

EFF Challenges National Security Letter Statute in Landmark Lawsuit - mtgx
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/07/eff-challenges-national-security-letter-statute-landmark-lawsuit

======
ChuckMcM
Gosh I love these guys for doing this. Seriously, there is some broken law
here in the name of 'war powers' and frankly as a citizen it really annoys me.
I understand the argument that in a time of war, extraordinary measures may be
justified in order to insure the survival of the state, but neither the 'war
on terror' nor the 'war on drugs' counts any more. In my opinion, these are
criminal enforcement activities, not 'wars'. As such they should be fully
constrained by the limits imposed by the constitution regarding due process.

~~~
redthrowaway
I think that, as societies, we really need to reflect and debate on what
counts as war. The US hasn't been involved in a total war, which I define as
one in which both sides face the prospect of annihilation, since WWII. Since
then, the West has been involved in countless conflicts that are, to varying
degrees, removed from an existential threat. If we are truly fighting for
survival, then I'm okay with forgoing certain rights in service to that fight.
If it's just minor armed conflicts in service of political goals, as most wars
since WWII have been, I'm not.

~~~
ChuckMcM
I agree with the sentiment, but disagree with the idea that America was at
risk of 'total annihilation' in WWII, at best the axis powers could have kept
the country on the N. American continent, but even that wasn't a likely
outcome. Our economy was just too strong for them to overcome.

That said, I tend to classify battles against nation-states 'wars' and battles
against non-soverign groups and individuals as 'law enforcement.' To the
extent that a group can declare 'war' on the US its really a statement about
rejecting some sort of legal enforcement authority rather than trying to
destroy the country.

~~~
repsilat
By that definition (the possibility of annihilation) I only count two - the
Cold War and the American Civil War. I don't like the definition, though - the
US certainly _was_ at war in WWII.

Somewhat unrelated, but I'd really like to see the War Powers Resolution get
to the Supreme Court. It would be nice to either have it acted upon or thrown
out instead of having it just sit there being ignored.

~~~
accountswu
The cold war didn't kill many Americans, it was mostly about Americans killing
Latin Americans or Koreans or Vietnamese or Laotians or Cambodians either
directly by napalm or by puppet dictators that were installed after CIA-backed
coups, such as the original 9/11: the 9/11/1973 coup against President Allende
of Chile (or 1953 Iran or 1954 Guatemala or 1964 Brazil).

The Russians weren't in Cuba for no reason, we were in their backyard before
they started their attempts to close the "doomsday gap" (quoting that term
from Dr. Strangelove).

Quoting Blum:

Let's also not forget that Eastern Europe became communist because Hitler,
with the approval of the West, used it as a highway to reach the Soviet Union
to wipe out Bolshevism forever, and that the Russians in World War I and II,
lost about 40 million people because the West had used this highway to invade
Russia. It should not be surprising that after World War II the Soviet Union
was determined to close down the highway.

------
01Michael10
The EFF rocks! It kills me that 90% of the public has little understanding of
most things the EFF does for them...

I am thinking of making a new donation to the EFF today to help with this
great cause ---> <https://supporters.eff.org/donate> <\--- Who is joining me?

~~~
c0ur7n3y
Your donation has been recorded citizen, and you have been placed on a special
list. Thank you.

-NSA

~~~
stephengillie
It does seem like just a matter of time before the EFF becomes a "known
terrorist organization" like WikiLeaks is about to become.

~~~
einhverfr
IANAl but my understanding is that the current lines are drawn at active
collaboration or directed communications to a designated _foreign_ terrorist
organization. I don't know whether this means that Brandenburg v. Ohio would
come out differently today (remember, Brandenburg was accused of advocating
terrorism at a domestic terrorist organization's meetings-- the domestic
terrorism organization being the KKK, and yes the word terrorism occurred in
the statute).

Under lines drawn in Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project you can blog all day
and night about how groups like Hamas could adopt nonviolent means of
resistance and be more successful, but if you directly talk to Hamas and make
such a recommendation, then the court has declined to say that is protected.

Worse, there is reason to think that is _not_ protected. In Citizens United v.
FEC the court said that independent expenditures were protected and
corporations had a right to speak on election issues, but that speech
coordinated in any way with candidates was not protected, because that makes
it into a gift in kind that has the same effect, in essence, of a bribe. The
idea that Citizens United and Holder v. HLP draw this funny line at who you
talk to vs what you say strikes me as dangerous.

But at least it isn't hard for the EFF to stay on the right side of that line.

------
sneak
Donating now. Please follow suit.

~~~
lux
I've donated to EFF before, but as a Canadian is there an equivalent org that
I can support here too?

~~~
01Michael10
Well, the EFF is U.S. based but is an international organization.

Online Rights Canada? <http://www.onlinerights.ca/>

~~~
_delirium
Hmm, that organization doesn't seem very active. No updates for >1 yr on the
"news" page. But in any case, their "donate" page actually suggests that you
donate to the EFF if you want to support their work:
<http://www.onlinerights.ca/donate/>.

They're partly funded by the EFF anyway (<http://www.onlinerights.ca/about/>),
or at least were whenever that was last updated.

------
mtgx
I wonder how many NSL's the FBI used against the bankers that collapsed the
economy in 2008. Probably a big whooping _zero_.

~~~
tikhonj
Well, regardless of how much you hate bankers, you'd hope like it to be zero--
it's not a matter of national security, after all.

I wouldn't want the government to brazenly expand its powers regardless of
whether I agree with the particular activity in question.

~~~
revelation
With the fervor the government makes everything a matter of national security
and then refuses to disclose on what grounds it does so (because, duh, thats a
matter of national security), surely systemic banks reach to the level of
importance of "national security".

------
cpeterso
Typo?

    
    
      - EFF is today releasing FBI-redacted briefing from a major new ongoing case
      + EFF is today releasing an FBI-redacted briefing from a major new ongoing case

------
accountswu
That is great news!

My personal guesstimate is that the general American public is more aware of
such dirty things than it was, say, 20 years ago and I think it is due to
internet, mainly due to alternative news sources that would get the truth out
because the lame-stream media would rather tell you songs about democracy and
not tell you about the secrecy and anything bad the government and
corporations have been doing.

These wiretappings were probably more focus on black liberation movements and
"Commies" a few decades ago, then the focus has been on Muslims now that the
US is not supporting Osama bin Laden type in Afghanistan (they are still
propping up the regimes in Saudia etc and supporting Osama-types in Libya,
Syria etc).

The shameless NYPD spied on entire Muslim community and on ordinary citizens
without any probable cause, without any legal authority. Obama's Attorney
General Eric Holder lied about it and the Department of (in)justice hasn't
done anything to correct it.

[http://michaelcostello.blogspot.com/2012/06/wiretap-
document...](http://michaelcostello.blogspot.com/2012/06/wiretap-documents-
prove-eric-holder.html)

[http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/04/shady-companies-
nsa...](http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/04/shady-companies-nsa/all/1)

Shady Companies With Ties to Israel Wiretap the U.S. for the NSA

April 3, 2012

[http://mondoweiss.net/2012/07/muslim-civil-rights-groups-
boy...](http://mondoweiss.net/2012/07/muslim-civil-rights-groups-boycott-
nypds-ramadan-conference.html)

In the wake of the New York Police Department’s spy scandal, a coalition of
Muslim groups in New York announced a boycott of the Ramadan conference, which
was held this morning. Ramadan, the Islamic holy month, begins later this
month.

I say the government and the corporations because it's all part of the same
group of people, the Chertoff guy who gave us the porn scanners for TSA used
to work for the Homeland Security.

<https://www.google.com/search?q=chertoff+scanners>

The Summers guy hired by Obama to clean up the mess was the guy who helped
create the mess.

There is good money to be made in this dirty business; we must kill them
because otherwise X[n] is coming to get us. President Y[m].

we must spy on our people because otherwise X[n] is coming to get us.
President Y[m].

Where m and n vary based on the year and X = {Bloody commies, Ruskies,
Terrorists, Mozlums}

and Y = {JF Kennedy _1, LB Johnson_ 2, Jimmy Carter _3, Ronald Reagan_ 4, Bush
I _5, Bill Clinton_ 6, Bush II, B Obama}

 _1 Wanted to "win" the Vietnam war rather than allow them to elect Ho Chi
Minh (who would have won if elections were held, as Eisenhower himself
acknowledged).

_ 2 Continued the same shit in the same and some more countries

 _3 Helped South Korean dictator (yes, South Korean dictator) kill a few
thousand protesters

[http://www.villagevoice.com/2002-10-15/news/carter-
hounded-b...](http://www.villagevoice.com/2002-10-15/news/carter-hounded-by-
kwangju-massacre/)

_4 Helped Saddam kill Iranians with US-supplied killing machines

 _5 The "I will never apologize for the United States — I don't care what the
facts are" President (after killing a few hundred Iranians by shooting a
civilian airplane) helped kill Iraqis on the pretext of helping Kuwaitis,
remember the incubator babies
hoax?<https://www.google.com/search?q=incubator+babies+kuwait+hoax>

_6 Continued bombing Iraq and helped kill at least half a million Iraqi babies
<https://www.google.com/search?q=Medeline+albright+worth+it>

~~~
accountswu
>Please keep this cancer on reddit. Thank you.

To the troll:aaaaaaaaaaaaaa

What is your point? Did you just sign up another account to leave this useless
comment?

Your message doesn't clarify whether you prefer wiretapping of all civilians
or just Muslims. Or perhaps you love bombing civilians around the world with
your tax dollars? I am not sure what your objection was, I thought I gave
plenty of references to prove my point; that it is all linked together and we
cannot fight one little battle for privacy separate from the so-called war on
terror (or war on communism or war on whatever minority group or whatever
"outside" group you would like to hate).

You can't just demand liberty and justice for some, not only because it's
hypocritical but because it won't work that way.

I might be wrong but you have to enlighten me with your ideas.

