Considering the responses of Bill Kristol, the Wall Street Journal, and others to President Bush's affirmation of warrantless domestic spying by the NSA, perhaps it's time to separate the wheat from the chaff in this America. The Rude Pundit believes a new "contract" of sorts is needed between the government and the American people. Howzabout this:
"I (the undersigned) believe President George W. Bush when he says that the United States of America is fighting a 'new kind of enemy' that requires 'new thinking' about how to wage war. Therefore, as a loyal citizen of President Bush's United States, my signature below indicates my agreement to the following:
"1. I believe wholeheartedly in the Patriot Act as initially passed by Congress in 2001, as well as the provisions of the Domestic Security Enhancement Act. Therefore, I grant the FBI access to:
"a. my library records, so it may determine if I am reading material that might designate me an enemy of the nation;
"b. my financial records, including credit reports, so it may determine if I am contributing monetarily to any governmentally proscribed activities or organizations;
"c. my medical records, so it may determine if my prescriptions, injuries, or other conditions are indicative of terrorist activity on my part;
"d. any and all other personal records including, but not limited to, my store purchases, my school records, my web browsing history, and anything else determined as a 'tangible thing' necessary to engage in a secret investigation of me.
"I agree that I do not need to be notified if my records have come under scrutiny by the FBI, and, furthermore, I agree that no warrant is needed for the FBI to engage in this examination of my personal records. Additionally, I agree that the FBI should be allowed to monitor any groups it believes may be linked to what it determines to be terrorist activity.
"2. I believe that the President of the United States has the power to mitigate any and all laws passed by the Congress and that he has such power granted to him by his status as Commander-in-Chief in the Constitution as well as the 2001 Authorization of Military Force, passed by the Congress, which states that the President can use 'all necessary and appropriate force' in prosecution of the war. Therefore, I grant the United States government the following powers:
"a. that the National Security Agency, under the direction of the President, may tap my phone lines and intercept my e-mail without warrant or FISA oversight;
"b. that the President may hold me or other detainees without access to the legal system for a period of time determined by the President or his agents;
"c. that the President may authorize physical force against me or other individual detainees in order to gain intelligence and that he may define whether such physical force may be called 'torture':
"d. that the President may set aside any and all laws he sees as hindering the gathering of intelligence and prevention of terrorist acts for a period as time determined by the President, including, but not limited to, rights to political protest.
"I agree that the Judicial and Legislative branch should be allowed no oversight of these activities, and that such oversight merely emboldens the terrorists. I also agree that virtually all of these activities may be conducted in complete secrecy and that revelation of these activities amount to treasonous behavior on the part of those who reveal these activities to the press and the citizenry.
"3. Finally, this document is my statement that I believe the President of the United States and the entire executive branch, as well as all departments and agencies involved, as well as all of its personnel, will treat these powers I have granted them with utmost respect. I believe that these powers will not be abused, nor will any of the information I have given them permission to examine be misinterpreted. However, should suc
To: cryptography[at]metzdowd.com Subject: A small editorial about recent events. From: "Perry E. Metzger" Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2005 13:58:06 -0500
A small editorial from your moderator. I rarely use this list to express a strong political opinion -- you will forgive me in this instance.
This mailing list is putatively about cryptography and cryptography politics, though we do tend to stray quite a bit into security issues of all sorts, and sometimes into the activities of the agency with the biggest crypto and sigint budget in the world, the NSA.
As you may all be aware, the New York Times has reported, and the administration has admitted, that President of the United States apparently ordered the NSA to conduct surveillance operations against US citizens without prior permission of the secret court known as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (the "FISC"). This is in clear contravention of 50 USC 1801 - 50 USC 1811, a portion of the US code that provides for clear criminal penalties for violations. See:
The President claims he has the prerogative to order such surveillance. The law unambiguously disagrees with him.
There are minor exceptions in the law, but they clearly do not apply in this case. They cover only the 15 days after a declaration of war by congress, a period of 72 hours prior to seeking court authorization (which was never sought), and similar exceptions that clearly are not germane.
There is no room for doubt or question about whether the President has the prerogative to order surveillance without asking the FISC -- even if the FISC is a toothless organization that never turns down requests, it is a federal crime, punishable by up to five years imprisonment, to conduct electronic surveillance against US citizens without court authorization.
The FISC may be worthless at defending civil liberties, but in its arrogant disregard for even the fig leaf of the FISC, the administration has actually crossed the line into a crystal clear felony. The government could have legally conducted such wiretaps at any time, but the President chose not to do it legally.
Ours is a government of laws, not of men. That means if the President disagrees with a law or feels that it is insufficient, he still must obey it. Ignoring the law is illegal, even for the President. The President may ask Congress to change the law, but meanwhile he must follow it.
Our President has chosen to declare himself above the law, a dangerous precedent that could do great harm to our country. However, without substantial effort on the part of you, and I mean you, every person reading this, nothing much is going to happen. The rule of law will continue to decay in our country. Future Presidents will claim even greater extralegal authority, and our nation will fall into despotism. I mean that sincerely. For the sake of yourself, your children and your children's children, you cannot allow this to stand.
Call your Senators and your Congressman. Demand a full investigation, both by Congress and by a special prosecutor, of the actions of the Administration and the NSA. Say that the rule of law is all that stands between us and barbarism. Say that we live in a democracy, not a kingdom, and that our elected officials are not above the law. The President is not a King. Even the President cannot participate in a felony and get away with it. Demand that even the President must obey the law.
Tell your friends to do the same. Tell them to tell their friends to do the same. Then, call back next week and the week after and the week after that until something happens. Mark it in your calendar so you don't forget about it. Politicians have short memories, and Congress is about to recess for Christmas, so you must not allow this to be forgotten. Keep at them until something happens.
Perry
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo[at]metzdowd.com
Many Tools of Big Brother Are Already Up and Running By JOHN MARKOFF and JOHN SCHWARTZ
In the Pentagon research effort to detect terrorism by electronically monitoring the civilian population, the most remarkable detail may be this: Most of the pieces of the system are already in place.
Because of the inroads the Internet and other digital network technologies have made into everyday life over the last decade, it is increasingly possible to amass Big Brother-like surveillance powers through Little Brother means. The basic components include everyday digital technologies like e-mail, online shopping and travel booking, A.T.M. systems, cellphone networks, electronic toll-collection systems and credit-card payment terminals.
In essence, the Pentagon's main job would be to spin strands of software technology that would weave these sources of data into a vast electronic dragnet.
Technologists say the types of computerized data sifting and pattern matching that might flag suspicious activities to government agencies and coordinate their surveillance are not much different from programs already in use by private companies. Such programs spot unusual credit card activity, for example, or let people at multiple locations collaborate on a project.
The civilian population, in other words, has willingly embraced the technical prerequisites for a national surveillance system that Pentagon planners are calling Total Information Awareness. The development has a certain historical resonance because it was the Pentagon's research agency that in the 1960's financed the technology that led directly to the modern Internet. Now the same agency -- the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, or Darpa -- is relying on commercial technology that has evolved from the network it pioneered.
The first generation of the Internet -- called the Arpanet -- consisted of electronic mail and file transfer software that connected people to people. The second generation connected people to databases and other information via the World Wide Web. Now a new generation of software connects computers directly to computers.
And that is the key to the Total Information Awareness project, which is overseen by John M. Poindexter, the former national security adviser under President Ronald Reagan. Dr. Poindexter was convicted in 1990 of a felony for his role in the Iran-contra affair, but that conviction was overturned by a federal appeals court because he had been granted immunity for his testimony before Congress about the case.
Although Dr. Poindexter's system has come under widespread criticism from Congress and civil liberties groups, a prototype is already in place and has been used in tests by military intelligence organizations.
Total Information Awareness could link for the first time such different electronic sources as video feeds from airport surveillance cameras, credit card transactions, airline reservations and telephone calling records. The data would be filtered through software that would constantly look for suspicious patterns of behavior.
The idea is for law enforcement or intelligence agencies to be alerted immediately to patterns in otherwise unremarkable sets of data that might indicate threats, allowing rapid reviews by human analysts. For example, a cluster of foreign visitors who all took flying lessons in separate parts of the country might not attract attention. Nor would it necessarily raise red flags if all those people reserved airline tickets for the same day. But a system that could detect both sets of actions might raise suspicions.
Some computer scientists wonder whether the system can work. "This wouldn't have been possible without the modern Internet, and even now it's a daunting task," said Dorothy Denning, a professor in the Department of Defense Analysis at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, Calif. Part of the challenge, she said, is knowing what to look for. "Do we really know enough about the precursors to terrorist activity?" she said.
If you are an active Internet user and under the age of 25 (or 30), you probably fit in one of two categories; either [1] You have tried social networking, but didn't really get what the buzz was about, or [2] you get it, you dig it, and you sit for hours scouring, posting comments and photos, and clicking refresh obsessively.
Everyone has heard of Facebook. At almost 2 years old, it's growth is staggering. Take a look at the Repeat Usage statistics, in particular and tell me that this isn't a craze bordering on obsession. 70 percent of users return on a daily basis to a site that really isn't all that dynamic. There are no blogs; just personal info, a place to post blurbs on users' "wall", and now pictures. With websites like Facebook and MySpace gaining an almost-disturbing amount of popularity, it seems that our desire for networking has trumped our sound-thinking, skepticism and desire for privacy.
I started thinking about this issue recently, and the question just keeps popping up: Why do we place so much trust in the creators of these websites? Since the emergence of "Web 2.0", it seems that with a simple "We're not evil, try our Beta" everyone is falling over themselves to shell out as much information as it takes.
Stop and think about Facebook for one minute. A 21-year-old Harvard student starts a networking site for college students, and now there are over 5 million users, many of which have probably never looked at the Privacy Policy. After all, Facebook is fun, so they freely post their name, address, school, concentration, political affiliation, friends, plans and even photos in which faces are linked to profiles. Comforted by the idea that this info isn't crawled by search engines, the fact remains that membership is only limited by the ownership of an ".edu" e-mail address (the Wall Street Journal expressed concerns about this, in fact).
What about the Privacy Policy? In the Help Section of Facebook it says, "Facebook respects your privacy. We don't distribute your user information to third parties" followed by "Read more about our Privacy Policy." Click the link and it says oh yeah, one more thing: we just might share your info, and it "may include sharing information with other companies, lawyers, agents or government agencies." This is a pretty typical policy, actually. It's in the section entitled "The Information We Collect" that it gets a little disconcerting.
When you visit the Web Site you may provide us with two types of information: personal information you knowingly choose to disclose that is collected by us and Web Site use information collected by us on an aggregate basis as you and others browse our Web Site.
It goes on to explain cookies, etc., but then ends with this vague third mode of data collection: I'm not sure what that means, but I do remember something about AOL's updated terms of service.
I'm not usually big on conspiracy theories, but I point out Facebook's privacy policy to highlight some other interesting aspects of this company. It has been just a few months since Accel Partners anno
Pentagon Will Review Database on U.S. Citizens Protests Among Acts Labeled 'Suspicious'
By Walter Pincus Washington Post Staff Writer Thursday, December 15, 2005; A01
Pentagon officials said yesterday they had ordered a review of a program aimed at countering terrorist attacks that had compiled information about U.S. citizens, after reports that the database included information on peace protesters and others whose activities posed no threat and should not have been kept on file.
The move followed an NBC News report Tuesday disclosing that a sample of about 1,500 "suspicious incidents" listed in the database included four dozen anti-war meetings or protests, some aimed at military recruiting.
Although officials defended the Pentagon's interest in gathering information about possible threats to military bases and troops, one senior official acknowledged that a preliminary review of the database indicated that it had not been correctly maintained.
"On the surface, it looks like things in the database that were determined not to be viable threats were never deleted but should have been," the official said. "You can also make the argument that these things should never have been put in the database in the first place until they were confirmed as threats."
The program, known as Talon, compiles unconfirmed reports of suspected threats to defense facilities. It is part of a broader effort by the Pentagon to gather counterterrorism intelligence within the United States, which has prompted concern from civil liberties activists and members of Congress in recent weeks.
To some, the Pentagon's current efforts recall the Vietnam War era, when defense officials spied on anti-war groups and peace activists. Congressional hearings in the 1970s subsequently led to strict limits on the kinds of information that the military can collect about activities and people inside the United States.
The review of the program, ordered by Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence Stephen A. Cambone, will focus on whether officials broke those rules, a Pentagon statement said. The regulations require that any information that is "not validated as threatening must be removed from the TALON system in less than 90 days," it said.
The Pentagon stopped short of officially acknowledging fault but strongly implied some information had been mishandled. "There is nothing more important to the U.S. military than the trust and goodwill of the American people," said the statement. "The Department of Defense . . . views with the greatest concern any potential violation of the strict DoD policy governing authorized counter-intelligence efforts."
The Talon database -- and several affiliated programs -- has been described by officials as a sort of neighborhood watch for the military, an important tool in trying to detect and prevent terrorist attacks against the military.
Under the programs, civilians and military personnel at defense installations are encouraged to file reports if they believe they have come across people or information that could be part of a terrorist plot or threat, either at home or abroad. The Talon reports are fed into a database managed by the Counterintelligence Field Activity, or CIFA, a three-year-old Pentagon agency whose budget and size are classified.
The Talon reports -- the number is classified, officials said -- can consist of "raw information" that "may or may not be related to an actual threat, and its very nature may be fragmented and incomplete," according to a 2003 memo signed by then-Deputy Defense Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz.
Cambone's review came one day after a sample of the CIFA database, containing reports of 1,519 "suspicious incidents" between July 2004 and May 2005, was disclosed first by NBC News, and by William M. Arkin, a former military intelligence officer and author, on his washingtonpost.com blog Early Warning.
Arkin said he obtained the information, which included a list of entries in the CIFA database, fr
To: cryptography[at]metzdowd.com
Subject: A small editorial about recent events.
From: "Perry E. Metzger"
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2005 13:58:06 -0500
A small editorial from your moderator. I rarely use this list to express a strong political opinion -- you will forgive me in this instance.
This mailing list is putatively about cryptography and cryptography politics, though we do tend to stray quite a bit into security issues of all sorts, and sometimes into the activities of the agency with the biggest crypto and sigint budget in the world, the NSA.
As you may all be aware, the New York Times has reported, and the administration has admitted, that President of the United States apparently ordered the NSA to conduct surveillance operations against US citizens without prior permission of the secret court known as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (the "FISC"). This is in clear contravention of 50 USC 1801 - 50 USC 1811, a portion of the US code that provides for clear criminal penalties for violations. See:
The President claims he has the prerogative to order such surveillance. The law unambiguously disagrees with him.
There are minor exceptions in the law, but they clearly do not apply in this case. They cover only the 15 days after a declaration of war by congress, a period of 72 hours prior to seeking court authorization (which was never sought), and similar exceptions that clearly are not germane.
There is no room for doubt or question about whether the President has the prerogative to order surveillance without asking the FISC -- even if the FISC is a toothless organization that never turns down requests, it is a federal crime, punishable by up to five years imprisonment, to conduct electronic surveillance against US citizens without court authorization.
The FISC may be worthless at defending civil liberties, but in its arrogant disregard for even the fig leaf of the FISC, the administration has actually crossed the line into a crystal clear felony. The government could have legally conducted such wiretaps at any time, but the President chose not to do it legally.
Ours is a government of laws, not of men. That means if the President disagrees with a law or feels that it is insufficient, he still must obey it. Ignoring the law is illegal, even for the President. The President may ask Congress to change the law, but meanwhile he must follow it.
Our President has chosen to declare himself above the law, a dangerous precedent that could do great harm to our country. However, without substantial effort on the part of you, and I mean you, every person reading this, nothing much is going to happen. The rule of law will continue to decay in our country. Future Presidents will claim even greater extralegal authority, and our nation will fall into despotism. I mean that sincerely. For the sake of yourself, your children and your children's children, you cannot allow this to stand.
Call your Senators and your Congressman. Demand a full investigation, both by Congress and by a special prosecutor, of the actions of the Administration and the NSA. Say that the rule of law is all that stands between us and barbarism. Say that we live in a democracy, not a kingdom, and that our elected officials are not above the law. The President is not a King. Even the President cannot participate in a felony and get away with it. Demand that even the President must obey the law.
Tell your friends to do the same. Tell them to tell their friends to do the same. Then, call back next week and the week after and the week after that until something happens. Mark it in your calendar so you don't forget about it. Politician
Considering the responses of Bill Kristol, the Wall Street Journal, and others to President Bush's affirmation of warrantless domestic spying by the NSA, perhaps it's time to separate the wheat from the chaff in this America. The Rude Pundit believes a new "contract" of sorts is needed between the government and the American people. Howzabout this:
"I (the undersigned) believe President George W. Bush when he says that the United States of America is fighting a 'new kind of enemy' that requires 'new thinking' about how to wage war. Therefore, as a loyal citizen of President Bush's United States, my signature below indicates my agreement to the following:
"1. I believe wholeheartedly in the Patriot Act as initially passed by Congress in 2001, as well as the provisions of the Domestic Security Enhancement Act. Therefore, I grant the FBI access to:
"a. my library records, so it may determine if I am reading material that might designate me an enemy of the nation;
"b. my financial records, including credit reports, so it may determine if I am contributing monetarily to any governmentally proscribed activities or organizations;
"c. my medical records, so it may determine if my prescriptions, injuries, or other conditions are indicative of terrorist activity on my part;
"d. any and all other personal records including, but not limited to, my store purchases, my school records, my web browsing history, and anything else determined as a 'tangible thing' necessary to engage in a secret investigation of me.
"I agree that I do not need to be notified if my records have come under scrutiny by the FBI, and, furthermore, I agree that no warrant is needed for the FBI to engage in this examination of my personal records. Additionally, I agree that the FBI should be allowed to monitor any groups it believes may be linked to what it determines to be terrorist activity.
"2. I believe that the President of the United States has the power to mitigate any and all laws passed by the Congress and that he has such power granted to him by his status as Commander-in-Chief in the Constitution as well as the 2001 Authorization of Military Force, passed by the Congress, which states that the President can use 'all necessary and appropriate force' in prosecution of the war. Therefore, I grant the United States government the following powers:
"a. that the National Security Agency, under the direction of the President, may tap my phone lines and intercept my e-mail without warrant or FISA oversight;
"b. that the President may hold me or other detainees without access to the legal system for a period of time determined by the President or his agents;
"c. that the President may authorize physical force against me or other individual detainees in order to gain intelligence and that he may define whether such physical force may be called 'torture':
"d. that the President may set aside any and all laws he sees as hindering the gathering of intelligence and prevention of terrorist acts for a period as time determined by the President, including, but not limited to, rights to political protest.
"I agree that the Judicial and Legislative branch should be allowed no oversight of these activities, and that such oversight merely emboldens the terrorists. I also agree that virtually all of these activities may be conducted in complete secrecy and that revelation of these activities amount to treasonous behavior on the part of those who reveal these activities to the press and the citizenry.
"3. Finally, this document is my statement that I believe the President of the United States and the entire executive branch, as well as all departments and agencies involved, as well as all of its personnel, will treat these powers I have granted them with utmost respect. I believe that these powers will not be abused, nor will any of the information I have given them permission to examine be misinterpreted. However, should such abuse or misinterpretation occur, I agree that such
The answer to the mystery of the NSA snooping scandal - why did they break the law when it was so ludicrously easy to get FISA warrants? - appears to be developing: they weren't just wiretapping, they were data mining. They were usingEchelon to 'Able Danger' the whole country (this is Poindexter's Total Information Awareness, which is supposedly dead, in action). The problem is that FISA was enacted prior to the current capability for data mining, and didn't anticipate how ubiquitous it could be. The reason they couldn't use FISA is that they would have had to obtain a FISA warrant for every person in the country. Data mining requires that you follow each link discovered by your snooping, and wouldn't work if it had to be subjected to FISA or the Constitution. The NYT article, now being spun as resisted by the Bush Administration (as if the NYT would publish anything without Rove's say-so), appears to itself be part of the spinning, a limited hang-out to cover up the bigger scandal.
Nice to assume that I favor Socialism opposed to Oligarchal Triumphalism. Good to see a happy "house niggah", fighting for his massah's right of ownership, you little tool.
In the Department Of Records:
"The Truth Shall Make You Free" - on statue
"Information Is The Key To Prosperity. A Ministry Of Information" - sign
above security stall.
"Help The Ministry Of Information Help You" - poster on wall
"Be Safe: Be Suspicious" - sign on wall
"Loose Talk Is Noose Talk" - poster on the wall of the computer room
Kurtzmann's office:
"Suspicion Breeds Confidence" - sign
Ministry of Information logos are stamped on many of the small items in
Kurtzmann's office, such as the teacup given to Lowry and the fishbowl.
These are nearly impossible to see on video.
Shangri La Towers:
"Happiness: We're all in it together" - Billboard
(This billboard is copied from a sign that appeared throughout the United
States during the depression.)
"Mellowfields. Top Security Holiday Camps. Luxury without fear. Fun
without suspicion. Relax in a panic free atmosphere." - advert on wall
above children playing.
"Reality" - graffiti on wall
"Shangorilla Towers" - Shangri-la tower's defaced sign.
"DO NOT FOLD, SPINDLE, MUTILATE" - stencilled on concrete wall inside.
Mr Lime's Office at Info. Retrieval:
"Trust in haste, Regret at leisure" - poster on wall
"Don't suspect a friend, report him" - poster on wall (also seen in both
Lint and Kutzmann's offices)
Jack's Office at Info. Retrieval:
"Who can you trust?" - poster on wall
Processing Plant:
"Mind that parcel. Eagle eyes can save a life." - poster on wall
"Power today. Pleasure tomorrow." - poster seen when the house gets lifted.
Shopping Mall:
"Consumers for Christ" - banner carried by band in the mall.
"Utopia Railways" - ad in the street when Sam blows up the building.
"Keep your city tidy" - sign on the trash can.
Yeah! Let's watch Brazil, and get nice and cozy with our futures!
In 1975, former Monty Python cast member and celebrated animator Terry Gilliam had a great idea for a movie. Along with playwright Tom Stoppard (Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead), he'd write and direct a sweeping, epic masterpiece about a world gone wrong.
The film would take place "somewhere in the twentieth century." It would feature an oppressive, totalitarian government which systematically stripped the public of its basic freedoms in favor of an ostensibly fraudulent and hopeless war on terrorism. The term "information retrieval" would be used implicitly throughout the film, a euphemistic nickname for the gruesome torture techniques applied to suspected terrorists as they're kidnapped, secured, and readied for interrogation.
The mechanics and systems of this "fantastical" world would need to be absurd and contradictory, serving only to bury its chief directors under bureaucracy, red tape, and endless coils of administrative paperwork. Identification cards, DNA scans and security checkpoints would round out Gilliam's view of a monolithic, technologically-driven society, and patriotic propaganda posters telegraphing a mandatory us-or-them mentality would be broadcast regularly to all citizens amidst the false cheeriness of a consumer theme park culture.
Spot-on, Mr. Gilliam!
Some of you guys thought it'd be like Trek. Oh, well. That was a "gimme", so we'd embrace technology as a beneficial end in itself - not just another manifestation of human tool appropriation. Technology won't make a paradise by creating super-abundance. We HAVE super-abundance, where 2% Elite own and control 96% of the resources, wealth and secondary benefits of that abundance. The rest of us fight it out over notions of artificial scarcity. That's CONTROL, baby!
Now, you get to live in the U.S., just like the old DDR! They payed engineers 2-3 times the "worker rate", and bought allegiance there, too! "I'm not worried about the totalitarian state. They pay for my Trabant! Why shouldn't I build eavesdropping equipment? At least we are safe from the evil forces of International Capitalism and the Jew-Bankers!"
Leiberman is shit on a stick. I don't care if he's Libertarian. He's a fundamentalist - one stripe away from the Taliban, and damned close to being a Jewish Tom DeLay. Also, he's a mole for Israel, and sells away US strategic interest and lives for temporary Israeli security goals on a regular basis.
I'm no Demo, either. Last party I registered with was the Black Panthers.
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly.
They didn't really do their homework on this one, did they. How do you tax a revokeable roight-to-use as property?
Maybe they are taxing licenses: that's rich! Maybe they can tax the right to vote, and other abstractions as well.
So has been preety well theorized in the Orkut example. InTel-Q was a big interest in this one...
Yeah. And cheap gas is negotiable, if you can still walk around feeling better than everyone, and pride yourself on your anger.
Recycled from other thread. Circulate freely.
Considering the responses of Bill Kristol, the Wall Street Journal, and others to President Bush's affirmation of warrantless domestic spying by the NSA, perhaps it's time to separate the wheat from the chaff in this America. The Rude Pundit believes a new "contract" of sorts is needed between the government and the American people. Howzabout this:
"I (the undersigned) believe President George W. Bush when he says that the United States of America is fighting a 'new kind of enemy' that requires 'new thinking' about how to wage war. Therefore, as a loyal citizen of President Bush's United States, my signature below indicates my agreement to the following:
"1. I believe wholeheartedly in the Patriot Act as initially passed by Congress in 2001, as well as the provisions of the Domestic Security Enhancement Act. Therefore, I grant the FBI access to:
"a. my library records, so it may determine if I am reading material that might designate me an enemy of the nation;
"b. my financial records, including credit reports, so it may determine if I am contributing monetarily to any governmentally proscribed activities or organizations;
"c. my medical records, so it may determine if my prescriptions, injuries, or other conditions are indicative of terrorist activity on my part;
"d. any and all other personal records including, but not limited to, my store purchases, my school records, my web browsing history, and anything else determined as a 'tangible thing' necessary to engage in a secret investigation of me.
"I agree that I do not need to be notified if my records have come under scrutiny by the FBI, and, furthermore, I agree that no warrant is needed for the FBI to engage in this examination of my personal records. Additionally, I agree that the FBI should be allowed to monitor any groups it believes may be linked to what it determines to be terrorist activity.
"2. I believe that the President of the United States has the power to mitigate any and all laws passed by the Congress and that he has such power granted to him by his status as Commander-in-Chief in the Constitution as well as the 2001 Authorization of Military Force, passed by the Congress, which states that the President can use 'all necessary and appropriate force' in prosecution of the war. Therefore, I grant the United States government the following powers:
"a. that the National Security Agency, under the direction of the President, may tap my phone lines and intercept my e-mail without warrant or FISA oversight;
"b. that the President may hold me or other detainees without access to the legal system for a period of time determined by the President or his agents;
"c. that the President may authorize physical force against me or other individual detainees in order to gain intelligence and that he may define whether such physical force may be called 'torture':
"d. that the President may set aside any and all laws he sees as hindering the gathering of intelligence and prevention of terrorist acts for a period as time determined by the President, including, but not limited to, rights to political protest.
"I agree that the Judicial and Legislative branch should be allowed no oversight of these activities, and that such oversight merely emboldens the terrorists. I also agree that virtually all of these activities may be conducted in complete secrecy and that revelation of these activities amount to treasonous behavior on the part of those who reveal these activities to the press and the citizenry.
"3. Finally, this document is my statement that I believe the President of the United States and the entire executive branch, as well as all departments and agencies involved, as well as all of its personnel, will treat these powers I have granted them with utmost respect. I believe that these powers will not be abused, nor will any of the information I have given them permission to examine be misinterpreted. However, should suc
To: cryptography[at]metzdowd.com
s c_sup_01_50_10_36_20_I.html
Subject: A small editorial about recent events.
From: "Perry E. Metzger"
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2005 13:58:06 -0500
A small editorial from your moderator. I rarely use this list to express a strong political opinion -- you will forgive me in this instance.
This mailing list is putatively about cryptography and cryptography politics, though we do tend to stray quite a bit into security issues of all sorts, and sometimes into the activities of the agency with the biggest crypto and sigint budget in the world, the NSA.
As you may all be aware, the New York Times has reported, and the administration has admitted, that President of the United States apparently ordered the NSA to conduct surveillance operations against US citizens without prior permission of the secret court known as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (the "FISC"). This is in clear contravention of 50 USC 1801 - 50 USC 1811, a portion of the US code that provides for clear criminal penalties for violations. See:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode50/u
The President claims he has the prerogative to order such surveillance. The law unambiguously disagrees with him.
There are minor exceptions in the law, but they clearly do not apply in this case. They cover only the 15 days after a declaration of war by congress, a period of 72 hours prior to seeking court authorization (which was never sought), and similar exceptions that clearly are not germane.
There is no room for doubt or question about whether the President has the prerogative to order surveillance without asking the FISC -- even if the FISC is a toothless organization that never turns down requests, it is a federal crime, punishable by up to five years imprisonment, to conduct electronic surveillance against US citizens without court authorization.
The FISC may be worthless at defending civil liberties, but in its arrogant disregard for even the fig leaf of the FISC, the administration has actually crossed the line into a crystal clear felony. The government could have legally conducted such wiretaps at any time, but the President chose not to do it legally.
Ours is a government of laws, not of men. That means if the President disagrees with a law or feels that it is insufficient, he still must obey it. Ignoring the law is illegal, even for the President. The President may ask Congress to change the law, but meanwhile he must follow it.
Our President has chosen to declare himself above the law, a dangerous precedent that could do great harm to our country. However, without substantial effort on the part of you, and I mean you, every person reading this, nothing much is going to happen. The rule of law will continue to decay in our country. Future Presidents will claim even greater extralegal authority, and our nation will fall into despotism. I mean that sincerely. For the sake of yourself, your children and your children's children, you cannot allow this to stand.
Call your Senators and your Congressman. Demand a full investigation, both by Congress and by a special prosecutor, of the actions of the Administration and the NSA. Say that the rule of law is all that stands between us and barbarism. Say that we live in a democracy, not a kingdom, and that our elected officials are not above the law. The President is not a King. Even the President cannot participate in a felony and get away with it. Demand that even the President must obey the law.
Tell your friends to do the same. Tell them to tell their friends to do the same. Then, call back next week and the week after and the week after that until something happens. Mark it in your calendar so you don't forget about it. Politicians have short memories, and Congress is about to recess for Christmas, so you must not allow this to be forgotten. Keep at them until something happens.
Perry
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo[at]metzdowd.com
CIA & NSA on ECHELON
ECHELON: America's Secret Global Surveillance Network
Many Tools of Big Brother Are Already Up and Running
By JOHN MARKOFF and JOHN SCHWARTZ
In the Pentagon research effort to detect terrorism by electronically monitoring the civilian population, the most remarkable detail may be this: Most of the pieces of the system are already in place.
Because of the inroads the Internet and other digital network technologies have made into everyday life over the last decade, it is increasingly possible to amass Big Brother-like surveillance powers through Little Brother means. The basic components include everyday digital technologies like e-mail, online shopping and travel booking, A.T.M. systems, cellphone networks, electronic toll-collection systems and credit-card payment terminals.
In essence, the Pentagon's main job would be to spin strands of software technology that would weave these sources of data into a vast electronic dragnet.
Technologists say the types of computerized data sifting and pattern matching that might flag suspicious activities to government agencies and coordinate their surveillance are not much different from programs already in use by private companies. Such programs spot unusual credit card activity, for example, or let people at multiple locations collaborate on a project.
The civilian population, in other words, has willingly embraced the technical prerequisites for a national surveillance system that Pentagon planners are calling Total Information Awareness. The development has a certain historical resonance because it was the Pentagon's research agency that in the 1960's financed the technology that led directly to the modern Internet. Now the same agency -- the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, or Darpa -- is relying on commercial technology that has evolved from the network it pioneered.
The first generation of the Internet -- called the Arpanet -- consisted of electronic mail and file transfer software that connected people to people. The second generation connected people to databases and other information via the World Wide Web. Now a new generation of software connects computers directly to computers.
And that is the key to the Total Information Awareness project, which is overseen by John M. Poindexter, the former national security adviser under President Ronald Reagan. Dr. Poindexter was convicted in 1990 of a felony for his role in the Iran-contra affair, but that conviction was overturned by a federal appeals court because he had been granted immunity for his testimony before Congress about the case.
Although Dr. Poindexter's system has come under widespread criticism from Congress and civil liberties groups, a prototype is already in place and has been used in tests by military intelligence organizations.
Total Information Awareness could link for the first time such different electronic sources as video feeds from airport surveillance cameras, credit card transactions, airline reservations and telephone calling records. The data would be filtered through software that would constantly look for suspicious patterns of behavior.
The idea is for law enforcement or intelligence agencies to be alerted immediately to patterns in otherwise unremarkable sets of data that might indicate threats, allowing rapid reviews by human analysts. For example, a cluster of foreign visitors who all took flying lessons in separate parts of the country might not attract attention. Nor would it necessarily raise red flags if all those people reserved airline tickets for the same day. But a system that could detect both sets of actions might raise suspicions.
Some computer scientists wonder whether the system can work. "This wouldn't have been possible without the modern Internet, and even now it's a daunting task," said Dorothy Denning, a professor in the Department of Defense Analysis at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, Calif. Part of the challenge, she said, is knowing what to look for. "Do we really know enough about the precursors to terrorist activity?" she said.
Published Wednesday, December 14, 2005 by Jacob | Post to Del.icio.us
If you are an active Internet user and under the age of 25 (or 30), you probably fit in one of two categories; either [1] You have tried social networking, but didn't really get what the buzz was about, or [2] you get it, you dig it, and you sit for hours scouring, posting comments and photos, and clicking refresh obsessively.
Everyone has heard of Facebook. At almost 2 years old, it's growth is staggering.
Take a look at the Repeat Usage statistics, in particular and tell me that this isn't a craze bordering on obsession. 70 percent of users return on a daily basis to a site that really isn't all that dynamic. There are no blogs; just personal info, a place to post blurbs on users' "wall", and now pictures. With websites like Facebook and MySpace gaining an almost-disturbing amount of popularity, it seems that our desire for networking has trumped our sound-thinking, skepticism and desire for privacy.
I started thinking about this issue recently, and the question just keeps popping up: Why do we place so much trust in the creators of these websites? Since the emergence of "Web 2.0", it seems that with a simple "We're not evil, try our Beta" everyone is falling over themselves to shell out as much information as it takes.
Stop and think about Facebook for one minute. A 21-year-old Harvard student starts a networking site for college students, and now there are over 5 million users, many of which have probably never looked at the Privacy Policy. After all, Facebook is fun, so they freely post their name, address, school, concentration, political affiliation, friends, plans and even photos in which faces are linked to profiles. Comforted by the idea that this info isn't crawled by search engines, the fact remains that membership is only limited by the ownership of an ".edu" e-mail address (the Wall Street Journal expressed concerns about this, in fact).
What about the Privacy Policy? In the Help Section of Facebook it says, "Facebook respects your privacy. We don't distribute your user information to third parties" followed by "Read more about our Privacy Policy." Click the link and it says oh yeah, one more thing: we just might share your info, and it "may include sharing information with other companies, lawyers, agents or government agencies." This is a pretty typical policy, actually. It's in the section entitled "The Information We Collect" that it gets a little disconcerting.
It goes on to explain cookies, etc., but then ends with this vague third mode of data collection:
I'm not sure what that means, but I do remember something about AOL's updated terms of service.
I'm not usually big on conspiracy theories, but I point out Facebook's privacy policy to highlight some other interesting aspects of this company. It has been just a few months since Accel Partners anno
Pentagon Will Review Database on U.S. Citizens
Protests Among Acts Labeled 'Suspicious'
By Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, December 15, 2005; A01
Pentagon officials said yesterday they had ordered a review of a program aimed at countering terrorist attacks that had compiled information about U.S. citizens, after reports that the database included information on peace protesters and others whose activities posed no threat and should not have been kept on file.
The move followed an NBC News report Tuesday disclosing that a sample of about 1,500 "suspicious incidents" listed in the database included four dozen anti-war meetings or protests, some aimed at military recruiting.
Although officials defended the Pentagon's interest in gathering information about possible threats to military bases and troops, one senior official acknowledged that a preliminary review of the database indicated that it had not been correctly maintained.
"On the surface, it looks like things in the database that were determined not to be viable threats were never deleted but should have been," the official said. "You can also make the argument that these things should never have been put in the database in the first place until they were confirmed as threats."
The program, known as Talon, compiles unconfirmed reports of suspected threats to defense facilities. It is part of a broader effort by the Pentagon to gather counterterrorism intelligence within the United States, which has prompted concern from civil liberties activists and members of Congress in recent weeks.
To some, the Pentagon's current efforts recall the Vietnam War era, when defense officials spied on anti-war groups and peace activists. Congressional hearings in the 1970s subsequently led to strict limits on the kinds of information that the military can collect about activities and people inside the United States.
The review of the program, ordered by Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence Stephen A. Cambone, will focus on whether officials broke those rules, a Pentagon statement said. The regulations require that any information that is "not validated as threatening must be removed from the TALON system in less than 90 days," it said.
The Pentagon stopped short of officially acknowledging fault but strongly implied some information had been mishandled. "There is nothing more important to the U.S. military than the trust and goodwill of the American people," said the statement. "The Department of Defense . . . views with the greatest concern any potential violation of the strict DoD policy governing authorized counter-intelligence efforts."
The Talon database -- and several affiliated programs -- has been described by officials as a sort of neighborhood watch for the military, an important tool in trying to detect and prevent terrorist attacks against the military.
Under the programs, civilians and military personnel at defense installations are encouraged to file reports if they believe they have come across people or information that could be part of a terrorist plot or threat, either at home or abroad. The Talon reports are fed into a database managed by the Counterintelligence Field Activity, or CIFA, a three-year-old Pentagon agency whose budget and size are classified.
The Talon reports -- the number is classified, officials said -- can consist of "raw information" that "may or may not be related to an actual threat, and its very nature may be fragmented and incomplete," according to a 2003 memo signed by then-Deputy Defense Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz.
Cambone's review came one day after a sample of the CIFA database, containing reports of 1,519 "suspicious incidents" between July 2004 and May 2005, was disclosed first by NBC News, and by William M. Arkin, a former military intelligence officer and author, on his washingtonpost.com blog Early Warning.
Arkin said he obtained the information, which included a list of entries in the CIFA database, fr
Subject: A small editorial about recent events.
From: "Perry E. Metzger"
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2005 13:58:06 -0500
A small editorial from your moderator. I rarely use this list to express a strong political opinion -- you will forgive me in this instance.
This mailing list is putatively about cryptography and cryptography politics, though we do tend to stray quite a bit into security issues of all sorts, and sometimes into the activities of the agency with the biggest crypto and sigint budget in the world, the NSA.
As you may all be aware, the New York Times has reported, and the administration has admitted, that President of the United States apparently ordered the NSA to conduct surveillance operations against US citizens without prior permission of the secret court known as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (the "FISC"). This is in clear contravention of 50 USC 1801 - 50 USC 1811, a portion of the US code that provides for clear criminal penalties for violations. See:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode50/us c_sup_01_50_10_36_20_I.html
The President claims he has the prerogative to order such surveillance. The law unambiguously disagrees with him.
There are minor exceptions in the law, but they clearly do not apply in this case. They cover only the 15 days after a declaration of war by congress, a period of 72 hours prior to seeking court authorization (which was never sought), and similar exceptions that clearly are not germane.
There is no room for doubt or question about whether the President has the prerogative to order surveillance without asking the FISC -- even if the FISC is a toothless organization that never turns down requests, it is a federal crime, punishable by up to five years imprisonment, to conduct electronic surveillance against US citizens without court authorization.
The FISC may be worthless at defending civil liberties, but in its arrogant disregard for even the fig leaf of the FISC, the administration has actually crossed the line into a crystal clear felony. The government could have legally conducted such wiretaps at any time, but the President chose not to do it legally.
Ours is a government of laws, not of men. That means if the President disagrees with a law or feels that it is insufficient, he still must obey it. Ignoring the law is illegal, even for the President. The President may ask Congress to change the law, but meanwhile he must follow it.
Our President has chosen to declare himself above the law, a dangerous precedent that could do great harm to our country. However, without substantial effort on the part of you, and I mean you, every person reading this, nothing much is going to happen. The rule of law will continue to decay in our country. Future Presidents will claim even greater extralegal authority, and our nation will fall into despotism. I mean that sincerely. For the sake of yourself, your children and your children's children, you cannot allow this to stand.
Call your Senators and your Congressman. Demand a full investigation, both by Congress and by a special prosecutor, of the actions of the Administration and the NSA. Say that the rule of law is all that stands between us and barbarism. Say that we live in a democracy, not a kingdom, and that our elected officials are not above the law. The President is not a King. Even the President cannot participate in a felony and get away with it. Demand that even the President must obey the law.
Tell your friends to do the same. Tell them to tell their friends to do the same. Then, call back next week and the week after and the week after that until something happens. Mark it in your calendar so you don't forget about it. Politician
Considering the responses of Bill Kristol, the Wall Street Journal, and others to President Bush's affirmation of warrantless domestic spying by the NSA, perhaps it's time to separate the wheat from the chaff in this America. The Rude Pundit believes a new "contract" of sorts is needed between the government and the American people. Howzabout this:
"I (the undersigned) believe President George W. Bush when he says that the United States of America is fighting a 'new kind of enemy' that requires 'new thinking' about how to wage war. Therefore, as a loyal citizen of President Bush's United States, my signature below indicates my agreement to the following:
"1. I believe wholeheartedly in the Patriot Act as initially passed by Congress in 2001, as well as the provisions of the Domestic Security Enhancement Act. Therefore, I grant the FBI access to:
"a. my library records, so it may determine if I am reading material that might designate me an enemy of the nation;
"b. my financial records, including credit reports, so it may determine if I am contributing monetarily to any governmentally proscribed activities or organizations;
"c. my medical records, so it may determine if my prescriptions, injuries, or other conditions are indicative of terrorist activity on my part;
"d. any and all other personal records including, but not limited to, my store purchases, my school records, my web browsing history, and anything else determined as a 'tangible thing' necessary to engage in a secret investigation of me.
"I agree that I do not need to be notified if my records have come under scrutiny by the FBI, and, furthermore, I agree that no warrant is needed for the FBI to engage in this examination of my personal records. Additionally, I agree that the FBI should be allowed to monitor any groups it believes may be linked to what it determines to be terrorist activity.
"2. I believe that the President of the United States has the power to mitigate any and all laws passed by the Congress and that he has such power granted to him by his status as Commander-in-Chief in the Constitution as well as the 2001 Authorization of Military Force, passed by the Congress, which states that the President can use 'all necessary and appropriate force' in prosecution of the war. Therefore, I grant the United States government the following powers:
"a. that the National Security Agency, under the direction of the President, may tap my phone lines and intercept my e-mail without warrant or FISA oversight;
"b. that the President may hold me or other detainees without access to the legal system for a period of time determined by the President or his agents;
"c. that the President may authorize physical force against me or other individual detainees in order to gain intelligence and that he may define whether such physical force may be called 'torture':
"d. that the President may set aside any and all laws he sees as hindering the gathering of intelligence and prevention of terrorist acts for a period as time determined by the President, including, but not limited to, rights to political protest.
"I agree that the Judicial and Legislative branch should be allowed no oversight of these activities, and that such oversight merely emboldens the terrorists. I also agree that virtually all of these activities may be conducted in complete secrecy and that revelation of these activities amount to treasonous behavior on the part of those who reveal these activities to the press and the citizenry.
"3. Finally, this document is my statement that I believe the President of the United States and the entire executive branch, as well as all departments and agencies involved, as well as all of its personnel, will treat these powers I have granted them with utmost respect. I believe that these powers will not be abused, nor will any of the information I have given them permission to examine be misinterpreted. However, should such abuse or misinterpretation occur, I agree that such
Funny. I just entered this in my Journal.
Tastes like your slavemaster flouridated it!
And Osama will - after he gets his CIA check for the job - like last time. Or didn't you know, he was a "company man"?
The answer to the mystery of the NSA snooping scandal - why did they break the law when it was so ludicrously easy to get FISA warrants? - appears to be developing: they weren't just wiretapping, they were data mining. They were using Echelon to 'Able Danger' the whole country (this is Poindexter's Total Information Awareness, which is supposedly dead, in action). The problem is that FISA was enacted prior to the current capability for data mining, and didn't anticipate how ubiquitous it could be. The reason they couldn't use FISA is that they would have had to obtain a FISA warrant for every person in the country. Data mining requires that you follow each link discovered by your snooping, and wouldn't work if it had to be subjected to FISA or the Constitution. The NYT article, now being spun as resisted by the Bush Administration (as if the NYT would publish anything without Rove's say-so), appears to itself be part of the spinning, a limited hang-out to cover up the bigger scandal.
Nice to assume that I favor Socialism opposed to Oligarchal Triumphalism. Good to see a happy "house niggah", fighting for his massah's right of ownership, you little tool.
In the Department Of Records:
"The Truth Shall Make You Free" - on statue
"Information Is The Key To Prosperity. A Ministry Of Information" - sign
above security stall.
"Help The Ministry Of Information Help You" - poster on wall
"Be Safe: Be Suspicious" - sign on wall
"Loose Talk Is Noose Talk" - poster on the wall of the computer room
Kurtzmann's office:
"Suspicion Breeds Confidence" - sign
Ministry of Information logos are stamped on many of the small items in
Kurtzmann's office, such as the teacup given to Lowry and the fishbowl.
These are nearly impossible to see on video.
Shangri La Towers:
"Happiness: We're all in it together" - Billboard
(This billboard is copied from a sign that appeared throughout the United
States during the depression.)
"Mellowfields. Top Security Holiday Camps. Luxury without fear. Fun
without suspicion. Relax in a panic free atmosphere." - advert on wall
above children playing.
"Reality" - graffiti on wall
"Shangorilla Towers" - Shangri-la tower's defaced sign.
"DO NOT FOLD, SPINDLE, MUTILATE" - stencilled on concrete wall inside.
Mr Lime's Office at Info. Retrieval:
"Trust in haste, Regret at leisure" - poster on wall
"Don't suspect a friend, report him" - poster on wall (also seen in both
Lint and Kutzmann's offices)
Jack's Office at Info. Retrieval:
"Who can you trust?" - poster on wall
Processing Plant:
"Mind that parcel. Eagle eyes can save a life." - poster on wall
"Power today. Pleasure tomorrow." - poster seen when the house gets lifted.
Shopping Mall:
"Consumers for Christ" - banner carried by band in the mall.
"Utopia Railways" - ad in the street when Sam blows up the building.
"Keep your city tidy" - sign on the trash can.
Yeah, like the English discovering New Guinea.
Orwell also had great exposure to the super-totalitarian government of post-war Burma.
Spot-on, Mr. Gilliam!
Some of you guys thought it'd be like Trek. Oh, well. That was a "gimme", so we'd embrace technology as a beneficial end in itself - not just another manifestation of human tool appropriation. Technology won't make a paradise by creating super-abundance. We HAVE super-abundance, where 2% Elite own and control 96% of the resources, wealth and secondary benefits of that abundance. The rest of us fight it out over notions of artificial scarcity. That's CONTROL, baby!
Now, you get to live in the U.S., just like the old DDR! They payed engineers 2-3 times the "worker rate", and bought allegiance there, too! "I'm not worried about the totalitarian state. They pay for my Trabant! Why shouldn't I build eavesdropping equipment? At least we are safe from the evil forces of International Capitalism and the Jew-Bankers!"
Posting provocative JE's on slashdot!
e .privacy.reut/index.html
Sure to to get me & my friends list into at least 'tier-2' on these lists.
Google is their "Echelon for the Internet." Look into the background of Schmidt.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/internet/06/03/googl
http://www.google-watch.org/jobad.html
Might be. It just means his label is small indication of his contents - and those are vile, no matter the designation.
Leiberman is shit on a stick. I don't care if he's Libertarian. He's a fundamentalist - one stripe away from the Taliban, and damned close to being a Jewish Tom DeLay. Also, he's a mole for Israel, and sells away US strategic interest and lives for temporary Israeli security goals on a regular basis.
I'm no Demo, either. Last party I registered with was the Black Panthers.
Two "troll" mods? For a bad joke? Does anyone know what a Troll is?
Q: "Who the hell is Peter Quinn?"
That's Martha, after "sexual reassignment" surgery. The "Peter" should have been your dead give-away.