Posted on 07/27/2016 12:06:39 PM PDT by MarchonDC09122009
Arab Americans Join With Tech, Privacy Groups to Fight Surveillance - Morning Consult
https://morningconsult.com/2016/07/26/arab-american-groups-join-partner-tech-privacy-fight-surveillance/?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTlRNeE16TmpNR0ZpT0daaSIsInQiOiJ1QXBqd28wWmlEbnpjWUVWRDNOaDZCU2tFMmJ6NXJ2MVJyRHZpcjhGWWxPcGJ1U1VyQXFCXC9PcUN6RmJ3emRKdkJJTWJSUmtBRGRTV09XNlI4QUZHU0xybWYxQ1I5QTRqQkJrZDAxbUEwVzg9In0%3D
Arab Americans Join With Tech, Privacy Groups to Fight Surveillance Amir Nasr | July 26, 2016
Privacy advocates in the technology space have a new ally in Arab American groups to help with their fight to keep U.S. surveillance at bay. They are spurred on by anti-Muslim rhetoric from Republicans.
In December, Donald Trump called for a “total and complete shutdown” of U.S. borders to Muslim immigrants. In March, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) said the country needed to “empower law enforcement to patrol and secure Muslim neighborhoods before they become radicalized.”
Earlier this month, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich backed the idea of testing “every person from here who is of a Muslim background” and deporting them if they believe in Sharia law.
It’s no surprise that privacy and civil rights groups shudder at such statements. Now they are joined by Arab American advocacy groups that view those remarks as a call to be more publicly opposed to government surveillance.
In June, the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee signed on to two letters to members of Congress, urging lawmakers to fight government surveillance. The letter was co-signed by some of the most notable tech and privacy groups.
The first letter, dated June 6, urged members of the Senate Judiciary Committee to reject an amendment that would allow the Federal Bureau of Investigation to obtain personal information — an individual’s name, postal address, email address, phone number, device serial number, login history and length of service with a provider — through a subpoena instead of a warrant. The supporters of that bill eventually pulled the measure from consideration because of a disagreement over the amendment.
The ADC signed on to another letter the following week, pressing House leadership to adopt an amendment to a defense spending bill that would prohibit intelligence officials from conducting warrantless searches of data gathered through Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Amendments Act. House lawmakers rejected the amendment.
The Arab American Institute signed on to the second letter, and the ADC and AAI were the only two signatories representing a specific cultural group.
ADC has partnered with civil liberty and tech advocates to fight government surveillance for more than a decade, but the divisive language surrounding the 2016 presidential campaign has increased concerns surrounding the issue.
“There is an urgency due to the political rhetoric and hate climate,” Yolanda Rondon, staff attorney for the ADC, wrote in an email to Morning Consult. “The calls for registry and immigration bans, patrolling neighbors are troubling and alarming, where fear mongering is being used to allow the abrogation of civil rights.”
Some of the comments featured from White House candidates were later walked back. Cruz told CNN that his statement on patrolling Muslim neighborhoods “does not mean targeting Muslims, it means targeting radical Islamic terrorists.”
Still, the issue for Arab-American groups is historically based. The Arab American Institute said at the time that Cruz’s suggestion “stands starkly against all that our Constitution embodies and is a rabbit hole we cannot go down.”
“When we begin to chip at constitutional rights, and all for a false sense of security because nothing is 100 percent or guaranteed, we go back to a time of the ‘Red Scare’ and McCarthy era, and the unconstitutional internment of Japanese Americans,” Rondon said.
The ADC has pushed back against surveillance since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, when the group started to get calls “related to persons believing cars were following them, random unnamed officials were infiltrating mosques and cultural centers, or tapping their phones, watching their communications,” Rondon said.
In 2013, the group focused on “substantive reform” to the Patriot Act to ensure the privacy of Arab Americans from the U.S. government.
Surveillance remains one of the ADC’s top priorities, particularly in relation to “arbitrary and discriminatory placement on watch lists,” as well as programs designed to counter violent extremism that Rondon says has “disproportionately targeted” the Arab American community.
The U.S. government has launched a large online counter extremism initiative through a variety of agencies and community grants. The administration says its focus is on drowning out posts on social media that present violence with positive messages.
Earlier this month, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson unveiled a $10 million grant program that will give local communities the resources to counter the influences that could incite certain individuals —i.e., lone wolves — to plan a terrorist attack.
“Building bridges to local communities is as important as any of our other homeland security missions,” Johnson said at the time.
But the ADC doesn’t view the counter extremism push the same way. These programs “made us suspect classes [of people] for criminal behavior or terrorism, and that our population must be controlled and watched,” Rondon said. “Our community is targeted and looked at with suspicion and placed on No Fly Lists, Selectee Lists and watch lists because of our country of birth, our Arabic name, wearing cultural garb or article of faith.”
This plays into their fight against surveillance. Privacy advocates have pushed back on the government’s ability to search the database of information picked up through Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Amendments Act. The sweep scoops up intelligence on U.S. residents even though it’s supposed to be limited to foreigners.
The ADC’s fear of being targeted by the government makes the group even more skeptical about the FISA program. “Arab American citizens, while 702 is suppose to focus on non-U.S. persons, are disproportionately targeted based on their country of birth/national origin/family ancestry and are wrapped up in ‘incidental data collection’ because of their communications with families and friends overseas,” Rondon wrote.
Privacy advocates have fought Section 702’s renewal because, they argue, it collects data of U.S. people who have communicated with someone overseas. They also say there is little oversight into how intelligence agencies can search the database. Tweet This Share This Author Photo Amir Nasr @amir_anasr
Amir covers tech policy and politics for Morning Consult. You can reach him via email at amir@morningconsult.com. Follow him on Twitter @amir_anasr. See all posts by Amir
About news article source:
*will need to trace news org staff political contributions in order to determine degree of legitimacy / bias.
https://morningconsult.com/about/
Morning Consult was never supposed to be a company. But in a few short years, we have grown from a small healthcare email into a company that covers the intersection of government and the country’s most important industries.
Committed to improving the way leaders access and use vital information, Morning Consult has expanded into the political, energy, finance, health, and tech sectors, conducted over 100 public opinion polls with over 250,000 Americans, and worked with over 75 trade associations and Fortune 500 firms from across the country.
I believe Trump was misquoted again. He said to close the border to all illegal immigration, and only allow legal immigration with proper screening. Muslim Americans ought to welcome that. I was concerned about Gingrich’s statement that Muslims who believe in Sharia should be deported. Something like 2/3 of Muslim Americans want Sharia, and we cannot deport citizens. It’s a huge problem, yes, but cannot be solved with one simplistic step.
I agree with your recollection of Mr. Trump’s actual statement and context.
Newt Gingrich has a history of stridently favoring authoritarian measures, ie: 1990’s he said the nation was in need for a large expansion of ophanages to raise children at risk.
Smart guy, perhaps, but he sure does step in it.
You’re right about Islam being a huge problem.
IMHO I think if the free world made a unified effort to marginalize, ridicule and humiliate Muslim *vulnerable tenets of faith and practices, we could demoralize them and start Huge dissent within their ranks that would lead to evolved thinking / moderation.
Islam supports:
Murder of anyone in disagreement with islam
Slavery
Pedophile rape
Subjection of women, no rights, beating, rape, genital mutilation, honor killing, financial abandonment
First cousin marriage inbreeding
Institutional dishonesty
And much more...
The Soviet Marxists extinguished American values and beliefs in little more than a generation.
The West needs to do the same to islam, for its own survival.
RE: “I believe Trump was misquoted again. He said to close the border to all illegal immigration, and only allow legal immigration with proper screening. Muslim Americans ought to welcome that. I was concerned about Gingrich’s statement that Muslims who believe in Sharia should be deported. Something like 2/3 of Muslim Americans want Sharia, and we cannot deport citizens. It’s a huge problem, yes, but cannot be solved with one simplistic step.”
If they’re not all sent home soon, USA will be doomed. At the very least, mass Moslem terrorist gangster attacks in our cities and schools and neighborhoods. Eventually, they’ll take over just like they already have in 56 other countries around the world
If they’re not all sent home soon, USA will be doomed. At the very least, mass Moslem terrorist gangster attacks in our cities and schools and neighborhoods. Eventually, they’ll take over just like they already have in 56 other countries around the world
This approach in discussions only closes minds. Good evangelization practices are more effective; raise objections in a challenging but not threatening way. Provide positive alternatives and honorable “way out.”
In any case, we need a constructive discussion that will pull in ignorant millennials and foreign-born citizens. I'd like to see a reality tv program that challenges minds creatively in a fun and attention-getting way. A national panel discussion of sharia could take up a tv season easily. Can sharia coexist with democratic principles? Is a Muslim marriage valid in western law? (Because female not asked to consent, doesn't participate, might not even have to be present.) Who has authority in Islam? Who has basic human rights in Islam? Does the Koran really teach that people get to heaven by killing “infidels?” (The oldest version doesn't say this!)
You make a very valid just point.
How about a compromise?
A two prong attack using both tactics?
High road, low road.
We are at war with an enemy that wants us subjugated or dead.
Using Socratic thought provoking WWJD questioning may not be very effective dealing with child raping, female genital mutilating, stabby-crabby beheading 7th century savages.
RE: “RE: marginalize, ridicule and humiliate...
This approach in discussions only closes minds. Good evangelization practices are more effective; raise objections in a challenging but not threatening way. Provide positive alternatives and honorable “way out.”
In any case, we need a constructive discussion that will pull in ignorant millennials and foreign-born citizens. I’d like to see a reality tv program that challenges minds creatively in a fun and attention-getting way. A national panel discussion of sharia could take up a tv season easily. Can sharia coexist with democratic principles? Is a Muslim marriage valid in western law? (Because female not asked to consent, doesn’t participate, might not even have to be present.) Who has authority in Islam? Who has basic human rights in Islam? Does the Koran really teach that people get to heaven by killing “infidels?” (The oldest version doesn’t say this!)”
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.