SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Homeland Security Shuts Down 'Intelligence' Reports on Journalists:
The acting secretary of homeland security said on Friday that he had shut down an intelligence examination of the work of reporters covering the government's response to protests in Portland, Ore., beginning an investigation into what he suggested was an infringement on First Amendment rights.
[...] The acting secretary, Chad F. Wolf, "is committed to ensuring that all D.H.S. personnel uphold the principles of professionalism, impartiality and respect for civil rights and civil liberties, particularly as it relates to the exercise of First Amendment rights," said Alexei Woltornist, the department's spokesman.
The intelligence office issued three "open-source intelligence reports" in the past week that summarized the Twitter posts of a Times reporter and the editor in chief for the blog Lawfare, noting that they had published leaked unclassified documents.
Mr. Wolf ordered the intelligence arm to "immediately discontinue collecting information involving members of the press" once he found out about the practice, Mr. Woltornist said.
[...] "The Department of Homeland Security has acknowledged that its intelligence reporting system, designed to combat terrorism, has instead been misused to target journalists who were reporting on the controversial activities of federal law enforcement officers," she said in a statement. "It is imperative that D.H.S.'s investigation determines how this happened and ensures it does not happen again."
[...] "If you're allowed to do this, what else are you allowed to do? If you're allowed to keep tabs on and file reports about my social media," he added, "are you allowed to gather all the other public record material that exists about me and create a dossier?"
The American Civil Liberties Union denounced the agency's actions on Friday, saying they were part of a larger pattern.
"Under Wolf's leadership, D.H.S. was caught just last year unconstitutionally targeting and building dossiers on journalists reporting on conditions at the border," the group's senior legislative counsel, Neema Signh Guliani, said in a statement. "For weeks, D.H.S. agents have been deliberately and brutally attacking journalists covering the Portland protests. And documents show that D.H.S. intelligence arm appears to be claiming authority it does not have. This administration's assault on the First Amendment continues to escalate."
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Monday August 03 2020, @11:15PM (13 children)
They were doing the same thing to reporters and activists involved with immigration issues on the border. I was opposed to that crap then, and I have to side with the ACLU this time.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/3/7/18254668/us-government-southern-border-dossiers-journalists-lawyers-activists-migrants [vox.com]
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/u-s-officials-made-list-reporters-lawyers-activists-question-border-n980301 [nbcnews.com]
https://soto.house.gov/media/in-the-news/homeland-security-investigating-immigration-officials-secret-list-journalists [house.gov]
The only questions asked of anyone at the border should involve citizenship status, and whether you have anything to declare. No one should have to surrender their electronic gear, or suffer hours of questioning regarding political beliefs.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 03 2020, @11:26PM (3 children)
Glad to hear you care about some of the fascism. As usual it seems to only be for the fascism which might inconvenience yourself, but hey we'll take it.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday August 04 2020, @12:15AM (2 children)
Uhhhhh - how does this benefit me specifically? I don't anticipate crossing the border any time soon - and at my age, if it isn't soon, I probably won't be doing it at all. Nor am I a participant in the ongoing riots or demonstrations. I don't gain anything, personally.
When the border surveillance came to light, I took a stand for justice, and freedom of the press. I'm doing the same thing here. It's almost like there's a theme here, maybe? Gubbermint doesn't get to tell the press what the press may or may not do. Gubbermint doesn't determine what is newsworthy. Gubbermint has to respect the Bill of Rights, even when it's inconvenient to do so.
As for the fascists, I still oppose ANTIFA and the Social Justice Warriors who insist that they have some moral high ground, from which to dictate how we should all talk, and how we should act. The only difference between DHS and Antifa is, DHS has power through legislation, and Antifa has no legislative backing. They're all douchebags.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 04 2020, @12:49AM
Actually, you gain quite a lot. Bolstering the First Amendment helps all of us. You included.
Allowing the state to spy on journalists would have a chilling effect on the free press. Whoever that press may be.
If it's news outlets whose editorial pages annoy you now, it could be those whose editorial pages you like in the next administration. The important part is that it's antithetical to the ideals of our democratic republic. Or don't you care about that?
Once more.
That benefits *everyone*. Even you, Runaway.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 04 2020, @10:08PM
It is because you can hypothetically put yourself in a situation where it would affect you. You are still lumping in people you don't like with rioters and nonsense labels for liberals so you don't have to feel back about government fascism violating people's constitutional rights.
I keep giving you opportunities to make better choices, yet you stubbornly refuse to let go of the propaganda that has programmed your brain.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Ethanol-fueled on Monday August 03 2020, @11:52PM (8 children)
ACLU back in the day were noble people who took a stand for unpopular opinions. Now, like the EFF and Mozilla Foundation, they're just Soros-funded partisan hacks. Lemme guess, you also think Snopes and the Huffington Post are gospel?
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday August 04 2020, @12:18AM (7 children)
I'll disagree, to some extent, with your characterization. The ACLU has always been a bunch of crazies, who don't much like government. I really think they are closet anarchists. Back in the day, they were right two times out of three, then it went to one time out of three, then one time out of four.
They still get something right often enough to be worth paying attention to. But they are slipping toward the Dark Side. I do believe that Darth Vader works in one of their back offices, away from the light of day.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Thexalon on Tuesday August 04 2020, @01:30PM (6 children)
The ACLU are die-hard supporters of the First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments in particular.
They started out defending communists, union organizers, and other left-wing types in court, because nobody else would and the government was routinely arresting those sorts for saying things that major businesses didn't like.
They've been consistent about those positions, famously defending the American Nazi Party's right to march.
If you've decided that the rights of citizens to speak their mind without being searched and harassed and arrested by the government is partisan hackery, then that says something about where you stand on the whole democracy thing.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 04 2020, @01:44PM
Your examples are over 40 years past.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday August 04 2020, @06:24PM (4 children)
Democracy. There are times when I think it might be nice to live in a democracy. Hey, it would be nice to try it once, so that I knew what it was like. Alas, all US citizens live in a REPUBLIC. Not a democracy, but a repupblic.
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Tuesday August 04 2020, @06:42PM (3 children)
Regardless of "democracy" versus "republic", if you don't believe that citizens should have the right to say what they would like to about the government without that government being able to use violence to stop them, then what you're a backer of is not a democracy or a republic, but instead a dictatorship or oligarchy.
To put it in the form of a joke Ronald Reagan told back in the 80's:
American: "I can go up to the White House and shout 'I don't like Reagan!'"
Russian: "So? I can go up to the Kremlin and shout 'I don't like Reagan!'"
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 04 2020, @10:04PM
Runaway LIKES the fascism because it is hurting the people he doesn't like. That is why he puts forth such a naive rebuttal. There is no reaching him with logic, he is emotionally compromised so it will require someone who can engage him on a proper emotional level to make him see his hypocrisy. After that it will require constant reminders and a change from his breitbart/fox/whatever propaganda sources to keep him from devolving.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday August 05 2020, @01:13AM (1 child)
Thexalon doesn't know it, but he's hosting a party for 100 people in his house this evening. They are "mostly peaceful" partiers. A couple guys are expected to bring commercial grade fireworks, heavy duty lasers, maybe a couple of guns, and demolition tools. If Thexalon tries to prevent this party, does that make him a fascist?
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Wednesday August 05 2020, @05:11PM
Hey, that sounds like a couple weekends ago out in my neighborhood, except for the "everybody at my place" part: Normally, it's different crews setting off the fireworks vs shooting a few rounds off vs playing with lasers. (Last weekend was rainy, otherwise it would have been similar.) And if they really want to demolish something, there are better targets around, really that would be much more fun.
You scare really easily.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.