Friday, August 31, 2007

Warrantless surveillance and the new Coretta Scott King disclosures

The FBI's warrantless surveillance abuses in the past demonstrate the severe dangers of the FISA bill which was just passed by the Democratic Congress. No government (or corporate) entity should be left to police itself. Oversight is a good thing.

read more | digg story


The Griper said...

my only question be is, are we speaking of domestic or international communications or both when debating this issue?

repsac3 said...

In terms of my post, I don't think it matters. There should be third party oversight, no matter who is being survailed. We shouldn't trust any organization to police itself & not abuse the privilege.

Coretta Scott King was an American citizen being watched here in America. Same with the library/bookstore provisions under this patriot act.

As far as wiretapping, I'm not sure I have enough faith in the secret FISA courts, but even they are better than nothing. Wherever an American is concerned, I want there to be timely oversight (I think the current law is within 72 hours AFTER beginning the tap. I'd be willing to stretch that to 7 days...) of the decisions the executive branch are making.

I'm less concerned about situations where international calls between foreigners are routed through the US. There ought to be a way to rewrite that part of the law--but even there, there ought to be some third party oversight.

(When it comes down to it, I just don't trust that people left to their own devices won't be tempted to abuse whatever power they're given. Plus, I think it's good for people to be aware of what the government is doing in their name.)

The Griper said...

"We shouldn't trust any organization to police itself & not abuse the privilege."

ok, i agree to a point. but one question. if we are not to trust any organization then how do we trust the organization that does the overseeing?

if you do not have faith in the fisa courts then you are saying that these courts need overseeing also.

as for the library/bookstore example i admit to mixed feelings on this. public libraries is an entity of government and the books are government property as such the government would have the right to know who is borrowing its books or what books were loaned out to who just as you or I had a right to know who borrowed any property of ours.

though traditionally the government never did it before and I'd really be against it if the purpose and intent was to determine what books would be censored from the public.

in regards to government i have this belief. what the government knows i have, the easier it is for government to take it away from me. i take this view in regards to the issues of taxes and guns. and i see the possibility of it occurring to this issue also.

the Coretta King example was my reason for the question. that would be strictly a domestic issue.

one last thing. if you see this as a privacy issue and not a security issue how do you justify wiretapping of communications of persons of another country? they deserve as much right to privacy as we do.