FBI Admits More Privacy Violations 179
kwietman writes "The FBI admitted that in 2006, for the fourth straight year, they improperly accessed phone and internet records of U.S. citizens. Director Robert Mueller testified that the abuses occurred prior to sweeping reforms enacted in 2007, and actually blamed the breaches in part on the telecommunications companies, who submitted more information than was requested. In another unsurprising development, the FBI also underreported the number of security letters - used to authorize wiretaps and to subpoena internet and telecom records - by over 4,600. The use of these letters to identify potential terrorists has, according to the government audit, increased dramatically since the implementation of the Patriot Act. Over 1,000 of these security letters were found to be improper in 2005, and similar numbers were expected for 2006 and 2007."
I'm not a U.S. citizen.... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Without outrage... (Score:5, Interesting)
Like $1000 per incorrectly tapped phone call? (Not per tap, but per call that occurred while that tap was in place.)
"for the fourth straight year" (Score:5, Interesting)
No, for some reason not enough people care. Firstly I blame the media -- just like the previous reports, and even the NSA wiretapping scandal, this will show up in the news for a little while then quietly vanish. Secondly I blame people who even when presented with facts by the media just blindly assume that it's all done to catch terrorists and they don't care. They're told the their privacy is being abused, and they mentally convert this into their privacy not being abused, only terrorists and since when do terrorists deserve privacy?
Even Congress -- now Democrat controlled -- doesn't do much but feign shock and dismay that the powers they granted without even reading what they were are being abused.
Some people care, but it just doesn't seem to be enough.
Catching bad guys (Score:5, Interesting)
He said the prevailing attitude seemed to be "Catch the Bad Guy." At first, this doesn't sound like it conflicts with the LAPD's motto: "To Protect and Serve." But, he explained, there's a huge difference when you think about it: "Catch the Bad Guy" implies treating everyone in a poor fashion just to maybe catch a bad guy. "To Protect and Serve" implies that everyone is innocent, and explicitly that the police must protect everyone and serve the communities in a good fashion as a priority, rather than suspect everyone and treat them badly.
That was almost 20 years ago. The LAPD's CRASH (anti-gang) unit has since been disbanded due to multiple court rulings of unconstitutionality (the LAPD suspected pretty much every minority) and civil liability case rulings/settlements (the LAPD busted more innocent heads than gang members). The attitude is still a problem, and I've seen it with many other police officers in different cities, BUT I'm not saying it's a majority... just a very annoying minority.
The main point here: "Catch the Bad Guy" is an easy trap to fall into, and many may not even realize they're acting this way, or simply don't see the distinction.
The court system is slow, tedious, and money draining -- same as the legislative system. However, we're not seeing our own citizens shot at by itchy-fingered National Guardsmen anymore. I have to remain optimistic, at least about large-scale shifts of thinking...
So, here's a logical solution... (Score:3, Interesting)
Article has the wrong title (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Sorry for being a broken record (Score:5, Interesting)
And actually his stance on privacy is just a symptom of having a government that doesn't actually work. It's easy to have a government that does no wrong when it doesn't do ANYTHING. A real visionary would find a way to have a functional, utilitarian government AND protect privacy, civil rights, and promote a peaceful non-interventionist foreign policy; and for that I am sorry his voice is marginalized, he has a lot of good things to say on those issues.
Re:I'm not a U.S. citizen.... (Score:1, Interesting)
1. The information was going to be discovered anyway and actively showing the information (in the best light, of course) will be less damning to the government.
2. The government is trying to distract you from something else.
There are exceptions to this, but those are primarily driven by individuals or political rivalries, not by agencies or governments as a whole.
Anyone think we need a "presidentsanalyst" tag? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Immunity my ass (Score:3, Interesting)
And who issues those subpoenas? Exactly, the same folks who have been committing these abuses! Sigh. I fear that, at this point, only a massive uprise from the people will turn the tide. Fortunately, as these things go, you don't actually need a full 'revolution': just turn far enough for the idle masses to realize that they've been playing the wrong team and finally dare to stand up. In eight years, I've seen your country turn from a free, law-abiding nation, into a near totalitarian police state. And I've said it before, just because you are 'free' to make a lot of money and go to McDonald's, doesn't mean you're not living in a police state. Your Bush/FBI has effectively bypassed your Constitution. And that's a dangerous president... erm, meant 'precedent' (chalk that up as a willful Freudian slip).