The End of Privacy

U.S. Constitution: Fourth 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.

The End of Privacy

Posted on Jan 24, 2008

By Elliot Cohen
www.truthdig.com

Amid the controversy brewing in the Senate over Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) reform, the Bush administration appears to have changed its strategy and is devising a bold new plan that would strip away FISA protections in favor of a system of wholesale government monitoring of every American’s Internet activities. Now the national director of intelligence is predicting a disastrous cyber-terrorist attack on the U.S. if this scheme isn’t instituted.

It is no secret that the Bush administration has already been spying on the e-mail, voice-over-IP, and other Internet exchanges between American citizens since as early as and possibly earlier than Sept. 11, 2001. The National Security Agency has set up shop in the hubs of major telecom corporations, notably AT&T, installing equipment that makes copies of the contents of all Internet traffic, routing it to a government database and then using natural language parsing technology to sift through and analyze the data using undisclosed search criteria. It has done this without judicial oversight and obviously without the consent of the millions of Americans under surveillance. Given any rational interpretation of the Fourth Amendment, its mass spying operation is illegal and unconstitutional.

But now the administration wants to make these illegal activities legal. And why is that? According to National Director of Intelligence Mike McConnell, who is now drafting the proposal, an attack on a single U.S. bank by the 9/11 terrorists would have had a far more serious impact on the U.S. economy than the destruction of the Twin Towers. “My prediction is that we’re going to screw around with this until something horrendous happens,” said McConnell. So the way to prevent this from happening, he claims, is to give the government the power to spy at will on the content of all e-mails, file transfers and Web searches.

McConnell’s prediction of something “horrendous” happening unless we grant government this authority has a tone similar to that of the fear-mongering call to arms against terrorism that President Bush sounded before taking us to war in Iraq. Now, Americans are about to be asked to surrender their Fourth Amendment rights because of a vague and unsupported prediction of the dangers and costs of cyber-terrorism.

The analogy with the campaign to frighten us into war with Iraq gets even stronger when it becomes evident that along with the establishing of American forces in Iraq, the cyber-security McConnell is calling for was, all along, part of the strategic plan, devised by Dick Cheney and several other present and former high-level Bush administration officials, to establish America as the world’s supreme superpower. This plan, known as the Project for the New American Century, unequivocally recognized “an imperative” for government to not only secure the Internet against cyber-attacks but also to control and use it offensively against its adversaries. The Project for the New American Century also maintained that “the process of transformation” it envisioned (which included the militarization and control of the Internet) was “likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event—like a new Pearl Harbor.” All that appears to be lacking to make the analogy complete is the “horrendous” cyber-attack—the chilling analog of the 9/11 attacks—that McConnell now predicts.

Apparently, the Bush administration had hoped to continue its mass surveillance program in secret, but as many as 40 civil suits were filed against AT&T and other telecoms, threatening to blow the government’s illegal spying activities wide open. Unable to have these cases dismissed in appellate court by once again playing the national-security card, the administration drafted and tried to push through Congress a version of the FISA Amendments Act of 2007 that gave retroactive immunity to telecom corporations for their assistance in helping the government spy en mass on Americans without a court warrant. The administration’s plan was to use Congress’ passage of this provision of immunity to nullify any cause of civil action against the telecoms, thereby pre-empting the exposure of the administration’s own illegal activities.

Two versions of the FISA bill emerged, one from the Senate Intelligence Committee drafted largely by Cheney himself, which contained the immunity provision, and another from the Senate Judiciary Committee that did not contain the provision. Although Senate Majority leader Harry Reid inauspiciously chose the former to bring to the Senate floor, the bill was surrounded by much controversy. There had been well organized grass-roots pressure to stop it from passing, and the House had already passed a version that did not include the retroactive immunity provision. Thus, in the face of a filibuster threat by Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), Reid postponed the discussion until the January 2008 session.

Now Reid has tried to put off the FISA Amendments Act once again by asking Republicans to extend, for one more month, the Protect America Act of 2007, an interim FISA reform act that is due to sunset in February. However, Cheney has urged Congress to pass his version of the FISA Amendments Act now. “We can always revisit a law that’s on the books. That’s part of the job of the elected branches of government,” Cheney said. “But there is no sound reason to pass critical legislation ... and slap an expiration date on it.”

Cheney’s point about the possibility of later revisiting the FISA Amendments Act after it becomes law may foreshadow replacing it in the coming months with a law based on McConnell’s plan, which is due to emerge in February. This would mark a gradual descent into divesting Americans entirely of their Fourth Amendment right to privacy—first by blocking their ability to sue the telecoms for violating their privacy and then by giving the government the same legal protection. After all, the FISA Amendments Act still requires the government to get warrants for spying on American citizens even if it does not afford adequate judicial oversight in enforcing this mandate. McConnell’s proposal, on the other hand, would make no bones about spying on Americans without warrants, thereby contradicting any meaningful FISA reform.

President Bush has already made clear he would veto any FISA bill that did not give retroactive immunity to the telecoms. However, if McConnell’s soon to be unveiled spy-at-will plan is turned into law, a separate law giving retroactive immunity to the telecoms would be unnecessary. All Bush and Cheney would need to do to protect themselves from criminal liability would be to make the new spy-at-will law retroactive in effect from the inception of the illegal NSA surveillance program. This would also be sufficient to deflate the civil suits filed against the telecoms because the past illegal spying activities that these companies conducted on behalf of the government would then become “legal.” Indeed, the Bush administration has already done this sort of legal retro-dating and nullifying of civil rights and gotten it through Congress. For example, the Military Commissions Act of 2006 conveniently gave Bush the power to decide whether someone—including himself—is guilty of torture, irrespective of the Geneva Conventions, and it made this authority retroactive to Nov. 26, 1997.

Whatever the final disposition of FISA in the coming weeks or months, the administration is now bracing to take a much more aggressive posture that would seek abridgement of civil liberties in its usual fashion: by fear-mongering and warnings that our homeland will be attacked by terrorists (this time of the menacing hacker variety) unless we the people surrender our Fourth Amendment right to privacy and give government the authority to inspect even our most personal and intimate messages.

It would be a mistake to underestimate the resolve of the Bush administration. But it would be a bigger mistake for Americans not to stand united against this familiar pattern of government scare tactics and manipulation. There are grave dangers to the survival of democracy posed by allowing any present or future government unfettered access to all of our private electronic communications. These dangers must be carefully weighed against the dubious and unproven benefits that granting such an awesome power to government might have on fending off cyber-attacks.

Elliot D. Cohen, PhD, is a media ethicist and critic. His most recent book is “The Last Days of Democracy: How Big Media and Power-Hungry Government Are Turning America Into a Dictatorship.” He is a first-prize winner of the 2007 Project Censored Award.

Full article at TruthDig.com

Real ID - Unnecessary Surveillance

Under the Real ID system, the individual draws his/ her rights from the act of possession of an identity card. Hence, a citizen can exercise his/ her fundamental rights contingent on their papers and documentation being in correct order. What we need to ask ourselves is if we should be forced to sacrifice our privacy for something that is of no practical use.

It is important to clearly define the objectives that the Real ID system is to accomplish. The system is expected to help identify illegal immigrants, track potential terrorists, solve problems of identity theft and provide a secure pathway for delivery of government services. Let’s examine these points.

Illegal Immigration

The Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) of 1986 was enacted to curb illegal immigration into the USA. In a disincentive for migrants in search of work, the Act made it illegal to employ aliens and those without a work permit. The act also called for greater enforcement at the borders and created new categories for seasonal agricultural workers.

The IRCA didn’t succeed in reducing employment opportunities either. Businesses simply realized that, due to their desperate situation, migrant labor was now even easier to exploit; thus, forcing illegal immigration further underground and victimizing legal Hispanic residents and job seekers.

In fact all the Real ID will do is track existing citizens as they apply for jobs. It also provides a method for corporations to circumvent existing privacy laws regarding tax information and employment status. Allowing banks and loan agencies to track your whereabouts and garnish wages at their discretion. If you work, your day to day business will be known by the corporate/government complex.

Terrorist Prevention

Supporters of the Real ID have argued that the system could have helped prevent the 9/11 tragedy if a record of their activities had been easily available. What the supporters fail to mention is the fact that all the hijackers involved in the attack had entered the United States legally, had mostly valid travel documents and most were not on any government watch list, with the result that the Real ID or any similar system would not have helped foil their plans.

Remember, it is mandatory for all Spanish citizens to carry an identity card, but that could not prevent the Madrid Bombings in March 2004 where at least 190 people were killed.

Delivery of Services

Given the ambitious aims of the Real ID, it shall probably be mandatory to carry the card at all times. Citizens without cards could have their rights temporarily withdrawn and their access to public spaces and services denied. They will not be allowed to fly, enter government facilities, receive public assistance, obtain prescription medications or apply for employment.

A citizen no longer has control over their personal and private information and is forced to share it with government and private agencies. They are forced to subject themselves to a search that is almost as physically intrusive as a bodily search.

You will be denied basic freedoms and access given to every generation to this point if you decided not to participate. You will not be allowed to “pass”, participation is mandatory.

Identity Theft

The arguments in favor of implementing Real ID are based on the fundamental assumption that the card will be truly infallible and will provide a foolproof method of identification. Once this basic assumption is questioned, the potential for misuse is frightening.

Once you have bound your entire life to this card you cannot unbind it. If someone where to steal you identity they would have access to not only your financial data but every intimate detail of your life. Is this a risk you are willing to take.

Corporate Involvement

Another worrying fact is that the role of private companies in the project has not been defined. The government has stated that it is interested in a public-private partnership whose modalities are yet to be worked out. The role played by these companies shall play a crucial role in defining the extent to which our privacy shall be compromised.

Corporate America could, with the simple passage of a law, start selling your location information to who ever wanted to stalk you. Any voyeur could gain personal insight into the most private details of your life including medical records. The government does not have a good track record keeping private information out of corporate America’s hands:

In 1936, President Roosevelt and the American congress promised that every citizen’s social security number would be kept confidential. Since 1936, there have been at least 40 amendments to the act, thereby ensuring that the social security number is one of the most visible features of all individual transactions in America today. The number is required to operate bank accounts and credit cards, for job applications and filing taxes, for accessing Medicare and drawing pensions.

It should be expected that Real ID will follow the same path.

Profiling

Post 9/11, the world has been gripped by an anxiety to gather as much human intelligence as possible, and states have made a persuasive case for the sacrifice of our rights of freedom and privacy at the altar of national security.

Real ID and similar projects, contribute to an argument that the terrorist, the subversive and the anti-national can be stereotyped as a social profile. This reduces law enforcement into a simple task of comparing citizen profiles against a pre-determined template, identifying successful matches and arresting the guilty. Clearly, this is a flawed means of approaching the problem.

Tie the Real ID legislation with the Violent Radicalization Act overwhelmingly passed by the House in 2007; it will be taken up by the Senate in early 2008, and a clear pattern of the desire to profile and track American citizens who think differently than the establishment comes into focus. Imagine being denied a job because you believe Christmas is about celebrating the birth of Christ not about consumerism and reckless consumption.

Police State

Identity cards are not simply the proof of our identities; they represent an elaborate series of institutions and processes put in place by society and the State. They represent the successful establishment of the state as the sole legitimate agent of control of society. While state interventions in society are not always negative; moves to map, categorize and monitor citizenry violate our rights as members of a free society.

Real ID Fails

Real ID shall fail on all counts; curbing of illegal immigration, effective and foolproof identification, and the combating of crime and terrorism. Instead, it shall stifle individual freedom, track citizens and blur the distinction between government and corporate interests.

Contact your state representative and urge them not to participate in the Real ID. If enough states opt out the federal government will be forced to abandon this obvious and necessary step down the road to fascism.

To contact your state representative go to Project Vote Smart.

This article was complied from many sources on the internet.

Cell Phone Tracking

Civil libertarians, like myself, loath any device which looks to reduce privacy and expose American's to unnecessary monitoring and tracking. We rail against the obvious technologies such as RFID tracking, a National ID, data mining and profiling services, city wide surveillance systems, online tracking and "loyalty cards". We will not give out personally identifiable information to anyone and even balk when the local hardware store clerk ask us for our zip code.

Hardcore survivalists have the same general attitude towards government/corporate involvement in our lives. Many will not even maintaining a permanent address or file an income tax return because they fear being targeted, tagged and tracked.

As highly honed as our survival skills are many of us still fall victim to the allure of a single device which quietly has infiltrated our lives and possibly already given out our closest held secrets. The following article should be read and inscribed in your mind.

Reach Out and Track Someone

By Terry J. Allen, Posted May 11, 2006

If you are one of the more than 200 million Americans with a cell phone nestled in your pocket, authorities may be able to find you any time day or night--even if you never make or receive a call.

You know the Verizon ad where a lockstep crowd personifies the network that accompanies its customer everywhere? Well, within that seemingly friendly horde, a high-tech Big Brother is lurking.

Most people know that when they make a mobile call--during a 911 emergency, for example--authorities can access phone company technology to pin down their location, sometimes to within a few feet.

A lesser-known fact: Cell phone companies can locate you any time you are in range of a tower and your phone is on. Cell phones are designed to work either with global positioning satellites or through "pings" that allow towers to triangulate and pinpoint signals. Any time your phone "sees" a tower, it pings it

Telecom companies and government are not eager to advertise that tracking capability. Nor will companies admit whether they are archiving the breadcrumb trail of pings from a cell phone so that they--or authorities--can trace back, after the fact, where the customer had been at a particular time. "Of course, there is that capability," says Bruce Schneier, chief technical officer with Counterpane Internet Security. "Verizon and the other companies have access to that information and the odds are zero that they wouldn't sell it if it is legal and profitable. This is capitalism after all."

But legality can be so tricky to pin down, especially when national security and corporate profits are involved. Communications companies and government have been repeatedly caught collaborating in highly questionable practices.

It is likely that authorities are also accessing cell phone call records and conducting real-time tracing of hapless Palestinians who donated to clinics and liberal activists who dared march for peace. And if the administration's record is a guide, it is interpreting privacy protection laws relating to cell phones in ways that bend and perhaps batter the Constitution.

Real-time tracking technology also opens disturbing entrepreneurial opportunities. Anyone who provides their kids, spouse or employees with a software-readied cell phone can secretly monitor them on the web. Wherify.com "locates loved ones within feet/meters in about a minute," and allows subscribers to "view location on both street and aerial mapping, to include date/time stamp, lat/long and block address" and "set breadcrumb schedule for periodic locates."

Everyone uses a cell phone, especially if you live in an off-grid location. I would recommend that if a cell phone is necessary then use an anonymous unit purchased with cash and loaded at 7-11 or any big box super store. Through call pattern recognition it can still be tied to you but if you change your habits this can be mitigated. Possibly explore just using GMRS radios to communicate with your family and friends the walkie-talkie sized units can have a range of ten to twenty miles. If nothing else a throwback CB will work just fine.

Even though all telecommunication carriers are bound by law to protect your personal information the era of George Bush has shown this to be a false promise broken when convenient. If the pattern remains then the Senate will pass Telecommunication Immunity as part of the FISA rework so the American public will never find out who has this sensitive phone and tracking information or how it is being used.

As the focus was on man behind the curtain we missed the flying monkey coming through the palace doors.

If interested in privacy issues check out the following sites.

Electronic Frontiers Foundation

Electronic Privacy Information Center