Wiretapped phones, now Internet?

[Wallace108]

Where the hell is the ACLU when you need it? Where's the liberal outrage over this like there was with the Patriot Act??
------

Wiretapped phones, now Internet?

To better track criminals, U.S. wants to be able to wiretap online communications.

By CHARLIE SAVAGE, New York Times
WASHINGTON - Federal law enforcement and national security officials are preparing to seek sweeping new regulations of the Internet, arguing that their ability to wiretap criminal and terrorism suspects is "going dark" as people increasingly communicate online instead of by telephone.

Essentially, officials want Congress to require all services that enable communications -- including encrypted e-mail transmitters such as BlackBerry, social networking websites such as Facebook and software that allows direct "peer-to-peer" messaging such as Skype -- to be technically capable of complying if served with a wiretap order. The mandate would include being able to intercept and unscramble encrypted messages.

The legislation, which the Obama administration plans to submit to Congress next year, raises fresh questions about how to balance security needs with protecting privacy and fostering technological innovation.

http://www.startribune.com/nation/103836983.html

[The Patriot]

Where the hell is the ACLU when you need it? Where's the liberal outrage over this like there was with the Patriot Act??

I gave up when Obama renewed the Patriot Act. That just drove a stake through by heart.

What they're trying to do here is a little different. The government can already tap the internet, but things like iphones and ipads scramble the information so well that now even the government can't decipher the transmissions, so they're asking companies like Apple and AT&T to "unscramble" the information for them so they can wiretap for "legal purposes".

I wouldn't trust them.

[Mach1]

I wouldn't trust them.

I'd trust them with this about as much as I'd trust them with my health.

[Devilsdancefloor]

I'd trust them with this about as much as I'd trust them with my health.

+1

[The Patriot]

I'd trust them with this about as much as I'd trust them with my health.

Well, you know, all the health care bill really does is force you to buy insurance from private companies. You're not being forced to see government doctors.

[Mach1]

Well, you know, all the health care bill really does is force you to buy insurance from private companies. You're not being forced to see government doctors.

Yet another lost freedom.

[venom]

[GodfatherofSoul]

This doesn't annoy me as much since telecoms are already piping raw internet traffic to the intelligence services. Google is apparently acting as a gateway for whatever the government wants to snoop on. I'm more annoyed by another story where the Obama administration is claiming the right to assassinate American citizens overseas without oversight.

[X-Terminator]

The Internet hasn't been truly "free" in years. The government has been attempting to gain control over it almost since the day it, along with the Web, became mainstream. It's not to the point where people should be paranoid...yet. But it definitely is a cause for alarm.

[Wallace108]

I was more or less taking a jab at the liberal establishment, which tarred and feathered Bush over the Patriot Act, yet remains rather silent over Obama's policies ... whether it's renewal of the Patriot Act, the Internet kill switch, or now this. Hypocrisy at its finest.

[GodfatherofSoul]

I was more or less taking a jab at the liberal establishment, which tarred and feathered Bush over the Patriot Act, yet remains rather silent over Obama's policies ... whether it's renewal of the Patriot Act, the Internet kill switch, or now this. Hypocrisy at its finest.

You think that because you only get your news from the "conservative establishment." There's been a lot of criticism of Obama since day one. But, all you hear is "liberals think Obama is the messiah" from Limbaugh. You can do a google search on any of those topics and find hits on any liberal news site.

[Craic]

You think that because you only get your news from the "conservative establishment." There's been a lot of criticism of Obama since day one. But, all you hear is "liberals think Obama is the messiah" from Limbaugh. You can do a google search on any of those topics and find hits on any liberal news site.

Not sure how his post matches your answer. Hypocrisy here is found in the Whitehouse itself, which made hay over those very issues, and then ramped them up or carried them out when they got into office.

Funny though, how "pet phrases" seem to be used by both sides to dismiss rational arguments or observations.

[GodfatherofSoul]

Not sure how his post matches your answer. Hypocrisy here is found in the Whitehouse itself, which made hay over those very issues, and then ramped them up or carried them out when they got into office.

Funny though, how "pet phrases" seem to be used by both sides to dismiss rational arguments or observations.

Of course the White House is being hypocritical since they're going back on their word. But, you can't say there hasn't been a lot of loud criticism from liberal at all levels. Elizabeth Warren is actually IN the administration and has slammed Obama's economic policies.

[Wallace108]

You think that because you only get your news from the "conservative establishment." There's been a lot of criticism of Obama since day one. But, all you hear is "liberals think Obama is the messiah" from Limbaugh. You can do a google search on any of those topics and find hits on any liberal news site.

You made an inaccurate assumption about me in your post. I've worked in the news media for more than 13 years, so I can assure you my daily diet of news consists of much more than Rush Limbaugh and others in the "conservative establishment."

When you reference "liberal news sites," are you referring to liberal bloggers or the mainstream media? It's a legitimate question.

But back to the topic at hand ...
In the months and years after the Patriot Act was passed, the mainstream media and Democrats tore Bush apart over the surveillance of American citizens and the trampling of civil liberties.

Here's an excerpt from a story in 2006:

This year alone, the Democrats overwhelmingly voted five times to kill the Patriot Act. When that didn't work, they filibustered. Last December, after the vast majority of Senate Democrats voted against renewing the Patriot Act, their minority leader, Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., boasted to a cheering crowd of political supporters, "We killed the Patriot Act."

On the House side, Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., along with a majority of House Democrats, voted on March 7 against re-authorizing the Patriot Act.

If Democrats take control of the House, Pelosi is said to be determined, as House speaker, to move up Rep. Alcee L. Hastings, R-Fla., to chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. According to Hastings, "The Patriot Act has given the government new powers to bug telephones, monitor e-mails and internet use, and search public databases. This is completely unacceptable."

In 2004, Sen. John Kerry, running for the presidency, called the Patriot Act "an assault on our basic rights."
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/...1/102047.shtml

Do you notice you don't hear conservatives criticizing Obama over his surveillance policies? That's because they supported Bush and the Patriot Act and they remain consistent in their view.

Republicans saw the Patriot Act as a necessary tool to wage a war against terrorism. Democrats saw the Patriot Act as a tool to wage a war against Bush and the Republicans. But now that they're in power, they not only support those surveillance tools, they're expanding them.

So I ask again, where's the outrage from the very people who screamed about civil liberties for seven years while Bush was in office? And I'm not talking about liberal bloggers. I'm talking about the mainstream media and our elected officials.

[Craic]

Of course the White House is being hypocritical since they're going back on their word. But, you can't say there hasn't been a lot of loud criticism from liberal at all levels. Elizabeth Warren is actually IN the administration and has slammed Obama's economic policies.

I never said that.

However, I am quite interested in how this all will be forgotten come election 2012.

[Craic]

In the months and years after the Patriot Act was passed, the mainstream media and Democrats tore Bush apart over the surveillance of American citizens and the trampling of civil liberties.

Here's an excerpt from a story in 2006:



Do you notice you don't hear conservatives criticizing Obama over his surveillance policies? That's because they supported Bush and the Patriot Act and they remain consistent in their view.

Republicans saw the Patriot Act as a necessary tool to wage a war against terrorism. Democrats saw the Patriot Act as a tool to wage a war against Bush and the Republicans. But now that they're in power, they not only support those surveillance tools, they're expanding them.

So I ask again, where's the outrage from the very people who screamed about civil liberties for seven years while Bush was in office? And I'm not talking about liberal bloggers. I'm talking about the mainstream media and our elected officials.

Excellent question! And, shall we ask about the hypocrisy of the Democratic Party?

[Craic]

Um..

If there is a wiretap order, I would imagine that it would either go through a judges' chamber. Therefore, what is the difference between tapping a phone, an internet connection, or bugging a house? If the judge signs off on it due to evidence presented, what is the difference?

[Wallace108]

Excellent question! And, shall we ask about the hypocrisy of the Democratic Party?

Don't know if I have that much time.

[Wallace108]

Um..

If there is a wiretap order, I would imagine that it would either go through a judges' chamber. Therefore, what is the difference between tapping a phone, an internet connection, or bugging a house? If the judge signs off on it due to evidence presented, what is the difference?

There's no real difference. What the Patriot Act essentially did was make it easier to obtain warrants. (There's a lot more to it, obviously. It's been a long time since I've looked at it. And I'm too tired right now to look further than this):

# The government no longer has to show evidence that the subjects of search orders are an "agent of a foreign power," a requirement that previously protected Americans against abuse of this authority.
# The FBI does not even have to show a reasonable suspicion that the records are related to criminal activity, much less the requirement for "probable cause" that is listed in the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution. All the government needs to do is make the broad assertion that the request is related to an ongoing terrorism or foreign intelligence investigation.
# Judicial oversight of these new powers is essentially non-existent. The government must only certify to a judge - with no need for evidence or proof - that such a search meets the statute's broad criteria, and the judge does not even have the authority to reject the application.
http://www.aclu.org/national-securit...sa-patriot-act