Most Americans Think Courts Are Failing To Limit Government Surveillance 281
Nerval's Lobster writes "More than half of Americans believe that the federal courts have failed to limit the U.S. government's collection of personal information via phone records and the Internet, according to a new survey from the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. But that's nothing compared to the 70 percent who believe that the government 'uses this data for purposes other than investigating terrorism,' according to the organization's summary of its survey. Another 63 percent of respondents indicated they thought the government is collecting information about the content of their communications. The Pew Research Center surveyed 1,480 adults over the course of five days in July. 'The public's views of the government's anti-terrorism efforts are complex, and many who believe the reach of the government's data collection program is expansive still approve of the effort overall,' the organization's summary added. 'In every case, however, those who view the government's data collection as far-reaching are less likely to approve of the program than those who do not.' Some 47 percent of those surveyed approved of the government's collection of phone and Internet data, while 50 percent disapproved. Among those who thought the government is reading their personal email or listening to their phone calls, some 40 percent approved of the data collection, even as 58 percent disapproved. There's much more, including how opinions of government surveillance break across political party lines on the Pew Research Center's Website."
Re:Hai Amerikanz, I can haz pazwords... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, there are times Godwin's law should be applied. And when your government is reading your mail (email, phone calls, social media). and monitoring your travel (street camers, license plate scanners on police cruisers), and your police are being militarized.
Exhibit 1: Listening to your communication
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/354590/greenwald-nsa-has-trillions-e-mails-and-phone-calls-betsy-woodruff [nationalreview.com]
Exhibit 2: Monitoring your travel
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2013/07/28/18740565.php [indybay.org]
Exhibit 3: Militarization of police
http://www.forbes.com/sites/bradlockwood/2011/11/30/the-militarizing-of-local-police/ [forbes.com]
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/4203345 [popularmechanics.com]
***
Essentially, the only reason most American's do not realize they are living in a police state is because most American's are decent folk and indoctrinated to submit to authority. As such, very few American's ever conflict with the state on a level to feel the police state.
The deranged genocide of millions is NOT a requirement for a police state. While Hitler and Stalin killed millions, much of the Soviet Republics police state history was not under the auspices of genocide. A police state, by necessity does not need to be a deranged murderous state, in order to be a police state.
So yes, with all of that happening. I think we've reached high time to be justified in enacting Godwin's Law.
"Don't be suspicious of your fellow Americans" (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Headdesk (Score:3, Insightful)
Spot On (Score:5, Insightful)
I recently wrote a long post about the subject:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4016327&cid=44388965 [slashdot.org]
As a nation, we need to come to terms with what our country has become.
After re-reading it, I would only change a few things: our goon squad isn't the most oppressive by any stretch, but it is the most well-armed. And while I believe that America is in reality a fascist totalitarian state, it's important to remember that there is no central plan that makes it so. It is the combined effect of corruption, institutional failures, and political apathy that make it effectively a fascist totalitarian state.
That's good, because it's less easy for any one individual to take over the entire system. But it's also bad because it can hide in plain sight.
Trolling all americans (Score:5, Insightful)
Essentially, the only reason most American's do not realize they are living in a police state is because most American's are decent folk and indoctrinated to submit to authority. As such, very few American's ever conflict with the state on a level to feel the police state.
I'm guessing this is just a troll but I'll bite anyway. A blanket assertion that all americans are too dumb to realize what a police state is followed by the assertion that we are all a bunch of sheep who are too docile to do anything about it? Not sure this person has met a lot of americans if they really think that and I'm quite sure this person has NO idea what life in an actual police state is like. I have friends who have actually live in genuine, certified police states and I've spoken to some of them at length about it. Whatever problems we have here in the US, there is NO valid comparison to be made. I do not live in fear of going to jail for off hand criticisms of our elected leaders. I do not fear that those currently in power will not leave office peacefully if they lose elections. I do not fear for a military coup. I do not think our courts as an institution are toothless or corrupt. The US has its problems but being a police state isn't one of them.
We actually understand what is going on, know our government is misbehaving and many of us are working actively to bring it back into line. This isn't our first rodeo with a government that has stepped out of line. That's what governments naturally try to do and correcting that tendency often takes time. You don't have to get out the ammo box to solve every problem. Usually the soap, ballot and jury boxes are quite sufficient.
Courts are not failing (Score:2, Insightful)
They are doing exactly as they are told.
70% of americans are failing to understand that what they see in movies is not real.
Re:Spot On (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Hai Amerikanz, I can haz pazwords... (Score:4, Insightful)
One only need to look at the City of Boston to see the full force of the Militarized Police State. One man, wounded and half dead, and the whole town goes Apeshit poo flinging crazy. Martial Law.
Or how about a few months before, when Big Bear Lake was also under Martial Law, for a lone gun man on the run.
If I were a terrorist, I would be planning on small time bomb and gun scare and go into "hide and seek" mode to shut down a town. A few buddies more and we could shut down every major metropolis in the USA. Wouldn't take more than a dozen or two to scare everyone and allow for the USA to go into full lockdown.
It will be the new 9/11. And good luck stopping 20 independent coordinated people from pulling this off. Pick off one, and nothing changes.
Re:Spot On (Score:2, Insightful)
So... what will you do when that one individual without political apathy comes along that abuses their power to tie it all in together through bribery, murder, and corruption?
The whole point of our system is to provide checks and balances to stop such an individual however what we're seeing more and more of is that rubber band has lost its elasticity.
I think its time to hit the ballots and ask ourselves what do we really want, what have we done against terrorism these past 300 years that's worked, that for some reason doesn't work now (how about not messing with the governments of other nations for fun on taxpayer money). We've created so many laws that doing just about anything is illegal. We've given too much power to authority that they act like assholes and get away with it with a smile. Realize that if we allowed firearms on planes, 9/11 would've never happened, the patriot act would've never happened, hundreds of thousands of people wouldn't have died in the decade long wars to follow. So ask yourself, who are we really protecting here through all these government programs.
Re:Trolling all americans (Score:5, Insightful)
I do not live in fear of going to jail for off hand criticisms of our elected leaders
That's because authority in the US is so powerfully entrenched that no amount of satire can hope to damage it. If someone makes fun of the party in power, what are people going to do? Vote for the other party?
I do not fear that those currently in power will not leave office peacefully if they lose elections.
Those truly in power in the US are not elected. Whether a Democrat or a Republican is in office, the true power is held by the ultra rich. No party that threatens the rich can ever attain power in the US.
I do not fear for a military coup.
Of course not. Why would the military overthrow a government that is completely controlled by the military industrial complex?
I do not think our courts as an institution are toothless or corrupt
Then why does every amendment except the third have exemptions you can drive a dump truck through? If you don't think courts as an institution are toothless or corrupt, you're simply not paying attention.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Spot On (Score:2, Insightful)
Not entirely true, translated KGB means "Committee for State Security". They often referred fondly to "Mother Russia".
Basically we've become everything we decried them of being in the 80's.
Re:Trolling all americans (Score:4, Insightful)
To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.
In 2005, go march with a sign that says "Bush is a nazi monkey." You're fine.
In 2009, go march with a sign that says "Obama is a secret Muslim socialist." You're fine.
In 2011, go march in front of the banks, and you're in jail.
There's a reason you're not afraid politicians will refuse to leave office. Why would they be?
How is hitting the ballots effective? (Score:5, Insightful)
In 2008/2012, there were close to 40 candidates initially running President.
I live in Pennsylvania, by the time the primaries arrived Pennsylvanians had a choice of voting for:
2008 - Clinton/Obama on the Democrat ticket, or McCain on the Republican ticket - where were the other dozens of choices?
2012 - Obama on the Democrat ticket, or Romney on the Republican ticket - where were the other dozens of choices?
***
My point, we only THINK we had an election. What we were given was a choice to vote for one of two candidates selected by the American politburo. These party laws, ballot laws, 2,000 signatures for a Democrat or Republican to be on a ballot, 20,000 for a 3rd party.
They're designed to allow us to feel like we have an influence via our vote. But they hide the illusion of reality, that we're living in a dream world NEO. We don't have a vote.
--
Heck, Ron Paul followers elected (legally) numerous convention "delegates". But then the Republican party refused to give them entrance credentials, even though they had legally been elected.
This is the mask that hides the truth.
Re:Trolling all americans - or waking Americans? (Score:4, Insightful)
"most Americans", I didn't say all...
There is in fact a growing number who are coming to similar conclusions. That something is seriously wrong with the path America is on, and the behaviors of our government.
But even still, a great many in America feel "Well if I'm not doing anything wrong, what do I have to worry about?"
But
***
I have friends and relatives who have lived as well. And you know what most of them say, America is far better than Russia, and other states. And no, we're no N. Korea for sure.
But those who live through, exclaim they're seeing it again. Those who have left, exclaim that we're starting to do many of the same things.
"We actually understand what is going on, know our government is misbehaving and many of us are working actively to bring it back into line."
Yes, I and you, and probably 20% of Americans fall into this category. And hopefully it will continue to grow.
***
But what are you arguments for the fact that we're NOT living in a police state? versus that we're just subservient to said state?
One also has to remember that a just because something isn't to the fullest extreme, does not negate it from being what it is.
A Big Mac may not be as unhealthy as a giant Fat Burger. But it's still unhealthy.
We may not be a police state on par with Russia, N. Korea, etc. But how does one argue we are not a police state when we are under 100% monitoring, our police have the authority act, detain, seize property on a whim.
???
Re:Trolling all americans (Score:4, Insightful)
Like or hate the Tea Party movement they showed a good example of 1/6th of the American people getting fed up and changing the structure of a political party on multiple issues.
No, they showed a good example of an astroturfed movement that tricked people into giving the ultra-rich even more wealth and power than they had before.
Ultra rich people get attacked by the United States all the time. Ask Bill Gates about his relationship with the Clinton administration
Before the trial, Microsoft gave no donations to politicians. Today they give millions of dollars. Despite being found guilty, Microsoft suffered no practical consequences. What happened to Microsoft was punishment for them not paying their dues for the service the US government provides to rich corporations.
And if you mean that no party that threatens the structure of wealth distribution could attain power, such a thing happened under FDR.
Most of what I'm talking about has been going on for 30-40 years. Starting with Nixon and really ramping up with Reagan. FDR was almost 70 years ago, a whole other world.
Re:Spot On (Score:5, Insightful)
Realize that if we allowed firearms on planes, 9/11 would've never happened, the patriot act would've never happened, hundreds of thousands of people wouldn't have died in the decade long wars to follow.
Wrong. 9/11 happened because people believed from past experience that the best way to handle a plane hijacking is to let the hijacker fly the plane to Cuba and everyone will stay safe and get a flight back home afterwards. After 9/11, no one will ever allow a hijacker to fly the plane to wherever he wants anymore. The passengers will turn into a mob rather than passive hostages because they will believe they are about to die. It is not possible for terrorists to pull off another 9/11 style attack, guns or no (especially since they now lock the cockpit doors and won't open for anything).
Fatherland, Motherland, Homeland (Score:5, Insightful)
When I was raised we called America, "Land of the Free, Home of the Brave." Calling ourselves something that echoed "Fatherland," or "Motherland" would have met revulsion. Those were appellations for Nazis and Communists. We despised the KGM, Stasi, and SS for their total surveillance. Being stopped to show your papers on a public road was THE test for whether you lived in a totalitarian state. Now we have the NSA violating the highest law of our land at will, and the TSA making random stops on our highways demanding drivers submit to searches and checks of their papers. Americans are still quite heavily armed for a civlian population, and we still do have means to information that circumvent government and official media. We will see if Americans still have enough moxy, enough self-awareness as a free people to rise up and re-assert their freedom, or if they will submit to tyranny and take the whole world down with them. But either way, it will not happen without a great deal of blood.
Foreign/Domestic Intelligence Surveillance Act (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Spot On (Score:4, Insightful)
...how much more intimate can they get?
Forced sonograms that neither the patient or doctor wants.
Re:Spot On (Score:4, Insightful)
If they changed the name to "Department of Rainbows, Unicorns, and Puppies," would you then feel free and happy?
Well, why not? We authorized a lot of this nonsense under the equally high-minded name "USA PATRIOT Act".
If you want to call the US a police state, I think you have some questions to answer: When did the "police state" cancel the vote? When did the "police state" shut down shutdown the newspapers, radio, and TV stations?
I guess you'll have to ask the Germans about that. About how in the beginning they elected people who promised to make them safe and prosperous and extract retribution on those who had injured them. And saw it all slide until votes were meaningless. Who needs to cancel the vote, anyway? The USSR had higher election turnouts than the USA does.
Shut down the media? I have actually descended to the point where one of my major news sources is Fox, because despite their obvious biases and creative invention of the news, the other mainstream channels have all been apparently simply reading verbatim a script handed to them by the Federal Government. Metadata? Who cares? His girlfriend is a pole dancer! Arf! Arf! Arf!
Mind you, not just arrest a reporter here or there for breaking the law, but actually show down the newspapers, radio, and TV stations?
A landslide starts with a few pebbles. But it doesn't end there.
When did the "police state" stop you from traveling without an internal passport?
When they started fingerprinting people coming into the country. Requiring passports to travel to/from alleged allies. And even internally, you'll find it awfully hard to get on an airplane without "showing your papers", even if the term now includes credit cards or driver licenses. Not just airports, either. The DHS has from time to time put the squeeze on at bus terminals and railroad stations.
When did the "police state" dismantle all of the political opposition parties and jail the leadership?
A lot of people have come to the cynical conclusion that they don't need to do that. That R and D are just 2 coats of paint on the same party, same as EastAsia and EurAsia.
When did the "police state" suspend habeas corpus?
Are you a goldfish? That argument came up right after 9/11. Fortunately even the apathetic masses found that idea alarming.
But not so alarming that we couldn't invent a whole new term - "Enemy Combatant".
When did the "police state" institute mandatory censorship of the media? (As opposed to the traditional water carrying for their ideologically favored party?)
You're too hung up on parties. The "party" in question is more like the Military-Industrial Complex. Which is why so many think that outside of single-issue items, both parties are the same party. As for "mandatory censorship", well, Reagan was when I first started hearing of cases where if you didn't report what pleased the administration you'd find your sources choked off. Post 9/11, it turned into a full-fledged megaphone.
When did the "police state" close the churches?
Why bother, if the churches themselves become part of the political inner circle a la Moral Majority? Not every police state is atheistic.
When did the "police state" start imprisoning people for criticizing the president?
"Free Speech Zones" are a good start.
When did the "police state" start having people fired from their jobs for not supporting the government?
Whistleblowers? We have an Act to protect them. And an administration that has made a name for itself in going after Whistleblowers.
When did the "police state" start punishing people for wanting to leave the country?
Ask Snowden.