10 ms·

Secrecy in law enforcement is contagious precisely because it makes things so much easier. Kafka's "Trial" was a nightmare for the accused, but think how conven

by zeteo 13y ago

Secrecy in law enforcement is contagious precisely because it makes things so much easier. Kafka's "Trial" was a nightmare for the accused, but think how convenient it is for the authorities to not publicize charges or sentencing and to do everything on their most expedient schedule. As soon as it was decided that accusations of "terrorism" could be treated this way, the seed was sown. The programs and procedures developed by the "anti-terrorist" agencies will be readily used and copied by any other branches of law enforcement that have the ability to do so; this case is a prime example. So, if you thought Orwell was scary, say hello to Kafka now.

fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
Have a dose of snark: You crackpot tinfoil hat-wearing kooks imagine all sorts of bizarro world stuff: the Bildeburgers, Skull and Bones, One-world elite conspiracies straight from the imagination of Dan Brown. I mean, how crazy do you have to be to think that every prosecutor in the US is conspiring with the DEA and the NSA, and that this has been going on for years without anyone noticing? You know what else? If you don't want to go to jail for drug smuggling, don't smuggle drugs! What's that? The gov't admits it? I see. Well you know, nobody made the drug smugglers use a cell phone. There has never been any privacy expectation for business records! That's between the phone company and the gov't. These programs are lawful and they have been approved by every single congressman. They all agree unanimously. Don't like it? Get a different phone company! The gov't needs this to protect our children from terrerrerrorism. Do you know how many terror attacks there would have been if they weren't working to keep us safe? No! Because they can't tell you; that would compromise the operations! The truth is that the vast majority of gov't agents are honest hard working people trying to keep your children safe. They should be celebrated as heroes. These disclosures only serve to harm the Motherland^H^H^H Homeland security. Now we'll have to just spend more taxes for new secret programs to replace the ones revealed by treacherous commie spies! /s
- andrewcooke 13y ago
  i have no idea what you are trying to say.
  - fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
    It's a poke in the eye directed at those statists and others who for years have been beating up on anyone who publicly acknowledged the possibility of any gov't conspiracy; usually by making comparisons to absurd examples, then sometimes claiming such things are normal or just, and or making false or illogical justifications.
    - seanmcdirmid 13y ago
      There are real conspiracy theorists out there who are batsh*t crazy, it is quite difficult to tell which ones are actually reasonable. The illogical fallacious arguments are spewed from both sides of the debate. Also, its possible to be a statist who is disgusted with the government's behavior; its not black and white as the libertarians would try to convince everyone is the case (the NSA is spying us...and we have to pay taxes!). Ya, some of us are pragmatic. So without a better alternative, we are free to shake our finger at the gov without advocating violent revolution or even deep systematic change. The devil you know... Of course, living in China gives me quite a different perspective on it all. The US could definitely do much worse, and it is important to stop going in that direction.
      - fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
        >There are real conspiracy theorists out there who are batsh_t crazy, Yeah, but that doesn't mean they all are. > it is quite difficult to tell which ones are actually reasonable. Isn't that the truth. I used to work with a fellow who was absolutely paranoid about gov't surveillance. Some people might think he was a lunatic off his medication if you got him started talking about it. He was an Air Force avionics tech in the 1970's. Everything he ever told me about gov't surveillance has turned out to be true. > The illogical fallacious arguments are spewed from both sides of the debate. That happens at the extents of every political faction. Look at the debate surrounding Abortion/Gay Marriage/Drugs/Welfare >Also, its possible to be a statist who is disgusted with the government's behavior; I never considered that. I should have though. I can see no reason why someone who would identify as a Statist would be any different than a person from any other political faction. We're all people. > its not black and white as the libertarians would try to convince everyone is the case (the NSA is spying us...and we have to pay taxes!). Ya, some of us are pragmatic. I'd be a Libertarian if I thought it could work. And be fair, there are a lot of different folks in that particular faction too. IMO, those Johnny-come-lately post Koch Bros. Libertarians don't really count. >So without a better alternative, we are free to shake our finger at the gov without advocating violent revolution or even deep systematic change. The devil you know... I'm not sure what you're getting at. >Of course, living in China gives me quite a different perspective on it all. It does give one a different perspective. I lived there in '08 & '09 (though not full time). >The US could definitely do much worse, and it is important to stop going in that direction. I have a feeling it could be a _lot_ worse in the US, but that's no reason to accept the status quo. IMO acceptance of the status quo practically guarantees a pretty terrible outcome.
- powertower 13y ago
  There are no false statements in the above.
  - niels_olson 13y ago
    I'd give you an upvote, but I've been so nice to you already. Do you really deserve it, they way you've treated me? I'm just a copper after all. I wouldn't know one end of an ID from the other. You'll have to take it up with our supervisor.
- mpyne 13y ago
  It's ^W^W^W, not ^H^H^H.
  - fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
    Are you sure? I'm happy to be corrected if I am missing something. I'll admit I don't know the origin of this convention; but I don't understand how the caret code for "End Transmission Block" makes more sense than the one for "Backspace". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASCII#ASCII_control_code_chart https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASCII#ASCII_control_code_chart
    - totalforge 13y ago
      NERDS!!!!
    - js2 13y ago
      Control-w deletes the previous word in Bash and in vi insert mode.
      - jlgreco 13y ago
        I believe, at least in Linux, the canonical line disipline also does ctrl-w. Pretty sure that behaviour isn't POSIX though.
        fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
        TIL ...
        kps 13y ago
        Control-W for ‘delete word’ entered Unix in BSD 4.x, along with changing to ^U for line erase (Bell Labs used ^X), ^R for refresh (consensus has reverted to ^L), and ^T for status (which Linux annoyingly still doesn't have). These came from Tenex / TOPS-20, which also had a fancy command completion scheme whose vestiges can be seen in ftp(1) as well as Cicso gear. Job control (with ^Z and ^Y) entered at the same time. At least Linux/SysV saw the usefulness of that....
- w_t_payne 13y ago
  Nice piece of sarcasm, there.
- niels_olson 13y ago
  For anyone who missed it, that was written in the style of The Trial.
tptacek 13y ago
Secrecy in law enforcement is problematic, but the secrecy here is less pervasive than you imply. The crimes people are being charged with here are public. The trials are public. Critically, the evidence is all public, and the chain of custody of all evidence in these cases appears to be public as well. Instead, what's alleged here is that the DEA is provided with enough information from intercepts to "always be in the right place at the right time". This kind of evidence --- legit evidence traceable to illegit sources --- would be excluded if it involved torture, but apparently the jurisprudence hasn't caught up to its use in unlawful surveillance.
- gnosis 13y ago
  "The trials are public." Actually, there mostly are no trials at all. As the article states, "most drug-trafficking defendants plead guilty before trial" One has to wonder if a "justice system" in which the majority of convicts have never even had a trial is worthy of the name.
  - tptacek 13y ago
    I find wildly erratic punitive sentencing for accused offenders who choose to go to trial alarming. But I'm not alarmed that the majority of offenders plea out. Trials are enormously expensive, and, in a coldly rational statistical sense, most of the accused are in fact guilty --- the fact patterns in many of these cases and the evidence supporting them are very straightforward. That there would be some incentive for the accused to spare the system the expense of litigation doesn't bother me, especially because the more resources get freed up from pointless controversies, the more resources are available to handle meaningful ones. So, I think we agree that there's a problem, but not what its causes are. Either way: plea out or not, these cases don't get brought without "untainted" evidence. The problem is that the DOJ's definition of "untainted" is subtly broken. "Fruit of a poisonous tree" is a good Google search to follow up on this.
    - Vivtek 13y ago
      Whether it goes to trial or not, whether the evidence is untainted or not, the primary problem with the war on drugs is the extrajudicial punishment system that is seizure of property on mere suspicion. Giving the DEA tips is paramount to simply declaring that anybody you dislike is no longer part of American society - and there's very little recourse, just as with the no-fly list. I'm still not sure how it has come to pass that Americans simply blithely accept all this.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
dobbsbob 13y ago
Police in my country have an agreement with the DEA so no warrants are needed at all. The courts in my country are difficult for the cops to snow with BS so instead they use US courts. The police here use illegal no warrant searches and surveillance that courts here throw out, so they have the local DEA office kidnap the suspect and delivered to the US through extraordinary rendition. Now police provide this illegally obtained evidence which is admissible in the less strict US court. Because they are looking at 100+ yrs prison sentence if they go to trial they always plead out because defense lawyers in the US tell them it's impossible to get evidence thrown out from UK, Canada or French police. It's a tidy arrangement, use the US as the world court to avoid annoying warrants. These are always conspiracy cases where no actual drugs are involved just bugged conversations, informants and emails

by zeteo 13y ago

fnordfnordfnord 13y ago

Have a dose of snark: You crackpot tinfoil hat-wearing kooks imagine all sorts of bizarro world stuff: the Bildeburgers, Skull and Bones, One-world elite conspiracies straight from the imagination of Dan Brown. I mean, how crazy do you have to be to think that every prosecutor in the US is conspiring with the DEA and the NSA, and that this has been going on for years without anyone noticing? You know what else? If you don't want to go to jail for drug smuggling, don't smuggle drugs! What's that? The gov't admits it? I see. Well you know, nobody made the drug smugglers use a cell phone. There has never been any privacy expectation for business records! That's between the phone company and the gov't. These programs are lawful and they have been approved by every single congressman. They all agree unanimously. Don't like it? Get a different phone company! The gov't needs this to protect our children from terrerrerrorism. Do you know how many terror attacks there would have been if they weren't working to keep us safe? No! Because they can't tell you; that would compromise the operations! The truth is that the vast majority of gov't agents are honest hard working people trying to keep your children safe. They should be celebrated as heroes. These disclosures only serve to harm the Motherland^H^H^H Homeland security. Now we'll have to just spend more taxes for new secret programs to replace the ones revealed by treacherous commie spies! /s

andrewcooke 13y ago
i have no idea what you are trying to say.
- fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
  It's a poke in the eye directed at those statists and others who for years have been beating up on anyone who publicly acknowledged the possibility of any gov't conspiracy; usually by making comparisons to absurd examples, then sometimes claiming such things are normal or just, and or making false or illogical justifications.
  - seanmcdirmid 13y ago
    There are real conspiracy theorists out there who are batsh*t crazy, it is quite difficult to tell which ones are actually reasonable. The illogical fallacious arguments are spewed from both sides of the debate. Also, its possible to be a statist who is disgusted with the government's behavior; its not black and white as the libertarians would try to convince everyone is the case (the NSA is spying us...and we have to pay taxes!). Ya, some of us are pragmatic. So without a better alternative, we are free to shake our finger at the gov without advocating violent revolution or even deep systematic change. The devil you know... Of course, living in China gives me quite a different perspective on it all. The US could definitely do much worse, and it is important to stop going in that direction.
    - fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
      >There are real conspiracy theorists out there who are batsh_t crazy, Yeah, but that doesn't mean they all are. > it is quite difficult to tell which ones are actually reasonable. Isn't that the truth. I used to work with a fellow who was absolutely paranoid about gov't surveillance. Some people might think he was a lunatic off his medication if you got him started talking about it. He was an Air Force avionics tech in the 1970's. Everything he ever told me about gov't surveillance has turned out to be true. > The illogical fallacious arguments are spewed from both sides of the debate. That happens at the extents of every political faction. Look at the debate surrounding Abortion/Gay Marriage/Drugs/Welfare >Also, its possible to be a statist who is disgusted with the government's behavior; I never considered that. I should have though. I can see no reason why someone who would identify as a Statist would be any different than a person from any other political faction. We're all people. > its not black and white as the libertarians would try to convince everyone is the case (the NSA is spying us...and we have to pay taxes!). Ya, some of us are pragmatic. I'd be a Libertarian if I thought it could work. And be fair, there are a lot of different folks in that particular faction too. IMO, those Johnny-come-lately post Koch Bros. Libertarians don't really count. >So without a better alternative, we are free to shake our finger at the gov without advocating violent revolution or even deep systematic change. The devil you know... I'm not sure what you're getting at. >Of course, living in China gives me quite a different perspective on it all. It does give one a different perspective. I lived there in '08 & '09 (though not full time). >The US could definitely do much worse, and it is important to stop going in that direction. I have a feeling it could be a _lot_ worse in the US, but that's no reason to accept the status quo. IMO acceptance of the status quo practically guarantees a pretty terrible outcome.
powertower 13y ago
There are no false statements in the above.
- niels_olson 13y ago
  I'd give you an upvote, but I've been so nice to you already. Do you really deserve it, they way you've treated me? I'm just a copper after all. I wouldn't know one end of an ID from the other. You'll have to take it up with our supervisor.
mpyne 13y ago
It's ^W^W^W, not ^H^H^H.
- fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
  Are you sure? I'm happy to be corrected if I am missing something. I'll admit I don't know the origin of this convention; but I don't understand how the caret code for "End Transmission Block" makes more sense than the one for "Backspace". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASCII#ASCII_control_code_chart https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASCII#ASCII_control_code_chart
  - totalforge 13y ago
    NERDS!!!!
  - js2 13y ago
    Control-w deletes the previous word in Bash and in vi insert mode.
    - jlgreco 13y ago
      I believe, at least in Linux, the canonical line disipline also does ctrl-w. Pretty sure that behaviour isn't POSIX though.
      - fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
        TIL ...
      - kps 13y ago
        Control-W for ‘delete word’ entered Unix in BSD 4.x, along with changing to ^U for line erase (Bell Labs used ^X), ^R for refresh (consensus has reverted to ^L), and ^T for status (which Linux annoyingly still doesn't have). These came from Tenex / TOPS-20, which also had a fancy command completion scheme whose vestiges can be seen in ftp(1) as well as Cicso gear. Job control (with ^Z and ^Y) entered at the same time. At least Linux/SysV saw the usefulness of that....
w_t_payne 13y ago
Nice piece of sarcasm, there.
niels_olson 13y ago
For anyone who missed it, that was written in the style of The Trial.

tptacek 13y ago

Secrecy in law enforcement is problematic, but the secrecy here is less pervasive than you imply. The crimes people are being charged with here are public. The trials are public. Critically, the evidence is all public, and the chain of custody of all evidence in these cases appears to be public as well. Instead, what's alleged here is that the DEA is provided with enough information from intercepts to "always be in the right place at the right time". This kind of evidence --- legit evidence traceable to illegit sources --- would be excluded if it involved torture, but apparently the jurisprudence hasn't caught up to its use in unlawful surveillance.

gnosis 13y ago
"The trials are public." Actually, there mostly are no trials at all. As the article states, "most drug-trafficking defendants plead guilty before trial" One has to wonder if a "justice system" in which the majority of convicts have never even had a trial is worthy of the name.
- tptacek 13y ago
  I find wildly erratic punitive sentencing for accused offenders who choose to go to trial alarming. But I'm not alarmed that the majority of offenders plea out. Trials are enormously expensive, and, in a coldly rational statistical sense, most of the accused are in fact guilty --- the fact patterns in many of these cases and the evidence supporting them are very straightforward. That there would be some incentive for the accused to spare the system the expense of litigation doesn't bother me, especially because the more resources get freed up from pointless controversies, the more resources are available to handle meaningful ones. So, I think we agree that there's a problem, but not what its causes are. Either way: plea out or not, these cases don't get brought without "untainted" evidence. The problem is that the DOJ's definition of "untainted" is subtly broken. "Fruit of a poisonous tree" is a good Google search to follow up on this.
  - Vivtek 13y ago
    Whether it goes to trial or not, whether the evidence is untainted or not, the primary problem with the war on drugs is the extrajudicial punishment system that is seizure of property on mere suspicion. Giving the DEA tips is paramount to simply declaring that anybody you dislike is no longer part of American society - and there's very little recourse, just as with the no-fly list. I'm still not sure how it has come to pass that Americans simply blithely accept all this.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

dobbsbob 13y ago

Police in my country have an agreement with the DEA so no warrants are needed at all. The courts in my country are difficult for the cops to snow with BS so instead they use US courts. The police here use illegal no warrant searches and surveillance that courts here throw out, so they have the local DEA office kidnap the suspect and delivered to the US through extraordinary rendition. Now police provide this illegally obtained evidence which is admissible in the less strict US court. Because they are looking at 100+ yrs prison sentence if they go to trial they always plead out because defense lawyers in the US tell them it's impossible to get evidence thrown out from UK, Canada or French police. It's a tidy arrangement, use the US as the world court to avoid annoying warrants. These are always conspiracy cases where no actual drugs are involved just bugged conversations, informants and emails