Category Archives: NSA

Friday Follies for June 21, 2013

Posted on by

I was going to make a FB post yesterday and was distracted. It’s a little thing, personal only to me and my sister. Yesterday was my father’s birthday. If he were still alive, he would be 111.

Happy birthday, Dad.

***

An item was disclosed this week about the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that appears to violate the Constitution’s 4th Amendment.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. — 4th Amendment to the US Constitution.

It now appears that FISA modified part of the 4th Amendment.

Authorized by Section 702 of the amended Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), the program did away with the traditional individual warrant for each foreign suspect whose communications would be collected in the United States. In its place, the FISA court, which oversees domestic surveillance for foreign intelligence purposes and whose proceedings are secret, would certify the government’s procedures to target people overseas and ensure citizens’ privacy. — The Washington Post.

Instead of individual warrants as required by the 4th Amendment, NSA was given a blanket certificate—a hunting and fishing license, so to speak, that allowed them to search anyone, everyone, whether hard evidence for probable cause existed, or not.

A comment posted on the Washington Post article above said, “I’m beginning to think the FISA court was set-up by the executive branch to rubber stamp all executive branch demands. The world’s most secret self-licking ice cream cone.” (Panhandle Willy, 6/20/2013 8:03 PM CDT)

 

***

Today is the anniversary of the ratification of the US Constitution. It received its 9th approving vote 225 years ago today by New Hampshire.

On June 21, 1788, New Hampshire became the ninth state to ratify the document, and it was subsequently agreed that government under the U.S. Constitution would begin on March 4, 1789. — www.history.com

Virginia and New York followed New Hampshire later in June but New Hampshire’s vote was sufficient to actually getting the new government running.

***

The Tea Party was out in force, yesterday, with a rally in Washington DC to protest the actions of the IRS. A number of Congressmen attended as well, Sens. Mike Lee (Utah), Rand Paul (Ky.), Ted Cruz (Texas), Reps. Michele Bachmann (Minn.) and Dave Camp (Mich.). The question now is whether any of our Missouri Senators and Representatives were there?

I’ve not seen any of the Missouri delegation post about their presence at the rally. I’ve asked Vicky Hartzler and Jason Smith that question but I’ve received no answers yet.

We must remember those absences when the primaries come next year and candidates want Tea Party endorsements.

***

Unsatisfied with the bureaucrats in your state and federal government? That makes you a terrorist says a Tennessee bureaucrat.

Unsatisfied with the quality of your water and eager to let the government know about it?

You might be a terrorist, according to the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation.

“We take water quality very seriously. Very, very seriously,” deputy director of TDEC’s Division of Water Resources Sherwin Smith told a baffled and outraged audience in Maury County, Tennessee. “But you need to make sure that when you make water quality complaints you have a basis, because federally, if there’s no water quality issues, that can be considered under Homeland Security an act of terrorism.”

Audience members saw the official’s answer as a means of deterring complaints from the public, according to a report in The Tennessean. — The Daily Caller.

Facebook

Scandal du Jour

Posted on by

More corruption have been unearthed in Washington, DC—again in the State Department. It seems their DSS, the Diplomatic Security Service, which is the department’s security service has been hiring prostitutes while on duty, engaged in “sexual assaults” on foreign nationals, and falsifying reports, among other things.

After the revelation of NSA snooping last week, it seems that every day there is another discovery of corruption and/or violations of law or the Constitution. It really makes you wonder what is coming next. All of this is a prime example of Congress enacting laws they do not understand, have zero concept of ‘unintended consequences’, or in the case of many democrats, simply don’t care it the law enhances their chances for re-election. There are a number of ‘Pubs defending the NSA as well.

It all makes one ask, “What resource do we have when the Constitution is ignored and no longer protects us?” Not many. Public opinion is about it…and the ballot box. The dems (and some ‘Pubs) are working hard to remove that second option, (Motor-Voter, continuing large-scale vote fraud, the Gang of Eights Immigration bill, etc.) Julian Assange claims the “rule of law” is collapsing in the US. He may be correct.

The PTBs (Powers That Be) claim the NSA leaker is a Chinese agent because he fled to Hong Kong. He may well be. That does not, however, invalidate his claims—in fact, once exposed, the NSA/CIA have tacitly admitted PRISM exists and has existed for years. The program’s supporters claim information skimmed by PRISM, prevented a terrorist subway attack in 2009.

Really? Perhaps. But how many individuals’ privacy was violated in the process? We don’t know—and that is the crux of the matter. How much do we not know. Supposedly, Congress was informed. So we were told. Then is was discovered that only a few congressmen in some oversight committees were told—and not everyone in those committees, only a select few.

It makes you wonder why some were told and why were others not informed? Hmmm? Obama claims all of Congress was briefed. Members of Congress, including some democrats, refute that claim.

It is interesting that Obama is even losing the rank ‘n file dem congressmen on this scandal.

Facebook

Friday Follies for June 7th, 2013

Posted on by

There are so many items to post about today that it’s almost overwhelming.  Where shall we start?

How about some bullet items.

As you can see, there are numerous subjects for a post. However, everyone is focused on the revelation that the NSA has been seizing call data for ALL (I’m still not sure that is accurate,) Verizon subscribers—and Verizon isn’t the only carrier involved!

What people are overlooking, is that this isn’t new. What is new is the volume of the data and the scope of the data seized.

The movies have misrepresented call tracing since the advent of the digital switch. Way back in the ’30s and ’40s, telephone switches were analog. In order to trace a call, you can to follow, trace a call, through the internal connections of the switch. It was a slow and laborious process.

With the advent and deployment of digital switches and modern call routing techniques, it’s much, much easier. A call detail record is created when the call is dialed. More data is added when the connection is made and additional data, timestamps, is added until the call is terminated. If either the originating or destination number is known, a carrier can retrieve the call data in seconds—a minute or two at most.

What is NOT available is the conversation.

You see, when digital switches were deployed in the ’60s and ’70s, the audio of the calls were digitalized, compressed, to better utilize and manage the telephone circuits between switches. If you tapped in on a circuit, you’d hear nothing. It’s digital data, not analog audio. The only place to tap is what is known as “the last mile,” the circuit between your home and the local switch. When wiretaps were granted, the taps had to be placed at or near the subject’s premises.

Digital central office and long distance switches weren’t designed to enable tapping and many, most perhaps, still aren’t. It’s extremely difficult. The FedGov, using FISA, asked the major telco carriers, in the early years of the 21st Century, to develop switches to enable tapping and to retrofit existing switches. It would be extremely expensive to retrofit the deployed switches and the carriers told to FedGov to pound sand.

The carriers did, as new switches were added and older switches replaced for added capacity, comply with the FedGov’s directives. Eventually, their networks will be replaced with switches that will have the capability of listening in on live conversations—but that time is still in the future. The transition will continue for several years, maybe a decade or more. Businesses just won’t replace a large, significant portion of their infrastructure at a whim of bureaucrats.  The expense would put them out of business.

However, the FedGov has carriers over a barrel…and a club called the FCC. The FCC licenses telecommunications carriers and using the threat to withdraw that license, can coerce the carriers into doing whatever the Feds want—within some fiscal reason. That’s why the transition has and will take significant time.

So, we have a reprieve for awhile. I don’t know how long. Years, maybe? A decade, possibly? We must put that time into good use. First, by electing a CONSERVATIVE congress. Next, repeal the Patriot ACT and disband DHS, or, failing that, severely curtail their power and scope.

It’s not too late…yet, if we are to preserve out liberty.

Facebook

Surveillance

Posted on by

(Update: Audio recordings of the Cass County Commission meetings are available through the County Clerk’s office.)

Surveillance.

sur·veil·lance  

/sərˈvāləns/
Noun: Close observation, esp. of a suspected spy or criminal.
Synonyms: supervision – superintendence – oversight – control

 

A FB friend posted a link to the column in the UK Guardian about Verizon being ordered to send customer call data to the NSA. I saw a copy of what was purported to be the court order last night. It was four pages and was, to the best of my memory, identical to the one all communication carriers received around 2003 after the Patriot Act was passed.

The order we received back then was a preparatory order to allow the carriers time to put in place methods to retrieve Call Detail Records (CDRs) when requested by the FedGov. My area of the company created CDRs for specialty call centers used to help the deaf and hard-of-hearing communicate with hearing folks. The call centers were used for mundane things such as ordering pizza, making appointments, etc.

The processes we added were basically search engines. When we were given a telephone number and other criteria, such as receiving an international call or making one, making a call to, receiving a call from a specific number, we would extract the CDR for those calls and send them on to our legal department who interacted with the appropriate FedGov department.

In the following years, I can remember being requested to provide CDRs twice. In both cases, I was told, one of the parties were being investigated for some criminal act. I never really knew the details.

The bottom line is that we were never ordered to send Call Detail Records en mass, without some filtering, and then only for specific numbers. The supposed court order I read last night seemed to be worded the same as the one I read back around 2003.

That call detail records for specific numbers are being sent to the FedGov under court order is a fact. It’s governed by FISA, as amended in 2008. However, in this era of pseudo-journalism, is this “new” report, a change? That’s the real question.

We see so many reports today on Facebook and other social media sites, from various news websites and many stretch credibility. Many, very many, are subsequently proven to be false, complete fiction. However, the initial report frequently becomes viral, spreading throughout the internet. Everyone sees it. Few, however, never see the followup that proves the initial report false. Many who read the first report and pass it on, unfortunately, never send the correction—nor care, if it is contrary to their ideology.

When I see reports such as these, I try to perform my own due diligence. I read several reports on the subject, read, if possible, the original source documents and do my best to evaluate the validity of the report. I often find the initial report to be true. Just as often, unfortunately, I find the original report to be questionable or false.

This particular report about Verizon, has not, yet, passed my smell test. Without further confirmation, it stinks a bit. Why? The supposed order I read on the internet (link to it above,) has no date other than an expiration date in the body of the text. It appears to be a photo-copy. It has no classification stamps as I would expect and the document itself declares.

When I still had access to classified documents, every page was stamped, not just the cover-sheet. Classified documents had a specific form and format. If the copy being shown on the internet is a true photocopy, I would expect to see classification stamps on every page. That, and some other indicators, make me doubt its authenticity. It may be incomplete, or have been altered. I don’t know.

You, however, must decide on your own. Me? I’m waiting for more information. What I’ve seen so far, is lacking credibility.

Facebook