Earlier this morning I posted about how the way some liberals are pushing the Foley scandal makes me nervous [0]. I would like to expand more on the idea of why I agree with Terrance [1] that Foley's case is another example of the rampant abuse of power by the so-called moral majority of the Republican party.
In that post I quote our Jeffrey Langstraat's, "The Children" is Us [2]; highlighting how "The Chidren" has become an effective rhetorical device used by Republicans and conservatives to develop policy which, might encroach on our civil rights and liberties but, hey, if it is for "The Children" it has to be good.
Let's take the issue of illegal wiretapping.
Back in 2002 Alex Galloway, created a whole software and digital art show [3] based on the FBI's Carnivore project [4]. The point of the show was to use the FBIs most infamous (and at that point still debatably illegal) spyware unleashed on the internet. Napier's contribution to the project was a data visualization client called Black and White [5].
First deployed in 1999, Carnivore is supposed to "surgically" read emails of suspected criminals and nothing else [6]. Questions and outrage dogged the project, especially after reports that Earthlink [7] would do the surveilling for the FBI given their servers could not handle the packet sniffers. Then the Electronic Privacy Information Center [8] successfully sued the government under the FOIA [9]. This opened the gates for privacy rights advocates, internet law experts and journalists to delve deeper into the inner workings of the software.
This is what the Guardian reported back in October of 2000 [10]:
Among the capabilities that peek out from behind all the indelible black swaths in the documents is an ability to reconstruct an entire Web page as viewed by a subject. A planned, updated version may even be able to capture voice-over-Web communications. Presently the system can capture and record all packet traffic to and from a selected IP, while monitoring a subject's on-line movements.
These extra capabilities underscore the controversial issue of FBI reliability in restraining itself when authorised to view only e-mail headers. This is a crucial point, because the Bureau can obtain the on-line equivalent of a pen register order (recording the destinations of out-going communications) or a trap and trace order (recording the origins of in-coming communications) without a warrant signed by a judge. Because of the lower standard, the contents of such communications must not be intercepted.
For such limited surveillance the standard of evidence is quite low: the FBI need merely be prepared to prove that the information sought could be material to an investigation. To snoop on the actual content communicated - the on-line equivalent of a telephone wiretap - the FBI must satisfy a judge that a crime is likely to be committed.
You'd think with the current blogstorms over illegal wiretapping that "the liberal bloggers" were the first ones to discover the government's illegal wiretapping program. The problem back in 2000 is that only "the geeks" of mainstream and new media knew about it --and the Bush administration, along with their then Attorney General Janet Reno [11], were successful in diffusing the impact of the news by framing it as only interesting to .... the geeks.
By 2005, thanks to Abu Ghraib, Hurracane Katrina and the Iraqi Occupation, the Bushites were not successful in making "only for the geeks" frame stick. Which is why Alberto Gonzales came out swinging with a secret (rhetorical) weapon : The Children.
Gonzales Wants New Web Rules Attorney General: ISPs Should Preserve Customer Info To Help Fight Kid Porn [12]
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said Tuesday that Congress should require Internet service providers to preserve customer records, asserting that prosecutors need them to fight child pornography.
Testifying to a Senate panel, Gonzales acknowledged the concerns of some company executives who say legislation might be overly intrusive and encroach on customers' privacy rights. But he said the growing threat of child pornography over the Internet was too great.
"This is a problem that requires federal legislation," Gonzales told the Senate Banking Committee. "We need information. Information helps us makes cases."
He called the government's lack of access to customer data the biggest obstacle to deterring child porn.
"We have to find a way for Internet service providers to retain information for a period of time so we can go back with a legal process to get them," he said.
Notice the outright lie about internet customer records. Carnivore was able to recrete data and web pages and do more than just the "packet sniffing" the Feds were using to sell it as harmless to civil rights. The problem is that data sifting takes time and people like Gonzales want to be to have immediate access of the information, especially with time-sensitive information.
The way "the geeks" pounded the feds over the Carnivore project left them smarting this time. They can't get away with "it's just software" frame. So now it's for "The Children".
As a mother of two computer saavy boys I would be more than happy to welcome legislation that would protect them from anybody using internet technology to harm them. The problem I see with this is not the intention, it's what's left unsaid. Given I know of wiretapping scandal that broke out five years ago around Carnivore, I know that the protection of my children is not at stake.
What is at stake for the US government is a way to spy on civilians without impunity. Forcing ISPs to save data eases the burden of data sifting. It would just take a mild accusation of child pornography or pedophilia to allow the government to snoop on not just a suspects records but whole ISPs with no system to prevent them of abusing their power.
"The Children" frame doesn't stop there.
Let's look at how it is being used with the current restrictions on reproductive rights being pushed all across the country. Parental consent has been the silver bullet of the abortion rights movement with states like Texas making it a capital punishment to help any teenage under the age of 18 to get an abortion [13]. We have also lists of books banned from libraries [14], for "The Children". We have the infamous parental warning labels on TV shows and record albums, for "The Children". We have now Google actively censoring sites like culturekitchen, alleging it contains material sexual in nature [14] not suitable for "The Children".
It's because of self-hating semi-closeted gay men like Mark Foley that we have the homophobic Defense of Marriage Act [15], for "The Children".
All this to say that using the frame of "predatorgate" is to play into one of the most successful frames pushed by Republicans in the last 6 years.
In the Mark Foley case, "The Children" plays nicely into obvious frames against gays. It's a ready made moment of hysteria relished by the extremists of the Republican party; because it's intrinsic to their political game :
Family Research Council [16]
Foley, an unmarried 52-year-old representative, had always refused to answer questions about his sexual orientation. Now that his emails and messages to teenage male pages have been revealed, it appears clear that Foley is a homosexual with a particular attraction to underage boys. While pro-homosexual activists like to claim that pedophilia is a completely distinct orientation from homosexuality, evidence shows a disproportionate overlap between the two.
As members of the reality-based community we have to ask, where is this leading us? Are Democrats going to end up [making pacts with the homophobia devil [17] that will end up having greater repercussions on our civil rights?
I was reminded during my conversations that since Congress, the Executive branch, and the military have all exempted themselves from discrimination laws and court oversight, victims there have nowhere to turn. People seeking justice would see this case as another moment of a government run amok, high and drunk with power.
Lack of checks and balances have given us a whole range of abuses of power in Capitol Hill : illegal wiretapping, secret torture chambers, intelligence leaks, wanton lobbying, prostitution (gay and otherwise) and now protected sexual predators.
What is worse, in the meantime, the same people who are supposed to protect us, are the same people who cut funding from family courts, domestic violence shelters, all to spend it in paramilitary enforcement programs like the "war on drugs" or " title="reference on Pat Buchanan's wet dream" target="_blank">Pat Buchanan's wet dream [18], the coming " title="reference on war on immigration" target="_blank">war on immigration [19].
Throughout the last two weeks I have been accused of not writing in a linear fashion and thusly, not being a good blogger [20]. I've written this lengthy post to try to convey how I look ahead on an issue by looking back. Sometimes it takes some good dose of labyrinthine logic to untangle a mess of narratives.
What I see here is a big issue :
- Abuses of power in the form of sexual advances to minors,
- Abuses of power by the covered up by members of Foley's party, the Republican party,
- Abuses of power by the 'preventive surveillance' policies that will be called for to protect 'The Children'.
Frame it otherwise and you'll be playing right into the hands of people like this :
Sexual fascism and the Mark Foley scandal [21]
Posted: October 3, 2006
1:00 a.m. EasternBy Linda Harvey
Apparently, Rep. Mark Foley is homosexual. And like many homosexual men, he likes young teen boys. We should pray for him that he gets a handle on this problem and refrains from harming any more kids.
Meanwhile, we need to wake up. The fact that this is typical behavior for homosexuals doesn't stop us from continuing to elevate such folks to positions where they gain access to our kids.
And the liberal wing of the GOP – the "It's My Party, Too" crowd – shelters and nurtures those who pose a serious threat to children in this and many other ways. Foley is on the advisory board of the radically liberal –- not "moderate"– PAC led by Christie Todd Whitman, who vetoed a partial-birth abortion ban bill while governor of New Jersey and supports homosexual "marriage."
[22] | 
[23] | 
[24] | 
[25] | 
[26] | 
[27]