JTjaden's blog

Click for video

'Terrorist Intent' Detector Set for Demo Next Year

(Feb. 25) -- New security technology at airports around the country is creating a furor over concerns that the screening devices can "see" beneath people's clothes. Now, the Department of Homeland Security is set to take technology one step further with a screening system that would, in a sense, peek inside your head.

The Future Attribute Screening Technology, or FAST, is designed to spot terrorists, or more specifically, people who are thinking about carrying out terrorist acts.

"The theory we're looking at here is [whether] there's a way to look at you, and only you, in a specific situation, and based on your presentation, make an assessment that you're showing indicators of what we call malintent," Robert Burns, the deputy director of the Homeland Security Advanced Research Projects Agency, told AOL News. "Malintent, as defined by the problem, is the intention or desire to cause harm."

[...]

http://www.aolnews.com/nation/article/homeland-security-set-to-demonstra...

There are just a few problems with this, for instance ...

Chief Judge Alex Kozinski writes scathing dissent in Fourth Amendment case

When a judge called for United States v. Lemus to be reheard en banc, the majority of judges in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals did not vote to rehear the case. Chief Judge Alex Kozinski wrote an absolutely blistering dissent to that denial. With Judge Paez joining in the dissent, he wrote:
.
This is an extraordinary case: Our court approves, without blinking, a police sweep of a person’s home without a warrant, without probable cause, without reasonable suspicion and without exigency—in other words, with nothing at all to support the entry except the curiosity police always have about what they might find if they go rummaging around a suspect’s home. Once inside, the police managed to turn up a gun “in plain view”—stuck between two cushions of the living room couch—and we reward them by upholding the search.

Did I mention that this was an entry into somebody’s home, the place where the protections of the Fourth Amendment are supposedly at their zenith? The place where the “government bears a heavy burden of demonstrating that exceptional circumstances justif[y] departure from the warrant requirement.” United States v. Licata, 761 F.2d 537, 543 (9th Cir. 1985). The place where warrantless searches are deemed “presumptively unreasonable.” Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573, 586 (1980).

Epic Fail in Congress: USA PATRIOT Act Renewed Without Any New Civil Liberties Protections

News Update by Kevin Bankston

Yesterday evening, the U.S. House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly to renew three expiring provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act, after the Senate abandoned the PATRIOT reform effort and approved the extension by a voice vote on Wednesday night.

Disappointingly, the government's dangerously broad authority to conduct roving wiretaps of unspecified or "John Doe" targets, to secretly wiretap of persons without any connection to terrorists or spies under the so-called "lone wolf" provision, and to secretly access a wide range of private business records without warrants under PATRIOT Section 215 were all renewed without any new checks and balances to prevent abuse. Despite months of vigorous debate, when PATRIOT renewal bills providing for greater oversight and accountability were approved by the Judiciary Committees of both the House and the Senate, Democratic leaders' push for reform fizzled in the face of staunch Republican opposition buoyed by recent hot-button events such as the attempted bombing of an airliner on Christmas Day and the shooting at Fort Hood.

Why the 'Don't ask, don't tell' policy is doomed

By David B. Rivkin Jr. and Lee A. Casey
Saturday, February 13, 2010; A21

When the Pentagon's top brass announced last week that they no longer believe military unit cohesion suffers from the presence of openly gay men or women in the ranks, they effectively transformed a policy question into a legal one, to which the answer is clear: Congress can no longer mandate discrimination in the armed forces on the basis of sexual orientation.

In the 2003 case Lawrence v. Texas, the Supreme Court struck down a Texas law criminalizing same-gender sexual relations, reasoning that such conduct was part of a constitutionally protected liberty interest. The court also suggested that the Texas statute was vulnerable to challenge as a denial of equal protection of the laws. And it is application of the equal protection doctrine to the military's professional assessment of the impact that openly gay service members have on combat effectiveness that is likely to be the end of "don't ask, don't tell."

Related? Cyber War-Game scheduled for Feb. 16
________________

.. the KB971033 update is scheduled to deploy to the manual downloading "Genuine Microsoft Software" site on February 16, and start pushing out automatically through the Windows Update environment on February 23.

Who Owns Your PC? New Anti-Piracy Windows 7 Update "Phones Home" to Microsoft Every 90 Days

Greetings. Sometimes a seemingly small software update can usher in a whole new world. When Microsoft shortly pushes out a Windows 7 update with the reportedly innocuous title "Update for Microsoft Windows (KB971033)" -- it will be taking your Windows 7 system where it has never been before.

And it may not be a place where you want to go.

California Court Slams Wardens for Illegally Stopping Motorists Over Lobsters

California Court of Appeal smacks down Department of Fish and Game for stopping and searching cars without authority.

The California Court of Appeal for the Fourth District on Tuesday ruled that a state agency may not pull over and search a motorist on a mere hunch that a lobster might be hidden in the vehicle. The court considered the case of Bounh Maikhio, a motorist stopped by Department of Fish and Game Warden Erik Fleet on August 19, 2007 at 11pm. That evening, Fleet had been spying through a telescope on the Ocean Beach pier in San Diego when he saw Maikhio put something into his bag.

All twelve links will open in this window, so be sure to click the back button to come back

Taser abuse videos

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=police+taser+abuse&search_ty...
________________________

Federal appellate court limits cops' use of Tasers

A federal appeals court on Monday issued one of the most comprehensive rulings yet limiting police use of Tasers against low-level offenders who seem to pose little threat and may be mentally ill.

In a case out of San Diego County, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals criticized an officer who, without warning, shot an emotionally troubled man with a Taser when he was unarmed, yards away, and neither fleeing nor advancing on the officer.

Sold as a nonlethal alternative to guns, Tasers deliver an electrical jolt meant to subdue a subject. The stun guns have become a common and increasingly controversial tool used by law enforcement.

There have been at least nine Taser-related fatalities in the Sacramento region, including the death earlier this month of Paul Martinez Jr., an inmate shot with a stun gun while allegedly resisting officers at the Roseville jail.

http://www.sacbee.com/topstories/story/2425481.html
_________________________

Sacramento Sheriff McGinness defends Taser use after ruling

http://www.sacbee.com/crime/story/2427227.html
_________________________

Why Are Cops Tasering Grandmothers, Pregnant Women and Kids?

http://www.aclusac.org/node/196
_________________________

Death reignites Taser debate

Over the weekend, a Sacramento man joined the growing tally of people who have died after police attempted to subdue them with Tasers.

Under the radar, Obama pushes for Patriot Act renewal

Feingold expresses frustration over Senate version

Richard Moore
Investigative Reporter

With key sections of the U.S. Patriot Act set to expire [Update: Extended for two months by the House] Dec. 31, the Obama administration - essentially tiptoeing through the corridors of Congress and using the raucous health care debate as cover - has quietly maneuvered for renewal of the controversial provisions, which he opposed as a senator.

Perhaps the most contentious measure is the business records provision, also known as the library provision, which allows the government to seek a court order forcing private entities such as banks, hospitals, and libraries to hand over "any tangible thing" - from library circulation records to medical records - officials think is relevant in a terrorist investigation.

That is a patently false implied message by the government. The message is that the disputed sections have only been used in terrorism investigations, and are used judiciously, and fairly, ... is not supported by fact. And the contention that there are court orders involved in everything they want to do, is an insult to our intelligence - National Security Letters, and their abuse

[...]

This is a very good article

http://www.lakelandtimes.com/main.asp?SectionID=9&subsectionID=9&article...

Click

What you should know

On December 31, 2009, three provisions of the Patriot Act will sunset. [Update: The House tabled the legislation, automatically extending the disputed sections for two more months] This is the perfect opportunity for Congress to examine all of our surveillance laws and amend those that have been found unconstitutional or have been abused to collect information on innocent people, including last year's changes to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) and the Attorney General Guidelines (AGGs).

Despite the many amendments to these laws since 9/11, congress and the public have yet to receive real information about how these powerful tools are being used to collect information on Americans and how that information is being used. All of these laws work together to create a surveillance superstructure – and Congress must understand how it really works to create meaningful protections for civil liberties.

The ACLU's recent report, Reclaiming Patriotism, provides more information on parts of the Patriot Act that need to be amended.

This is an excellent summary of the recent revelations of the massive surveillance by our government on us, it's citizens. Maureen Dowd explains below why this is an absurd excuse for violating our privacy rights, without cause

If we can’t catch a Nigerian with a powerful explosive powder in his oddly feminine-looking underpants and a syringe full of acid, a man whose own father had alerted the U.S. Embassy in Nigeria, a traveler whose ticket was paid for in cash and who didn’t check bags, whose visa renewal had been denied by the British, who had studied Arabic in Al Qaeda sanctuary Yemen, whose name was on a counterterrorism watch list, who can we catch?

Following the Money Trail: Telecoms and ISPs Feed the Secret State's Surveillance Machine

"Follow the money."

And why not. As the interface between state and private criminality, following the money trail is oxygen and combustible fuel for rooting out corruption in high places: indelible signs left behind like toxic tracks by our sociopathic masters.

After all, there's nothing quite like exposing an exchange of cold, hard cash from one greedy fist to another to focus one's attention on the business at hand.

And when that dirty business is the subversion of the American people's right to privacy, there's also nothing quite like economic self-interest for ensuring that a cone of silence descends over matters best left to the experts; a veritable army of specialists squeezing singular advantage out of any circumstance, regardless of how dire the implications for our democracy.

In light of this recommendation researcher Christopher Soghoian, deploying the tools of statistical analysis and a keen sense of outrage, reaffirmed that "Internet service providers and telecommunications companies play a significant, yet little known role in law enforcement and intelligence gathering."

That the American people have been kept in the dark when it comes to this and other affairs of state, remain among the most closely-guarded open secrets of what has euphemistically been called the "NSA spying scandal."