Topics

ACLU attorney Ann Beeson
The Associated Press

Ann Beeson, the American Civil Liberties Union attorney for the plaintiffs challenging the government's wiretapping policy, addresses the media in Detroit.

Featured Topic | Posted 33 weeks 21 hours ago

Is the military skirting the law to spy on Americans?

The Pentagon is using the FBI to skirt legal restrictions on domestic surveillance to obtain private records of Americans' Internet service providers, financial institutions and telephone companies, the ACLU alleged Tuesday.

Read More

Ben likes: The case for telecom immunity

Andrew C. McCarthy/National Review Online

Democrats continue to charge that the administration wants “blanket immunity” for the telecoms (much the way they misleadingly repeated that warrantless eavesdropping on cross-border al-Qaeda communications was “domestic spying”). In fact, the proposed immunity is very limited. It applies only to telecoms that either did nothing to help the government or that helped only on the basis of a written representation by the government that the program had been reviewed by the president and determined legal.

Thus, the immunity would not protect, say, a telecom that permitted surveillance on an informal request from a rogue agent without a written assurance of lawfulness -- which, in fairness, is the only type of conduct over which it might be appropriate to hold them liable.

Read More

Joel likes: Unchecked government powers get abused

Glenn Greenwald/Salon

Ever since the Patriot Act was enacted, Russ Feingold had been almost single-handedly (at least among members of Congress) trying to warn of the potential for abuse of NSLs. Finally, a couple of months prior to the time the Patriot Act was to be renewed in early 2006, Feingold got some help in his crusade, when The Washington Post's Barton Gellman published a superb investigative article which detailed the FBI's increasingly frequent and broad use of NSLs, and surveyed the obvious dangers from these unchecked surveillance instruments.

It seems there are a few brand new lessons that we can perhaps draw from these revelations ... Allowing government officials to engage in surveillance on American citizens with no warrant requirement ensures that surveillance will be used for improper ends, against innocent Americans.  

Read More

How readers are voting

your vote
average
vote
Capitol camera
Flickr user takomabibelot

A camera hangs with a street light, outside the U.S. Capitol.

Featured Topic | Posted 34 weeks 1 day ago

Are we becoming a surveillance society?

Surveillance cameras already dot the streets of major American cities. Now Miami is taking it to the next level, preparing to launch camera-equipped drones -- like the ones used by the military overseas -- that will fly above the city to spy for crime below. That has raised concerns from civil liberties groups like the ACLU. Is the U.S. becoming a surveillance society?

Read More

Ben likes: Surveillance cameras cannot prevent terrorism

Jim Harper/National Review Online

Surveillance cameras do have forensic value that can help authorities catch suspects after crimes have already been committed. The problem with this is that, for obvious reasons, suicide attackers tend not to worry about being caught afterwards. Antiterrorism strategies should be geared towards prevention; that is how lives are saved. The U.K. contains over 4.2 million surveillance cameras — one for every 14 people — and the Glasgow attackers still eluded detection until it was too late. The only reason there were no fatalities was the attackers’ own amateurishness. 

In a further blow to the perceived effectiveness of surveillance cameras, Clive Norris of the Sheffield University Centre for Criminological Research testified last year that researchers found that Glasgow crime did not decrease after cameras were installed city-wide. It actually increased by nine percent. 

Senator Lieberman's proposal for stepping up surveillance has other problems besides ineffectiveness. Corruption could become an issue. This has already happened in a number of U.S. cities that have installed cameras at traffic intersections to deter drivers from running red lights.

Read More

Joel likes: Insecurity cameras

William Pentland/The Nation

"I do think that in this day and age, if you think that cameras aren't watching you, you are very naïve," New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg said in October during a tour of London's massive surveillance-camera system. "We are under surveillance all the time. We live in a dangerous world and people want to have security cameras." Bloomberg added that everyone he had met in London was "thrilled" about the security cameras around the city.

The government has a long and storied history of abusing surveillance powers. The more powerful surveillance technology grows, the more Bill Brown gets concerned. "When consumer convenience merges with law enforcement, merges with the military-industrial complex, this is what I worry about. Not today, not tomorrow, but the day after."

Read More

How readers are voting

average
vote
The ACLU sues, but the courts don't listen
The Associated Press

The ACLU sued over the NSA's warrantless wiretapping, but couldn't persuade the courts.

Featured Topic | Posted 39 weeks 2 days ago

Warrantless wiretapping: The feds may be listening, but the federal courts are not

Is the government listening to your phone calls? Maybe or maybe not, but either way, don't expect the courts to offer any answers any time soon. The United States Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected a lawsuit against the National Security Agency's terrorist surveillance program, which began shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks.

The American Civil Liberties Union wanted the court to allow a lawsuit on behalf of journalists and activists over the warrantless wiretapping program. The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed the suit last year, saying the plaintiffs could not prove their communications had been monitored.

Is the wiretapping program an violation of Americans' rights or an essential tool in the war on terrorism? Do you feel like the government is watching you?

Read More

Ben likes: Why the lawsuits should be dismissed

Andrew C. McCarthy/Washington Legal Foundation

Though public debate is surely proper, the courts are an inappropriate forum. The wartime penetration of enemy communications is a policy decision classically entrusted to the political branches of government. The suits should therefore be dismissed for want of jurisdiction, or for want of merit in the event the courts decide to entertain them.

Read More

Joel likes: Frank Church and the abyss of warrantless wiretapping

The Nation

The natural tendency of Government is toward abuse of power. Men entrusted with power, even those aware of its dangers, tend, particularly when pressured, to slight liberty. Our constitutional system guards against this tendency. It establishes many different checks upon power. It is those wise restraints which 'keep men free. In the field of intelligence those restraints have too often been ignored.

Here, there is no sovereign who stands above the law. Each of us, from presidents to the most disadvantaged citizen, must obey the law. As intelligence operations developed, however, rationalizations were fashioned to immunize them from the restraints of the Bill of Rights and the specific prohibitions of the criminal code. The experience of our investigation leads us to conclude that such rationalizations are a dangerous delusion.

Read More

How readers are voting

your vote
average
vote