NYC Mayor Bloomberg reaffirms his disregard for privacy rights

NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg (I)

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has long been renowned for sacrificing privacy rights and personal liberty on the altar of health and security, and now he’s gone and revealed just how many damns he doesn’t give about people’s concerns for his fantasized nanny/surveillance state:

Envisioning a future where privacy is a thing of the past, Mayor Bloomberg said Friday it will soon be impossible to escape the watchful eyes of surveillance cameras and even drones in the city.

He acknowledged privacy concerns, but said “you can’t keep the tides from coming in.”

“You wait, in five years, the technology is getting better, they’ll be cameras everyplace . . . whether you like it or not,” Bloomberg said.

The security measures have drawn scorn from some civil libertarians — but Bloomberg scoffed at privacy concerns on his Friday morning program on WOR-AM.

“The argument against using automation is just this craziness that 'Oh, it’s Big Brother,’” Bloomberg said. “Get used to it!”

It’s one thing to claim that the rise of automated surveillance technology is perhaps inevitable, but it’s quite another to so openly embrace and exacerbate it under the thin guise of public safety.

It continually disturbs me just how many people act like Orwellianism is an ideal rather than a cautionary tale.

(via @BuzzFeedAndrew)

Daily Blend: Friday, February 22, 2013

Diana Medley

Ontario top appeals court rules it just fine if police want to snoop around a suspect’s cellphone – so long as there’s no password, or then they have to ask permission.

Indiana Republicans agree: One government-sanctioned rape by medically pointless transvaginal ultrasound just isn’t enough for women seeking an abortion.
(via @jennifurret)

I’m not sure what’s remotely surprising about a study that links childhood bullying to psychological disorders in adults (except to those “it’s normal/harmless for kids to pick on each other” assholes).
(via RT: @jennifurret)

Sullivan, Indiana teacher ^[pictured] suspended over anti-gay remarks, universally suspected of being special educator Dianne “gays have no purpose in life and I don’t understand it” Medley.
(via Friendly Atheist)

If you have any story suggestions, feel free to leave them in the comments or send them in.

Canadian gov’t kills “lawful access” Internet snooping bill

It’s been a year since a commotion erupted around Canada over the government’s proposed Bill C-30, so-called “lawful access” legislation that would allow law enforcement to openly snoop around citizens’ private online data. (Particularly memorable was Public Safety Minister Vic Toews’s typically horrendous argument that privacy advocates who opposed the bill were really just “stand[ing] with the child pornographers”.)

Unlike in the US, though, where public outcry is generally met with contemptuous silence, it seems the Canadian government has actually paid attention to all the protesting, as the bill has effectively been axed for now:

Earlier this week, it was announced that the Canadian government has agreed not to move forward with the bill, claiming that they "listened" to the concerns of the public:

We will not be proceeding with Bill C-30 and any attempts that we will continue to have to modernize the Criminal Code will not contain the measures contained in C-30, including the warrantless mandatory disclosure of basic subscriber information or the requirement for telecommunications service providers to build intercept capability within their systems. We've listened to the concerns of Canadians who have been very clear on this and responding to that.

That’s one battle over with, though there still exists numerous issues with the current system, such as voluntary ISP disclosure of private user data. Privacy rights aren’t in as dire straights in Canada as they are in the US, which seems to take an almost perverse joy in violating its Fourth Amendment these days, but it’s a struggle nonetheless to keep the government’s eyes and ears away from where they don’t belong.

Daily Blend: Wednesday, February 13, 2013

Pres. Barack Obama

President Obama ^[pictured] shocks privacy advocates everywhere with an executive order on cybersecurity that isn’t replete with Fourth Amendment violations.

Republicans still think it’s a good idea to put queen crazypants Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) on the House Intelligence Committee.

17 months after DADT, Defense Department finally figures out what limited benefits they can grant same-sex military families under DoMA.

Science-Based Medicine’s David Gorski hammers Penn & Teller for their appearance on the quack-tastic Dr. Oz Show.
(via The Daily Grail)

Sean Curry at BuzzFeed offers some pointed rejoinders to “15 questions atheists are sick of answering”.
(via Friendly Atheist)

If you have any story suggestions, feel free to leave them in the comments or send them in.

DEA wants to illegally snoop in private medical records

Never content with its current laundry list of privacy violations in its zeal to prevent the next great (imaginary) drug craze, the DEA is now trying to get permission to snoop around in private patient medical records without a warrant. Cue the ACLU:

The Drug Enforcement Administration is trying to access private prescription records of patients in Oregon without a warrant, despite a state law forbidding it from doing so. The ACLU and its Oregon affiliate are challenging this practice in a new case that raises the question of whether the Fourth Amendment allows federal law enforcement agents to obtain confidential prescription records without a judge’s prior approval. It should not.

[…]

In 2009, the Oregon legislature created the Oregon Prescription Drug Monitoring Program (PDMP), which tracks prescriptions for certain drugs dispensed by Oregon pharmacies […]. The program was intended to help physicians prevent drug overdoses by their patients and more easily recognize signs of drug abuse. Because the medical information revealed by these prescription records is highly sensitive, the legislature created robust privacy and security protections for the PDMP, including a requirement that law enforcement must obtain a warrant before requesting records for use in an investigation. But despite those protections, the DEA has been requesting prescription records from the PDMP using administrative subpoenas which, unlike warrants, do not involve demonstrating probable cause to a neutral judge.

Probable cause? Constitutionally-mandated due process? Never heard of it.

(via @radleybalko)

Daily Blend: Tuesday, January 15, 2013

Stephen Colbert

I think we’ve officially reached the point where the NRA is doing to gun rights what PETA does to animal rights.

New York police get even creepier, now fighting war on prescription painkillers by hiding GPS trackers in fake pill bottles for unsuspecting pain patients druggies.
(via Joe. My. God.)

California judge blocks overbroad law that would destroy sex offenders’ free speech rights to anonymity online.

Good gawd are MRAs/PUAs pathetic. How grimly amusing that these silly little boys presume to call themselves “men”.
(via @jennifurret)

Oh, and Wonkette also has some fun with the sex-obsessed little toad.

And finally, following Jon Stewart’s lead, it’s Stephen Colbert’s ^[pictured] turn to shine on gun control [no time for a transcript, sorry]:

Non-U.S. readers: Click here to learn how to enable Comedy Central videos (Firefox only)

If you have any story suggestions, feel free to leave them in the comments or send them in.

If you’ve done nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide … right?

Zach Weiner at Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal goes political:

© Zach Weiner

Transcript: (click the [+/-] to open/close →)

[−]

AERIAL SURVEILLANCE ROBOT: Hello citizen. I'll be monitoring you on your walk today! Enjoy your safety.

---

CITIZEN: What? That's a violation of my privacy.

ROBOT: If you've done nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide

---

CITIZEN: Everyone has something to hide and usually no one cares. By surveilling everyone, you catch the benign breaches of law and taboo. If the public are all guilty, the executive part of the government can selectively enforce laws, essentially giving them both judicial and legislative power, which defeats the whole point of separation of powers.

Be sure to see the rest for the punchline (and don’t forget the red button!). Of course, my go-to reply to anyone who tells me I’ve got nothing to hide if I’ve done nothing wrong is to immediately demand to see their bank statement and online passwords. After all, any flustered reaction can only be a sign that they’re hiding their wrongdoing! QED.

(via The Agitator)

Senate renews NSA’s horrible (and illegal) spying program

It appears to be open season on U.S. citizens’ privacy rights this week, as only days after the Senate approved warrantless snooping in people’s personal emails, it’s now renewed the NSA’s horrendously unconstitutional spying program, known as the FISA Amendments Act, after striking down several proposed amendments that would’ve created any trace of oversight:

After three key amendments that would have brought some oversight to the NSA's ongoing spying program were rejected last night, and the final such amendment was rejected this morning, there was little doubt that the Senate would move ahead with renewing FISA in its current and highly problematic form. Immediately following the rejection of the Wyden amendment, that's just what they did, voting 73-23 to extend FISA for another five years.

Of course, there was no doubt that FISA would be renewed – has Congress shown any remote interest in curbing the federal government’s ability to breach the American people’s privacy in the last few decades? – but it would still have been nice if it had done something as simple and obvious as, say, put a system in place to estimate how many U.S. citizens are even being illegally spied on in the first place. But it would seem even that was akin to inviting the terrorizers to bomb America’s email inboxes or something.

U.S. Senate okays warrantless email surveillance

In which Congress’s love for letting the federal government snoop around in people’s private lives without probable cause burns anew:

Legislation sent to President Obama this week quietly removed language in a bill that would have — for the first time — forced law enforcement to obtain a warrant to read Americans' email. Currently, private email that has been stored by a third party for more than 180 days can be accessed by the government without a warrant.

The Senate Judiciary Committee had added a provision to legislation demanding that law enforcement or government agencies show probable cause for email searches. The provision was added to a bill aimed to allow users the ability to post on their Facebook feeds what they are watching on video services. […]

The bill was praised by Netflix as a modernization of the law "giving consumers more freedom." It passed the Senate on a voice vote, but without the language that would have forced law enforcement to obtain warrants rather than simply subpoenas to snoop into private emails.

I guess Congress got tired of continually throwing the increasingly tattered remains of the Fourth Amendment under the lawnmower and has moved on to openly mocking it, instead.

Daily Blend: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 – Lazy Halloween

I find myself with both an overabundance of blogging material and a critical lack of drive this evening, so here’re your links for the day.

Federal judge rules that police don’t need a warrant to install hidden surveillance cameras on private property. Comes with the usual *headdesk*-worthy Fourth Amendment distortions.
(via @radleybalko)

A better phrasing: “Three ex-governors resort to predictably and embarrassingly bad arguments to oppose California death-penalty repeal”.
(via @LilianaSegura; RT: @radleybalko)

Headline of the day contender.

Second contender, as well as another item to keep in mind if you ever find the odd soul wondering why no-one takes PETA seriously.
(via Joe. My. God.)

While we’re at it, have this brief, pictorial Frankenstorm retrospective:

NYC shortly after Hurricane Sandy’s passage [source | full size (1024×722)]

Don’t miss this spectacular, gut-wrenching special on Hurricane Sandy’s devastation at the Boston Globe’s Big Picture feature.
(via Joe. My. God.)

If you have any story suggestions, feel free to leave them in the comments or send them in.

Congress still clueless about wiretapping law they reauthorized

If there’s one thing all sides of the U.S. political spectrum can agree on, it’s that the current Congress is quite terrible at its job. But the least they could do would be not to broadcast their blatant cluelessness about the contentious surveillance bills they pass. Watch as they line up to proclaim how Average American Joe has nothing whatsoever to fear from the recently reauthorized FISA Amendments Act warrantless wiretapping law:

"This bill has nothing to do with Americans on American soil," said Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) on the floor. The bill only grants authority for "targeting foreigners located outside of the United States, and not on Americans in the United States, or anywhere else in the world," said House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Chair Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.), who repeated this twice for emphasis. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) even emphasized that "the government cannot reverse target individuals overseas in order to monitor those in the United States. That means the government cannot target a US person simply by monitoring a non-US person that the US person is talking to."

And now, a word from advocates for reality:

That's not true. The bill "allows the bulk suspicionless collection of communications coming into and out of the United States," explains Michelle Richardson, legislative counsel with the American Civil Liberties Union. "While the proponents always point out we're targeting the overseas end and those people don't have Fourth Amendment rights, the Americans and other people in the US on the other end of that call, or email or Skype, do have Fourth Amendment rights."

See, the law allows the government to collect communications between individuals abroad who are interacting with people in the United States. In other words, the government can get around Americans' Fourth Amendment rights against search and seizure by "targeting" the communications of a foreigner who just happens to be communicating with someone in the United States. They're not supposed to deliberately exploit the loophole to get around the Fourth Amendment, but once they use it to get information, they can keep it, even if they find out that they were spying on an American citizen after the fact.

In short: Another unconstitutional, overbroad and all-too-easily abused law to spy on the private lives of a largely ignorant and complacent populace and passed – yet again – by demagogic lawmakers who don’t even know the first thing about it.

Then again:

On the other hand, maybe they do know that the bill allows warrantless surveillance of American citizens, and they simply don't care.

No-one has shown themselves more eager to snoop around other people’s private affairs without their knowledge or permission – all under the transparent pretense of security – than American politicians.

(via The Agitator)

Tags: FISA Amendments Act • U.S. Congress • warrantless wiretapping

Daily Blend: Friday, September 14, 2012

What does the sexist hatred that’s been tearing at the atheist movement look like? Something like this. ^[pictured]
(via @pzmyers)

Minnesota school district needed a crushing courtroom defeat to remind them that students are also U.S. citizens with rights to privacy and free speech.

Kansas Republicans wish to remind you that they’re still a bunch of embarrassing idiots.
(via @BadAstronomer)

And finally, The Onion on religious riots: So true. So sadly true. (And so very, very NSFW.)

If you have any story suggestions, feel free to leave them in the comments or send them in.

Tags: Rebecca Watson • misogyny • Skepchick • atheists • atheist movement • Minnewaska Area School District • Kansas • Republicans • Barack Obama • Kansas Objections Board • Kris Kobach • Judaism • Christianity • Hinduism • Buddhism • blasphemy • Moses • Jesus Christ • Ganesha • Buddha • The Onion

Daily Blend: Wednesday, June 20, 2012

Hamza Tzortzis

Senators: We want the NSA to reveal how many U.S. citizens it illegally spied on. NSA: That would violate their privacy.

How to tell if a controversial claim is scientifically true. Includes lots of Phil “Bad Astronomer” Plait, always a nice bonus.
(via Bad Astronomy)

Noted Islamic Creationist hack ^[pictured] plagiarizes from noted Christian Creationist hack to “critique” Richard Dawkins’s The God Delusion.
(via Pharyngula)

xkcd’s being awesome again, exoplanets edition.

If you have any story suggestions, feel free to leave them in the comments or send them in.

Tags: National Security Agency • NSA • Ron Wyden • Mark Udall • FISA Amendments Act • Lifehacker • Phil Plait • Bad Astronomer • David McRaney • Alan Henry • scientific method • confirmation bias • Hamza Tzortzis • Islam • Creationism • William Lane Craig • Richard Dawkins • The God Delusion • xkcd • comics • exoplanets

Daily Blend: Thursday, June 14, 2012

From the file of awesome surprises: Comcast ^[pictured] takes a stand for its clients’ privacy, refuses to cooperate in BitTorrent “shakedown” lawsuit.
(via The Agitator)

Two Alabama public TV managers fired after protesting Republican official’s demands to air revisionist Christian-nationalist program from pseudo-historian David Barton.

“He is not the pastor of the United States, he is the President of the United States.”

If you have any story suggestions, feel free to leave them in the comments or send them in.

Tags: Comcast • ISPs • Internet Service Providers • BitTorrent • filesharing • David Barton • Alabama Educational Television Commission • Alabama Public Television • Allan Pizzato • Pauline Howland • Rodney Herring • Frederick Haynes III • Friendship-West Baptist Church • Barack Obama • gay marriage • same-sex marriage • marriage equality

Balko debunks hysterical myths about Indiana self-defense law

There was quite a bit of hubbub last May when the Indiana Supreme Court declared that Hoosiers had no right to defend themselves or their homes if law enforcement officers chose to barge in unlawfully, effectively undercutting the state’s “Castle Doctrine” as well as hundreds of years of common law precedent dating back to the Magna Carta.

In response, state legislators presented a bill to reverse this ineffably absurd (and dangerous) decision, and the issue remained dormant until last week, when the legislature widely approved the amendment and Gov. Mitch Daniels (R) signed it into law.

At once, a fresh outcry erupted, this time over concerns that (as headlines variously, and totally responsibly, phrased it) “Indiana legalize[d] shooting cops”, conjuring imagery of troopers being blasted away with shotguns if they so much as knocked at a citizen’s door at night, presumably frightening any meth-hammered inhabitants into thinking they were suddenly in mortal peril.

Naturally, the ever-vigilant Radley Balko has a detailed write-up at The Huffington Post explaining everything that the newly revised law does – and most certainly does not – allow:

Jeffersonville, Ind., police Sgt. Joseph Hubbard told Bloomberg News, "If I pull over a car and I walk up to it and the guy shoots me, he's going to say, 'Well, he was trying to illegally enter my property. Somebody is going get away with killing a cop because of this law."

Added Tim Downs, head of the state's largest police union: "It just puts a bounty on our heads."

Fortunately, the law does nothing of the kind.

[…]

The Castle Doctrine law says that if someone has entered or is attempting to enter your home without your consent, you're legally permitted to use a reasonable amount of force to expel the intruder from your residence. If you reasonably believe your life or members of your family are in danger, you can use lethal force. The revision to Indiana's law simply states that public servants aren't exempt from such treatment.

Rutherford pointed out that the word "reasonable" appears throughout the revision to the Indiana law. "That's important. The amount of force you use must be reasonable," he said. "So if a police officer pokes his head inside your screen door because he heard something suspicious, no, you don't now have free rein to shoot him."

Daily Blend: Saturday, April 14, 2012 – One hundred years later

“I know this isn’t scientific, but this ship’s warning me she’s gonna die and take a lot of people with her.”
— Thomas Andrews, Managing Director of Harland and Wolff Shipyards

“Many brave things were done that night, but none more brave than by those few men playing minute after minute as the ship settled quietly lower and lower in the sea … the music they played serving alike as their own immortal requiem and their right to be recorded on the scrolls of undying fame.”
— Lawrence Beesley, survivor

[full size (1313×1050)]

Your links:

Canadian Supreme Court strikes down law allowing warrantless wiretaps during emergencies.
(via Rof F)

Make that successful doggycide: Pembroke Pines, FL dog who was shot six times after nipping at a cop’s ankle died three weeks later.
(via @radleybalko)

Which is more predictable: That an obvious “miracle” was debunked, or that the Indian skeptic who debunked it was then charged with blasphemy?

If you have any story suggestions, feel free to leave them in the comments or send them in.

Tags: Titanic • Canada • Supreme Court of Canada • Section 184.4 • warrantless wiretaps • wiretap laws • Pembroke Pines, FL • Baxter the Australian Shepherd • Lido Isle • Frank Jones • Cindy Jones • Cameron Jones • Chris Chacon-Chang • Sanal Edamaruku • India • miracles • blasphemy laws • debunking

Lawsuit: School violates student’s Facebook privacy

Here’s another school that needs to be reminded – preferably with a crushing courtroom loss – that the First and Fourth Amendments don’t have any age restrictions that somehow exclude minors:

A Minnesota middle school student, with the backing of the American Civil Liberties Union, is suing her school district over a search of her Facebook and e-mail accounts by school employees.

The 12-year-old sixth grade student, identified in court documents only as R.S., was on two occasions punished for statements she made on her Facebook account, and was also pressured to divulge her password to school officials, the complaint states.

"R.S. was intimidated, frightened, humiliated and sobbing while she was detained in the small school room" as she watched a counselor, a deputy, and another school employee pore over her private communications.

The lawsuit claims that her First Amendment rights were violated by employees at Minnewaska Area Middle School, in west-central Minnesota, as well as her Fourth Amendment rights regarding unreasonable search and seizure.

And what are these messages with contents so scurrilous that school officials felt the need to bring in a police officer to assist them in interrogating her?

According to the complaint, R.S. felt that one of the school's adult hall monitors was picking on her, so she wrote on her Facebook "wall" that she hated that person because she was mean.

The message was not posted from school property or using any school equipment or connections, the lawsuit states.

Somehow, the school principal got a hold of a screenshot of the message, and punished R.S. with detention and made her apologize to the hall monitor, the complaint says.

She was in trouble again shortly thereafter for another Facebook post, which asked who turned her in, using an expletive for effect, the lawsuit says. She was given in school suspension and missed a class ski trip.

In the third incident, according to the complaint, R.S. was called in by school officials after the guardian of another student complained that R.S. had had a conversation about sex on Facebook.

Reprint: Open letter to Vic Toews

Min. Vic Toews

Americans aren’t the only people confronted with a government that seems to believe that Big Brother is an ideal rather than a deterrent. The Canadian Parliament has been engulfed in a heated debate lately over a new bill that would allow the feds to spy on Internauts through their online tracks under the usual pretense of “protecting teh children”, and the sponsor for the bill is Public Safety Minister Vic Toews.

The following was originally published at my friend’s blog, Log of Veritas. Reprinted with permission. Picture is mine.

---

Dear Minister Toews,

I'd like to voice my concern about the Government's intent to pass Bill C30, or as it is known, the Protecting Children from Internet Predators Act. As a Canadian citizen who uses the Internet, I am supremely concerned that the Conservative government is interested in co-opting my Charter rights for the ease of prosecution. While titled to be defending children from Internet predators, the actual bill's language refers only to general situations. We have no assurances that the rights co-opted by your government shall be used only in the situations suggested in the rationale. Perhaps there is only the greatest of intentions with this bill, but you are surely aware of what the proverbial road to Hell is paved with.

My Charter rights are very simple. They state that "Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure." This has meant, historically, that in order to obtain my personal records and documentation, the Government of Canada must prove to a judge that they have a legitimate merit in doing so: aka, you have to get a warrant. This has also been extended to corporations; once again, the Government of Canada must prove they have a legitimate merit in obtaining property or information from a company, such as an Internet service provider. The McLaughlin Court has consistently ruled in favour of the individual against the Government in these situations, and it is certainly not outside the realm of reason to suggest that Bill C30 is blatantly unconstitutional.

Canadians do not have a long tradition of Constitutional rights like our southern neighbours, but we do have a long tradition of avoiding government interference. You claimed this moral high ground when dismembering the long gun registry earlier in your administration, but you ignore it now when it comes to the Internet. Minister Toews, the Internet is speech, and speech must be free. It is no business of yours, Mr. Harper, Ms. Turmel, Mr. Rae, or any other politician what happens on someone's computer or over the Internet, unless a Canadian law enforcement agency can make a compelling case to a judge that it should be. I must insist that you remove Bill C30 from consideration.

I have CC'd Messrs. Harper, Rae, Angus, Andrews, Cotler and Sandhu, Mrs. Turmel, as well as my local MP, Mr. MacKay, as I feel this matter is of great import and should be addressed by all parties.

Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,
Benjamin Stonier
Antigonish, NS

Send your own copy of this letter to vic.toews@parl.gc.ca, and any other government member you like!

Edit (02/22/12 1:07 PM ET) – Added a little description for context.

Tags: Vic Toews • Bill C-30 • Protecting Children from Internet Predators Act • Canada • Veritas • Benjamin Stonier • Log of Veritas

Daily Blend: Thursday, February 16, 2012

Rep. Kim Pearson (R-IA)

Dear mobile readers: I have re-enabled Mobile View and added a note in the comments terms of use that messages posted in Mobile View will be transferred to the main Disqus platform.

Iowa Rep. Kim Pearson ^[pictured] (R) introduces most extreme anti-abortion bill yet, outlawing all abortions and sentencing doctors to life in prison.

Chicken-farming, Matrix-style. Or, how to turn meat-lovers into vegetarians.
(via The Daily Grail)

“[The Girl Scouts] were encouraging girls to embrace whoever they were; it didn't matter what choices they made, as long as they were true to themselves. That was a concern.”
(via Joe. My. God.)

Whoa. 80% of Tasmanian devils have been wiped out by cancer; scientists doing what they can to save the rest.

Anthropomorphic tumor Ted Nugent’s top 10 greatest hits. How telling it is that conservative groups are eager to host him. (Or The Simpsons.)

And another one: Anti-gay conservative radio host Michael Berry investigated for hit & run after leaving a drag show at a gay bar.
(via Joe. My. God.)

6 Terrifying User Agreements You've Probably Accepted.

Americans love Canada. (Sitting in a tree?)

If you have any story suggestions, feel free to leave them in the comments or send them in.

Tags: Kim Pearson • Iowa • felonies • Tea Party • Republicans • chickens • poultry • farming • The Matrix • Girl Scouts • American Heritage Girls • Shanna Stewart • Tasmanian devil • cancer • Tasmania • Devil Facial Tumor Disease • DFTD • Ted Nugent • National Rifle Association • NRA • right-wing media • conservatives • The Simpsons • Michael Berry • drag shows • gay bears • hit & run • EULA • Canada • United States • USA • Gallup