Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: President's 'rat out your co-worker' plan, unlikely to work experts say [View all]Divernan
(15,480 posts)34. Here's the "actual language" of concern.
Sec. 6.1. There is established an interagency Insider Threat Task Force that shall develop a Government-wide program (insider threat program) for deterring, detecting, and mitigating insider threats, including the safeguarding of classified information from exploitation, compromise, or other unauthorized disclosure, taking into account risk levels, as well as the distinct needs, missions, and systems of individual agencies. This program shall include development of policies, objectives, and priorities for establishing and integrating security, counterintelligence, user audits and monitoring, and other safeguarding capabilities and practices within agencies.
There you have vague, undefined and totally unrestricted language allowing subjective interpretation and application by & within each federal agency.
One of the principles of legislative drafting - which I have done for a legislature, and which I taught law students how to do - is that a key section of a law is the "definitions" section, which controls how the law can be interpreted and implemented. How important is a definition of a word? Just ask sharp lawyer, Bill Clinton: "It depends on what your definition of 'is' is." The phrase "other safeguarding capabilities and practices" could not be vaguer or more open-ended. With a phrase like this tacked on, there are NO limits on the type and degree of spying on employees which can be done. I think most employees understand they have no expectation of privacy at work re their computer, their desk, etc. Put this order can be interpreted to authorize spying on them 24/7. Put a tracking device on their personal car? Follow them on their lunch break? Track their credit card usage? It's all good under this order.
The scenario envisioned by this Order sounds like an unbelievable dystopia.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
85 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
The "secrets" they most want to keep are those with the least real justification
Fumesucker
Jul 2013
#8
Agreed. It's disgusting. They are protecting their gravy train with overclassification.
GoneFishin
Jul 2013
#33
And who did the 2000 Democratic Vice Presidential candidate campaign for in 2008?
Fumesucker
Jul 2013
#54
Don't give up. You convinced me that all is not lost yet only a few weeks ago.
Egalitarian Thug
Jul 2013
#75
I'll refrain from characterizing President Obama, but yes, we're seeing insanity at work
cali
Jul 2013
#12
Obama is onto something! Putting America back to work with the Insider Threat Program.
democrank
Jul 2013
#13
And of course all of the roughly 2.25 million federal workers on payroll would be conscientious.
BornLooser
Jul 2013
#18
Not true. Honest and dedicated Federal employees have always been custodians of Federal resources.
kelliekat44
Jul 2013
#31
Executive Order 13587 -- Structural Reforms to Improve the Security of Classified Networks and
struggle4progress
Jul 2013
#20
... Barlow said the policy “does not mandate” that employees report behavior indicators ...
struggle4progress
Jul 2013
#21
of course it doesn't. But the program is bad enough. Do you actually support this nonsense?
cali
Jul 2013
#23
I posted the Executive Order you're so upset about. Perhaps you could point out
struggle4progress
Jul 2013
#27
For starters, maybe you could just point out the actual language that concerns you
struggle4progress
Jul 2013
#30
why? seriously, I've told you what concerns me. why on earth should I address this?
cali
Jul 2013
#32
It's not legislation: it's an Executive Order. Existing statutes aren't modified
struggle4progress
Jul 2013
#38
Federal Civil servants have alwlays been to advised or asked to report fraud, waste, and abuse of
kelliekat44
Jul 2013
#28
Yeesh. Any reply I make to this will surely end up with someone screaming
bullwinkle428
Jul 2013
#42
"Those who fail to report them could face penalties, including criminal charges."
winter is coming
Jul 2013
#58
call me naive but this strikes me as 1- extraordinarily counterproductive and..
steve2470
Jul 2013
#74
With the utter disrespect for the rule of law and classified information, it's a shame
AllINeedIsCoffee
Jul 2013
#78