better watch out

Brendan Deiz

Betterwatchout_1

  • JRA (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Actually, the student who said the Feds visited him after requesting the "little red book" from his library admitted he was lying. It never happened. Nobody spies on you at the library. You should check your facts before posting cartoons like this to public sites. I'm surprised the adults around here let it get through.

  • SOmethingElseEntirely (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Actually one insidious group does spy at you when checking out books. The library itself. Evil but true. Do you know they will even occassionally give this information over to the public. The horror.

    As for websites - there are way more evil individuals tracking your traffic. They are so evil they do it for a profit. One of these evil capatilists known in the blogosphere as BlueOregon occassionally brags about how many people visit its site flaunting their knowleged of where we go on the internet.

    And anyone involved in politics know that the state of Oregon tracks every donation you make to PACs. Wow, occassionally this information is used against people in their free exercise of running for office (Ron Saxton's donations being suspect).

    My god! No Republicans involved and this big brother scenerio exists here in Oregon under the leadership of Democratic governors.

    Enough with the joking-

    What the Bush adminstration is doing is nothing compared to what some less than ethical people are doing in the private sphere. Regardless of the fact that someone in the administration was stupid and didn't pull a warrant, they have a public policy interest that will allow the Executive branch to do exactly what Clinton and now Bush are doing (after OKC Clinton pushed for many of the same measures).

    What I fear - whats really scary - is the data collected about you on a daily basis that can be used against you in the private market. Your shopping habits (i.e. club card data) correlated against your medical record. Your credit card profile versus how much your auto insurance or medial insurance will cost. This doesn't even scratch on the issues with identity theft fails do to be addressed by both parties adequately. (Many of you campaign experienced people know the info you can deduce given the right data input correlated against someone -MoveOn did an awesome job of targeting voters).

    If you as a democrat beleives that your right to privacy is threatened by these measure you can fix it here locally in Oregon. In the EU the way personal data is used (speicifcally club-cards and credit card data) is tightly restricted. We could easily do this in Oregon and it would accomplish more for your personal freedom than measures relating to home-land security (unless your hobby is designing bombs or advocating violence in which case it won't help you much).

  • (Show?)

    JRA,

    You are correct in pointing out that the "Little Red Book" story has been debunked as a fraud, but my Google search tells me that the correct info has just gotten out there in the last few hours.

    I'll give Brendan a pass on this one.............

    SOmethingelse,

    Glad you label yourself appropriately. A real small "L" libertarian keeps an eye on our liberties and doesn't rush around like a NeoCon/Straussian with his Golden ass on fire, trying to tease tortured definitions out of the Constitition to defend allies in power. Maybe you can round it out ala Daniel Pipes with the old "If you have nothing to hide" chestnut.

  • (Show?)

    The little red book story has turned out to be a fraud but that doesn't make the cartoon wrong.

    On the contrary, the Patriot Act authorizes accessing individuals' library records under FISA. The Powers That Be have fought hard to keep that access included, even though they have also claimed they don't really intend to use it. Kind of reminiscent of the whole torture thing: We don't torture but if we don't have the legal right to torture it will mean the end of civilization as we know it.

    Lots of information available at the American Library Association website.

    Perhaps Brendan isn't the one who needs a better acquaintance with the facts.

  • (Show?)

    Doretta is correct. This is why many libraries have stopped keeping track of what books you have checked out once you return those books.

    They do not think it is right for the government to come in and look at that information, so they've done what they can to stop it-- not keep the information.

    The cartoon doesn't talk about the "little red book," it talks about one of the items on the list of things that the Patriot Act allows them to look at.

  • Skip from Gresham (unverified)
    (Show?)

    When it gets right down to it....I don't give a rat's azz if the government knows what books I read or what the content of my email and phone calls are. I have nothing to hide....if there are individuals in this country that do have something to hide then I suspect it's to all of our advantage that the goverment does indeed keep close tabs on them.

    Just a thought.

  • (Show?)

    Not everyone who doesn't want the government to see everything in their e-mail or what happens with their phones are doing something illegal.

    What about those who are doing things such as strategizing on how we're going to win elections next year and in 2008.

    Or are giving reporters the truth behind the lies the government tries to feed us (I'm talking about stuff like Watergate).

    I'm sorry, but we're guaranteed a right of privacy in this country unless a judge issues a warrant. And they are supposed to have a certain amount of evidence that you're actually a threat or doing something illegal before they get that warrant.

    Unless they have a warrant, I don't want the government (or anyone else) reading my e-mails, listening into my phone conversations, etc. unless I've given them permission to do so.

  • JRA (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I believe in privacy as well, but also in security. If a known criminal, terrorist or criminal/terrorist suspect is spending time in the library, our authorities need to know what they're looking at, and to do so without the knowledge of the suspect. If a crime has been committed and during the course of investigation it's revealed that the suspect spent time on a library internet connection, our authorities should have the right to see what sites he was visiting. If, in the course of spying on a known terrorist overseas, we notice they call residents of the United States, we have the right to listen in on these calls. In a time of war, the president has powers to make such things happen. This has nothing to do with Watergate or politics. It has everything to do with national security. I'm not saying the Patriot Act is a perfect law, nor that everything GWB adminsitration does is correct, but at least they realize the stakes of the war we're in, while others (most democrats) don't even recognize a war is going on.

    Something else is right. Info is collected on us every day by service providers, employers and marketers. Perhaps the least invasive entity is the federal government.

  • (Show?)

    JRA--

    We never said the government cannot look at such things. We're just asking that they follow set rules and processes-- they make a case and take it before a judge to get a warrant. There is a secret court for just such things so that suspected terrorists/spies can be watched without them knowing.

    However, what they're doing is spying on Americans without following any of the processes being followed. They decide they want to watch an American and they do it without a warrant. There is no excuse for that.

    We are at a hightened alert because of terrorists-- we are not "at war." Just because the Bush Administration calls it a "war on terrorism," does not mean we're at war. We're at war when we declare war on another country, are physically attacked by another country and are physically having to defend ourselves (as in Country X brings troops into the U.S. and we're having battles all over the country), etc. Trying to ferret out terrorists around the world is not "at war."

  • (Show?)

    Thanks Skip,

    I figured that someone would jump on the "nothing to hide" bandwagon.

    JRA,

    Seconding what Jenni said, I don't think that there's anyone on this board or in the US Congress that calling for the scrapping of the Patriot Act or an end to gummint domestic surveillance. What we are calling for is review and oversight by the judiciary and the legislative branches.

    Judge Luttig, NeoCon and alleged StrictConstructionist and, a darling of the Federalist Society just came out against the administration's assertions of absolute power vested in the Executive Branch too. He flatly denied their attempt to change the rules again around the Padilla case.

    Like Russ Feingold is saying, Why ask for permission on anything if in fact, the President's powers are unlimitted? That is a totalitarian argument.

    This argument is not bertween conservatives and liberals. It's between constitutionalists and enablers of empire.

  • Danny Haszard (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Public audio/video recorders are everywhere,when i go to the department store i never give it a thought because i'm an honest guy.We have been living with cameras at dunkin donuts for years.

    The same goes for the libraries and the internet.-Danny Haszard

  • Skip from Gresham (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Jenni.....I suspect that your email, reading material, and phone calls are of no interest to anybody so rest easy. As far as "strategizing" to win the next election, let me say that we liberals are taking a step back with rants about this issue. The VAST majority of the American people are worried enough about security that they will err on the side of the cowboy from Crawford on this one. We keep falling into the same old trap...looking totally wimpy on natioal defense.
    I sometimes wonder if Karl Rove isn't off the chart brilliant and actually creates these controversies.

    In any case, it will all get straightened out by Congress after the first of the year with new more explicit ground rules laid down. In the meantime we have far more important issues to bring forth to the masses.

  • (Show?)

    Skip, not everything is about winning elections. Winning elections is good, but protecting freedom in America is good too.

    JRA, it isn't about crimes or criminals, it's about people who may have something to do with people who may have something to do with people who may have something we think may be bad in mind. Courts, rules of evidence, probable cause, innocent until proven guilty, habeus corpus--that stuff is all there to keep the government from jerking people around on a vague whim. Those things are all there precisely so that the government keeps its police powers focused on crime and criminals. That's all stuff the current administration is doing their best to weaken in the name of national security.

    We had a President not that long ago who thought it was perfectly appropriate to break into a psychiatrist's office looking for information about a patient and to break into the campaign headquarters of the opposing party looking for political info. Hint: Richard Nixon did not authorize the Watergate break-in because the Democrats were guilty of a crime. Two of the Watergate burglars were former FBI agents and several had ties to the CIA. The people who run the government are in a unique position to use all kinds of information against people.

    It isn't about whether or not you are honest. You think everyone in government is above manipulating information because they don't like someone's politics or have a personal grudge? You think no one in government would even think of using police powers to gain a financial or political advantage? You think the government never just makes mistakes? You might want to check with Brandon Mayfield on that last one.

    It doesn't even have to be you they go after for it to be a bad thing for you. You think if Karl Rove has carte blanche to wiretap anyone he wants he isn't going to eventually get around to Ron Wyden or John McCain?

    Slowly chipping away at the protections and freedoms we have as Americans is not as dramatic as blowing things up but over time could prove to be equally deadly.

  • JRA (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Jenni - to say that we're not at war simply says that you do not comprehend the situation. Your lack of comprehension of the war on terror prevents you from having a valuable opinion on this subject. Your position is clear: you are at war with GWB while the rest of America is at war with OBL.

    Pat - if GWB were randomly searching for arab names in the phone book to spy on, that'd be one thing. But it doesn't appear to be the case. Our government has listened to international calls of a small number of people (I heard 30s, but could be wrong) who had verified contact with known terrorist suspects overseas. If a qualified intelligence agent (read: not politician) has reason to believe someone could be a potential terrorist, then we should allow them to be investigated.

    Doretta - interesting you would bring up Brandon Mayfield, because in that case, a warrant was issued and an arrest was made. Obviously, they were wrong, but procedure was followed. In my opinion, the one thing they did do wrong (besides catch the wrong guy) was to leak damaging material about him to the press. There is no reason we should know the name Brandon Mayfield. The fact that we do is a travesty and I feel sorry for Mr. Mayfield. Of course, while terrorist suspects are being spied on, no press leaks should occur.

  • (Show?)

    JRA--

    I just love how you use the whole "you're with us, or against us" mentality on this.

    My husband, who is a Republican, supports Bush, and is an Army vet says the same thing-- the "war on terrorism" is not the same thing as "being at war."

    I completely understand the situation and have plenty comprehension in regards to the so-called "war on terrorism." Adding the word "war" to it does not put us at war. Otherwise we've been at war for quite some time now-- the war on drugs.

    Skip from Gresham--

    Actually, I wouldn't be so quick to jump to that conclusion. I've been quite involved in liberal/progressive politics for years including protests. I've already done some of the process to see about getting my FBI file, and I've learned it's more than a handful of pages. It's not out of the ordinary for people who disagree with the Administration, and are vocal about it, to be watched. My political work while living in Texas almost assuredly put me and my family on Bush's list of people to watch.

  • (Show?)

    Doretta - interesting you would bring up Brandon Mayfield, because in that case, a warrant was issued and an arrest was made. Obviously, they were wrong, but procedure was followed. In my opinion, the one thing they did do wrong (besides catch the wrong guy) was to leak damaging material about him to the press. There is no reason we should know the name Brandon Mayfield. The fact that we do is a travesty and I feel sorry for Mr. Mayfield. Of course, while terrorist suspects are being spied on, no press leaks should occur.

    I noted the Mayfield case only as an example of the government making mistakes. (Kind of cute how you make a big deal of leaking to the press and put the minor detail of arresting and incarcerating an innocent man in parentheses.) But now that you bring it up, where do you suppose Mr. Mayfield would be today had there been no Spanish law enforcement insisting that the FBI had the wrong guy, no defense attorney and no court supervising? Say he'd gone on a business trip to Spain and they'd picked him up there as an "enemy combatant"?

  • Skip from Gresham (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Jenni....my brother recently retired from the US Marshal's office so it was easier for me to get access to my FBI file some years ago, which was filled mainly by my 8 years in the antiwar movement, 4 of which I'm ashamed to say was as an operative in SDS. Clinton by the way, had almost all of those files from the 60's and 70's destroyed.

    My point was and is......if you want to change the direction of the country you have to get people with the "right" core beliefs elected. Sadly the right wing of the GOP has been doing a much better job than we have for most of the past 27 years. And they will continue to do so as long as we stay on the radical fringe on issues such as the NSA. Our rants on issues in that sphere drown out the conversations we'd like to have on Global trade, Healthcare, and the like.

    Oh well.

  • (Show?)

    I was born in the 70s, so my records are from the 90's on (how do you say the current decade? The 00's? The 2000s?). I know if one hadn;t been started prior to 1997, that's when one was started for sure-- I worked for a U.S. Congressman. Besides working events with President & Mrs. Clinton and VP Gore, we also had a threat come into our office. I had a man sit there and tell me he was going to kill the mayor, congressman, president, etc. All the while I couldn't use the "panic button," since the previous Congressman's staff had disconnected it because they were mad they lost (just one of many things they did to the office and the things in it).

    We had an FBI agent come in and do a thorough interview with me, including my full name, DOB, SSN, etc. I was told that if I didn't have a file already, one would be started. But as much as I was involved in activities prior to that, I'm sure I had one.

    I'm waiting to find out how much it's going to cost so I can get a copy of the file. I'm interested to see what's in it.

    But I agree that the right-wing had been better at getting their issues out-- and framing ours. We need to do a lot better.

  • JRA (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Doretta - From my understanding, the main evidence in the Mayfield case was a fingerprint that by Mayfield's own admission, was a close resemblence. The government's duty was to investigate the guy, and I guess even arrest him if they thought they had the evidence. But at the end of the day, justice usually prevails and the innocent are let go. It happens every day in this country. But prior to arresting Mayfield, someone leaked the story to the media about an American muslim-convert being a suspect in the Madrid bombings. That was wrong and was the one part of standard procedure that apparently was not followed. The same thing happened 10 years ago at the Atlanta olympics with Richard Jewell.

    Had Mayfield gone to Spain, I don't think he would have been secretly picked up as you imply. Evidence is key, and once they investigated his case it was proven he wasn't a terrorist. Unlike you, I don't think our government is out to randomly pick up and incarcerate people just for kicks. But then again, I don't have a blind hatred for GWB that prevents me from using logic...

  • Mayfield / Jewell comparison is valid (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Had Mayfield gone to Spain, I don't think he would have been secretly picked up as you imply. Evidence is key, and once they investigated his case it was proven he wasn't a terrorist. Unlike you, I don't think our government is out to randomly pick up and incarcerate people just for kicks. But then again, I don't have a blind hatred for GWB that prevents me from using logic...

    JRA mentions Richard Jewell. Are those who compare Mayfield to Jewell consumed with hatred for Bush?

    Or is it that Bush supporters can't handle any criticism of anything he has ever done?

  • (Show?)

    Let me assure you, JRA, I'm not blind and any mistrust I may have for President Bush has been earned by him.

    I'm not accusing the government of randomly incarcerating people for no reason. They had a reason for incarcerating Mr. Mayfield, it just turned out to be wrong.

    You only underscore my point when you explain that Mr. Mayfield was investigated and let go. He got to go to court. He got a lawyer. He got to challenge the evidence against him. Now you tell me what would have happened if two things about his case had been different. What if he had coincidentally had a perfectly legitimate reason to be in Spain, or worse, the Middle East, when his fingerprint got spit out by the computer and what if the Spanish government had not already matched the fingerprint to a known person if interest in Europe?

    We've already officially admitted that a substantial number of people we've been keeping prisoner since 9/11 were innocent people who were just in the wrong place at the wrong time. We've released some of them only after years of incarceration. Once we have them, proving them innocent has not been a priority.

    What's been happening in the last few years is not the worst of it. It all really has been, at least mostly, an attempt to make us safer. Human nature and human history makes the probability very close to 100% that if we grow our essentially unsupervised surveillance and incarceration capabilities those activities will become the normal routine and people will learn to use them in ever more egregious ways.

connect with blueoregon