Previously, the Bush Administration has argued that the U.S. possesses “sovereign immunity” from suit for conducting electronic surveillance that violates the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). However, FISA is only one of several laws that restrict the government’s ability to wiretap. The Obama Administration goes two steps further than Bush did, and claims that the US PATRIOT Act also renders the U.S. immune from suit under the two remaining key federal surveillance laws: the Wiretap Act and the Stored Communications Act. Essentially, the Obama Adminstration has claimed that the government cannot be held accountable for illegal surveillance under any federal statutes.
Again, the gulf between Candidate Obama and President Obama is striking. As a candidate, Obama ran promising a new era of government transparency and accountability, an end to the Bush DOJ’s radical theories of executive power, and reform of the PATRIOT Act. But, this week, Obama’s own Department Of Justice has argued that, under the PATRIOT Act, the government shall be entirely unaccountable for surveilling Americans in violation of its own laws.
Please read this analysis on Salon. I hope that the administration responds and clarifies some of their language if the analysis does not reflect their intent.
Every defining attribute of Bush’s radical secrecy powers — every one — is found here, and in exactly the same tone and with the exact same mindset. Thus: how the U.S. government eavesdrops on its citizens is too secret to allow a court to determine its legality. We must just blindly accept the claims from the President’s DNI that we will all be endangered if we allow courts to determine the legality of the President’s actions. Even confirming or denying already publicly known facts — such as the involvement of the telecoms and the massive data-mining programs — would be too damaging to national security. Why? Because the DNI says so. It is not merely specific documents, but entire lawsuits, that must be dismissed in advance as soon as the privilege is asserted because “its very subject matter would inherently risk or require the disclosure of state secrets.”
Every three years, the Copyright Office develops a list of approved exemptions to the DMCA’s anti-circumvention protections. This is the third time through the process, and the government has approved the largest number of exemptions to date—though they’re still incredibly narrow.
Exemptions are allowed for 1) the educational library of a university’s media studies department, in order to watch film clips in class; 2) using computer software that requires the original disks or hardware in order to run; 3) dongle-protected computer programs, if the the dongle no longer functions and a replacement cannot be found; 4) protected e-books, in order to use screen-reader software; 5) cell phone firmware that ties a phone to a specific wireless network; and 6) DRM software included on audio CDs, but only when such software creates security vulnerabilities on personal computers.
There are many versions of this video on Youtube. I linked to the one that has the full version of the story. Look at the graphic under the image of Mark Foley and you will see that he is labeled D-FL. Mark Foley is not a Democrat.
As far as I am aware at this moment neither FOX News or the O’Reilly factor appologized or even admitted to the error. It could be an honest mistake, but it really seems a little fishy when there is no acknowledgement.
John Stewart has also commented on this. I will try to find that clip and post it as well.
In this video the incorrect graphic shows up twice. Once around 58 seconds into it, and again at around 2:38. It is also the same photo both times.
Recently, The Miami Herald brought to light the threat of identity theft facing Floridians because of the prevalence and accessibility of personal information online Public records easy targets for ID thieves, Aug. 27.
This follows the announcement by the Transportation Department that two computers containing sensitive data — in one case, the personal information of more than 133,000 Floridians — have been stolen in the last several months.
Note to the American people, the words liberal and conservative are useless. These words are thrown around instead of intelligently debating the issues at hand. We need to express exactly what actions a government official has taken that we feel are clearly wrong, or what a news personality said that we feel distorts the facts. Why do I feel it is so important that we have more intelligent discourse and stop bickering using words that are too general to be of use? Continue reading
WASHINGTON – The Federal Communications Commission ordered its staff to destroy all copies of a draft study that suggested greater concentration of media ownership would hurt local TV news coverage, a former lawyer at the agency says.
The report, written in 2004, came to light during the Senate confirmation hearing for FCC Chairman Kevin Martin.