Obama to strengthen domestic warrantless wiretapping capabilities

[IndyColtsFan]

Instead of being a coward then, let's hear your opinion on this matter.

I wonder if we'll get a wall of text, half of it bolded or capped, with a huge string of emoticons too. 😀

 

[BoberFett]

Here's a thread that's practically a checklist of who we can expect not to respond.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=93065

 

[JS80]

Here's a thread that's practically a checklist of who we can expect not to respond.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=93065

lol

While I was reading the OP I keep saying to myself, "14 more months, he will be in power for 14 more months".

I have not been exactly crossing off the days on a calendar but maybe I should get one.

I wonder how many of this forum's members would vote for GWB next year if they could.

and let's not forget Mr. "Traitor in Chief" haha

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Here's a thread that's practically a checklist of who we can expect not to respond.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=93065

You win the thread. Hilarity has officially ensued.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

and let's not forget Mr. "Traitor in Chief" haha

Don't forget his criminal cabal either.

 

[bamacre]

This thread needs more bold letters and emoticons.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

And the loudest voices now are because...?

Most speaking in this thread are those who were against it then and now. Those who supported it then aren't going to go against it now.

Where's everyone else?

 

[JD50]

This thread needs more bold letters and emoticons.

I've noticed a lot less bold letters and emoticons ever since Obama turned into Bush 2.0

 

[MotF Bane]

Here's a thread that's practically a checklist of who we can expect not to respond.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=93065

Great. So those who do respond can prove themselves to have at least some principles; those who don't are hypocritical scum.

 

[Fern]

I have some objection to referring to this simply as "domestic warrentless wiretapping" because IMO that's badly misleading. The program was limited to "authoriz[ing] warrantless intercepts where the government "has a reasonable basis to conclude that one party to the communication is a member of al Qaeda, affiliated with al Qaeda, or a member of an organization affiliated with al Qaeda, or working in support of al Qaeda." and that one party to the conversation is "outside of the United States".

But in reveiwing info on the subject I came upon this:

On January 17, 2007, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales informed U.S. Senate leaders by letter [4] that the program would not be reauthorized by the President. "Any electronic surveillance that was occurring as part of the Terrorist Surveillance Program will now be conducted subject to the approval of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court," according to his letter.

TBH, I haven't been keeping up with the subject, but it appears Obama, contrary to his campaign rhetoric, is taking this further than Bush did.

I almost feel like expressing surprise about how the media etc isn't making a big fuss about as they did when Bush was in office, but that would be dishonest; I'm not surprised at all.

Fern

 

[Acanthus]

Boo.

I strongly disapprove.

 

[her209]

Instead of being a coward then, let's hear your opinion on this matter.

A warrant needs to be obtained prior to wiretapping taking place whether its terror related or not. IIRC, the original reasoning being warrantless wiretapping, i.e., circumventing the FISA courts, was that obtaining the warrant would take up to 72 hours in which time, critical intelligence gathering opportunity may have been missed. Those of us opposing the warrantless wiretapping were calling bullshit.

See, no wall of text. No bolding. Short and sweet.

EDIT: Corrected the hours.

 

[her209]

I wonder if we'll get a wall of text, half of it bolded or capped, with a huge string of emoticons too. 😀

Mind telling us who you were? These "wall of texts" posts happened prior to your join date.

 

[werepossum]

Meh. I was no more than very mildly discomfited when Bush did it, and I'll extend the same courtesy to Obama. I really have no problem with automated systems which monitor all communications for terrorism, with the dual caveats that any monitoring by an actual live person requires a warrant (based on the automated systems' evidence plus supporting evidence) and that anyone caught misusing this information is severely punished.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Mind telling us who you were? These "wall of texts" posts happened prior to your join date.

I've been lurking in AT since the 90s. I know the cast of characters quite well. :awe:

 

[crownjules]

I wonder if the same people who hammered Bush about the Patriot Act will come down hard on O for this. I doubt it.

I certainly will. The Patriot Act, or anything like it, should be condemned regardless of which party is currently championing it's "usefulness". It's a gross infringement on our right to privacy and is exactly the sort of thing the founders of this country provisioned against in our Constitution. I don't know how they can make a law that directly contradicts our most sacred of documents.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

 

[Schadenfroh]

Looks like a lower level court is trying to declare warrantless domestic wiretapping illegal. Could be in for a long fight between the judicial system and the Obama admin.

http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_17453295?nclick_check=1

The Obama administration is appealing a court ruling that an anti-terrorism policy of wiretapping electronic communications without a warrant was illegal.

Here is one way to deal with a lawsuit:

U.S. District Court Judge Vaughn Walker ruled in favor of two attorneys for the Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation who said the government eavesdropped on their phone conversations without court approval.
...
The Oregon-based foundation was disbanded after the Treasury Department froze its assets and placed it on an official list of terrorist organizations.

 

[irishScott]

1. The Cold War is over
2. Our two current wars are against 3rd world countries who have effectively no means to strike back at our mainland.
3. We have no conflicts with any serious threat on the horizon.
4. Defense and counter-intelligence spending is higher than it was when we had the threat of nuclear annihilation.

Does not compute.

 

[irishScott]

I certainly will. The Patriot Act, or anything like it, should be condemned regardless of which party is currently championing it's "usefulness". It's a gross infringement on our right to privacy and is exactly the sort of thing the founders of this country provisioned against in our Constitution. I don't know how they can make a law that directly contradicts our most sacred of documents.

Not to de-rail, but look at the 2nd Amendment vs most gun laws for plenty of that. Power corrupts, and the corrupt will skirt the system as much as they possibly can.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

A warrant needs to be obtained prior to wiretapping taking place whether its terror related or not. IIRC, the original reasoning being warrantless wiretapping, i.e., circumventing the FISA courts, was that obtaining the warrant would take up to 72 hours in which time, critical intelligence gathering opportunity may have been missed. Those of us opposing the warrantless wiretapping were calling bullshit.

See, no wall of text. No bolding. Short and sweet.

EDIT: Corrected the hours.

Not quite. When the feds felt the need they could immediately start a wiretap. The agency had to apply for a warrant within 72 hours so it would be reviewed in a timely manner. IIRC the number of times a judge stopped a tap could be counted on one hand.

 

[wuliheron]

All this does is make it official that with modern technology we're about to loose any pretense of privacy. Forget 9/11 and the feds, everyone from Amazon.com to your employer is increasingly monitoring your every move and spoken word. Neither the money nor the political will exists to put up an effective resistance to this tidal wave. Inevitably I'm sure congress will quietly change the constitution and we can kiss another aspect of government of the people, by the people, and for the people goodbye.

 

[waggy]

All the government wants is more power and control. It doesn't matter who is in office.

exactly. the main goal of most in government is to gain more power. once they get it they rarely give it up.

again is anyone really surprised?

 

[PoAT.PaN]

I am not a fan of the patriot act and I'm not a fan of this. The United States is becoming increasing Orwellian. Things like warrantless wiretapping, Guantanamo Bay, TSA, etc are slow depriving us of our privacy and our rights.

 

[tk149]

All the government wants is more power and control. It doesn't matter who is in office.

This.

Warrentless wiretapping is BS no matter who is in office. As soon as a warrant is issued though, the telecom's should be providing data as soon as possible. The first half of this (provide data quickly) is a good idea, but providing data without a warrant is a violation of the 4th.

And This.

 

[McWatt]

Not quite. When the feds felt the need they could immediately start a wiretap. The agency had to apply for a warrant within 72 hours so it would be reviewed in a timely manner. IIRC the number of times a judge stopped a tap could be counted on one hand.

Exactly, and this should make us ask why the government wants to be able to set up a wiretap without a warrant. As you've stated, it's not to make surveillance faster or more effective. I suspect it's so that they can avoid a paper trail. A wiretap with a warrant becomes public record; the department of justice couldn't listen in on a presidential candidate's phone calls to get blackmail material because it wouldn't be a secret process. Without a warrant they can do whatever they want without recourse.