Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Obama to release FISA court opinion that ruled NSA surveillance unconstitutional

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 143 posts

Re: Obama to release FISA court opinion that ruled NSA surveillance unconstitutional

#91

Post by andy_ppp »

jlgreco wrote: post #14
sp332 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's probably some fighting going on about what exactly should be redacted or preserved.

Hmm, that makes sense. Not really knowing what sort of thing information is in court decisions, what is likely the sort of thing that will be redacted? Names of example programs/agents/terrorists I guess? I don't know if it would make sense for that sort of thing to be in the decision. Or are they likely going to redact more than just supporting information?

Much like the secret court order, with secret bits being removed, you don't really ------------ ------- ------------ - ----. And lets face it - the ----.

Re: Obama to release FISA court opinion that ruled NSA surveillance unconstitutional

#92

Post by saraid216 »

joshfraser wrote: post #50
dictum wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What saddens me is that while in the 2012 elections it seems most Obama voters were effectively choosing the lesser of two evils, in 2008 they were voting for Obama. They believed in what he was supposed to represent. In retrospect, maybe they were voting against Bush . In the next election maybe a majority will vote against Obama , and the game will keep going.

We may never have a true democratic election in the US again. As long as the NSA dragnet exists, we'll never know what privately collected information was used to humiliate political opponents or cause them to withdraw from the race rather than face public embarrassment.

To agree with anigbrowl, corruption at the ballot box has pretty much been a thing in politics since America's inception. But there are a lot of assumptions in your lament that are extremely problematic.

Political opponents are not the crux of democracy. Very few things in the apparatus of government are dismantled upon the election of any office. Office holders set the direction and make the crucial decisions, but they are not the messiahs we make them out to be. It's comforting to believe in benevolent dictators and lofty monarchs, but if your only real choice is between two people, you're already failing as a democracy.

The choice for an elected official should stand on that candidate's character and their willingness to listen and engage on the issues you care about. But the issues themselves are something you yourself remain responsible for.

We haven't had a "true democratic election" since we came up with party platforms.

Re: Obama to release FISA court opinion that ruled NSA surveillance unconstitutional

#93

Post by AnthonyMouse »

a3n wrote: post #78
bitwize wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Barring a constitutional amendment that implements a multiparty, proportional-representation parliament, your choices in Murka are either Kang or Kodos.

If what you're doing isn't working, do anything else. Voting 3rd party is anything else. I vote 3rd party, which to me is invoking "none of the above."

> If what you're doing isn't working, do anything else.

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic. That's just the legislator's fallacy: "We must do something, this is something, therefore we must do this."

You would be better off to try something that has more hope of actually working, like voting in the primaries. Or encouraging your state representatives to publicly finance elections for federal office in your state, so you have a better choice for federal candidates in the future. Or finding a way to convey to your representatives that you won't be supporting them in the future if they don't do something about this in the present, rather than waiting for the next election when the issue may no longer hold the attention of the public.

Re: Obama to release FISA court opinion that ruled NSA surveillance unconstitutional

#94

Post by javajosh »

This is actually really, really great news, and I'm really impressed that we're changing direction so quickly. This is a huge bureaucracy, and softening even this much in a few short months is an amazing thing. I see this as a very hopeful sign that we'll get back on track - just more slowly than anyone (including myself) would like it to go. But it's a nation of almost 400 million people and crazy complex body of law to deal with: nothing changes on a dime.

Re: Obama to release FISA court opinion that ruled NSA surveillance unconstitutional

#95

Post by chinpokomon »

dylangs1030 wrote: post #76
windexh8er wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure how anyone can has enough reasonable information to make a case that FISA doesn't rubber stamp cases. It seems to me it works that of the way large organizations navigate political nuances internally; people who don't run the technology and platforms make the decisions as it pertains to influence that, is often, good for self-preservation and fiscal motivation - the operators implement the systems as the…

"I'm not sure how anyone can has enough reasonable information to make a case that FISA doesn't rubber stamp cases." The burden of proof is on the positive, not the negative.

The burden of proof applies to those who's liberties are infringed. If my rights are being stripped, the burden of proof should not be that I need to prove the NSA is infringing those liberties, it should be that they need to prove that they aren't. With National Security Letters, the recipients can't even acknowledge that they've received them, and with the FISA court, we have no way to know.

Re: Obama to release FISA court opinion that ruled NSA surveillance unconstitutional

#96

Post by betterunix »

anigbrowl wrote: post #54
mullingitover wrote: post #8

It's fascinating that the situation is such a mockery of the rule of law, yet it keeps on rolling. If the FISA decided that the NSA's activities were illegal, why would it keep rubber-stamping the warrants? It seems like at that point it should deny every single request going forward until the illegal activities have stopped. Is there a process for impeaching the FISA judges for malfeasance?

If the FISA decided that the NSA's activities were illegal, why would it keep rubber-stamping the warrants? First, I don't agree that they rubber-stamp warrants, but believe they evaluate them on a case-by-case basis - not least because their decisions might be classified now, but may well be declassified in the future, and their reasoning will be held up to scrutiny. More importantly, just because an agency is found…

"First, I don't agree that they rubber-stamp warrants, but believe they evaluate them on a case-by-case basis"

The FISC is called a rubber stamp because they almost never reject requests for a warrant. The government can be almost certain that no matter how outrageous its request is, FISC will say "yes." That they may be evaluating requests on a case-by-case basis is irrelevant if they always come to the same conclusion.

Re: Obama to release FISA court opinion that ruled NSA surveillance unconstitutional

#97

Post by anigbrowl »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #87
anigbrowl wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In fairness that runs in both directions - we would certainly be better off with some proof of FISA courts' effectiveness, even if were historical (eg declassification of past decisions from >10 years ago, or the establishment of objective criteria for declassification).

It would also help significantly if the default for their opinions not be that they are automatically classified and put the burden of proof on the government in each individual case to justify why the public shouldn't know what the law is.

Well, opsec. Spying is by definition a clandestine activity, and I think there are good arguments in favor of spying - the main one being that while it might seem nicer not to spy on anyone, you end up being less informed, and uninformed executives are more likely to end up going to war, which is a lot more destructive than spying. If you read up on the Curveball story in Iraq, that's a classic case of what happens when you make decisions with inadequate information.

Re: Obama to release FISA court opinion that ruled NSA surveillance unconstitutional

#98

Post by SimHacker »

samstave wrote: post #22
jivatmanx wrote: post #19

At a point in our nation's early history, we decided to trust Constitutional interpretation to the Supreme Court. There were cons to that decision - the Constitution is our social contract and thus it's interpretation is ultimately up to the people - but on the whole I think it was a good one. But, if for whatever reason, this Judicial review cannot occur - whether that be willful avoidance by the DEA for "Parallel C…

Well, when the NSA is spying on and potentially blackmailing the Supreme Court itself, then it really doesn't matter. Watch this vid with Siebel Edmund's where she says that the NSA has basically just extended to a massive degree the level of blackmail that intelligence has used since the days of Hoover. The 4th branch. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pc3esnkqM7E&feature=share

The correct assumption is the more some politician supports the NSA, the dirtier stuff they have to blackmail them with. I wonder what Pelosi's secret is?

Re: Obama to release FISA court opinion that ruled NSA surveillance unconstitutional

#99

Post by rustynails »

samstave wrote: post #22
jivatmanx wrote: post #19

At a point in our nation's early history, we decided to trust Constitutional interpretation to the Supreme Court. There were cons to that decision - the Constitution is our social contract and thus it's interpretation is ultimately up to the people - but on the whole I think it was a good one. But, if for whatever reason, this Judicial review cannot occur - whether that be willful avoidance by the DEA for "Parallel C…

Well, when the NSA is spying on and potentially blackmailing the Supreme Court itself, then it really doesn't matter. Watch this vid with Siebel Edmund's where she says that the NSA has basically just extended to a massive degree the level of blackmail that intelligence has used since the days of Hoover. The 4th branch. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pc3esnkqM7E&feature=share

Watch this video at around 22 minutes, http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/kill-the-messenger/

Dear Mr Obama - please explain why we are REPEATING the same thing. Shame on you if you fool us once, shame on us if you fool us again...

I was shocked when I watched this video. It's all happening again...

Re: Obama to release FISA court opinion that ruled NSA surveillance unconstitutional

#100

Post by betterunix »

mark_l_watson wrote: post #29

I donated money to Obama's 2008 campaign and voted for him twice. I am very disappointed with him. Now, my honest opinion is that at worst he sometimes flat out lies, or at least cleverly tries to confuse people. He says that he had an orderly plan for reviewing privacy issues, all the while, I think that his administration has consistently been trying to keep things hushed up.

"I donated money to Obama's 2008 campaign and voted for him twice."

...after the first four years, why would you vote for him again? It became clear almost from the first day of his presidency that his campaign promises were hollow.

Stop letting your fear that a Republican might win get the better of you. Vote third party until the Democrats get their act together.

Post reply on HN