Archive.org Defeats FBI's Demand For User Information 224
eldavojohn writes "Although we don't know what they were after due to the settlement, a gag order was just released that kept Internet Archive member Brewster Kahle quiet. The FBI had issued a national security letter to them under the Patriot Act. Kahle fought it. Hard. The EFF came to the aid of his lawyers and what resulted was one of the only three times an NSL has been challenged: all three have been rescinded. The FBI agreed to open some of the court files now for it to be public. The ACLU added, 'That makes you wonder about the the hundreds of thousands of NSLs that haven't been challenged.'"
It's time for Civil Disobedience and Regime Change (Score:5, Insightful)
A five year prison term might be preferable to experiences like this [wired.com], especially when ratting out the FBI can save hundreds of thousands of innocent people from further constitutional abuse. I can not demand heroic action by others but I wish there had were more than three in the hundreds of thousands of abused citizens so far. Innocent people going to jail for protecting privacy of other innocent people would shut this monster program down fast.
Vote for anyone but Republicans in 2008 and vote out everyone who had anything to do with the poorly named Patriot act.
Re:It's time for Civil Disobedience and Regime Cha (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It's time for Civil Disobedience and Regime Cha (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It's time for Civil Disobedience and Regime Cha (Score:4, Informative)
Re:It's time for Civil Disobedience and Regime Cha (Score:5, Insightful)
But that's an exercise for the reader.
Re:It's time for Civil Disobedience and Regime Cha (Score:5, Informative)
Obama didn't vote for either Patriot Act or the Iraq War ... because he wasn't in office at the time. He did, however, vote *against* reauthorizing the Patriot Act. He's also on the record opposing the Iraq War, though I don't have handy the details of his war appropriations voting record.
Interesting factoid about the Patriot Act: it was passed in a hurry (we all know), and it was presented as legal tools for fighting terrorists. Now, I'd be fine with that, on the face of it - however, DOJ has been heavily promoting it as set of laws (and amendments to existing laws) for fighting crime. Yes, they are promoting to district attorneys etc. using all those bypass-the-constitution-anti-terrorism goodies to inspect the accounts and lives of people who aren't suspected of terrorism.
In other words, the Patriot Act doubles as an end-run around the Constitution for ordinary criminal cases. When I mention this in conversation to folks, many of them say they think this is fine! I don't.
Re:It's time for Civil Disobedience and Regime Cha (Score:4, Interesting)
My big point of the year is this: The government isn't some far off, distant, thing that takes our money (and still is in debt), builds roads (to nowhere) and fights (immoral, illegal) wars. The government, in this great nation, IS the people. Once people realize this we can return to a society that valued freedom and the (history book) ideals that we were founded on.
This country needs its own French Enlightenment. It needs to have some writers, thinkers and speakers who don't involve themselves in the process at that level but rediscover the ideals we have strayed from (liberty!) and promote them to the masses. When people start saying The Government can look into your life then it's time to remind them that they are trying to look into your life, they are the ones trying to police your life. Start examining them for flaws, with most people it's not hard, and manipulate them if you have to - they need to realize that this is a very slippery slope.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:It's time for Civil Disobedience and Regime Cha (Score:5, Interesting)
It's the perennial question - how exactly do we exit Iraq? What's your idea? Me, I'm against the war, but I'm not for pulling out hastily. Because, I wonder what will happen... will more people die, will it be as many as the U.S. and its allies have killed already ... will there be further ethnic cleansing and displacement of people beyond the millions who've been "invited" to leave their homes, etc.
Help me Obi Wan.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I was trying to be funny. Apparently I misjudged my ability to make funny posts. Sorry.
Re:It's time for Civil Disobedience and Regime Cha (Score:5, Insightful)
Vote for anyone but Republicans in 2008 and vote out everyone who had anything to do with the poorly named Patriot act.
Personally, the voting record is more important to me than whether they have an R or D beside their name. If that means that I'm voting in Republicans then so be it. I'd rather have a Republican who refused to vote for the Patriot Act than a Democrat who dropped to his knees and pucked up to the Bush administration. Not that there are many Republicans who fit that description...
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Vote for anyone but Republicans in 2008 and vote out everyone who had anything to do with the poorly named Patriot act.
Personally, the voting record is more important to me than whether they have an R or D beside their name. If that means that I'm voting in Republicans then so be it. I'd rather have a Republican who refused to vote for the Patriot Act than a Democrat who dropped to his knees and pucked up to the Bush administration. Not that there are many Republicans who fit that description...
Ron Paul is a republican who refused to vote for the Patriot Act.
Re:It's time for Civil Disobedience and Regime Cha (Score:4, Informative)
However, Congress is two parts, the Senate, and the House of Representatives.
In the House of Representatives, Republicans voted 214 for, 14 against, Democrats 43 for, 156 against.
Re:It's time for Civil Disobedience and Regime Cha (Score:5, Informative)
The Patriot Act wasn't passed unanimously. Russ Feingold (D-WI) voted against it. [senate.gov]
Russ Feingold makes me proud to be from Wisconsin.
Re:It's time for Civil Disobedience and Regime Cha (Score:5, Insightful)
Resist the temptation to make this partisan. Democrats were perfectly willing to vote for the PATRIOT Act and then try to excuse their complicity after the fact. That is not a commendable act.
Re:It's time for Civil Disobedience and Regime Cha (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It's time for Civil Disobedience and Regime Cha (Score:5, Insightful)
Incorrect. (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:It's time for Civil Disobedience and Regime Cha (Score:5, Insightful)
Make no mistake - the teachers unions have nothing to do with it. The students are more than capable of fucking it up all on their own, and tend to take pleasure in doing so.
[BTW, nope, I'm not a teacher, so this rant is not self serving at all; I'm just a product of and a witness to the system, and to me the educations that kids receive these days matches quite well what society considers to be "just right" - a generation of retard parents gives rise to a generation of retard kids, and anyone smarter than that average level of retardation has to really fight the system]
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The entire pretense for the invasion was a lie, we know it was a lie because up until Sept 11, 2001 when reporters asked anyone in the
Re:It's time for Civil Disobedience and Regime Cha (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
What puzzles me is why Congress even voted on this version rather than tossing every c
Re: (Score:2)
Good. Because they count on that when they vote.
Re:It's time for Civil Disobedience and Regime Cha (Score:5, Insightful)
A five year prison term might be preferable to experiences like this [wired.com], especially when ratting out the FBI can save hundreds of thousands of innocent people from further constitutional abuse. I can not demand heroic action by others but I wish there had were more than three in the hundreds of thousands of abused citizens so far. Innocent people going to jail for protecting privacy of other innocent people would shut this monster program down fast.
Vote for anyone but Republicans in 2008 and vote out everyone who had anything to do with the poorly named Patriot act.
Us against them. Good over evil. With or against us. Sheep think in those terms.
The emotional rhetoric from politicians never ends and their simple minded constituents emulate that behavior instead of engaging in critical thinking.
You do realize that there were PLENTY of Democrats that had voted for the Patriot Act. Hell, IIRC 99% of Congress didn't even read the God damn thing!
Re:It's time for Civil Disobedience and Regime Cha (Score:5, Informative)
Russ Feingold said at the time he wasn't necessarily opposed to the bill but couldn't vote for something with such sweeping changes without having time to read or research it. He has said since then that after reviewing it he supports about 95% of the things in the bill. He strongly opposes that other 5% that is total crap.
Man I love having him as my Senator
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
That's just about the stupidest thing I've ever heard. So, in order to have a right to complain about the government in power, you have to actively support the scam* that it created to sustain its power?
(*the concept of voting, itself, is not a scam, but American elections are)
Re:It's time for Civil Disobedience and Regime Cha (Score:5, Insightful)
Republicans are well known for holding the line and sticking to their talking points. They've worked hard to earn this reputation, and there's no reason to forget that they've repeatedly unified behind awful ideas.
Obama voted against the AUMF and filibustered the permanent reauthorization of the PATRIOT act. Additionally, he wont be tempted to hold the Republican line, seeing as how he is a Democrat.
The same logic applies to other good Democrats. It works against the Republicans - we need look no farther than Ron Paul to see what happens to Republicans who respect the constitution and the rule of law.
Re:It's time for Civil Disobedience and Regime Cha (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Oh really? Have you noticed the cost of fuel, health care and food prices over the last 5 years?
You think the cost of fuel is driven by currency markets? It's scarcity (artificial or otherwise) and increased demand. If fuel were directly tied to currency, that would only account for it going from $1/gallon to $1.60/gallon... yet here it sits near $4. Food requires fuel to grow, and people are now even turning that into fuel. Plus, we grow a surplus of food in this country, so food is primarily dollar-based.
Health care is rising at double digit annual rates.
The gold standard wouldn't even touch this one. Doctors are paid in dollars, medicines made pr
Re: (Score:2)
You had me right up until "Vote for anyone but Republicans..." Sheep think in those terms.
And you had me right up until "sheep think in those terms."
Republicans are well known for holding the line and sticking to their talking points. They've worked hard to earn this reputation, and there's no reason to forget that they've repeatedly unified behind awful ideas.
Obama voted against the AUMF and filibustered the permanent reauthorization of the PATRIOT act. Additionally, he wont be tempted to hold the Republican line, seeing as how he is a Democrat.
The same logic applies to other good Democrats. It works against the Republicans - we need look no farther than Ron Paul to see what happens to Republicans who respect the constitution and the rule of law.
You're comparing one politician to the whole Republican party? Whoopee do! Dear citizen, let me fix your paragraph for you:
Democrats are well known for holding the line and sticking to their talking points. They've worked hard to earn this reputation, and there's no reason to forget that they've repeatedly unified behind awful ideas.
A quick Google search reveals that Senators Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Mark Hatfield (R-OR) voted against the AUMF resolution. So your argument proves nothing.
The GP seemed to
Re: (Score:2)
"Sleep. Food. Food. Sleep."
Re:It's time for Civil Disobedience and Regime Cha (Score:2, Insightful)
Yes, using intelligence and technology (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
You think out of 100 million people, they won't pass laws that suppress, repress, digress, and every other 'ess, those who make up the other 150 or more million in this country?
The "pioneer, radical, outcast" you claim are essential simply won't be part of any collective.
The impetus for change comes from inside. Kruschev said he'd bury us. He banged his shoe on the lecturn. Banging his shoe on the lecturn did nothing. It's
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:It's time for Civil Disobedience and Regime Cha (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes. But not because of the attacks anymore, they fear you, their people. And it's not an isolated phenomenon. You can see it all over the "western" world, with more and more paranoid surveillance laws coming into existance. Most of them targeting the internet, which is a perfect tool to assemble and organize people of the same interests. Interests that may and often do go diametrally against the goals of our governments.
The advantage governments have over their subjects is that they are organized. No, don't laugh, I know how bureaucracy weighs it down, but they have the advantage of having trained specialists in every field necessary. Something you don't have. You are not a lawyer, bureaucrat, IT professional, PR guru and fundraiser all rolled into one. That's what gives your government an edge over you (in case one wants to stand up against the government). With the internet, people can organize and gain access to the same specialists the government has.
The same holds true for corporations, btw.
Now, the internet also allows organisation of partisan groups who won't just fight with legal means but also illegal ones. And that's what they're really afraid of. Since they already managed to bleed the "lower incomes" completely dry, not only siphoning away the little rest of their savings but also pushing them so deeply into debt that they can't spend anymore, the meager rest of the middle class is the next target. The divide between rich and poor opens wider, the number of poor people growing, and it's a matter of time until the mob reaches critical mass again. Their attempt with the increased surveillance is to make sure it's easy to identify the "heads" of such movements and decapitate them before they can gain momentum.
Re:It's time for Civil Disobedience and Regime Cha (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It's time for Civil Disobedience and Regime Cha (Score:2)
Re:It's time for Civil Disobedience and Regime Cha (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:It's time for Civil Disobedience and Regime Cha (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:It's time for Civil Disobedience and Regime Cha (Score:5, Insightful)
Welcome to the Land of the Free.....Have you any rights to declare?
Re:It's time for Civil Disobedience and Regime Cha (Score:2, Insightful)
Just like they wanted to go to war, but now they claim they never wanted to go.
When you start to call parties out, instead of individuals, you are only adding to the problem.
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, there you have your finger on it. It's a sad, sad thing to win a war, only to discover you've become the enemy.
Mr. Peabody would be proud (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
and your evidence for (Score:2)
Stupid Questions (Score:5, Interesting)
Are they tracked somewhere publicly, and wouldn't that defeat the whole point of being secret about them?
And given that these are clear-cut violations of free speech, how is it that the entire NSL program still exists? The first time one of these was challenged, I thought any judge worth their salt would declare the NSL anti-constitutional.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm in no way condoning their actions, but its human nature to "cheat" or "lie" just a little for the better good. However, in this case, its affecting more people that most realize.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Stupid Questions (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Stupid Questions (Score:5, Informative)
The problem is all the "ifs" in that. "If" the Supreme Court grants certiorari.... That's such a big "if" that it's not even funny.... They've proven remarkably resistant to any attempts to strike down challenges to the "Patriot" Act in the past, up to and including the refusal to grant standing for a challenge to anyone who could not prove that their privacy had been violated in the wire tapping case.
There are just too many Bush nominees on the court for this to get struck down as unconstitutional. Bush could probably wipe his backside with the Constitution, then declare martial law and postpone the election and they probably wouldn't overrule him....
Re: (Score:2)
Misplaced confidence (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The three that challenged it broke the "law" by so much as telling their lawyer that they had received The Letter. I'm sure that if The Letters permitted people to discuss them, more than three people would have spoken to their lawyers and done something about it.
Re: (Score:2)
I've disagreed with just about everything I've read from Scalia. The only person I've disagreed with more frequently (or maybe just as frequently) is Clarence Thomas. I can't imagine Scalia defending anything other than a strict reading of the literal words of the constitution, and a strict reading of the words of the constitution would say that a wire tap isn't a search or a seizure. It is watching from afar, and he'd probably say it falls into the "plain view doctrine" or some other such obvious bullsh
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Stupid Questions (Score:5, Interesting)
You'd think that, but you'd be forgetting that the courts have been packed by Republicans for the last 7 1/2 years, and cumulatively, 19/12 out of the last 28 years. The courts are no more able to defend civil liberties than we are at this point; they have been too thoroughly packed with people for whom civil liberties is a dirty word associated with "flaming liberals" and "tree hugging hippies".
Yes, the NSLs are blatantly unconstitutional and represent a direct attack upon the rights of individuals to be free from unreasonable search and seizure, among other things. They also dramatically expand the power of the government to monitor the citizenry in ways that the Constitution never intended to allow and, indeed, which could not reasonably have been foreseen by the funding fathers at all. This is why the Constitution must be a living document that must be periodically revisited and updated by people whose goal is preserving liberty, not concentrating government power. Unfortunately, the Constitution's fatal flaw is that the only way it recognizes for updating the constitution is through a process that does not readily allow for apolitical review (well, not counting judicial enhancement of the Constitution through binding precedents).
For the Constitution to truly be effective, it needs a procedure for review and amendment that formally allows for and defines the process for constitutional conventions and public referendums so that a proposed Constitutional amendment, upon receiving a 2/3rds of the popular vote in two consecutive election cycles, becomes ratified without the need to go through Congress or the state governments (but subject to judicial findings of unconstitutionality if it violates any fundamental Constitutional principles). Only then can the Constitution be a truly living document that protects civil liberties in the face of those who would turn our government into a totalitarian regime, given the opportunity.
Re:Stupid Questions (Score:5, Insightful)
*thinks a moment* So... 44 1/3rd years? Hehe, jk.
They also dramatically expand the power of the government to monitor the citizenry in ways that the Constitution never intended to allow and, indeed, which could not reasonably have been foreseen by the funding fathers at all.
They didn't have to, any more than they had to foresee telephone or e-mail tapping, because the wording of the 4th Amendment is technology agnostic. That's the way it should be. That's why when a case of warrantless e-mail reading came before the court, the judge ruled that this was illegal. Without having to have a whole Constitutional amendment just for email (and one for text messaging, and one for IM, etc etc etc).
We don't need any change to the Constitution whatsoever to stop these abuses. We just need for the Constitution as written to be enforced. That is the problem, and making it easier to modify the Constitution would not make it more likely to be enforced. We already have an amendment that covers these situations; if you think the problem is stacked courts, why do you think they would enforce some new amendment that covers the exact same thing?
The only thing it would make more likely is that when another "ZOMG teh terrists are attacking! I can has ur liberties?" moment occurs, the people will not only allow it, they will enshrine it in the highest law of our land. At least USAPATRIOT expires, and parts of it have already had rulings against it as constitutional. You can't rule an amendment unconstitutional; and amendment is constitutional by definition.
Our system isn't perfect, but our Constitution is damn good and one of its strengths is that it can't be changed easily.
Re: (Score:2)
Smart aleck.... That'll teach me to watch the typos... or better yet, use decimal numbers. 19.5 out of the last 28.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd also contend that most people in this country consider Republican a dirty word these days, not hippy or liberal.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You know it's possible to be a Republican and actually support the constitution, right?
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but they haven't had a very good track record lately. Then again, the Democrats haven't had a great track record lately, either, just not as bad a track record....
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Stupid Questions (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not saying that sometimes it helps to actually RTFA, but anyway:
Unconstitutional or not, the whole NSL / PATRIOT stuff screams "abuse me" at 130dB.
Re:Stupid Questions (Score:4, Funny)
Well it did, but then it received an NSL gag order.
Re:Stupid Questions (Score:5, Funny)
I thought you couldn't discuss a NSL...
You are probably thinking of Fight Club, the US government is committed to transparency and the rule of law.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
+3 Funny
Seriously, with abuses like the Patriot Act and NSLs, I can't help but chuckle.
Re:Stupid Questions (Score:5, Informative)
According to Wikipedia [wikipedia.org], semi-annual reports need to be made to congress, including a non-classified count of National Security Letters issued.
The US Department of Justice also performed an audit [usdoj.gov] in 2007 that contains some more statistics.
Re: (Score:2)
So much for telco immunity (Score:5, Insightful)
Boy, I'm sure the telcos are hating this. This story shows once and for all that "the government told me to" is not a valid excuse for violating civil rights.
I am calling a godwin ehre (Score:2)
A true Patriot - protecting our freedom (Score:5, Insightful)
Allowing small group of people that benefit disproportionably to the many, to create an indentured servitude is not patriotic, fighting it is. The maintaining of the separation of powers, protecting the Bill of Rights, and the Constitution as well as defending them is the is the ultimate Patriotic Act.
It is time for transfer of power from the few to the many, the wise (conservative) and those that value freedom (liberal), and those that value both, (party free independents for collective control).
Laws of changed such that we have become cattle simply to be herded and this is most unpatriotic.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The maintaining of the separation of powers, protecting the Bill of Rights, and the Constitution as well as defending them is the is the ultimate Patriotic Act.
I'm no fan of the Patriot Act, but I'd just like to point out something that bothers me. It seems the people on the left most vocal about defending the Constitution and the intent of its founders are the ones most determined to destroy its second amendment. Our founders intended us to have freedom of speech, to be free from unreasonable search and seizure, and to be able to have military weapons to defend ourselves and our nation. It's one package.
Re:A true Patriot - protecting our freedom (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Nice strawman. Got any proof?
Proof *does* exist. However, to read it will require a very careful and thorough cleaning beforehand with lots of disinfectant, odor-eliminators, and use of rubber gloves. You can probably find it floating at the top of a sewer reclamation plant pool in the Washington, D.C. area. Oh, and
In "unrelated" news... (Score:5, Funny)
There's one way to stop this nonsense. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Of course, a principled conservative might oppose the patriot act in support of smaller government, but conservatives are on the whole unprincipled.
Re: (Score:2)
Fixed that for you, as they say. IOW, it's an oxymoron. Democrat or Republican.
Re: (Score:2)
Some numbers and information on the NSL (Score:2, Informative)
How is judicial oversight and transparency bad? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Nobody has given me a reason either as to why this needs to be done warrantless. We have a whole court set up for proceedings of a secretive nature. I see no reason why we can't simply expand that court to meet demand, as opposed to circumventing it entirely.
I
Stazi Police (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
By the way, don't "Ministery for State Security" and "Department of Homeland Security" sound awfully similar? I don't know whether the DHS's name is unfortunate or just cynical...
More info from EFF, ACLU and Internet Archive (Score:2, Informative)
The court documents are available as well as other information.
We hope this helps de-spook some of these demands and encourages other libraries and recipients to consult lawyers and consider their alternatives.
http://www.archive.org/iathreads/post-view.php?id=192021
The patriot act is appropriately named (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:GOD defeating unprecedented evile using.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:GOD defeating unprecedented evile using.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Note how it wrote "(Score:-)" once. To me it looks like the bot read the score from a post and mistook it for actual content; the colon is the end of the fragment and since colons don't occur too often in Slashdot posts the most likely token to begin with a colon is a smiley.
There definitely is some kind of supervision going on, th
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Yeah, see, I think you might have that a little backwards there. You seem to be going towards the aphorism "Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely", which is anecdotally true for most of human history. But the entire point of Separation of Powers and C