A little-remarked feature of pending legislation on domestic surveillance has provoked alarm among university and public librarians who say it could allow federal intelligence-gathering on library patrons without sufficient court oversight.
Draft House and Senate bills would allow the government to compel any “communications service provider” to provide access to e-mails and other electronic information within the United States as part of federal surveillance of non-U.S. citizens outside the country.
The Justice Department has previously said that “providers” may include libraries, causing three major university and library groups to worry that the government’s ability to monitor people targeted for surveillance without a warrant would chill students’ and faculty members’ online research activities.
“It is fundamental that when a user enters the library, physically or electronically,” said Jim Neal, the head librarian at Columbia University, “their use of the collections, print or electronic, their communications on library servers and computers, is not going to be subjected to surveillance unless the courts have authorized it.” Story from the Washington Post.
fun with reading
Washington Post: “The bills, which would replace a temporary law amending the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, would not require the government to demonstrate “probable cause” … ”
Amendment IV of the U.S. Constitution: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
It’s like they’re not even making a pretense of upholding their oaths anymore.
I liked this too: “Sen. Christopher S. Bond (R-Mo.), the intelligence committee vice chairman, who helped craft the bipartisan Senate bill, said librarians need not worry. The government, he said, would seek to monitor only “suspected terrorists.” If a surveillance target communicates with a U.S. citizen or a resident who is not a target, the latter’s communications would be “minimized” or blacked out, he said, and the bill would require a court to approve the minimization procedures.”
“You know what happens if that [library exception] gets into the bill?” Bond said. “You would have your libraries filled with al-Qaeda operatives.”
Notice the Constitution doesn’t say “no Warrants shall issue but upon probable cause … unless you black out stuff you’re not supposed to see and promise not to look at it or use it or keep it, ok? You gotta pinky swear, ok?”
Further I would propose to Sen. Bond that unless he wants the Capitol Building filed with Al-Qaeda operatives that he let me read his mail and examine his hard drive. We cannot be too careful. We’re at war and stuff.
On to something.
I think Chuck could be onto something when he says: “Further I would propose to Sen. Bond that unless he wants the Capitol Building filed with Al-Qaeda operatives that he let me read his mail and examine his hard drive.”
In many ways I think our nation would be much better off if we had as much access to the private communications of Congressmembers and Administration officials as they do with us. And since there are only 535 Members of Congress and a few thousand “top officials” in the Executive Branch we could do some really effective data mining and quickly figure out who was taking money from whom to do what.
Note: Above idea is a “modest proposal.” I’d simply prefer the Constitution to be upheld for citizens and officials alike and not have a “national security exemption” that “immunizes” people and corporations who repeatedly violate federal statutes on surveillance and torture.
—————-
“No doubt another may also think for me; but it is not therefore desirable that he should do so..” – Thoreau
Sen. Bond aint no James Bond
Why is this cheetos-eating surrender-monkey and cranky, whiny crybaby still holding office? Is he really so stupid that he thinks that a real terrorist operative wouldn’t be able to shell out a few bucks a month for a private internet subscription? Or does he merely want to close another door that allows for the free flow of information?
What a puking coward this gutless, little chickenshit is.
Save the easily offended: ban everything.