Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Bush Wants Right to ISP Customer Data

samzenpus posted more than 9 years ago | from the big-brother dept.

Privacy 565

bryan8m writes "Wired is reporting that the Bush administration wants back the ability to make ISPs turn over information on their customers. The U.S. Court of Appeals is handling the case and of course the feds want to hide details of it from the public. The law giving the government the power to seize communications records from 1986 was strengthened in 2001 by the Patriot Act and struck down after the ACLU challenged it."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Why Bother with the Courts? (5, Insightful)

geomon (78680) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679051)

When did the Bush administration become concerned about legality? Their previous stances on issues including torture, sovereign right of nations, and the role of Article 2 power has been done without discussing it with anyone.

Now all of the sudden they are getting a read from the courts?

Fucking facists.

Re:Why Bother with the Courts? (5, Insightful)

Ryvar (122400) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679086)

The reason the Bush administration is concerned about legality in this matter is because they aren't going after individuals or impoverished nations filled with people the average idiot American distrusts and blames for gas prices.

They're stepping on the toes of large, multi-national corporations many of whom have major media holdings and could make life very, very painful for the US government. Translation: they ARE being watched on this one, so they have to cross the 't's and dot the 'i's.

--Ryv

Shaddup! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12679148)

Yer all a bunch of commie pinko liberal America-haters. Our President is doing the BEST HE CAN to protect us from terrorism, and he NEEDS these powers.

Re:Shaddup! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12679165)

Aye hes doing the best he can , dammed shame he less compitent than harold shipman

Re:Shaddup! (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12679191)

Bullshit, he's not even coming close to "the best". Maybe the best "he can" but when he ignores everyone telling him that none of his airline regulations are working and he ignores us, it's time to accept that his best just doesn't cut it.

We're still sitting ducks for someone sneaking shit onto an airplane while screeners profile for british shoe bombers (oh wait, they're not, they're profiling for "people who look like they might be muslim", ignoring the fact that muslims are in just about every country in the planet and every color humans come in), meanwhile El Al has had one successful hijacking in decades, and not for lack of people trying.

Re:Why Bother with the Courts? (3, Insightful)

geomon (78680) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679171)

They're stepping on the toes of large, multi-national corporations many of whom have major media holdings and could make life very, very painful for the US government.

Your comment reminded me of a thought I had regarding the fines that everyone wanted Microsoft to pay for using its monopoly to crush competition. Before the USDOJ action, Microsoft was one of those rare companies that made no significant political contributions to either party. I'm sure this had more to do with their wanting to stay out of someone's crosshairs, but they only made token lobbying efforts as well.

After the judgement, they dump a ton of cash on both parties and they lobby every bill that may have an impact on their business operations.

They're paying their fine: one congressman at a time.

Re:Why Bother with the Courts? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12679279)

the average idiot American
Huh? Yeah, we Americans are such idiots. We are only the wealthiest and strongest nation on earth. I guess we have all been just fumbling around as a bunch of "idiots" for the last few hundred years and just got lucky.?

Jealousy is a fickle friend!

U.S.M.C.

Re:Why Bother with the Courts? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12679305)

Please don't equate greed with intelligence.

Re:Why Bother with the Courts? (2, Insightful)

KenFury (55827) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679099)

Wow first post out and already Facist is being used. Not that I disagre but.. Wow!

Re:Why Bother with the Courts? (4, Insightful)

geomon (78680) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679251)

Wow first post out and already Facist is being used. Not that I disagre but.. Wow!

Apparently eveyone objected to my use of the word "socialist", so I changed it to keep everyone's panties smooth and not bunchy.

Call it by name (2, Interesting)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679261)

Once the fascists are recognized beneath their lying masks (like NaZis - National Socialists), people are quick to call them what they are. After all the Bush abuse of the people for the benefit of his corporate government, there's no going back to his "man of the people" scam.

Re:Why Bother with the Courts? (0, Flamebait)

HillaryWBush (882804) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679136)

Ilegal facist burocracy!

Re:Why Bother with the Courts? (4, Insightful)

MrLint (519792) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679160)

I agree. This is merely a blatant attempt at the US govt (under the control of the power mad) to sidestep the courts.

If there is an actual case with actual charges all that has to be done is *file the supoena*. This administration is doing just about everything in its power to 'legalize' the ability to exercise power above the law.

There was once when the 'republican" party and the 'conservatives' meant smaller govt, less spending, and less intrusiveness.

I cant imagine that we need secret laws and skulduggery against our own people to fight the phantom menace

It's worse than you say: (5, Informative)

Futurepower(R) (558542) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679196)


In my opinion it is worse than you say.

Here are reviews of 35 books and 3 movies that discuss how bad it really is: Unprecedented Corruption: A guide to conflict of interest in the U.S. government [futurepower.org] .

Background information: History surrounding the U.S. war with Iraq: Four short stories [futurepower.org] . The U.S. government declared war on Arabs long before there was Arab terrorism against the U.S.: New York Governor Pataki's statements are equivalent to a declaration of war. [futurepower.org]

The U.S. government is bankrupt. The value of the U.S. dollar is dropping fast because the Bush administration is rapidly borrowing money [futurepower.org] . Who is doing the borrowing? These people: U.S. Federal Deficit by Political Party [futurepower.org] . If you are a U.S. citizen, you owe: $26,289.01 [brillig.com] , even if you are only 1 year old.

Re:Why Bother with the Courts? (5, Insightful)

JenovaSynthesis (528503) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679245)

Well you know how Bush loves hypocrisy. Like bitching about "activist judges" and then continuously trying to appoint a judge (and finally succeeding) his won attorney general has called an "activist judge" on several occassions and actually worked with the conving conservative whore.

And we all love Republican's love of ethics. Like how Clinton gets head and it involves an impeachment and Senate trial. But god forbid someone even mention the shit Tom DeLay does. Or Bill Frist's violation of medical ethics with his famous diagnosis via heavily edited video tapes.

Re:Why Bother with the Courts? (1)

PsychicX (866028) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679275)

"Big Brother Tries to Muscle ISPs "

I have to admit, I like the Wired title much better than the Slashdot one.

fp (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12679053)

fp

YOU FUCKING FAIL IT! (1)

Luke727 (547923) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679065)

We don't tolerate failures in this country. Your information is being sent to the Secret Service as we speak. Enjoy your (indefinite) stay in Gitmo, bitch!

Christmas List... (-1, Troll)

midifarm (666278) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679058)

Will someone please tell President Bush that there is no Santa Claus???

Peace

Re:Christmas List... (1, Funny)

taniwha (70410) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679090)

on the contrary, Bush is convinced there is .... and he's gonna make sure that damned sleigh gets searched by the bozos at TSA each and every time

Sounds bad but... (3, Interesting)

Sheetrock (152993) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679063)

This just brings things in parity with requesting library records. Except that ISP accounts can be used for more nefarious purposes than library books.

The most important thing is to make sure that with any additional powers granted there is enough oversight from a disinterested third party to insure said powers are used only within their intended scope for their intended purpose.

Re:Sounds bad but... (4, Insightful)

SillyNickName4me (760022) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679115)

The most important thing is to make sure that with any additional powers granted there is enough oversight from a disinterested third party to insure said powers are used only within their intended scope for their intended purpose.

While I agree with the importsance of this, I'd like to point at the importance of questioning if a power is needed at all, and not granting it if such a need cannot be proven. Checks and balances can only work when they are not bogged down in burocracy and procedure to be effective. Too much power with a too big counterweight (oversight by 'uninterested' 3rd parties) easily results in a substational amount of burocracy.

Re:Sounds bad but... (1)

Crimson Dragon (809806) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679204)

Where do you find a disinterested third party in this connected world? Better yet, who decides what disinterested is? If we can't figure that out, someone interested will decide who is disinterested, and you can see the problems that could arise....

FISA (oh man, I think that's the acronym) warrants were an enlargement of executive power in that they were granted in a blanket fashion, and arguably caused great damage to checks and balances..... this could be an even greater blow to checks and balances, and thereby our rights. How much power does the executive branch really need, considering we survived hundreds of years without the current power bacchanal the executive branch enjoys?

Re:Sounds bad but... (5, Insightful)

pashdown (124942) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679150)

The bad part: "To expand the FBI's power to seek records without the approval of a judge or grand jury."

This means no oversight, and opens the door for all kinds of abuse. Giving the government a little grief? No problem, they'll just have to make life hard for you.

Re:Sounds bad but... (1)

antiMStroll (664213) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679176)

Doesn't work. Look at what this administration has done to the concept of oversight when it comes to environmental protection, use people from affected industries to 'guard the henhouse'. The most important thing is to make sure they don't get their way.

Re:Sounds bad but... (1)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679280)

You've already accepted that the government has a legitimate interest in obtaining that information, and have not reached that point yet. I would submit that such need has not been proven to any reasonable degree, and "matter of national security" and "terrorism" just don't cut it anymore. They've cried wolf way too many times.

Besides, even if the Feds could give us a viable excuse for conscripting ISPs to serve as national wiretappers, are there any truly "disinterested" third parties anymore? Everyone has an agenda and it isn't always obvious. There are no government agencies that I would trust to monitor my communications, much less to keep secure anything they decide to record somewhere. And so far as private-sector organizations are concerned ... well. Their track record on security hasn't been so good lately either. So, forget it. In my NERH opinion, it just isn't worth the risk.

Holy Hell Man! (0, Troll)

Asshat Canada (804093) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679066)

I hate to say it:

I am endlessly thankful I don't live in your country.

Actually, I love to say it.

Re:Holy Hell Man! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12679244)

Yes, but you do live right next door to it. And we have lots of guns. I for one would be on edge if my next door gun crazy neighbor started doing scary stuff.

Bush can have my ISP data... (2, Interesting)

joelparker (586428) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679069)

...when he gives our country his data about why our men and women in uniform are *still* dying in Iraq while Bin Laden is still at large.

Re:Bush can have my ISP data... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12679110)

Freedom and terrorist.

ps. and I am still not a script! pbxbxjr

Re:Bush can have my ISP data... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12679170)

There's a strong suggestion that Bin Laden died of kidney failure a while ago, and he only remains as puppet figure to help turn America into a police state.

Re:Bush can have my ISP data... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12679179)

Hell, how about a peak at his army records too?

AWOL for over a year? DUI convictions?

Don't worry as long as you're a good little shill for corporate interests you can still be President.

War criminal? Compuslive Liar? Complete failure as a leader?

Don't worry, see above and you can get a second term.. no problem.

Re:Bush can have my ISP data... (3, Insightful)

Morris Thorpe (762715) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679198)

I'm sorry mods, but I can't see how that's insightful.

What does one thing have to do with the other?
It seems many of us are simply predisposed to attack anyone whose ideology is different from ours. Without thought.

Sadly, I think this is what our political leaders have taught us: shrill reponses to just about anything proposed by our enemies (those who don't align with our politics.) It is a scary, scary practice and one that is getting worse.

Disclaimer: I'm not saying I advocate the war or the topic. In fact, I've not even RTFA.

Re:Bush can have my ISP data... (2, Interesting)

aergern (127031) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679262)

What happens when these are not explained away as unthoughtout attacks.. since it's been 5 years that we've lived with Shrub and his adminstration. What would you call it when someone thinks it out very carefully? Then they come to the conclusion that a good part of the States and the World has been bent over and they didn't even buy them dinner first? It's not shrill to state the truth.. some can be shrill about it but the truth is the truth.

Hiding the law from the people who it is directed (5, Interesting)

haluness (219661) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679072)

and of course the feds want to hide details of it from the public

I have read of this before, but it is very strange that in a democracy (?) laws for the popluation can be discussed/made by not letting the population know about them.

Does'nt this seem *too* close to a dictatorship - not that the US is one, but it increasingly is seeming that certain aspects are going in that direction

Re:Hiding the law from the people who it is direct (2, Informative)

PsiPsiStar (95676) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679091)

Even worse are the laws about what a person can bring on a flight that can't even be discussed.

Re:Hiding the law from the people who it is direct (4, Insightful)

psykocrime (61037) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679134)

Does'nt this seem *too* close to a dictatorship

Hell yeah, it does.

not that the US is one, b

Give it a little more time... These things don't happen overnight.

Re:Hiding the law from the people who it is direct (2, Funny)

Decameron81 (628548) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679289)

Give it a little more time... These things don't happen overnight.
...and just when you thought you were helping good Bush end the war and bring peace he will do a dark side lighting on Richard Stallman and throw him out of the window...

Re:Hiding the law from the people who it is direct (1)

rubicon7 (51782) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679182)

Does'nt this seem *too* close to a dictatorship - not that the US is one, but it increasingly is seeming that certain aspects are going in that direction

Let's wait and see what happens with the 2008 U.S. Presidential election. Yes, our Presidents are limited to 2 terms, but it wouldn't surprise me in the least if something arose in early '08 that prompted the Executive and Legislative branches to try and keep Bush in office.

Paranoid? Perhaps.

Re:Hiding the law from the people who it is direct (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12679226)

You've been watching too much Star Wars ;-)

Seriously though, they'll just bring in another puppet to replace Bush, and keep Cheney, Wolfovich(sp?) and all pulling the strings behind the scenes.

Re:Hiding the law from the people who it is direct (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12679183)

The USA is far from its original ideals.

It looks more like a plutocracy with the wealth and power being concentrated in the top few percent of the population. The only direction now is down into despotism.

Re:Hiding the law from the people who it is direct (5, Insightful)

Ryvar (122400) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679186)

In some ways it's worse than a dictatorship, if you think about it. Most people in nasty dictatorships have an all-to-clear a picture of exactly what kind of behaviors will get them 'disappeared.' It's not a guarantee or anything (you may be a government-critic's brother, for instance), but at least you have a sense of your position on the terrain.

In the United States the law is so hopelessly complex, the enforcement so arbitrary, and adherence to the concept of checks and balances is such a farce that very few people are entirely sure of the legality of all their actions. Or what the consequences would be. We have developed a culture of lawyers for precisely this purpose - we walk on pins and needles hoping to God we aren't crossing some local, state, or federal ordinance without realizing it.

To live in the United States without having a law degree or the money to employ someone with one full-time is to be a second-class citizen.
--Ryv

Re:Hiding the law from the people who it is direct (4, Insightful)

Maestro4k (707634) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679293)

In the United States the law is so hopelessly complex, the enforcement so arbitrary, and adherence to the concept of checks and balances is such a farce that very few people are entirely sure of the legality of all their actions. Or what the consequences would be.
Actually it's getting easier to figure it out, all you have to ask is "Will this make some corporation mad?" if the answer is yes then it's probably against the law or soon will be. Also the consequences will be quite dire, you'd be better off murdering someone.
To live in the United States without having a law degree or the money to employ someone with one full-time is to be a second-class citizen.
Frankly I think we're below second-class, we're tolerated as necessary only because we buy the products the corporations make. If it wasn't for that we'd probably be in deep shit.

Re:Hiding the law from the people who it is direct (0, Troll)

t_allardyce (48447) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679197)

The US is so democratic its democratised itself into a dictatorship...

Re:Hiding the law from the people who it is direct (4, Interesting)

Decameron81 (628548) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679228)

I have read of this before, but it is very strange that in a democracy (?) laws for the popluation can be discussed/made by not letting the population know about them.


In Argentina we've recently had a similar law proposal. Fortunately there was enough people who cared to at least stop it for a while. One of the many rumours we had flying around at that time was that the Bush administration was behind all that as part of a deal to relieve some of the pressure regarding our current economical problems.

I personally believe that these are just rumors... but I can't stop to notice that we were in exactly the same situation just two months ago.

What the hell is going on with our so called democracies? Do they really deserve that name?

Re:Hiding the law from the people who it is direct (5, Insightful)

Maestro4k (707634) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679265)

I have read of this before, but it is very strange that in a democracy (?) laws for the popluation can be discussed/made by not letting the population know about them.
Welcome to the US of the 21st century where controversial bills are passed as riders to defense spending bills and passed by voice vote (so there's no record of who voted for or against). This has been going on for some time, but it has increased dramtically under Bush's administration, and not all of it after 9/11/2001. After 9/11 almost anything goes of course. Torture's been determined legal, secret searches are fine, but hey at least we caught Bin Laden right? Oh wait we didn't...
Does'nt this seem *too* close to a dictatorship - not that the US is one, but it increasingly is seeming that certain aspects are going in that direction
It's not just certain aspects, our entire government seems to be happily heading towards either dictatorship or fascism controlled by the corporations. Many feel that the latter has already occurred and it's just a matter of time before the whole semblance of government by the people is dropped.

What do I think? All I know is that it certainly feels like whatever any corporation wants they get, but whatever I want (and others like me want), even when it's constitutional freedoms, I don't get it because it would inconvenience some corporation. So I'd have to say we're well down that road to control by corporations and I wouldn't be surprised to see congress and the courts dissolved and the presidency turned into a dictatorship in my lifetime.

Fuhrer Bush! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12679080)



Seig Heil!
Seig Heil!

money makes friends (-1, Troll)

tofucubes (869110) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679083)

wow, the RIAA can afford to buy out our government and use congress for its private interests... this is scary I thought our country's government had some honor or integrity... I'm still looking for the advertised "honest politician"

Re:money makes friends (1)

kc32 (879357) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679117)

I think a lot of people would be honest politicians if they could just get elected into office.

Re:money makes friends (1)

tofucubes (869110) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679124)

wait I don't think this is related to the RIAA actually I'm not sure...sorry

AYBTU (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12679084)

all your user base belong yo us!!!

Re:AYBTU (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12679287)

What you say!!

For the confused (4, Interesting)

HillaryWBush (882804) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679095)

It's not about getting information on terrorists when they email each other.

It's about getting blackmail data on government officials to force them to do what the Administration wants.

Re:For the confused (1)

Maestro4k (707634) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679307)

It's about getting blackmail data on government officials to force them to do what the Administration wants.
I doubt it, most of the incriminating stuff probably occurs on the networks of the house & senate offices so the administration could come by it quite easy. Remember the controversy over an aide accessing data they weren't supposed to?

They will defend the US to the point (5, Insightful)

cyber_rigger (527103) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679101)

...that no one will want to live here anymore.

Re:They will defend the US to the point (0)

zonker (1158) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679194)

yeah and by that time you won't be free to leave. we'll call this new nation... the people's republic of china.

Re:They will defend the US to the point (4, Interesting)

linguae (763922) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679211)

Well, where do you suggest that we move to? Many of the other country's policies are going south as well. The megacorporations are controlling Europe's and Australia's policies as well, and the majority of the rest of the world is third-world and has many of its own issues. People say lots of good things about Canada, but it's only a matter of time until it succumbs to US pressure. I've also thought about Japan, but I don't know how the situation of liberties is in that country.

Are there any free places left, or am I forgetting a few places?

Re:They will defend the US to the point (2, Insightful)

cyber_rigger (527103) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679249)

Well, where do you suggest that we move to?

I don't know. I've heard some interesting things about New Zealand. I'm sure it has its drawbacks too.

Begun the Clone Wars Have (3, Interesting)

dotslashdot (694478) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679116)

Combine the fact that EVERYTHING is terrorism--copyright violations, every hacker etc. with this wonderful bit of super surveillance and how long before GNU/Linux is defined as an instrument of terrorism? Or until all of our tools become illegal in the name of the Fatherland? Begun the Clone Wars have.

Diabloical (5, Insightful)

101percent (589072) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679122)

I'm not a bush basher generally. I'm not totally against the RIAA and MPAA.

But I must say, that this initiative is truely diabolical. My freedoms to surf the internet privately is clearly being breached here.

Are we going to see them applying the same interpretationist polcies that they use on television to the internet. I mean whos to say what constituits a "terrorist" website?

Goodbye my friends. I think 1984 has truely, and finally come alive, and its time for some of us to go underground.

Time to (4, Funny)

FidelCatsro (861135) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679123)

Execute order 66

Re:Time to (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12679219)

don't you mean plan 9? sorry, but ep3 sucked...

Re:Time to (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12679235)

Ah come on now , it wasnae that bad was it .
People are just gonna bash it tae hell , but honestly the acting was no worse than the origional trillogy which had just as many plot holes ...

It figures... (2, Interesting)

flag burning (837301) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679126)

A man who can barely hold his own while giving a speech is now telling ISP's to turn information over. That makes a lot of sense.

Unfortunately... (5, Insightful)

sumday (888112) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679144)

the, "if you've got nothing to hide, why worry?" argument will probably win this one. but guys, c'mon. This descision will quash terrorism... don't you see...?

I'm so glad... (5, Insightful)

calstraycat (320736) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679152)

I'm so glad that the "keep-the-government-out-of-people's-lives" party is in power.

Re:I'm so glad... (2, Insightful)

77Punker (673758) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679222)

Well, you see, the only people REALLY interested in being in power are the ones who, well, want to weild the power. I want to mind my own business so I don't run for office, they want to run everybody's lives so they put themselves in that sort of position.

It's really that simple.

Re:I'm so glad... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12679240)

but.. but... teh terr0ristz! tehy gonna k1llz0rs all y00!

Re:I'm so glad... (1)

YrWrstNtmr (564987) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679260)

I'm so glad that the "keep-the-government-out-of-people's-lives" party is in power.

It could be worse.

They could get all your hacker information! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12679161)

After a quick browsing of the ISP records they could know a lot about us... It seems that you have been living two lives. In one life, you are Thomas A. Anderson, program writer for a respectable software company. You have a social security number, you pay your taxes and you help your land lady carry out her garbage. In the other you are an annoying slashdot troll under the alias "Anonymous Coward" and are guilty of virtually every computer crime we have a law for, including extreme comparisons of the Bush administration to fictional works such as The Matrix or 1984. One of these lives has a future... In all seriousness, though, I can't see how giving the government access to ISP records is going to beneficial to the people. Guess the Department of Homeland Security is getting bored and needs something to do.

fight against terrorism or pirates? (1)

fatalwall (873645) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679162)

Now they say its about fighting terrorism but doesnt this just open the door for them to do it for anything... as long as they add terrorism before or after it.

Re:fight against terrorism or pirates? (1, Insightful)

t_allardyce (48447) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679177)

Well yeah but you have to remember that all this is about fighting terrorism.

If they hate our freedom the only way we can stop them is buy taking away our freedom.

I can see more personals like this in the future (5, Funny)

Valacosa (863657) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679181)

Seriously, if things keep on going on the way they are, I can see a lot of personals like this popping up:

"Single, white 22-year old Canadian male willing to `marry' American female fleeing fascist regime. Must be intelligent and conversational. Preferably aged 19-25, ethnicity unimportant."

Already happening! (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12679272)



http://www.marryanamerican.ca/ [marryanamerican.ca]

Title is mis-leading. (4, Interesting)

nberardi (199555) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679184)

Wow talk about a mis-leading head line. If you read the article in Wired it says congress is debating this. This article just starts off biased and just gets worse fromt here. It is obviouse where the writer stands on this issue and what side of the political fense the writer stands on, but last time I checked the Patiot Act didn't pass with a narrow margin and it doesn't look like it is going to pass with a narrow margin again this time.

So for all you liberal's out there that say my guy would never vote for this, and Bush is evil because he did. Check the vote records for this back in 2001. It's all posted on the Library of Congress website.

Re:Title is mis-leading. (1)

Walkingshark (711886) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679276)

Your post ignores the realities of the situation the PATRIOT act was passed in. Your attempt at blatant deception shows that your values are in sync with those who wish to subvert our Republic into a tyranny. You are a slave-by-choice, and you seek to bring all of us down to your level.

FUCK! (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12679189)

How did we re-elect this fuck?

FUCK!!!!

Guess we have to wait for the apocalypse for any real change..

Re:FUCK! (-1, Troll)

SillyNickName4me (760022) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679238)

> How did we re-elect this fuck?

Because the alternative was even worse?

With Bush you at least know what you'll get, the only thing you knew about Kelly is that he didn't have a clue what you'd get, and neither did you.

Re:FUCK! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12679300)

Yes, but you knew what you got was pretty fucking bad, and for Kerry to be much worse would be quite an astounding feat.

Ahem [gets on soapbox] (5, Insightful)

64nDh1 (872430) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679203)

The way I see it, your IP is becoming more and more like your phone number. It's part of who you are and we're fast approaching the day that the two will be essentials for anyone living anywhere in the world. You'll need your digits so people can call you, and your IPv4 or IPv6 digits for other reasons, and it'll become the norm.

How would people react if the Bush, or any, administration claimed the right to be able to tap anyone's phone for any reason?

From the article:
The legal filing with the 2nd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in New York comes amid a debate in Congress over renewal of the Patriot Act and whether to expand the FBI's power to seek records without the approval of a judge or grand jury.

And will they also seek the entitlement to search domestic residences without a warrant approved by an authority figure? Would I be far off in this seeming to be about the same? For those who lost their short term memory, and those who like repetition:

without the approval or a judge or grand jury

How do you respect a law like that?

There's plenty of blame to go around ... (5, Informative)

Fookin (652988) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679216)

Let us not forget a key point:

Congress creates the bills, the President merely signs them into law.

Where is all the uproar about the Congressmen who voted for these laws? I see plenty of anti-Bush sentiment here, but where's the outrage towards *your* representatives who approve of this?

Get angry all you want at the occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave, but don't give a free pass to the occupants of both the Hart and Russell Senate Office Buildings, they typically stick around a lot longer than a President.

Paranoia (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12679217)

When did the Bush administration become concerned about legality?

Sigh... here goes another moonbat delusional hatefest on Slashdot. Guess that's what happens when the majority of the audience is comprised of antisocial overmedicated middle school kiddies.

Six years ago, such an byline would read: "the justice department did X" instead of "the Clinton administration" because rational people of both political persuasions know that there isn't an evil Clinton or Bush monster behind every closet door. Clinton advocates were very vocal about this when Reno personally ordered the anti-constitutional attack on Gonzolas, as well as the Ruby Ridge attack on isolationist nuts that resulted in the conviction of FBI operatives (unfortunately for following Reno's orders).

In spite of first-hand involvement by Reno and her staff, the media message was clear: "justice department" was to blame, not any Clinton conspiracy. Funny how it doesn't work out when the clinically deranged nutballs start seeing Bush conspiracies behind every action.

If you want to be consistent, then start screaming about Hillary Clinton's ties to the RIAA and MPAA, following her husband's support for DRM initiatives. Then there's Hillary's nationalized medical record initiative, which would have required all doctors and medical centers to send all U.S. medical files to the Federal Government for review and control. Funny how the left ignores this kind of tyranny. Guess that's why they're called useful idiots.

Re:Paranoia (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12679263)

You dumb shit.

You're obviously a republican, and you're making excuses for this by bringing up what Clinton did in office. However, Clinton is fucking history. He's out of office. It doesn't matter. This dickhead is in office RIGHT NOW, fucking up your country, and you're whining "well Clinton was bad too". Grow a fucking brain.

Re:Paranoia (2, Funny)

geomon (78680) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679295)

Sigh... here goes another moonbat delusional hatefest on Slashdot.

Mocking Republicans for doing the same stuff that Democrats were demonized for is pure sport for Libertarians.

The sooner people realize that there is a fractional difference between the two, the sooner we can return to true competition in politics.

Republicans=Democrats who used to smoke pot until their kids started stealing their stash.

Re:Paranoia (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12679302)

While I agree with most of what you are saying,I believe that Ruby Ridge took place when Bush 41 was in office. Summer of 92' I believe.

Fuck the ACLU (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12679218)

We are AT WAR people! I mean give me a fucking break, why should this administration which is doing everything it can to protect us from terrorism have to answer to a partisan, bullshit anti-american organization like the ACLU?

We might as well let the beef industry be regulated by PETA, for christ sakes.

Re:Fuck the ACLU (1)

SillyNickName4me (760022) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679273)

You have been at war since the involvement in Korea, and that one did not end.

Ah, this undeclared war against a non state enemy you mean? this war on drugs? or oh wait, it was terrorism, or what? copyright violators?

Deciding you are at war comes with many consequences. If you argue that the USA is at war, that implicitly also means your enemy is a party you can be at war with. This means you cannot deny the rules and treaties that govern war to them. Come back when the people in the US government understand this instead of calling things 'war' whenever it comes in handy, without taking the consequences.

Re:Fuck the ACLU (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12679285)

why should this administration which is doing everything it can to protect us from terrorism have to answer to a partisan, bullshit anti-american organization like the ACLU?


So we can keep our democracy while creating new ones? Dumbass, if Bush really cared about terrorism, Bin Ladin would have been captured or killed by now. This is just a power grab from the idiots that voted this fool into office.

Re:Fuck the ACLU (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12679290)

Yeah!!! You tell 'em and don't stop there either. When you rule out the voice of the ACLU why don't you complain about all the damn 'liberals' who are so opposed to America's progress as a great country that they'd put Osama in power in Iraq, just to stick it to the Republicans and piss on the dead troops they care so little about.

What everyone needs is a proper leader, someone who takes whatever the hell they want, whatever the cost in dollars, jobs, international respect, or the blood of the citizens. Bush might not be that man, but Cheney is, so what's the difference?

This is exactly like the beef industry being regulated by PETA - democracy was a crackpot idea to begin with, and we'd all be better off in a dictatorship. /asshat

Guilty people should be worried (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12679220)

I know I'll sleep well tonight.

Another "So What" (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12679223)

Ok, customer data from ISPs. I own a (small) WISP, and the government isn't going to get anything useful from me, because I don't KEEP anything useful. My customers all get DHCP addresses, I don't keep squid cache logs, and my mail logs get flushed after a week. So I get a subpoena for my records: I'll be happy to give you a few hundred megs on a CD of my last weeks' worth of mail logs. Enjoy them.

The anti-Bush crowd just trolls for stuff to get all worked up about. This is about as effective as passing a law that everything written in the sand below the high-tide line is fair game for the guv'mint to use against you. No ISP has the capacity or the desire to keep secret records of every web-site visit, and every inbound and outbound email for every customer.

I'm going to find something useful to stress about.

Which way to go? (0, Redundant)

Walkingshark (711886) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679250)

As Bush continues to ignore the constitution in favor of increasing his own executive power, in his ever bolder attempts to convert the executive manager position of President into a neo-kingship, he will find that more and more people see through his ploy and begin to unite against him. It will finally be when his hubris blinds him to the true source of his power and he attempts to wield his power over a signifigant subset of the wealthy that he will find himself and his tribe of neoconservatives on a long trip down a short pier. The surest way to destroy an empire is to remove its head before succession has been settled. Impeachment of DeLay and continued defeats of Frist politically will create a struggle for succession that could tear apart the fiscal conservative-social conservative coalition that has brought Red shirts to power. The key to long term success is to demand a new movement to unprecedented levels of open government and government oversight. Removing the back room deal aspect of politicing can prevent things like Bush spying on your web browsing from ever being an issue.

This will not stand (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12679252)

I am writing this letter rather reluctantly. I do not wish to begin an incendiary debate about Mrs. Micheal Simms's perceptions. However, Mrs. Simms has recently made a few statements that I find disturbing to such a degree that I cannot remain silent. As a preliminary, I want to think outside the box. Her policies may sound comfortable and simple, but it must not be forgotten that if the past is any indication of the future, she will once again attempt to send the wrong message to children. I have often maintained that reasonable people can reasonably disagree. Unfortunately, when dealing with Mrs. Simms and her rank-and-file followers, that claim assumes facts not in evidence. So let me claim instead that there are few certainties in life. I have counted only three: death, taxes, and Mrs. Simms doing some clumsy thing every few weeks.

Her "I'm right and you're wrong" attitude is mudslinging, because it leaves no room for compromise. Mrs. Simms's premise (that the boogeyman is going to get us if we don't agree to her demands) is her morality disguised as pretended neutrality. Mrs. Simms uses this disguised morality to support her ethics, thereby making her argument self-refuting. It doesn't do us much good to become angry and wave our arms and shout about the evils of her allegations in general terms. If we want other people to agree with us and join forces with us, then we must take away as many of her opportunities for mischief as possible.

I have a New Year's resolution for Mrs. Simms: She should pick up a book before she jumps to the churlish conclusion that the cure for evil is more evil. During the first half of the 20th century, cynicism could have been practically identified with onanism. Today, it is not so clear who can properly be called acrimonious foolish-types. I wish that some of her gofers would ask themselves, "Why am I helping her redefine unbridled self-indulgence as a virtue, as the ultimate test of personal freedom?" Others may disagree, but I feel that Mrs. Simms's annoying manifestos declare that headstrong ruffians have dramatically lower incidences of cancer, heart attacks, heart disease, and many other illnesses than the rest of us. Mrs. Simms then blames us for that. Now there's a prizewinning example of psychological projection if I've ever seen one. That's all I have time now to write. If you want to get more insight into Mrs. Micheal Simms's mentality, though, then study the details of her tracts. Try to see the big picture: It will decidedly amaze you. It will take your breath away. And it will convince you that ignoring this letter can be considered an admission of guilt on Mrs. Simms's part.

No More Clintons! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12679258)

NO MORE CLINTONS:

http://www.cafepress.com/nomoreclintons [cafepress.com]

fuck Bush and fuck Bush!!! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12679267)

In my opinion this president is disregarding democratic opinion, a corrupt looser who committed election fraud, a warmonger who abuses the words "freedom" and "democracy" to push his Orwellian agenda. He can go and fuck himself.

just get on with it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12679282)

Can we just get to full blown fascism already?

Most Americans won't care, actually most of them will welcome it.

Seriously, this slowly eroding our rights stuff is just taking forever, let's just get it over with...

Re:just get on with it (1)

ElDuderino44137 (660751) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679292)

Agreed.
Liberty ends with a thunderous applause.

Congratulations America! (0, Troll)

oritpro (679586) | more than 9 years ago | (#12679298)

you voted for him.

This should never happen at all.. (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12679299)

As they look over the world's painful panorama of war and terror, some people conclude that it is too late, that no amount of information or activity could possibly stop this insanity. But those who take that pessimistic view understand neither Slashdot nor its current rung on the ladder to total power. Unless you share my view that I indeed hope that Slashdot's punishment fits its crime, there's no need for you to hear me further. According to the laws of probability, I feel that Slashdot has insulted everyone with even the slightest moral commitment. It obviously has none, or it wouldn't use antidisestablishmentarianism as a more destructive form of diabolism.

Should we blindly trust such superficial, gruesome boneheads? Slashdot's bedfellows insist that "Slashdot is a perpetual victim of injustice." First off, that's a lousy sentence. If they had written that Slashdot's hariolations are about as useful to society as a hundred deutsche marks were in 1923 Germany, then that quote would have had more validity. As it stands, Slashdot somehow manages to maintain a straight face when saying that we have no reason to be fearful about the criminally violent trends in our society today and over the past ten to fifteen years. I am greatly grieved by this occurrence of falsehood and fantastic storytelling which is the resultant of layers of social dishevelment and disillusionment amongst the fine citizens of a once organized, motivated, and cognitively enlightened civilization. Slashdot's propositions will have consequences -- very serious consequences. And we ought to begin doing something about that. Slashdot's artifices are a hotbed of corporatism. But you knew that already. So let me add that Slashdot keeps saying that freedom must be abolished in order for people to be more secure and comfortable. For some reason, Slashdot's forces actually believe this nonsense.

Like a lion after tasting the blood of human victims, Slashdot will feed us ever-larger doses of its lies and crackpot assumptions. Please let me explain that ignorance is bliss. This may be why Slashdot's cringers are generally all smiles. The long and short of it is that Slashdot struts like a god on Mount Olympus, looking down on us mortals below. In view of that, it is not surprising that I don't need to tell you that in Slashdot's line of business, you don't need to know what you're talking about. That should be self-evident. What is less evident is that Slashdot's factotums all look like Slashdot, think like Slashdot, act like Slashdot, and make widespread accusations and insinuations without having the facts to back them up, just like Slashdot does. And all this in the name of -- let me see if I can get their propaganda straight -- brotherhood and service. Ha! If Slashdot were as bright as it thinks it is, it'd know that I receive a great deal of correspondence from people all over the world. And one of the things that impresses me about it is the massive number of people who realize that it shouldn't take a condescending cheap shot at a person that most insane gutter-dwellers will never be in a position to condescend to. That's just plain common sense. Of course, the people who appreciate its philippics are those who eagerly root up common sense, prominently hold it out, and decry it as poison with astonishing alacrity. Unfortunately, Slashdot's stubborn prognoses neglect to take one important factor into consideration: human nature. Common sense and scientific evidence agree: If we don't remove the Slashdot threat now, it will bite us in our backside as soon as our backs are turned.

Will the worst kinds of spineless mountebanks there are ever oppose our human vices wherever they may be found -- arrogance, hatred, jealousy, unfaithfulness, avarice, and so on? Don't bet on it. Pessimism is dangerous. Slashdot's self-centered version of it is doubly so. If I may be permitted to make an observation, when you tell Slashdot's emissaries that Slashdot's litanies are filled with a number of very clear-cut and blatant lies -- lies of both omission and commission -- they begin to get fidgety, and their eyes begin to wander. They really don't care. They have no interest in hearing that it seizes every opportunity to usher in the beginning of a maladroit new era of conformism. I cannot believe this colossal clownishness. Any sane person knows that I want to compile readers' remarks and suggestions and use them to make Slashdot answer for its wrongdoings. That may seem simple enough, but when one examines the ramifications of letting Slashdot waste our time and money, one finds a preponderance of evidence leading to the conclusion that it should stop bellyaching and start healing itself. So what's the connection between that and its ravings? The connection is that all of the bad things that are currently going on are a symptom of Slashdot's jaded, negligent exegeses. They are not a cause; they are an effect.

However dysfunctional the national picture already is, an organization that wants to get ahead should try to understand the long-range consequences of its actions. Slashdot has never had that faculty. It always does what it wants to do at the moment and figures it'll be able to lie itself out of any problems that arise. If you think about it, if the human race is to survive on this planet, we will have to serve on the side of Truth. Since most people oppose Slashdot's incorrigible, selfish principles, it has had to open new avenues for the expression of hate using every muddleheaded means imaginable. For those of you who don't know, I do not have the time, in one sitting, to go into the long answer as to why Slashdot harbors persistent and inappropriate anger. But the short answer is that our path is set. By this, I mean that in order to encourage opportunity, responsibility, and community, we must do what comes naturally. I consider that requirement a small price to pay because if I am correctly informed, the lockstep ideological conformity of Slashdot's secret police and their mindless parroting of Slashdot's wily cliches about fogyism have reached a level of absurdity hardly matched by any historical example that comes to mind. In any case, I believe I have found my calling. My calling is to improve the lot of humankind. And just let it try and stop me. What is often overlooked, however, is that Slashdot is completely insolent. We all are, to some extent, but it sets the curve.

I wish that some of Slashdot's myrmidons would ask themselves, "Why am I helping Slashdot wage a clandestine guerilla war against many basic human rights?" Slashdot recently claimed that collectivism is a viable and vital objective for our nation's educational institutions. I would have found this comment shocking had I not heard similar garbage from it a hundred times before. There is a format Slashdot should follow for its next literary endeavor. It involves a topic sentence and supporting facts.

Now the surprising news: Slashdot's position that it has been robbed of all it does not possess is based upon a specious argument without any substantive basis. In reaching that conclusion, I have made the usual assumption that if I were elected Ruler of the World, my first act of business would be to provide some balance to Slashdot's one-sided taradiddles. I would further use my position to inform certain segments of the Earth's population that Slashdot should think about how its ideologies lead impetuous, subhuman beggars to subject human beings to indignities. If Slashdot doesn't want to think that hard, perhaps it should just keep quiet. While we may all pray for a perfect utopian world in which everyone is holding hands and singing "We Are the World" in perfect harmony, the reality is that we must point out the glaring contradiction between Slashdot's idealized view of fanaticism and reality. As mentioned above, however, that is not enough. It is necessary to do more. It is necessary to step back and consider the problem of Slashdot's excuses in the larger picture of popular culture imagery. Slashdot is the embodiment of everything petty in our lives. Every grievance, every envy, every wishy-washy ideology finds expression in Slashdot. Easy as it may seem to address the continued social injustice shown by intellectually challenged, feral usurers, it is far more difficult to examine the warp and woof of Slashdot's pleas.

Anyone who follows today's debates on opportunism and, by happenstance, is also familiar with Slashdot's unruly hijinks, is struck by that old truism: We are observing the change in our society's philosophy and values from freedom and justice to corruption, decay, cynicism, and injustice. All of these "values" are artistically incorporated in one person: Slashdot. The irony is that Slashdot's most dissolute teachings are also its most morbid. As the French say, "Les extremes se touchent." I might be able to forgive Slashdot, but only if it promises never again to excoriate attempts to bring questions of racialism into the (essentially apolitical) realm of pedagogy in language and writing. Slashdot truly believes that you and I are morally inferior to pugnacious present-day robber barons. It is just such rash, cranky megalomania, callow egoism, and intellectual aberrancy that stirs Slashdot to produce a new generation of disruptive, soulless dweebs whose opinions and prejudices, far from being enlightened and challenged, are simply legitimized.

I'm not the first to mention that Slashdot's flagitious writings commit senseless acts of violence against anyone daring to challenge its logorrheic words. News of this deviousness must spread like wildfire if we are ever to take personal action and warn the public against those uncompromising fanatics whose positive accomplishments are always practically nil, but whose conceit can scarcely be excelled. Slashdot's disquisitions can be rightly understood only as what some malodorous, eccentric blusterers have been brave enough to call them: a failure. Even if I agreed that Slashdot's audacious recommendations were of paramount importance, it would still be the case that Slashdot needs to stop living in denial. It needs to wake up and realize that I do not appreciate being labeled. No one does. Nevertheless, if you are not smart enough to realize this, then you become the victim of your own ignorance. Slashdot just keeps on saying, "We don't give a [expletive deleted] about you. We just want to delude and often rob those rendered vulnerable and susceptible to its snares because of poverty, illness, or ignorance."

It is difficult for many people to accept that by preventing people from seeing that the real problem is the complexity of a changing national and world economy, Slashdot's apostles can foment aberrant forms of political tyranny. And while we're on the subject, there are two related questions in this matter. The first is to what extent Slashdot has tried to reduce human beings and many other living organisms to engineered products and mere cogs in the social machine. The other is whether or not if Slashdot succeeds in its attempt to rule with an iron fist, it'll have to be over my dead body. That's it for this letter. I sincerely hope that typing it was not a complete waste of energy. Unfortunately, I do realize that my words will probably trigger no useful response in the flabby synapses of Slashdot's brain. I just felt obligated to go through the motions because Slashdot is trying to gag the innocent accused from protesting Maoism-motivated prosecutions just to prove it can.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?