The White House will push Congress to ‘make it easier to wiretap the internet’.
The Obama Administration is going to push Congress to write policy granting the executive branch of the U.S. government more privileges to “wiretap the internet” and the implications are global, Charlie Savage reported today at The New York Times.
It’s all to fight terrorism, of course, he added:
Essentially, officials want Congress to require all services that enable communications—including encrypted e-mail transmitters like BlackBerry, social networking Web sites like Facebook and software that allows direct “peer to peer” messaging like Skype—to be technically capable of complying if served with a wiretap order. The mandate would include being able to intercept and unscramble encrypted messages.
The bill, which the Obama administration plans to submit to lawmakers next year, raises fresh questions about how to balance security needs with protecting privacy and fostering innovation. And because security services around the world face the same problem, it could set an example that is copied globally.
The amoral argument from the industry is that such measures counter the “decentralized design” of the internet. It’s what progresses from the becoming-archaic telephone-method of commincation, one expert said.
But, don’t forget—TERRORISM REQUIRES UNBRIDLED POWER, AS DOES COUNTERING IT!:
But law enforcement officials contend that imposing such a mandate is reasonable and necessary to prevent the erosion of their investigative powers.
“We’re talking about lawfully authorized intercepts,” said Valerie E. Caproni, general counsel for the Federal Bureau of Investigation. “We’re not talking expanding authority. We’re talking about preserving our ability to execute our existing authority in order to protect the public safety and national security.”
In other words: ‘lawfully’ means whatever the government agents chooses to permit. According to Ms. Caprioni, this isn’t “expanding authority”, only expanding what people in authority are immune from prosecution after committing and allowing more information to be collected against people without due process, with lesser scrutiny to probable cause.
The key isn’t overtly “expanding authority” like adding agents and arms and cameras and wiretaps, etc., but crafting the most deceitful language:
There is not yet agreement on important elements, like how to word statutory language defining who counts as a communications service provider, according to several officials familiar with the deliberations.
Manufacture consent for evil and evil becomes good.