DC judge rips into the NSA over mass surveillance

In an extraordinary opinion, DC judge Richard Leon has laid into the NSA and US government for its bulk collection of phone records, and issued an injunction banning the collection of metadata on several individuals. Railing against arguments made by the government to dismiss the case, claims it needed more time to make …

[BillG]

In other words, because people don't have the full details of the secret spy program they can't argue that they were included in the secret spying program.

To add to the hypocrisy, the NSA was once nicknamed "No Such Agency" because the government denied that it existed! And because the agency officially didn't exist, you couldn't argue in court that it was doing anything illegal.

The NSA just learned that argument still isn't valid.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

The UK government famously prosecuted the communist party for destroying a bug.

While denying that MI5 had planted the bug or even that MI5 existed.

The prosecution's argument was that the spied upon believed that it was the government was doing the spying and so intended to destroy government property !

[g e]

"no evidence that the NSA has accessed records"

So, the defence can show they weren't then?

[DocJames]

Give that judge a medal!

(Or an extra wig, or whatever judges get for being awesome.)

Quickly, for I hear the helicopters approaching.

[John 104]

Re: Give that judge a medal!

here in the states, they get a big black robe. Sort of like a Holocost Cloak, but without the hood. Or Andre The Giant.

[Preston Munchensonton]

Government Denying Wrongdoing

It's just as ludicrous as the denial of the existance of workers at the US Government project at Groom Lake (aka Area 51). Government conducted behind closed doors with a blanket excuse of national security doesn't make any of us more secure from the threats that exist. If we entrust such strong powers in a central government, the government has to account for its use of power in a public, open manner, even at the potential expense of expose its dirty laundry to the rest of the world.

I'm sure all Yanks would have expected this shameful behavior to stop with their new messiah cum Nobel Peace Prize winner. Ironic just how much things stay the same despite changing so frequently.

[Notas Badoff]

Re: Government Denying Wrongdoing

"I'm sure all Yanks would have expected this shameful behavior to stop with their new messiah cum Nobel Peace Prize winner. Ironic just how much things stay the same despite changing so frequently."

How many seconds do you think would elapse between the President declaring he would squash these illegal activities and Congress drafting articles of impeachment?

Each individual congressional district is happily electing their individual idiot, without thinking about the power of idiocy multiplied to the point of being in the majority. Case in point is Texas District 6 whose favorite son was Phil Gramm, author of the fabulous collapsible banking system. Who did they replace him with when he retired? Joe Barton, of fame defending bumbling BP over the interests of mere domestic citizens, among other stinking missteps. No revulsion from Republicans or Democrats or voters elsewhere matters to a district wanting to screw the nation with *their* own little screwball.

The only way Obama would be able to break the "snooping is patriotic" logjam is with a bomb, and he already has too many saying he's Muslim.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Government Denying Wrongdoing

"The only way Obama would be able to break the "snooping is patriotic" logjam is with a bomb, and he already has too many saying he's Muslim."

You really are delusional - Obama has made no effort to curtail this unlawful surveillance.

On the contrary, he has continued to expand it.

Perhaps your tin foil hat is on a little too tight?

[a_yank_lurker]

Re: Government Denying Wrongdoing

I did not mostly because I do not believe either major party would want to shut it down for their own reasons.

[Alan Brown]

Re: Government Denying Wrongdoing

"Ironic just how much things stay the same despite changing so frequently."

The purpose of a president is not to wield power, but to deflect attention from the people who do.

[erikj]

Re: Government Denying Wrongdoing

First of all, us Yanks really have no control over who gets a Nobel Peace Prize and, well, he's hardly new. Not to mention he was elected, mainly, because the previous guy allowed the economy to get wrecked while obsessing over non-existent WMDs.

But regardless of party or country, we've seen how well government intelligence services play their executives and legislators by exploiting technical ignorance and crafting the legal loopholes. The (open) Judiciary is honestly our only hope, which is one reason agencies work so hard to keep cases from ever seeing light in a courtroom.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Government Denying Wrongdoing

Preston Munchensonton: I'm sure all Yanks would have expected this shameful behavior to stop with their new messiah cum Nobel Peace Prize winner. Ironic just how much things stay the same despite changing so frequently.

Meet the new boss

Same as the old boss

"Won't Get Fooled Again"

The Who

[Youngone]

Circular Reasoning

I'm of the view that the "dangers" in the world are created by the US Government for their own ends.

They now have the excuse to surveil whoever they like, (because of the dangers in the world).

They can also sell various states around the world lots and lots of military gear, giving those states the ability to fight the US created enemies.

These foreign states can of course use the US made military gear to suppress any dissent at home, but that's probably just a bonus.

If anyone thinks I'm a conspiracy theorist, well you might be right, but that doesn't make me wrong.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Circular Reasoning

Having been on the sharp end making a particular point to whichever group has gotten on the US government's shit-list, and examining the local history so I have a bit of a clue as to who is shooting whom, sometimes why, and especially keeping a weather-eye on my backside to make sure all the possible opponents are in view, yeah. I'd agree that's a pretty good summary for most of the shit where I've been there, done that, burned the T-shirt.

All too frequently it's some US-centric multinational, three, a dozen, whatever, that's the root of the problem. Interesting statistic is that the US Marines intervened over one-hundred, yes 100, times in Nicaragua between 1919 and 1929. Every one of them was to put native unrest down that arose from the abuse of the peasants by United Fruit Co. That's just a taste of what I learned in (US Army) ROTC. It was a real eye-opener studying their textbooks which gave a very different view of historical context. [Which is why you should have broad sources so that somewhere in all that, you might have something resembling a truth or three.]

[Tim99]

Re: Circular Reasoning

@Jack of Shadows

The involvement of the USA on behalf of businesses in South America is described in "War is a Racket" by Major General Smedley Butler. An overview is here: Link - rationalrevolution.net.

The USA has been at war with someone for 222 out of 239 years since 1776. So it is business as usual.

[John Smith 19]

@Jack of Shadows

"the US Marines intervened over one-hundred, yes 100, times in Nicaragua between 1919 and 1929. Every one of them was to put native unrest down that arose from the abuse of the peasants by United Fruit Co. "

Hence the term a "A Banana Republic"

[John 104]

Re: Circular Reasoning

Oh. Well, lets just pull those carriers out of the gulf and close up all those european bases. Good night and good luck...

[Anonymous Coward]

Meanwhile in the UK parliament we have Theresa May about to take mass surveillance even further.

[h4rm0ny]

Trying to take it further. It's still draft and the time to hassle your MPs about it is now. Few people write to MPs - for every letter on a subject, there are many more who didn't write. So when they get a lot on a particular subject, it does stand out.

Also, it is surprisingly satisfying to take fifteen minutes or so needed to just have actually spoken up. MP details available here.

[Anonymous Coward]

@ h4rm0ny

Unfortunately my MP is a Tory party bootlicker who has never voted against the Government, I've checked him up on www.theyworkforyou.com.

If only it were David Davis who was my MP and not Alan B'stard.

[sabroni]

Nevertheless, he wants to stay on the westminster gravy train, and voters are what keeps him there. So worth letting him know you voted for him before (!) and won't again if he supports the snooper's charter...

[AndyS]

@h4rm0ny

Thanks, just sent one. Here is my letter if anyone else wishes to use bits of it:

----

Dear [my MP],

I am writing regarding the Draft Communications Data Bill (aka the Snooper's Charter).

I find it extremely worrying that the government sees fit to retain the private actions of individual citizens, of whom no wrongdoing is suspected, in such a way.

I have several concerns, which I do not believe have been addressed:

Firstly, retaining this sort of information on every single citizen effectively allows the government to build a profile of all of one's public and private life. All interests, all social interactions, all news and media and all searches, allow a very detailed profile to be built up. This would expose both public and private communications and interactions in a way which raises very serious privacy concerns. Far from playing "catch up" with technological developments, as the government has presented this bill, this is a vast and far-reaching new power, which has never before been available.

Secondly, this data will be stored on databases managed by private companies, who have no real incentive to keep it secure. Encrypting is not mandated by the bill. As evidenced by the recent Talk Talk and Ashley Madison leaks, no data kept in a connected database can ever be 100% secure, and databases like this, spread between many different private entities working on lowest-cost platforms, will be a prime target for attack. This data will, at some time, be hacked and/or leaked. It will, for absolute certain, provide excellent targets for blackmail, extortion and fraud.

Thirdly, the data captured will provide excellent material for "fishing trips." People who may find themselves arrested, or in conflict with authorities, for one reason, can have this valuable database of evidence searched to find other accusations against them.

Privacy is a valuable item. We all have reason to maintain privacy, and it is far more worrying when it is the government intruding that privacy, against every person in the country, and on a vast, organised scale, than if I found a neighbour with a camera at my daughter's window.

Please let me know how you intend to vote on this bill and, if you intend to back the government, what your justification for doing so will be - please address my three concerns above.

Yours sincerely,

[me]

[Any mouse Cow turd]

House of lords

I must admit, I think that an elected upper house is a bad idea for democracy. Unelected hereditary peers with no real political or corporate conflicts of interest would be much less likely to toe the line than someone who may be dependant on future earnings from cronies.

[John 104]

Re: House of lords

I think this is why Trump has the GOP running scared. The guy can't be bought, doesn't owe anyone anything in a political sense, and pretty much does what he want's. Not too good for the establishment...

[dan1980]

The call for 'balance' is understandable because, despite what some activists may imply, we all trade away some 'freedoms' and privacies for some securities. And this is both normal and thoroughly reasonable.

But citing the need for 'balance' does not and allow one to violate the rights enshrined in the Constitution. It does not matter how great a measure of security such a violation might provide; you just can't do it.

In other words, you can't attempt to justify the infringement of those rights by claiming that the infringement is 'balanced' by the gains in security.

The constitution is a line over which the government can not cross for any reason - no matter how well intentioned. And that is the essential genius of it, because the framers understood not only that good intentions have a tendency - or at least a risk - to result in bad things but also that it is sometimes difficult to separate out genuine good intentions from sham.

They also understood that once rights are lost, it is very difficult to get them back and that allowing them to be infringed - even minutely and even if for the most noble and honest of reasons - opens the way for them to be infringed in larger ways and for less noble and honest reasons.

Thus, these rights are assured (in theory . . .) no matter how noble or reasonable or well 'balanced' is the proposal to infringe them. There is, as has been put many times, no such thing as a 'small' infringement on the rights guaranteed by the constitution.

And this is coming from an Australian - I very much wish we had a similarly effective and prudent framework here.

[RedneckMother]

Bravo!

@ dan1980

Speaking (writing) as a US citizen, I salute you!

My uncle, who served in the 1ST Cavalry in WWII, told me of his respect for Australians... He told me that they knew US History better than the "average" US citizen. He regaled me with stories of his time with the Australian troops.

He told me that he trusted the Ossies (sp?) over the masses in the US, because they were better people than many "Americans", better understood the difference between right and wrong, and were fiercely loyal to others.

I will always hold dear his stories of his dealings and friendships with Australians.

In your post, you've demonstrated your superior understanding of the fears and intents of the framers of the US Constitution. I thank you, and wish you well.

RIP Uncle Jim, and all his friends from Australia who have passed.

[John 104]

Re: Bravo!

Oh, and I thought his name was going to be Bruce. ;)

[Mark 85]

Dan, have my upvote.

You are spot on. The reality is, that the President, the Congress, and many agencies have been mangling the Constitution for many decades. It's just been getting progressively worst and this current batch seem hell-bent on doing the most damage.

This particular judge is caught in the rat-trap. He's trying to protect the Constitution but not destroy himself in the process. We need more voices like his in the courts. The Supremes seem to be (and have been for too many decades) beholden to the party that put them in the job. Many times, their vote is slanted because of the party affiliation and loyalty.

I believe the US is coming to a crisis point with regard to the Constitution. It will either end up as nice historical document or the government will be forced to adhere to it. I hope for the later but... that hope is becoming fainter as the corporates are now in a full court press (basketball term) for their snooping and if they can get away with it, the government can also.

Scary times, indeed.

[a_yank_lurker]

"It will either end up as nice historical document or the government will be forced to adhere to it." The latter would be a lot less messy but I suspect the powers in government will not submit unless there is some red stuff flowing down the street.

[dan1980]

@Mark 85

Working bottom to top:

"The Supremes seem to be (and have been for too many decades) beholden to the party that put them in the job. Many times, their vote is slanted because of the party affiliation and loyalty."

No, I don't think that's quite right. The effect may be, roughly, the same, but it works from the other direction: Judges hold certain positions on legal and social and ideological issues and they are nominated and appointed by politicians based on how closely those positions align with their own.

So, your judgement is inaccurate in the same way that it is inaccurate to say that presenters at Fox* bend to the will of Uncle Rupert. The reality is that Murdoch appoints editors and managers that share his views and they in turn hire and promote reporters and presenters that are of the same mind. That's not to say that this is a right-wing-only affair; I use Fox because Murdoch's MO is familiar to US, UK and Australian residents and he is a particularly strong example of this kind of deck-stacking.

The reason it is important to be accurate in this is that accusing a judge of toeing a particular political line in deference to a political sponsor or benefactor allows the core criticisms of ideological bias to be discounted. And Murdoch's employees are, again, a great example: they vehemently deny that they change write specifically and explicitly to support Murdoch and take great umbrage to the suggesting. The effect is, of course, largely the same, but framed that way, it can be rejected far more easily.

To the current SCOTUS Justices, we can see someone like Scalia who is a 'textualist' and thus views it as proper to read a law - including and especially the Constitution - with a eye to what the language itself means, rather than what the law, and especially the sponsors and writers of the law intends. This is generally to the favour of more conservative/right-wing as a textualist will attempt to remove words and phrases from the historical context in which they were written and thus disregard the actual meaning of the law in favour of the meaning of the words.

"The reality is, that the President, the Congress, and many agencies have been mangling the Constitution for many decades. It's just been getting progressively worst and this current batch seem hell-bent on doing the most damage."

In this, there is truth but it ties in very much with the above issue in that judges are appointed based on how well their ideologies mesh with the people who control those decisions.

More importantly, the current tactic is to simply make it as difficult as possible for the people, and thus the courts, to actually obtain a complete enough record to ever definitively say one way or the other.

* - Or the columnists and editors of his papers in the UK and Aus.

[croc]

While most of you are not aware of the facts, (as they are highly classified) the NSA has stopped many hundreds, if not thousands of attacks on American soil as well as around the world... End our programs at your peril.

[Mark 85]

Are you implying that these "stopped" attacks were the result of snooping on everyone? Or were they targeted? Have they stopped domestic terrorist attacks by local groups? Or ones from outside? The differences are important.

[a_yank_lurker]

There were no stopped attacks only blackmail.

[Graham Marsden]

@croc

> While most of you are not aware of the facts, (as they are highly classified)

Yet *you* are???

BTW apropos of your handle, I've got this magic stone which prevents me from being bitten by crocodiles...

[The March Hare]

magic stone

cost you 3 dollars?

[Graham Marsden]

@The March Hare - Re: magic stone

> cost you 3 dollars?

Bloke said he was cutting his own throat...

[John H Woods]

Re: @croc

@Graham I think his handle actually refers to his footwear...

[ckm5]

Even the NSA has admitted that the number of 'stopped attacks' is less than 100, not 'many hundreds'. http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/nsa-director-50-potential-terrorist-attacks-thwarted-controversial/story?id=19428148

Further analysis has thrown up a lot of doubt as to that number and several actual attacks (e.g. Boston marathon & Ft. Hood shootings) weren't even predicted.

[Alan Brown]

> Even the NSA has admitted that the number of 'stopped attacks' is less than 100, not 'many hundreds'

In other news, both the NSA and GCHQ have predicted 50 of the last 3 terrorist attacks.

The fact that 47 didn't happen (and 46 of those probably only existed in someone's mind) is what they're taking credit for.

[Alan Brown]

No, the NSA _say_ they have.

On the other hand if the USA didn't go around dropping bombs on foreign civilians, there wouldn't be a steady supply of pissed-off revenge-seekers queuing up to try and get it.

Ditto for the Federal govt's stomping all over individual and state constitutional rights since 1941, in an effort to stay on a war footing and therefore keep power federated instead of devolving back to the individual states as was supposed to happen at the end of ww2 (until the cold war fired up). US domestic terrorists do tend to have several loose screws upstairs but what's come out over the years has made even their deluded fantasies look tame at times.

What's been happening since 1990 is a combination of batshit crazy economic policy pushed by a sociopathic cocaine smuggler with a power fetish (search for "The ten reprehensible crimes of Ronald Reagan" sometime) and the US military-industrial complex thrashing around more and more frantically to keep itself in power, most recently by embedding itself into the economy so firmly that like a cancerous growth, removing them is going to damage the surrounding parts - but leaving them there will eventually kill the host.

There are several recent history lessons in what happens if you allow your military budget to become a tail wagging the dog and the most obvious one is the Soviet Union. Those F35s might yet turn out to be the straw that breaks the camel's back. Last time an aircraft turned out to be so overpriced and utterly useless at any task they dumped the F111B and came up with the F14/15/16 instead but the lesson learned from that was how to ensure your programs can't be cancelled, rather than "don't build flying pigs"

[Anonymous Coward]

@Croc

Prove it. Prove your assertions. To date the 2-3 post-Snowden examination of the bulk metadata intercept and storage program have found only one instance where the program stopped a terrorist incident, when it assisted in the discovery and arrest of a Somalian-born New York cab driver who wanted to send several thousand Dollars to Al Shabab extremists in Somalia. Other than that, zip--and these examinations supposedly had access to classified material.

The NSA has tragically degenerated from it's historic genesis in the WW2 U.S. Navy code-breaking efforts against the Japanese Empire. Those efforts helped the navy stop the Japanese at Coral Sea and Midway, and probably shortened the war in the Pacific by a year or two. Nowadays the NSA seems to spend inordinate amounts of time and money looking under the beds and in the closets of law-abiding Americans. Why? Knowing DC, bureaucratic mission creep needed to justify next year's larger budget request is a distinct possibility. A statist mindset that essentially enshrines the NSA/intelligence community as the nation and the rest of Americans as some kind of 300 million + potential fifth column because they are outside the intelligence/DoD fence is another. Or perhaps our leaders and officials have simply become drunk with power, and feel that it is their right to meddle in the affairs of the citizenry.

You want us to trust you? Act in a trustworthy manner. You want us to believe you? Stop lying to us. See how easy that is?

[Kev99]

Finally. A judge who agrees the US government is and has been actively violating the US Constitution with illegal search and seizure. I wonder if this ruling can be applied to the goofs at the TSA?

[kain preacher]

I just hope this judge does not have an accident.

[Graham Marsden]

"an injunction that bars the US government from collecting their data"

"Oh, dear", says the US Government and NSA, "that's *us* told! We will immediately and forthwith stop doing pppppfffffff....

"... sorry, I just can't keep a straight face and say that!"

[chivo243]

It seems

That there are powers at work greater than the government here. Politicians are sock puppets, decisions are made elsewhere...

[Ralph B]

Klayman versus Obama

Hey, Klayman! I always wondered what happened to that guy. Loved the game. And the music.

[DropBear]

Re: Klayman versus Obama

Oh, that guy. He entered the witness protection program and assumed a new identity as "Tommynaut" - last I heard he was working as a pilot...

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm afraid that the judge has now spectacularly curtailed any future political career ambitions he may have had.

He deserves to be applauded by all Americans, for standing up to the corporate / government machine, and telling it like it is.

[Velv]

Just as the US is getting its provisions slapped down, the UK is pushing to bring them in.

LOOK AND LEARN PEOPLE (politicians). The people won't allow it. You are not defending them, you are subjugating them. It will end badly. You will be out of a job, and no longer under the spying protections you are trying to enforce (Wilson).

[phil dude]

and in other news...

On Ars there is a report that the Snoopers Charter contains a toxic bit about backdoors and gag orders...

So they can hack your machine, but make *you* lie about it!!!

P.

[Mystic Megabyte]

Re: and in other news...

I was wondering about that. If you take the oath and are asked directly "Does your system have a backdoor?", then who is the higher authority? Is it God or the government? If you are an earnest believer then maybe being "put to the sword" means being stabbed in the back by the judiciary.

[Alan Brown]

Re: and in other news...

"So they can hack your machine, but make *you* lie about it!!!"

They can do that already.

[Anonymous Coward]

Nice try

The plaintiffs won't prove that the NSA violated any laws because they didn't. Computer filtering of com data is not in any way a violation of the fourth amendment of "unreasonable search". It's guaranteed this meritless opinion will be overruled on appeal.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Nice try

"Computer filtering of com data" is a mis-characterization of the data being gathered and the judges ruling.

But maybe that is the administration's next argument.

And if I listen into your calls, I'm just monitoring voltage variations over the wire.

[Anonymous Coward]

Mass Surveillance - Tip of the Iceberg

"StingRays" and "Meta-data" collection are just one small part of a multi-faceted problem which is targeting American society today.

The "Meta Data" statement frequently made by the NSA is a total ploy; a chaff cloud, pure misinformation intentionally disseminated to deceive the masses.

Do not think think that the NSA (IRS, FBI, DHS, DEA, etc.) with all of their capabilities and with no oversight haven't deployed other illegal tools from their arsenal - which include but are not limited to the GPS tagging of vehicles belonging to Americans who have never committed a crime, deployment of StingRays, and intensive cyber-intrusions.

NSA has been doing a "Full Take" (everything and anything - phone calls, sms, emails, contact harvesting, VOIP monitoring, browsing, history, skype, etc.) on all US citizens for more than a decade - and now all of the other three letter agencies are involved.

The "Meta Data" collection statement is a "sleight-of-hand," which is meant to divert everyone's attention from the fact that (1) The NSA is doing a full take, and (2) in many cases is using the illegally intercepted communications in an aggressive fashion against American citizens who are not involved in any nefarious or illegal activities.

These agencies turn over all of the intercepted communications (no warrants of course) and PII (Personal Identifying Information) to local and state law enforcement through the Regional Data Fusion Centers.

Most state law enforcement agencies, and most local level law enforcement agencies in major cities have their own StingRay/DirtBox/TriggerFish (cell-site simulators).

So even if a judge issues a cease and desist order to the NSA, or the House Oversight Committee demands answers from federal law enforcement agencies, there are hundreds, if not thousands of cell-tower spoofing-units deployed on the street with local/state agencies in every major US city.

Federalization has already occurred on many levels.

If you are labeled as a potential "Domestic Threat" (conservative, military veteran, Tea Party supporter, LGBT community member, investigative journalist, activist, politically outspoken academic, gun owner, property owner in a foreign country), private security companies (usually run by ex-federal law enforcement members - DEA, FBI, DHS, DoD) are paid to illegally monitor your movements on US soil - as part of a classified DOMINT (Domestic Intelligence) Program, which equates to COINTELPRO on steroids.

So instead of the NSA and other federal agencies using their ELINT capacities and cell-site simulators to fight the bad guys in other countries, they are more focused on harassing innocent Americans with technologies like StingRay - and other military-grade hardware which the general public does not know even exists.

Snowden revealed only the tip of a very evil and dark clandestine iceberg which is rapidly bearing down on American society, robbing all of liberty who are unwittingly standing in its path.

Addressing the unconstitutional use of cell-site simulators will not even begin to resolve the issues that Americans are facing from illegal surveillance, harassment, and the sharing of all of their personal identifying information (supposedly covered by the Privacy Act), and ALL electronic communications (not just "meta-data").

Some elements within the DoJ (especially FBI and DHS) are using the "5 D" domestic counter-intelligence tenets against Americans who are considered "threats" without ever having a day in court: Deny, Disrupt, Deceive, Degrade, and Destroy.

These same DoJ elements, and the private contractors who work alongside of them on US soil against innocent Americans, are engaged in a hyper-aggressive and illegal COINTELPRO (Counter-intelligence Program) instead of focusing on very real external threats.

A cheap, home-made cell-site simulator can be made for less than $2000 and powerful (suitcase module) units built for law enforcement can be purchased for less than $100,000 (since the manufacturers know that the units are purchased with federal funds, they have kept the prices jacked up intentionally).

But hey, as long as slush funds for domestic black ops are funneled to cronies and private security contractors, who cares if US security falls by the wayside as the taxpayers' dime is spent on technology which is inevitably used against the American people.

After all, it ain't about "security," it is about money and the control of US citizens, not the targeting of real and potential foreign threats.

Everything the Church Committee addressed has been reborn - and it is more sadistic, vicious, and intrusive than ever before, especially given the degree of technological advancement which has occurred in the four+ decades subsequent to the committees formation.

Hopefully someone within today's political machine will consider addressing the extent to which these illegal domestic intelligence operations have targeted and victimized millions of innocent Americans.

Look Up: Zersetzung, Triggerfish, DirtBox, IMSI-catcher, FinFisher, EPIC, Treasure Map, Pre-crime program (per a 2011 DHS document), JTRIG.

[MrTuK]

Off the Grid

So I suppose the whole US Secret service is really scared of people that stay of the grid then, that is who they are really afraid of;

1.) The person's that don't own a mobile phone or just use's throw away one's and maybe use's US mail service for written communication as its far more difficult to intercept.

2.) The person's without credit/bank cards as they cannot be traced what they buy, just use's cash.

3.) The person's that don't own a vehicle.

4.) The person's without a Passport or Driving license.

5.) The person's that don't pay Tax as no record of them exists.

6.) The person's that don't own a computer but use's the Internet under alias's in Internet cafe's.

7.) The person's using a Live Linux Distro maybe on a USB Stick as they are getting faster and bigge these days.

8.) The person's owning/using gun's without a license/paperwork.

All I can say is Redneck Mountain people watch out !