The Obama administration is moving to relax restrictions on how counterterrorism analysts may access, store and search information about Americans gathered by government agencies for purposes other than national security threats.
Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. is expected on Thursday to sign new guidelines for the National Counterterrorism Center, which was created in 2004 to foster intelligence sharing and to serve as a clearinghouse for terrorism threats, according to officials.
The guidelines will lengthen to five years — from 180 days — the center’s ability to retain private information about Americans when there is suspicion that they are tied to terrorism, intelligence officials said. The guidelines are also expected to result in the center making more copies of entire databases and “data-mining them” — using complex algorithms to search for patterns that could indicate a threat — than it currently does.
Read More:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03
I think this little excerpt of news really says a lot and it definitely relates to what we've been talking about in class. Many people in class expressed fear about the government watching over them, well here you go I suppose. The government has extended the amount of time they can hold your private information when terrorism is suspected. They have eased these restrictions as well to aid in data mining, searching for threats in large data. However, I'm going to make the extremely contentious argument that I'd rather have the government doing these things rather than not searching for terrorists. If there is a slight chance that this data could help prevent a terrorist attack, then I think it's worth it, especially since I don't have anything to hide. In the technologically connected world we live in today it is naive to think that anything you do on the internet is private or safe anyway.
Laura, it's a good point that you make. I'm sure that some of this torture and investigation is done for the common good of the American citizens. In those instances, I agree with you wholeheartedly. However, I'm starting to wonder when things will stop. I don't want to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but I can see this spiraling out of control. This idea, like others that we discussed in class, sounds like a slippery slope. The government might think it's okay to investigate a suspected terrorist, but what are the definitions of a suspected terrorist? The guidelines are certainly not black and white, as in a suspected terrorist is a person that does x, y, and z. Since every case is different, every suspected terrorist will meet different guidelines for why they are a suspected terrorist. With that being said, the lines are very blurred, and I can see the government agreeing to more and more invasions of privacy, even if they are not entirely necessary.
ReplyDeleteI believe that this sort of thing might actually help the U.S. and it's citizens. Yes, it is a little scary and uncomfortable knowing that the government will be looking at all of us closer and for a longer period, but if you are a good citizen that respects their country and abides by the laws then you should have nothing to hide. I haven't read thoroughly into what the actual restrictions are going to be eased too, but I'm sure they won't be too drastic. The government does have to respect a citizens private life, in that there is a difference between hacking our cell phones to ease drop in on the conversations and delving into ones background information to see what he/she is all about. If by accessing some more information for each person means the next attack on American soil may or could be prevented than I'm all for it.
ReplyDeleteI THINK THAT JONATHAN IS ON TO SOMETHING IN THE MIDDLE OF WHAT HE HAS TO SAY. INSTEAD THOUGH I THINK WE ARE ALREADY ON THAT SLIPPERY SLOPE. IF WE WEREN'T WHY IS J.W. LINDH STILL IN PRISON? WHY IS THERE A NEW YORK T-SHIRT SALES MEN STILL IN PRISON? WHY IS GUANTANAMO BAY STILL OPEN? WHY WAS SECTIONS 1021 AND 1022 OF LAST YEAR'S NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT SIGNED INTO LAW? WHY DOES THE NYPD FEEL THE NEED TO NOT ONLY SPY ON MUSLIMS BUT GIVE ITSELF THE ABILITY TO GO OUTSIDE OF IT'S CURRENT JURISDICTION OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK? MOST IMPORTANTLY HOW MANY TERRORIST ATTACKS HAS ALL OF THAT THWARTED? A DOZEN MAYBE JUST A LITTLE MORE THAN THAT.
ReplyDeleteYOU KNOW WHAT MAKES YOU A BAD CITIZEN? SUPPORTING GOVERNMENT OR GOVERNMENT POLICY THAT HAS EVEN THE SLIGHTEST POSSIBILITY TO BE ABUSED IN THE WRONG WAY. YOU ALL HAVE TO REMEMBER THAT POLITICIANS AREN'T UNCORRECTABLE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT ISN'T INFALLIBLE. THEY ARE PEOPLE TOO, AND ARE JUST AS SUSCEPTIBLE TO GREED AND BIGOTRY AND JUST BEING IN A BAD MOOD. THINK ABOUT THIS: YOUR BEST FRIEND JUST SO HAPPENS TO BE ANGRY AND THE DIRECTOR OF HOMELAND SECURITY WHEN HE OR SHE PICKS UP AN INNOCENT GUY. WHAT HAPPENS TO THAT PERSON? NOW REPLACE YOUR FRIEND WITH WITH THAT ANNOYING PERSON FROM DOWN THE HALL IN YOUR DORM OR THAT PROFESSOR WHO NEVER GIVES OUT A's. IN FACT I'D GO SO FAR AS TO SAY THAT THINKING THAT IT IS AT ALL OKAY FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO BE DOING THIS PUTS AMERICANS AT GREATER RISK THAN ANY TERRORIST ATTACK EVER COULD.
WHY? A TERRORIST WILL KILL YOU, BUT LOOK AT THAT TORTURE VID WE WATCHED IN CLASS. ALL IT WOULD TAKE IS FOR YOU TO END UP LIKE ANY OF THE PEOPLE IN GUANTANAMO IS TO HAVE THAT INFORMATION OF YOURS THEY'RE KEEPING END UP ON THE WRONG LIST. YOU'LL BE SUFFERING FOR YEARS, MAYBE THE REST OF YOUR LIFE, AND AS AN ADDED BONUS YOU MAY NEVER SEE THE LIGHT OF DAY AGAIN. BY THE WAY JON, THEY DON'T HAVE TO HACK THEY ONLY HAVE TO CLAIM P.A.T.R.I.O.T. ACT.
This is a really good article and definitely pertains to our class. This is definitely a controversial topic whether or not the government should be allowed to monitor its citizens and access their personal information so readily. I'm normally not someone who worries about big brother watching over me and looking at what I’m doing, but I think what makes this unsettling for me is that they use the term terrorism to define their reasoning for their snooping. Like we discussed in class multiple times, defining terror and what a terrorist is is extremely difficult and is a very large grey area. The original reason I don’t mind that the government can monitor people is simply because I know I have nothing to hide. But, now that they are using terrorism to define what is considered grounds for their accessing your personal information, how long until someone tries to bend laws to include things as downloading movies and music as terrorism? A man named Kim Dotcom (yes he had his name legally changed to Dotcom) was arrested a while back for inventing and running his website called Megaupload which while it had many legal uses, also allowed illegal content sharing to prosper. Someone even referred to him as a terrorist during his court cases.
ReplyDelete"Kim Dotcom, founder of cyberlocker website Megaupload, which was seized by the US authorities earlier this year, is being treated like a terrorist as Crown prosecutor Anne Toohey argues that he needs to be returned to prison."
http://www.wendycockcroftwebdesign.com/blog/blogs/blog1.php/treated-like-a-terrorist-us-tries-to-put-dotcom-back-in-jail
From an article about Mr. Dotcom it says, "If the line between piracy and terrorism becomes blurred in the eyes of content providers and lawmakers, Dotcom may yet have cause to regret his vaunted gift with a virtual assault rifle."
http://www.forbes.com/sites/danielnyegriffiths/2012/03/19/kim-dotcom-megaupload-case/
As i see it, this is just opening a door for lawmakers and the government to twist words in order to turn anyone into a terrorist. That’s what makes me nervous.