About Me

My photo
This blog is the work of an educated civilian, not of an expert in the fields discussed.

Saturday, March 10, 2007

Bill of Rights: First and Fourth



"The Inspector General conducted a fair and objective review of the FBI's use of a proven and useful investigative tool," said Director Robert S. Mueller, III, "and his finding of deficiencies in our processes is unacceptable."

-- Secrecy News

For example, the FBI on 739 occasions used secret contracts with three telephone companies to obtain records related to 3,000 phone numbers after asserting -- in most instances -- that the records were needed because of "exigent circumstances" and promising that requests for subpoenas had already been sent to U.S. attorney's offices.

In fact, many of these claims were false, according to the report: The letters were mostly used in "non-emergency circumstances"; no documentation existed of a connection to "pending national security investigations"; and "subpoenas requesting the information had not been provided to the U.S. Attorney's Office before the letters were sent."


-- Washington Post

Glenn Greenwald recently had much more on this improper collection of citizen "telephone records, e-mail addresses, and employment and credit histories of people deemed relevant to terrorism or espionage investigations" (WP), which often -- as is normally the case in such massive data mining practices -- is not that relevant at all. This includes the "voluntary" turning over of records by Internet providers and other sources that goes far beyond what is legally required, but which is logically done to cover one's butt. False assurances that things like this simply won't be done notwithstanding.

It needs to be underlined that such wrongdoing, not intentional or not, was found by in-house investigations. There is naturally a type of bias there in favor of the government, but still, we find much troubling activity. It goes without saying that this is why we have independent review requirements via a separate body of government (known as the courts) under the Fourth Amendment. And, congressional oversight. In fact, the executive here doesn't even want Congress to have full access to the report that even they admit showed troubling practices. Uh huh.

The wrongdoing here is not just incompetence or "unacceptable" lax habits. It is a natural growth of the power demanded and given to the executive. Likewise, reflected in some of the groups that have brought suit against the government spying practices, it has clearly threatens the freedoms of the First Amendment. Free speech and so forth requires a certain degree of privacy and freedom from unjust governmental oversight. Knowing who we call, how we spend our money, and so forth are weighty matters of particular import.

To spy on us without even faithfully following too powerful laws like the Patriot Act adds insult to injury. But, breaking the law really isn't too bad. Nothing to be TOO seriously worked up about though its advisable to you know stop doing it and all. Long road ahead, huh?