
President Obama’s Dragnet - forgotAgain
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/07/opinion/president-obamas-dragnet.html?pagewanted=all
======
mtoddh
From the article:

"The defense of this practice offered by Senator Dianne Feinstein of
California, who as chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee is supposed
to be preventing this sort of overreaching, was absurd. She said today that
the authorities need this information in case someone might become a terrorist
in the future."

That second sentence is the one that really caught my eye:

 _She said today that the authorities need this information in case someone
might become a terrorist in the future._

Wow. Just wow.

~~~
khuey
Feinstein is one of the worst people in the Senate on civil liberties issues,
and one of the foremost advocates of the national security state.

~~~
ericd
Ugh, I think I voted for her. :-( When is she up for reelection?

~~~
khuey
2018\. But it's exceedingly unlikely that she has a realistic challenger in
either the primary or the general elections.

~~~
yahelc
She'll be 85 in 2018. There's a decent chance she'll retire.

~~~
rhizome
My pennies are on California AG Kamala Harris being groomed for the same role
and purpose.

------
pvnick
Said Jim Sensenbrenner, who _introduced the Patriot Act_ :

“As the author of the Patriot Act, I am extremely troubled by the F.B.I.’s
interpretation of this legislation,” he said in a statement. “While I believe
the Patriot Act appropriately balanced national security concerns and civil
rights, I have always worried about potential abuses.” He added: “Seizing
phone records of millions of innocent people is excessive and un-American.”

~~~
Everlag
When the fellow who introduced the Patriot act goes against something in the
name of American privacy you know you've crossed the line that is political
suicide.

And they don't have a 9/11 as an excuse this time.

~~~
wonderzombie
Well, you know what they say: failure is an orphan. Warrantless wiretapping
has been going on for however many years, and now he's got a problem with it?
OK, bro, whatever you say.

------
jurassic
> The administration has now lost all credibility on this issue.

Yes. Fuck you Mr. Obama, Mr. Bush, and everyone who ever voted for the PATRIOT
Act. Failed promises on Gitmo, mideast conflicts, drone murders, and civil
liberties/domestic spying. I hope they impeach him for failing to uphold the
Constitution.

I'm cynical, so I suspected this was probably happening all along. But my
anger over this is still white hot. Our whole government is broken when
leaders of both major parties blatantly lie and conspire to undermine our
Constitution.

~~~
angersock
Did you vote for Ron Paul or one of the minority parties, or were you
complicit in this farce?

~~~
rhizome
Flip all the parties next go 'round. In a reliably red district and/or state?
Vote Democrat, and vice-versa. Vote the bums out, especially the Yes on
PATRIOT Act ones. The law of averages will keep the distribution we have now.

~~~
flyinRyan
No, no no! Vote fucking independent in all cases. Fuck republican/democrat.
They are a different view of the same database table.

------
pessimizer
Aren't you suddenly getting terrified about what the dossier created by data
mining every phone call, every email, every article on every website you read,
every comment you've ever left, every book you ever bought, every library book
that you ever took out, the magazines that you subscribe to, every cent you've
ever spent by card and where it was spent, every place you've ever lived,
every place where you worked, every place you ever made a phone call from,
every classmate you've ever had, how much electricity you use, and the same
things about all of your probable friends - w/different data sources starting
7-15 years ago?

Are you even more terrified of the executive summary? Is it just me?

~~~
anigbrowl
Nope. It was obvious from the get-go that the purpose of the Patriot Act was
to normalize what had previously been the domain of covert investigations of
individuals. I don't personally feel terrified about it because I am too
boring to become a likely object of suspicion; realistically, the chance of my
being swept up in a government intelligence operation is about as likely as my
being blown up by terrorists. And frankly, the Patriot act has had
considerably _less_ impact on individual liberties and Democratic
participation that I expected it to at the time it was passed.

On the other hand, I'm quite depressed that it's taken people so long to put
it together that they're willing to buy into the idea that Obama a) invented
it or b) had the freedom to single-handed dismantle it. The entire country
badly needs a remedial course in civics, not least in Congress's ongoing game
of hot potato.

This book predates the war on terror but seems extremely relevant:
[http://www.amazon.com/Power-Without-Responsibility-
Congress-...](http://www.amazon.com/Power-Without-Responsibility-Congress-
Delegation/dp/0300065183)

~~~
spinchange
Obama switched his stance to be in support of the Patriot Act/FISA extension
_right in the middle of the 2008 primaries_! Chris Dodd, who was also running,
led a huge filibuster effort AGAINST it. He ultimately failed and was one of
the first to drop out. Moreover, for the record, Joe Biden is largely
considered one of the architects of what became the Patriot Act, from his 1995
Omnibus Terrorism Bill (after the Oklahoma City bombings.) It's like a source
document for the current legislation.

So, yes, Congress passes these laws, but yes, Obama, Biden, and the majority
of Democrats also do bear responsibility. Obama is the President. He signs off
on, and executes this and is in favor of it and it was known before he was
elected.

~~~
anigbrowl
_Obama switched his stance to be in support of the Patriot Act /FISA extension
_right in the middle of the 2008 primaries_!_

This is true, so that rather invalidates the complaint that 'this isn't what
we voted for.' Much like military incursions into Pakistan to target bin
Laden, Obama himself clearly ran as a conservative Democrat, but a lot of
people projected their own views onto him without paying attention to his
actual platform.

 _He signs off on, and executes this_

He has limited the scope somewhat through signing statements, but I feel bound
to observe that the huge majorities with which Congress passed the original
Patriot act and its various extensions make his signature a mere formality -
even if he wiped his ass with it on national TV, it would still be the law and
he would still be required to faithfully execute it.

------
emin_gun_sirer
This article would have been stronger if it had contained a bit of
introspection. Why did it require a UK paper to uncover this operation?

~~~
Shivetya
which of the major issues that the Obama Administration has the major US media
broken recently? None. We have had nearly five years of a silent, complacent,
if not compliant, major news media in the US. Sadly we have to resort to
foreign news sources to get to the story.

Don't be surprised if Al-Jazeera breaks a story before one of ours does.

~~~
jbm
Your comment implies that Al-Jazeera is a poor source of news. Is there a
reason you feel that way, other than their lack of reporting on Qatar?

I find that they have excellent coverage of Africa, Asia, and most of the
Middle East.

(Sorry if that wasn't your intention)

~~~
LukeShu
I think the implication was that Al-Jazeera does little coverage of the US.

------
vijayboyapati
Question: At what point does the average statist admit that the libertarians
(s)he has been belittling for so many years as tin-foil hat crackpots were far
more savvy about the nature of the state than they were?

Answer: never

~~~
wonderzombie
Stopped clocks, once a day, etc. ;)

In all seriousness, though: civil liberties are one of the very few areas
where libertarians and liberals (I presume "statist" was meant to be a jibe)
can agree. Liberals were in fact among the groups pissed off about the PATRIOT
Act, FISA, et al, during the Bush years.

By this point, nearly a decade later, I'd resigned myself to the fact that
nobody cared. I can't decide if I'm pleasantly or unpleasantly surprised that
this is finally getting more attention.

~~~
_delirium
Yes, civil-liberties advocates have been on this particular horse since before
the term "libertarian" even came into widespread usage. Various kinds of
attempts at dragnet surveillance, at various scales, have been an active issue
of controversy going back decades (e.g. in the McCarthyist era), and civil-
liberties groups like the ACLU have been pretty consistent in opposition.

------
mtgx
It should be mentioned that it was written by the Editorial Board of NYT.

~~~
ISL
I'd 's/mentioned/emphasized/' . The first 1.7 paragraphs read like they're
straight out of the WSJ.

~~~
sillysaurus
What's the significance of this?

~~~
jpdoctor
> _What's the significance of this?_

I cannot remember (I'm 49yo) the NYT ever going from endorsing a candidate [1]
to " _The administration has now lost all credibility._ " That's quite a fall
politically.

[1] [http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/28/opinion/sunday/barack-
obam...](http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/28/opinion/sunday/barack-obama-for-
president.html?pagewanted=all)

Edit: I have to agree with them, but I hold out hope that this will cause
several high-profile firings in the administration.

~~~
dkulchenko
> I hold out hope that this will cause several high-profile firings in the
> administration.

Why would it? It's pretty obvious Obama's complicit in this - why would he
fire those who are implementing policies that he's supporting?

~~~
jpdoctor
When presented with new data, some people change course. I am hoping Obama
falls into that class.

~~~
tsotha
New data? Do you really think this is news to Obama?

~~~
jpdoctor
> _Do you really think this is news to Obama?_

Do you really think the NYT headline was known to Obama? So yes: The reaction
of the populace is news.

Again: Some people change course when presented with new data. While
politicians and partisans rarely fall into that camp, I'm hopeful that Obama
does.

~~~
jlgreco
He presumably changed course once already (when he received 'the news' that he
could get away with the sort of shit he had many convinced he wouldn't do).
With any luck he'll change course again with the new 'news' that the first
news was wrong.

However I cannot say that I am optimistic.

------
yk
I did grow up in West Germany during the 80ies, and at that time I was told
that we were on the right side of the wall, because our government does not
kill people, does not torture people and does not spy on its own population.
Sometimes I wonder who won the cold war.

~~~
Riesling
I think with the fall of the rivaling system, the need for the western world
to differentiate itself just went away.

------
wslh
I really think of Obama government as populism (disclaimer: I live in another
country with a lot of populism). The IRS scandal is part of that. He plays
nice cards in public but in secret he has another agenda. At one point you
connect the dots when he plays the same tricks.

~~~
sp332
From what I've seen, Obama is pretty peeved about the IRS thing. Mainly
because it spent a lot of political capital he needed for other projects...
like this one.

~~~
cglace
Pretty peeved they were caught?

------
sneak
Keep paying US taxes and voting. That should work.

(But seriously. It's time. Pack your belongings and leave. Vote with your tax
dollars, please.)

~~~
dkulchenko
Leave where? Everyone always says that, but where would be better (mainly in
terms of civil liberties)?

~~~
jlgreco
Yeah, leaving doesn't work. The solution is sadly not that simple.

But neither does voting. How could voting work when the public is not even
suppose to be aware of this sort of thing? This sort of secrecy is
incompatible with democracy. Without being able to make an informed decision
the best you can do is vote for the candidate that assures you that they will
have a transparent administration.... oh wait.

~~~
sneak
Yes, it works great. I know because I tried it.

~~~
jlgreco
Leaving works for individuals fortunate enough to be in a position where it is
feasible. Unfortunately it is not a solution that can be applied across the
board. Even assuming every concerned American had the means to leave, such a
mass exodus of Americans would surely cause concern in any country they might
wish to flee too.

~~~
sneak
Only the innovators need emigrate for the plan to work, fortunately.

------
drawkbox
The 'Patriot' Act was written 8 days after 9/11. It is time for it to go and
be rewritten in saner times.

The founders and framers of the Constitution and Bill of Rights knew the
tyranny that can happen, but they have never seen what abuse of technology can
be in terms of privacy.

The people that say 'they have nothing to hide' don't realize that personal,
business, ideas, private, market information can really be used in many other
ways beyond helping fight terrorism.

Strong anonymization and approvals to access the individuals responsible for
the info need to be rethought and it should be a public discussion if all our
data will be accessible.

~~~
flyinRyan
Or how about scrap it and don't rewrite anything. Terrorism is no threat to
the US, just stop making a big deal about it. The boston bombers killed 3
people. That's like 1 car crash.

------
merraksh
Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal says it well:

[http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=2961#c...](http://www.smbc-
comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=2961#comic)

but also:

[http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=2974#c...](http://www.smbc-
comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=2974#comic)

