The War on Terror , abuse of power and old wisdom

[MD-1118]

What about counter terrorism? You know, fighting fire with fire?

[Kilarin]

Along these lines. The US government has issued a new policy about laptops crossing the border.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 03030.html

--
Federal agents may take a traveler's laptop computer or other electronic device to an off-site location for an unspecified period of time without any suspicion of wrongdoing, as part of border search policies the Department of Homeland Security recently disclosed.

Also, officials may share copies of the laptop's contents with other agencies and private entities for language translation, data decryption or other reasons, according to the policies, dated July 16 and issued by two DHS agencies, U.S. Customs and Border Protection and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
--

So, think about it. You go on a trip to Europe. You take your laptop with you. AND, you don't happen to have everything encrypted.

Upon your return your laptop is confiscated at the border, just because. Hopefully you get it back sometime. But all of your personal emails, all of your personal family photos, all of your secret business correspondence, the love letters you wrote your spouse, the pictures you took at in the hot tub that night. All of these are now public property. They've been poured over by government agencies, and even by private agencies who were hired for their computer expertise. Anything interesting likely been copied onto someones jumpdrive and taken home. You'll be able to download it on the web soon after.

Of course, since they HAVE all this data, the temptation to USE it will be impossible to resist. Watergate, Martin Luther King, etc. Expect those kinds of scandals to multiply drastically.

It's just not good to give the government permission to look over everyone's personal data without oversight or a good reason to be suspicious.

[Spidey]

Well…Try to keep this in perspective, the government has ALWAYS had the right to search your personal belongings when you leave or enter the country, American citizen or not, suspicious or not.

[Will Robinson]

Well…Try to keep this in perspective, the government has ALWAYS had the right to search your personal belongings when you leave or enter the country, American citizen or not, suspicious or not.

Exactly! Same stuff just a different scapegoat. It's election time that's for sure. Once Bush is done and the Dems are in power all these concerns will go back where they were before....

[Tunnelcat]

Kilarin, you beat me to it. Not only can the government confiscate your laptop, there is NO time limit for it's return to the owner. If you're data's encrypted, they'll probably force you to open the files for them anyway instead of them wasting their time decrypting it. Then they take it from you to munge through and send you on your merry way, thank you very much.

I mean, there must be a probable cause issue here. The government doesn't strip search everyone that enters the U.S. do they? Nor do they confiscate your luggage without cause, send you home, search through it at their leisure and then maybe return everything at some later date, as far as I know. But why is your personal laptop automatically singled out as a security threat if you're an average American citizen on vacation and needed to do some work? I'm willing to bet that EVERY laptop that travelers are carrying into the U.S. will be looked through, no exceptions. And why do they get to keep it for an indeterminate period of time with no recourse for the owner?

You can argue that this is all necessary for national security, but at what point do we as a people realize these measures are becoming a detriment to us? How far does the government need to go to keep us safe? Where do you draw the line? That's my concern, the increasing creeping control over our lives, like a growing cancer, all in the name of protection. We won't see our dilemma until we're prisoners in our own little safe country cage. In my mind, the terrorist's are winning so far.

By the way Will, I thought that Republicanism stood for smaller government, not bigger and more oppressive. But I do agree that putting the Dems back in doesn't necessarily mean a magic solution, but I'm game to see what happens. I also no longer believe that our government is really run by the people. It's become a soulless power machine with a lot of inertia that only the powerful few have access to. We have the delusion of the vote, but it's like spitting into the wind, it comes right back into your face in an unpleasant way.

[Lothar]

I'm willing to bet that EVERY laptop that travelers are carrying into the U.S. will be looked through, no exceptions.

I'd gladly take your money from you on that bet. See Foil's earlier post for why.

[Spidey]

Logistics are the only thing that prolly keeps everyone from being searched.

[Kilarin]

I'd gladly take your money from you on that bet. See Foil's earlier post for why.

Logistics are the only thing that prolly keeps everyone from being searched.

It depends on how easy it gets to use some of the governments automated "suck the computer dry" devices. It's POSSIBLE they could end up routinely copying every laptop that comes through, but it's not real likely.

But actually, this doesn't change the basic problem for me. They certainly would have searched Martin Luther King Junior's laptop. After all, they bugged his bedroom to record him making love. The government has proved over and over that the can and WILL abuse any power they can get their hands on. Especially against political opponents. It's best and safest to maintain a strict system of checks and balances and to require probable cause before you can search someones laptop or tap their phones.

I WOULD be in favor of changing the wiretapping laws to be more reasonable in the case of foreign persons. IF I understand wiretapping laws within the US (and that's a very big if), when the cops get a warrant to listen in on Al Capon's conversations, they don't have to get a separate warrant for each person who calls Al. As long as the person is talking to Al Capon, they can listen in. that is what the warrant is FOR.

The same should be true in the case of foreigners. If the FISA court gives permission for wiretapping Osama Bin Laden. Then that should automatically include permission to listen to anyone who is calling Osama Bin Laden for so long as they are talking to Osama. It's simple common sense.

[woodchip]

So seriously, with all the online storage facilities, why would you have sensitive info on your carry laptop when traveling abroad?

[Kilarin]

So seriously, with all the online storage facilities, why would you have sensitive info on your carry laptop when traveling abroad?

I wouldn't trust the online storage facilities. But then, I keep personal data on my desktop or laptop encrypted, so I'm a bit paranoid. And if I was taking a laptop across the border, I wouldn't even have encrypted data on it. All my personal data would be on a flash drive that can be conveniently removed before passing through customs.

So no, I'm not worried about the government getting it's hands on MY data. Which doesn't really change the problem at all though. Most people aren't as paranoid as I am.

[Tunnelcat]

This gets better and better. Remember the anthrax letters right after 911? Well, now the government magically comes up with a suspect who conveniently commits suicide right before he's to be arrested by the FBI.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/08/01/ant ... topstories

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nati ... 3855.story

This whole thing smells like a setup to me. You'll remember that two of the letters were mailed to Daschle and Leahy and well as a several more to a host of 'liberal' news organizations.

Now connect the dots and this is my paranoid conjecture here. Cheney and Tom Ridge were trying to find a reason to invade Iraq at the time and there were no definite links to the 911 terrorists and Saddam (I heard this little tidbit on Tom Hartman's radio show). Daschle and Leahy were not convinced that Iraq was the origin of the 911 terrorists, and they were the two important and hesitant votes required to approve an invasion and war against Iraq. Remember, it's come out that the Bush Administration wanted to go to war with Iraq even BEFORE 911. A short while later, some anthrax letters get mailed to these two Democratic Senators and some 'liberal' news agencies. The investigation eventually shows that the anthrax happens to be the same strain from Fort Detrick that the U.S. gave to Saddam during the Iraq/Iran War when the U.S. was an ally with him at the time. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

Well, when that didn't prove a convincing enough link to Saddam, the government had to find a suspect fast. The FBI, after a long supposed investigation, comes up with Hatfill, a government bioweapons scientist at Fort Detrick. After an embarrassing and years long public fiasco, he is exonerated and is paid $2.85 million plus $150,000 a year for life in a government settlement.

Fast forward to now. No suspect had been found in all these years of FBI investigating and as the Bush Presidency winds down with no indictment for the anthrax crime, viola, we get Ivins, who happens to commit suicide as the government gets ready to arrest and charge him.

This whole thing doesn't pass the smell test here. There are too many little details that don't work out when you read all the information about this guy. Sure, there are some incriminating items, but it's still a little dirty. Maybe another innocent caught up in the administration's web of deceit concerning it's lies about going to war with Iraq? Was he framed and murdered as a cover up to hide the government's role itself in sending out the anthrax letters to bolster their reasons to go to war with Iraq? You can come up with all sorts of conspiracy theories here.

Believe what you want, but a government is more likely to lie to it's citizens during a time of war. Be very skeptical of the things they say and do, especially when it comes to our 'security'.

[Spidey]

Don’t forget to stock up on tinfoil.

[Kilarin]

a government is more likely to lie to it's citizens during a time of war. Be very skeptical of the things they say and do, especially when it comes to our 'security

I agree, but I can't see any reason why the government would build a big coverup for the anthrax letters at THIS time in history. It had mostly been forgotten. AND, I don't quite buy that they would use a method like this one to eliminate political opponents. It's not that I don't think they would eliminate a political opponent if they could, just that this doesn't sound like a method they would be likely to use. To uncertain and to traceable to government sources.

[Foil]

Don’t forget to stock up on tinfoil.

Heh, I can agree with you there somewhat, Spidey.

Concerns about this issue can certainly be taken way too far, into paranoid-conspiracy-theory-land. I've met a few people who were absolutely convinced that the government was going to "put tracking chips with video and sound capabilities in all of us!" and such.

Personally, I'm fine with government intelligence doing everything it can to protect us, including necessary wiretaps and surveillance. I just balk at the attempts to give them unchecked power without accountability, not only because of the potential for abuse, but because I think that would eventually hinder the quality of their work.

Oh, and remember, tinfoil helmets actually increase the effectiveness of alien or 'big brother' monitoring.

[Tunnelcat]

Authority should always be questioned and a little bit of paranoia isn't necessarily a bad thing. Maybe my conjecture and imagination is too fantastic for everyone, but you never know. As far a I'm concerned, I will always be skeptical of anything the Bush/Cheney Administration puts out in any press releases. All their dirt isn't fitting under the carpet anymore. If you guys want to swallow their load of @#%$, go ahead.

[Tunnelcat]

This one scares me and it's brought to you by George H.W. Bush and the War on Drugs he started years ago.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5it3a ... gD92DS8KG1

What the cops did was LEGAL here too, except maybe it violated this guy's CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS! Oops, not any more. We need to stop drug use at all costs!