This transcript is from Get FISA Right's Patriot Act reform Tweetchat held in our Patriot Act Action Hub.


HarryWaisbren:

Hello everyone, and welcome to Get FISA Right’s #patriotact reform tweetchat!

We are here today in order to spur grassroots activism to reform the Patriot Act in this critical period prior to the December 31 reauthorization deadline. Today’s tweetchat will entail a mix of online organizers and civil liberties experts going over the issues at hand by “delving into the details” of the bills as well as discussing what we can do about them.

As part of this effort, Get FISA Right is very proud to release our Open Letter to President Obama which we are using as a tool to accept both Obama’s and Attorney General Holder’s invitation for a conversation about civil liberties (you can sign on by clicking through).

This tweetchat will serve as a medium to spread the letter in particular and our passions for civil liberties in general. You can participate by writing in the chat room and/or by tweeting to #patriotact.

It should be quite a time---especially with experts such as Shahid Buttar of BORDC, Julian Sanchez of Cato, and our very own Jon Pincus of Get FISA Right---but the more participation we get from all of you (in the chat and via twitter) the better this event will be!

GetFISARight:
Ask @BarackObama to please support #patriotact reform! http://act.ly/1fp Please RT

Oryctolagus:
RT: @GetFISARight:Ask @BarackObama to please support #patriotact reform! http://act.ly/1fp Please RT

HarryWaisbren:
RT @GetFISARight:Ask @BarackObama to please support #patriotact reform! http://act.ly/1fp Please RT

HarryWaisbren:
Our #patriotact reform tweetchat begins in about 15 minutes:http://bit.ly/Qq5VE

GetFISARight:
Our #patriotact reform tweetchat begins in about 15 minutes:http://bit.ly/Qq5VE

BORDC:
@GetFISARight Open Letter to President Obama http://bit.ly/gfrbordc #patriotact #privacy

Brons:
Ask @BarackObama to please support #patriotact reform! http://act.ly/1fp Please RT

Julian
Just checking in


Jim Burrows:
Hi, Julian.


jdp23
good morning all ...

normative:
Reminder:I'm doing an online chat on #patriotact at 11 EST (i.e. in ten minutes) http://bit.ly/Qq5VE


Shahid
Great to see you all


jdp23:
good morning Shahid! thanks for jioning us

jmwilde3:
Ask @BarackObama to please support #patriotact reform! http://act.ly/1fp Please RT

jdp23:
a word from our sponsor:please sign the open letter at http://bit.ly/gfrbordc/ and http://bit.ly/gfrchange/ if you haven't already!

HarryWaisbren:
Shahid---after an intro, I am going to kick it off to you to discuss the legal issues at hand.

Brons:
RT @GetFISARight: Our #patriotact reform tweetchat begins in about 5 minutes:http://bit.ly/Qq5VE

HarryWaisbren:
Hey everyone, we're giving people another few minutes to show up. Get your questions ready, because we have top notch experts at hand to answer any of your patriot act questions at hand!


HarryWaisbren:

Hello again everyone, and welcome to Get FISA Right’s #patriotact reform tweetchat!

jdp23:
welcome all! how many people are here?

Brons:
If you have #patriotact questions for Julian Sanchez of the Cato Institute or Shahid Buttar of BORDC ask at:http://bit.ly/Qq5VE

Julian Sanchez:
Morning all!

Jim Burrows:
Hi. Jim Burrows of GFR here.

korkie:
hi all


Shahid:
Thanks so much for joining us this morning.

HarryWaisbren:

As part of this effort, Get FISA Right is very proud to release our Open Letter to President Obama which we are using as a tool to accept both Obama’s and Attorney General Holder’s invitation for a conversation about civil liberties (you can sign on by clicking through).

This tweetchat will serve as a medium to spread the letter in particular and our passions for civil liberties in general. You can participate by writing in the chat room and/or by tweeting to #patriotact.


Amagi
Hello


jdp23:
i'll talk a little more at the end about the open letter

HarryWaisbren:
It should be quite a time---especially with experts such as Shahid Buttar of BORDC, Julian Sanchez of Cato, and our very own Jon Pincus of Get FISA Right---but the more participation we get from all of you (in the chat and via twitter) the better this event will be!


jdp23:
one of the great things about chat is that multiple people can talk at once, so if you have questions please jump in

HarryWaisbren:
And with that, I will kick it off to Shahid to discuss the legal issues in regards to Patriot Act reform.

To anyone with a twitter account, please help us summarize comments into tweets to spread the word!


Jenny
Good morning all. I signed the petition. Now what!

jdp23:
@GetFISARight's #patriotact tweetchat is starting now at http://is.gd/4N3fv ... join @normative and Shahid Buttar of @BORDC! #p2 #privacy

jdp23:
Jenny, stay tuned ... take it away Shahid!

Shahid:
The long & short of this unfortunate story reflects an about-face by the Obama administration, which ran on a campaign platform emphasizing restoring rule of law principles and civil liberties.

korkie:
Ask questions the government won't answer @GetFISARight: Our #patriotact reform tweetchat begins in about to begin:http://bit.ly/Qq5VE

normative:
Oh yeah, if you can't make the chat but have #patriotact questions, use that hashtag and we'll see them & field them for later perusal.


Shahid:
Reflecting perhaps the worst facets of the political dynamic our nation's capital, the administration has governed in a seemingly diametrically opposed fashion, lobbying the Senate and House to undermine civil liberties protections proposed in each chamber.

GetFISARight:
Shahid of @BORDC:The long & short of this unfortunate story reflects an about-face by the Obama administration #patriotact


triv33
I signed the petition, if it hadn't been for a lonely diary at Kos, I would have had no idea about this.


jdp23:
when i decided to support Obama back in very early 2008, his stance on civil liberties was a big part of it ... i'm really disappointed in their actions so far


Shahid:
The JUSTICE Act was originally proposed by a group of 9 Senators -- including Senator Feingold (D-WI), whose lone vote against the PATRIOT Act in 2001 stands out as a bright historical spot, as well as a sharp contrast to the coalition of 8 colleagues who joined him in proposing robust civil liberties protections this year.

Jim Burrows:
Glad you came, Triv. That was my diary, http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/11/24/807589/-Get-FISA-Rights-Open-Letter-to-President-Obama

Folks please recommend it so it's less lonely. :-)


triv33:
oh, i rec'd it, but I was oh, so lonely.


Shahid:
The story of its demise in the Senate is troubling, to say the least. Here's the tale from inside the beltway:http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/67459-administration-stares-down-patriot-act-criticism


Shahid:
But chances remain to support the JUSTICE Act, which includes the most robust protections for privacy among the bills introduced in Congress. It remains alive in the House, where it was introduced by Rep. Rush Holt.


Amy Ringenbach:
(in the room, friends)

jdp23:
Shahid, is there any chance the Holt bill will make it to the floor?


Shahid:
Unfortunately, the bills emerging from each of the Judiciary Committees are a pale shadow of the JUSTICE Act, and instead essentially reauthorize the three provisions set to expire this year without imposing meaningful limits on the expansive and dangerous authorities created by the Act.

GetFISARight:
Shahid of @BORDC discussing demise of the JUSTICE Act, cites:http://bit.ly/72r94k #patriotact

korkie:
Obama stares down Patriot Act criticism http://bit.ly/hQ76d #patriotact


triv33:
Why isn't more attention being paid to just how little of any of this is being used against actual terrorism? Or what it is actually being used for?


Mark
Hello! What's going on?

Shahid:
Well, that's the question -- it largely turns on the House leadership. The bills emerging from the Committees have greater procedural traction, but a "revolt" on the floor could conceivably send the Holt bill to the conference committee.

Jim Burrows:
Shahid, can you contrast JUSTICE with HR 3845 and 3846 ?



Shahid:
That's the rub, though -- unless the Senate passes something similarly protective (which it won't) -- whatever protections we do get into the final House bill will get watered down in the inter-chamber conference. And let's not even begin to imagine what manner of presidential signing statement the administration might concoct to even further eviscerate potential protections that make it out of Congress.


Julian Sanchez:
triv33:Well, some of the stuff is statutorily restricted to counterintel uses. But it's true that the "sneak and peek" provision, allowing physical searches with delayed notification, has overwhelmingly been used for ordinary drug, fraud, weapons, and tax evasion cases --and only in a tiny, tiny fraction of instances for anything related to terror


Mark:
Shadid is exactly right.

jdp23:
Shahid, there's a December 31 deadline. if the House and Senate aren't in agreement, what's likely to happen?


triv33:
Yes, Julian, that's what I was getting at, the "sneak and peek" abuses.


Shahid:
I think the migration of counter-terrorism laws to the routine context (unrelated to national security) is one of the big untold problems. Julian beat me to the punch on sneak & peek, but that's exactly right -- the PATRIOT Act reflects a political bait & switch, a set of authorities proposed in the name of fighting terror, but increasingly used for completely unrelated purposes.


Julian Sanchez:
There were 763 new S&P warrants issued in fiscal 2008. Three were for terrorism cases.

GetFISARight:
Shahid of @BORDC:essentially reauthorizes 3 provisions set 2 expire w/out proper limits on dangerous authorities created by the #patriotact


Julian Sanchez:
In reality, it should come as no surprise, since the FISA already had provision for physical search in intelligence cases--and forget delay, those are totally covert


Mark:
Can I tweet that Julian about the S&P warrants?


Julian Sanchez:
We're on the record here


Julian Sanchez:
Go nuts


jdp23:
Mark, and everybody else:yes, please tweet whatever you find interesting!


Shahid:
If we reach the end of the year before Congress attains a consensus, I think we can expect a streamlined bill to re-authorize the expiring provisions on a short-term basis until Congress reconsiders them in the spring.


Mark:
lol thanks! :)


Shahid:
Julian mentioned FISA, which is apt given the group on this chat.

GetFISARight:
@normative:sneak & peek", allowing physical searches w/ delayed notification, has overwhelmingly been used for non-terror cases #patriotact

Hegemommy:
TIme is not out on fixing the #patriotact. Key provisions of JUSTICE can still happen. http://bit.ly/6rDCTb


Shahid:
Among the elements of the JUSTICE Act of which I was especially fond were (a) a bar on bulk collection through the warrantless wiretapping scheme, as well as (b) a revocation of the telecom immunity enshrined in last year's legislative debacle.

korkie:
#patriotact There were 763 new S&P warrants issued in fiscal 2008. Three were for terrorism cases.

Hegemommy:
RT @korkie:#patriotact There were 763 new S&P warrants issued in fiscal 2008. Three were for terrorism cases.

GetFISARight:
Shahid of @BORDC:migration of counter-terrorism laws 2 the routine context (unrelated 2 security) is 1 of big untold problems #patriotact


Shahid:
I shouldn't speak of the bill int he past tense yet, though, as there does remain a chance in the House. The problem is that, with health care and the economy "sucking the air out of the room," there is little pressure coming from the field to hold Members of Congress accountable, either to their oaths to support the Constitution, or their political constituents.


jdp23:
that's where we come in :-)


Shahid:
One thing that especially strikes me in all this is the sheer ignorance within DC of the widespread rejection of these authorities across the country. Over 400 cities & towns, as well as 8 states, passed resolutions opposing the PATRIOT Act over the past several years -- but you'd never guess it from the discourse that prevails today. http://www.constitutioncampaign.org/map/resos.php


Shahid:
We're also caught in several political bear traps:(a) the lack of independent oversight from a complacent Congress inclined to deer to its political leadership in the White House...

Jim Burrows:
Shahid, do you have an opinion as to the impact of HR 3845 and 3846 on the JUSTICE Act in the House?

GetFISARight:
Shahid of @BORDC:struck by sheer ignorance within DC of the widespread rejection of these #patriotact authorities across the country


Shahid:
The original Conyers bills were strong and certainly a step forward from the bill voted out of the Senate Judiciary Committee, but even the Conyers bill was watered down in the committee earlier this month.

Jim Burrows:
True enough. Though the Conyers fared better than JUSTICE did over in the Senate.


Julian Sanchez:
In a rather mendacious way, I might add. The public summary of the "manager's amendment" modifying that bill -- which I expect all of about five people read anyway -- is actually rather misleading about the substantive changes it makes to the legislative language.


Shahid:
picking up that list of bear traps.... (b) Dems, notably including the President, wanting not to look weak on national security. This dynamic is especially frustrating as it reflects political process problems. Is any politician's, or political party's, electoral future more important than the Constitution? Whatever we might say in answer to that question, Congress has a recurring MO:bowing to the political forces of the moment and kicking the constitutional can down the road.


jdp23:
that's a great point SHahid

Jim Burrows:
I didn't realize that the "manager's amendment" weakened it. Missed that. Thanks you.

HarryWaisbren:
Shahid, when down with your list of "bear traps", we'll kick it over to Julian


Shahid:
The history of detention policy is illustrative, in that Congress (as it did with FISA) laid down to acquiesce to expansive claims of executive power. In the detention cases, the Supreme Court fortunately vindicated some of the more fundamental interests (e.g., habeas) at stake -- but there's no reason to think it would be similarly supportive in the surveillance context, especially given the right wing's rejection of privacy as a constitutional norm. But I digress....


Julian Sanchez:
It was under the cover of a bunch of "Technical amendments" and "clarifications" -- but it, for instance, carved a big loophole to once again permit "john doe" roving wiretaps in counterespionage (as opposed to counterterror) cases


Shahid:
The last one I'd flag is (c) the ephemeral institutional memory of our national electorate, which has essentially forgotten its pervasive concerns over surveillance as the authorities created by the PATRIOT Act have grown entrenched and become part of the "new normal."

GetFISARight:
normative:summary of "manager's amendment" modifying Conyers bill rather misleading on changes it makes 2 legislative language. #patriotact

Lindahyattyoung:
RT @jdp23: Shahid:little pressure coming from the field to hold Members of Congress accountable on #patriotact and FISA

ColinCurtisKS:
RT @GetFISARight:Ask @BarackObama to support #patriotact reform! http://act.ly/1fp Please RT #p2

ColinCurtisKS:
RT @Hegemommy:Time is not out on fixing the #patriotact. Key provisions of JUSTICE can still happen. http://bit.ly/6rDCTb #p2

GetFISARight:
@normative summary of "manager's amendment" modifying Conyers bill rather misleading on changes it makes 2 legislative language. #patriotact

GetFISARight:
Shahid of @BORDC: Bear trap to #patriotact reform:Dems, notably including the President, wanting not to look weak on national security


Shahid:
Last thing I'll say for the moment:keep your eyes on the prize, which is the domestic surveillance regime generally. As noxious as the PATRIOT Act is, even it is a mere tip of an iceberg that also includes the new (and vastly problematic) FBI Guidelines, the warrantless wiretapping scheme (whose outer contours remain secret), and the Suspicious Activities Reporting process. In other words, whatever concerns we raise about PATRIOT, the sum of these various parts is even worse.

GetFISARight:
Shahid of @BORDC: Congress has a recurring MO:bowing to the politics of the moment & kicking constitutional can down the road. #patriotact


Shahid:
Julian, take it away....!


Julian Sanchez:
Well, I hope not the last thing, as I've been piping up regularly, and hope Shahid will feel free to do the same


Julian Sanchez:
So, first, painful detail on the roving tap business if anyone's interested:http://www.juliansanchez.com/2009/11/10/a-bait-and-switch-in-the-house-on-roving-wiretaps/


Shahid:
Absolutely -- I'm just glad to be out of the hot seat....


jdp23:
great overview Shahid thanks so much!

HarryWaisbren:
Yeah Shahid, thanks so much for your commentary, and we'd love to have as much of your perspective as we can!


Julian Sanchez:
And Shahid's last point is actually an incredibly salient segue point, because I think it's easy to get lost in the weeds of how NSLs work or what's wrong with 215 orders in isolation — happy as I am to go weeding if anyone wants to get extra geeky


Shahid:
My pleasure. It's great to see so many voices, from so many political perspectives, standing together to defend liberty and privacy. These issues have the potential to heal bridge our political continuum, making activism of this sort potentially transformative.


Julian Sanchez:
What's more important, I think, is to see how these fit together to limn a sea change in the way we conduct surveillance—a macro shift that eclipses all the specific policy points, and yet is weirdly absent from a public discussion that carries on as though we're still fighting over the procedures we're going to use to fasten alligator clips and reel-to-reel tape on copper phone lines


triv33:
I have another question, domestic terrorism, it's written so as to be so deliberately vague, will that stand? It seems that any political demonstration could be called domestic terrorism if the government cared to do so.


Shahid:
The arena in which the definition of terrorism will most likely get narrowed relates to the "material support" standard, which is before SCOTUS this Term.

GetFISARight:
@normative:public memory tough, too easy 2 get lost in the weeds of how NSLs work or what's wrong with 215 orders in isolation. #patriotact

joshbuckner:
Ask @BarackObama to please support #patriotact reform! http://act.ly/1fp Please RT

Brons:
@normative :A Bait-and-Switch in the House on Roving Wiretaps? http://bit.ly/8QxKYx #patriotact


Julian Sanchez:
And that shift is a transition from the kind of individualized, target-based surveillance contemplated by the Fourth Amendment, the kind of surveillance all our structures of oversight are built to accomodate...


Brandon at ARL:
It's worth mentioning, even emphasizing, that we KNOW as a matter of public record that National Security Letters have been overused and abused repeatedly. That's in the DOJ Inspector General's reporting. http://judiciary.senate.gov/hearings/testimony.cfm?id=2616&wit_id=6193

GetFISARight:
Shahid of @BORDC:great 2 see so many voices, from so many political perspectives standing together 2 defend liberty & #privacy! #patriotact


Julian Sanchez:
...to what some legal scholars are calling "dataveillance" -- where it's not a target selected for scrutiny of his communications, but the stream of communications and metadata itself that is surveilled in order to locate targets


jdp23:
Julian and Shahid, Fusion Centers, Secure Flight [or whatever it's called these days] and the various data mining initiatives all fit in with this general movement

GetFISARight:
@normative:sea change in the way we conduct surveillance—a macro shift that eclipses all the specific policy points. #patriotact


Julian Sanchez:
We are issuing 20-50 THOUSAND national security letters each year. FBI ops manuals show that each NSL can have multiple targets and multiple recipients. If there were a fraction that many terrorists in the country, the eastern seaboard would be a smoking crater by now


Shahid:
That's exactly right. Fusion centers are problematic for their own reasons. I'd draw attention back to Julian's point about the new paradigm being offensive because it's focused on identifying potential threats before they act. The "preventive paradigm," to borrow others' phrases, is not only constitutionally dubious, but a fiction of junk science.


Julian Sanchez:
We are not surveilling people anymore. We are surveilling populations. So when the administration fights to permit "roving wiretaps" based on a mere "description" of a group, rather than a particular individual

Jim Burrows:
Julian, isn't one thing that draws us towards the "dataveilance" model the fact that it is actually relatively hard to narrow the search if the place you are tapping is the Internet backbone. With email in the clear and the human identities tied to the ip addresses and domain names obscured, it is just plain easier to sweep up everything.

korkie:
RT @GetFISARight: Shahid of @BORDC: Bear trap 2 #patriotact reform:the ephemeral institutional memory of national electorate, forgotten ...

korkie:
RT @GetFISARight: Shahid of @BORDC: Bear trap to #patriotact reform:Dems, notably including the President, wanting not to look weak on ...


Julian Sanchez:
That should be seen in the context of the NSL power, which makes it feasible to have a group "description" that consists of an abstract pattern of connections, like a social graph. And Jim's right, that's driven in part by the fact that we've got a legal structure based on the presumption of geographically limited surveillance with targets in known locations

Jim Burrows:
Not that I'm frgiving the intrusion and violation of Constitutionally protected rights. I'm just looking at the circumstances that help entice us into it.

korkie:
RT @GetFISARight: @normative:Conyers bill watered down in a rather mendacious way. #patriotact

korkie:
RT @GetFISARight: Shahid of @BORDC:even the Conyers bill was watered down in the committee earlier this month. #patriotact

sarahburris:
RT @GetFISARight:Ask @BarackObama to support #patriotact reform! http://act.ly/1fp Please RT #p2

korkie:
RT @GetFISARight: RT @Hegemommy:TIme is not out on fixing the #patriotact. Key provisions of JUSTICE can still happen. http://bit.ly/6rDCTb

GetFISARight:
@normative:shift to what legal scholars are calling "dataveillance" --not a target selected for scrutiny of his communications. #patriotact

korkie:
RT @GetFISARight: Shahid of @BORDC:Over 400 cities & towns, as well as 8 states, passed resolutions opposing the #patriotact over the p ...

korkie:
RT @GetFISARight: Shahid of @BORDC:reach the end of the year before Congress attains a consensus on #patriotact, reauthorize short term ...

GetFISARight:
@normative:not target, but the stream of communications and metadata itself that is surveilled in order to locate targets. #patriotact


jdp23:
The "junk science" point is very important. It'd be great to get the technical community involved in debunking the bad science -- and publicizing the debunking -- just as they have with voting rights.


Julian Sanchez:
RIght, I mean, the intel people are not just *making things up* when they say that new technologies have made things hard for them under the old legal structuresw


Julian Sanchez:
It is genuinely hard to handle e-mail in a reasonable way under the four-part FISA structure of "electronic surveillance"


Shahid:
Whether data in the public record is at all probative of a predisposition towards violence is the ultimate question there. But it's not:you simply can't tell which person out of a population may be driven to violence based on what food they buy from the grocery store. If anything, this sort of dragnet is counter-productive, because it inundates analysts with false leads. I'll try to find a link to share for more on this notion.


Julian Sanchez:
Never mind a chat session conducted using TOR


Julian Sanchez:
Oh yeah, the National Academy of Sciences did a long and thorough report concluding that *predictive* data mining is basically useless

GetFISARight:
@normative:legal structure based on the presumption of geographically limited surveillance with targets in known locations. #patriotact

Hegemommy:
RT @GetFISARight: Julian Sanchez aka @normative:We are not surveilling people anymore. We are surveilling populations. #patriotact

GetFISARight:
@jdp23:"junk science" point is very important. It'd be great to get the technical community involved. #patriotact

Jim Burrows:
Absolutely, Shahid. There is no substitute in the intelligence (meaning spying) game than intelligence (meaning smarts). Sweeping hideous quantities of data and doing questionable statistical analysis on the basis of what the last nut case did to prediect the next one gets you chasing shadows.


triv33:
Are you telling me the toppings on my pizza are not a vital clue? They need that data!


Julian Sanchez:
There are other forms of potentially greater use. A social graph is like a fingerprint, so if you're following a particular network via, say, their cell communications, it may be possible to use that pattern to find a net of anonymous online accounts corresponding to those people

GetFISARight:
@normative:intel people not making things up when they say new tech has made things hard 4 them under the old legal structures. #patriotact


jdp23:
also, the "objective" analyses that get applied to the data frequently embed societal or individual biases. i looked at from a computer science theory perspective back when I was in Microsoft Research

GetFISARight:
@normative:It's genuinely hard to handle e-mail in a reasonable way under 4 part FISA structure of "electronic surveillance". #patriotact

GetFISARight:
@normative:National Academy of Sciences did thorough report concluding that *predictive* data mining is basically useless. #patriotact

Jim Burrows:
(excuse the awkward wording in that. Reading and writing at once is too much for my dyslexic brain.)


Julian Sanchez:
This is just to say, the term "data mining" is almost uselessly broad. This Minority Report fantasy that you're going to pluck potential terrorists from a national pool of credit card records is profoundly stupid, but there are a range of more targeted traffic or transaction analysis approaches we may or may not want to permit

EndTheRoboCalls:
Today - #HTT - #HashTagTues - let us know which hashies you are following and why. Me - #privacy and #patriotact

PrivacyCampDC:
Today - #HTT - #HashTagTues - let us know which hashies you are following and why. Me - #privacy and #patriotact

MS0M303:
Today - #HTT - #HashTagTues - let us know which hashies you are following and why. Me - #privacy and #patriotact

SotomayorScotus:
Today - #HTT - #HashTagTues - let us know which hashies you are following and why. Me - #privacy and #patriotact

PCDCNtwk:
Today - #HTT - #HashTagTues - let us know which hashies you are following and why. Me - #privacy and #patriotact

jdp23:
RT @normative:National Academy of Sciences did thorough report concluding that *predictive* data mining is basically useless. #patriotact

GetFISARight:
@normative:A social graph is like a fingerprint, so if following a particular network via, say, their cell communications...#patriotact


Julian Sanchez:
What is totally irresponsible, though, is to act like we're still doing old-school target/suspicion/investigation intelligence work, and try to modify a structure of checks built for that to accomodate the new surveillance without being up-front about what we're doing


Shahid:
Here (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/04/AR2006020401373.html) is a story from 3 years ago documenting the inundation of analysts by false leads.


Julian Sanchez:
Absolutely—that was with respect, as I recall, to the NSA wiretap program


Julian Sanchez:
Probably using keyword flagging of communications


Shahid:
Absolutely -- we have fundamentally changed the paradigm since 2001, and with a minimum of process and deliberation. No one read te PATRIOT Act when it first passed, and now we're onto the second round of reauthorization with the implicit (and erroneous) presumption that the current law is a legitimate baseline from which to move forward.


Julian Sanchez:
Just to hit a point Shahid made earlier about creep:It's important to remeber that even when they're gathering information for legitimate intelligence purposes -- and history shows that (bar Nixon, who was an exceptionally shameless bastard) that's how intel abuses usually started -- it doesn't get thrown out. It gets kept. And can be used LATER when someone wants to pull up that database for routine criminal enforcement purposes.

korkie:
RT @PCDCNtwk:Today - #HTT - #HashTagTues - let us know which hashies you are following and why. Me - #privacy and #patriotact

GetFISARight:
@normative:Minority Report fantasy u're going 2 pluck potential terrorists from national pool of credit card records is stupid. #patriotact


Julian Sanchez:
And it will not happen next week, or next year. It will happen in a decade when a massive government database of transaction and communication records about every man woman and child in the country is normal; when reasonable moderates wonder why all the hysterics ever thought it was a source for concern

leareiter:
RT @BORDC:@GetFISARight Open Letter to President Obama http://bit.ly/gfrbordc #patriotact #privacy


Julian Sanchez:
And suddenly it will seem downright *wasteful* not to use that perfectly good database not to hunt down tax cheats and dope smokers and... hell, by then probably Marlboro smokers too


jdp23:
and we do love government efficiency!


Julian Sanchez:
The problem with Patriot is not the abuse it permits right now. It's the architecture of control -- possibly through misuse, but just as possibly in perfect accord with the letter of the law -- it enables for tomorrow.

korkie:
RT @BORDC:@GetFISARight Open Letter to President Obama http://bit.ly/gfrbordc #patriotact #privacy

GetFISARight:
Shahid of @BORDC:fundamentally changed the paradigm since 2001, and with a minimum of process and deliberation. #patriotact


Julian Sanchez:
OK, I'll shut up now. Jon?


jdp23:
Thanks!

healthycitizens:
RT @korkie:Obama stares down Patriot Act criticism http://bit.ly/hQ76d #patriotact

GetFISARight:
Shahid of @BORDC:No one read #patriotact when it first passed, and now we're onto the second round of reauthorization. Still illegitmiate.

korkie:
RT @GetFISARight: Shahid of @BORDC:No one read #patriotact when it first passed, and now we're onto the second round of reauthorizatio ...


jdp23:
First I'd like to set this in the context of civil liberties activism in general. The Patriot Act battle going on now is a basis for the battles next year ... and next Congressional term.


jdp23:
These issues are complex, and the media doesn't like to cover them. When they do, the coverage is simplistic. Almost nobody's covering the fundamental change in paradigm Julian and Shahid are talking about.

Jim Burrows:
Likewise, Julian, with Obama's willingness to use the overabundance of executive authority in general that Bush accumulated. He's only using it for good, so what's teh harm? The harm of course is when a future President turns out to be another "Little Colonel".


jdp23:
When you talk with people one-on-one, they get it. People around the country hate the Patriot Act. BORDC's local initiatives in 2001/2002 were evidence of it. So are the Twitter conversations.

Jim Burrows:
"Little Corporal". I'm going back to bed after this all done. I cannot get anything straight.

GetFISARight:
@normative:And suddenly it will seem downright wasteful not 2 use that perfectly good database. Hunt tax cheats & dope smokers. #patriotact


jdp23:
The challenge is how to get around the media blockade, which keeps DC from realizing the extent of the opposition ... and keeps people from knowing how they can put pressure on the administration and context.


jdp23:
That's crucial for the longer-term battle. We need to demonstrate our strength now, and then start influencing primaries and congressional elections. So the connections we're making and the techniques we're pioneering here are the basis for the future.


jdp23:
OK, now on to the activism.


Julian Sanchez:
Media loves a narrative. Gerald Ford is Clumsy. Al Gore is stiff. George Bush garbles English. The narrative right now is fevered partisan polarization. A story where Obama is working with Blue Dogs and Republicans against liberal Dems (at least in terms of the legislative players—some of us libertarians are still out here) doesn't fit


triv33:
Some people get it, some people refuse to believe that it could ever be used against them. They honestly think it's only to be used for terrorism, they do not get it.

JeffM2001:
RT @GetFISARight:Ask @BarackObama to support #patriotact reform! http://act.ly/1fp Please RT #p2

GetFISARight:
@normative:biggest problem with #patriotact is architecture of control it enables for tomorrow

Hegemommy:
RT @GetFISARight: @normative:biggest problem with #patriotact is architecture of control it enables for tomorrow

Jim Burrows:
Go, activism!


jdp23:
that's a great point Julian


jdp23:
let me just detour for a second and talk about the narrative


jdp23:
because it relates to the activism


jdp23:
Get FISA Right's open letter last summer cracked through because it played into the narrative of social networks transforming politics

korkie:
RT @GetFISARight: @normative:biggest problem with #patriotact is architecture of control it enables for tomorrow

GetFISARight:
@jdp23:these issues are complex, and the media doesn't like to cover them. When they do, the coverage is simplistic. #patriotact

GetFISARight:
@jdp23:We need to demonstrate our strength now, and then start influencing primaries and congressional elections. #patriotact


jdp23:
people knew that MyBO, Facebook, YouTube etc. were part of why Obama was winning ...


jdp23:
and wanted to write about it. there's also a powerful element of "this is the future of political organizing", the first time something like this had happened

Hegemommy:
The average citizen doesn't think #patriotact affects their life, but it does. Do you know who looked at your medical records?

korkie:
RT @Hegemommy: RT @GetFISARight: @normative:biggest problem with #patriotact is architecture of control it enables for tomorrow

GetFISARight:
@jdp23:So the connections we're making and the techniques we're pioneering here are the basis for the future. #patriotact

korkie:
RT @GetFISARight: @jdp23:So the connections we're making and the techniques we're pioneering here are the basis for the future. #patriotact


jdp23:
i think the comparable narrative going forward is to combine the online social media activism with the offline local organizing like BORDC's local ordinance campaigh


jdp23:
"New media", "social media", "social network sites" ... these are ways people can talk to their friends and relatives about the issues. And when enough people start talking, the traditional media starts to listen.


jdp23:
So now's the time to put it all together online -- as a complement to the other activism online and off from ACLU, EFF, American Library Association and of course BORDC.


jdp23:
We collaboratively wrote the open letter, going through several editing passes -- you can see them on the blog if you're really interested.


jdp23:
People can sign on in various ways


jdp23:
BORDC offered to host it at http://bit.ly/gfrbordc/ ... We also have it on Change.org http://bit.ly/gfrchange/ And Care2 at http://www.thepetitionsite.com/petition/899417535 And on Twitter, as an act.ly petition:http://act.ly/1fp


jdp23:
oops sorry the Care2 link is at http://www.thepetitionsite.com/petition/899417535


jdp23:
and now the challenge is to get the word out


jdp23:
share it with your friends in email


jdp23:
if you're on Facebook or MySPace, post it on your wall -- and if you have friends who you know would be interested, share it with them


jdp23:
If you're on Twitter, please tweet it


triv33:
went to the blog to see the letters this morning, I will be passing it along via e-mail


jdp23:
RT @GetFISARight:Ask @BarackObama to support #patriotact reform! http://act.ly/1fp Please RT #p2

GetFISARight:
@jdp23:when enough people start talking, the traditional media starts to listen. #patriotact


jdp23:
thanks triv33!


jdp23:
and if you have a blog, please blog about it ...

GetFISARight:
@jdp23:So now's the time to put it all together online -- as a complement to the other activism online and offline. #patriotact

korkie:
RT @GetFISARight: @jdp23:when enough people start talking, the traditional media starts to listen. #patriotact

jdp23:
RT @GetFISARight:Ask @BarackObama to support #patriotact reform! http://is.gd/52J8z Please RT #p2

emilycrockett:
RT @GetFISARight:Ask @BarackObama to support #patriotact reform! http://act.ly/1fp Please RT

GetFISARight:
@jdp23:We collaboratively wrote the open letter, going through several editing passes. #patriotact

Brons:
RT @GetFISARight: @jdp23:when enough people start talking, the traditional media starts to listen. #patriotact


jdp23:
we've got a link to the blog posts so far at http://getfisaright.wordpress.com/2009/11/24/blog-posts-about-the-open-letter/


jdp23:
if you blog about it, please add yours there!


jdp23:
That's a heck of a lot of links I know ... the best way to stay in touch is to come back here, to the Patriot Act action hub


jdp23:
we keep it updated with the latest links and ways of taking action


Julian Sanchez:
Thanks for pulling everything together Jon, and thanks to everyone who came by or followed along in the Twitterverse.


jdp23:
we also update our suggested tweets fairly often; there's a link here, or you can follow along on the blog


jdp23:
Thanks for being here, Julian ... it was Harry and the rest of the GFR crew who pulled things together, I just came along for the ride :-)


jdp23:
any quesions on the activism aspects before we wrap it up?


Julian Sanchez:
Well then I withdrawn my thanks and transfer them to Harry. But thanks all the same just for being you.


jdp23:
:-)


triv33:
Thanks for doing this.


jdp23:
thanks for showing up, triv33!

Fochik:
RT @GetFISARight #patriotact

korkie:
RT @Brons: RT @GetFISARight: @jdp23:when enough people start talking, the traditional media starts to listen. #patriotact


triv33:
anytime.

HarryWaisbren:
Thanks a lot Julian, Shahid, the GFR team, triv33, and everyone else following along for participating!

Jim Burrows:
Yes. Thank you everyone. Even you Jon. :-)


Jim Burrows:
Yes. Thank you everyone. Even you Jon. :-)



Emily
Thanks for an interesting discussion, fellas. Just caught it at the tail end


Julian Sanchez:
Rockin, thanks again all. Transform and roll out!


Shahid:
Thanks, everybody. Let's go get 'em....

korkie:
☺
korkie:
thank you

BleuZ00m:
Thank you Julian and Shahid! That was amazing! Now, we'll multiple your thunder.. Underway. Jon, Harry, Korkie: Phew!!

HarryWaisbren:
Alright, this was a fantatsic tweetchat! The comments exhibit how much better the media can do to cover this issue, and we have a great base to spread these words even more on twitter!

BleuZ00m:
And Hello and a huge THANK YOU Triv33!

HarryWaisbren:
Thanks again, and have a wonderful thanksgiving everyone!
☺