Slashdot Mirror
Feds Arrest Private Eye at HOPE
An anonymous reader writes "FBI agents today arrested Steven Rambam, the owner of a company that bills itself as the largest privately held online investigative service in the United States, according to Washingtonpost.com's Security Fix blog. From the story: 'Rambam was arrested this afternoon by FBI agents just moments before he was to lead a panel discussion on privacy here at the HOPE hacker conference in New York City. Rambam and three other panelists were to discuss how they dug up -- in just 4.5 hours of searching private and public databases -- more than 500 pages worth of data on HOPE attendee Rick Dakan, who agreed to be the guinea pig for the project.'"
AFAIK, digging up information on a willing person and presenting isn't illegal.
I too have felt the cold finger of injustice.
No one has any idea why he was arrested? I read the article and there wasn't any hint at a reason.
"There is no real right or wrong, just what the majority accepts at the time."
Anyone else think that this was all just a big stint to keep him from revealing the information to a bunch of people? I want to see what they went through so much trouble to hide.
Good try, but it seems a few of them beat you to it. I'm sure it won't be the last of them either.
Maybe, he was being arrested on other charges, not necessarily linked to the presentation e was about to give.
How about we wait for more info before we start screaming one way or the other.
Links to porn.
I've already noticed that about 60% of posts are conspiracy theories about shutting him up..
we know nothing about the charges, and generally in high profile arrests there is a lag time between the actual arrest and the announcement of charges to the relevant media.
Now if he just disappears after this and we hear nothing.. then ill be worried, but as of now I see absolutely no red flags here.
VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
And speaking of conspiracy stuff please check out this newspaper column, then realize that the columnist that wrote this had a name change, was born and grew up in Russia, and has a long association with the Cato Institute (ostensibly a "libertarian think tank" but they normally side with the neocons on almost everything.
If only more Americans had read the US Constitution....
Isn't there a character named this in some of Kinky Friedman's books? I know most if not all of the major characters in The Kinkster's mysteries are based on real people but it would be wild if one of them is actually a private eye.
I've looked at a few of Kreb's columns, and he has no qualifications for writing a column on security. He's a gossip-monger with limited skills. If he could see to take pictures, he'd give papparazi a bad name.
I suspect this article was written to "scoop" other reporters. That's the only reason I can think of for the total lack of real information. Perhaps he ought to take lessons from Steve Rambam on how get information?
"The mind works quicker than you think!"
it's true that Krebs sucks.
Then it's show of force. Only the Feds are supposed to play with the "stovepipes" of Carnivore and when they pay you to do it for them you need to keep your mouth shut.
Can you say "Police State"? I voted for George Bush because he promissed me a smaller and less invasive government. This is what I got.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
guys name was Mark Felt.. he was also pardoned, parthenetically he was also "Deep Throat"
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
Subject line says it all. Consider yourself warned.
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
Listen, anyone who belongs to that many TLAs and FlAs, has to be guilty of something.
Steve's bio.
OK, as long as you don't try to impose your ideals of spelling on us.
http://www.rootstrikers.org/
Generally, when a "hacker" is arrested at the beginning of a presentation in front of a crowd, that signals a red flag.
Some people die at 25 and aren't buried until 75. -Benjamin Franklin
Oddly enough, the FBI chose to make this move in New York City, where they knew that none of the attendees would be armed.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
On the subject of Rambam check out previous talks given at HOPE conferences. He's a good speaker and quite interesting on the topic of information availability. He stated a couple of weeks ago in an interview leading up to this conference's talk that he had planed to do the same basic presentation at the last hope but the "victim" got cold feet at the last moment after he realized just how much information was available and threatened to sue. If you listen to the old presentations he does make a point that almost any information is available legally but it is more difficult to get it legally than illegally. I have to believe from hearing him speak several time that what he would have done for this presentation would at least to be best of his knowledge been legal.
Four previous presentations.
Privacy - Not What It Used To Be
http://www.the-fifth-hope.org/mp3/privacy.mp3
Databases and Privacy
http://h2k2.hope.net/media/databases.mp3
Information on the Masses with Steve Rambam.
http://h2k.hope.net/post/panels/h2kinfo.mp3
Info for Masses
ftp://ftp.2600.com/pub/oth/beyondh/nfo4mses.ra
I've already noticed that about 60% of posts are conspiracy theories about shutting him up..
You must be new here.
All joking aside if the charges are unrelated to the presentation, the timing of the arrest makes sense. I would assume that his attendance at the conference was not a secret. From the FBI's point of view it is a win win situation. You know exactly where and when a person will be and you also get the side effect of fear from conference attendees, not to mention all the media attention. Basically, don't fuck with us. We're the FBI which will not be overshadowed by a private organization.
Don't bother with that link, it goes to a barnyard porn site.
Odd you should say that....
The guy getting arrested might be an issue, but i am suprised no one is focused on the staggering amount of info the company was able to obtain about a non famous guy. 500 pages? :|. How many pages do they have on you?
All I know is that he appears in Kinky Friedman's mystery novels. If the President considers himself a TRUE Texan (which I don't), then he should pardon Rambam immediately.
Or at least give him an inappropriate backrub.
Bemopolis
"I guess the moral of the story is, don't paint your airship with rocket fuel." -- Addison Bain
"Do us all a favour... Please STOP trying to impose your ideals of freedom on other nations!"
Our ideals are great. It's the execution that we fuck up on.
5 Years and 5 Days later, we see that the gov't hasn't learned from their mistake of arresting someone before they are to give a presentation at a hacker convention. http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/07/17/13 0226Remember last time
I am sure that this is going to fall under the broad and sweeping legislation that has passed in recent years to combat hackers and terrorists. No doubt using a computer to commit a crime will soon be like using a gun in a crime in California: Mandatory minimum sentences that put everyone (evil and ignorant) into the same catagory and take discretion out of the hands of judges (or liberal judges at least). At least electronic voting booths are still insecure...
7h3$3 4r3n'7 7h3 Ðr01Ð$ ¥0 4r3 £00|{1n9 f0r. M0v3 4£0n9. --OB1
Private Eye Arrested in the Middle of Waste Dumping Scheme
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
Only the Feds are allowed to spy on people.
Ramdam was charged with impersonating a mime, mopery with intent to loiter, probity, nothosonomia, and one moving violation.
Muslim community leaders warn of backlash from tomorrow morning's terrorist attack.
We're so screwed. People like you have effectively killed the skepticism of government actions on which freedom relies. Thanks. We really appreciate all you've done.
When can we expect to find out additional information on his arrest? There is no meat to this story.
Peter: I got an idea, an idea so smart my head would explode if I even began to know what I was talking about.
I can actually find out a heck of a lot about somebody with their name and Google. If you know power searching tips, and construct searches based on what you already find, you can find out a lot. If I had somebody's name who was a frequent Internet user, I could probably find out a fair amount of biographical information on them with a few variations on their name. Then I could search using those pieces of information as keywords and find out even more information.
...and you can too! A lot of the information he says he found in 4.5 hours is not that impressive. Pics of his former roommates? Easy if they're Myspace or Facebook friends. Places he lived before? Check the history for his wall. Places he worked before? If he was in IT, and you can find his favorite internet screenname, you can find his postings to internet tech forums such as Slashdot, Devshed, Sourceforge, etc, complete with the details of what he was working on.
And God help you if you have a MySpace account with a wall. Then I can learn everything about your social life, including the names of your friends. Then I can look them up too and construct a whole web of information about you.
That's just with Google. Combine that with even modest law enforcement databases and you can find out a heck of a lot about one person.
Granted, that still scares me a LOT. I value my privacy but I feel like I don't actually have it anymore. All I'm saying is his deal is not all that unique. Or maybe I'm just The Power Google Searcher From Hell!!!!!
Nobody got this? Modertate funny..
Read the following link about how he maliciously sued Osirusoft, the maintainer of relays.osirusoft.com after having them DDOS'd. It does not shock me to see that this asshole has ended up in handcuffs at all. He has always acted above the law. For those that remember the foonet.net story will rejoyce to see that this shithead is going to PMITA prison.
Note that I did not say he was stupid, hence I post as AC.
It's true no man is an island, but if you take a bunch of dead guys and tie 'em together, they make a good raft.
LOL so funny, man... never would have expected it...
Every single link relating to HOPE, being hope.net (with various prefixes, etc) and those mp3 files coming off hope sites... all just ~gone~... is anyone seeing them?
According to this article, he has been involved in a lawsuit against a spam blocker (his company was mistakenly placed on a spam blocklist), he has tracked Nazi war criminals, and he discovered that Elvis has Jewish ancestors.
Steve Rambam lost his law suit against the anti-spam DNSBL run by Joe Jarad. In the process Steve lost any respect I might have had for him for other things.
SPF support for most open source mail servers can be found at libspf2.
http://www.oretek.com/lawsuite/
"Basically, don't fuck with us. We're the FBI which will not be overshadowed by a private organization."
Which is something THEY SHOULDN'T BE DOING. An arrest should never, ever be a PR or propaganda-like stunt. It should be a fact of doing their job, not to glorify the activity. (i.e. if they knew he was going to be there, they could have picked him up as he entered the building, etc.)
This is the exact, specific, and clear reasons why people hate the FBI. This action supports everyone who hates the FBI or mistrusts government, or hates overbearing or misused authority.
The mere fact that the charges are not clear (charges are a matter of public record and jailing or holding someone should be publicly known per the civil rights of the individual), were not stated at the time of the arrest, in my mind, is a stupendous error (if that fact stands scrutiny). It may be legal, but to do so in front of so many people who, by and large compared to the general population, *are* knowledgeable about the law, familiar with bad tactics, and rather resourceful, really ends up shouting out the ills of "the system."
i.e. with unknown charges, I for one hope this potential self-serving action by the FBI gives more public awareness to how bad the Patriot Act may be if they in fact did not announce or make clear the charges and doing so does relate to the Act.
Oh scuttlenerd, how great your sacrifice on the alter of hacktivist needs. Yes, you went to the HOPE convention now go fuck yourself. It isn't a crime to disseminate legally obtained informaiton.
Regardless of why the arrested him, it was bad timing from a PR standpoint. If it wasnt related directly to what he was going to say and they needeed to stop him from revealing something a better choice would have been to arrest him *after* the speech.
Do they need to wait? Of course not, but bad PR is never a good thing and they HAD to know what this would look like..
---- Booth was a patriot ----
If only for Rambam's suit against oretec and Joe Jared, I'd say it was fate balancing the scales.
And again, this is in advance of knowing what Rambam is charged with. If it's silly, then I'll have to (yuck!) support him. If it is legitimate AND he's guilty, then I hope he gets tossed in jail and the key thrown away.
My sense of justice doesn't allow me to not object when an injustice is done, even if it's against someone I think deserves what happens for another reason. The law must be fair and just for everyone, even if I think a particular person is a piece of human garbage.
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
Conference founder Emmanuel Goldstein said organizers were trying to figure out where the FBI had taken Rambam
Why didn't they just announce the arch-criminal himself?... circa 1984.Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
Who modded you troll?
Wikileaks, no DNS
How come illegal sites like this aren't taken down lightening fast by the authorities? I once accidentally saw some of the other kind of illegal porn images that should not have been hosted on a .com company site, yet were available for all to see. There are some things that you just cannot un-see. :-(
From TFA: Conference founder Emmanuel Goldstein said organizers were trying to figure out where the FBI had taken Rambam, and were contacting his parents and his lawyer.
What's funny is that in 1984, Emmanuel Goldstein is "the Enemy of the People" after having once been a leading Party member almost at the level of Big Brother.
If we're going to (badly) juxtapose reality with fiction, Rambam would be Winston, the guy who follows Goldstein's lead & eventually ends up arrested by agents of the Thought Police.
(I know, the FBI != Though Police. I said it was a bad juxtaposition)
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
Do one of you guys wanna tell him, or should I?
<cough>
There are two essential points to acquiring restricted data.
1) Access the data.
2) Don't get caught.
These guys covered only one point in preparations for their panel.
Anagram("United States of America") == "Dine out, taste a Mac, fries"
You're obviously part of the conspiracy!
I voted for George Bush because he promissed me a smaller and less invasive government. This is what I got.
Sorry, but you are just too dumb. Anyone with half an eye could tell that Bush was pro Big Government. How could anybody who even tried to educate themselves even a little on this issue think otherwise? If you can't take the (little) time and (small) effort to look behind the promises, this is what you get.
Just like it began in Germany in the early 30s.
Soon, though, at least people will have the excuse that they voted for $CORRUPT_BIG_GOVT_PRESIDENTIAL_CANDIDATE because the police threatened to beat the shit out of them...
I find it ironic that the guy is arrested in front of a whole bunch of online geeks, yet nobody has managed to find the single, most pertinent bit of information: What's he been charged with?
:v)
It appears you can't access this kind of information online.
Vik
How long can the FBI hold people without charge under conventional laws? The good thing is the FBI are real law enforcement instead of spooks playing at being cops without the benefit of a rule book.
Yes, you're allowed to vote, in a Diebold machine which puts your vote behind an opaque screen. You're allowed to say what you want, unless you expose an illegal government program. You're allowed to be whatever religion you want, unless you are a muslim and a certain shade of brown which means you might be held without charges indefinitely, and if the Bush Administration find out that "oops, we got the wrong guy", you are forbidden from challenging them because of "state secrets". And, Mr. God-fearing Christian, you think the family health doctors who are still being murdered by your fellow worshippers didn't "fear for their lives"? Let's see: Secret Prisons. Domestic Wiretapping. Torture. "Rendition". Presidential "signing statements" in which the executive claims the right to ignore a law. These are not things that "stand for freedom". Oh, you're free to peruse the Internet, but a record is being kept of where you go and what you see. If you don't believe there is a crisis in this nation which threatens the liberty which was so hard-won by our forefathers, you are either stupid or hopelessly hypnotized by Rush Limbaugh. Which one are you, plueken?
You are welcome on my lawn.
I wouldn't be surprised if everyone at the conference was arrested.
Spoon not. Fork, or fork not. There is no spoon.
Because they're probably hosted in countries where the authorities couldn't give two shits.
I used to get high on life, but I developed a tolerance. Now I need something stronger.
I had an interesting debate a few weeks ago about this very subject with a friend of mine who voted for Bush in the last election. Now, that's not to say that the guy is an idiot, far from it. But he was indeed arguing that we shouldn't immediately assume someone is innocent in lieu of evidence. He did use the term 'bleeding heart' once or twice, which did somewhat disturb me as in effect he was saying that anyone who thinks terrorists should be tried fits that description. It's interesting to see, though, how this sort of thing came about; the other side's thinking, as it were.
The United States is breaking the Geneva Conventions in Guantanamo by not treating prisoners humanely. Whether or not the prisoners are indeed unlawful combatants, they deserve humane treatment. An exerpt:
I think a lot of this is to do with the (deserved) hatred associated with terrorism by the general public. An eye for an eye, effectively; they don't treat us as humans, so why should we do the same for them? As difficult as it is for me to believe, I think there are people who think this is an adequate way of doing things. In my opinion, though, we can't lower ourselves to their level. Human rights are just that: human rights, applicable to all humans. Even if they're the scum of the earth.
And I want to be clear here: 99.9% of people who say that these terrorists should be tried are not saying we should let them go. That seemed to be the main jist behind the aforementioned conservative friend's argument; that it would be possible that someone could be mistried, get out on a technicality, or not be proven guilty even though they were, so in order to be 100% safe we should simply detain them all and bypass the trial entirely. But even if lawyers and technicalities are the problem, we should fix those problems rather than abolishing their right to a fair trial, a right which has been guaranteed to all for hundreds of years.
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
Excuse me? Please point out where in the Patriot Act a citizen can be held without charges for years. It doesn't exist.
The Constitution trumps the Patriot Act, which guarantees the right to speedy and fair trial. There are non-citizens who have been held as political prisoners. Is there just reasoning? It is hard to say, but people are sure quick to jump to opinions without any real facts in these cases. Fundamentalists call them guilty without facts and don't care. Liberals assume they are innocent victims. Who is right? I say both are wrong for jumping to conclusions without facts.
Legally, if you are not a US citizen, then you don't have much in the way of rights or protection here. And when the country is at war, and if you are linked with that war, you don't have much protection either.
The Geneva Convention (in which I was schooled during my time in the Marine Corps) is pretty unreasonable. It says the POWs are to be allowed phone calls, send and receive mail, etc. etc. Personally, I wouldn't abide by that. I think they should receive humane treatment, with Red Cross visits. But communication is a serious security risk. But that's just my opinion.
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
First they came for the Linux users, but I didn't care because I didn't use Linux.
Then they came for the OSX users, but I didn't care because I didn't use OSX.
Then they came for the Windows users, but by then it was too late; they were all far too stupid to help me...
Just kidding! I'm sure the FBI will offer a fair and speedy trial. After all, it's a 6th-Amendment right guaranteed to all Americans.
Well, almost all Americans...
barack to the future?
The same goes for torture. Today, if you object to torture, you have to justify your position, because Gitmo and Abu Ghraib have inoculated everyone against the idea that torture is by definition wrong. Police states don't happen overnight, and as they develop into fruition, "normal people" won't recognize the status quo as a police state--it'll just be normal, a "nothing to see here" common-sense extension of what we see every day.
I call them detainees, not suspects. Some are no doubt suspected of crimes, but many in Gitmo and Abu Ghraib were caught up in sweeps, or are held because they are thought to have information. Holding someone because you want to interrogate them for information isn't the same thing as holding them because you think they themselves have done or will do something bad. "Interrogation" does not address guilt or innocence, and in fact any of us can be interrogated, regardless of our guilt or innocence. Some of these people have been the victim of a Kafkaesque "six degrees of Kevin Bacon" imprisonment. They knew a guy who knew a guy who was at this place this other person might have passed through, and ergo they might know something, so we'll hold them for a while. Since there is very little oversight, very little accountability for abuse, coupled with high accountability for failing to get information, in short order we have waterboarding and people being beaten to death. Calling them "suspects" makes us feel better about not caring, because we're at least halfway implying that they might have done something, but in reality being held for interrogation doesn't even assert guilt, much less provide evidence for it.
nt
When the country falls into chaos, politicians talk about 'patriotism'. Lao-Tzu
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereignity
In New York City, applications for permits are routinely denied if the reason given is "self defence." This applies to all weapons, not just pistols, and even if you just want to keep it at home. "The determination whether to grant the license is completely within the discretion of the licensing officer."
You pretty much have to a) be a cop or b) know a cop.
The current "rumor" going around the con is, he had an outstanding warrant in another state and his arrest was regarding that. Again, this is just what's been going around, we don't know what the real story is as of yet.
The reason Google is not an effective search tool for digging up information about people is that names are very far from unique. I just did a search on my name, turned up over 50,000 hits - but less than 1% of them actually apply to me. Try it for your name, you'll see what I mean (unless you have a really unusual name - and most people do not have really unusual names).
So long as people aren't really physically harmed, then scaring prisoners with dogs, or stripping them naked is fair game in interrogation as far as I'm concerned.
I hope you get to experience this shadowy margin between torture and hazing. I hope you realize that Americans won't stand for our soldiers to be treated the way we're treating Iraqis. At the center of this is why we're failing to win the hearts and minds of the country we're occupying.
Seth
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
There isn't a magic number of "disappearances" or "renditions" or deaths by torture that have to be added up before the police-state litmus-paper turns ugly colors. What would you say does differentiate a police state from a bastion of liberty? Can you have imprisonment without trial, torture, and secret prisons and still be call someone an extremist or alarmist for talking about imprisonment without trial, torture, and secret prisons? At what point does talking about documented, known reality stop being alarmist? I didn't say that every case was a Padilla case, but I do say that the Padilla case, and a growing number of similar cases, will eat away whatever integrity and credibility our system has. They taint the rest, because lurking over every investigation, every interrogation, every question asked, will be a smirk and a quiet "we don't HAVE to do this, so you want to be helpful." Yes, dammit, it matters.
Has anyone noticed that 2600.com and all Hope sites are down?
Time to break out Team America: World Police:
"America... fuck yeah! Coming to save the motherfucking day now. America... fuck yeah! Freedom is the only way now."
So the cynicism and paranoia on Slashdot are due not to government holding people without trial, or torturing and beating them to death in secret prisons, or fabricating a rationale for a war that has killed tens of thousands, or ubiquitous surveillance without any oversight, but because of my alarmism concerning all of the above documented and well-known events? O God, what have I done?
Good grief, in what fascist hellhole do you live? In the United States the police can arrest you without a warrant only if they have very good reason to believe you have just committed, or or about to commit, a crime. Here and here and here are some legal references. "Very good reason" in this context means a reason that will convince a judge not only that you should have been arrested, but also that there wasn't time to get him (the judge) to sign off on it first. Judges really like to be in control, so in practise this means the police can freelance a decision to arrest in only a few well-defined situations.
For example, the police can arrest you without a warrant if an officer has just seen you do something highly suspicious, like run out of a convenience store wearing a ski mask, with a store owner yelling "Stop thief!" in hot pursuit, or a credible witness says they just saw you commit a serious crime -- for example your girlfriend accuses you of slugging her and causing the bruises that appear on her face -- or you match the description of someone wanted for jumping bail on a multiple murder charge, or even if you've been stopped for a minor infraction, like a traffic violation, but proceed to give an obviously false name, refuse to sign the citation, and aren't carrying any valid ID, so they have no way of being reasonably sure you'll appear in Court to answer the summons.
Can the police walk up to you at a public function, where you're doing absolutely nothing illegal, just minding your own business, and showing no indications of fleeing the country -- and arrest you without a warrant? Never.
Besides the fact that he's an important and respected Jewish rabbi, he also belongs to a different time period.
Slashdot community, please notice: I am looking for a girlfriend.
Nave H. Weiss
It's this thing called the slashdot effect. When you get way more traffic than normal the servers and/or networking equipment sometimes fail. 2600 does not seem to have a huge networking operation so it probably is not hard to overwhelm them. Throw the fact that the entire staff is busy with Hope and it's bound to happen. BTW 2600 and Hope site are up right now (Sunday July 23, 2006 11:23 am GMT).
... thank you mam?
That's not even the real problem. The real problem is how should we know whether those guys we got are terrorists we shouldn't treat as humans or innocent bystanders we should unless we want to become like the terrorists ourselves.
A argument, that's -IME- been reasonably successful with red-blooded Americans and upstanding citizens recently, is to ask them whether Bush releasing Guantanamo prisoners in troves means he's letting murderers back on the streets to kill innocent children or if he locked up innocent people for years without any rights. Unfortunatly some see "but they're from Afghanistan" as a valid counter-argument and it's hard to argue against (because it reveals a completely screwed-up set of values which would require long and hard work to correct =/ )
Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage
I'm not saying that we should man the barricades and break out the ammo, only that we have a responsibility to not let it get to that point before we say, "hey dammit, this is wrong." This is where the battle is, for the most part--with words. Ideas and principles matter. What we are willing to tolerate changes to accomodate what we've already tolerated, because we largely can't admit that we looked the other way. If we tolerate it on the small scale, what moral argument do we make to oppose the exact same practices on the large scale?
We have to recognize wrong and raise bloody hell about it, if only via a few posts on a lame blog or in a conversation over the water cooler at work. I'm not an activist, but when I speak up, here or in real life, it may give confidence to someone else who has been quietly thinking "you know, this doesn't look right." If I'm silent, that one quiet little voice caves into the raucous majority and eventually they don't have any doubts that it's okay for Padilla or anyone else to rot away in jail without the "privelege" of a trial. A voice of dissent, one who brings up the ideals we all ostensibly believe in, is more important than you think. If I followed your lead, I'd wait until no voice was possible. What do you want me to do, wait until I'm being herded into a black van with a hood over my face to cry out "golly, this is wrong?"
Well, after reading a good deal of the posts here, I can gather some tendencies. We don't know anything yet concerning the question just WHY he was arrested. Could've been anything. Could be completely unrelated to the conference. Maybe it's got to do with his biz as a private eye and he let his eyes peek into privacies he shouldn't peek in.
Maybe he REALLY commited a crime!
Yet the general reaction is that the government is trying to silence someone who "knows too much". Doesn't that tell us something about the way the people views its government? The general sentiment I get from reading this is that you do not trust your government. That you consider an arrest, if you have no further information to the whys and whats, to be unjustified.
Now, one could argue that we have a tendency to be sympathetic with like minded people. But still, it's kinda strange to see a complete distrust of your governments actions. We'll be living in interesting times...
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I saw Mr. Rambam speak at the previous H.O.P.E. - he gave a presentation entitled "Privacy: Not What It Used to Be." It's available online in MP3 and M3U format.
Definitely worth a listen: he's onto the privacy violations committed by our Government in cooperation with private corporations. After listening to what he has to say, you'll understand why the government would target him.
Well, we will all sure sleep better with him off the streets. Maybe they will lock him up with David Carruthers and throw away the key. Do YOU feel safer? /It really seems like the FBI is more interested in publicity than public saftey sometimes..
-- -- Warning. Do not stare directly at the sun.
A few thoughts making an arrest where fewer weapons are present. No matter what the arresting agency's motivations are having fewer guns around is a good idea when it happens looks good from their view. Every bullet fired goes somewhere and I imagine most law officers remember that in a crowded place. Also, what difference would it have made if more people in the room had been armed? If everyone in the room had a gun what would you have them do, pull a weapon on a federal law officer? If a person or multiple people had drawn weapons what would that have accomplished besides justifying any action the FBI took on site and in later actions against the guy arrested and anyone associated with him? The people that are moving this country away from our rights and towards a more authoritarian structure would love that. It would be another threat that Americans have to be "protected" against, a domestic threat requiring more domestic surveillance and warrantless action to deal with these domestic terrorists. What version of events do you think would be spread across mainstream television watching America? The Fox news version of course and I think people here are savy enough to know what that would be like. A few side notes: I was educated, trained and worked briefly in print journalism, so I may be more cynical than most people. I like guns, own two with the appropriate permits, but am against general conceal and carry because I see what idiots many people are with cars while driving and the thought of them having guns with them wherever they go scares the hell out of me.
Not Joseph, and he was charged a six months ago. I'm not saying that holding him 3 years without charging him is okay, but I also find it odd that you can't even keep track of the state of your example when making a point relating to his treatment.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
I don't agree that when someone overstays their visa the government should then "drop it" and just let them stay. What's the point of having dates on visas if they cannot be enforced?
In my opinion, if someone overstays their visa or if they violate the terms of their visa (which says in essence "don't be evil"), the government can deport them. If they wish to fight the deportation, that will slow the process down, and they will have to accept those consequences, as long as they are reasonable.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
What's wrong with his spelling?
Three British bankers have been extradited from the UK to Texas, using legislation that was originally
intended to combat terrorism, but has now apparently been extended to include financial trading.
At present the legislation has only been ratified in the UK, but not in the USA (there are a good few
Irish nationalists the UK police would like to interview). They had the misfortune of ending
up being tangled up the Enron collapse.
BUSINESS NEWS: CIMA protests over 'NatWest Three' extradition
And one witness has already committed suicide
Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
Speach.
http://www.rootstrikers.org/
That is all.
-illumina+us "I put on my robe and wizard hat..."
Chicago cops totrure(d) people to get confessions:
(report on torture
Daley says he was not aware of cop torture
Gutierrez assails Daley over cop torture scandal
And SURPRISE! The statute of limitations has run out, NO COPS ARE GOING TO JAIL FOR THIS!
mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
Well, I'd be more likely to trust a Texas redneck than an FBI thug. I'd rather that the people be armed so that their government fears the people rather than the other way around.
In Michigan, the government is required to let you have a permit unless they can find a reason that you shouldn't, like a history of mental illness or a criminal record. The people applying for the CCW permit have to take a class on the proper and legal use of a firearm. If they fail that requirement, they can't get a permit.
I consider Michigan's law to be reasonable. It permits self-defense without creating an excessive burden for the citizen who wishes to carry.
It's illegal in New York City for practically anyone except the politically connected to carry. NYC also has a high rate of firearm crimes. Big surprise: criminals break laws. They don't care that it's illegal to carry firearms. But if you want to defend yourself from the criminals (who know that you are unable to defend yourself from their predations), you risk being chewed up and spit out by the legal system.
Can anyone think of a good reason why Dick Cheney and his minions should be able to monopolize firearm onwership? Neither can I.
One of these arrest attempts in which the following occurred:
1) The entire front row of the audience stood up and turned out to be lawyers representing the speaker; or
2) As the speaker was carted off, a previously arranged secondary speaker stepped onto the stage and continued the presentation - and if that one was also arrested, a third, then a fourth, then a fifth...
After all, there's nothing like having a firewall and failover backups.
If the speaker and the entire audience turned out to actually be cardboard cutouts, that would be a honeypot?
There is a section in the Patriot Act allowing for the suspension of habeas corpus, with no limits defined. I use to repeat the specific section, but it's been awhile and I am no longer interested in rereading that bilge again, suggest you read it at least once. And any good leatherneck should read General Smedly Butler's "War is a Racket" at least once - assuming they still make you bless him at night in boot.
Look at his columns. They are mostly bereft of useful info. Membership in an organization does not confer competency. I suspect that he belongs to those organizations to get newsletters and pick up gossip.
"The mind works quicker than you think!"
First off, most people would lack the resources to sue. Second off, if state law says they can detain you a certain amount of time without arrest -- which many do, they did nothing illegal that they can be sued for. Third off, even if they did broke the law and were sued, the establishment likely would not side against a cop, for an arrestee. Remember, most of Rodney King's perpetrators got away with it, and almost every unjustified police shooting gets away with it too. 3 days in jail is chump change compared to such grand events. Wake up, please.
-Clio
Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
The security community is rife with self-proclaimed "experts" who are nothing more than con-men cashing in on the fear and ignorance of the technical community. Rombom seems to fit the description well enough, so he may have been arrested for a very real crime.
In any event, make of these supposed court documents what you will. I have no specific information. I only know what I stated above -- that the infosec industry currently attracts a lot of criminal scumbags.
Wow. You've sure got some balls to stand up against nigger-hating proponents of states' rights in the year 2006.
We should definitely track and lock up anyone who say "nigger". Like you, I'm also proud to be a vigilant, free-thinking opponent of police states.
Oops, I mean you're a fucking group-thinking nerd.
Um, when was this golden period of civil rights of which you speak? Can't have been the 80s (Reagan and his eeeeeevil AG Ed Meese), can't have been the 70s (Nixon! Eeek!), the 60s (Selma, Roe v. Wade), the 50s (McCarthy, HUAC hearings), the 40s (Japanese-American internment), the 30s (Grapes of Wrath, Pinkertons beating up strikers), the 20s (ward fixers, no votes for women)....can't have been the last century, with Lincoln suspending habeas corpus and all and the Army shooting on draft protesters...can't even have been the early 19th century, with the Alien and Sedition laws and the government locking up newspaper editors for printing attacks on the President...
So...hmmm...I'm guessing you're talking about the first few months after the Bill of Rights were ratified?
My point is that by historical standards I think you're wrong. The rights you are theoretically granted in the Constitution are more often enjoyed in practise today than at any time in the Republic's history. Perfection has not yet arrived, of course, and some people suggest Guantanamo is evidence of its lack.
But on the other hand, if that's the most important thing they can point to -- when our grandfathers striking the steel mills could point to nightsticks on their head, and our great-grandfathers could point to black men hung to the nearest tree because a white girl cried rape -- well, I think maybe we could use a little humility. We have it good, real good, compared to most of the world, through most of its history. We should not rest until things are better, of course, but whining about how bad it has become for us (when quite the reverse is true) seems a little...graceless.
Why on earth do those clowns hold conferences in the US? For goodness sake - hold the conventions in Mexico, or Antigua, or ANYPLACE else.
You might be surprised who'd be willing to present knowing they wouldn't be nabbed the moment before taking the stage.
What about when it's your buddies being held POW. Is it still as unreasonable then? Would you still be all about how they are denied such things?
Being informed has been demonstrated, over and over again, to be the best weapon for the individual.
You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
I'm sorry to hear about the abuse you've endured.
I ask you how you would interrogate someone without using scare tactics?
I would interrogate 'enemy combatants' the same way the police in America are authorized to interrogate American citizens. I might lie to them. I might coerce information out of suspects with exagerrated threats of harsh punishments.
I would ensure that the Red Cross is supervising my treatment of prisoners. I would showcase my fair and respectful treatment of prisoners as a demonstration that my cause is just and humane. I would deny my opponents the opportunity to use prisoner abuse as recruitment propaganda.
The coalition of the willing found both Saddam's sons and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi by information gleaned from paid informants... not by water boarding captured prisoners in secret overseas CIA prisons.
If I were ever tortured by a government entity and were released, I am certain that the rest of my life would be dedicated to visiting my abuse ten-fold on those who had mistreated me. And I'm not even a big 'eye-for-an-eye' proponent.
Seth
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
hates competition.
A copy of the complaint against Rambam (named as "Rombom" in the document) says he is being charged with witness tampering and obstruction of justice in an ongoing government case against a former Brooklyn assistant district attorney who was indicted for money-laundering. The complaint against Rombom and more information about the charges are available at the latest Security Fix post - http://blog.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2006/07 /fbi_charges_hope_speaker_with_1.html
Cops can say whatever they want to get you to confess to a crime. This is BS, as one poster already said, guess the FBI don't like the competition. A-holes!
If Kerry was the answer, it must have been a stupid question.
The UN - The largest "political" cause of death.
Can you please find it? I've never read the whole document, but I have constantly challenged people to find these tidbits and they never do. I have at the very least read sections and the headings looking for these various clauses.
Even if such clauses did exist, you could argue that they violate the Constitution and thusly aren't valid.
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
From a person who has served in the military I can tell you that American soldiers have NEVER received mail and phone calls as POWs. I don't understand why it was put in the Geneva convention and agreed upon by everyone when no one on the planet does it.
And I wouldn't expect that treatment for myself, or my buddies. I do think it is a major security threat to allow them open communication with the outside world. I said they should be allowed Red Cross visits so that their families know they are alright. I do believe that to be reasonable.
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
If I have time, I shall endeavor to do so, but it was just read over the air on CSPAN last month when the senate committee was once again questioning that half-assed shyster, attorney general Gonzales.
Section 215 - something suggests to me your reading comprehension needs some work, along with any critical thinking processes one would hope you might possess. Debate isn't just about challenging people about the obvious. The entire Patriot Act violates the US Constitution --- everything the Bush Cabal has done in office challenges the US Constitution --- exactly what planet are you living on??? Have you ever done anything in life which requires any mental concentration???? Try using your time a little more constructively a start by Googling "US-Oman Free Trade Agreement" and next search on "NAFTA highway" ....
`(a)(1) The Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation or a designee of the Director (whose rank shall be no lower than Assistant Special Agent in Charge) may make an application for an order requiring the production of any tangible things (including books, records, papers, documents, and other items) for an investigation to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities, provided that such investigation of a United States person is not conducted solely upon the basis of activities protected by the first amendment to the Constitution.
When Googling for this section, I found all kinds of commentary where people insisted that for voicing a political opinion you could be prosecuted and subjected to illegal searches. And you accuse me of poor reading comprehension. This states that one can make a request to seize property in an investigation, given that the grounds of the investigation are not based solely on fist amendment rights. You can not be investigated for reading a certain book, or voicing a particular opinion.
That request must be approved not only by a judge, but also the Attorney General. Where is this section does it say that your Constitutional rights have been removed? Oh wait, it doesn't.
Try again. Except next time drop the personal insults and try bringing some facts.
`(2) An investigation conducted under this section shall--
`(A) be conducted under guidelines approved by the Attorney General under Executive Order 12333 (or a successor order); and
`(B) not be conducted of a United States person solely upon the basis of activities protected by the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
`(b) Each application under this section--
`(1) shall be made to--
`(A) a judge of the court established by section 103(a); or
`(B) a United States Magistrate Judge under chapter 43 of title 28, United States Code, who is publicly designated by the Chief Justice of the United States to have the power to hear applications and grant orders for the production of tangible things under this section on behalf of a judge of that court; and
`(2) shall specify that the records concerned are sought for an authorized investigation conducted in accordance with subsection (a)(2) to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities.
`(c)(1) Upon an application made pursuant to this section, the judge shall enter an ex parte order as requested, or as modified, approving the release of records if the judge finds that the application meets the requirements of this section.
`(2) An order under this subsection shall not disclose that it is issued for purposes of an investigation described in subsection (a).
`(d) No person shall disclose to any other person (other than those persons necessary to produce the tangible things under this section) that the Federal Bureau of Investigation has sought or obtained tangible things under this section.
`(e) A person who, in good faith, produces tangible things under an order pursuant to this section shall not be liable to any other person for such production. Such production shall not be deemed to constitute a waiver of any privilege in any other proceeding or context.
`SEC. 502. CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT.
`(a) On a semiannual basis, the Attorney General shall fully inform the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives and the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate concerning all requests for the production of tangible things under section 402.
`(b) On a semiannual basis, the Attorney General shall provide to the
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
Frankly, I believe you to be a neocon troll, just tying up people's time. Now go back and reread it very sloooooowly. I stand by what I said previously...
First of all, I'm liberal on all my major political beliefs save for one. Yet you respond with personal attacks, and again with zero facts. Perhaps you need to look up the definition of troll. You seem confused.
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
You pretty much have to a) be a cop or b) know a cop.
And/or be very wealthy and/or influential.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano