Skip to content
thepete.com - » TheBig Brother thepete.com

TheAdvertising:
:gnisitrevdAehT

Posse Comitatus is Effectively Dead, Literal Death Coming Soon

by ThePete 9:52 pm 2008-12-02

Just a quick FYI on what Posse Comitatus is–it’s an act that was passed into law back in 1878 and it keeps American military troops from enforcing the law. This law is a good thing because it stops the USA from being a military dictatorship. If the military enforces the law and not a civilian police force, that’s exactly what you have. Sure, we may have elected Obama and our local officials, but the guy who decides to pull you over for a speeding violation might be holding an automatic rifle. You’re going to do whatever that military person dictates.

All that said, let me direct you to a few headlines from ThePete.Com over the past month or two:

US Army to Be Used Inside the US

US Army Troops Have Begun Serving Inside US

More On the Status of Posse Comitatus in the US

That first post was about how military troops would serve on active duty to support local authorities in times of disaster or a terrorist attack–but specifically, they are to be trained in dealing with “unruly or dangerous individuals and crowds.”

In other words, during times of emergency, they’ll be doing things the police normally do.

The second post is about how the 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team has begun active duty inside the US–this was back in early October, by the way.

The third post goes talks about Democracy Now holding a debate on the subject of Posse Comitatus and military troops on the streets of America.  I added that mission creep might occur and these soldiers would go from playing police during an emergency, to playing police full-time after the disaster is done.  Seems reasonable to assume mission creep is a possibility, since we went into Iraq for the WMDs and didn’t leave when we found none.

Late last night, at 2:45am I saw a Reuters.com article and felt compelled to write a post with this title:

Chances of a WMD Attack in a big city better than 50%??

The Reuters article reported on the claims of a task force–they said that there’s a better than 50/50 chance that a major city in the world will be hit by a WMD terrorist attack.

Then, yesterday, fellow Pete, Peter Santilli, of PeterSantilli.com, Twittered a link to a WashingtonPost.com article with the following headline:

Pentagon to Detail Troops to Bolster Domestic Security

Yep, apparently 20,000 more USGIs will be added to active duty on American soil by 2011. Here’s a cutting from that WaPo article:


Before the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, dedicating 20,000 troops to domestic response — a nearly sevenfold increase in five years — "would have been extraordinary to the point of unbelievable," Paul McHale, assistant defense secretary for homeland defense, said in remarks last month at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. But the realization that civilian authorities may be overwhelmed in a catastrophe prompted "a fundamental change in military culture," he said.

So, what changed here with the non-military culture (us)? Was there really less hatred for America before 911? That would strike me as impossible since, if people didn’t hate America before September 2001, 911 would never have happened, right? So, why are our values suddenly different? Why are we suddenly OK with troops serving inside America’s borders?

3000 people died on 911. That’s less than the number of American soldiers who died in Iraq. It’s nothing compared to the number of Iraqis died in our invasion of their country–yet, here we are accepting a virtual military dictatorship, but only in the case of a "nuclear terrorist attack or other domestic catastrophe," say Pentagon officials.

And what an amazing coincidence that a task force announces that they feel some major city in the world has a better than 50 percent chance of being hit by WMD when they did? Isn’t this just perfect timing for the military, the politicians and the military industrial complex?

Lots of money to be made in the fear industrial complex!

Now, I don’t think 911 was an inside job, but I do think it was a virtual inside job–that is to say that I think 911 was allowed to happen. What kind of leaders ignore the obvious signs that something like this could happen? We don't need a police state to be able to scramble fighter jets that can intercept hijacked aircraft. We don’t need the Patriot Act to stop known terrorists from entering the country and taking pilot lessons. We just need our leaders to do their jobs.

That’s what upsets me the most in all of this–the Home Minister of Mumbai resigned after his mishandling of the Mumbai Attacks last week. Have we had one person resign in shame because of 911? And now we’re supposed to assume that the same people who let 911 happen are going to not screw this up, too?

And what about Obama’s supposed “change we need”? Well, his cabinet is made up almost entirely of Clintonites and you may recall that they were in charge of America until just eight months before 911 happened. So, it’s a cross-partisan breakdown of leadership.

What can we do?

Beats me, man. I’m just a blogger.

by ThePete 9:52 pm 2008-12-02 In TheNews, TheBig Brother, ThePete.Com, TheWarnings | Tags , , , , , | $ |

Chances of a WMD Attack in a big city better than 50%??

by ThePete 2:45 am 2008-12-02

Grabbed this on my iPhone just now and I have to admit that I don’t trust this task force. These guys MUST be lying or hopelessly paranoid. There is no way you could say there’s a better than 50/50 chance that a city will get hit by WMD.
 
Of course, bio or chem weapons I could see as being more likely, but still not a 50% chance, but nukes (which are what we all think of first when we hear the letters “WMD”)?? No way, man, and reporting this story this way is nothing short of alarmist and fear mongering.
 
Reuters is really doing us a disservice by not making it immediately clear that nukes are much less likely than chem or bio. And even knowing that, when I saw that headline and read that first paragraph, I thought they meant their was a better than even chance that nukes would definitely hit a big city–then reality set in and I remembered how the odds of any random big city being hit are dramatically against.
 
Thanks, Reuters, for making us crap our pants…again!
 
Oh and newsflash: government task forces have been getting it wrong for the last 8 years–probably longer–all the press ever does is highlight the fear and bury the logic. Way to unquestioningly quote the party line and question little-to-nothing.

Posted by email from thepete’s posterous

by ThePete 2:45 am 2008-12-02 In TheNews, TheBig Brother, ThePete.Com, TheWars | Tags , , , , | $ |

More On the Status of Posse Comitatus in the US

by ThePete 3:20 pm 2008-10-10
utterli-image
I’ve blogged on US Army troops serving on American soil before (here: http://thepete.com/…-inside-us and here: http://thepete.com/…de-the-us/ ) and on Tuesday of this week (here: http://www.democracynow.org/…it_will_be ) Democracy Now covered the topic as well. They had a mini-debate on the topic of the Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Team serving under US Army North, which, Amy Goodman explained, is "the Army service component of Northern Command". She had on Army Col. Michael Boatner, future operations division chief of USNORTHCOM, and Matthew Rothschild, editor of The Progressive magazine to discuss the issue.

The transcript does make for good reading and, to be fair, Boatner does assuage some fears about a unit of active duty soldiers functioning on American soil. However, what the debate doesn’t discuss is the slippery slope argument. There’s another phrase that can describe the danger more accurately: Mission Creep.

This is when your mission is to achieve one goal, but along the way you see something else you can do so you just do it, rather than getting permission or get any other feedback about it. This is fine if you’re doing chores around the house, but when you’re a soldier trained to kill insurgents (and have just came back from doing exactly that) I don’t think even an inch of mission creep is acceptable.

In the Democracy Now segment, Boatner assured us that soldiers wouldn’t be bringing their "heavy weapons and combat vehicles" with them on this domestic service but that "They would bring their individual weapons, which is the standard policy for deployments in the homeland."

Now, think about this–do you really want to have some guy with an M-16 patrolling the streets during a disaster? What if he makes a single mistake and mis-identifies someone as a threat who really isn’t one? During Katrina I remember members of the press identifying black people wading through flood waters with garbage bags in their hands as looters. Meanwhile, white people wading through the water with suitcases were identified as refugees.

Any human is capable of this kind of mistake. What makes this mistake even more dangerous is when someone trained to defend themselves with a gun makes it.

More…

by ThePete 3:20 pm 2008-10-10 In TheNews, TheBig Brother, ThePete.Com, TheWarnings | Tags , , | $ |

US Army Troops Have Begun Serving Inside US

by ThePete 12:32 pm 2008-10-06
utterli-image
So, while we’re all watching the stock market’s ride to hell, we may be missing another important story.

Back on September 23, 2008, I posted (here: http://thepete.com/…de-the-us/ ) about how Democracy Now was reporting that US military troops would begin training for domestic duty here, inside the US on October 1. This, in theory, violates the Posse Comitatus Act which prohibits the use of the military as any type of law enforcement. From the Wikipedia article on the PCA (here: http://en.wikipedia.org/…itatus_Act ): "The statute generally prohibits federal military personnel and units of the United States National Guard under federal authority from acting in a law enforcement capacity within the United States, except where expressly authorized by the Constitution or Congress. The Coast Guard is exempt from the Posse Comitatus Act."

Yet, the following comes from the CNN.com article (original here: http://www.cnn.com/…index.html ) I screencapped above:

They will be based in Fort Stewart, Georgia, and focus primarily on logistics and support for local police and rescue personnel, the Army says.

Huh, so guys who have been trained to fire automatic weapons at enemies are now going to provide "logistics and support" for police and local rescue? Seems like the police should just hire more people for that–that is unless the soldiers will be doing more than just providing support.

It’s a little bit like hiring a professional sniper to shut your kid up during dinner. Obviously inappropriate overkill.

But there’s more from the CNN article of interest:

The plan is drawing skepticism from some observers who are concerned that the unit has been training with equipment generally used in law enforcement, including beanbag bullets, Tasers, spike strips and roadblocks.

That sounds suspiciously like law enforcement duties…

And more from the article:

That kind of training seems a bit out of line for the unit’s designated role as Northern Command’s CCMRF (Sea Smurf), or CBRNE Consequence Management Response Force. CBRNE stands for chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and high-yield explosive incidents.

Isn’t that adorable? They’re trained to deal with chemical. biological, radiological, nuclear and high-yield explosive incidents and they’re called "Sea Smurf"!

Hrm… that sounds way worse than just Army soldiers trained to kill supporting cops. If they’ve been previously trained to deal with all that heavy crap, it means they’re *paranoid* Army soldiers trained to kill.

Do I even need to say how not cool that is?

Funny how this is happening right on top of a huge economic crisis. Is the USG expecting other things to go wrong, too?

Mobile post sent by thepete using Utterli. reply-count Replies.

by ThePete 12:32 pm 2008-10-06 In TheNews, TheBig Brother, ThePete.Com | Tags , , | $ |

US Army to Be Used Inside the US

by ThePete 6:33 pm 2008-09-23

A couple days ago QuantumParticle Twittered (here: http://is.gd/31PC ) a link to an ArmyTimes.com article reporting on how the US Army is moving the 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team from Iraq to the USA to serve on the streets of America if needed.

Now, there’s a little law called the Posse Comitatus Act that was passed in 1878 that prohibits the military from enforcing the law (read more here: http://en.wikipedia.org/…itatus_Act ). So, this kind of story urks me. I followed the link QP had included in his Twitter, but the ArmyTimes website had moved the article. Then, yesterday, Amy Goodman from DemocracyNow.org reported on it (here: http://www.democracynow.org/…/headlines ) saying:

Beginning in October, the Army plans to station an active unit inside the United States for the first time to serve as an on-call federal response in times of emergency. The 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team has spent thirty-five of the last sixty months in Iraq, but now the unit is training for domestic operations. The unit will soon be under the day-to-day control of US Army North, the Army service component of Northern Command. The Army Times reports this new mission marks the first time an active unit has been given a dedicated assignment to Northern Command. The paper says the Army unit may be called upon to help with civil unrest and crowd control. The soldiers are learning to use so-called nonlethal weapons designed to subdue unruly or dangerous individuals and crowds.

Does the military expect a lot of protests or disasters to be coming their way?

This seems a creepy redeployment for our men and women in uniform, so naturally, I had to find the Army Times article, so I went back to ArmyTimes.com and found this article:

http://www.armytimes.com/…d_090708w/

It’s exactly what Goodman was talking about.

Why is bad that the USMil enforces the law?

Because they’re not trained to enforce the law. They have automatic weapons, grenades and (on a good day) body armor. You want a guy with a machine gun pulling you over for a traffic violation?

You want army soldiers patrolling the streets and "keeping the peace" (more like forcing the peace).

I don’t.

And neither did the guys behind that 1878 law. Sadly, while doing research for this post, I came across an essay written waaay back in 2000 that suggests (if true) that the Posse Comitatus act has already been watered down dramatically. Read that essay here: http://www.homelandsecurity.org/…ilcock.htm

Funny how that article is on a website that claims to be run with money from the USG. I guess it’s a justification for what’s going on with the 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team.

Regardless, the idea of soldiers walking down streets even in times of emergency kinda scares me. I mean, do we want to live our lives like we’re an occupied country?

I don’t know if the "slippery slope" argument applies, but I feel like it might…

Mobile post sent by thepete using Utterli. reply-count Replies.

by ThePete 6:33 pm 2008-09-23 In TheNews, TheBig Brother, ThePete.Com, TheWarnings | Tags , , , , | $ |

Cheney Edited Global Warming Testimony

by ThePete 8:23 pm 2008-07-10
utterz-image
I grabbed this from Google News just after midnight on 7/9/8. It seems that somebody in the USG admitted that Cheney had edited the testimony a USG health official gave to Congress.

Isn’t that nice? A man with no experience or expertise in the field of environment-related health issues told a government expert in said issues what to tell another part of the government about the issue.

Will this absurd royalism ever stop?

I know, I know–it’ll stop January 20, 2009.

But to that I say this: I wonder if the Obama Administration (knock on simulated wood grain) would give into the temptation of getting all big-brothery on our asses. If the last guys did it, what’s to stop the new guys?

Of course, I still think Hillary will pull it out and win it. :P

Mobile post sent by thepete using Utterz. reply-count Replies.

by ThePete 8:23 pm 2008-07-10 In TheNews, Politricks, TheBig Brother, ThePete.Com, TheScience | Tags , , , , | $ |

Random Jabberings on Oppression and Big Brothery

by ThePete 4:32 pm 2008-03-07

Random Jabberings on Oppression and Big Brothery

I remember back in 1992 when Clinton was first elected. As a writer I was concerned: Without Bush in office, how would we ever see that dystopian future, replete with all manner of big-brothery and oppression? Well, little did I know that eight years later Clinton would be replaced by…another Bush.

Eight years after that is where we are today and, once again, I’m looking for evidence of this dystopian future/present. Of course, the problem with looking for things is that you often find them–even if they’re not there. But if I deal with only the hard facts of a situation, it’s then up to us to interpret those facts as either oppression or not.

Then again, what does oppression even mean? Is it OK if we live in a society that is generally un-oppressive? Or is that old saying true–that if one man is oppressed all men are?

Ever since George W. Bush made that joke about how his job would be easier if he were a dictator, I’ve found myself trying to imagine life in the shoes of a German, circa 1932. When Hitler was elected with just 31% of the vote, did Germans freak out and hold their government responsible for making sure he was the rightful winner? When a government building was set on fire, were there conspiracy theorists who were called whack-jobs and freaks? When Hitler opened secret camps to keep the Jews in (he didn’t advertise them, you know) did Germans hear the rumors and just ignore them?

I’m not comparing Bush to Hitler, I’m comparing we American citizens to the German citizens in the 1930s. Is it not real oppression until America looks like the society of George Orwell’s novel, "1984?"

A few weeks ago, I noticed a Twitter post from an Internet friend of mine that explained (quickly) that she had been in a car that was pulled over by a cop. While being pulled over, the police officer took her USB thumb drive and looked at it’s contents on the laptop in his police cruiser. This is the kind of thing (as a writer) I’m looking for, so I wanted to know more. I contacted her and she told me more about it. Here’s a nutshell of what she said:

1) She’s disabled, so she wasn’t at the wheel.

2) They asked her if they could search her bag, but when she said no, they said that her answer gave them reason to be suspicious. So, they searched it anyway.

3) They asked her to play her harmonica to prove the bag was hers.

4) Upon finding her thumb drive, they looked at its contents. She said it held financial and medical records–things most of us consider private. Though, I believe that under the Patriot Act there’s something about being able to search your financial records without a warrant.

5) The driver hadn’t been speeding, they had pulled him over because he had a past drug conviction.

6) When she asked what the police were looking for on her thumb drive, she was told something to the effect of “evidence of terrorist activities and/or child pornography.”

Now, I’ve heard of other cases of this sort of thing happening. There was the toy shop owner who had Homeland Security take away her Rubik’s Cubes because they violated patent laws, even though the patent had expired (http://thepete.com/…fringement ). There was another case of a young woman venting her frustrations about George W. Bush on her LJ and then getting a visit from the Secret Service (http://thepete.com/…ion-or-not ).

To me, this seems bad. To me, this all seems oppressive. But is it? Didn’t most Germans live normal lives during World War II? Weren’t most Germans able to generally go on with their lives as usual?

Aren’t most of us going about our lives as normal, too?

I wonder what Germans of 1932 would think about something like this.

A sidenote on that Internet friend of mine who clearly had her rights violated–she calls herself "Cherrishhellfire" online and she said something really quite profound when we spoke on the phone. She said:

"If I am nothing else in this lifetime, I need to be an alarm clock."

I realize now that this is precisely what I’ve been trying to be during my ten years of being a blogger. I’ll have to thank her for helping me work that out. :)
Mobile post sent by thepete using Utterz.  Replies.

EDIT: I forgot to mention point 6 when I first posted this.

by ThePete 4:32 pm 2008-03-07 In TheNews, TheBig Brother, TheMiniBlog, ThePete.Com | Tags , | $ |

Nate Ritter: How to Beat Time-Warner Hi-Jacking

by ThePete 12:17 pm 2008-02-29

On Monday, I blogged (here: http://thepete.com/…y-internet ) about how Time-Warner Cable (aka "Road Runner") was hi-jacking (high-jacking?) web searches. Essentially, if you type in an incomplete on incorrect URL each browser is supposed to do what you want in that situation. In the case of Firefox (the only browser I use), I believe, it defaults to using google to make a best guess as to what you were aiming for. T-W recently started usurping this feature and instead funnels you to an advertising-rich page (seen at the above-linked, uh, link). Internet savior Nate Ritter has come up with a solution.

Here’s what he says in a recent post on his site (here: http://blog.perfectspace.com/…erception/ ):

I really hate their page. It honestly sucks.

So, I turned it off. I disabled it.

If you have the same issue and don’t like it, you can disable that setting too. Here’s how. Go to http://ww23.rr.com/prefs.php and choose “Disable” for the option labeled “Web Address Error Redirect Service: This preference allows you to opt in or out of Road Runner’s non-existing domain landing service.” Then click the “Save” button.

I did it and it worked for me. Have a look at the screencap above to see what the page looks like.

Be sure to swing by Nate’s blog if you have a mo’ and any interest in "community, entrepreneurship and business strategy". He’s a great guy–during the San Diego fires last year he live-Twittered the entire experience. I found his Twitterstream infinitely more informative (and engrossing) than the news I would get from CNN or any other mainstream news source. Follow his Twitters here: http://twitter.com/nateritter
Mobile post sent by thepete using Utterz.  Replies.

by ThePete 12:17 pm 2008-02-29 TheBig Brother, TheBig Business, TheTech.ThePete.Com | Tags , , | $ |

Time-Warner Cable Hi-Jacking My Internet

by ThePete 2:05 am 2008-02-25

So, one of the cool geeky things about using Firefox as a browser (as a scifi fan) is that if you want to get to the official website of Doctor Who, you just type in "dr" into the URL field and hit return. Doing that usually sends me right to http://bbc.co.uk/doctorwho

Well, tonight I tried it because I wanted to find out if they had announced the air dates in the UK for the new series of the show only to discover that Road Runner Internet (the official name for Time-Warner Cable) had cut me off at the pass and shoved a bunch of ads in my face instead of giving me what I wanted. See the above screencap to see what I saw.

So, we pay for cable TV and get programming with commercials. We pay for cable broadband and we get Internet… with commercials.

Does anyone else think this might be getting a little out of hand?
Mobile post sent by thepete using Utterz.  Replies.

UPDATED: thepete.com/nate-ritter-how-to-beat-time-warner-hi-jacking

by ThePete 2:05 am 2008-02-25 TheBig Brother, TheBig Business, ThePete.Com, TheTech.ThePete.Com | Tags , , | $ |

Wikileaks.org Threatened by "Legal" Action

by ThePete 12:10 pm 2008-02-19

So, I see an article at the BBC News website today (here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/…250916.stm ) and it reports on how a California court has ordered the website Wikileaks.org to be taken offline. From the article: "A controversial website that allows whistle-blowers to anonymously post government and corporate documents has been taken offline in the US.

Wikileaks.org, as it is known, was cut off from the internet following a California court ruling, the site says.

The case was brought by a Swiss bank after "several hundred" documents were posted about its offshore activities.

Other versions of the pages, hosted in countries such as Belgium and India, can still be accessed.

However, the main site was taken offline after the court ordered that Dynadot, which controls the site’s domain name, should remove all traces of wikileaks from its servers."

The catch is, that the above screencap was taken by me *after* I read the BBC News article. Seems like folks at the BBC, good as they are at reporting news with reasonable depth, still make mistakes. Of course, the real problem here isn’t that the BBC makes the odd mistake. It’s that a site like Wikileaks.org is being threatened in this way.

More from the article: "The case was brought by lawyers working for the Swiss banking group Julius Baer. It concerned several documents posted on the site which allegedly reveal that the bank was involved with money laundering and tax evasion.

The documents were allegedly posted by Rudolf Elmer, former vice president of the bank’s Cayman Island’s operation.

A spokesperson for Julius Baer said he could not comment on the case because of "pending legal proceedings".

The BBC understands that Julius Baer asked for the documents to be removed because they could have an impact on a separate legal case ongoing in Switzerland."

This makes no sense to me. So, a legal case in another country is grounds for people in the US (and the rest of the world) to go without information that they need in order to know who to trust or who to work for or who to avoid? This decision by the California court removes ALL whistleblower information that Wikileaks.org was hosting from the public–not just the stuff pertaining to this Swiss case.

This kind of censorship harms us all and it allows crimes to be committed and it allows the criminals who commit them to get away with it.

So much for freedom of speech.
Mobile post sent by thepete using Utterz.  Replies.

by ThePete 12:10 pm 2008-02-19 In TheNews, TheBig Brother, ThePete.Com, TheWarnings | Tags , , , , | $ |

SENATE VOTES TO BAN TORTURE–AGAIN

by ThePete 2:06 pm 2008-02-14

Can’t believe I missed this yesterday, but apparently, the USGov has voted to ban torture–again.

The above screencap comes to us from a February 13, 2008 article at NYTimes.com (here: http://moourl.com/9mu3x ) and it reports that:

"The Senate voted 51 to 45 on Wednesday afternoon to ban waterboarding and other harsh interrogation methods used by the Central Intelligence Agency against high-level terrorism suspects."

The funny thing is that water boarding has been classified as a type of torture for centuries. I’m pretty sure the Inquisition used it as one of their tactics. I read someplace that it’s listed in a French book on torture from the 1800s. Torture is already illegal, yet now our fearless leaders in Washington have banned it again.

There are actually two laws on the books prohibiting covert propaganda. This is thanks to Congress wanting to look like it was addressing the issue of the White House violating the first federal law banning covert propaganda. Rather than seeing that the first law is enforced, they pass a new one.

Same deal here.

Of course, the punchline to this joke comes in the final two paragraphs:

"Senate Democrats, sensing an opportunity to highlight a policy dispute between the White House and Senator John McCain, the likely Republican presidential nominee, had been hoping that Republicans would make a procedural challenge to the provision on interrogation methods.

Mr. McCain, a former prisoner of war, has consistently voiced opposition to waterboarding and other methods that critics say is a form torture. But the Republicans, confident of a White House veto, did not mount the challenge. Mr. McCain voted �no� on Wednesday afternoon."

Yep. A man who was tortured in Vietnam, a man who supposedly can’t raise his arms above his head, a man who millions call an American hero, just voted to NOT ban torture.

Sure, I just got done pointing out how stupid it is that Congress has passed a second law banning torture, but I’m thinking that a guy who *was* tortured *might* want to vote "yes" on even redundant bans on the practice. And regarding other Republicans trusting Bush to veto the ban, doesn’t that send an even worse message?

Now, in case you happen to be one of those people that doesn’t understand why torture is alwaysalwaysalwaysalwaysalwaysalways wrong–even if there’s a bomb that you KNOW is about to go off–let me explain it in very simple terms:

Do we want them to do it to us?

Then we can’t do it to them.

It’s the Golden Rule, folks–don’t do unto others what you would not have them do unto you. That’s all there is to it.

Of course, in the end, it’s too bad our government can’t, you know, enforce the laws that already exist.
Mobile post sent by thepete using Utterz.  Replies.

by ThePete 2:06 pm 2008-02-14 In TheNews, Politricks, TheBig Brother, ThePete.Com | Tags , , , , , | $ |

InfraGard: USGov Working With Businesses-Not You

by ThePete 12:42 am 2008-02-12

What do you get when the US government and private businesses work together?

Something fishy, in my mind.

Today on DemocracyNow.org’s podcast (www.democracynow.org/2008/2/11/report_fbi_deputizes_23_000_business ), I heard about a part of the federal government that is working with “business leaders” to help secure the infrastructure of America in case of a disaster or terrorist attack. At least that’s what a group with a name like “InfraGard” suggests.

Here’s a bit from InfraGard’s entry at Wikipedia.org (here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/InfraGuard ) that suggests something different: “InfraGard Alliances and the FBI said that they have developed a TRUST-based public-private sector partnership to ensure reliability and integrity of information exchanged about various terrorism, intelligence, criminal, and security matters.”

Sounds more like domestic spying to me. What would business owners have to do with “information exchanged about various terrorism, intelligence, criminal, and security matters”? As good citizens shouldn’t business leaders feel obligated to report anything suspicious they see going on?

Why do they need to be recruited, specifically? Do they get special training? Exactly what the heck is all this about?

In fact, if you have a look at the paragraph in the screencap of the InfraGard website above, you’ll see that they actually describe themselves *three* different ways. Check ‘em out:

1)InfraGard is an information sharing and analysis effort serving the interests and combining the knowledge base of a wide range of members.

OK, so, the FBI helps the members of InfraGard share and analyze information across all of it’s various members–but what kind of information could that even be?

2) At its most basic level, InfraGard is a partnership between the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the private sector.

Why would the private sector need to partner-up with the FBI? Would my friend who runs a boba drink shop benefit from InfraGard? This kind of vague language could mean anything.

3) InfraGard is an association of businesses, academic institutions, state and local law enforcement agencies, and other participants dedicated to sharing information and intelligence to prevent hostile acts against the United States.

Whoa.

So, this *is* domestic spying. It’s just that the government is having businesses do the actual big-brother routine. Isn’t it the job of the government to protect us from our enemies and not the Coca-Cola company?

Exactly where are our tax dollars going if the USGov needs this kind of “partnership” with some 23,000 business leaders? This is like Blackwater, only much more subtle–and therefore more scary since it’s practically invisible.

What’s worse is that apparently, some of InfraGard’s business leaders have been told that in a time of martial law *they* can use *lethal* force if they see the need. According to journalist Matt Rothschild who wrote a piece on InfraGard for The Progressive magazine (here: www.progressive.org/mag_rothschild0308 ) and gave an interview on today’s Democracy Now: “The business leaders themselves were told, at least in this one meeting, that if there is martial law declared or if there’s a time of an emergency, that members of InfraGard would have permission to protect—you know, whether it’s the local utility or, you know, their computers or the financial sector, whatever aspect. Whatever aspect of the infrastructure they’re involved with, they’d have permission to shoot to kill, to use lethal force to protect their aspect of the infrastructure, and they wouldn’t be able to be prosecuted, they were told.”

He also said: “These companies, these representatives of these companies feed the FBI information about threats. They also can give the FBI information about disgruntled employees and have the FBI investigate them. So the pipeline goes that way.”

So, if you’re not happy at your current work place, I’d be careful how you express it. With the power to call in the FBI, you can bet *some* businessman is going to abuse that power at some point.

Rothschild added: “And the pipeline goes the other way, too. The FBI gives these 23,000 businesspeople almost daily threat warnings that the public never gets. In at least one occasion, a government official, Governor Gray Davis of California, didn’t get, until he heard from his brother, who was in InfraGard, about threats to the bridges in California.”

So, now these businesses are more important than we individual citizens. The USG cares more about businesses than the citizens it is supposed to protect.

And don’t think InfraGard came into being just because of 911. According to their entry in Wikipedia, they were first formed in 1996 in Cleveland, Ohio, but expanded to other cities two years later–more than three years before 911.

So, this isn’t about protecting America from Al Qaeda. Al Qaeda didn’t exist in 1996. This is about being paranoid.

Am I against protecting infrastructure like electricity, water and communications? Of course not–but isn’t that the job of the police, the National Guard and other local authorities? Where is the check and/or balance here?

Also, why haven’t we heard of InfraGard in the last ten years it’s been around?

And why the hell did they spell “guard” wrong in their name?

What is our country coming to??

Wow–this was a long one

by ThePete 12:42 am 2008-02-12 In TheNews, TheBig Brother, ThePete.Com, TheWarnings | Tags , , , | $ |

911 Whistleblower Talking Again

by ThePete 6:27 am 2008-01-10

Above is a screencap of part of the very first post I wrote about Sibel Edmonds way back in 2004 (http://thepete.com/…efore-911).

As a translator for the FBI, Edmonds says she saw hard evidence in the days after 911 that there were warnings that 911 was going to happen. When she tried to tell people about this, Ashcroft legally gagged her. She eventually got fired and she’s been trying to get her story out sideways ever since–that was almost four years ago.

She was quiet for a long time (or maybe it was just that the media wasn’t covering her), but now she’s spoken to http://TimesOnline.co.uk/ and to BradBlog.com–why to only them? Because, essentially, no one else will listen.

Here are some links if you’re interested:

All of my posts on Edmonds:
http://thepete.com/index.php

A CBS story from August 2004 on her:
http://www.cbsnews.com/…6954.shtml

The Times Online article about/with her from January 6, 2008:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/…137695.ece

BradBlog.com’s piece on her from two days ago:
http://www.bradblog.com/

Finally, Edmonds’ own website:
http://www.justacitizen.com/

Please check this stuff out–if only to learn about it for yourself. But if you are as concerned as I am, please pass on this story to other folks.

Seems there are a lot of well-known-names that are involved in allowing nuclear secrets to get out and, essentially, allowing 911 to happen.

Weee, nothing like some conspiracy crap to make your morning exciting!
Mobile post sent by thepete using Utterz.  Replies.

by ThePete 6:27 am 2008-01-10 In TheNews, TheBig Brother, ThePete.Com | Tags , , , , , | $ |

In Case You Forgot, Big Businesses Help the Government Spy on Us

by ThePete 6:00 am 2007-12-05

Just digging through the stuff I wanted to blog on over the past couple weeks and I found an article on WashingtonPost.com regarding major telephone companies complying with US government requests for information on their customers. According to the article:

Federal officials are routinely asking courts to order cellphone companies to furnish real-time tracking data so they can pinpoint the whereabouts of drug traffickers, fugitives and other criminal suspects, according to judges and industry lawyers.

Mind you, this is happening without a court order or a warrant (which are kinda the same thing). Why is this bad? Well, it’s bad because the government can make mistakes. A judge is there to make sure the police or FBI are not making mistakes. If a judge doesn’t double check the cop’s work, then who’s the check and balance here? No one.

So, with this power, they could get it in their head that you’re a terrorist when you’re really not. In fact, based on the track record of the government, the majority of people arrested on terrorism-related charges are not found guilty of terrorism-related crimes. Some aren’t found guilty of crimes at all. If there’s no system for making sure cops get it right, what’s to stop them from getting it wrong?

by ThePete 6:00 am 2007-12-05 In TheNews, TheBig Brother, TheBig Business, ThePete.Com | $ |

Help Free Jammie and the Rest of Us, Too

by ThePete 1:02 am 2007-10-30

Free Jammie

When I first heard about that poor woman who had to pay off a $200,000+ fine because a bunch of asshole jurors couldn’t stand up for what was right, I wanted to put my fist through something. Well, now we all can help her pay that ridiculously cruel and unusual punishment by buying stuff from her CafePress store. She’s got T-shirts, thongs, bags and more. Check out her store–it’s for a good cause! Swing by her site FreeJammie.com–it’s down as I type this, but hopefully that’s because Gizmodo.com blogged about her selling thongs to help pay the astronomical fine.

If I wasn’t already saving up for a move to Japan and an XO, I’d already be placing an order. I’ll definitely buy a t-shirt or two if someone can just give me some steady paying work!! Anyway, if you’ve got a job, go buy a shirt.

by ThePete 1:02 am 2007-10-30 TheBig Brother, TheBig Business, TheMiniBlog, ThePete.Com | $ |

Every Hear of the Council for National Policy?

by ThePete 6:00 am 2007-10-05

Yeah, me neither. I was catching up on my Daily Shows last night and on the episode that aired Monday night, they did their segment “You Don’t Know Dick” covering the latest in Dick Cheney news. This edition let us in on a secret visit Cheney took in Utah. The thing is, we don’t know where in Utah he had the meeting, nor do we know when it was or what, specifically, was discussed at the meeting. All we do know is that the meeting was with the Council for National Policy. The following are the first two paragraphs from the CNP’s entry at Wikipedia.org (check it here: urltea.com/1o0y):

The Council for National Policy (CNP), is an umbrella organization and networking group for conservative activists in the United States. The New York Times has described it as a “little-known group of a few hundred of the most powerful conservatives in the country,” who meet three times yearly behind closed doors at undisclosed locations for a confidential conference.[1] It was founded in 1981 by Tim LaHaye as a forum for conservative Christians seeking to strengthen the political right in the United States.[2]

The CNP describes itself as “an educational foundation organized under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. We do not lobby Congress, support candidates, or issue public policy statements on controversial issues. Our over 600 members include many of our nation’s leaders from the fields of government, business, the media, religion, and the professions. Our members are united in their belief in a free enterprise system, a strong national defense, and support for traditional western values. They meet to share the best information available on national and world problems, know one another on a personal basis, and collaborate in achieving their shared goals.”

In other words they are as close to evil as evil can get.

Let’s translate what a belief in “a free enterprise system, a strong national defense, and support for traditional western values” really means.

1) “a free enterprise system” - unchecked corporate power. Cheap labor is welcome to apply. Those with morals, not so much.

2) “a strong national defense” - Kill them before they kill us–even if they’re only going to kill a handful of us and we’ll lose more soldiers to war than victims to terrorists in the process.

3) “support for traditional western values” - We hate gays, think minorities are OK in subservient roles, all Muslisms are extremists, women are weak-minded, kitchen-based baby-factories, and that we are never ever wrong.

You know this is true. Just look at how these guys are acting. Iran is next despite it being a very bad idea. In fact, Iran is next because it is a very bad idea. Just think–they’ll be spreading traditional western values (forcing the USG’s will on Iran) by exercising a strong national defense (by attacking them before they attack us) with the whole thing sending billions (trillions?) into the private sector’s military industrial complex (not to mention all the McDonaldses and Starbucks we’ll bring to Tehran).

LOVELY.

by ThePete 6:00 am 2007-10-05 In TheNews, TheBig Brother, ThePete.Com | $ |

PATRIOT ACT AND INTERNET SPYING TAKE HITS

by ThePete 6:00 am 2007-09-17

The war against Big Brother is far from over, but there have been positive developments that you might have missed. For instance, the Washington Post reported in a September 7, 2007 article that I found at AZCentral.com (here: urltea.com/1hpr) that a judge has struck down the part of the Patriot Act that allowed the USG to spy on your personal communications. Check out a cutting:

A federal judge struck down controversial portions of the Patriot Act in a ruling that declared them unconstitutional Thursday, ordering the FBI to stop its wide use of a warrantless tactic for obtaining e-mail and telephone data from private companies for counterterrorism investigations.

The ruling by U.S. District Judge Victor Marrero in New York said the FBI’s use of secret “national-security letters” to demand such data violates the First Amendment and constitutional provisions on the separation of powers because the FBI can impose indefinite gag orders on the companies and the courts have little opportunity to review the letters.

The secrecy provisions are “the legislative equivalent of breaking and entering, with an ominous free pass to the hijacking of constitutional values,” Marrero wrote. His strongly worded, 103-page opinion amounted to a rebuke of both the Bush administration and Congress, which had revised the act in 2005 to take into account an earlier ruling by the judge on the same topic.

Of course, there could easily be an appeal and a future judge might overturn this judge’s ruling or maybe not. If a future judge doesn’t, then, while another appeal begins, the USG will just keep on doing what it’s doing as it has in the past. Like violating FISA laws that require they get permission before illegally spying on Americans. ;) Also, like they did when they had those secret prisons.

And even if appeals do fail and the USG doesn’t break the law anyway, that Washington Post article points out that there are still issues:

Marrero’s decision would bar the use of NSLs to demand data from electronic-communications companies, a procedure that was the focus of the suit. But the ruling appears to leave untouched the FBI’s ability to demand bank records, credit reports and other financial data related to counterterror and other probes, because those authorities are covered by other statutes, according to legal experts.

Ah well. At least we’re getting somewhere, right? It shows that we can get further.

by ThePete 6:00 am 2007-09-17 In TheNews, TheBig Brother, ThePete.Com | $ |

PRIVACY RESOURCES FOR US, THE LITTLE PEOPLE

by ThePete 6:00 am 2007-09-06

King George’s nose butting into your life got you down? Sick of wondering if that terrorist movie script your developing might get you sent off to Gitmo? Tired of wondering if footage of you picking your nose on an empty street corner will end up on that “stupid criminals” TV show?

Well, privacy is a huge issue these days. I feel like I need to be careful what I blog about now. I’ve done my best to generally keep my real name off of my site and for a couple years now I have been watching what I say to any friends who might be mistaken for terrorists. I have one friend who literally looks like ObL. It’s crazy. These days misunderstandings can get you in jail or worse.

So, on the heels of my post from the other night on the Point-Click-Spy system the FBI has set up (here: urltea.com/1ei2) I thought it would be a good idea to post some URLs to web sites I’ve come across that would be useful if you are concerned about all this crazy domestic spying shit. I mean, let’s say you have legit concerns–what do you do? Check out these sites:

www.epic.org/

That’s the Electronic Privacy Information Center website. There are all sorts of great resources there. From news to books to links to “what you can do” web sites. Check it out!

www.privacy.org/

Privacy.org is run by the folks at EPIC.org, but deals with more than just electronic stuff. It deals with things like Universal ID cards, laws that restrict rights and a bunch more stuff. They’ve got an RSS feed that you can grab, too. I had to dig to find it so here it is: www.privacy.org/index.rdf

votingintegrity.org/

VotingIntegrity.org isn’t overtly about privacy issues, but it does cover the people who make laws about privacy issues. Not much point in worrying about your privacy if you have no way of controlling the laws. Elections are how you control the laws. Well, assuming they’re not rigged. ^_^

eff.org

EFF is the Electronic Frontier Foundation. These guys are the ACLU for the Internet. Their site is jammed with stuff that will teach you all sorts of scary stuff regarding what our government has done to our rights on the ‘net. I highly recommend this site.

OK, that’s all for now. I just might update this post as I come across more privacy-oriented websites. If you come across any, feel free to send them to me or just post links in the comments (keep in mind that I reserve the right to moderate said comments). Thanks!

by ThePete 6:00 am 2007-09-06 In TheNews, TheBig Brother, ThePete.Com | $ |

FBI CAN POINT-CLICK-EAVESDROP ANYWHERE IN THE US

by ThePete 11:24 pm 2007-09-04

This is scary shit right here.

I was just listening to the podcast version of Democracy Now! for August 31, 2007, yes I’ve been falling behind, and, during headlines (readable here: urltea.com/1eh3), they talked about how Wired Magazine is reporting (here: urltea.com/1eh1) about a point-click-spy system that the FBI can use to electronically listen in on anything you do electronically. Here’s a cutting from the article at Wired.Com :

The FBI has quietly built a sophisticated, point-and-click surveillance system that performs instant wiretaps on almost any communications device, according to nearly a thousand pages of restricted documents newly released under the Freedom of Information Act.

The surveillance system, called DCSNet, for Digital Collection System Network, connects FBI wiretapping rooms to switches controlled by traditional land-line operators, internet-telephony providers and cellular companies. It is far more intricately woven into the nation’s telecom infrastructure than observers suspected.

It’s a “comprehensive wiretap system that intercepts wire-line phones, cellular phones, SMS and push-to-talk systems,” says Steven Bellovin, a Columbia University computer science professor and longtime surveillance expert.

OK, so it’s not quite EVERYthing you communicate electronically–the article doesn’t immediately mention web/email traffic, but that’s OK–another program (read about it here: urltea.com/1eh4) has that covered (but the article does mention it). Also, some web/email traffic uses cell phone networks these days. Hell, on some days I travel more on the Internet via my Sidekick 3 than I do on my MacBook. So, whether it’s voice, text, VoIP, web, email or Nextel-walkie-talkie-style “push-to-talk” you could easily be listened in on by the FBI. I think the only way to be completely safe from these guys is if you use a couple of tin cans and some string.

I wonder what kind of bandwidth kite string gets…

Anyway, here’s some more yumminess from the Wired article:

DCSNet is a suite of software that collects, sifts and stores phone numbers, phone calls and text messages. The system directly connects FBI wiretapping outposts around the country to a far-reaching private communications network.

OMG! That private communications network must be owned by COBRA!! This is just the kind of thing Cobra Commander would be behind! With Destro’s connections in the US military, he’d be able to…

OK, but seriously. What the hell is this? A “private communications network” is the endpoint for a chain of FBI surveillance? WTF? Is our government just outsourced from private industry, here?

Well, it seems like there’s outsourcing going on in both directions here. Check out a bit more from the article:

Together, the surveillance systems let FBI agents play back recordings even as they are being captured (like TiVo), create master wiretap files, send digital recordings to translators, track the rough location of targets in real time using cell-tower information, and even stream intercepts outward to mobile surveillance vans.

FBI wiretapping rooms in field offices and undercover locations around the country are connected through a private, encrypted backbone that is separated from the internet. Sprint runs it on the government’s behalf.

Isn’t that nice of Sprint? Now I’m doubly glad I ditched them for my mobile phone service!

And, predictably enough, there’s more:

Today, most carriers maintain their own central hub, called a “mediation switch,” that’s networked to all the individual switches owned by that carrier, according to the FBI. The FBI’s DCS software links to those mediation switches over the internet, likely using an encrypted VPN. Some carriers run the mediation switch themselves, while others pay companies like VeriSign to handle the whole wiretapping process for them.

I HAAAATE VERISIGN!!! In fact, I already hated those guys. Now I REALLY HATE ‘EM!

Anyone who has been a web master for as long as I have been remembers their obscene pricing and their clever but shitty attempts to trick people into transferring their domains to VeriSign. They’re a bunch of dickweeds. But I digress.

But how did it get this bad???

It’s Bill Clinton’s fault!!

No, really. It is. The article goes on:

The law that makes the FBI’s surveillance network possible had its genesis in the Clinton administration. In the 1990s, the Justice Department began complaining to Congress that digital technology, cellular phones and features like call forwarding would make it difficult for investigators to continue to conduct wiretaps. Congress responded by passing the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act, or CALEA, in 1994, mandating backdoors in U.S. telephone switches.

Essentially, this law forces private companies to play along with Big Brother or face charges. And here you thought you lived in a free country!

Like ex-senator Rick Santorum once said (here: urltea.com/1eh5) the right to privacy “does not appear anywhere in the text of the Constitution.” Oh sure, you can infer it and you can certainly associate privacy with being free (from judgment) to do what you want in your pursuit of happiness, but don’t be surprised if you get snagged for doing something the USG doesn’t like you doing because they are paying attention.

There is some good news in all of this. The docs that spilled all of these beans were granted via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. Here’s more on this from the Wired article:

The released documents suggest that the FBI’s wiretapping engineers are struggling with peer-to-peer telephony provider Skype, which offers no central location to wiretap, and with innovations like caller-ID spoofing and phone-number portability.

So, there are a few glimmers of hope. I use Skype more and more these days and like it just fine. It makes me very happy to know that there’s really no way for the USG to listen in on calls made with it. Actually, my understanding is that it’s only fully secure in Skype-to-Skype calls–Skype-to-landline/cell phone calls, I believe, can be monitored.

Someone might wonder how the private companies can just play along. Well, the Wired article covers this, too:

Randy Cadenhead, the privacy counsel for Cox Communications, which offers VOIP phone service and internet access, says the FBI has no independent access to his company’s switches.

“Nothing ever gets connected or disconnected until I say so, based upon a court order in our hands,” Cadenhead says. “We run the interception process off of my desk, and we track them coming in. We give instructions to relevant field people who allow for interconnection and to make verbal connections with technical representatives at the FBI.”

The nation’s largest cell-phone providers — whose customers are targeted in the majority of wiretaps — were less forthcoming. AT&T politely declined to comment, while Sprint, T-Mobile and Verizon simply ignored requests for comment.

Agent DiClemente, however, seconded Cadenhead’s description.

“The carriers have complete control. That’s consistent with CALEA,” DiClemente said. “The carriers have legal teams to read the order, and they have procedures in place to review the court orders, and they also verify the information and that the target is one of their subscribers.”

That’s all fine and dandy, but what’s the incentive for these carriers to not help out? How can these carriers stand up and say “no” when the USG doesn’t provide adequate docs? What can they do if the USG lies to them the way the USG has lied to us about Iraq, Al Qaeda, Katrina and more? What if the companies are lying? What if DiClemente and Cadenhead are both lying?

That’s the real problem with all of this.

Our government isn’t supposed to lie to us. Nor are companies supposed to lie to us.

The problem is, they have and continue to.

As a result, we can trust NOTHING these people say to us. It’s a complete break down of the power structure in America. Too bad most Americans haven’t really reacted to it yet.

Oh and by the way (in case you forgot or haven’t been paying attention) this is what a police state looks like.

It may not be a full-on 1984-style oppressive state, but with this kind of power to domestically spy, you’ve got to wonder when they’ll install those viewscreens in our homes. They can tap everything else electronic, but some of us still don’t use computers (believe it or not) and eventually King George and his United States Government will want to spy on those analog-people, as well.

Just give them time…

by ThePete 11:24 pm 2007-09-04 In TheNews, TheBig Brother, ThePete.Com | $ |

THE GOVERNMENT KNOWS YOU’RE READING THIS BLOG

by ThePete 1:41 pm 2007-08-20

Well, the government knows you’re reading this blog like you know the name of your childhood pet. That’s not to say you’ll use the name of your childhood pet for any reason since it’s likely dead. Likewise, the US government is keeping track of the Internet traffic in America but isn’t likely to use it, necessarily. Don’t believe me? Well, it turns out that a truly patriotic American employee of AT&T, called Mark Klein, noticed a strange room in his building that seemed to be enshrouded in secrecy. I’ll let a cutting from a March 6, 2007 article article at ABCNews.com (blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/03/whistleblower_h.html) tell the story:

…Klein describes how he stumbled across “secret NSA rooms” being installed at an AT&T switching center in San Francisco and later heard of similar rooms in at least six other cities, including Atlanta, San Diego, Los Angeles, Palo Alto, San Jose and Seattle.

“You needed an ordinary key and the code to punch into a key pad on the door, and the only person who had both of those things was the one guy cleared by the NSA,” Klein says of the “secret room” at the AT&T center in San Francisco.

…

Klein says he collected 120 pages of technical documents left around the San Francisco office showing how the NSA was installing “splitters” that would allow it to copy both domestic and international Internet traffic moving through AT&T connections with 16 other trunk lines.

“It’s gobs and gobs of information going across the Internet,” Klein says.

Weee!

What’s wrong with this?

The USG is collecting soooo much data, it would be impossible for a human (even several humans) to sift through it all. That means the NSA employs an algorithm, a sort of computer program, to sift through all the information. The only problem with this is that this algorithm is programmed by a human. Humans are flawed–we make mistakes all of the time. Especially, the humans who run the Bush Administration. I think we can all agree that they mess up all the time (either that or they’re truly corrupt, amoral people–but that’s a post for another time).

So, what if you’re on the Internet, looking up some information on “bomb making” because you’re writing a book about it, or perhaps you’re just curious how easy it is for terrorists to build those IEDs in Iraq.

Well, you could easily be targeted by the NSA as a possible domestic terror threat. You could get arrested and detained indefinitely as an enemy combatant. That would make “being curious” about something like “explosives” a pretty dangerous thing to be curious about, wouldn’t it? You being arrested would discourage other folks for being curious about things and, essentially, it would mean certain types of knowledge are effectively outlawed.

Think about that for a moment–certain knowledge is outlawed.

But what if you had a much better reason to look information like that up? What if you caught your kid making a chlorine bomb in your back yard one day? You don’t want him to make another, so you clear out everything in the house that he could use to make another one. But how do you know what ingredients he used? Surely it takes more than chlorine to make a bomb, so you start googling. You find a whole mess of “chlorine bomb” videos on the YouTube. You also find, in these videos, instructions on how to make said “chlorine bombs”. But, thanks to these rooms at ISPs around the country, the USG now knows you’re researching both “bomb making” and “chlorine bombs.”

GOSHES, it’s like a bad Jeff Foxworthy sketch!

“If you google for both ‘bomb making’ AND ‘chlorine bombs’, you might be a domestic terrorist!”

On the other hand, you might not be.

In fact, statistics show that the majority of humans on the planet are NOT terrorists–even ones that look up information on “bomb making”!

It’s true!

However, thanks to this absurd paranoia that terrorism is a threat to the American way of life (it really isn’t), we have equipment and software at offices of Internet providers around the nation that are watching our every Internet move. The bad news is that thanks to those new powers the Bush Administration got from Congress the other day (thepete.com/did-i-mention-that-bush-is-legally-lawless/), all of this is legal.

In fact, after all the uses of bomb-related keywords in this here post, the government DEFINITELY knows you’re reading this blog.

by ThePete 1:41 pm 2007-08-20 In TheNews, TheBig Brother, ThePete.Com |