Years of unlawful phone record searches by FBI
From The Washington Post:
“FBI general counsel Valerie Caproni said in an interview Monday that the FBI technically violated the Electronic Communications Privacy Act when agents invoked nonexistent emergencies to collect records.”
“FBI officials told The Post that their own review has found that about half of the 4,400 toll records collected in emergency situations or with after-the-fact approvals were done in technical violation of the law.”
“Among those whose phone records were searched improperly were journalists for The Washington Post and the New York Times, according to interviews with government officials.”
So that would constitute criminality no?
Read the full article: “FBI broke law for years in phone record searches” -WaPo
meet the new boss
When the Bush administration asterisked the bill of rights with claims of executive privilege and state secrets they woke many a citizen to the frailty of our system. The so-called city on a hill was ready to sacrifice its constitution for the safety offered up by an unchecked executive branch.
Yes our concept of checks and balances, co-equal branches of government, and the rule of law were nice ideas, but when faced with the hard reality of guys with box cutters it was those in the choir of American exceptionalism (ironically many of the same voices who use American ideals as justification for all sorts of expansionist policies) who were among the first to advocate sacrificing liberty for a little security.
Now it appears the Obama administration is ready to pick up where these self-styled pragmatists left off. If you haven’t been tracking these issues read on and weigh in:
Wiretapping, FISA, and privacy: Obama vs. Courts, Obama Channels Cheney
Extraordinary rendition: Obama preserves renditions as counter-terrorism tool.
Obama on Surveillance of Citizens: Obama Goes to Bat for Secrecy.
Telecom Immunity: Obama Administration Supports Telco Spy Immunity , Obama loses state secrets argument setting up possible judicial showdown
big brothers without borders
CBS News recently spoke with Mr. Joel Brenner, who they described as “the nation’s top cyber-security official” about the security risks facing U.S. travelers planning on attending the Beijing Olympics.
The travel advisory was blunt: “All information you send electronically-by fax machine, personal digital assistant (PDA), computer or telephone-can be intercepted.” It was of course non-news.
Then came an exchange between Mr. Brenner and reporter Bob Orr that must have come as a surprise to at least a few viewers:
Brenner: “The public security services in China can turn your telephone on and activate its microphone when you think it’s off.”
Orr: If the phone’s in my pocket, and it’s off, you’re saying an outside force, an outside agent can turn it on?
Brenner: Yeah
Orr: And listen to what I’m doing?
Brenner: That is what I’m saying.
Orr: And my Blackberry?
Brenner: Same thing.
Well, there you have it. The head of U.S. cyber-security is a card carrying member of the tin-foil hat brigade. I mean really. Even if it were possible for some shadowy (Chinese) government agency to turn my phone on after I had PUSHED–AND HELD– THE OFF BUTTON… what would I have to worry about? I’ve done nothing wrong, and therefore have nothing to hide. Isn’t that the way the argument goes?
Anyways, maybe it’s Mr. Brenner who’s got something to hide… or maybe he’s got something or other he just doesn’t want us thinking too much about.
Sure glad the ol’ US of A would never sell my sovereign rights down the river like those sneaky Chinese.
Oh and in case you were wondering how to foil the Leviathan that is the (Chinese) surveillance state: remove your cellphone batteries. Sorry iphoners, any attempt to pull your battery makes your warranty null and void.
UPDATE: For reasons unknown, the video which was hosted on the CBS website appears to have been taken down. I’ve updated my link to point to the same video, now hosted by cnet.com.
Ellsberg on FISA: basis for tyranny
The following is a paraphrased transcription of an interview with Mr. Ellsberg that I found over at www.fourhourworkweek.com:
[People] should ask themselves whether they think it’s possible that various members of Congress have either something to hide or something that would embarrass them politically that they don’t want out…
It could be things that the congressperson, or the journalist, or the source wants to achieve or are planning to achieve that the government can manipulate by blocking it, by frustrating them, by promising to them. In other words, this information would enable the government to intimidate or blackmail, or manipulate every member of Congress, every official who might be tempted to reveal criminality, people like the ones in the NSA who knew that criminal action was, and is going on. This law is intended to legalize it basically, and to continue the cover-up, to conceal it.
You can’t have a democracy, with the state, the executive branch having that kind of information… total information about the, about every communication, every credit card transaction, the fax, e-mail, telephone conversations of everyone. And as far as we know, that’s what’s being collected right now.
Two hundred years ago, Ben Franklin was asked what kind of government we had at the end of the Constitutional Convention, and he told the lady who asked him that, “A republic, if we can keep it.” You can’t keep a republic, a constitutional republic with that degree of knowledge by the president and the executive branch… you have something else… you can call it an autocracy, a dictatorship. It’s the basis for tyranny. And that’s what the constitution was meant to prevent. And that’s what this bill would confer: Unlimited power, in the way the East German Stasi, the state surveillance organization… You can live lives, weddings, education, business, jobs, you can go along as normal… but you’re not living in a democracy or anything that even pretends to be one.
… I really admire some members of congress who are doing, planning to do, and will do I’m confident everything they can to block this unconstitutional, dangerous legislation. The way I see them, it reminds me of [the] opposition by Henry David Thoreau, which was very much in my mind when I… copied the Pentagon Papers and gave it to the New York Times. He said, “There are thousands of people who are opposed to slavery”, in his time that was in 1848 “and to the Mexican War” which was a war of aggression… in opinion. “But they do nothing in effect to stop it. They hesitate and they regret, but they do nothing in earnest or with effect. At most,” he said “they give a cheap vote.” Well, he went on to say, “Cast your whole vote, not a piece of paper merely, but your whole influence.” He said “A minority is powerless when it conforms to the majority. It is not even a minority then. But is irresistable when it clogs by its whole weight.” Now for a Senator, you can’t do this in the House of Representatives, but for a Senator who casts his or her whole vote, means to clog by his or her whole weight, with a filibuster, a minority of people: Senators Dodd, Feingold, Senator Boxer, and Senator Wyden have already promised to filibuster this in attempt to prologue the debate so that this bill does not infringe on our liberties after all, and others can join them.
So this is a chance now for all the voters and citizens, and Obama supporters and Republicans who care about the Constitution… every viewer in the next hours can fill the… message services of their senators, wherever they are, Republican or Democrat… they have a chance to make a real difference here to keep the freedom and the liberty that we celebrated just two days ago on July the 4th, from beginning to die two days from now. It’s in mortal danger right now. It can be preserved if senators can be urged to live up to their oaths, the same oath I took, to uphold the Constitution.
I have to say that no senator, Republican or Democrat, should be voting for this Senate bill — not one. Every one who does so, is in fact violating his or her oath to defend the Constitution. But they can do better than that. Specifically, Senator Obama who had earlier promised to join a filibuster is now indicating for reasons I don’t know honestly, to change that –reverse that position… Over twenty thousand of his supporters… are appealing to him, saying “we support you,” I’m one of those by the way, “we support you, we’ll contribute, but we ask you to do better.”
One easy way to contact your senator about FISA is being provided by Blue America. They will connect you for free.
Here’s a list of senators who voted for FISA the last time it was in the Senate and are most likely to vote for it again this time around. Please spend a few minutes and reach out to one or several of these senators:
Democrats:
Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), Evan Bayh (D-IA), Daniel Inouye (D-HI), Tim Johnson (D-SD), Herb Kohl (D-WI), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Claire McCaskill (D-MO), Mark Pryor (D-AR), Blanche Lincoln (D-AR), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Ken Salazar (D-CO), Tom Carper (D-DE), Barbara Mikulski (D-MD), Jim Webb (D-VA), Ben Nelson (D-NE), Bill Nelson (D-FL), Kent Conrad (D-ND), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), Not voting: Clinton (D-NY)
Republicans:
Alexander (R-TN), Corker (R-TN), Allard (R-CO), Barrasso (R-WY), Enzi (R-WY), Bennett (R-UT), Hatch (R-UT), Bond (R-MO), Brownback (R-KS), Roberts (R-KS), Bunning (R-KY), McConnell (R-KY), Burr (R-NC), Dole (R-NC), Chambliss (R-GA), Isakson (R-GA), Coburn (R-OK), Inhofe (R-OK), Cochran (R-MS), Wicker (R-MS), Coleman (R-MN), Collins (R-ME), Snowe (R-ME), Cornyn (R-TX), Hutchison (R-TX), Craig (R-ID), Crapo (R-ID), DeMint (R-SC), Not Voting: Graham (R-SC), Domenici (R-NM), Ensign (R-NV), Grassley (R-IA), Gregg (R-NH), Sununu (R-NH), Hagel (R-NE), Kyl (R-AZ), McCain (R-AZ), Lieberman (ID-CT), Lugar (R-IN), Martinez (R-FL), Murkowski (R-AK), Sessions (R-AL), Shelby (R-AL)Smith (R-OR), Specter (R-PA), Stevens (R-AK), Thune (R-SD), Vitter (R-LA), Voinovich (R-OH), Warner (R-VA)
You might also consider visiting the wiki that’s been set up for this at Get Fisa Right
One last thought: Anybody in DC should consider going down to the Senate gallery to be there in person to witness this vote on Wednesday. I think a gallery full of citizens gathered for this issue might remind our lawmakers just how important this issue is.
FISA, Obama, and the Nixon Precedent
Over the last several days there have been many heated discussions on the FISA bill that’s coming up shortly for a vote in the Senate. Most of the discussions have revolved around Senator Obama and his expressed support for the highly controversial bill, which includes a provision virtually guaranteeing legal immunity for telecommunications companies like AT&T, Verizon and Bell South who have helped the Bush administration illegally spy upon the American people in violation of their Fourth amendment rights. Many are looking to Obama as a Constitutional scholar, a consensus builder, and the de facto leader of his party to stand up for the rule of law and rally his party against this bill. Thus far, Senator Obama has expressed support for the FISA legislation and it appears that he will not hold to his pledge to filibuster any bill that includes immunity for the telecoms. The majority of “netroots” in my view are simply outraged that the man they’ve been supporting, volunteering for, and contributing to is not living up to their expectations. And it seems fair to say that those expectations are not the ideals of the “starry-eyed but sadly naive purist” but rather the very rule of law, the foundation of order within our country, and the contract between our people and our government that vests the government with rank and authority in exchange for the simple protection of our liberties as elaborated in our founding documents.
The response to this outrage within the online community has led some Obama supporters to proclaim that the FISA bill is simply not worth all the fuss. “Purist” liberals must stop obsessing on this and focus all their energies on the election, or else they’ll be be complicit in a McCain win. To these posters I think there is something worth considering:
How far will the Bush administration go to ensure a McCain win in November?
We have the elections of 2000 and 2004 as benchmarks, and lest we forget, we also have the election of 1972. To quote an earlier post on the topic:
Nixon’s White House relied on law enforcement and intelligence agencies, ex-F.B.I. and C.I.A. agents, and cadres of miscellaneous and unsavory personnel in their efforts to identify, root out, and embarrass “political enemies.” In the name of national security, they wiretapped those opposed to the war in Vietnam and those within its own administration suspected of leaking to the press. It also sought to surveil and sabotage the Democratic Party. Morton Halperin, once on the Nixon payroll was wiretapped while later working for Democrat Ed Muskie, then a contender for that party’s nomination to the presidency. “I was working on the Muskie campaign for president,” Halperin recalls in a 2005 interview for NPR “They picked up calls about that. They picked up many personal calls. My little kids were on the phone and they got those. My wife’s phone calls — everything was intercepted.” Nixon’s “Plumbers” unit broke into the office of whistle-blower Daniel Ellsberg’s psychiatrist in an effort to gather information that could be used against him in retribution for leaking the Pentagon Papers. The Committee to Re-elect the President attempted to wiretap the headquarters of eventual Democratic nominee and Nixon opponent Senator George McGovern, and were known to have wiretaps on journalists within The New York Times and CBS.
That one needs repeating: ***Nixon’s administration attempted to wiretap the Democratic nominee***
Of course, technology has come a long way since the 1970′s:
The specifics of how government surveillance programs operate has until very recently been a matter of pure speculation. A recent article in the Wall Street Journal has, however, shed some light on the massive scope and capability of these programs. Government intelligence agencies can begin with something as simple as a phone number or an Internet address and quickly track “all domestic and foreign transactions of people associated with that item — and then the people who associated with them, and so on, casting a gradually wider net.” They may also choose to begin more broadly, by directing “the government’s spy systems” “to collect and analyze all electronic communications into and out of” a given city. Information collected would include: “records of phone calls, email headers and destinations, data on financial transactions and records of Internet browsing” as well as “a cellphone’s location, whom a person is calling, and what Web sites he or she is visiting.” The system would collect information about other people, including those residing in the U.S., who communicated with the original target through the use of sophisticated social network tracing technology.
In the face of such an overwhelming intelligence gathering apparatus, one wonders what checks are left to protect the “persons, houses, papers, and effects” of average citizens, but also of opposition party candidates during an election period. The “Opponents List and Political Enemies Project” revealed by Nixon White House Counsel John Dean III during the Watergate Hearings reminds us the depths to which the Executive Branch can sink in its effort to retain the presidency. In a memorandum to Presidential Advisers H.R. Haldeman and John D. Ehrlichman, Dean wondered how they could “maximize the fact of our incumbency in dealing with persons known to be active in their opposition to our Administration; stated a bit more bluntly—how we can use the available federal machinery to screw our political enemies.“
Now I think its worth asking ourselves a question: What reason do we have to think that the present administration is above such tactics? As we know, FISA was set up in the wake of Watergate era spying to put a check on government spy power.
And once immunity is granted and spy power expanded how do we expect to ever know just how these powers have been abused? Must we wait until McCain takes the election to consider the possibility that perhaps massive unchecked illegal surveillance power really was worth all the fuss?
Want to know more about FISA, AT&T, and the NSA? You can watch an excellent Frontline segment on FISA here. This is the third of 5 segments. If you ‘d like to watch the full (hour long) episode you can do so here, be sure to click “watch the full episode” on screen right.
[UPDATE] June 28, 2008: AT&T Whistleblower: Spy Bill Creates ‘Infrastructure for a Police State’, Obama social networking group forms to pressure the Senator to oppose FISA bill
[UPDATE II] June 28, 2008: Full text of the FISA bill (pdf)
leave a comment