Durch Studs Terkel, Quentin Junge, Barbara Flynn Currie und James Montgomery

Mehr als sechs Jahre nach den Terroristangriffen von Sept. 11, 2001, des Bush Leitung Remains festgelegt am Verwenden der Erscheinung von denen Angriffe (und andere mögliche neue Angriffe) als Rechtfertigung für reckless, ungesetzliches und verfassungswidriges Verhalten. Dieses Muster kann in die gegenwärtige Bemühung im Kongreß offenbar gesehen werden, der Leitung ungeprüfte Energie zu bewilligen, auf Amerikanern auszuspionieren und großen korporativen Wesen für ungültiges Verhalten im voraus zu verzeihen.

Im Augenblick nimmt Kongreß an einer Debatte über änderungen an der Auslandsnachrichten-überwachung-Tat teil. Letzter August, Kongreß hineingekommen zu den Nachfragen durch die Bush Leitung, um die Spionagenturen ausgedehnt, die neuen Energien, die Telefonanrufe, die E-mails und Web site Gebrauch der Amerikaner zu bewilligen ohne vorherige Aufsicht von einem Gericht zu überwachen. Das Gesetz, bekannt als die schützenamerika Tat, bewilligt Spionagenturen unfettered Zugang vollständig Spektrum der erbenden Kommunikationen oder aus den US heraus ohne die Regierung zu erfordern, zu zeigen, daß die Einzelpersonen, die überwacht werden, in jedes mögliches Vergehen miteinbezogen werden.

Kongreß setzte einen kurzzeitigen Rahmen auf das neue Gesetz und, nach einer einzelnen Verlängerung, wurde sie eingestellt, um abzulaufen Feb. 15. Beide US Haus und Senat boten an, das Maß für einige Wochen beim Arbeiten zu verlängern auf dauerhafterer Gesetzgebung. Dieses Angebot wurde durch zurückgewiesen Das Weiße Haus - weil die Bush Leitung nicht einfach die Energie wünscht, auf Amerikanern ohne eine Ermächtigung (sie behaupten diese bereits Berechtigung), auszuspionieren, möchten sie rückwirkende Immunität den riesigen Nachrichtentechnikfirmen der Nation bewilligen, die mit der Regierung beim Ausspionieren auf unschuldigen Amerikanern zusammenarbeiteten. Trotz der Proteste durch das Weiße Haus, ist die Wahrheit, daß die Regierung bereits genügend Energie hatte, unter pre-existing Gesetz auszuspionieren.

Präsident Bush' s Direktor der nationalen Intelligenz bestätigte vor kurzem, daß das Ziel dieser gesetzgebenden Bemühung, Amnestie für die Telefonfirmen zur Verfügung zu stellen war. Wenn die telecoms die „erhalten-heraus-von-Gefängnis-freie“ Karte empfangen, die die Leitung verlangt, werden mehr als 40 Prozesse, die aufladen, daß die Telefonfirmen zu hergestelltem Bundesgesetz konträr fungierten, indem sie nicht Verbraucher' schützten, Privatleben aus Gericht heraus geworfen. We are plaintiffs in one such lawsuit, and Congress should not deny us our day in court. The companies broke the law, and we believe they must be held accountable.

The Bush administration and its acolytes now claim that we must give giant telecoms amnesty for breaking the law, or else those telecoms will no longer cooperate with the government in spying efforts that help protect America. The truth is that telecoms do not need a special deal. These companies have immunity from lawsuits for turning over customer records to the government if they do so in conformity with existing law. But, in this instance, the telephone companies knowingly violated that law. If we give them a free pass this time, won’t the telephone companies feel free to violate the laws protecting our privacy in the future?

The Bush administration and its supporters in Congress complain that these lawsuits are simply about money and enriching trial lawyers — suggesting that the litigation should be stopped because of the potential damages that might be awarded in such lawsuits. This criticism ignores the fact that, according to the rules in the federal court, the only way that we could ensure that a federal judge could continue to explore previous violations if the companies simply changed their participation or the government changed or ended the program was to ask for minimal damages. We are not interested in recovering money for ourselves, nor is our counsel, the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois. We, however, are committed to assuring that these giant companies are punished for violating the law and thus dissuaded from violating the law in the future.

More important, amnesty not only lets the companies off the hook without answering any questions, it assures that the American people will never learn about the breadth and extent of the lawless program. Some seem to suggest that we should not have our day in court because a select few members of Congress have been able to review documents about the spy program operated by the White House. The judgment of a few Washington insiders is not a substitute for the careful scrutiny of a federal court.

Congress is supposed to act to protect the rights of American citizens, not sacrifice those rights to large corporate entities. The House and Senate should resist the bullying tactics of the Bush White House and ensure that we have our day in court to vindicate our rights and reveal any illegality engaged in by the telecoms. We need to know about the Bush White House’s secret program.

———-

Studs Terkel, author and oral historian; Quentin Young, physician and advocate for health-care reform; State Rep. Barbara Flynn Currie; and James Montgomery, former Chicago corporation counsel, are plaintiffs in Terkel, et. al vs. AT&T.

Claims the Royal Family was being bugged by GCHQ (Government Communications Headquarters) have been denied at the Princess Diana inquest.

Rumours were rife by 1993 that the Government’s intelligence and security organisation may have been behind the infamous Squidgygate and Camillagate tapes.

Under the law GCHQ would have needed to get the Foreign Secretary to sign off on such a phone tap and no such green light from the Government was sought, the inquest heard.

Sir John Adye, the GCHQ director between 1989 and 1996, said: “It could not have been done without a warrant.”

Ian Burnett QC, for the coroner, said: “And intercepting the Royal Family is simply not within the scope of the intelligence the Government was seeking?”

Sir John replied: “Indeed, it was not.”

Mr Burnett asked: “And there was no such warrant?”

Sir John answered: “I am sure there was no such warrant.”

On the tapes, James Gilbey, who was named as one of the princess’s lovers, repeatedly told her “I love you” and referred to her as “Squidgy” 53 times.

A conversation between the Prince of Wales and Camilla Parker Bowles (now the Duchess of Cornwall) in the early 1990s was also recorded and came to light around the same time.

Sir John told the jury he was “satisfied” that GCHQ had not been involved in those tapes.

And in an “unprecedented” move, given the intelligence services golden rule never to comment on its operations, a statement was released denying any involvement.

The court heard that ministers were briefed so they could “truthfully” tell Parliament that “none of the security and intelligence agencies had been intercepting the communications of the Royal Family”.

Denials were repeatedly made in the House of Commons and the House of Lords.

In a written statement John Major, the then Prime Minister, said: “There is no substance in the rumours about the involvement of the security and intelligence agencies intercepting the communications of the Royal Family.”

The jury have heard claims that Diana felt she may have been bugged.

Mohamed al Fayed has maintained that the fatal car crash that killed his son Dodi, Diana and driver Henri Paul in Paris’s Alma Tunnel in 1997 was set up by MI6 at the behest of the Duke of Edinburgh.

© Independent Television News Limited 2008. All rights reserved.

By Ryan Singel

Be careful who you frag. Having eliminated all terrorism in the real world, the U.S. intelligence community is working to develop software that will detect violent extremists infiltrating World of Warcraft and other massive multiplayer games, according to a data-mining report from the Director of National Intelligence.

The Reynard project will begin by profiling online gaming behavior, then potentially move on to its ultimate goal of “automatically detecting suspicious behavior and actions in the virtual world.”

• The cultural and behavioral norms of virtual worlds and gaming are generally unstudied. Therefore, Reynard will seek to identify the emerging social, behavioral and cultural norms in virtual worlds and gaming environments. The project would then apply the lessons learned to determine the feasibility of automatically detecting suspicious behavior and actions in the virtual world.
• If it shows early promise, this small seedling effort may increase its scope to a full project.

Reynard will conduct unclassified research in a public virtual world environment. The research will use publicly available data and will begin with observational studies to establish baseline normative behaviors.

The publicly available report — which was mandated by Congress following earlier concerns over data-mining programs — also mentions several other data-mining initiatives. These include:

• Video Analysis and Content Extraction - software to automatically identify faces, events and objects in video
• Tangram - A system that wants to create surveillance and threat warning system that evaluates known threats and finds unknown threats to issue warnings ahead of an attack
• Knowledge Discovery and Dissemination - This tool is reminiscent of the supposedly-defunct Total Information Awareness program. It seeks to access disparate databases to find patterns of known bad behavior. The program plans to work with domestic law enforcement and Homeland Security.

The report gives no indication why the find-a-terrorist cell in Sims project is called Reynard, though that is a traditional trickster figure in literature.

An inquiry has been demanded into claims lawyers’ legally-protected conversations with clients in jail are routinely bugged.

Opposition parties said such a practice would strike “at the heart” of the justice system and suggested it could only have been sanctioned by ministers. And one leading QC warned that the courts could let violent offenders walk free if it was shown their meetings with lawyers had been taped.

Justice Secretary Jack Straw has already launched an inquiry into claims a Labour MP’s jail meetings with a terror suspect constituent were bugged at Woodhill Prison, Milton Keynes.

Sadiq Khan’s case sparked particular controversy amid suggestions it breached a ban on bugging MPs - and is being examined by Chief Surveillance Commissioner Sir Christopher Rose.

Now the Tories and Liberal Democrats are demanding a fresh probe into claims by an unnamed whistleblower that it was part of a wider practice nationwide.

The individual, said to have “detailed knowledge” of the operation at Woodhill, told the Daily Telegraph “hundreds” of meetings with lawyers had been eavesdropped. Murderers and other category-A prisoners - including Soham murderer Ian Huntley - were said to have been targeted as well as terror suspects.

The Ministry of Justice said covert listening operations were “a matter for the police and are undertaken in line with the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000″.

But Shadow Home Secretary David Davis said the allegations were so serious they merited a new inquiry.

“If it is… a widespread practice it is very hard to imagine that could have happened without ministerial approval because the risks are so great - it goes so close to the heart of our justice system and it puts the whole trial process at risk,” he said.

“That is why I have called for Mr Straw to set up a second inquiry - not to stretch the first one, we need the answer to the Rose inquiry in a couple of weeks’ time - to actually establish what the real practice is, how common this is and what needs to be done about it.”

© Copyright Press Association Ltd 2008, All Rights Reserved.

Sean O’Neill

The inquiry into the bugging of a terrorist prisoner and his MP has been asked to examine whether the eavesdropping was carried out at the request of the FBI.

The Times has learnt that two weeks after the taped conversation with Sadiq Khan, MP, in June 2006, Babar Ahmad was visited in Woodhill jail by Metropolitan Police Special Branch detectives who told him: “We could help you if you will help us.”

Lawyers for Mr Ahmad, 33, who is fighting extradition to the United States, believe the approach was an attempt to persuade him to negotiate a plea-bargain deal before a trial in the US on terror charges.

Mr Ahmad was arrested in London in 2004 on a US extradition warrant over his alleged involvement with websites said to be recruiting for Taleban and Chechen Mujahidin groups.

Searches of his home and office at Imperial College London, where he was an IT technician, were carried out by the Metropolitan Police and material was passed to the US authorities. “Why were they scratching around when the decision had been made a long time ago that Babar Ahmad was not going to be prosecuted in Britain?” asked Gareth Peirce, Mr Ahmad’s solicitor. “Were they trying to exploit some perceived vulnerability in the bugged conversation?”

Ms Peirce said she has written to Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, and Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary, raising issues she wants the inquiry into the bugging to look at. She said: “Very serious questions have to be asked about who this eavesdropping was being carried out for.”

Mark Kearney, a former police intelligence officer at the prison in Milton Keynes, has claimed he was put under pressure by the Met to carry out the bugging. Mr Kearney, 48, is being prosecuted for allegedly leaking unrelated information to a local newspaper journalist. The former officer wants to give evidence to the inquiry into the bugging incident but has yet to hear from Sir Christopher Rose, the Chief Surveillance Commissioner, who is conducting it.

By NICK PARKER
THOMAS WHITAKER
and GRAEME WILSON

BUGGING scandal MP Sadiq Khan was first probed by security services over his association with a 9/11 terrorist, The Sun can reveal.

And it has emerged that Justice Secretary Jack Straw knew of concerns over the Muslim MP’s visits to another jailed terror suspect TWO MONTHS ago.

Security sources told yesterday how 9/11 plotter Zacarias Moussaoui asked lawyer Mr Khan to represent him after being accused of being the ‘20th hijacker’.

Concerns … Straw

The Labour whip was not allowed to see Moussaoui and was barred from seeing court papers in the run-up to the trial.

But the MP for Tooting, South London, acted as a consultant to the self-confessed al-Qaeda agent — jailed for life in 2006.

Human rights lawyer Mr Khan, 37, who says he loathes terror groups, was the only practising Muslim on Moussaoui’s team. It brought him to the attention of MI5 and MI6.

One security source said last night: “It is hardly surprising he came to the attention of security services in view of the people he was associated with.”

Extremists

Mr Khan later defended extremists and Brits held in Guantanamo Bay.

Last year it was revealed that five members of his family belonged to fundamental group Hizb ut-Tahrir.

Meanwhile, it has emerged that Mr Straw knew on December 14 of concerns over Mr Khan’s jail visits to another terror suspect.

His private office was told then that Press inquiries suggested Mr Khan’s meetings with Babar Ahmad, 33, at Woodhill Prison in Milton Keynes, Bucks, were being bugged.

Named … Kearney

Mr Straw told the Commons on Monday that the first he knew of the bugging allegations was on Saturday afternoon.

He insisted last night: “I was aware in December of inquiries from a newspaper concerning visits by Mr Khan to Babar Ahmad.

“But at no stage before last Saturday was I aware of any information that these inquiries concerned any covert recording or anything like that and I confirm what I told the House.”

Mr Straw is believed to have told officials that he thought someone was trying to “smear” Mr Khan.

Computer boffin Ahmad has been held since his arrest in August 2004 under anti-terror laws.

Tory MPs yesterday voiced fury that Mr Straw had not told the Commons the full story.

Shadow Home Secretary David Davis said: “We are told Jack Straw has been briefed by officials on Press inquiries relating to Sadiq Khan’s visits to HMP Woodhill yet, despite his officials knowing of the allegations of bugging, they still failed to brief him.

“If true, this is frankly extraordinary and raises enormous questions about the leadership of this department.”

Tories said the issue was raised with Mr Straw just three days after Mr Davis wrote to Gordon Brown, on December 11, warning him a Labour MP was being bugged.

Number 10 has said the letter was never received. Mr Straw’s officials insist they had been alerted on December 14 by the Press, not Mr Davis’s letter.

One senior insider said: “Jack knew there was some sort of story but he did not know the details. He should have been told about claims the visits were being recorded.”

Earlier, Mr Davis argued the eavesdropping breached the Wilson Doctrine, which says MPs should not be bugged. He added: “This is a serious issue. It makes the PM a liar, basically.”

Leader of the Commons Harriet Harman called on Mr Davis to apologise for that remark. Mr Straw has ordered an inquiry to be headed by Whitehall’s chief surveillance commissioner and former judge Sir Christopher Rose.

Ahmad is facing extradition to the US over claims he raised cash for the Taliban and Chechen terrorists.

The man behind the bugging has been named as retired cop Mark Kearney, 48. He worked at Woodhill jail as a police intelligence officer.

Richard Ford, Home Correspondent and Sean O’Neill

Video briefing: who is Babar Ahmad?

Bugging devices planted in a prison telephone were illegally used to record privileged conversations between an inmate and his solicitor, The Times has learnt.

Defence lawyers said last night that the breach confirms long-held suspicions that the recording of legal visits is widespread. Security experts told The Times that they believed that dozens of prisoners are routinely the subject of covert surveillance.

The revelation comes days after it emerged that an MP’s meeting with a jailed constituent had been recorded. However the taping of legal meetings is considered far more serious because it may breach a defendant’s rights and has the potential to collapse criminal trials.

The full transcripts of the taped conversations with a 71-year-old man who is serving life for murder only came to light because they were disclosed to Simon Creighton, the solicitor who was caught up in the surveillance.

The revelation will bring demands for Jack Straw to widen the official inquiry into the bugging of Sadiq Khan, a Muslim MP visiting a terror suspect, to investigate the extent of covert surveillance in Britain’s prisons.

Mr Straw, the Justice Secretary, told MPs yesterday that Sir Christopher Rose, the Chief Surveillance Commissioner, is to head an inquiry into the bugging of a conversation involving Mr Khan and Babar Ahmad when the MP visited him in Woodhill jail.

Mr Creighton’s case involves Harry Roberts, who was convicted of the murder of three police officers in Shepherd’s Bush, West London, in 1966. Last night the solicitor said: “If they are prepared to go to these lengths in this case, it makes one wonder what they are prepared to do with other prisoners, particularly those convicted of serious offences.”

Roberts, currently in Littlehey prison in Cambridgeshire, is involved in a long battle to be released on parole. His 30-year minimum term expired 11 years ago.

His parole hearings have been held in secret but in documents sent to his solicitor, a government-appointed lawyer included transcripts of bugged telephone conversations. Two transcripts of discussions betweeen Mr Creighton and Roberts when he was in Channings Wood jail were found with other legal documents.

The transcripts of calls made in 2005 and 2006 include every word spoken from the moment that a receptionist at Mr Creighton’s firm answers the phone to Roberts and he asks: “Can I speak to Simon”.

Mr Creighton said that the transcripts included discussions of legal tactics that he was going to employ in court proceedings planned as part of Roberts’s struggle to win parole. They also included discussions about problems that Roberts was having in jail.

Mr Creighton, of Bhatt Murphy solicitors in London, said: “I am deeply shocked by this breach of such an important and fundamental right. It is especially worrying that it occurred in this case where there were already heightened sensitivities because of the decision made by the parole board to receive secret evidence.

“Had the secrecy order not been lifted it would never have come to light and it makes me wonder whether this is a more common practice than anyone has previously dared to imagine.”

He said that the bugging of legal telephone calls was a breach of common law and the European Convention of Human Rights.

It is not clear whether the bugging operation was being operated by the police or prison service.

The telephone calls of all prisoners are subject to monitoring but the recording or monitoring of calls to legal advisers is banned.

Prisoners have expressed concerns frequently that telephone calls with their lawyers and legal visits are being bugged. Mr Creighton said: “There has always been a degree of paranoia among prisoners that their calls are recorded. Sometimes they say that clicks heard during conversations are recordings being switched off. Whenever this has been raised with the authorities they have always denied it.”

Gareth Peirce, Mr Ahmad’s solicitor, said that defence lawyers had written to the governors of Woodhill and Belmarsh prisons on a number of occasions seeking assurances that legal visits were not being bugged.

Ms Peirce said: “Many prisoners . . . believe that their visits are being listened to and defence lawyers are concerned that they are not able to reassure them on that score.

“The position is very disturbing. Bugging of legal visits would be a serious intrusion. There is an absolute right to confidentiality when it comes to legal visits. To justify such a thing happening would need the Home Secretary to authorise it. If it were found to have happened, that would have the most enormous consequences.”.

The Ministry of Justice said last night: “The Justice Secretary was not previously aware of this matter.

We will consider what further steps are needed once we have more information.”

By Andre Damon

The Democratic-controlled Senate moved Thursday to shield telecommunications companies that aided the Bush administration’s illegal domestic spying program from lawsuits. By a vote 60 to 36, the Senate rejected any provision in its upcoming amendment to the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that would open the companies to prosecution in civil courts.

Congress passed a temporary amendment to the FISA Act before its Labor Day break in August, which included retroactive protection for the telecom companies complicit in the administration’s illegal wiretapping. That amendment is set to expire on Friday, and Congress is seeking to work out a replacement before then.

While debate over the Senate bill will continue into next week, the House has already passed a draft of the bill that did not include immunity. If the Senate finalizes its version next week, it will move on to be reconciled with the House version, where it can be expected that an immunity clause will be inserted into the final document.

For its part, the White House said it would veto any bill that did not include complete immunity for companies that aided its illegal program. The Bush administration and congressional Republicans are also strongly pressing for an expansion of the bill’s provisions, and not simply a renewal of the temporary law passed six months ago.

The Senate picked up the bill this week after laying it aside in mid-November. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid apparently moved to postpone the debate when it became apparent that the bill could not be completed before Congress took its holiday break.

In view of differences that have arisen over a replacement bill, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Silvestre Reyes (Dem.-Texas) and Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (Dem.-Mich.) proposed extending the current law—which is set to expire February 1—for another 30 days.

However, Senate republicans blocked such an effort Tuesday, in line with views expressed by Vice President Dick Cheney, who commented Wednesday, “There is no sound reason to pass critical legislation like the Protect America Act and slap an expiration date on it.”

The day before the vote, Cheney gave a speech at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think-tank, in which he demanded immunity for telecommunications companies that had participated in the program and said the FISA expansion bill should be passed as quickly as possible.

A number of Senate Democrats agreed to vote for the preservation of the immunity clause following the Bush administration’s agreement on Thursday to Democrats’ demands that it show them classified documents relating to the warrantless domestic spying program.

Senate Republicans supporting the inclusion of an immunity clause were supported by a number of Democrats, most notably Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller (W.Va.). Presidential hopefuls Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama were absent during Thursday’s vote and it is unclear whether they will participate on Monday, when the debate is set to continue.

Sometime around September 2001, the Bush administration illegally authorized the National Security Agency (NSA) to intercept data from people within the US without first obtaining warrants. This was in violation of the 1978 FISA act, which set up a secret court to authorize surveillance within the US. Congress retroactively legalized the Bush administration’s program by passing last August 5 the Protect America Act of 2007, which is set to expire February 1.

If the bill is not renewed, government agencies complain that they will have to resort to getting individual court orders in order to spy on communications that pass through the US telecom infrastructure. The Democrats—even those calling for a rejection of the immunity clause—do not want to leave the intelligence agencies out in the cold, fearful of being seen as “soft on terrorism.”

House Majority Leader Harry Reid, in bemoaning the Republicans’ demands, said, “It appears that the Republicans want failure. They don’t want a bill.” The debate—even to the limited extent that the Democrats are willing to draw it out—revolves around the best way to manage the massive domestic spying program implemented illegally by the Bush administration.

Mike McConnell, the national director of intelligence, is currently working on a bill that would simply do away with the FISA court and create conditions under which intelligence agencies could spy without the added burden of obtaining warrants. Such a bill could then by applied retroactively to shield the telecommunications companies from prosecution. In promoting the bill, McConnell raised the specter of an imminent terrorist attack, stating recently, “My prediction is that we’re going to screw around with this until something horrendous happens.”

Democrats and Republicans alike have announced their support for immunity on the grounds that they do not want to hurt the balance sheets of telecommunications companies. There are currently some 40 lawsuits filed against the telecoms by individuals and groups in relation to the wiretapping. These cases have already unearthed a number of details the Bush administration would prefer to leave hidden, including testimony by a former AT&T employee that the company let out space within one of its main routing facility, which was used to direct traffic directly to the NSA.

Determining what NSA electronic surveillance can be used by police or introduced into court by Government, may be the next battle Americans have to fight.

Dan Scott

It is not surprising the Telecom Industry wants “Retroactive Immunity” from at least forty law suits after they helped government spy on Americans’ personal phone calls, faxes and emails? But Not so obvious or discussed by major media is what happens to NSA’s millions of illegally collected emails, faxes and phone call information that belong to U.S. Citizens? Will that information be deleted or copied? Or Used In Court against Americans?

Depending on the legal scheme the U.S. Government devises to let the phone companies off the hook for spying on its Citizens, could set NSA free—to share its “illegally collected wiretap information” with local, state and federal police in order to initiate almost any kind of criminal investigation.

Determining what NSA electronic surveillance can be used by police or introduced into court by the Government, may be the next battle Americans have to fight.

Previously prosecutors were not allowed access to the Justice Department’s “intelligence files” for domestic criminal prosecutions. In 2003 a court ruling lowered that barrier, allowing prosecutors to review old surveillance. In 2003, Attorney General John Ashcroft asked government prosecutors to review thousands of old intelligence files including wiretaps to retrieve information prosecutors could use in “ordinary criminal prosecutions.”

It is problematic Law enforcement agencies will want to use NSA’s old illegal wiretap evidence and other surveillance to go back perhaps decades to arrest Americans and/or civilly forfeit their homes, inheritances and business using only a “preponderance of evidence” under Title 18 of the United States Code. The Patriot Act specifically mentions provisions passed in Rep. Henry Hyde’s bill HR 1658 “The Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2000.” HR 1658 included a “retroactive asset forfeiture provision” that applies retroactively to assets already subject to government forfeiture, meaning “property already tainted by crime” provided “the property” was already part of or later connected to a criminal investigation in progress” when HR.1658 passed.

In 2000 after HR1658 passed the “old statute of limitations” died that gave government “five years” to seize property from the actual date a “property” was involved in crime. Police now have five-years to seize property from “whenever police claim” they learned a “property” was made subject to civil asset forfeiture. There are over 200 U.S. laws that can subject property to civil asset forfeiture.

Imagine NSA sharing its illegal-domestic surveillance information with countless police agencies that are dependent on forfeiting Citizens’ property to pay their department’s operating costs. Police can too easily take an innocent person’s hastily written email or phone call out of context to allege a crime was committed. Imagine Police using the Patriot Act’s low standard of proof “a preponderance of evidence” to judge NSA illegal domestic wiretap information, perhaps to go back before 2000 to civilly seize a Citizen’s home, business or other property. No conviction is required for the U.S. Government to civilly forfeit a Citizen’s home or business.

Under the Patriot Act, witnesses can be kept secret while being paid part of the assets they cause to be forfeited.

The US Vice President, Dick Cheney calls on Congress to ‘permanently’ allow warrantless wiretaps on foreign electronic communications.

During a speech to the Heritage Foundation in Washington on Wednesday, Cheney said it is ‘urgent’ to renew and update the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) ‘immediately and permanently’.

The 30-year-old FISA is a federal law allowing physical and electronic surveillance and the collection of ‘foreign intelligence information’ coming from and going to territories under US control.

In a modification made last year that will expire on February 1, the Congress empowered intelligence agencies to tap into telephone conversations and emails, without first obtaining the permission of a special FISA court.

Cheney warned of ’serious consequences’ if the Congress fails to provide protection for telephone and Internet carriers from lawsuits for alleged complicity in privacy rights violations in the US ‘war on terror’.

“The challenge to the country has not expired over the last six months,” he said, referring to the so-called war on terror launched in the aftermath of the 9/11.

“It won’t expire anytime soon, and we should not write laws that pretend otherwise,” said the US Vice President.

MD/AA

With the Cold War long over, the CIA no longer faces any real competition, right? Wrong. The world’s top espionage agencies are as busy as ever. This week, the FP List looks at the countries that best know how to wield a cloak and dagger.

DENIS SINYAKOV/AFP/Getty Images

Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR)

Country: Russia

Area of expertise: Officially—counterterrorism and protecting Russian commercial interests abroad. Unofficially—consolidating political power back home.

Activities: Russia has a formidable spying tradition that dates back to the czarist-era Cheka. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the once omnipotent KGB was broken up into several smaller organizations with vastly limited powers. Since ex-KGB man Vladimir Putin took power, however, the SVR, or Sluzhba Vneshney Razvedk as it’s known in Russian, has recovered much of its swagger. Russian spying within the United States is now back to Cold War levels, U.S. officials believe. Peter Earnest, the executive director of the International Spy Museum in Washington, who matched wits with the KGB as a CIA operative for over three decades, shared this assessment. “They are as important today as they ever were, if not more,” he said. “Russia has not eased off at all on its espionage activities.” The SVR is widely suspected to have played a role in the assassination of ex-spy Alexander Litvinenko in London last year. Putin has denied this allegation and lauded the SVR as “one of the most professional and effective special services.” In reality, the intelligence services have emerged as one of the most powerful political groups in Putin’s Russia, and ex-KGB agents occupy many of the Kremlin’s key positions. As the Russian saying goes, “There’s no such thing as an ex-Chekist.”

FREDERIC J. BROWN/AFP/Getty Images

Ministry of State Security

Country: China

Area of expertise: Industrial espionage and data analysis, domestic security

Activities: The MSS is close in structure to the old Soviet KGB and is responsible for both domestic security and foreign espionage. Its overseas activities are believed to be focused aggressively on the United States, particularly its high-tech industries and military technology. Rather than relying on a handful of agents, the MSS views almost anyone has a potential intelligence asset and gathers intelligence on new weapons systems painstakingly over time through personal contacts. “Chinese espionage is different than Western espionage,” says Earnest. “We go after a secret somewhere; they go after numbers. They collect little bits and pieces and put it together.” Sources often don’t even realize they’ve collaborated with a foreign spy mission, and the thousands of Chinese diplomats, students, and business people who travel to the West every year make spies incredibly difficult to detect. Through this method, the Chinese have managed to reverse engineer numerous U.S. weapons systems. China appears to be stepping up its espionage efforts in cyberspace as well. In September 2007, the Pentagon accused China of hacking into U.S. Defense Department databases. The governments of Germany and Britain have made similar accusations.

Research and Analysis Wing

Country: India

Area of expertise: Destabilizing Pakistan

Activities: RAW was founded in 1968 specifically to counter Pakistani support of militant groups within India, but over the years it has grown into one of the world’s most formidable intelligence services, with wide-ranging activities in Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bangladesh, and elsewhere. It is particularly active in Bangladesh, where it played a key role in that country’s movement for independence from Pakistan. Pakistani authorities often blame RAW for terrorist attacks in their country. Although these accusations tend to lack evidence, RAW does have a history of backing militant groups in Kashmir, Afghanistan, and Sri Lanka. Recent years have not been easy for RAW. In 1996, RAW was implicated in a scandal involving the illegal donation of funds to U.S. congressional campaigns. Stories about infiltration by U.S. and Chinese assets have become public scandals, and the media is now calling for greater transparency and oversight of the notoriously secretive agency.

ROUF BHAT/AFP/Getty Images

Inter-Services Intelligence

Country: Pakistan

Area of expertise: Destabilizing India

Activities: Sometimes described as a state within a state with virtually no oversight, ISI is best known for the firm control it exercises over Pakistan’s politics and its role in protecting the military from domestic opposition. But the ISI has also been accused of playing both sides in the global war on terror—fighting Islamist extremists domestically while abetting them abroad. Whether spreading anti-Indian propaganda in Kashmir or funding Sikh separatists in Punjab, the ISI has consistently undermined India’s stability for decades. India has accused the ISI of involvement in dozens of terrorist attacks over the years, including the Mumbai bombings of 2006 that killed 187 people. At the same time, the ISI has worked with the U.S. and allies to combat al Qaeda and the Taliban inside Pakistan.

ROUF BHAT/AFP/Getty Images

Secret Intelligence Service (MI6)

Country: Britain

Area of expertise: Counterterrorism, James Bond nostalgia

Activities: After a decade of budget cuts during the “peace dividend” years following the Cold War, Her Majesty’s secret service was caught somewhat unprepared for the challenges of the war on terror. On 9/11, only 30 of MI6’s 1,600 agents were working on counterterrorism. Since then, the agency has been on an all-out recruitment blitz that includes previously unheard of measures, such as taking out ads in newspapers and allowing agents to grant interviews. (Among the fun facts revealed: There really is a person called “Q” who designs gadgets, just like in the James Bond films, but “M” is actually called “C.”) MI6 has also taken out ads in online spy-themed computer games such as “Tom Clancy’s Splinter Cell.” This is a far cry from the Cold War era, when undercover recruiters surreptitiously singled out Oxford and Cambridge’s best and brightest for intelligence work. Despite the charm offensive, MI6 has been attacked in the British media for allegedly participating in CIA-organized “rendition” of terrorism suspects to be tortured abroad. Kremlin officials have also accused MI6 of trying to influence Russia’s domestic politics. MI6’s activities may not be as expansive as they once were, but Earnest characterizes this as “a shift in priorities” toward Middle Eastern terrorism, “rather than a decline.”

The Mossad

Country: Israel

Area of expertise: Combating Islamist terrorism, evacuating Jewish refugees

Activities: “We’re all students of the Mossad,” says Earnest. Since it was founded in 1951, “the Institute,” as it translates in English, has acquired a reputation for extraordinary skill and aggressiveness in combating Israel’s enemies. Some of its notable achievements include the abduction of Nazi leader Adolf Eichmann from Argentina in 1960, the assassination of the planners of the 1972 Munich Olympics killings, and the assassination of a senior Hamas operative with an exploding cellphone in 1996. The Mossad has also been active over the years in efforts to assist Jewish refugees who seek to immigrate to Israel, including the secret airlifting of thousands of Ethiopian Jews in “Operation Moses” in 1984. The Mossad made some moves toward greater transparency and openness in the 1990s, including revealing the name of its director for the first time, but under Ariel Sharon it turned back toward the clandestine operations for which it is best known. Reports indicate that the Mossad may have had either an agent or an informant at the Syrian military installation that Israel bombed in September 2007.

Israel has successfully launched a spy satellite which will be used to gather intelligence on Iran’s activities, a new report says.

The TECSAR satellite is particularly important for Israel since it can be used to ‘keep tabs on Iran’s nuclear program’, the report said citing unnamed Israeli officials.

The officials revealed that the TECSAR satellite operates with an enhanced footage technology, allowing it to transmit images regardless of daytime and weather conditions.

TESCAR is considered the Zionist regime’s most advanced satellite in orbit to date.

Israel has been backing the US efforts to isolate Iran and persuade the international community to intensify sanctions against the Islamic Republic over its nuclear standoff with the West.

Despite a report by US spy agencies last fall which conceded that Iran is not developing nuclear weapons, Washington and Tel Aviv accuse Tehran of pursuing a nuclear arms program.

Iran says its nuclear activities are within the framework of the regulations of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

MD/HGH/RE

In October, two security experts at hacker conference ToorCon9 in San Diego hacked into their hotel’s corporate network using a Cisco VoIP phone

By Linda Leung Framingham

Cisco confirmed it is possible to eavesdrop on remote conversations using Cisco VoIP phones. In its security response, Cisco says: “an attacker with valid Extension Mobility authentication credentials could cause a Cisco Unified IP Phone configured to use the Extension Mobility feature to transmit or receive a Real-Time Transport Protocol (RTP) audio stream.”

The US is pursuing a multibillion-dollar programme to develop the next generation of spy satellites, the first major effort of its kind since the Pentagon cancelled the ambitious and costly Future Imagery Architecture system two years ago, according to US officials.The new system, known as BASIC, would be launched by 2011 and is expected to cost $2-4bn (€1.4-2.8bn), according to US officials familiar with the programme.

Photo reconnaissance satellites are used to gather visual information from space about adversarial governments and terror groups, such as construction at suspected nuclear sites or militant training camps.

Satellites also can be used to survey damage from hurricanes, fires and other natural disasters.

The new start comes as many US officials, politicians and defence experts question the high costs of satellite programmes, particularly after the demise of the previous programme that wasted time and money.

The National Reconnaissance Office spent six years and billions of dollars on Future Imagery Architecture, or FIA, before deciding in September 2005 to scrap a major component of the programme.

Boeing, the primary contractor, had run into technical problems in the development of the electro-optical satellite and blew its budget by as much as £3bn (€2bn) before the Pentagon pulled the plug, according to industry experts and government reports.

“They grossly underestimated the cost of the programme”, as well as the technological feasibility of FIA, said John Pike, a space expert who heads GlobalSecurity.org. FIA “was an hallucination”, he said.

The Defence Department is in the initial stages of preparing the new programme for bidders. The Pentagon’s classified “request for information” on the technology was issued this autumn to industry. Comments were due two weeks ago. A solicitation for proposals is expected next spring.

Meanwhile, the Pentagon is conducting a study to determine what satellite capabilities are feasible. The analysis will be completed by the end of the year.

Officials said the Pentagon was considering a range of options, but the new programme is expected to be significantly less ambitious than the one it is meant to replace.Options include developing an entirely new photo imagery satellite or a derivative of a commercial imagery satellite, buying a commercial satellite or leasing existing satellite capacity.

A US commercial satellite launched in September by DigitalGlobe can make out the outline of a 20in object from space. In April, a satellite will be launched with the ability to see a 16in object. By 2011, that capability is expected to narrow to nearly 10in.

Industry officials said the contract probably would be for a commercial or commercially derived spacecraft because of the time and budget constraints and the government’s apparent desire to maintain control of the satellite.

The US military has a $1bn (€680,920) contract with two commercial satellite companies to buy space imagery. Each contract pays for a satellite, its launch and insurance and roughly 200 million dollars in photo imagery.

“We would look forward to reviewing any new government acquisition request since we give the government more eyes in the sky and high quality imagery at a fraction of the cost,” said Mark Brender, vice president for communications at GEOEYE.

GEOEYE and DigitalGlobe have the imagery contract with the Pentagon.

When the Pentagon cancelled the programme in 2005, it hired Lockheed Martin to cobble together a space craft from spare parts from the current generation of secret electro-optical reconnaissance satellites to cover a potential gap in coverage.

The House and Senate intelligence committees have criticised the Pentagon and intelligence agencies’ management of space programmes. Half the programmes have experienced cost growth of 50% or more.

The US Defence Department spends about $20bn (€13.6bn) annually on space programmes. 

http://www.eecho.ie/news/story/?trs=mhmhidqlojgb

Bush administration forced to turn over spying documents by Friday

Declan McCullagh

A federal judge has ordered the Bush administration to divulge documents related to immunizing telecommunications companies from lawsuits, saying they illegally opened their networks to the National Security Agency.

U.S. District Judge Susan Illston in San Francisco gave the Office of the Director of National Intelligence until November 30 (Friday) to turn over documents relating to conversations it had with Congress and telecommunications carriers about how to rewrite wiretapping laws.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation had filed this case to seek faster processing of a Freedom of Information Act request it filed, which could help buttress its ongoing lawsuit against AT&T. There are approximately 250 pages of unclassified material and 65 pages of classified material, which would be redacted, that the administration has identified but said could not be turned over until December 31.

Note that Illston’s order doesn’t deal with the NSA’s wiretapping program itself (how it works, what companies are involved, whether there really is a secret room at AT&T’s 611 Folsom Street location). Instead the documents relate only to conversations and communications about retroactive immunity for companies like AT&T that are accused of violating the law.

Note also that if AT&T and other telecommunications companies followed the law, no retroactive immunity is necessary. Because AT&T and the Bush administration are supporting such a legal shield, you can draw your own conclusions about what’s really going on.

The Friday deadline means that the documents will likely be available in time to influence congressional debate over amending the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Some FISA amendments expire in February 2008, which means that Congress is likely to return to the topic soon.

The House of Representatives rejected retroactive immunity on November 16. The Senate Judiciary Committee seemed to like the idea of immunity, but the debate is expected to resume on the Senate floor next month.