management of Hitler and the Third Reich and also the fact that most Nazis got away and were recruited by the right wing in America as "antiCommunist" anti-popular democracy agents and kilers.

There is a direct line from the Bushes to Hitler to the Bushes to what is happening now.

Obama is like the guy who attacked the tar baby - the more he tries to strike it the further stuck in the fascist tar he gets.

Nice to make your acquaintance.

As a believer in nonviolence I oppose any militant acts to change things.

Bt I am not ignorant that the purpose of the second amendment is to protect us from the tyranny of despots and tyrants.

I would add that I am not opposed to self defense and defense of others to protect the innocent from imminent harm.

As a strategy, however, (and this is more related to posts by others upthread) violence is impractical as a means of changing things. Progressive antifascists are simply outgunned and outresourced.

Satyagraha is the only practical means left in our democracy to make the serious changes we need to see.

But VERY few are willing to help fill the jails or turn the other cheek in the face of brutality and violence the way Gandhi and MLK did and inspired others to do.

But we have to try.

Salud!

[Harry Monroe]

60. You forgot "War is Peace" , "Slavery is Freedom" and "Ignorance is Strength"!!

[dixiegrrrrl]

77. Well, let's look at the 10 steps of Fascism and see if we have reached it:

1. Invoke a terrifying internal and external enemy.....check.
( Al-kada, the war on terra, etc)

2. Create a gulag......check.
Quantanamo...and other secret prisons.

3. Develop a thug caste........check...
Blackwater and others like it.
We now have scores of private mercenary companies.
And remember the recently revealed CIA "hit squads"?

4. Set up an internal surveillance system..........check.

5. Harass citizens' groups..........check.
the American Civil Liberties Union reports that thousands of ordinary American anti-war, environmental and other groups have been infiltrated by agents: a secret Pentagon database includes more than four dozen peaceful anti-war meetings, rallies or marches by American citizens in its category of 1,500 "suspicious incidents". The equally secret Counterintelligence Field Activity (Cifa) agency of the Department of Defense has been gathering information about domestic organisations engaged in peaceful political activities: Cifa is supposed to track "potential terrorist threats" as it watches ordinary US citizen activists. A little-noticed new law has redefined activism such as animal rights protests as "terrorism". So the definition of "terrorist" slowly expands to include the opposition,

6. Engage in arbitrary detention and release......check.
The No-fly list. American citizens being "detained" at the border.
Any Goodman was "detained" at the Canadian border just recently.
They wanted to know what she was planning on saying in a speech.

It is a standard practice of fascist societies that once you are on the list, you can't get off.

7. Target key individuals.....check.
the most famous recent incidence of this was the US Attorney firings.
No one has been held accountable for that yet, either.
There has been a well documented series of prosecutions brought against
Democratic candidates, Sieglman being a well known case.
Other people have been prevented from speaking in the US about sticky topics.

8. Control the press.........check.
This really needs no further comment.

9. Dissent equals treason..............check.
Under the Military Commissions Act of 2006 - the president has the power to call any US citizen an "enemy combatant". He has the power to define what "enemy combatant" means. The president can also delegate to anyone he chooses in the executive branch the right to define "enemy combatant" any way he or she wants and then seize Americans accordingly.

10. Suspend the rule of law.......hmmmmmm.

Erasing the laws has been working pretty well for the past 10 years.


Whadda ya think, of the above?
Are we there yet?

[Lochloosa]

196. Nice Flag!

[KakistocracyHater]

207. I thought it was "everyone is doing it"-now kids everywhere can use this

argument, was I wrong? Because that's how it seemed to be to me, the judge says 'everyone's being spyied on, so it isn't wrong, even if the law says so I refuse to consider it'!

[GodlessBiker]

14. Well, this certainly encourages the gov't to do bad things to a lot of people in order to turn...

a particularized injury into a generalized grievance.

[No Elephants]

90. Yep. Very bad policy inherent in this decision.

[Jakes Progress]

15. Slip sliding away.

Slip sliding away.

You know the nearer your destination, the more you're slip sliding away.


Requiescat in Pace American Idea.

[SammyWinstonJack]

16. Nice!

x(

[Downwinder]

17. Hey, can we tap the Government's phones now? n/t

[thereismore]

18. When the government does it, then it's not illegal... nt

[ShortnFiery]

20. Yes, but in the USA the document below used to MEAN SOMETHING to our Legislators:

[chrisa]

19. How long until Government officials use private information...

To attack opponents, or even blackmail? For example, conversations over the phone with a doctor?

But no, "surveillance makes us free! This is America! Home of the free! Sometimes you just have to give up some rights to be safe! You can't yell "fire" in a crowded movie theatre! Don't you know there's a War on Terror going on! When it ends, Al Kader is defeated, and there are no terrorists left in the world, then we'll get those rights back. Just watch!"

[flyarm]

22. and what would make you think that hasn't been going on since this started? eom

[KansDem]

29. Or worse yet, the corporations' new status..

For example:
BigCorp wants legislation changed to fulfill its business plan;
BigCorp recruits potential-cabanaboy DumbShit for US Congress, gives him/her oodles of geld, thanks to SCOTUS, for campaign while taking advantage of CorpMedia's immunity from lying during election;
Dumbshit, buoyed by CorpMedia's make-believe campaign coverage, is elected and goes to DC;
BigCorp sends in its surrogate government experts (lobbyists) to Sen. DumbShit to rewrite and present new legislation, BUT BigCorp really as another agenda;
BigCorp contacts Sen. Dumbshit, who now sits on important committees, and asks for a wiretap on CompetitorCorp;
Sen. DumbShit says "okie-dokie" and sees to the task. After all, there's no judicial overview now;
BigCorp gets a whole shitload of valuable information on one of its biggest competitors, and uses it to get the edge.

It doesn't seem like a far-fetched example.

[Trillo]

39. And BigCorp's secrecy prevents discovery of

"particularized injury", because it could have just been "bad luck".

[chrisa]

118. Very realistic, in fact.

How long until a scandal like that emerges? It's bound to happen.

Corporations fighting for government power is a scary concept. This should be thwarted before it gets any worse.

[V_Byl]

124. At this point...

I'm not sure a scandal like that would even emerge - it'll just happen and we will never know.

[SlingBlade]

50. How long until Government officials use private information...???

Well, Its been exactly 1171 days since democrats took control of Congress,
yet War Criminals STILL walk the streets of America

If this doesn't prove conclusively that either blackmail or collusion exist
in the Democratic leadership, I don't know what does

Whattaya think ?

K & R :)

[Mithreal]

154. It does lean toward the persuasive.

[No Elephants]

86. Um, Watergate? Nixon in general?

[chrisa]

121. It was done through burglary.

As opposed to corporations having the power to actually have the government spy for them legally. Corruption of this magnitude would make Watergate look like nothing.

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[avaistheone1]

44. True. Obama agrees with these abuses.

Obama has protected the spying telecoms.

[sattahipdeep]

54. Obama Quietly Issues Ruling Saying It's Legal For The FBI

To Break The Law On Accessing Phone Records http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100121/1418107862.shtml

Obama administration issued a secret rule almost two weeks ago saying it was legal for the FBI to have skirted federal privacy protections."

What's more, the report noted that the cozy relationship between the bureau and the telecoms made it hard to differentiate between the FBI and the nation's phone companies.

FBI, Telecoms Teamed to Breach Wiretap Laws

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/01/fbi-att-verizon-violated-wiretapping-laws/

[No Elephants]

88. Other way around. This court agreed with Obama. See Reply # 79.

[myrna minx]

23. This week just keeps getting better and better.

[Frank Cannon]

34. And it's still not over.

I figure we have at least another 24 hours before the next big hit.

[proudohioan]

64. You think it's gonna be that long??????

[Frank Cannon]

110. I'm an optimist

[Ezlivin]

24. I can use my calling card now!

[Mithreal]

133. +1

[westerebus]

25. Nothing a million molotov cocktails can't fix.

If you think for one minute a sociopath will change his mind and spare you, you will continue to expect this government to do what is required of it by the law.

There is no law.

There is the time between now and fate.

Your only decision is how you will meet your fate.

[JonLP24]

26. K&R

Not because I agree with the decision but more people need to see this. This is no good! x(

[HCE SuiGeneris]

28. It's to protect our FREEDOM, dontcha know?

:puke:

[dbonds]

30. Is avoidance of surveillance also immune?

[Bragi]

31. This may be some big cosmic joke

Next week we'll wake up and find out we won in Mass; there was no SCOTUS money=free speech ruling; arbitrary domestic surveillance will still be unconstitutional; and we'll be listening to it all on Air America.

[Arugula Latte]

33. And Conan will still have the Tonight Show.

:)

[Arugula Latte]

32. I, for one, welcome our new corporo-fascist overlords.

:patriot:

[geardaddy]

43. Nice Simpsons reference

:D

[Mithreal]

134. Me too.

:patriot:

[Andronex]

36. Anyone here believes...

Anyone here believes that they would have allowed some real progressive or anybody who truly supports the constitution near the white-house. One more democratic senator won't make any difference, this game is rigged and we should try something different even if it's probably too late.

[Wapsie B]

48. That's right.

They'd be deader'n a Kennedy if by some miracle they got on the ballot and got elected.

[No Elephants]

93. +1 One definition of insanity is continuing to do the same thing, but expecting a different result.

Any specific suggestions?

[Mithreal]

135. I know it looks like we are buried under a shit avalanche at the moment

but sooner or later we gotta start digging our way out.

Gotta shovel or gonna use your hands?

[Trillo]

37. Good Cop Bad Cop Routine?

That's what it's looking like to me.

[FlyByNight]

40. The principles outlined in the Bill of Rights...

...AREN'T SUGGESTIONS.

Coupled with the Fascist Court decision yesterday, how can anyone refer to this country as a "democracy" or "republic" anymore? To do so would be sarcastic or a very sad joke.

:grr:

[Soylent Brice]

41. ...

:(

[Oldtimeralso]

46. Welcome to the New CSA

We now live in the Corporate States of Amerika.

[Lugnut]

47. WTF?

Where the fuck am I and how did I get here? :grr:

[gulfcoastliberal]

51. the Obama administration issued a secret rule almost two weeks ago saying it was legal for the FBI

to have skirted federal privacy protections.

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/01/fbi-att-verizon-violated-wiretapping-laws/

Just in case you wondered the Obama admins position.

[JenGatherer]

52. Right now I am grateful

That we can still communicate with each other here. You all are helping me to hang on to reality as we go through the looking glass. I await the shutdown of my beautiful internet connections with others.

Jen

[winyanstaz]

63. Of course we can still communicate here :) but of course it's all being recorded....

and this way...the government can spot the "troublemakers"....you know...the ones that keep wanting the laws upheld and the Constitution restored.

[Mithreal]

136. No reason to. It's part of the bread and circuses now.

And corporations love the monitoring aspects as much as some in "our" government.

No time to despair though. Believe me, WE will fix this eventually. All the panic of the TPTB is for good reason.

[Politicub]

53. Just wow - it keeps coming strong

Can a supreme court judge be impeached?

Do the conservatives like this stuff?

[Harry Monroe]

55. And the hits just keep coming!!

It just gets better and better, doesn't it? :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

[Mithreal]

58. Fascism is certainly ramping up. No doubt about it.

Except for the same all too few exceptions, the Dems are not fighting it. Not that the R's aren't many times worse.

We are going to hear many more saying don't resist or give them more time. Centrism was never your friend though.

I have been given ten minutes to speak at my next local Dem meeting. I plan to bring my new pitchfork. I am not kidding. Got it from Lee Valley, excellently well made and a great price too. I think it will ruffle a few feathers. May not let me speak when they see it though despite my being a member in good standing. Sounds foolish I know.

[tom_paine]

201. Could anything be more foolish of the Celebrity-puking, False Reality Bubble that encompasses the

Empire?

I think not. But what it WILL do is put you on several Federal Lists and increase your CTAC (Civilian Threat Assessment Code) or whatever the Bushies that control our military, intelligence and LE "industries" are calling it, these days.

Not that you shouldn't do it nor be afraid. Just by posting on DU, you have likely raised your CTAC.

If we are going to meet our fate, lets do it standing proud.

[slay]

59. Things are just getting more and more FUCKED every day

these court rulings are awful - what the hell is wrong with these judges? are they bought and paid for like our congress critters? UGH! :mad:

[reformist]

61. Another day, another horrendous decision.

I'm embarrassed to say this, but I used to vote Republican. I think this week has cured me of that forever!

[Generator]

65. You think the ACLU could spend more time on this

than defending corporations? Rome is burning and some are playing fiddles. I hate to say it but George W. Bush was right, the Constitution is just a goddamn piece of paper now. Worthless as a message board rant.

[DisgustedInMN]

66. Another...

:wtf: moment.

[Mithreal]

140. I liked to think of the Bush years as a show called Great Moments in Irony

Sort of in the style of the Dave Chappelle Show sketch if you know the one I am talking about, Mudbutt.

The Obama Presidency is turning into Great Moments in WTF.

I so badly want to be wrong you just don't know it. So many stories that I hear and pass along to my wife, I just cannot believe them myself, I so often want to cry and yell.

[gaijinlaw]

68. We just need to hang on

and work hard to get a Democrat in the White House and Democratic majorities in the House and Senate then... wait, WHAT?! :banghead:

[bugisbug]

69. Ah, come on...

Let's discuss something really important - who's your pick for the SuperBowl? :sarcasm:

That's all we need to care about. Right? Unfortunately, as long as the bread and circuses exist, most people either won't care or prefer to keep their eyes averted.

[Mari333]

70. is it Fascism yet? knr

[dixiegrrrrl]

81. The American Heritage Dictionary defines fascism as

"the domination of a government by corporations of the political right, combined with bellicose nationalism."

So, yes, I do believe it is that time.

[Mari333]

85. wow.

bellicose, indeed. knr on your post

[dixiegrrrrl]

91. Upthread I listed the 1o steps of Fascism....

which we seem to be meeting handily, btw.

[Mithreal]

141. Just ask Benito Mussolini, although the authenticity of the quote has been questioned

“Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power.”

Are we there yet may be less important than how we find our way out.

[katty]

72. god - this caps the take away of citizens rights week

[The_Commonist]

78. And that's not even the Friday news dump.

What else are they going to do to screw us over today?

[Vinca]

73. This is the icing on the cake for this wonderful week.

[jonathon]

74. So, what do we do?

[Better Believe It]

83. K & R

[alp227]

84. Watch what you say on the phone!

I think I'm gonna vote for a presidential candidate who will pledge to repeal the PATRIOT Act. Obama clearly never did.

[SandWalker1984]

150. Don't watch what you say on the phone -- may I make a suggestion?

Why make it easier for the spynicks? Try slipping phrases into your conversations like "Timmy really bombed on his math test today."

You get the idea. Let's keep "them" busy checking out millions of phone conversations.

Be creative!

[makemyday]

87. Life is short. Live it while you can. When it's over, it's over.

In order to be truly free one needs:

1. Freedom from Religious Intervention.

2. Freedom from Government Intervention.

3. Freedom from Medical Intervention.

4. Freedom from Social Intervention.


This may be encouraging:

"First they ignore you,
then they ridicule you,
then they fight you,
then you win." -- Gandhi

[Mithreal]

144. Appreciate the Gandhi quote. However, there is such a thing as good intervention.

I personally don't care for #1, so with you there.

I want clean drinking water, clean air, safe roads, safe food, safe drugs, safe cars, safe banks and on and on.

I want my health care to treat me when I am sick and not bankrupt my family or future, etc.

I want my unemployment insurance, public schools, social security, disability, etc.

So, what are you talking about anyway? Otherwise, like your style, even if confused by your content.

[Lasher]

92. This has been a pretty shitty week.

Think I'll drink enough beer to float the USS Saint Ronnie. If there's any more bad news don't tell me till Monday.

[Torn_Scorned_Ignored]

94. Not much really to worry about

Phone systems use digital fiber optic satellite and such.

Oh wait, that's just like TeeVee! And high speed internet!

...and you thought those voices were a party line...
AND it was!

Ah well carry on, we're only talking about rights here and they didn't seem to matter too much when I talked about mine being so horribly violated.


< edit to add :redbox: :tv: >

[ima_sinnic]

96. the trojan horse looked so sexay in shades

:eyes:

[Butch350]

97. So sad. Are freedoms or the illusion of freedom is slowly being taken away.

[h9socialist]

98. But you are hereby granted 25 extra grams of Victory Chocolate

Under the spreading chesnut tree, I sold you, you sold me.



(Sound familiar???)

[defendandprotect]

99. Sounds like America is now operating under the new NUREMBERG LAWS!!!

[librechik]

103. into the abyss

abandon all hope ye who pass through these gates

[cdillon]

106. Whatta concept!!!

What a concept -- because the government was spying on all, and not just a few, that makes it ok. Well, if we apply that to other crimes ..... If the government kills everyone then that is ok, as long as it didn't discriminate. Or, if the government puts everyone under house arrest, then thats ok too. Or, if the government, nationlizes all bank accounts, that would be legal too.

This could make Soviet totalitarianism look good.

[sattahipdeep]

108. So if it hasn't

touched you personally then it doesn't matter--right?

[santamargarita]

109. What a shitty week!

n/t

[underpants]

139. Yes it has been

BOO!

[emsimon33]

112. The blows keep coimng. When will we finally stand up & be counted!

[boppers]

113. In summary: "We've been doing this for over 100 years now, nothing to see here."

What has me surprised is the outrage. Folks honestly didn't seem to know that this has always been considered legal in the United States. Diplomatic pouches are the *exception*, not the rule.

All other persons, possessions, and traffic have always been subject to search when they enter, or leave, our borders. Once the internet hit, the borders vanished for extremely large amounts of traffic.

[No Elephants]

127. This has not always be considered legal in the United States. We have

a Fourth Amendment to our Constitution. And physically leaving our borders is not the correct analogy anyway.

The internet is not all that different from other forms of electronic communication, such as telegrams (now defunct), teletypes and telephones. Wiretaps always required a warrant granted by the court. Then we went to FISA. And even FISA was relatively recent, not "always."

[boppers]

148. Mail to/from the US was inspected. Still is to some extent, I assume.

Same with telegrams, and later wire technologies. Once we went wire-less, those were added (with lots of issues, because cell phones, for example, are basically broadcast on publicly leased airwaves... and you don't get to claim a radio broadcast is "private").

"Wiretaps always required a warrant granted by the court".... Uhm, nope. Domestic wiretaps, on domestic communications, between citizens, required a warrant, if done in the US, for matters not related to national security.

Even with FISA (since 1978), tapping between nationals, in the US, between non-US-Persons, could be done for a year, and if the tapping was done in the US, by US intelligence, on a US person, and was not related to disclosing issues damaging to national security, and was done by US agencies, it then had to be sanctioned within 72 hours.

Note the five part test on tapping americans with 72-hour warrants:
1) The tap mechanism had to be in the US. Thus, tapping *everything* that passed through international under-sea cables was legal. Same with international sat relays.
2) Intelligences agencies could not tap in the US.... but Sprint could. MCI could. Qwest could. AOL could. Comcast could. "Contractors" could.
3) A US person could not be the target. If the target was a foreign national, however, who had hundreds of calls from US persons, only one warrant would be needed.
4) The "national security" loophole. This is where it gets tricky. Disclosing the tapping infrastructure that's in place would be a problem, therefore, they don't talk about it, and lots of issues (such as "we had to tap them, it looked like an attack was going to happen in a week") can be considered matters of national security.
5) (See 2 above) Israel's state department (for example) could pay Qwest for a local tap on a US/Palestinian conversation, and then deliver it to the US.

[Mithreal]

145. boppers, get your skis ready, the shark is waiting

[boppers]

153. A Fonzi reference?

What's needed, I think, is a Church 2.0, to examine the loopholes left in, and/or added in, since then.

[glinda]

114. Telecom Company is a Person now. We are F$&^$#%ed.

[scentopine]

115. Hey AT&T - A Big Fuck You to You and Your Outsourcing, You Traitors!

[AlphaCentauri]

116. A constitutional referendum on it's way n/t

[FiveGoodMen]

117. Steal a little and they throw you in jail; steal a lot and they make you king.

[BlueJac]

119. I am so sick of this shit........

thanks Obama for the change we were promised!!!

[scentopine]

122. News Corp will buy a candidate and help AT&T defeat net neutrality -nt

[V_Byl]

126. That's one of my biggest fears.

Not just for political opinions being suppressed, but I'm a small online retailer, and I can just see Amazon or Walmart using their money to manipulate traffic to only get high speed access on their sites. Won't be hard for companies that are that big to buy off the 2 or 3 high speed IPS's in any given area.

:(

[FLPanhandle]

128. ...and I used to make fun of Libertarians.

Sorry guys, you were right.

[Mithreal]

146. Please explain. Right about what? I thought Libertarians were for

eliminating government regulations and letting courts be the remedy?

If I misunderstood, would appreciate the lesson?

Please and thank you.

[boppers]

156. Libertarians wanted a free communications network.

So, here's how it works:

The internet was basically tossed from the government folks to the libertarians. It flourished.

People wanting to control what could, or could not, be seen on the internet wanted the government to take over. They called it "Net Neutrality".

So, the corporations decided to take over the government.

Check-mate.

[Mithreal]

159. I had no idea that Libertarians were allies in net neutrality.

Always supposed they were free the market/corporations to do what they want.

I suppose that would set up a conflict in them between freedom of the individual versus the corporation.

They do seem a confusing bunch though.

Alrighty, Boppers, thank you, I will look into it for a little more insight.

[boppers]

163. "The internet routes around censorship".... It's an old mantra.

Libertarians are allies in net neutrality, but not allies in Government enforced "Net Neutrality", because as soon as somebody else gets to decide what is, and isn't, "neutral", then neutrality has ended.

Think of a person who wanted to set up a "liberal ISP", where faux news feeds got lower priority than MSNBC or the BBC. A libertarian view would be that the person setting up such an ISP should be allowed to do so, and conversely the same would hold for a corporate, conservative, ISP.

However, if everybody is forced, legally, to be "neutral", then the power lies in the hands of those who get to decide what is neutral... which would not be the individual, but the government, or corporations.

[MissDeeds]

130. K&R n/t

[appleannie1]

132. What did you expect from Papa Bush's nominee? Certainly nothing constitutional.

[AsahinaKimi]

137. I don't get it ..

How can something thats illegal and unconstitutional and still be allowed because some Judge says so? WTF?


I guess the constitution is just a piece of paper! :sarcasm:

[midnight]

138. The courts have no constitutional authority to approve of this.

[QC]

142. How very, very hopeful and changealicious! n/t

[valerief]

160. Maybe if we each incorporate ourselves, we can get some rights. nt

[pleah]

166. We are soooooo fucked! nt

[Faith No More]

167. All this stuff happening at once is not a coincidence.

The fact that it's happening this fast, right before our eyes is good indication that something is up. This country is going down the tubes and the assholes running the show know it. They are going to grab as much power as they can and insure that they are holding all the cards when the shit hits the fan. What's going to take place over the next few years is going to be beyond shocking even by today's standards.

[Dream Detector 2010]

169. The hits just keep on coming!

What a week!

[demoleft]

170. Judge nixes two Bush-era domestic spying cases

Source: afp

AFP - A federal judge has tossed out a pair of lawsuits accusing government officials during former president George W. Bush's era of "dragnet spying" on people's Internet and telephone communications.

US District Court Judge Vaughn Walker said in a written decision late Thursday that the named plaintiffs did not show they were victims of spying and therefore lacked standing to champion the class-action suits.
...
Appeal of the dismissals of the telecom cases is pending in court, according to Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) senior staff attorney Kevin Bankston.
...

"The alarming upshot of the court's decision is that so long as the government spies on all Americans, the courts have no power to review or halt such mass surveillance even when it is flatly illegal and unconstitutional," said Bankston.

Read more: http://www.france24.com/en/20100122-judge-nixes-two-bush-era-domestic-spying-cases

[ixion]

171. This is how a Democratic Republic dies...

death by a thousand 'nixes'

[boppers]

"Bush era"? That's why it was dismissed. It had nothing to do with Bush.

Spying on international communications has always been considered legal, and the judge didn't feel that private citizens had standing to stop internal communications monitoring.

[pasto76]

176. no dude, to wiretap a US citizen on US soil requires a warrant

the "old" system even allowed 48 hours of surveillance of a citizen on US soil before going to a special court (whose name escapes me) and getting a back dated warrant.

That wasnt enough for Bush and Co. This violates decades of precedence requiring wiretaps. Guilty people have walked because of wiretap screw ups. Its that big of a deal. So conversely, people should be getting prosecuted for violating my, yours, and every US citizens 4th amendment right.

This is just as bad as ther SCOTUS decision yesterday.

SGT PASTO

[boppers]

178. ...NOT if one party to the conversation is on foreign soil.

That's how the NSA got involved. (You're thinking of FISA, BTW). International taps don't require a warrant.

Where it gets messy is that with Skype, IM, and web-boards, it's extremely difficult to determine if any party to a conversation is on foreign soil. Add in relays, proxies, and creative routing, not to mention distributed communications like bittorrent, and establishing locations becomes near impossible without days, or even months, of work.

You're right that wire-tapping a US-only conversation, that only happened on US soil, requires a warrant, or a private entity (such as a phone company) to volunteer records and information (which they often do), but if you read the actual judgement, the opening paragraphs are about conversations that leave US soil.

[ThomCat]

180. The issue with dragnet surveilance,

the type alleged here by getting everything that went through the AT&T switches, is that it got a lot of traffic that did NOT involve non-citizens. Just because you are overseas you do not surrender your rights. The government still needs a warrant. They are only supposed to have that freedom to spy without a warrant if one of the parties is not a citizen (never mind that this still infringes on the rights of the citizen too.)

There is the additional issue that because of peak traffic congestion, it used to be most efficient for carriers to route long distance voice service overseas and back again instead of routing it direct. That bypassed the congestion bottlenecks. I don't know if that is still true, but it if is, that would also give the government access to spy on voice traffic too. As if they need another loophole to be able to spy on us.

Then again, that AT&T switch handled backbone internet traffic, and as you mentioned, with internet traffic there is a whole other can of worms. Because of the decentralized architecture of the internet a lot of traffic even within the US gets routed overseas for part of its journey, so any internet traffic can be spied upon.

The court has just made our expectation of privacy null and void.

[boppers]

181. "Just because you are overseas you do not surrender your rights"

China and Saudi Arabia and... well... *everywhere else* does not agree that US people get to have special US rights for themselves when on foreign soil.

"that would also give the government access to spy on voice traffic"...

Yup. For quite a while now.

"The court has just made our expectation of privacy null and void."

The court has confirmed what I noticed about 1987 with ATM routing. Others may have had different expectations, but I haven't considered phone calls or any other form of electronic communication "private" since then.

[ThomCat]

183. It doesn't matter what other countries think.

We are talking about American law, and our rights under American law. Americans don't loose our rights under American law when out of the country.

Our own government doesn't suddenly get to break the law and hurt you in some way just because you are overseas.

You sound unconcerned about the loss of privacy as if it is no big deal. That's really sad. I hope you never need those rights you are so willing to toss away.

[boppers]

185. "Americans don't loose our rights under American law when out of the country."

American exceptionalism.

Lovely.

I'm not unconcerned about a loss, as I can't lose something I never had.

[ThomCat]

186. That isn't American exceptionalism.

That's law. :wtf:

In matters where the US law applies, it does not change because you happen to be out of the country. How basic a concept does that have to be for you to understand?

American Exceptionalism would be if I said that the US was somehow ah better nation than all others. I have no idea how you see that in anything I wrote. I didn't mention any judgment about any nation anywhere in my post. :eyes:

[boppers]

187. That's only law in ONE country. ONE.

"In matters where the US law applies, it does not change because you happen to be out of the country."

So, do you think that Sharia law should apply in the US, if an Afghani woman happens to be here?

Should our laws apply everywhere, but it's not right to stone a woman to death for adultery in the US because.... uhm.... our laws are better, and should apply, but theirs shouldn't?

Or are you arguing for Sharia laws here?

Or are you missing out on the glaring flaw in your argument, that US law does not apply out of country, because it is not under US legal jurisdiction?

[ThomCat]

188. You do realize that are exceptions, where any nations laws reach

across their borders, right?

We are talking about one of those types of exceptions.

You're changing the subject, apparently because you really don't know what you're talking about.

But in issues of wiretapping, borders are really important, and the ability to cross borders, and knowing who is on which side of borders is really important. Knowing if the person on the other of the border is a citizen is important because the US government is constrained in how they can deal with US citizens.

If I am in England and I am talking to someone in the US, and the US government is eavesdropping on me, my rights as a citizen still apply because I am a citizen. British law may also apply, of course. But American protections are not null and void! American Laws do not stop protecting you from the American Government the moment you cross the border.

Duh! :eyes:

[boppers]

189. Opinions do not trump law. eom

[ThomCat]

190. Wow! You truly are clueless.

:eyes:

[Divine Discontent]

208. very.

[Jefferson23]

173. The spy who loved me, the United States of America.

[Qutzupalotl]

174. Talk about a Catch-22.

To have standing to challenge the practice, you must have evidence that you in particular have been spied upon and harmed thereby. But there's no way to find that out without a legal challenge.

I know there has been a whistleblower who testified that all communications -- everything -- is being swept up and stored. But the NSA is not going to divulge how that material is being used without a suit; and that's what would show individual harm in the legal sense.

The only comfort I find in this scenario is that if the NSA's goal is really as they state (a big if), and if their methods are as has been described elsewhere on DU (sniffing out trigger words for terrorist-related activities), it's possible that no harm other than being analyzed by a computer will come to an individual citizen. Keeping invasion minimal (along with rulings like this) will make legal challenges difficult. But the outrageous thing to me is that this information is probably being stored indefinitely, which places every citizen potentially in jeopardy of blackmail, should it be misused. Blackmail would, of course, threaten their nice legal hedge, but a future scenario in which NSA agents do not fear legal jeopardy is not hard to imagine. And that's just one potential misuse; it's not hard to imagine the NSA declaring antiwar activists dangerous and using these tools not just to electronically sniff for buzzwords but to examine more closely and personally, which would definitely violate the fourth amendment (I don't know how they get around it now). Or what if business interests connected to the government want to see what their competition is up to? Or when to sell their stock?

The bottom line is that this information is too personal to us, too valuable to possible nefarious interests, and historically considered to be private, to entrust to a shadowy agency with little to no accountability. Trust us? I don't think so.

[sattahipdeep]

177. So if it hasn't touched you personally then it doesn't matter--right?

:wtf:

[boppers]

179. It's called "standing". It's a legal thing.

In short: A person cannot sue the government for something that happened to somebody unrelated to them.

[sattahipdeep]

182. So its a legal thing?

If i were of jewish decent and not related
to any person in the holicost then it doesn't matter?

[boppers]

184. In the US courts, yes....

You cannot sue McDonalds because somebody else was burned by their coffee.

[defendandprotect]

175. We're going from outrageous decision to more outrageous decisions...!!!

[gimama]

191. "as long as the govment spies on all Americans.."..

wth?! because we're ALL abused makes it ok?
..& this pretty much declares we ALL *are* being spied on..
Ummm, Mr.President?Sir? Would You mind fixin' this for us?

[Name removed]

172. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

192. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

193. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Hubert Flottz]

197. We the people lose yet again...

Will we ever win again?

[RedCloud]

198. Conservative judges continue to conspire against us!

[panzerfaust]

199. Change you can ... ?

[zoff]

204. Is this judge a repug?

If so I wouldn't be surprised, but if he is a dem, then were screwed.

[riversouth]

209. PRIVACY

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.