Posted on 11/29/2001 8:47:46 AM PST by Asmodeus
Ashcroft Accused Of 'Global Internet Power Grab'
Thu Nov 29 2001 10:14:02 ET
BUSINESS WEEK reported under the headline, "Ashcroft's Global Internet Power-Grab," that a "new law lets the Justice Department go after foreign hackers, even if U.S. computers weren't a target," and asks whether the US should be the global cyber police.
In fresh editions, BUSINESS WEEK added: "An amendment to the definition of a 'protected computer' for the first time explicitly enables U.S. law enforcement to prosecute computer hackers outside the United States in cases where neither the hackers nor their victims are in the U.S., provided only that packets related to that activity traveled through U.S. computers or routers.
"This remarkable amendment is to the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, which Congress enacted in 1984 to prohibit conduct that damages a 'Federal interest computer,' defined at the time as 'a computer owned or used by the United States Government or a financial institution,' or, 'one of two or more computers used in committing the offense, not all of which are located in the same State...
"Under the Department of Justice's interpretation of this legislation, a computer hacker in Frankfurt Germany who hacks into a computer in Cologne Germany could be prosecuted in the Eastern District of Virginia in Alexandria if the packet related to the attack traveled through America Online's computers. Moreover, the United States would reserve the right to demand that the extradition of the hacker even if the conduct would not have violated German law, or to, as it has in other kinds of cases, simply remove the offender forcibly for trial. What is perhaps the most troubling about this legislation, in addition to the lack of any debate or focus on it, is the fact that the Department of Justice manual simply says that this unprecedented power will be used in 'appropriate cases.' The Department of Justice provides no guidance to prosecutors or citizens of the world what kinds of cases it will deem to be 'appropriate' for the expanded jurisdiction."
BUSINESS WEEK concludes: "Every country has the right to protect its own citizens, property and interests. No country has the right to impose its will, its values, its mores or laws on conduct that occurs outside its borders even if they may have a tangential effect on that country. The new legislation permits the U.S. government to do just that, and is unwise and unwarranted."
Dirtboy concludes that BUSINESS WEAK just contradicted itself. I don't think Ashcroft will go after minor-league hacking. But if a hacker causes millions of dollars in losses or damage in the United States, they are just as culpable as a terrorist who blows up a five-million dollar facility.
The fact is that the only voice of dissent for liberty has come from the right, the far right by press standards, and that the left has completely abandoned any claim to defender of civil liberties.
Of course the day the press acknowledges that Paul Weyrich and Bob Barr were but a slim few to question the wisdon of the anti-terrorism bill will be a cold day in hell...
all your computers are belong to us
Well the republicans certainly arent playing that role now are they? The same republicans who had a fit over "know your customer" under clinton seem totally OK with a similar policy applied to retail sales under bush.
...hehe...it was only a matter of time...took 5 replys...
Grover Nordquist, Paul Weyrich, Phyllis Schlafly, the NRA...
Don't like it? Build your own internet!
How so, Ms. Duffy? While Ashcroft's enemies make me more likely to support Ashcroft, I am unaware of anything that the AG has done that would make me describe him as "courageous."
FReegards...MUD
Do you mean one that is composed of servers, workstations, and cabling that are owned by private business and individuals?
I mean the one where the workstations, routers, servers, and cabling are strung across American soil.
Maybye you didn't notice but a lot of us are toast. About 4K of us. But shreding the remaining vestiges of the constitution will make us safer. Well maybye not, but he's a Republican so who cares?
Bob Barr is a defender of the constitution too. Every other Tuesday.
They must be cooling the ice rink in hades now, because this comes from the Washington Post, Nov. 29th. The press is nowhere near as homogenous as people here like to believe.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A33277-2001Nov29.html
"A strange-bedfellows coalition of everyone from Vermont socialist Bernie Sanders to the ACLU to Georgia libertarian Bob Barr is sounding alarms that the real threat to liberty comes not from Osama bin Laden, but from Attorney General John Ashcroft. The air is thick with op-ed references to 'star chambers,' 'witch hunts' and 'Orwellian' government. Pat Leahy, who runs the Senate Judiciary Committee, has suggested that the Administration favors 'secret trials' and 'summary executions.'
Bob Barr's objections were also noted in the NYTimes in at least 3 articles,
Date: November 18, 2001, Sunday
A NATION CHALLENGED: THE TERRORISM FIGHT; Civil Liberty vs. Security: Finding a Wartime BalanceDate: November 15, 2001, Thursday
A NATION CHALLENGED: AN OVERVIEW: NOV. 14, 2001; A Widening Rout, Civil Liberties Issues, a Red Cross RetreatDate: November 15, 2001, Thursday
A NATION CHALLENGED: CIVIL LIBERTIES; WHITE HOUSE PUSH ON SECURITY STEPS BYPASSES CONGRESS
Gee, I guess the lame-stream press is not so lame if you actually read it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.