http://news.cnet.com/…

IRS undercover operations: Privacy invasion?
The bailout bill also gives the Internal Revenue Service new authority to conduct undercover operations. It would immunize the IRS from a passel of federal laws, including permitting IRS agents to run businesses for an extended sting operation, to open their own personal bank accounts with U.S. tax dollars, and so on. (Think IRS agents posing as accountants or tax preparers and saying, “I’m not sure if that deduction is entirely legal, but it’ll save you $1,000. Want to take it?”) That section had expired as of January 1, 2008, and would now be renewed.

Starting with the so-called Anti-Drug Abuse Act in 1988, the IRS has possessed this authority temporarily, with occasional multiple-year lapses. A 1999 internal report said the IRS had 126 “trained undercover agents” working in field offices at the time. This is the first time that such undercover authority would be made permanent.

Sens. Max Baucus (D) and Chuck Grassley (R) have been pushing to make it permanent for a while, claiming (PDF) in April that: “Undercover operations are an integral part of IRS efforts to detect and prove noncompliance. The temporary status of this provision creates uncertainty, as the IRS plans its undercover efforts from year to year.”

There’s another section of the bailout bill worth noting. It lets the IRS give information from individual tax returns to any federal law enforcement agency investigating suspected “terrorist” activity, which can, in turn, share it with local and state police. Intelligence agencies such as the CIA and the National Security Agency can also receive that information.

The information that can be shared includes “a taxpayer’s identity, the nature, source, or amount of his income, payments, receipts, deductions, exemptions, credits, assets, liabilities, net worth, tax liability, tax withheld, deficiencies, overassessments, or tax payments, whether the taxpayer’s return was, is being, or will be examined or subject to other investigation or processing, or any other data received by, recorded by, prepared by, furnished to, or collected by the Secretary with respect to a return.”

That provision had already existed in federal law and automatically expired on January 1, 2008.

What’s a little odd is that there’s been little to no discussion of the IRS sections of the bailout bill, even though they raise privacy concerns. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said this week: “I will continue to work with congressional leaders to find a way forward to pass a comprehensive plan to stabilize our financial system and protect the American people by limiting the prospects of further deterioration in our economy.” He never mentioned the necessity of additional IRS undercover operations.

While everything is going on and the abolition of the Fed is on many people’s minds… lets not forget the terrible things the IRS does and that it too needs to be abolished.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/…

Lawrence Lessig, a respected Law Professor from Stanford University told an audience at this years Fortune’s Brainstorm Tech conference in Half Moon Bay, California, that “There’s going to be an i-9/11 event” which will act as a catalyst for a radical reworking of the law pertaining to the internet.

There’s going to be an i-9/11 event. Which doesn’t necessarily mean an Al Qaeda attack, it means an event where the instability or the insecurity of the internet becomes manifest during a malicious event which then inspires the government into a response. You’ve got to remember that after 9/11 the government drew up the Patriot Act within 20 days and it was passed.

The Patriot Act is huge and I remember someone asking a Justice Department official how did they write such a large statute so quickly, and of course the answer was that it has been sitting in the drawers of the Justice Department for the last 20 years waiting for the event where they would pull it out.

Of course, the Patriot Act is filled with all sorts of insanity about changing the way civil rights are protected, or not protected in this instance. So I was having dinner with Richard Clarke and I asked him if there is an equivalent, is there an i-Patriot Act just sitting waiting for some substantial event as an excuse to radically change the way the internet works. He said “of course there is”.

Skip to 4:30:

Lessig is the founder of Stanford Law School’s Center for Internet and Society. He is founding board member of Creative Commons and is a board member of the Electronic Frontier Foundation and of the Software Freedom Law Center. He is best known as a proponent of reduced legal restrictions on copyright, trademark and radio frequency spectrum, particularly in technology applications.

Anyone who doesn’t think the Internet as we know it can be controlled by the government is missing the obvious. The telecoms, which own all the major hubs and backbones, are in bed with the government. They now have immunity from instances where they work with the government to spy on subjects. They work with the NSA to tap major internet hubs with machines able to do realtime analysis of all traffic passing through it. The government even provides them with monopoly status in many parts of the country isolating them from competition. Just like all large corporations which are regulated… they are in bed with the corporatists running the government.

http://arstechnica.com/…

The government has appealed a September federal court ruling that struck down the National Security Letter (NSL) provision of the PATRIOT Act. The NSL provision, which can be used without probable cause or judicial oversight, gives the FBI the ability to secretly demand access to the private records of libraries, Internet service providers, and other organizations. National Security Letters also impose gag restrictions on recipients, which forbid them from disclosing that they have received the letter.

In a strongly-worded ruling issued earlier this year in a lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of an anonymous Internet service provider, federal court judge Victor Marrero wrote that the NSL provision of the PATRIOT Act represents an unconstitutional deprivation of First Amendment rights and threatens to undermine the Separation of Powers doctrine by expanding the executive branch’s authority to the detriment of governmental accountability. The government has now appealed Marerro’s ruling and will continue to fight for the preservation of the PATRIOT Act in court.

In a statement issued yesterday by the American Civil Liberties Union, a representative of an ISP voiced concerns about the National Security Letter gag orders and expressed frustration at being unable to testify during recent Congressional inquiry regarding the involvement of telecommunications companies in the NSA wiretap program. As a result of the gag order, the speaker is forced to remain anonymous and cannot disclose specific details regarding the National Security Letters that his company has received.

National Security Letters have been around for a long time. The PATRIOT Act has made them the government’s favorite new tool. The idea goes back to the times before our revolution when British soldiers did the same kind of warrant on the spot deal. There are actual reasons for that 4th Amendment. This thing really need to get put down. The ridiculousness of this story should be enough to convince the average person that these on the fly warrant/gag orders are a very dangerous and unnecessary tool to have.