Why can't we utilize secret law to improve our schools and infrastructure? Why can't we utilize secret law to fund a national health care program?
Most of these secret law is about how the government operates in the national security arena. We don't reveal that any more than we reveal how we gather intelligence. As for the FISA court opinions, that is not the first court to have secret proceedings. E.g., a former CIA operative was convicted years ago and his appeal to the Second Circuit was shrouded in secrecy.
The notion that the public should be able to weigh in on all this is "good government" gone wild. Reminds me of an Obama campaign pledge in 2008 that his administration would negotiate important things on TV. Can you imagine anybody believing that serious negotiating can take place in public? Shame on Obama for taking advantage of naivete.
The notion that the public should be able to weigh in on all this is "good government" gone wild. Reminds me of an Obama campaign pledge in 2008 that his administration would negotiate important things on TV. Can you imagine anybody believing that serious negotiating can take place in public? Shame on Obama for taking advantage of naivete.
Truth is a crime.
Everything is held from the public today - even the 'laws' that are signed and go into effect are not transparent; most of the content is never in the news, nor can it be found. It took me over 6 months to get a copy of the final ACA, and then I was told, it wasn't actually complete.
More than being 'secret' laws written these days are 1000s of pages, pick winners and losers, and the authors believe the American people are too stupid to comprehend it. Pathetic.
We should have a limit on the length of a piece of legislation as well as a ban on Pork. But we tried that when the dems were in power and Reid said no.
More than being 'secret' laws written these days are 1000s of pages, pick winners and losers, and the authors believe the American people are too stupid to comprehend it. Pathetic.
We should have a limit on the length of a piece of legislation as well as a ban on Pork. But we tried that when the dems were in power and Reid said no.
Forget the nuances implied in this article. Shouldn't "Secret Law" really be called Creeping Dictatorship? Our whole American way of life needs an overhaul and if we wait too long, it will happen through revolution in the streets.
13
Great article. A related issue is that an enormous amount of the workings of government is not technically secret, but is constructively secret because it lacks transparency due to overcomplexity. Do persons filling out various federal forms know the governing law for those forms? Even where such forms list statutory authority, they do not usually enunciate the administrative regulations, executive policies, departmental policies or the corporate policies of a contractor that may empower them and are the real and true governing law. A huge step toward transparency would be to require a complete table of authorities, with citations to all relevant law and policy of every type, to be included with every federal form used by every federal agency and contractor.
2
Secret and Lies
When the Director of National Intelligence perjures himself in testimony to Congress and the President protects him and their mutual secrets, we've got a big problem. Even if we got more transparency, how can we trust it's the truth? After all, this was touted as The Most Transparent Administration Ever.
Granted, the President has a huge and difficult job. As the defacto CEO of a global financial and military EMPIRE that needs constant expansion as well as protection for its markets, aka the 'national interest', s/he also has to keep that fact a secret too otherwise we might not send our sons and daughters to fight their battles. We're already paying for them.
Oh, and let's not forget President Obama's secretly negotiated TPP, Trans-Pacific Partnership, secret ONLY from the public and Congress, NOT the corporations who got seats at the negotiating table.
When the Director of National Intelligence perjures himself in testimony to Congress and the President protects him and their mutual secrets, we've got a big problem. Even if we got more transparency, how can we trust it's the truth? After all, this was touted as The Most Transparent Administration Ever.
Granted, the President has a huge and difficult job. As the defacto CEO of a global financial and military EMPIRE that needs constant expansion as well as protection for its markets, aka the 'national interest', s/he also has to keep that fact a secret too otherwise we might not send our sons and daughters to fight their battles. We're already paying for them.
Oh, and let's not forget President Obama's secretly negotiated TPP, Trans-Pacific Partnership, secret ONLY from the public and Congress, NOT the corporations who got seats at the negotiating table.
11
Not a rhetorical question: does any other country actively disclose the type of information, especially interpretations of national security law, in the manner Ms. Goitein suggests?
3
Over our entire history, to the extent that our government has legislated secretly, by executive order, agency regulation, secret congressional hearings, and the like, it has overwhelmingly been the case that, when the secret is exposed, there has been little value to the secrecy, other than to hide government screw,-ups or the action has been shown to be violative of Constitutional or public legislative prohibitions.
Such legislative secrecy is to be distinguished from the privilege that ought apply to internal discussions concerning what policy ought to be. It was long ago recognized, in law and in government, that certain kinds of discussions can properly be conducted in private. When those discussions lead to policy or action, then, whatever the stated basis for that policy or action may be, ought be public. A major reason for privileged discussion is to permit the participants to freely express and argue the possible best path without the necessity of watching every tentative word or concept for political correctness.
There are circumstances when secret government rules and action are justified -- but those circumstances are far fewer than claimed, and there ought be a clear route for all such rules and actions to eventually become part of the public record, within as short a period as is reasonably required based upon the circumstances of the rule or action.
Such legislative secrecy is to be distinguished from the privilege that ought apply to internal discussions concerning what policy ought to be. It was long ago recognized, in law and in government, that certain kinds of discussions can properly be conducted in private. When those discussions lead to policy or action, then, whatever the stated basis for that policy or action may be, ought be public. A major reason for privileged discussion is to permit the participants to freely express and argue the possible best path without the necessity of watching every tentative word or concept for political correctness.
There are circumstances when secret government rules and action are justified -- but those circumstances are far fewer than claimed, and there ought be a clear route for all such rules and actions to eventually become part of the public record, within as short a period as is reasonably required based upon the circumstances of the rule or action.
5
Where there is marriage without love, the saying goes, there will be love without marriage. In like fashion: Where there is secret law, there will be unauthorized release of information.
Will the future view our Edward Snowdens as patriots and heroes? Will cyber hackers attain hallowed status as defenders of democracy?
A note to the CIA and NSA: You get just what you ask for.
Will the future view our Edward Snowdens as patriots and heroes? Will cyber hackers attain hallowed status as defenders of democracy?
A note to the CIA and NSA: You get just what you ask for.
4
This reminds me of "Shock Doctrine" bad things happen and government and corporations use the bad thing to consolidate power in THEIR best interest
7
When Senator Obama was campaigning for President, he said he would filibuster the FISA law that gave telecomm corporations retroactive immunity for spying on U.S. citizens (which was illegal at the time). Instead he suspended his campaign long enough to go to Washington and vote for the law. Without a whimper of protest. So even before he was elected, those of us who were paying attention knew what we were getting. HRC will "continue his legacy" -- you can bet the farm on that.
8
Secret laws are needed to insure and preserve the freedom we hold so dear in America.
2
One important piece of information is missing here. The US actually has a Public Interest Declassification Board, established by Congress. The Board currently has two vacancies. both presidential appointees. Its reports make sobering reading,
https://www.archives.gov/declassification/pidb/recommendations
But its recommendations seem to be ignored by both Congress and the President.
Especially recommended is the 2012 report
Transforming the Security Classification System
https://www.archives.gov/declassification/pidb/recommendations/transform...
https://www.archives.gov/declassification/pidb/recommendations
But its recommendations seem to be ignored by both Congress and the President.
Especially recommended is the 2012 report
Transforming the Security Classification System
https://www.archives.gov/declassification/pidb/recommendations/transform...
3
Add to this list Hillary Clinton's Kissingerian penchant, reported in these pages yesterday to have been revealed in a secret speech to Goldman Sachs, for covert warfare. Domestically there is a chance she can be pushed to support humane social and economic policies, but with regard to foreign policy she is Dr. Strangelove incarnate.
5
Who shall watch the watchers, the Romans asked. Sadly, 200 centuries later the problem still exists -- to some extent, the X-files paranoia about the government was actually realistic.
4
The paranoia isn't true it only seems so because you don't see all the facts.
I remember being taught about the German Nazi's as a kid. They were described & attributed as having the best most disciplined abilities a man could achieve in science, organization of bureaucracy, soldiering etc.
Recently I saw a documentary and it turns out that was not so. Hitler was a speed freak, the Army and much of the populace used Speed to artificially give themselves energy. The nation wasn't well organized so much as those around them we less organized and sheer force, momentum and propaganda seems to have carried them forward through things they were just a hairs breadth from failing at.
It was basically a nation being run and controlled by a bunch meth addicts who had pharmaceutical meth and guns.
There was no Aryan or any kind of superman. They were drug addicts who had the access to government authority to do what they did. By the time anyone realized they were as evil as they were it was too late.
Our "intelligence" services seem to be similarly lucky and able to hide their failures not as is often implied very good at conspiracy and being both omnipotent and impossibly incompetent at the same time as it suits the story being told.
I remember being taught about the German Nazi's as a kid. They were described & attributed as having the best most disciplined abilities a man could achieve in science, organization of bureaucracy, soldiering etc.
Recently I saw a documentary and it turns out that was not so. Hitler was a speed freak, the Army and much of the populace used Speed to artificially give themselves energy. The nation wasn't well organized so much as those around them we less organized and sheer force, momentum and propaganda seems to have carried them forward through things they were just a hairs breadth from failing at.
It was basically a nation being run and controlled by a bunch meth addicts who had pharmaceutical meth and guns.
There was no Aryan or any kind of superman. They were drug addicts who had the access to government authority to do what they did. By the time anyone realized they were as evil as they were it was too late.
Our "intelligence" services seem to be similarly lucky and able to hide their failures not as is often implied very good at conspiracy and being both omnipotent and impossibly incompetent at the same time as it suits the story being told.
1
Secrets have become the stock and trade of American government and America business.
Hillary's secret e-mails and secret speeches ... Monsanto et al spending tens of millions of dollars -- and possibly more -- to pass a bill, aka the DARK Act (and succeeding this past July), that essentially blocks a simple Vermont law requiring the labeling of genetically engineered foods.
"... with liberty and justice for all ..." (and secrecy, too, but don't ever say that.)
Hillary's secret e-mails and secret speeches ... Monsanto et al spending tens of millions of dollars -- and possibly more -- to pass a bill, aka the DARK Act (and succeeding this past July), that essentially blocks a simple Vermont law requiring the labeling of genetically engineered foods.
"... with liberty and justice for all ..." (and secrecy, too, but don't ever say that.)
4
It is our dependency, wanting gov to be the mommy and daddy who will take care of us, not telling us things that would be bad for us, that powers this, in addition to the fact that people will abuse power, not a governmental "addiction," which is a word/concept that adds nothing to the discussion at all.
It would be nice if the author took more care with words, and thought more deeply about this subject.
Think for yourself?
It would be nice if the author took more care with words, and thought more deeply about this subject.
Think for yourself?
3
Democracy is messy and requires compromises that many would prefer not to make. But the increased power that the executive branch has exercised in recent years (under both parties) is not the answer.
President Obama has made it well known that he disdains the nitty-gritty work of getting legislation passed and dismisses critics with statements like "I won." Is it any wonder our government is gridlocked?
Congress gets it own share of blame. Comprehensive immigration reform under President Bush failed because of an unwillingness on both the left and right to compromise. Social Security reform has failed because Congress lacks the political will to either cut benefits or increase taxes.
It's time for Congress to step up to the plate and enforce their Constitutional duties and not delegate such responsibilities to the Executive Branch.
President Obama has made it well known that he disdains the nitty-gritty work of getting legislation passed and dismisses critics with statements like "I won." Is it any wonder our government is gridlocked?
Congress gets it own share of blame. Comprehensive immigration reform under President Bush failed because of an unwillingness on both the left and right to compromise. Social Security reform has failed because Congress lacks the political will to either cut benefits or increase taxes.
It's time for Congress to step up to the plate and enforce their Constitutional duties and not delegate such responsibilities to the Executive Branch.
2
This editorial is spot on, and yet, there are so very many in our society who want the government to grow ever larger and intrude more and more into our lives.
4
Ernst Frankel addressed this issue here in his Dual State.
https://www.amazon.com/Dual-State-Contribution-Theory-Dictatorship/dp/16...
https://www.amazon.com/Dual-State-Contribution-Theory-Dictatorship/dp/16...
Secret law is the same kind of oxymoron that exists in countries we "bring democracy" to. Just saying.
5
Secret laws under President Obama's totally transparent administration. I am shocked, perhaps we will see an in depth investigation on all the major news programs.
2
Forget 'transparency', 'accountability' and all the modern buzzwords and go to Aquinas: "[Law] is nothing else than an ordinance of reason for the common good, made by him who has care of the community, and promulgated." A law not promulgated is not a law, it's an exercise of power.
6
Thank you for this article. The mindset described also can affect far more areas of government.
For democracy to work, the people need to know just what their government is doing.
For democracy to work, the people need to know just what their government is doing.
2
Seems unlikely that the current President would do that since he has got himself caught up in shady practices too. The use of drones is clearly illegal in the correct proper interpretation of the meaning of that word, as are the resulting deaths of innocent civilians. Shady lawyers creating shady arguments that are never subject to proper open public review do not constitute making law of any kind. It is a con mans game of making excuses and being allowed to out of fear.
If we won't send a soldier to kill someone why are we fighting there at all? This isn't a case of something like WWII or even Vietnam where the enemy is known and defending territory, we are chasing criminals (who possess almost nothing and don't care for anything but destroying the things others have) and using remote weaponry to kill them and many innocents without trial.
A good correlation would be to imagine the LAPD or NYPD or Dallas PD using drones to make hits on "known gang members & or their associates".
It aint right, It aint American.
Why bother having high standards if we aren't even going to attempt to live up to them?
I expect that if we ever get an honest POTUS and Congress that along with the entire W admin President Obama and quite a few of his admin will be facing war crimes charges as well.
If we won't send a soldier to kill someone why are we fighting there at all? This isn't a case of something like WWII or even Vietnam where the enemy is known and defending territory, we are chasing criminals (who possess almost nothing and don't care for anything but destroying the things others have) and using remote weaponry to kill them and many innocents without trial.
A good correlation would be to imagine the LAPD or NYPD or Dallas PD using drones to make hits on "known gang members & or their associates".
It aint right, It aint American.
Why bother having high standards if we aren't even going to attempt to live up to them?
I expect that if we ever get an honest POTUS and Congress that along with the entire W admin President Obama and quite a few of his admin will be facing war crimes charges as well.
2
America is a democracy. Its Constitution states that the people are the ultimate source of power and that the government has only the power that the people explicitly give to it. Thus any "secret law" is not a law at all; it is the government's illegal seizing of power.
Constitution, 10th Amendment: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
This is where the Supreme Court should step in and preserve the democratic powers of the citizens. Otherwise America loses its democracy. America would then become more like what it rebelled against.
Constitution, 10th Amendment: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
This is where the Supreme Court should step in and preserve the democratic powers of the citizens. Otherwise America loses its democracy. America would then become more like what it rebelled against.
5
Here's the thing. At a time when even our government cannot assure itself (or us!) that it won't be hacked (by a foreign govt) or exposed (by a whistleblower), having "secret laws" - made secret by one person alone - seems both both foolish and imprudent.
Just like all of us should ask ourselves, when it comes to moral behavior, "How would I feel if it came out on the Front Page of the Sunday NYTimes?" So should any President - when signing a secret law.
For the record, it's humorous now... when I'm retired: long ago, in my clinical psychology training, I had a nightmare on Sat night. That I'd had an improper relationship with my therapist. And lo and behold, in the rest of the dream, there it was! PRINTED in the Sunday NY Times! My therapist, a wonderful, honorable man, and I had a good laugh about this. On Monday afternoon. "You have a Super Ego as big as a house!" he said.
The NYTimes, my Super Elgin...
Just like all of us should ask ourselves, when it comes to moral behavior, "How would I feel if it came out on the Front Page of the Sunday NYTimes?" So should any President - when signing a secret law.
For the record, it's humorous now... when I'm retired: long ago, in my clinical psychology training, I had a nightmare on Sat night. That I'd had an improper relationship with my therapist. And lo and behold, in the rest of the dream, there it was! PRINTED in the Sunday NY Times! My therapist, a wonderful, honorable man, and I had a good laugh about this. On Monday afternoon. "You have a Super Ego as big as a house!" he said.
The NYTimes, my Super Elgin...
1
Last word was supposed to be Ego. But maybe Lord Elgin wanted to weigh in - secretly. ;-)
2
Thank you for this article. One sad consequence of our ridiculous election is that this sort of thing just won't get discussed. Hillary Clinton will perpetuate similar policies--and we know that she's a fan of covert intervention from her "conversations" with Wall Street. But since Trump is so evil, we are supposed to let these things slide. We thereby lose sight of just how devious and sinister a Democratic administration can be--and has been and is.
So at least let's be clear about what we're really voting for when we vote against Trump. Your essay helps us see that.
So at least let's be clear about what we're really voting for when we vote against Trump. Your essay helps us see that.
2
The person responsible for the infamous “torture memos,” Jay S. Bybee is now enjoying a lifetime appointment to the appellate court. The "kill memo" author, David J. Barron also has a lifetime appointment to the second highest court in the land. What's more disturbing is the secret court must be insular. They all report to one person, Chief Justice Roberts.
1
The land of the free and the home of the brave has become a police state with secret laws, prisons, corrupt politicians, and police that are licensed to kill unarmed civilians with impunity. Corporations buy influent at all levels of the government while avoiding prosecution for fraud and illegal financial manipulations. Professional politician's priority is to fund their reelection campaigns regardless of the cost or source of the money.
The biggest secret of all is the American people let this happen by not participating in the democracy they foolishly watch from the sidelines.
The biggest secret of all is the American people let this happen by not participating in the democracy they foolishly watch from the sidelines.
5
Nothing will change while people wait for elections while laboring under the illusion that they can vote themselves free. There needs to be a general raising of consciousness. People need to fully absorb the reality of the situation and decide to care about something other than money. Then, they will unite. For now, they remain divided, fighting with each other while the banksters rob them blind.
3
The attitude of the executive branch toward openness cannot be stressed too much, and this should be an important issue in the presidential election. For those who value transparent governance, neither presidential candidate is acceptable - Congress will have to take on a greater role in opening up both the executive and the judicial branches.
2
Let's face it. We have built a top-heavy superstructure on the weakening, poorly maintained foundation of the national security state that was constructed during and after WW II. We are now overloaded by the laws, rules, and bureaucracies of the permanent secrecy-surveillance state. During WW II, we had the offices of naval and army intelligence, the FBI, and the OSS. What we have now are several dozen, overlapping, barely coordinated intelligence and law enforcement agencies. They are hugely expensive. They cannot even decide what information is classified and what is not, viz., the Clinton email scandal. It will take an unimaginable legislative and political upheaval to sort this mess out and bring it under the control required to protect the civil liberties of American citizens and the national security, whatever that means, of the United States.
2
"In 2015, Congress passed a law requiring more transparency in FISA court opinions, and the office of the director of national intelligence has published all of its “Intelligence Community Directives” online."
The “Intelligence Community Directives” can be seen at two different sites:
https://www.dni.gov/index.php/intelligence-community/ic-policies-reports...
http://fas.org/irp/dni/icd/
The second site states: "With a couple of exceptions (e.g. ICD 2005-1 and ICD-1), all ICDs are issued sequentially within one of nine series of policy areas"
Given that statement and the likelihood that bureaucrats start off each sub-section with a policy ending in "00", it appears that the following ICDs are not available on either site: 105, 303, 305-309, 400, 401, 600, 603-609, 611, 613-622, 624-629, 631-649, 657-659, 711-730, 733-749, 800, 901, 903-905
Also, 708 is listed but not available.
So there must be some sort of secret exemption that allows the office of the director of national intelligence to not publish some of its “Intelligence Community Directives” online.
The “Intelligence Community Directives” can be seen at two different sites:
https://www.dni.gov/index.php/intelligence-community/ic-policies-reports...
http://fas.org/irp/dni/icd/
The second site states: "With a couple of exceptions (e.g. ICD 2005-1 and ICD-1), all ICDs are issued sequentially within one of nine series of policy areas"
Given that statement and the likelihood that bureaucrats start off each sub-section with a policy ending in "00", it appears that the following ICDs are not available on either site: 105, 303, 305-309, 400, 401, 600, 603-609, 611, 613-622, 624-629, 631-649, 657-659, 711-730, 733-749, 800, 901, 903-905
Also, 708 is listed but not available.
So there must be some sort of secret exemption that allows the office of the director of national intelligence to not publish some of its “Intelligence Community Directives” online.
So much for the hackneyed adage "Ignorance of the law is no excuse."
2
I agree with the writers who note that this is a vague article. It needs careful editing resulting in precise language. As others have pointed out Congress makes laws which have to be interpreted by the executive and judicial branches. If we don't want "secret" law it is Congress' job to write laws in clear, precise language and then to investigate how the law is being applied and to cooperate with the executive and judicial branches to be sure the wishes of Congress are being executed.
We've had too much unsubstantiated claims recently to tolerate them in an Op-Ed in the NYTimes.
We've had too much unsubstantiated claims recently to tolerate them in an Op-Ed in the NYTimes.
1
It's pretty simple: we need a Supreme Court ruling that a law or regulation which is not publicly published is a legal nullity.
Pity that that will never happen.
Pity that that will never happen.
1
There is really nothing new about the so-called 'secret law' described by this article. The following reference citations from law journals all relate to these kinds of controls (sanctions) quietly made against authors and inventors in the computer industry in the United States:
Chisum, Donald S. Chisum on Patents (Vol. 1) : § 1.06 Inventions Relating to National Security, Atomic Energy and Aeronautics and Space. Release through 113, Sept. 2008 p. 1-363 to 1-398. Matthew Bender 2008. ISBN: 9780820515250
Franks, Renae Angeroth. The National Security Agency and Its Interference with Private Sector Computer Security. 72 Iowa L. Rev. 1015 (1987)
Greenspoon, Robert. U.S. Government Control Over the Export of Scientific Research and Other Technical Data: Holes in the Sieve. 16 Mich. J. Int’l L. 583 (1995)
Lee, Sabing H. Protecting the Private Inventor Under the Peacetime Provisions of the Invention Secrecy Act. 12 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 345 (1997)
Winters, Steven B. and John A. Bloomgren. How the US Government Controls Technology. 19 Computer & Internet Lawyer 1 (2002)
Chisum, Donald S. Chisum on Patents (Vol. 1) : § 1.06 Inventions Relating to National Security, Atomic Energy and Aeronautics and Space. Release through 113, Sept. 2008 p. 1-363 to 1-398. Matthew Bender 2008. ISBN: 9780820515250
Franks, Renae Angeroth. The National Security Agency and Its Interference with Private Sector Computer Security. 72 Iowa L. Rev. 1015 (1987)
Greenspoon, Robert. U.S. Government Control Over the Export of Scientific Research and Other Technical Data: Holes in the Sieve. 16 Mich. J. Int’l L. 583 (1995)
Lee, Sabing H. Protecting the Private Inventor Under the Peacetime Provisions of the Invention Secrecy Act. 12 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 345 (1997)
Winters, Steven B. and John A. Bloomgren. How the US Government Controls Technology. 19 Computer & Internet Lawyer 1 (2002)
This reminds me of "Animal House", where Dean Wormer had the Deltas on "double secret probation".
Telling people that they have violated a law that is secret is bizarrrely authoritarian. My understanding is that you can not be prosecuted for an act committed before a law was passed making the act illegal. Keeping the laws secret and then prosecuting is just as bad.
Telling people that they have violated a law that is secret is bizarrrely authoritarian. My understanding is that you can not be prosecuted for an act committed before a law was passed making the act illegal. Keeping the laws secret and then prosecuting is just as bad.
3
Who do we trust to make decisions that cannot be intelligently micromanaged by committee or sensibly made public? At this point I'd not trust the hands of Congress or the voting public in deciding matters of gravity or even either being privy to too much delicate information - that's not on principle, but the fundamental tenets of democracy begin to falter when a sizeable portion of the citizenry is eager to elect a demagogue and Congress has become a partisan circus. If executive officialdom were to fall into the wrong hands at this moment - with a hobbled SCOTUS and the mind-bogglingly complex map of global conflict currently raging - this country would be in very serious trouble. I sometimes find myself wishing rather idiotically for a philosopher king. It's a commonplace that democracy is messy; sometimes it's perhaps only held together safely by necessary subterfuge. But we all know where the rub is there. Good article.
It is for this very reason that our vote is a very precious right and should be exercised with great thought. "In God we trust" just does not cover it.
In his seminal "Leviathan," Thomas Hobbes wrote, among 14 rules for governing officials : "Reserve no powers over others, which you do not wish others to reserve against yourself." This is a sort of "reverse Golden Rule."
If the government cannot be relied upon to respect the civil liberties and privacy of its citizens, then it should not rely on the citizens to respect any right to government's privacy. In this atmosphere of "hidden law," citizens must guess and speculate what the law is; in the U.K., there were "Star Chamber' proceedings, the notorious Irish "Diplock Courts" and now the FISA Court. These secret Tribunals operate in a vacuum, unencumbered by published law, producing secret decisions, creating nightmares out of Franz Kafka's dystopian novel "The Trial."
In a sense, the government is creating its own "blowback" in the actions of Chelsea Manning, Edward Snowden and others. A government which operates in the shadows cannot rely on the forced compliance or patriotism of subservient subjects.
As Benjamin Franklin famously wrote: Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary security, deserve neither liberty, nor security."
If the government cannot be relied upon to respect the civil liberties and privacy of its citizens, then it should not rely on the citizens to respect any right to government's privacy. In this atmosphere of "hidden law," citizens must guess and speculate what the law is; in the U.K., there were "Star Chamber' proceedings, the notorious Irish "Diplock Courts" and now the FISA Court. These secret Tribunals operate in a vacuum, unencumbered by published law, producing secret decisions, creating nightmares out of Franz Kafka's dystopian novel "The Trial."
In a sense, the government is creating its own "blowback" in the actions of Chelsea Manning, Edward Snowden and others. A government which operates in the shadows cannot rely on the forced compliance or patriotism of subservient subjects.
As Benjamin Franklin famously wrote: Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary security, deserve neither liberty, nor security."
1
Authors and inventors in the United States now must consider the types of 'secret law' described in this article to better understand professional issues. These are issues where the person's career appears to be quietly influenced by the Government, Government contractors, or academia that accepts Federal funding.
The FISA Quarantine Hypothesis and the Defense Export Hypothesis are two examples.
These were created by those participating in the engineering arts related to open computing systems – those where computer hardware and software can be inspected for viral implants and back door entry points. However, these same hypotheses might be applied to other engineering and academic fields that involve 'dual use' science or technology. These are fields of invention that have wide civilian applications, but may also be of interest to the Federal Government, and specifically to the U.S. Department of Defense, Department of Energy, NASA, Department of Homeland security or to law enforcement at-large.
The FISA Quarantine Hypothesis suggests that punitive actions taken against authors and inventors are legal instruments so long as they are ordered by the FISA Court in Washington D.C. The Defense Export Hypothesis suggests that these same punitive actions are illegal instruments motivated by private defense industries who could not otherwise garner export licenses on arms unless they are equipped with viral implants and back door entry points.
The FISA Quarantine Hypothesis and the Defense Export Hypothesis are two examples.
These were created by those participating in the engineering arts related to open computing systems – those where computer hardware and software can be inspected for viral implants and back door entry points. However, these same hypotheses might be applied to other engineering and academic fields that involve 'dual use' science or technology. These are fields of invention that have wide civilian applications, but may also be of interest to the Federal Government, and specifically to the U.S. Department of Defense, Department of Energy, NASA, Department of Homeland security or to law enforcement at-large.
The FISA Quarantine Hypothesis suggests that punitive actions taken against authors and inventors are legal instruments so long as they are ordered by the FISA Court in Washington D.C. The Defense Export Hypothesis suggests that these same punitive actions are illegal instruments motivated by private defense industries who could not otherwise garner export licenses on arms unless they are equipped with viral implants and back door entry points.
1
Secret agreements between ours and foreign governments make it impossible for democracy to reach the realm of foreign policy. Our elite has skittered far off from common sense and makes itself removed from correction in its secrecy. Make public the secret agreements that now put us at the Bear's den on a war footing.
Hollywood could help by halting the constant diet of seductive 007-type movies that predispose Americans to accept the effectiveness of intelligence services, which, if fairly evaluated, might just turn out to be self-sabotage.
Hollywood could help by halting the constant diet of seductive 007-type movies that predispose Americans to accept the effectiveness of intelligence services, which, if fairly evaluated, might just turn out to be self-sabotage.
This goes to show that Edward Snowden is an American hero who should be exempted from prosecution for revealing to the American people that their government is secretly spying on them. Hopefully, there will be more leaks which will reveal the full extent of the surveillance and the hidden agenda behind it.
8
Even my father, an old-school, straight-ticket-voting Republican (well, maybe not in THIS election) who served in the Pentagon says this. He thinks they should give Snowden a medal and a parade and welcome him home as a champion of freedom.
2
Do you regard the hackers who leaked the Democratic Party emails as heroes?
2
In the meantime, Hillary wants him tried and imprisoned for treason, and Trump would probably try to make the whole "FEMA camps are really concentration camps waiting for when marshall is imposed" conspiracy theory a reality
2
"Secret law denies us the ability to shape the rules that govern official conduct through the democratic process. It prevents us from holding the government accountable for violations, rendering such violations more likely."
Which is precisely why it exists: Government officials always want the ability to do things without repercussions.
Which is precisely why it exists: Government officials always want the ability to do things without repercussions.
1
"Which is precisely why it exists: Government officials always want the ability to do things without repercussions."
The GOP had been expanding the false protection for actions while in office since reagan. Used to be public servants were held to account for the shady things they did.
The GOP had been expanding the false protection for actions while in office since reagan. Used to be public servants were held to account for the shady things they did.
1
The mass gerrymandering of 2010-2011 https://www.salon.com/2016/06/13/this_is_how_the_gop_rigged_congress_the... gives us an unrepresentative congress, just as much as unlimited donations renders us powerless to vote for who we want.
This unaccountable government that shouldn't even be in power in the first place, then goes rogue in secret to get away with crimes we never asked for.
How can we get our country back from all of this?
This unaccountable government that shouldn't even be in power in the first place, then goes rogue in secret to get away with crimes we never asked for.
How can we get our country back from all of this?
7
We could stop rewarding them by re-electing them time and again, for one thing. Stop supporting the status quo and demanding knee-jerk solutions ot events that are hyped up to instill fear.
2
I just had a thought; How about maps to the homes of the 1%like there are maps to the stars homes in LA? Then we would know who & where to protest.
Secrecy is the product of weak and incompetent leaders. They could easily be removed, but our failure to employ recall or impeachment perpetuates the problem of secrecy in government.
6
We wouldn't need to use recall (not available, in any event, for federal office) or impeachment if we would use the first choice - the ballot box. Stop reelecting incumbents just because of the D or R after their name!
2
We first need to have an honestly run system. The GOP has corrupted every part of it to hold onto power they could not get by free and fair election. Their districts are gerrymandered to prevent such things from happening.
None are so blind...
America's government did not transmogrify into a criminal enterprise openly serving the interests of money powers and flouting the nation's highest laws overnight. The people are letting it happen. They're ignoring the danger, whether by way of apathy, complicity or naivety.
Read history and do your job, citizens.
Use the system while you still have a chance to do so.
America's government did not transmogrify into a criminal enterprise openly serving the interests of money powers and flouting the nation's highest laws overnight. The people are letting it happen. They're ignoring the danger, whether by way of apathy, complicity or naivety.
Read history and do your job, citizens.
Use the system while you still have a chance to do so.
7
No the people are not responsible for allowing this to happen. This was done in secret by the GOP and was reagan's plan all along. The GOP has been systematically deconstructing our government and taking away the people's ability to wield power over them for decades. It was reagan who made secret law so ubiquitous just 6 short years after Congress took apart the corrupt system the CIA & FBI had created.
The people have little power to correct it now as the GOP have gerrymandered the nation to keep themselves in power. How can you recall or impeach someone who has a bullet proof voting district?
The people have little power to correct it now as the GOP have gerrymandered the nation to keep themselves in power. How can you recall or impeach someone who has a bullet proof voting district?
1
@magic: Wrong. The people are a physical force of nature. They hold *all* of the real power.
I speak of reality you speak of fantasy and illusion.
The power is their vote. Their vote has been twisted into meaninglessness by the GOP gerrymandering voting districts so they can win more seats than their actual numbers of voters would honestly allow.
The power is their vote. Their vote has been twisted into meaninglessness by the GOP gerrymandering voting districts so they can win more seats than their actual numbers of voters would honestly allow.
Big Business, Wall Street Banks and Big Gov, have just about cornered us...
Read Huxley's Brave New World and Orwell's 1984, and think of the sickening audacity of what Wells Fargo Bank, just recently discovered, did to many millions of its customers.
Real news dwindles even more in favor of news-o-tainment.
Read how few big corporations pay more than a little tax--or none, even getting tax rebates for consecutive years.
Read Huxley's Brave New World and Orwell's 1984, and think of the sickening audacity of what Wells Fargo Bank, just recently discovered, did to many millions of its customers.
Real news dwindles even more in favor of news-o-tainment.
Read how few big corporations pay more than a little tax--or none, even getting tax rebates for consecutive years.
6
Not only the sickening audacity of the actions Wells Fargo engaged in, but that it also appears there will be no consequences for John Stumpf other than "stepping down"... meaning that he still retains his golden parachute. No indictment, no trial. And apparently no conseqences for middle managers who condoned and pushed the internal practices. And very little assistance, in practice, to the thousands of customers whose credit ratings were damaged by those actions. Nor compensation for other downline effects such as denial of loans based on credit rating damage.
It is extremely rare that corporate malfeasance atbthe top tiers ever suffers the consequences for criminal action. The propensity for "secret law" is as big a problem in the corporate world as it is in government, for understandable reasons. It provides cover for the perpetrators. Or, perhaps.... perpe-'traitors'.
It is extremely rare that corporate malfeasance atbthe top tiers ever suffers the consequences for criminal action. The propensity for "secret law" is as big a problem in the corporate world as it is in government, for understandable reasons. It provides cover for the perpetrators. Or, perhaps.... perpe-'traitors'.
2
Secret law is no law.
5
Yet another tidbit leading American citizens to question just how much of Ben Franklin's republic we have been able to keep. A genuinely sad commentary.
6
The biggest "secret law" in this country is how the electoral college works.
No it isn't.
"The Electoral College is a controversial mechanism of presidential elections that was created by the framers of the U.S. Constitution as a compromise for the presidential election process. At the time, some politicians believed a purely popular election was too reckless, while others objected to giving Congress the power to select the president. The compromise was to set up an Electoral College system that allowed voters to vote for electors, who would then cast their votes for candidates, a system described in Article II, section 1 of the Constitution."
http://people.howstuffworks.com/question472.htm
"The Electoral College is a controversial mechanism of presidential elections that was created by the framers of the U.S. Constitution as a compromise for the presidential election process. At the time, some politicians believed a purely popular election was too reckless, while others objected to giving Congress the power to select the president. The compromise was to set up an Electoral College system that allowed voters to vote for electors, who would then cast their votes for candidates, a system described in Article II, section 1 of the Constitution."
http://people.howstuffworks.com/question472.htm
1
Just soes you know- the candidacy of Trump is exactly the reason the founding fathers created the Electoral College, to prevent the rabble from electing a dangerous demagogue.
2
All of which serves to help justify the actions of Edward Snowden and various other leakers.
10
Snowden and Manning were phony's acting out. In Manning's case to inflict harm as punishment for perceived slights and in Snowdens case I am still not convinced he is not a commie spy.
Both of them set up a situation where they point and say "see they are not following the law" while at the same time insisting that they should not be subject to that same law.
Both of them set up a situation where they point and say "see they are not following the law" while at the same time insisting that they should not be subject to that same law.
" .... congressional oversight should stand in for public scrutiny. But the system breaks down in practice."
The breakdown occurs primarily in congressional grandstanding and individual representatives running off at the mouth. Perhaps more information would be shared if these bozos 1) could keep their mouths shut; 2) had anything relevant to say when they opened their mouths.
The breakdown occurs primarily in congressional grandstanding and individual representatives running off at the mouth. Perhaps more information would be shared if these bozos 1) could keep their mouths shut; 2) had anything relevant to say when they opened their mouths.
A culture of secrecy should be perfect for someone like Hillary
Clinton who has made a career - as she admits - of speaking out of both sides of her mouth, and being as opaque as possible about her behavior.
Clinton who has made a career - as she admits - of speaking out of both sides of her mouth, and being as opaque as possible about her behavior.
12
"In the realm of national security, where Congress tends to tread lightly, other sources of law predominate"
That may be common now, but it has not always been common, and it is not essential.
The American Revolution was fought led by the Continental Congress that did not even have an executive. That war was run by Congressional Committees. It can be done, we did it.
In other wars, Congress got deeply involved.
The Civil War was closely monitored by Congress. That was the first modern war, and Congress was deeply involved in ways that helped.
Even in WW2, Congress got deeply involved in questions now deferred. The Truman Committee supervised procurement, even getting the B-26 medium bomber redesigned with new wings on threat of cancellation, based on a confrontation in open committee between Truman and the leaders of the corporation making the plane.
After WW1, committees of investigation determined that Congress ought to have gotten more involved in that war. Those lessons led to greater Congressional oversight in WW2.
If we have secret laws, it is not just because bureaucrats do it. Congress has final say. It allows this. It can do it differently, it has before. This is a choice. A bad choice.
That may be common now, but it has not always been common, and it is not essential.
The American Revolution was fought led by the Continental Congress that did not even have an executive. That war was run by Congressional Committees. It can be done, we did it.
In other wars, Congress got deeply involved.
The Civil War was closely monitored by Congress. That was the first modern war, and Congress was deeply involved in ways that helped.
Even in WW2, Congress got deeply involved in questions now deferred. The Truman Committee supervised procurement, even getting the B-26 medium bomber redesigned with new wings on threat of cancellation, based on a confrontation in open committee between Truman and the leaders of the corporation making the plane.
After WW1, committees of investigation determined that Congress ought to have gotten more involved in that war. Those lessons led to greater Congressional oversight in WW2.
If we have secret laws, it is not just because bureaucrats do it. Congress has final say. It allows this. It can do it differently, it has before. This is a choice. A bad choice.
15
There is no such thing as secret law. There are interpreations of law that are secret in order to protect the American people. A law in the United States is a public act of Congress. The term "secret law" is inflammatory and misleading.
It is not "widely considered" that the monitoring of international communications is "illegal." In an article dealing with law, the author must be precise in language. "Widely considered" is vague and misleading.
The author should have done a better job in descrbing what "wiretapping" actually involved. Once again, the word "wiretapping" is hopelessly vague in a wireless world. Very few people actually understand what the government did. The author should also point out that there are no records of non-terrorists who suffered in any way from government monitoring.
The purposeful infliction of pain, extreme fatigue, sensory overload, and fear of drowning (called "torture" here) is repugnant, counter-productive, and unethical in the extreme. However, the author fails to advocate for proper treatment of detainees by casually linking torture and surveillance in a swirl of vague, misleading, and incerndiary arguments.
It is not "widely considered" that the monitoring of international communications is "illegal." In an article dealing with law, the author must be precise in language. "Widely considered" is vague and misleading.
The author should have done a better job in descrbing what "wiretapping" actually involved. Once again, the word "wiretapping" is hopelessly vague in a wireless world. Very few people actually understand what the government did. The author should also point out that there are no records of non-terrorists who suffered in any way from government monitoring.
The purposeful infliction of pain, extreme fatigue, sensory overload, and fear of drowning (called "torture" here) is repugnant, counter-productive, and unethical in the extreme. However, the author fails to advocate for proper treatment of detainees by casually linking torture and surveillance in a swirl of vague, misleading, and incerndiary arguments.
21
Law is the entire system of rules made by a government. A secret is not accessible by the public. Statutes made by Congress are law and are public. Certain rules, regulations, and directives made by the executive branch and bureaucrats are also law, but not accessible to the public, and are, therefore, secret. Thus, Secret Law.
1
"...When President Obama issued procedures and standards for using lethal force against suspected terrorists overseas, agency officials were bound to follow them..."
During WWII, any American who joined the German army would be considered an enemy combatant, just as today any American who joins an overseas terrorist group should be.
The Left wants to be protected from terrorist acts but wants to do it by singing Kumbaya, because kindness will surely work, right?
During WWII, any American who joined the German army would be considered an enemy combatant, just as today any American who joins an overseas terrorist group should be.
The Left wants to be protected from terrorist acts but wants to do it by singing Kumbaya, because kindness will surely work, right?
The article states"
"When President Obama issued procedures and standards for using lethal force against suspected terrorists overseas, agency officials were bound to follow them."
No, they were not; no more than Germans were bound to follow the directives of the Nazi during WWII.
Nor is, the FISA Court, a Court at all...but rather, an agency which operates illegally in its current form.
Nor is "secret law" Law at all. It is bold-faced illegality hiding under cover of the phrase national security.
I guess the NYT writers stopped thinking about what they were writing.
"When President Obama issued procedures and standards for using lethal force against suspected terrorists overseas, agency officials were bound to follow them."
No, they were not; no more than Germans were bound to follow the directives of the Nazi during WWII.
Nor is, the FISA Court, a Court at all...but rather, an agency which operates illegally in its current form.
Nor is "secret law" Law at all. It is bold-faced illegality hiding under cover of the phrase national security.
I guess the NYT writers stopped thinking about what they were writing.
10
If the law is kept secret, then does ignorance of the law become an excuse? Indeed, with all the classification and prison terms associated with it, is knowing what the law is now a crime? And how are people punished for breaking a law the existence of which they did not know? and for knowing a law that they are not supposed to know?
8
It is understood that the government may have to occasionally operate in the shadows in order to protect the country. However, the rules governing these operations should always be exposed to the light of day. A government that operates in secret utilizing secret rules is not a government of the people. It is a government of the autocrats.
56
HOW NAIVE the Writer and readers still are!
The world is governed by a secret shadow unaccountable to only itself, and here is the break-off point from the fig leaf of not only democracy but decency.
Wretched is this country where intelligence is left with only this shadow meaning because intelligence in the light of intelligence has long but been relinquished from the records of the American Century and its Empire without a dubt doomed by it!
The world is governed by a secret shadow unaccountable to only itself, and here is the break-off point from the fig leaf of not only democracy but decency.
Wretched is this country where intelligence is left with only this shadow meaning because intelligence in the light of intelligence has long but been relinquished from the records of the American Century and its Empire without a dubt doomed by it!
3
When someone as thoughtful, intelligent,and measured as Barack Obama may be legitimately criticized for using secret law, the very idea of someone like Trump exercising such power out of his own personal prejudices and fits of pique should give even some of his supporters pause.
6
Sure, Obama would never misuse the "power" and do something like assassinate U.S. citizens without due process. Oh wait...
7
These issues represent our general paranoid outlook about other nations in that we are the people who dropped and invented the bomb to end World War II.
Ever since we have been a nation of paranoid souls knowing that eventually the same thing could happen to us. We have to created bigger bombs, bigger secrets, for the ever growing hatred that we have created all over the world.
Ever since we have been a nation of paranoid souls knowing that eventually the same thing could happen to us. We have to created bigger bombs, bigger secrets, for the ever growing hatred that we have created all over the world.
3
I would like to pose the question of whether 'Arbitration' in the workplace or imposed upon an unwilling consumer can be a source of 'secret law'? So much of the process seems to take place in secret, but are the precedents set in the arbitration hearings carried forward into other hearings? If a company is found guiltless in obvious neglect cases, or a corporate officer found non-liable in a rape case in which a standard court would have convicted, does that make others immune in the same situations?
7
More evidence that the Republicans and Democrats are fringe parties. Vote Libertarian
2
One of the many reasons I'm voting for Gary Johnson
1
The very term "secret law" is an oxymoron, and an Orwellian one at that.
2
The governments addiction to Lies!
1
Not only secret laws, but also secret legal defenses. The "state secrets" doctrine allows the government to use to shut down inconvenient civil lawsuits. This includes those between private parties where the government is not even a party to the lawsuit.
Recently, the government used the "state secrets" doctrine to shut down a private defamation action between Victor Restis and the lobbying group United Against a Nuclear Iran (UANI). UANI had publicly accused Restis of helping to Iran violate US sanctions against Iran. Restis denied this, and sued. The Dep't of Justice intervened. It claimed allowing the lawsuit to go forward would endanger state secrets. Based on secret allegations by unnamed government employees in a secret hearing in which the plaintiff had zero input and was not even allowed to participate, the court dismissed the lawsuit.
The question remains how a private lobbying front obtained US state secrets. The Obama Administration has been quite aggressive in going after those who leak state secrets. But the lobbying front UANI is exempted--and why is itself secret.
Secret legal defenses, secret evidence, secret ties between the government and private lobbying groups, secret exemptions from laws against leaking state secrets.
Just what we need in a democracy.
Recently, the government used the "state secrets" doctrine to shut down a private defamation action between Victor Restis and the lobbying group United Against a Nuclear Iran (UANI). UANI had publicly accused Restis of helping to Iran violate US sanctions against Iran. Restis denied this, and sued. The Dep't of Justice intervened. It claimed allowing the lawsuit to go forward would endanger state secrets. Based on secret allegations by unnamed government employees in a secret hearing in which the plaintiff had zero input and was not even allowed to participate, the court dismissed the lawsuit.
The question remains how a private lobbying front obtained US state secrets. The Obama Administration has been quite aggressive in going after those who leak state secrets. But the lobbying front UANI is exempted--and why is itself secret.
Secret legal defenses, secret evidence, secret ties between the government and private lobbying groups, secret exemptions from laws against leaking state secrets.
Just what we need in a democracy.
1
Now this is an area where the self-style Press can do some service, instead of bigging up demagogues and media freaks. But it would involve hard work. Oh dear.
2
What is the black and white Constitutional basis for unwritten law? While we are at it, where is the same for Congressional- Executive Agreements like NAFTA, GATT and the TPP?
One does not have to be a lawyer to read our Constitution. It says that "No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
Knowing that, exactly how did civil forfeiture come into being and such widespread abuse? Or the disappearances of US citizens after 9-11 without Habeas Corpus and other well established rights?
Secrecy and Democracy do not mix except on a temporary basis under the most extreme conditions. Lawyers and politicians are using secrecy to undermine the will of Americans and the intent of our Constitution.
One does not have to be a lawyer to read our Constitution. It says that "No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
Knowing that, exactly how did civil forfeiture come into being and such widespread abuse? Or the disappearances of US citizens after 9-11 without Habeas Corpus and other well established rights?
Secrecy and Democracy do not mix except on a temporary basis under the most extreme conditions. Lawyers and politicians are using secrecy to undermine the will of Americans and the intent of our Constitution.
10
@David Gregory: Your comment alludes to an elephant in the room that the complicit Little Eichmanns that serve the interests of power assiduously fail to notice. America's government is openly flouting its own Constitution. In effect, the country now has a criminal government. People need to think that over...
6
Right. As Hillary has said, "You need a public and private position". The problem is confounding as politicians are supposed to be public servants.
1
Sorry - this is not a new American "exceptionalism" invention. Been going on since governments were formed and will continue to go on. Remember Jack Nicholson - "The truth - you can't handle the truth!" The only hope is to elect/appoint moral individuals with a sense of human decency.
13
I agree in so long as consideration of morality and decency is independent from religious or ideological affiliation. Is that even possible in the public sphere? I guess that's the real IQ test for democracy and its future.
Absent in this op-ed piece is Edward Snowden, the American hero who has done more than anyone in generations to awaken people around the world to the reality of what the vast secret government does to its citizens.
Mr. Snowden has sacrificed his life to bring us the news that our government was (and probably still is) spying on its people to an extent that would make the Stasi, the now-defunct East German secret police, green with envy.
Mr. Obama, stand up and do something courageous that will definitely burnish your legacy for future generations: pardon this young patriot and let him come home.
Mr. Snowden has sacrificed his life to bring us the news that our government was (and probably still is) spying on its people to an extent that would make the Stasi, the now-defunct East German secret police, green with envy.
Mr. Obama, stand up and do something courageous that will definitely burnish your legacy for future generations: pardon this young patriot and let him come home.
11
The authors should have included federal agencies’ novel “interpretations” of existing laws as examples of “secret laws.” For example, the Department of Education has decided that Title IX requires colleges and universities to conduct sexual assault investigations and tribunals to determine guilt even though Title IX makes no mention of sexual assault. The Justice Department has determined that gender identity rather than chromosomes, genitalia and reproductive functions determines sex, giving transgender people the “right” to use restrooms of their choice. The Justice Department also argues that prosecutorial discretion gives the president authority to override the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act by granting millions of illegal immigrants immunity to deportation.
4
Very timely - both candidates should be pressed on their views of such "secret laws." It is also worth remembering that totalitarian regimes or merely dictatorial ones were wont to pass retroactive laws, making past activities that were legal suddenly illegal and subject to prosecution. The GOP candidate for President shows no respect for law as it is so we might well expect him to seek
revenge on his opponents by this kind of "legal" hindsight.
revenge on his opponents by this kind of "legal" hindsight.
18
I think the article should explain more clearly that these "secret laws" are not the same types of laws that prescribe or proscribe regular citizens' behaviors. These are really more regulations governing government behavior, and the people who need to know about them in order to comply are given training opportunities in order to do so. No one needs to worry about secret police knocking on your door because you broke the "secret law."
3
"the people who need to know about them in order to comply"
What about the people who need to know about them in order to decide whether they approve of what their government is doing in their name?
What about the people who need to know about them in order to decide whether they approve of what their government is doing in their name?
2
carlos
One sided secret FISA laws can literally order anyone to do anything and jail you if you refuse or tell anyone including a lawyer. Most of our tech companies were ordered by these laws to "join" the PRISM program and funnel ALL customer to the NSA. The companies had to lie to their customers and shareholders and tell them their data was secure, not being turned over to the US government. Before Snowden, the public had no idea that FISA courts could issue massively broad rulings. Call it regulation if you want, semantics does not make it less tyrannical and democracy destroying.
One sided secret FISA laws can literally order anyone to do anything and jail you if you refuse or tell anyone including a lawyer. Most of our tech companies were ordered by these laws to "join" the PRISM program and funnel ALL customer to the NSA. The companies had to lie to their customers and shareholders and tell them their data was secure, not being turned over to the US government. Before Snowden, the public had no idea that FISA courts could issue massively broad rulings. Call it regulation if you want, semantics does not make it less tyrannical and democracy destroying.
This is why Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning are true heros, sacrificing everything in order to expose the evils of unfettered power. Hopefully, they will inspire many more to expose the corruption underlying the current policy to classify anything and everything.
Exposure is only the first step. Prosecution of war criminals, especially those in high office is the only remedy. Unfortunately, we have yet to do that.
Demand it!
Exposure is only the first step. Prosecution of war criminals, especially those in high office is the only remedy. Unfortunately, we have yet to do that.
Demand it!
11
The responsibility both for enabling and failing to monitor "secret" law lies in the hands of Congress. Only Congress has the power to make laws and approve budgetary expenditure. Congress shirks that responsibility by passing blanket laws delegating such power to the Executive and then looking the other way after passing budgetary provisions for it to be carried out. When things go wrong, Congress then (with its fingers crossed behind its back) pretends shock, horror and innocence. By the way, which party currently controls Congress?
33
Was it any different when the other (i.e., non-current) party controlled Congress? I don't recall, for example the Pelosi/Reid Congress stepping up to the plate either!
3
To George S: True enough, George. It is a national failing.
5
Reminds me of when the Animal House fraternity was on double secret probation. Back in the good old days when secret laws were seen as stupid and laughable.
4
there is a culture of secrecy that permeates DC bureaucrats and can be found in every single U.S. agency. the IRS, e.g., notwithstanding significant FOIA losses in court, continues to create new secret law that can only be wrestled out by additional litigation. Most of this secrecy is driven by fear. I often wondered how much of this secrecy would evaporate if HQ was moved out of town.
1
REALLY! It's been my experience in the Defense Industry for decades. If you want to talk about illegalities, just send in a few secrete reporters and you'll have more examples of law breaking that you could write about. Sex, money, collusion and most of negligence.
This article is not even touching the top of the iceberg. Good luck!
This article is not even touching the top of the iceberg. Good luck!
7
Congress and the American public, have sit idly by and allowed this mess to emerge and grow.
Congress has written weak laws that grant power to unelected bureaucrats with language about how "the Secretary shall make rules...", to interpret statutes, and promulgate thousands of regulations and power for themselves. It is running amok.
The American people have come to view the presidency as THE government, the sole power to be fawned over (including their spouse in some bizarre celebrity-like adoration) and deferred to in virtually anything. We read ad nauseam about the president's "legacy", the indignation at any criticism of him, the defend at all costs attitude. A "phone and a pen" is good enough for many, it seems.
Well, this is what you get, folks. And the last eight years of the "most transparent administration in history" has only made it worse. Add in that we are now on the verge of electing someone for whom secrecy and disdain for rules are her main operating modes.
The people need to wake up and demand that Congress rein in the executive branch. The courts need to invalidate any sanction/punishment created by the bureaucracy rather than our elected representatives. Stop worrying about what dress the First Lady wore last week and focus on what's important. It may be too late to stem the tide of all of this if we don't start to wake up now to the shadow government we are allowing to fester and grow.
Congress has written weak laws that grant power to unelected bureaucrats with language about how "the Secretary shall make rules...", to interpret statutes, and promulgate thousands of regulations and power for themselves. It is running amok.
The American people have come to view the presidency as THE government, the sole power to be fawned over (including their spouse in some bizarre celebrity-like adoration) and deferred to in virtually anything. We read ad nauseam about the president's "legacy", the indignation at any criticism of him, the defend at all costs attitude. A "phone and a pen" is good enough for many, it seems.
Well, this is what you get, folks. And the last eight years of the "most transparent administration in history" has only made it worse. Add in that we are now on the verge of electing someone for whom secrecy and disdain for rules are her main operating modes.
The people need to wake up and demand that Congress rein in the executive branch. The courts need to invalidate any sanction/punishment created by the bureaucracy rather than our elected representatives. Stop worrying about what dress the First Lady wore last week and focus on what's important. It may be too late to stem the tide of all of this if we don't start to wake up now to the shadow government we are allowing to fester and grow.
32
George S, you miss a key distinction: "administrative law" is not "secret law." Regulations are proposed and implemented for many agencies by the agency heads under procedures that are specified and they are public. "Secret laws," as used here, are truly "secret," i.e. classified and protected from public scrutiny. Administrative law is old, long established and regulated. "Secret law" is a whole other thing.
GSW I do get the point...I just wanted to point out that it all ties into a lack of accountability and the wresting (or giving away) of power by/from our elected representatives to bureaucrats, attorneys, political appointees, etc., all operating with an autonomy and non-public spirit that should an anathema to us all. Secrecy has thus become so easy and a use will only increase.
2
Bravo. However, it may already be too late. Too few care, or want accountability.
2
But clearly, Obama is a symbol of transparency, integrity, and the rule of law. /sarcasm
6
This is the nature of Republican, and authoritarian, addiction to dark power. This is what the US can expect from a Republican dominated government. They are the rulers, we are the serfs, who may not hunt in their forest. The guillotine sounds like the perfect Republican device for controlling the masses.
13
I think of Republicans, in this day and age, as a kind of reborn combo of Bolsheviks and Nazis, if you can picture that. In other words, accountable to nobody, including the American citizenry.
4
Yeah, certainly not like Obama added to the problem. I mean forget that messy little "Let's assassinate our own citizens without a trial" stuff..
10
The candidate with all the secrets is Hillary Clinton. E mails, paid speeches, Foundation activities...all secret. Why would anyone think her Presidential Administration would be transparent and open?
9
I have no recollection of any of these "secret laws" putting people behind bars. Just as we are at liberty to do as we please that which is not illegal, the people in government should be able to uphold, enforce, and execute the law by any means or policy which is legal. I wouldn't want a private citizen, internet commentor, or even the government telling me how to do my job as long as it was within the bounds of what is lawful and the policies my employer set forth as a condition of my employment. No secret policy should stay secret forever, but there are legitimate reasons not everything is publicized.
These "secret laws" not only put people behind bars, but tortured and killed and ruined lives and reputations. Perhaps the majority of those at the sharp end of the stick don't count as "people" in your mind.
12
America is no longer a free democratic republic. Whether it ever was one is highly debatable, but the constitutional rule of law clearly no longer applies to the people in power. There is a two-tiered standard of justice which is neither balanced nor blind to money and class.
7
Secret laws spiral downward to secret rules that we are supposed to know and follow but we can't because we don't know what those rules are because they are secret. Looking at you, TSA, hiding behind SSI.
42
I agree: Out of sight, out of mind!
Anything can be /done justified in the name of National Security and for Public Safety. That is the Mantra of Dictators, including those "democratically elected". Homeland Security and NSA are the real rulers of the American People: like it or not. There is no way to stop them, as they traffic in fear, something to which we're all susceptible.
Lincoln had it right: a government by the people for the people.
Anything can be /done justified in the name of National Security and for Public Safety. That is the Mantra of Dictators, including those "democratically elected". Homeland Security and NSA are the real rulers of the American People: like it or not. There is no way to stop them, as they traffic in fear, something to which we're all susceptible.
Lincoln had it right: a government by the people for the people.
2
A very worthwhile editorial. I hope it encourages interest and concern rather than impulsive anger.
25
Anger at our spiraling out of democracy into Oligarchy, with corrupt elections, terrible candidates, secret prisons, droned citizens, vulgar Trump vs war mongering Hillary, Sanders sabotage, media propaganda, Goldman Sachs living high off the hog after crashing the worlds economy without consequence etc etc REQUIRE's anger to motivate folks to change things.
In the UK folk just WHINE and do nothing. It inspires me to see black Americans inspired by righteous anger refusing to lie down and get shot for breathing while being black. There needs to be more anger, more involved citizens. It is the passivity of the citizenry that the corrupt Elite hope for which is why they bury us under mountains of 'spin'.
I, like most, am appalled by the vulgar Trump but find the one sided and unanimous focus on his vulgarity and 11 year old videos disgusting while ignoring the reality and history of Hillary's real crimes, as SOS with her policies of Nation destruction (Libya, Syria, Iraq, Yemen), democracy sabotage (Honduras, Egypt, Ukraine) and election sabotage (see Wikileaks who tell only unwelcome truths our 'media' dislike reporting; which is why Debbie Wasserman Schultz was forced to resign).
Between hunting down 'whistle blowers', truth tellers and secret courts we are becoming a totalitarian State where accusations without proof are enough to be condemned by our media (Assange is a rapist, Putin is Stalin, Russia is behind the leaks etc).
Indeed there is much to be angry about!
In the UK folk just WHINE and do nothing. It inspires me to see black Americans inspired by righteous anger refusing to lie down and get shot for breathing while being black. There needs to be more anger, more involved citizens. It is the passivity of the citizenry that the corrupt Elite hope for which is why they bury us under mountains of 'spin'.
I, like most, am appalled by the vulgar Trump but find the one sided and unanimous focus on his vulgarity and 11 year old videos disgusting while ignoring the reality and history of Hillary's real crimes, as SOS with her policies of Nation destruction (Libya, Syria, Iraq, Yemen), democracy sabotage (Honduras, Egypt, Ukraine) and election sabotage (see Wikileaks who tell only unwelcome truths our 'media' dislike reporting; which is why Debbie Wasserman Schultz was forced to resign).
Between hunting down 'whistle blowers', truth tellers and secret courts we are becoming a totalitarian State where accusations without proof are enough to be condemned by our media (Assange is a rapist, Putin is Stalin, Russia is behind the leaks etc).
Indeed there is much to be angry about!
4
"Documents released by the State Department in litigation reveal that 42 percent of binding agreements between the United States and other countries are unpublished."
Shadow governments. Secret cabals. Ghost laws.
Now (just curious), at the point it can be identified that "42 percent" of anything (seashells, eggs, secret laws) exists, that's a substantial part of the "whatever". And "secret laws" actually DO matter more than "seashells", just ask anyone living in a box at one of our "black ops sites". "Sir, which do you find more important: How many seashells there are on the Florida coastline, or your human right to an open accusation and speedy trial, juried by your peers?"
Yes, I understand the difference between someone in a box and "binding agreements" between the US and other countries, but there is that small problem of leakage and seepage, of open laws morphing into secret laws where folk wind up in a cube (not the norm of a human body, we're more rectangularish). Here, our problem is a little different: We have already STARTED with secret "binding agreements". Not much morphing seepage needed after that.
"We pay a high price for this system".
Gosh, ya think?
It is irrelevant to me whether the "secret" legality is a covert CIA operation or a mutually agreed-upon contract between our country and another. Both endanger me. Both endanger this nation.
Secret laws do not have a place in a democracy, because then we worry about who is in a box somewhere...
Got it?
Shadow governments. Secret cabals. Ghost laws.
Now (just curious), at the point it can be identified that "42 percent" of anything (seashells, eggs, secret laws) exists, that's a substantial part of the "whatever". And "secret laws" actually DO matter more than "seashells", just ask anyone living in a box at one of our "black ops sites". "Sir, which do you find more important: How many seashells there are on the Florida coastline, or your human right to an open accusation and speedy trial, juried by your peers?"
Yes, I understand the difference between someone in a box and "binding agreements" between the US and other countries, but there is that small problem of leakage and seepage, of open laws morphing into secret laws where folk wind up in a cube (not the norm of a human body, we're more rectangularish). Here, our problem is a little different: We have already STARTED with secret "binding agreements". Not much morphing seepage needed after that.
"We pay a high price for this system".
Gosh, ya think?
It is irrelevant to me whether the "secret" legality is a covert CIA operation or a mutually agreed-upon contract between our country and another. Both endanger me. Both endanger this nation.
Secret laws do not have a place in a democracy, because then we worry about who is in a box somewhere...
Got it?
47
rosa--If we really want to get a handle on this kind of operation, we should make sure our elected officials may not legally add components to any bill that are not directly relevant, which is something they do EVERY TIME THEY PASS A LAW. Democracy does not serve the wealthy, not authoritarian Republicans.
2
So true, ChesBay.
1
Just as there is junk science, there is junk law. If some of these super double top secret directives, opinions and decrees were made public they'd be embarrassing humiliations, like the John Yoo torture memos for example. I'm quite certain the light of day would also reveal them to be quite illegal in and of themselves. These 'laws' cheapen and erode our democracy. Too many in government, especially national security, are caught up in a faux patriotic fervor that smacks of Nixon's rationale; "if the president does it it's not illegal". This leads directly to perverse violations of our laws, rationalized with ironically tortured logic to preserve our nation of laws.
All nations, like all people, have secrets. There are legitimate reasons for them and for protecting them. But when that protection apparatus grows so cancerous and large as to allow Iran Contra, for instance, or the interment of Japanese, or Muslims, then it must be countered aggressively. Our government currently is involved in many such schemes, and wants to have more. The DEA has a database of every doctor who writes every prescription for opioids and every patient who takes them, including every pharmacy that fills them. I'm willing to bet they have much more than that, so much for medical privacy under the HIPAA act. Do they track abortions? Maybe not now, but considering who may next lead the country, I'd worry about that. BATFE would love to have that kind of intel on guns. You see where this could go.
All nations, like all people, have secrets. There are legitimate reasons for them and for protecting them. But when that protection apparatus grows so cancerous and large as to allow Iran Contra, for instance, or the interment of Japanese, or Muslims, then it must be countered aggressively. Our government currently is involved in many such schemes, and wants to have more. The DEA has a database of every doctor who writes every prescription for opioids and every patient who takes them, including every pharmacy that fills them. I'm willing to bet they have much more than that, so much for medical privacy under the HIPAA act. Do they track abortions? Maybe not now, but considering who may next lead the country, I'd worry about that. BATFE would love to have that kind of intel on guns. You see where this could go.
38
We now have the Administration legislating (in public or in secret), the Supreme Court legislating, and the Congress not doing anything.
136
So much for checks and balances..
1
The administration has used its executive power in the face of obstruction, and years of no actual congressional responsibility, or progress. They have refused to do the public's business.
4
Congress doing less than nothing: John McCain with, apparently, Mitch McConnell, refusing to vote for any Supreme Court justice nominee President Clinton might suggest. https://thinkprogress.org/john-mccain-republicans-will-block-anyone-clin...
While we curtail secret laws, we should also take away the immunity of our Government leaders in particular the President.The President should be held accountable for decisions he made that were responsible for the loss of American lives, such a Vietnam, Korea & the biggest crime of all the Iraqi conflict, which was fought to secure our Middle East Oil supply,not to destroy Iraqi nuclear weapons, which never existed.This would make the President far more cautious in committing us to war.
22
Whenever laws are secret, the public perception allows for the imagination to fill in the blanks-----corruption, pay for play, and all manner of evil schemes, and so we have dozens of conspiracy theories with which to waste time either validating or disproving. There are always leaks unless as Ben Franklin said, "Three may keep a secret, if two of them are dead."
38
HI! A quick visit to many websites, like for example emptywheel.net will illustrate why it needn't merely take "imagination" to chart, if you will the
"corrupt practices and collusion between people of different agencies pursuing the same "secret" un-Constitutional, un-American policy-goals in the name of national security BUT in fact originating in the selfish impulse of nothing more noble than their own financial security!"
Imaginary conspiracy it is not. The military industrial complex has created a fifth column in our country and it has blanket protection using a whole new form of secret law to promulgate its objectives, right in front of the over-worked, underpaid desperately ignorant American people.
The distracted nature if not outright American apathy the devices protecting its racket.
"corrupt practices and collusion between people of different agencies pursuing the same "secret" un-Constitutional, un-American policy-goals in the name of national security BUT in fact originating in the selfish impulse of nothing more noble than their own financial security!"
Imaginary conspiracy it is not. The military industrial complex has created a fifth column in our country and it has blanket protection using a whole new form of secret law to promulgate its objectives, right in front of the over-worked, underpaid desperately ignorant American people.
The distracted nature if not outright American apathy the devices protecting its racket.
1
This article is in too broad a stroke to be meaningful, Snowden revelations? What are those exactly? When using language like this it means nothing.
To put it very concretely, I have been haunted by a graphic description of the surgical repairs to a Guantanimo prisoner's rectum just last week to treat the damage from torture a year ago. I thought we'd all decided that torture does not work and that Guantanimo was going to be closed down entirely.
I don't mind my international communications being tapped if it's for safety, but I do mind what was done to that man even if he is my mortal enemy.
The same people who approved and perpetrated that torture under secret law could one day decide that me, you, or anyone we know could be deemed a public enemy. Those pleased at Trumps's jeers that Hillary should be in jail have never made that more clear.
THAT is the danger of secret law. There are always too many Trump, McCarthy, and I put with them McConnell and Ryan types who have no problem using power secretly. And this prisoner, in 2016? that's on Obama's watch.
There is some serious explaining to do. I remain haunted by the thought of what was done to him ever since I heard it on NPR.
To put it very concretely, I have been haunted by a graphic description of the surgical repairs to a Guantanimo prisoner's rectum just last week to treat the damage from torture a year ago. I thought we'd all decided that torture does not work and that Guantanimo was going to be closed down entirely.
I don't mind my international communications being tapped if it's for safety, but I do mind what was done to that man even if he is my mortal enemy.
The same people who approved and perpetrated that torture under secret law could one day decide that me, you, or anyone we know could be deemed a public enemy. Those pleased at Trumps's jeers that Hillary should be in jail have never made that more clear.
THAT is the danger of secret law. There are always too many Trump, McCarthy, and I put with them McConnell and Ryan types who have no problem using power secretly. And this prisoner, in 2016? that's on Obama's watch.
There is some serious explaining to do. I remain haunted by the thought of what was done to him ever since I heard it on NPR.
94
"I thought we'd all decided ... that Guantanimo was going to be closed down entirely."
Obama & many of the public 'decided', but cowards in the Republican–led Congress blocked bringing dangerous prisoners to mainland prisons.
Obama & many of the public 'decided', but cowards in the Republican–led Congress blocked bringing dangerous prisoners to mainland prisons.
The best way to defeat the jihad/war being waged against us: Destroy the regimes that support and sponsor it, Iran and Saudi Arabia.
https://www.theobjectivestandard.com/2015/11/ten-steps-to-end-jihad-agai...
https://www.theobjectivestandard.com/2014/09/jihad-america-end/
https://www.theobjectivestandard.com/2015/11/ten-steps-to-end-jihad-agai...
https://www.theobjectivestandard.com/2014/09/jihad-america-end/
3
The NYT constantly praises Obama's Executive Orders, which also bypass Congress, because they align with their ultra-progressive ideals. Now they are aghast of these "secret laws." Typical of how a once great newspaper has become so biased that even my bird rejects it when I put it in her cage.
12
At least, you have found a proper use for the N.Y. Times, particularly the Editorial page! My birds have no problem expressing their displeasure at the Times Editorial positions, particularly their endorsement of Hillary Clinton!
3
G.H.
President Obama has issued less executive orders than any other President from Nixon on. Your outrage is misguided. Reagan forced employment drug testing on the nation with an executive order, far more disruptive than any of Obama's orders, just one example.
President Obama has issued less executive orders than any other President from Nixon on. Your outrage is misguided. Reagan forced employment drug testing on the nation with an executive order, far more disruptive than any of Obama's orders, just one example.
The President, who campaigned on becoming "the most transparent in history" has become the least. We have to rely on leaked emails to show how corrupt and secretive the Obama administration was and is, including its most favored product, Hillary Clinton.
Oh, but she's not as bad as Trump will be, right? THIS is a standard?
Oh, but she's not as bad as Trump will be, right? THIS is a standard?
23
In this election, Amrericans will be chhosing the lesser of 2 evils. Hillary the amazon warrior; or Donald Bader (really bad!).
Either way, prepare for 4 more years of war. Oh, it's either guns or butter!
So roads, rails, bridges, levees, schools, hospitals, public utilities, tornado/hurricane/wildfires affected states and towns will be allowed to go unfunded or underfunded in order to send more tanks/tomahawks to Irak and Israel. And don't forget that we have only 12 Nuclear powered aircraft carriers and we should really have 24. No matter that the rest of the other nations do not have more than 3 all together. Talk about overkill: 12X, 24X ...NX!
Out policy makers have gone insane, but they blame it on 9/11, ISIS, WMD: they take no responsibility for their own ineptness and lack of wisdom.
Power corrupts; but absolute power corrupts totally.
Either way, prepare for 4 more years of war. Oh, it's either guns or butter!
So roads, rails, bridges, levees, schools, hospitals, public utilities, tornado/hurricane/wildfires affected states and towns will be allowed to go unfunded or underfunded in order to send more tanks/tomahawks to Irak and Israel. And don't forget that we have only 12 Nuclear powered aircraft carriers and we should really have 24. No matter that the rest of the other nations do not have more than 3 all together. Talk about overkill: 12X, 24X ...NX!
Out policy makers have gone insane, but they blame it on 9/11, ISIS, WMD: they take no responsibility for their own ineptness and lack of wisdom.
Power corrupts; but absolute power corrupts totally.
1
Thank you, Ms. Goitein, for this important article. I think most Americans would agree, at least in theory, that the actions of high-level government officials should be subject to the transparency and accountability you advocate in the article. On the other hand, without actually admitting it, I think most Americans also hope that the president and national security officials will not hesitate to "do whatever it takes to keep America safe," and we don't really want to know the details. I would like to claim as my own personal stance that even the most crucial objectives must be pursued only by truly legal and moral means, but I realize that such a high standard depends on religious rather than practical reasoning.
23
Sorry, I don't want the president and national security official to 'do WHATEVER it takes to keep America safe.' Safety is an illusion. I did not view The Patriot Act with fervor and it's title is a misnomer and misleading.
You (government) can attempt to keep us safe, but please do so within the confines of transparent laws and regulations that have been vetted by professionals and have had public discussion. Though I am becoming concerned by the wisdom of the public part, given how many of the public are still supporting Trump.
You (government) can attempt to keep us safe, but please do so within the confines of transparent laws and regulations that have been vetted by professionals and have had public discussion. Though I am becoming concerned by the wisdom of the public part, given how many of the public are still supporting Trump.
2
How do you expect a government "keep a country safe" when that country permits its citizens to own and use powerful lethal weaponry? Ridiculous. The threat is Us. It is not Them.
The government CAN'T keep you safe. Everything it does in secret is to consolidate it's power over the citizenry in violation of Constitutional rights. Everything it does abroad in the Middle East exacerbates tensions, creates dangerous power vacuums and invites blowback.
The government CAN'T keep you safe. Everything it does in secret is to consolidate it's power over the citizenry in violation of Constitutional rights. Everything it does abroad in the Middle East exacerbates tensions, creates dangerous power vacuums and invites blowback.
1
And I'm sure President Hillary will have a transparent administration. Yeah, right.
15
Is it against the law to comment on secret law? How can I know?
24
"How can I know?"
In the middle of the night, someone will come to your door, flash credentials, take you in, and threaten you.
In the middle of the night, someone will come to your door, flash credentials, take you in, and threaten you.
A secret court is not a court, it is an abomination. That legislators and members of the executive branch, many of whom are lawyers, allow this is repellent and conjures up the fig leafs promulgated by the NAZIs to give an air of legitimacy to their own horrors.
We, as Americans, need a new class of representatives, citizens who watch over the elected officials and hold them accountable. Our officials can not be trusted to do the right thing on their own.
The press has abrogated responsibility in all but a few cases so it falls to outfits like the ACLU and bloggers like Popehat.com to call attention to horrific and tyrannical behaviors on the part of or government.
Here is PopeHat on the FISA "Court" (please read)
https://popehat.com/?s=fisa+court
Finally, I quote the estimable Ken White of PopeHat on trust:
"I don't trust my government, I don't trust the people who work for my government, and I believe that the evidence suggests that it's irrational to offer such trust.
...
1. The government lies to you about the extent of its surveillance of you.
2. The government says it needs secrecy, but lies about its secrets and the grounds for keeping them secret.
3. The government says it needs expanded powers to fight terrorism, but lies: in fact it uses expanded "anti-terrorism" powers to advance a variety of domestic agendas.
4. Terrorism is whatever the government says it is."
We, as Americans, need a new class of representatives, citizens who watch over the elected officials and hold them accountable. Our officials can not be trusted to do the right thing on their own.
The press has abrogated responsibility in all but a few cases so it falls to outfits like the ACLU and bloggers like Popehat.com to call attention to horrific and tyrannical behaviors on the part of or government.
Here is PopeHat on the FISA "Court" (please read)
https://popehat.com/?s=fisa+court
Finally, I quote the estimable Ken White of PopeHat on trust:
"I don't trust my government, I don't trust the people who work for my government, and I believe that the evidence suggests that it's irrational to offer such trust.
...
1. The government lies to you about the extent of its surveillance of you.
2. The government says it needs secrecy, but lies about its secrets and the grounds for keeping them secret.
3. The government says it needs expanded powers to fight terrorism, but lies: in fact it uses expanded "anti-terrorism" powers to advance a variety of domestic agendas.
4. Terrorism is whatever the government says it is."
66
Read a list of what the government considers 'terrorist' organizations some time... very frightening. Some legitimately are, but many are not.
Our Founders knew of the old secret court called the Star Chamber, and were very anxious to prevent that. It was often mentioned as an evil to be avoided. We avoided it for over 200 years. Until now.
3
No kidding. To be faced with your accuser, to have a speedy trial, an open court, laws that are not promulgated post hoc a la NSA. These are the things that were meant to differentiate us from autocracies. It ain't working and our legislators are otherwise occupied.
The founders are spinning.
The founders are spinning.
4
Great study -a little gleam of sunshine into the dark, little-known world of national security. And why is it like this?
Whence the Patriot Act?
At least in part, because some legislative group was pushed, should we say manipulated- into a hysterical over- reaction after certain, horrible terrorist acts.
These bloody, terrorist acts were perpetrated mostly by intelligent, educated Saudi's against the United States of America, focusing on the Pentagon and our world trade.
An act they justified because they had long been outraged and frustrated by the strong military presence and influence of the United States of America in their sanctuary- in the holy land of Islam.
Disgusting Infidels in their sacred home- invited and welcomed ages ago by certain, now proven compromised and corrupt Saudi monarchs.
And the incisive question- the one that is rarely asked- is why and what are we doing there in the first place?
There was something about an under-the-table assurance given by FDR to the Saud monarchs way back when, in another age of history, a World War, and of course, the inevitable link to crude oil supplies and security.
And yet today, another big unasked question still lingers, smelling up the air.
Why are we still there now?
Why are we still being victimized by the Patriot Act?
Whence the Patriot Act?
At least in part, because some legislative group was pushed, should we say manipulated- into a hysterical over- reaction after certain, horrible terrorist acts.
These bloody, terrorist acts were perpetrated mostly by intelligent, educated Saudi's against the United States of America, focusing on the Pentagon and our world trade.
An act they justified because they had long been outraged and frustrated by the strong military presence and influence of the United States of America in their sanctuary- in the holy land of Islam.
Disgusting Infidels in their sacred home- invited and welcomed ages ago by certain, now proven compromised and corrupt Saudi monarchs.
And the incisive question- the one that is rarely asked- is why and what are we doing there in the first place?
There was something about an under-the-table assurance given by FDR to the Saud monarchs way back when, in another age of history, a World War, and of course, the inevitable link to crude oil supplies and security.
And yet today, another big unasked question still lingers, smelling up the air.
Why are we still there now?
Why are we still being victimized by the Patriot Act?
30
This type of government shenanigans has been going on whenever the need arises. During the Viet Nam War, there was the secret Phoenix Program run by the CIA with military operatives who would kill or capture suspected Viet Cong members, as well as civilians who were thought to have information on Viet Cong activities. Many of these people were taken to interrogation centers where they were tortured in an attempt to gain intelligence on Viet Cong activities. Women who were captured in this manner were subject to rape and sometimes rape followed by murder in addition to standard torture procedures. Phoenix operatives allegedly killed between 26,000 and 41,000 Vietnamese people.
Strangely, following the end of the Viet Nam War, several women in the east area of Sacramento, CA were terrorized in their own homes and then raped and brutally murdered by a single man known as the East Area Rapist. He would use a gun to control his victims initially. The husband or boy friend was often gagged and tied up using an unusual and complicated "diamond" knot, which was taught in the Phoenix Program military units, and forced to endure the mental torture of his wife or girlfriend being raped. Then, both victims were often brutally murdered (once, by logs from the fireplace). After a year, the crime scenes moved to nearby areas and eventually to Southern California as proven by DNA evidence. In total, he committed 12 homicides and 45 rapes with the last rape and murder occurring in 1986.
Strangely, following the end of the Viet Nam War, several women in the east area of Sacramento, CA were terrorized in their own homes and then raped and brutally murdered by a single man known as the East Area Rapist. He would use a gun to control his victims initially. The husband or boy friend was often gagged and tied up using an unusual and complicated "diamond" knot, which was taught in the Phoenix Program military units, and forced to endure the mental torture of his wife or girlfriend being raped. Then, both victims were often brutally murdered (once, by logs from the fireplace). After a year, the crime scenes moved to nearby areas and eventually to Southern California as proven by DNA evidence. In total, he committed 12 homicides and 45 rapes with the last rape and murder occurring in 1986.
10
A diamond knot is just a knife lanyard knot. It isn't that complicated and has been used by sailors for centuries.
reply to Eint
It looks complicated to me and I saw a YouTube video of how it was done.
But the main point is that it appears to be a very effective restraint mechanism. The East Area Rapist carried these around with him on his adventures of murder and rape.
It looks complicated to me and I saw a YouTube video of how it was done.
But the main point is that it appears to be a very effective restraint mechanism. The East Area Rapist carried these around with him on his adventures of murder and rape.
The FBI, Sacramento District Attorney and Homicide Police Unit have renewed their efforts to identify and capture this serial killer and rapist and announced a $50K reward on June 15, 2016. (See ’East Area Rapist’ still haunts Sacramento, by M. Breton, Sacramento Bee)
I detailed my method in an email to the Sacramento homicide police:
“Following the East Area Rapist’s last crime committed in Northern California on July 5, 1979 (Danville, CA), the associated crime data would indicate that he was transferred to the Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) installation at the University of California Santa Barbara (near Goleta) and reported for duty there sometime before October 1, 1979. See attached map which shows only two military installations in the area (the second facility is a U. S. Defense Contract Audit agency and accountants as a general rule are not killers). This map shows both the location of the ROTC facility and Queen Ann Lane a few miles away (at the top of the map) where the East Area Rapist’s first crime in southern California took place on October 1, 1979. His second crime also took place in Goleta, CA on December 30, 1979.
It should be easy enough to obtain from cooperative U. S. military authorities a list of military transfers made to the ROTC installation near Goleta during the small time-frame of July 5, 1979 to October 1, 1979. There must also be comprehensive military records (such as payroll records) of duty personnel stationed there at that time.”
I detailed my method in an email to the Sacramento homicide police:
“Following the East Area Rapist’s last crime committed in Northern California on July 5, 1979 (Danville, CA), the associated crime data would indicate that he was transferred to the Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) installation at the University of California Santa Barbara (near Goleta) and reported for duty there sometime before October 1, 1979. See attached map which shows only two military installations in the area (the second facility is a U. S. Defense Contract Audit agency and accountants as a general rule are not killers). This map shows both the location of the ROTC facility and Queen Ann Lane a few miles away (at the top of the map) where the East Area Rapist’s first crime in southern California took place on October 1, 1979. His second crime also took place in Goleta, CA on December 30, 1979.
It should be easy enough to obtain from cooperative U. S. military authorities a list of military transfers made to the ROTC installation near Goleta during the small time-frame of July 5, 1979 to October 1, 1979. There must also be comprehensive military records (such as payroll records) of duty personnel stationed there at that time.”
1
The liberties of a people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them.
Patrick Henry
Patrick Henry
119
Moi: je suis la Loi.
Le ROI: Louie XIV
I, myself, am the Law.
KING Louie XIV
Wow, talk about power!
Le ROI: Louie XIV
I, myself, am the Law.
KING Louie XIV
Wow, talk about power!
OK, let's correct that a little bit :
"L'État (The State), c'est moi.'' -Louis XIV
"L'État (The State), c'est moi.'' -Louis XIV
Government seldom gives back power. Something you may want to think about the next time you are trading your privacy and other rights away for neurotic security.
63
I couldn't agree more. I've given up sounding the bell. Ever since 9/11 I've been trying to inform the younger folks in this country about our history and what we tried to change in the 60's and to keep open. It's too late the flood gates have fallen. I'm so tired of hearing the refrain " why should I care? I don't do anything wrong, so it doesn't matter to me how much surveillance there is." Really? What they don't consider is when you allow your government to circumvent the law in foreign policy it's only a matter of time before they turn it on their own country. Hello 2016.
4
Indeed. The current caretaker, opining as a candidate how open and accessible his administration would be, is instead an enemy of sunlight and he heads the most secretive and uncooperative regime in our history. Until the next one, which will be the Clinton crime family, known for their lies, hypocrisy, disdain for working people and uptight, paranoid secrecy. We shall see whether this paper provides journalistic honesty in their coverage of them or whether our best hope for informative reporting comes from hackers and exiles. And one wonders at our complete distrust of all things official.
11
"Sunlight is the best disinfectant."
-- Justice Louis Brandeis
-- Justice Louis Brandeis
5
This sounds sensible to me.
And much of this under former adjunct law prof Obama, whose legacy HRC has vowed to continue. Lucky us.
21
It was started by the evil Cheney and his Satanic minions. True, Obama did not stop it; it seems likely that as with so much running by Washington Consensus, he felt unable to rein them in. And yes, we must expect that HRC will delight in it.
3
I all countries there are two layers in the production and administration of laws. Laws are written by the appropriate legislative body but they are interpreted and put into effect by administrators, the government's bureaucratic agencies. So, even with "open" laws, we have an intermediate layer that may obfuscate the intent of the law.
This process is more opaque when dealing with the secret arm of the government. I find, for example, all this talking over the secrecy of e-mail political posturing by some and turf protection by those who label them. Every agency thinks that its activities are absolutely crucial and secret agencies, undoubtedly, feel this more so, hence their penchant to consider everything of maximum importance and hence deserving of the maximum protection. But the world seems to remain standing in spite of the many unsurprising revelations.
This process is more opaque when dealing with the secret arm of the government. I find, for example, all this talking over the secrecy of e-mail political posturing by some and turf protection by those who label them. Every agency thinks that its activities are absolutely crucial and secret agencies, undoubtedly, feel this more so, hence their penchant to consider everything of maximum importance and hence deserving of the maximum protection. But the world seems to remain standing in spite of the many unsurprising revelations.
16
The US secret, initial and continued, support of Pashtun warlords and extreme Mujahadeen jihadists in Afganistan(when Russia already had decided to leave with a "moderate"Islamic government in place) was ILLEGAL and helped virtually create Taliban,Al Qaeda,the Haqqanis,and another dozen extremist groups leading to an unending conflict.
The 9/11 tragedy and the "fabricated"Iraq Wars caused by extremist ideologies and big oil influence led to destruction of Iraq and out of the shredded Sunni population civil war and Isis resulted.
The Iraq war was ILLEGAL,so was the intentional destruction of the Iraqui civil service and army.......whose leaders now lead Isis.
In 2005,illegaly and clandestinely, the US military supplied weapons and financial support to Somali warlords and the Ethiopean dictator to "clean up"Mogadishu of" muslim extremists" the cruelty of the Ethiopean military in killing Somalis, recruited thousands and the armed war lords reinforced the extremists. Al Shabab has now become an Africa wide terrorist group.
When government becomes opaque and unnacountable ,wiggling by constitutional protections,through legalese of "secret law" loss of freedom and torture result!
The invasion of Iraq was illegal based on fraudulent not erroneous information