If you have old copies of the 'Old Farmers Almanac' you're a terrorist

To coin a phrase from the 1990's 'Stop The Insanity'!

The FBI is warning police nationwide to be alert for people carrying almanacs, cautioning that the popular reference books covering everything from abbreviations to weather trends could be used for terrorist planning.
 
In a bulletin sent Christmas Eve to about 18,000 police organizations, the FBI said terrorists may use almanacs "to assist with target selection and pre-operational planning." It urged officers to watch during searches, traffic stops and other investigations for anyone carrying almanacs, especially if the books are annotated in suspicious ways. "The practice of researching potential targets is consistent with known methods of al-Qaida and other terrorist organizations that seek to maximize the likelihood of operational success through careful planning," the FBI wrote. (DOESN'T ANYONE QUESTION HOW OUT OF CONTROL THE WAR ON TERRORISM HAS BECOME?)

"For local law enforcement, it's just to help give them one more piece of information to raise their suspicions," said David Heyman, a terrorism expert for the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies "It helps make sure one more bad guy doesn't get away from a traffic stop, maybe gives police a little bit more reason to follow up on this." (this is ludicrous, total B/S it's just another reason for police to search you under a made-up pretense)

How did almanacs suddenly come to be included among the tools of the terrorism trade? According to the FBI, their contents typically include "profiles of cities and states and information about waterways, bridges, dams, reservoirs, tunnels, buildings and landmarks," often accompanied by photographs and maps. All of which would be consistent with "known methods of al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations that seek to maximize the likelihood of operational success through careful planning."

The FBI noted that use of almanacs or maps may be innocent, "the product of legitimate recreational or commercial activities." But it warned that when combined with suspicious behavior -- such as apparent surveillance -- a person with an almanac "may point to possible terrorist planning."

"Our almanac is about as far away as you can get from terrorism and about as close as you can get to what you would think of as Americana," said Peter Geiger, editor of the Farmers' Almanac.

"I don't think anyone would consider us a harmful entity," said Kevin Seabrooke, senior editor of the Old Farmers Almanac.

The publisher for The Old Farmers Almanac said terrorists would probably find statistical reference books more useful than the collections of Americana in his famous publication of weather predictions and witticisms.

"While we doubt that our editorial content would be of particular interest to people who would wish to do us harm, we will certainly cooperate to the fullest with national authorities at any level they deem appropriate," publisher John Pierce said.

The FBI said information typically found in almanacs that could be useful for terrorists includes profiles of cities and states and information about waterways, bridges, dams, reservoirs, tunnels, buildings and landmarks. It said this information is often accompanied by photographs and maps.
(authorities use the old standby: taking photos is a suspicious act. Does having or using a GPS make us terrorists? WAKE UP!)
http://www.sfgate.com/default/article/FBI-urges-police-to-watch-for-people-with-almanacs-2544495.php
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2003-12-30-fbi-almanacs_x.htm
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2004-01-07/features/0401070175_1_farmer-s-almanac-selection-and-pre-operational-planning-target-selection-and-pre-operational
http://fnk.ca/board/coffee-lounge/40056-fbi-urges-police-watch-people-carrying-books.html
http://seattletimes.com/html/nationworld/2001825885_almanac30.html
http://articles.philly.com/2004-01-06/news/25366258_1_almanacs-fbi-issues-terrorists
http://www.foxnews.com/story/2003/12/29/fbi-links-almanacs-with-terror-planning/
http://boingboing.net/2003/12/29/fbi-warns-of-terrori.html

In 2009 the FBI claimed an alleged terrorist Ali Al-Marri used an Almanac 

"Ali Al-Marri agrees that the government would prove at trial that an almanac recovered in his residence was bookmarked at pages showing dams, waterways and tunnels in the United States, consistent with al Qaeda attack planning regarding the use of cyanide gases."
http://www.fbi.gov/springfield/press-releases/2009/si043009.htm

Police "smart cars" to be equipped with fingerprint scanners and facial recognition sensors

NY - The department’s prototype “smart car,” outfitted with the latest gadgets in public safety. It has two infrared monitors mounted on the trunk that record any numbers it sees—such as license plates and addresses. It has surveillance cameras and air sensors capable of sending real-time information to police headquarters. The NYPD says it is the cruiser of the very near future.

The smart car is one of dozens of projects included in a long-term strategic plan known as NYPD2020, prepared in November for Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly.

The 13-page report describes initiatives ranging from the high-tech (500 officers have received Samsung Rugby smartphones equipped to deliver real-time crime data) to the bureaucratic (new guidelines for recruiting and keeping qualified candidates). More than a dozen are already under way.

The initiative began in 2011, under the guidance of McKinsey & Co. The consulting firm worked with NYPD officials over 11 months to create a road map for the department over the next decade. McKinsey & Co. declined to comment.

The report said using a consultant would help force change in such a large organization. Experts agreed. “Even the NYPD is limited in the things they can and can’t do,” said Jon Shane, a professor in the Department of Law, Police Science and Criminal Justice Administration at John Jay College of Criminal Justice.

Mr. Kelly then charged the NYPD’s project-management office to decide which of the nearly 260 projects could be started immediately. The office’s seven employees, who have experience in technology, economics and terrorism analysis, is led by Deputy Inspector Brandon del Pozo, a 16-year NYPD veteran.

The smart car prototype has been on the road for about a year and is based out of the 84th Precinct in Brooklyn Heights. The idea came about as the NYPD looked for ways to connect intelligence gathered in the field with the department’s new system that compiles raw data, video feeds and other information, then alerts officials to potential incidents and maps where crimes occur. The system is already at police headquarters, and will soon be in each precinct and command around the city.

The car’s scanner can read license plates, then check the results against a database that contains the plate numbers of cars that are stolen, may have been involved in a crime, or have outstanding infractions. The data is stored for an indefinite period, though that will likely change, Mr. del Pozo said.

“It reads any set of numbers,” Mr. del Pozo said. “If it doesn’t get a hit, it gets stored. We don’t look at [the results] unless an investigation points to them.”

A detector attached to the rear windshield can scan the air for increased radiation levels, and ship the results back to an NYPD command center.

Some of these capabilities already exist in some squad cars, but no other car is outfitted with all of the technology, Mr. del Pozo said, adding that future smart cars might include fingerprint scanners and facial recognition sensors.
http://stream.wsj.com/story/latest-headlines/SS-2-63399/SS-2-413583/

There are more than 70 immigration checkpoints manned by U.S. Customs inside the U.S.

Many travelers don't realize that complying with the Border Patrol's questioning can be completely optional. It is well within their Fifth Amendment rights to remain silent. If this right is exercised, the agent does not have the power to further detain them absent consent, reasonable suspicion, or probable cause that the traveler is committing a crime. While the Supreme Court ruled in Martinez-Fuerte that temporary detention at internal checkpoints is not an unconstitutional encroachment, the detention must not be indefinite and may only be for a reasonable amount of time.

Noncitizen permanent residents over 18 years old are required to carry green cards when they travel within the United States, according to the Immigration and Nationality Act. Those caught without one face a maximum fine up to $100 and/or imprisonment for up to 30 days for each offense. But you can't tell the difference between a citizen and green card holder without seeing some kind of government identification. Given Americans' historical antipathy toward national ID requirements, which are routine in most of the rest of the world, it comes as a surprise to many that they can be asked to provide proof of citizenship even when venturing nowhere near an international border.

More than 70 immigration checkpoints manned by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) now operate well inside U.S. territory, as far away from the Mexican frontier as Sarita, Texas-nearly 90 miles north of the nearest major border crossing. The agency has used internal traffic checkpoints since 1924. Since the 9/11 attacks, the Border Patrol's mission has increasingly emphasized preventing terrorists and illegal weapons from entering the United States. Some of the checkpoints are on roads that never intersect the border. No reasonable suspicion or probable cause or consent is required for these indiscriminate detentions. Travelers usually comply politely, not knowing-and likely not caring-that by doing so they are waiving their constitutional rights.

But not everyone plays along. as scouring YouTube videos, border-state news archives, and court cases can attest, hundreds of resisters, mostly males in or around their thirties, are refusing to comply, capturing the often nerve-rattling conflicts on their smartphones. They may be lone dissidents, but they have created a robust online community of checkpoint constitutionalists.

CBP agents, at times accompanied by area law enforcement officers, await as the motorist pulls up. Drug-sniffing dogs are often led by another CBP agent around the line of vehicles as they wait in a queue. Drivers are instructed to roll down their window if they haven't already. The CBP agent then firmly asks the driver, along with any other passengers, if they are United States citizens.

Citizen warning: The CBP claims they delete their videos after 30 days.

This is when the confrontation begins.

"Am I being detained, agent?" is the common refusenik reply.

"No you are not being detained, sir," the agent replies. "We need to know if you are a United States citizen."

The scene is usually tense. Drivers are visibly nervous in many of the videos. It's not easy to stand up for your rights on a lonely desert road when surrounded by German Shepherds and heavily armed men in green, military-looking uniforms.

"If I'm not being detained, then I'm free to go, correct?"

Agents are not accustomed to non-compliance. "You are not free to go until I can verify you are a United States citizen," goes the common reply.

"Well, if I'm not free to go, does that mean I am being detained?"

At this point agents will sometimes declare that the driver is indeed being detained, but only temporarily. The refusenik will then ask why he is being detained, and request to see a supervisor. The Border Patrol cop, his supervisor, and other law enforcement officials who sense an emerging situation will gather around the vehicle. Traffic builds up. Blood pressure rises.

"You are being detained temporarily for immigration purposes. We need to know if you are a United States citizen. Please answer the question."

The driver may then point out to the agent that at least some reasonable suspicion of criminal activity is required in order for any further detention to be lawful. If the refusenik is lucky, the built-up traffic or just the ongoing hassle of the exchange will pressure the agent to wave the driver on through.

If he is unlucky, the border cop may declare that he indeed has probable cause. At this point, the motorist has little choice but to comply with the demand to pull into secondary and submit to a search.

Internal checkpoints are legally separate from checkpoints on international borders or their "functional equivalent," such as international airports. At these border crossings, CBP agents have wide latitude to search and seize, absent any warrant or probable cause. They can also unilaterally refuse to admit international travelers. Internal checkpoints are more complicated.

In a pivotal 1976 Supreme Court case, U.S. v. Martinez-Fuerte, the defendant was caught transporting illegal aliens through an internal immigration checkpoint located on Interstate 5 between Oceanside and San Clemente in California, about 90 miles from the border. After the immigrants were discovered and admitted their status, Amado Martinez-Fuerte was charged with two counts of illegally transporting aliens. A court majority opined that "brief questioning of [the motor vehicle's] occupants even if there is no reason to believe that the particular vehicle contains illegal aliens," is legal.

In the Supreme Court case United States v. Montoya de Hernandez (1985), the court further ruled that "automotive travelers may be stopped at fixed checkpoints near the border without individualized suspicion, even if the stop is based largely on ethnicity." Flowing from this case is the assumptive creation of the "border search exception" allowing for warrantless searches within 100 miles of the border. This Fourth Amendment-lite zone encompasses the place of residence for nearly two-thirds of the U.S. population.

Martinez-Fuerte held that internal checkpoints were considered to be a functional equivalent of a border crossing only if the government could prove with reasonable certainty that traffic passing through was international in character and would be comprised of only a "negligible number of domestic travelers."

The Border Patrol's Inspector's Field Manual governing internal checkpoints has been public information since 2008, thanks to a successful FOIA request from immigration attorney Charles M. Miller. According to Section 18.7 of the manual, before an inspector may constitutionally detain a traveler at a non-entry checkpoint, the inspector "must have reasonable suspicion that the person is an alien and is illegally in the United States." The manual goes on to say: "This higher degree of suspicion arises generally in questioning persons encountered in and around the port who are awaiting persons referred to secondary. This suspicion is based on questioning of alienage alone and also involves specific articulable facts, such as particular characteristics or circumstances which the inspector can describe in words."

If, according to the CBP's guidelines, inspectors shall not indefinitely detain a traveler without at least reasonable suspicion, the collection of videos online clearly shows agents breaking their own rules.
http://reason.com/archives/2013/12/28/americas-internal-checkpoints

"Police state" drivers license checkpoints set up in Virginia:
http://massprivatei.blogspot.com/2013/07/police-state-drivers-license.html

DUI checkpoints are an end run around the Constitution:
http://massprivatei.blogspot.com/2013/08/dui-checkpoints-are-end-run-around.html

Public Safety director claims illegal checkpoints are a response to “various criminal activities and unsafe driving behaviors”
http://massprivatei.blogspot.com/2013/10/public-safety-director-claims-illegal.html

ACLU legal director discusses how to deal with checkpoints in America:
http://massprivatei.blogspot.com/2013/07/aclu-legal-director-discusses-how-to.html

 

 

How the NSA hacks your iPhone using 'Dropout Jeep'

The complete and detailed description of how the NSA bugs, remotely, your iPhone. The way the NSA accomplishes this is using software known as Dropout Jeep, which it describes as follows:

"DROPOUT JEEP is a software implant for the Apple iPhone that utilizes modular mission applications to provide specific SIGINT functionality. This functionality includes the ability to remotely push/pull files from the device. SMS retrieval, contact list retrieval, voicemail, geolocation, hot mic, camera capture, cell tower location, etc. Command, control and data exfiltration can occur over SMS messaging or a GPRS data connection. All communications with the implant will be covert and encrypted."

The flowchart of how the NSA makes your iPhone its iPhone is presented below:

• NSA ROC operator
• Load specified module
• Send data request
• iPhone accepts request
• Retrieves required SIGINT data
• Encrypt and send exfil data
• Rinse repeat

What is perhaps just as disturbing is the following rhetorical sequence from Applebaum:

"Do you think Apple helped them build that? I don't know. I hope Apple will clarify that. Here's the problem: I don't really believe that Apple didn't help them, I can't really prove it but [the NSA] literally claim that anytime they target an iOS device that it will succeed for implantation. Either they have a huge collection of exploits that work against Apple products, meaning that they are hoarding information about critical systems that American companies produce and sabotaging them, or Apple sabotaged it themselves. Not sure which one it is. I'd like to believe that since Apple didn't join the PRISM program until after Steve Jobs died, that maybe it's just that they write shitty software. We know that's true."

Now everyone knows that their iPhone is nothing but a gateway for the NSA to peruse everyone's "private" data at will. Which, incidentally, is not news, and was revealed when we showed how the "NSA Mocks Apple's "Zombie" Customers; Asks "Your Target Is Using A BlackBerry? Now What?"

How ironic would it be if Blackberry, left for dead by virtually everyone, began marketing its products as the only smartphone that does not allow the NSA access to one's data (and did so accordingly). Since pretty much everything else it has tried has failed, we don't see the downside to this hail mary attempt to strike back at Big Brother and maybe make some money, by doing the right thing for once.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-12-30/how-nsa-hacks-your-iphone-presenting-dropout-jeep

To protect and infect the militarization of the internet:

Studies reveal Voice Stress Analysis is junk science

The speculation behind how Voice Stress Analysis (VSA) works is based upon the following premise: liars experience more psychological stress when lying than truth tellers do when they tell the truth.

The notion is that this psychological stress results in minor changes in the blood circulation, which subsequently influences various characteristics of the voice. This is where they employ an instrument known as a Psychological Stress Evaluator and use microphones attached to a computer to detect and display intensity, frequency, pitch, harmonics or (my favorite) microtremors.

It is used in the workplace and even in some police investigations today including the recent high-profile case of George Zimmerman’s shooting of Trayvon Martin:

There is absolutely no empirical validity to any of the above assertions by the VSA community. None. In fact, the core notions have been falsified repeatedly dating back to Horvath (1978, 1979) and Gamer (2006).

The Comparative Questions test (CQT), which is lauded by the polygraph industry as being the gold standard in protocols, entirely depends on the examiner not being blinded to the inquiry. The questions need to be discussed with the examinees prior to the examination, and background information is needed from the examinee. This means that CQT protocol cannot be carried out covertly.

Even the voice analysis community even admits that the RIT (Relevant-Irrelevant test) protocol cannot be performed on people using voice stress analysis.

There are large intrapersonal differences with no research to isolate that variable.

There are astronomically large issues with interrater interpretation of the same data.

The National Research Council in 2003 concluded that “although proponents of voice stress analysis claim high levels of accuracy, empirical research on the validity of the technique has been far from encouraging.”

The US Department of Defense Polygraph Institute conducted a controlled study and found it to be inferior to the polygraph and slightly above random chance in the detection of lies.

So why does it persist as an investigative tool? It is scientific junk.

Consider the following survey of the empirical research as compiled by the American Polygraph Association

• Brenner, M., Branscomb, H., & Schwartz, G. E. (1979). Psychological stress evaluator: Two tests of a vocal measure. Psychophysiology, 16(4), 351-357.
  Conclusion: “Validity of the analysis for practical lie detection is questionable”
• Cestaro, V.L. (1995). A Comparison Between Decision Accuracy Rates Obtained Using the Polygraph Instrument and the Computer Voice Stress Analyzer (CVSA) in the Absence of Jeopardy. (DoDPI95-R-0002). Fort McClellan, AL: Department of Defense Polygraph Institute.
  Conclusion: Accuracy was not significantly greater than chance for the CVSA.
• DoDPI Research Division Staff, Meyerhoff, J.L., Saviolakis, G.A., Koenig M.L., & Yourick, D.L. (In press). Physiological and Biochemical Measures of Stress Compared to Voice Stress Analysis Using the Computer Voice Stress Analyzer (CVSA). (DoDPI01-R-0001). Department of Defense Polygraph Institute.
  Conclusion: Direct test of the CVSA against medical markers for stress (blood pressure, plasma ACTH, salivary cortisol) found that CVSA examiners could not detect known stress. This project was a collaborative effort with Walter Reed Army Institute of Research.
• Fuller, B.F. (1984). Reliability and validity of an interval measure of vocal stress. Psychological Medicine, 14(1), 159-166
  Conclusion: Validity of voice stress measures was poor.
• Janniro, M. J., & Cestaro, V. L. (1996). Effectiveness of Detection of Deception Examinations Using the Computer Voice Stress Analyzer. (DoDPI95-P-0016). Fort McClellan, AL : Department of Defense Polygraph Institute.
  DTIC AD Number A318986.
  Conclusion: Chance-level detection of deception using the CVSA as a voice stress device.
• Hollien, H., Geison, L., & Hicks, J. W., Jr. (1987). Voice stress analysis and lie detection. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 32(2), 405-418.
  Conclusions: Chance-level detection of stress. Chance-level detection of lies.
• Horvath, F. S. (1978). An experimental comparison of the psychological stress evaluator and the galvanic skin response in detection of deception. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63(3), 338-344.
  Conclusion: Chance-level detection of deception.
• Horvath, F. S. (1979). Effect of different motivational instructions on detection of deception with the psychological stress evaluator and the galvanic skin response. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64(3, June), 323-330.
  Conclusion: Voice stress did not detect deception greater than chance.
• Kubis, J. F. (1973). Comparison of Voice Analysis and Polygraph As Lie Detection Procedures. (Technical Report No. LWL-CR-03B70, Contract DAAD05-72-C-0217). Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD: U.S. Army Land Warfare Laboratory.
  Conclusion: Chance-level detection of deception for voice analysis.
• Lynch, B. E., & Henry, D. R. (1979). A validity study of the psychological stress evaluator. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 11(1), 89-94.
  Conclusion: Chance level detection of stress using the voice.
• O’Hair, D., Cody, M. J., & Behnke, R. R. (1985). Communication apprehension and vocal stress as indices of deception. The Western Journal of Speech Communication, 49, 286-300.
  Conclusions: Only one subgroup showed a detection rate significantly better than chance, and it did so by the thinnest of margins. Use of questionable statistical methods in this study suggests the modest positive findings would not be replicated in other research. See next citation.
• O’Hair, D., Cody, M. J., Wang, S., & Chao, E. Y. (1990). Vocal stress and deception detection among Chinese. Communication Quarterly, 38(2, Spring), 158ff.
  Conclusion: Partial replication of above study. Vocal scores were not related to deception.
• Suzuki, A., Watanabe, S., Takeno, Y., Kosugi, T., & Kasuya, T. (1973). Possibility of detecting deception by voice analysis. Reports of the National Research Institute of Police Science, 26(1, February), 62-66.
  Conclusion: Voice measures were not reliable or useful.
• Timm, H. W. (1983). The efficacy of the psychological stress evaluator in detecting deception. Journal of Police Science and Administration, 11(1), 62-68.
  Conclusion: Chance-level detection of deception.
• Waln, R. F., & Downey, R. G. (1987). Voice stress analysis: Use of telephone recordings. Journal of Business and Psychology , 1(4), 379-389.
  Conclusions: Voice stress methodology did not show sufficient reliability to warrant its use as a selection procedure for employment.

 'Assessing the Validity of Voice Stress Analysis Tools in a Jail Setting' study by Damphousse, Kelly R., University of Oklahoma & the Oklahoma Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services.

Abstract:

Manufacturers of Voice Stress Analysis (VSA) devices have suggested that their devices are able to measure deception with great accuracy, low cost, and little training.

As a result, police departments across the country have purchased costly VSA computer program s with the intention of supplementing (or supplanting) the use of the polygraph at an estimated cost of more than $16,000,000.

Previous VSA studies have been conducted using simulated deception in laboratory conditions. These earlier research projects suggest that VSA programs have the capacity to detect changes in vocal patterns as a result of induced stress. To date, however, no published research studies have demonstrated that VSA program s can distinguish between “general” stress and the stress related to being deceptive.

The goal of this study was to test the validity and reliability of two popular VSA programs (LVA and CVSA) in a “real world” setting. Questions about recent drug use were asked of a random sample of arrestees in a county jail. Their responses and the VSA output were compared to a subsequent urinalysis to determine if the VSA programs could detect deception.

Both VSA program s show poor validity – neither program efficiently determined who was being deceptive about recent drug use. The programs were not ab le to detect deception at a rate any better than chance.

The data also suggest poor reliability for both VSA products when we compared expert and novice interpretations of the output.

Correlations between novices and experts ranged from 0.11 to 0.52 (depending on the drug in question).

Finally, we found that arrestees in this VSA study were much less likely to be deceptive ab out recent drug use than arrestees in a non-VSA research project that used the same protocol (i.e., the ADAM project).

This finding provides support for the “bogus pipeline” effect.

For more information read the 'Virginia Department of Occupational Professionalism and Regulation Study of the Utility and Validity of Voice Stress Analyzers'.
http://www.thetruthaboutforensicscience.com/voice-stress-analysis-challenges/

DNA police checkpoint lawsuit

Reading, PA. police helped a private contractor pull over innocent drivers to take cheek swabs to check for prescription drugs, a driver claims in court.
     
Ricardo Nieves sued the City of Reading, its Mayor Vaughn Spencer, Police Chief William Heim, and the Pacific Institute for Research & Evaluation, in Federal Court.

He also sued a John and Jane Doe, allegedly employees of the Pacific Institute.

The Calverton, Md.-based Pacific Institute, a nonprofit with 10 research centers around the country, studies individual and social problems related to alcohol and drugs, according to its website.

The company "receives money from the federal government to research the driving habits of motorists," Nieves says in the lawsuit.

The Pacific Institute was working on a contract with the National Highway and Traffic Safety Administration, according to Pennsylvania newspaper reports on the bizarre stops.

Nieves claims the company had permission from the mayor and police chief to pull over drivers who had not broken any laws, to test them for prescription drugs and study their behavior.

It happened to him on Dec. 13 as he drove on a public road in Reading, Nieves says.

 "A cruiser owned and operated by the City of Reading Police Department was parked by the side of the street with its lights flashing," the lawsuit states.

 "Bright orange security cones lined the lane where plaintiff was driving. Plaintiff was in the right hand lane and the lane to plaintiff's left was full of traffic such that he could not pull over to change lanes.

 "Defendant John Doe stepped out into plaintiff's lane of traffic, blocked his further advance, and flagged him to pull off the public road into a parking lot on Laurel Street."

Nieves had no choice but to drive into the parking lot, where five to seven improvised parking spaces had been created by orange security cones. He pulled into one.

"Nieves reasonably believed under the totality of the circumstances that he was being stopped by the Reading Police Department because of the flashing lights of the police car on the street, the fluorescent orange cones on the street and in the parking lot, and the presence of a police car in the parking lot that was occupied by a police officer," he says in the complaint.

A woman with a clipboard, allegedly a Pacific Institute employee, came up to his car and told him he had done nothing wrong and he was not being "pulled over" - a statement Nieves says was "clearly false."

Jane Doe told him, "the purpose of the stop was a survey of drivers' behavior and that she wanted to take a cheek swab to check for the presence of prescription drugs," according to the lawsuit. She told him he would be paid to do it, Nieves says.
     
She asked him twice more - the third request Nieves calls coercion - at which point he told her "very firmly, 'No. Thank. You,'" according to the complaint.
     
She tried to hand him a pamphlet, which he did not accept, then walked away from his car. A Reading police officer in a parked police car then pointed him the way out of the lot, Nieves says.

"Under Reading's Stop-and-Swab Policy, motorists are apparently not even stopped for the purpose of determining whether they are engaged in criminal activity, but rather for the purpose of gleaning information about their long-term driving habits," Attorney Aaron Martin wrote in a brief to the court. Martin went on to say: "If such a purpose can justify a suspicionless stop, one wonders what other survey subjects the city of Reading asserts are sufficiently compelling to justify the random stopping of vehicles. Inquiries into religious preferences? Television viewing habits? Sports team support?"
     
Nieves claims the city and its police department receive money from the Pacific Institute for letting the private contractor stop drivers without probable cause, which is unconstitutional.
     
He seeks an injunction and damages for conspiracy to violate the Constitution, constitutional violations and false imprisonment.

Senator Dan Coats last month called on NHTSA to pull the plug on the program pending congressional hearings into the matter.

"I am extremely concerned that NHTSA is using federal dollars to both hire local uniformed police and conduct a checkpoint where DNA samples are taken through coercion from drivers stopped without probable cause," Coats wrote in a letter to NHTSA's administrator. "Since these checkpoints are being conducted through NHTSA, I urge you to immediately halt this program until it can be fully reviewed by Congress."
http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/12/30/64123.htm
http://thenewspaper.com/news/43/4302.asp

Traffic Safety Administration takes its blood & saliva 'Survey' to PA, with predictable results:

It appears the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (in conjunction with the White House Office of National Drug Policy) isn't done turning American citizens against their local police departments with its quest to determine what percentage of drivers are hitting the road while under the influence of drugs or alcohol.

The police department of Ft. Worth, Texas, didn't seem to enjoy the extra attention its assistance of the NHTSA at "voluntary" checkpoints brought with it. After first defending his officers' actions during the saliva/blood/oxygen draws, the chief later backtracked, offering a sincere apology that actually apologized for his department's participation rather than simply leaving any contrition left unsaid. ("We apologize if any drivers were offended…" Seriously?)

The claims made by both the NHTSA and Ft. Worth PD about this "survey" didn't add up. It was supposedly both "voluntary" and "anonymous." But drivers who refused to participate had their breath surreptitiously "tested" by Passive Alcohol Detectors, which means at least one aspect wasn't "voluntary." And those that did agree to give blood or saliva had to sign a release form, which knocks a pretty big hole in the "anonymity" side of it. Furthermore, having law enforcement officers ask nicely for cooperation tends to make "voluntary" experiences feel more "mandatory." A sign posted before the checkpoint could have pointed out the survey was voluntary, but one would imagine this sort of notification would have eliminated the desired "randomness" the NHTSA was seeking.

Police there joined forces with the Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation - a company hired by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy - to conduct the road stops.

Reading Police Chief William Heim said to the Reading Eagle that federal authorities are only trying to determine the extent of drunken and drugged driving statistics as part of an overall fight to lower road crashes and driving-related injuries. And he said the cheek swab requests weren’t aimed at collecting DNA but rather checking for the presence of prescription drugs, Fox News said. Moreover, he claimed police only served as security and weren’t actually pulling drivers to the side or asking questions.
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20131218/16503525610/traffic-safety-administration-takes-its-blood-saliva-survey-to-pennsylvania-with-predictable-results.shtml
http://readingeagle.com/article/20131217/NEWS/312179910#.UsMJfXl3uUk
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/dec/18/penn-police-pull-people-over-random-dna-tests-feds/

NHTSA saliva, sweat & hair DNA testing information:
http://www.nhtsa.gov/people/injury/research/StateofKnwlegeDrugs/StateofKnwlegeDrugs/pages/3Detection.html

C-SPAN question: Is the U.S. a police state?

Security guards can arrest citizens for DUI

 

North Carolina - Rental cops hired by homeowners associations (HOA) like the Lake Toxaway Community Association can conduct traffic stops that would be unconstitutional if performed by an actual police officer, according to a ruling handed down last week by the North Carolina Court of Appeals. A three-judge panel took up the case of Frederick Lloyd Weaver Jr, who was stopped on April 20, 2012 by an armed security guard employed by Metro Special Police and Security Services. The HOA for the Carleton Place townhomes near the University of North Carolina at Wilmington contracted with Metro Special Police & Security Services.

North Carolina allows armed guards to wear police-like uniforms with badges, carry guns and drive cars with flashing red and white light bars. Qualifying for the security guard position requires four hours of classroom instruction and a day on the range.

Another well know security company is AlliedBarton Security Services.

Security guard Brett Hunter received no training as to estimating speed or handling drunk drivers, but he was tasked with issuing speeding tickets to people driving through the community. When Hunter saw Weaver's Acura through his rearview mirror, he guessed that the car was traveling at 25 MPH in a 15 MPH zone. He turned on his flashing lights and forced Weaver to pull over.

"I'm Officer Hunter from Metro Public Safety," Hunter said as he asked Weaver for his driver's license.

After noticing slurred speech and other signs of intoxication, Hunter ordered Weaver out of the car to sit on the curb while he called the police. Hunter also wrote an HOA speeding ticket. About ten minutes later, a university police officer arrived, only to realize she lacked jurisdiction. Thirty-five minutes into the traffic stop, a Wilmington Police Detective arrived, confirmed the signs of intoxication and took Weaver into custody for driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI),

At trial, New Hanover County Superior Court Judge W. Allen Cobb Jr found the security guard was acting under the authority of the state and therefore was bound to the same reasonable suspicion standard that applies to police officers conducting a traffic stop."His show of apparent lawful authority (flashing lights, uniform, badge, and gun) intimidated defendant and made him feel compelled to wait outside his car for 45 minutes until WPD arrived," Judge Cobb found.

The appellate panel rejected this reasoning, arguing that rental cops are not bound by such restrictions.

"A traffic stop conducted entirely by a nonstate actor is not subject to reasonable suspicion because the Fourth Amendment does not apply," Judge Rick Elmore wrote for the appellate panel.

The judges determined that Hunter was not a state actor because he was not encouraged or recruited to make such arrests by the local police department.

North Carolina v. Weaver ruling: http://thenewspaper.com/rlc/docs/2013/nc-rentacop.pdf

Data brokers & private companies are spying on citizens who are “frequent ‘text posters’”

A Senate committee report goes to great lengths to determine all of the things that data brokers, the companies that trade in consumer data, don’t want to talk about. The 35-page report describes some of the companies’ strategies for collecting and organizing data, but significant portions of the report discuss what the companies are unwilling to talk about: namely, where they get a lot of their data and where that data is going.

Companies covered in the report include well-known firms, like Datalogix and Acxiom, as well as credit reporting companies that also trade in consumer data, like Experian and TransUnion. In the report, the committee sets out to answer four questions: what data is collected, how specific it is, how it’s collected, and how it’s used. While the first two questions turned out to be reasonably easy to answer, the companies all but stonewalled the committee on substantial answers to the latter two.

The report harkens back repeatedly to the good old days of data collection, when many of the same companies queried used demographic information like zip codes to help marketers figure out where to send catalogs or area codes to figure out which towns to telemarket to. These days, our many interactions with the Internet—particularly financial ones—have resulted in an onslaught of data for these data brokers to not only collect, but to resell to interested parties.

Datalogix claimed to the committee that it has data on “almost every US household,” while Acxiom’s databases cover 700 million people worldwide. Types of data collected include consumer purchase and transaction information, available methods of payment, types of cars consumers buy, health conditions, and social media usage. Equifax specified that it knew such specific details as whether people have bought a particular kind of shampoo or soft drink in the last six months, how many whiskey drinks a person has had in the last month, or how many miles they’ve traveled in the last four weeks.

What the companies would not specify in full were their sources for consumer data. Three companies, Acxiom, Experian, and Epsilon, would not reveal the sources of their data, citing confidentiality clauses as the reason.

The other data brokers said that their data comes from free government and public databases, along with purchase or license data from “retailers,” “financial institutions,” and “other data brokers,” which were otherwise described as “third-party partners.”

The report mentions that companies acquire social media data specifically for inclusion in their databases. However, this information is difficult to connect to a profile without access to much of the metadata logged by the sites providing those services. Those sites even discourage trying to source that information outside their official avenues; as the report states, Facebook once asked data broker Rapleaf to dispose of data it had obtained by crawling the website. On the other hand, it’s well-known that companies like Facebook and Google re-sell “anonymized” data fed to their services by customers to third parties like these data brokers.

Acxiom also gets data from websites that collect data in exchange for coupons, discounts, or health insurance quotes. Beyond that, Acxiom only stated cryptically that “there are over 250,000 websites who state in their privacy policy that they share data with other companies for marketing and/or risk mitigation purposes.”

What the companies did reveal was how they package this information internally. Subjects are often scored by data brokers in order to be sold in segments to certain companies on parameters like their ability to be socially influenced or whether they are “frequent ‘text posters.’”
http://arstechnica.com/business/2013/12/data-brokers-wont-even-tell-the-government-how-it-uses-sells-your-data/
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/10/data-mining-companies-sell-your-info

Judge says DHS is complicit in human trafficking that helps fund drug cartels

In a court order he signed on Dec. 13, 2013, U.S. District Judge Andrew S. Hanen of the U.S. District Court of the Southern District of Texas wrote that four times in the last four weeks he has heard troubling cases involving the DHS’s complicity in helping smuggle people across the border to their final destination.

This particular court opinion involved a case where Mirtha Veronica Nava-Martinez attempted to smuggle a ten-year old El Salvadorean female, whom Judge Hanen referred to only by her initials Y.P.S. to protect the minor’s identity, into the country. Nava-Martinez pled guilty and has been sentenced; Judge Hanen wrote after the case:

On May 18, 2013, Nava-Martinez, an admitted human trafficker, was caught at the Brownsville & Matamoras Bridge checkpoint. She was trying to smuggle Y.P.S. into the United States using a birth certificate that belonged to one of her daughters. Nava-Martinez had no prior relationship with Y.P.S. and was hired by persons unknown solely to smuggle her into the United States. Nava-Martinez is a resident alien and this was her second felony offense in three years, having committed a food stamp fraud offense in 2011. She was to be paid for smuggling Y.P.S. from Matamoras to Brownsville, although the identity of her immediate payor and the amount are unknown. The details as to how Y.P.S. got to Matamoros, Mexico from El Salvador, and how she was to get from Brownsville to Virginia, were also not disclosed to the Court.

Hanen noted that the “conspiracy” began when Y.P.S.’s mother, Patricia Elizabeth Salmeron Santos, “solicited human traffickers to smuggle” her daughter from their home country of El Salvador into the United States and onward to her residence in Virginia.

Salmeron Santos, Hanen wrote, had “applied for a tourist visa in 2000, but was turned down," adding, “Despite being denied legal entry into the United States, she entered the United States illegally and is living in Virginia." Salmeron Santos admitted that she hired the smugglers for $8,500 and paid them $6,000 in advance.

“The criminal conspiracy instigated by Salmeron Santos was temporarily interrupted when Nava-Martinez was arrested,” wrote Hanen. “Despite this setback, the goal of the conspiracy was successfully completed thanks to the actions of the United States Government.”

Hanen wrote that his court is “quite concerned with the apparent policy of the Department of Homeland Security of completing mission of individuals who are violating the border security of the United States.”

Specifically, Hanen said, Customs and Border Protection agents stopped Nava-Martinez at the border. “She was arrested, and the child was taken into custody.”

The DHS officials were notified that Salmeron Santos instigated this illegal conduct. Yet, instead of arresting Salmeron Santos for instigating the conspiracy to violate our border security laws, the DHS delivered the child to her—thus successfully completing the mission of the criminal conspiracy. It did not arrest her. It did not prosecute her. It did not even initiate deportation proceedings for her. This DHS policy is a dangerous course of action.

“The DHS, instead of enforcing our border security laws, actually assisted the criminal conspiracy in achieving its illegal goals,” Hanen wrote. 

The Government’s actions were not done in connection with a sting operation or a controlled delivery situation. Rather, the actions it took were directly in furtherance of Y.P.S.’s illegal presence in the United States. It completed the mission of the conspiracy initiated by Salmeron Santos. In summary, instead of enforcing the laws of the United States, the Government took direct steps to help the individuals who violated it. A private citizen would, and should, be prosecuted for this conduct.

“This is the fourth case with the same factual situation this Court has had in as many weeks,” Hanen wrote.

In all of the cases, human traffickers who smuggled minor children were apprehended short of delivering the children to their ultimate destination. In all cases, a parent, if not both parents, of the children was in this country illegally. That parent initiated the conspiracy to smuggle the minors into the country illegally. He or she also funded the conspiracy.

In each case, the DHS completed the criminal conspiracy, instead of enforcing the laws of the United States, by delivering the minors to the custody of the parent illegally living in the United States.”
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/12/19/Judge-DHS-complicit-in-conspiracy-with-cartels-to-smuggle-illegal-alien-children-into-US

DHS insider gives private investigator Douglas Hagmann his final warning:

Under the cover and amid the distraction of the Christmas bustle, I had my last “official” contact with a source inside the Department of Homeland Security known as “Rosebud” in my writings. My source is leaving his position, retiring along with numerous others choosing to leave this bureaucratic monstrosity.

My source took unprecedented measures to be certain that our contact was far off the radar of prying government eyes and ears. I was stunned at the lengths he employed, and even found myself somewhat annoyed by the inconvenience that his cloak-and-dagger approach caused. It was necessary, according to my source, because all department heads under FEMA and DHS are under orders to identify anyone disclosing any information for termination and potential criminal prosecution.

“DHS is like a prison environment, complete with prison snitches,” he said, referring to the search for leaks and leakers. And the warden is obsessed. Ask anyone in DHS. No one trusts anyone else and whatever sources might be left are shutting up. The threats that have been made far exceed anything I’ve ever seen. Good people are afraid for their lives and the lives of their families. We’ve all been threatened. They see the writing on the wall and are leaving. It’s not a joke and not hype.”

“I’ve seen documentation of multiple scenarios created outside of DHS. Different plans and back-up plans. Also, please understand that I deliberately used the word ‘created,’ as this is a completely manufactured event.  In the end it won’t be presented that way, which is extremely important for everyone to understand. What is coming will be blamed on some unforeseen event out of everyone’s control, that few saw coming or thought would actually happen. Then, another event will take place concurrent with this event, or immediately after it, to confuse and compound an already explosive situation.” I asked for specifics.

 

“As I said, there are several scenarios and I don’t know them all. I know one calls for a cyber-attack by an external threat, which will then be compounded by something far removed from everyone’s own radar. But it’s all a ruse, or a pretext. The threat is from within,” he stated. “Before people can regain their footing, a second event will be triggered.”

 

“I’ve seen one operational plan that refers to the federal government’s response to a significant terrorist attack on U.S. soil. Information at these levels is compartmentalized. I don’t have specifics, just plans for the response. The response will be controls and restrictions on travel, business, and every aspect of our lives, especially gun ownership and speech that incites people against the government. I guess some people would call it Martial Law, and they would not be incorrect. But understand that this will be a process deployed in stages. How quickly of a process remains to be seen.”

 

“I don’t think anyone except the initiated few know the precise series of events or the exact timing, just a general overview and an equally general time period. I think we’re in that period now, as DHS has their planned responses finalized. Also, the metals are important because it’s real money, not Ponzi fiat currency. The U.S. has no inventory of gold, so the prices are manipulated down to cause a sell-off of the physical assets. China is on a buying spree of gold, and other countries want their inventory back. The very people causing the prices to drop are the ones who are also buying the metals at fire sale prices. They will emerge extremely wealthy when the prices rise after the U.S. currency becomes wallpaper. A little research will identify who these people and organizations are.”

http://www.homelandsecurityus.com/archives/10236

Is DHS a criminal organization?
http://www.fulldisclosure.net/2013/05/is-deptl-of-homeland-security-a-terrorist-organization-vb116/

One out of every four activists could be a corporate spy

RT's Abby Martin interviews Guardian investigative journalist Nafeez Ahmed, who wrote about the report.

Ahmed describes the public-private surveillance partnership that works to crush dissident movements, often in favor of protecting corporate interests:

The report uncovers compelling evidence that much corporate espionage is facilitated by government agencies, particularly the FBI. The CCP report examines a September 2010 document from the Office of the Inspector General in the US Justice Department, which reviewed FBI investigations between 2001 and 2006. It concluded that: 

    "... the factual basis of opening some of the investigations of individuals affiliated with the groups was factually weak... In some cases, we also found that the FBI extended the duration of investigations involving advocacy groups or their members without adequate basis…. In some cases, the FBI classified some of its investigations relating to nonviolent civil disobedience under its 'Acts of Terrorism' classification."

The Justice Department found that:

    "... the FBI articulated little or no basis for suspecting a violation of any federal criminal statute... the FBI's opening EC [electronic communication] did not articulate any basis to suspect that they were planning any federal crimes….We also found that the FBI kept this investigation open for over 3 years, long past the corporate shareholder meetings that the subjects were supposedly planning to disrupt... We concluded that the investigation was kept open 'beyond the point at which its underlying justification no longer existed,' which was inconsistent with the FBI's Manual of Investigative and Operational Guidelines (MIOG)."

The FBI's involvement in corporate espionage has been institutionalised through 'InfraGard', "a little-known partnership between private industry, the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security." The partnership involves the participation of "more than 23,000 representatives of private industry," including 350 of the Fortune 500 companies.

But it's not just the FBI. According to the new report, "active-duty CIA operatives are allowed to sell their expertise to the highest bidder", a policy that gives "financial firms and hedge funds access to the nation's top-level intelligence talent. Little is known about the CIA's moonlighting policy, or which corporations have hired current CIA operatives."

Spooky Business: Corporate Espionage Against Nonprofit Organizations
http://www.corporatepolicy.org/spookybusiness.pdf

Social network spying could lead to lawsuits:

Organizations looking to hire new staff should rethink their clandestine use of social networking websites, such as Facebook, to screen new recruits. William Stoughton of North Carolina State University, lead author of a study published in Springer’s Journal of Business and Psychology, found that this practice could be seen as a breach of privacy and create a negative impression of the company for potential employees. This spying could even lead to law suits.

 

In one experiment, Stoughton’s research team, consisting of Drs. Lori Foster Thompson and Adam Meade, examined the reaction of applicants to prospective employers’ reviewing their social networking websites. In another part of the research, participants had to rate their experience with a proposed selection process through a simulated selection scenario. In both cases, participants rated how they felt about their privacy being invaded and if the attractiveness of an organization was diminished because of such strategies. In the second experiment, participants were also asked whether they’d consider seeking legal justice if social network screening occurred.

 

The results demonstrate that applicants perceived pre-employment screening of social networking websites as an invasion of privacy, and might even consider suing an organization for it. Such practices further reduce the attractiveness of an organization during various phases of the selection process.

 

Notably, Stoughton’s team found that people are very sensitive to their privacy being compromised, regardless of whether they are offered the job or not. It could even discourage candidates from accepting offers of employment if they interpret poor treatment of applicants as a preview or indication of how they would be dealt with as employees. Prior research has shown that people who do accept an offer of employment while being selected under unfair procedures are prone to unfavorable attitudes post-hire. The negativity resulting from perceived procedural mistreatment during the hiring process could carry forward onto the job, leading to low performance and high turnover.

Stoughton advises applicants to reconsider using their Facebook pages as private forums for casual discussion with their friends, and to rather adopt a much more guarded tone. He hinted at the demand for a new, so-called “scrubbing” service in which objectionable material is removed from clients’ presence on the Internet. This might be especially valuable for people applying for sensitive positions, such as jobs requiring a security clearance.

“Social network spying on job candidates could reduce the attractiveness of an organization during various phases of the selection process, especially if the applicant pool at large knows or suspects that the organization engages in such screening,” Stoughton notes. “Because internet message boards and social media provide easily accessible forums for job seekers to share their experiences and opinions with others, it is very easy for a soured applicant to affect others’ perceptions of an organization.”
http://www.springer.com/about+springer/media/springer+select?SGWID=0-11001-6-1449155-0

Google's transparency report reveals disturbing trend to squelch free speech in U.S.

Google revealed a sharp rise in requests from U.S. government officials (police) asking for political content to be removed from the web in its latest transparency report.

“Over the past four years, one worrying trend has remained consistent: governments continue to ask us to remove political content. Judges have asked us to remove information that’s critical of them, police departments want us to take down videos or blogs that shine a light on their conduct, and local institutions like town councils don’t want people to be able to find information about their decision-making processes,” Susan Infantino, legal director, said in a blogpost.

“These officials often cite defamation, privacy and even copyright laws in attempts to remove political speech from our services. In this particular reporting period, we received 93 requests to take down government criticism and removed content in response to less than one third of them. Four of the requests were submitted as copyright claims,” she said.

In the US Google and its peers are fighting to be allowed to disclose how often they receive legal demands for information from the National Security Agency (NSA). Those requests are made through the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (Fisa) court and the companies are legally barred from disclosing them.

A presidential review panel, looking into the NSA in the wake of whistleblower Edward Snowden’s revelations, suggested tech companies should be allowed to disclose Fisa requests.

“While the information we present in our transparency report is certainly not a comprehensive view of censorship online, it does demonstrate a worrying upward trend in the number of government requests, and underscores the importance of transparency around the processes governing such requests. As we continue to add data, we hope it will become increasingly useful and informative in policy debates and decisions around the world,” said Infantino, the legal director.

From January to June 2013, the following countries made the most requests to remove content:

• Turkey (1,673 requests for 12,162 items)
• United States (545 requests for 3,887 items)
• Brazil (321 requests for 1,635 items)
• Russia (257 requests for 277 items)
• India (163 requests for 714 items)

In the US Google received 545 requests for the removal of 3,887 items. Among those requests was one from a local law enforcement official to remove a search result linking to a news article about his record as an officer. Google did not remove the search result.
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/dec/19/google-transparency-report-political-content#!

Verizon to publish transparency report disclosing law enforcement requests for customer information:
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/verizon-to-publish-transparency-report-disclosing-law-enforcement-requests-for-customer-information-2013-12-19?reflink=MW_news_stmp

4th. Amendment is dead: Police can search motorists cellphones if they've been stopped for a traffic violation

Drivers pulled over for minor traffic violations can have their cell phone searched, according to a recent federal ruling. A judge decided last week that Oklahoma City, Oklahoma police were in the right when they downloaded information off the mobile phone belonging to Noe Vergara Wuences who was pulled over on March 22, 2012 because the temporary paper license plate on his new car flapped a bit in the wind.

During the stop, Officer Scott McCall asked Wuences about his travel plans. At 12 minutes into the traffic stop, Officer McCall radioed for a drivers license check. A few minutes later the license came back clean, so Officer McCall asked dispatch to send a canine unit. At this point, Officer McCall asked Wuences if he could search the car. Wuences said he "doesn't mind."

The drug dog alerted on the methamphetamine in the vehicle and Wuences was arrested. Officer McCall took the Nokia 1616-2C and ZTE X500 mobile phones that were in the car and began using a Cellebrite UFED device to download all of the data. Many police departments, even in small towns, use this portable unit to crack cell phone passwords and grab emails, text messages, phone records and photographs automatically. Officer McCall failed to download the Nokia data, but he wrote down the phone log information manually.

The Oklahoma City officer did not seek a warrant before gathering the data, so Wuences and his attorney, John M. Dunn, argued this was a Fourth Amendment violation. The courts have created an "automobile exception" to the prohibition on warrantless searches that allows an officer to look in closed containers found in a vehicle because of the reduced expectation of privacy when driving. Given the large amount of data contained on modern cell phones, Dunn argued the exception should not apply.

"Because the courts have recognized the technological change in cellular phones which is elevated them from being analogous to a 'beeper' which had extremely limited data storage capability, and has now recognized that they are more like handheld computers containing large amounts of personal and private information, which should not be subject to 'rummaging' on the part of the government merely because it is located in a vehicle," attorney John M. Dunn argued.

Officer McCall manually searched all areas of the cell phone's memory, not just the parts that could be reasonably related to drug trafficking. Dunn noted that the officers made no attempt to prevent the phones from being remotely wiped. US District Judge Gregory K. Frizzell was not persuaded.

"The court finds, based on the record at the evidentiary hearing, that there was probable cause to believe the cell phones contained evidence of a crime," Judge Frizzell ruled. "Further, the court finds that officers had reason to believe there was a risk that the evidence could be destroyed by remote means."

Wuences accepted a plea bargain and entered a guilty plea after the ruling was issued.

U.S. v. Zaavedra ruling: http://thenewspaper.com/rlc/docs/2013/us-cellsearch.pdf

Pennsylvania motorist describes police DNA checkpoint:

Facebook, Google, Microsoft and Amazon are purchasing fiber optic cables to control the internet

Facebook, Google, Microsoft and Amazon are purchasing fiber optic cables used for the internet to become the suppliers of the information, servicing the internet themselves.

The ability for users to maintain their 1st Amendment rights on the internet is being placed into the hands of the corporations.

When a user visits Amazon.com, they are standing on private digital property and are subject to the rights and laws where the servers are housed.

This enables the governments, through direct contact with the literal connections to the internet via these corporations, the systematic control over the free flow of information continues on.
Google already owns more than 100,000 miles of global private FOC routes. (Sprint owns just 40,000.)

Facebook just finished installing a massive high capacity network throughout Europe that links back to its massive Arctic data center in Sweden. The social network also just invested millions to help lay a 6,000-mile-long cable across the Pacific. Meanwhile, Amazon's spending on infrastructure is up 44 percent to $2.6 billion as it buys up more fiber networks, as Microsoft builds its own networks and invests in underwater cables.

Facebook has recently installed a network that connects user information to the Arctic Circle Datacenter (ACD).

Both Microsoft and Amazon have invested in cloud services.

Google’s Project Link (PL) wants to build “fiber-optic networks, making it possible for local providers to connect more people to the Internet and each other.”

To solidify their influence over government, the titans of the internet, including Google, eBay, Amazon and Facebook, combined forces under the blanket of a newly formed lobby group that wants to influence lawmakers on how they can manipulate the internet as well as how important they truly are.

The lobby group is called the Internet Association , and is based in Washington, DC, and headed by Michael Beckerman, former adviser of the Energy and Commerce Committee within the House of Representatives.

The Internet Association’s goal is to control the perspective of elected officials on internet technologies, their uses and cooperation with various federal agencies. Their website claims they are “dedicated to advancing public policy solutions to strengthen and protect an open, innovative and free Internet.”

Beckerman explains : “The Internet isn’t just Silicon Valley anymore. The Internet has moved to Main Street. Our top priority is to ensure that elected leaders in Washington understand the profound impacts on the Internet and Internet companies on jobs, economic growth, and freedom.”
http://www.occupycorporatism.com/facebook-google-poised-begin-real-takeover/
http://gizmodo.com/facebook-and-google-want-to-control-the-cables-that-car-1484955396
http://online.wsj.com/news/article_email/SB10001424052702304173704579262361885883936-lMyQjAxMTAzMDEwNjExNDYyWj

DHS wants high school & college student spies

DHS announced the launch of the 2014 Secretary’s Honors Program (SHP) Cyber Student Volunteer Initiative for college students. Through the program, more than 100 unpaid student volunteer assignments will be available to support DHS’ cyber mission at local DHS field offices in over sixty locations across the country.

More information about the SHP Cyber Student Volunteer Initiative here. The Air Force is also promoting the Cyber Patriot contest for high school students.

“DHS is excited to continue the Secretary’s Honors Program Cyber Student Volunteer Initiative and expand it to additional DHS offices and locations while increasing our engagement with students in the important cybersecurity work DHS does every day,” said Acting Secretary of Homeland Security Rand Beers. “Providing these opportunities across the Department is a vital step in our efforts to cultivate the next generation of cybersecurity leaders and to attract the best and brightest cyber talent who are looking to pursue a career in public service.”

This program, created in April 2013 by former DHS secretary Janet Napolitano, provided assignments at U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Homeland Security Investigations computer forensics labs and state and major urban area fusion centers. Now the program has been expanded to include new opportunities at the U.S. Secret Service, the U.S. Coast Guard, the Transportation Security Administration, the Office of Intelligence and Analysis, the DHS Office of the Chief Information Officer, and additional state and major urban area fusion centers and ICE labs.

Through the initiative, student volunteers will gain hands-on experience and exposure to the cybersecurity work performed by DHS cybersecurity professionals. The program is specifically designed for current college students pursuing a program of study in a cybersecurity-related field. DHS says that participants will perform a broad range of duties in support of DHS’ cybersecurity mission, in areas ranging from cyber threat analysis to digital forensics to network diagnostics and incident response. Student volunteers will begin in spring 2014 and participate throughout the summer.

“DHS Summer Research Team Program for Minority Serving Institutions” to provide faculty and student research teams with the opportunity to conduct research at the university-based DHS Centers.

Benefits include:

• Weekly stipends for faculty ($1,200), graduate students ($600), and undergraduate students ($500);
• Housing Allowance for faculty ($1,500) and students ($1,000);
• Travel allowance for one round-trip to Center for participants who live more than 50 miles, one-way, from their assigned Center;
• Follow-on funding up to $50,000 may be awarded to faculty to continue research and collaboration efforts with the DHS Center for the 2014-2015 academic year.

More information can be found at The Cyber Security Forum Initiative.
http://federalgovernmentjobs.us/jobs/Secretary-S-Honors-Program-Cyber-Student-Volunteer-356670600.html
http://www.orau.gov/dhseducation/faculty/index.html

Daleks coming to a school near you & may replace police at $6.25 an hour

 

CA -  The company Knightscope is shooting to have the K5 fully deployed by 2015 on a machine-as-a-service business model, meaning clients would pay by the hour for a monthly bill, based on 40-hour weeks, of $1,000. The hourly rate of $6.25 means the cost of the K5 would be competitive with the wages of many a low-wage human security guard.

 

There are about 1.3 million private security guards in the United States, and they are low-paid for the most part, averaging about $23,000 a year, according to the Service Employees International Union. Most are not unionized, so they're vulnerable to low-cost automation alternatives.

 

The robots, which are 1.50 metres (59.06 inches) tall and weigh about 300lbs. are able to collect real time data and utilize predictive analytics.

 

The automatons have in-built crime detection technology, and a camera which can relay any felonies to police.

 

The K5 will be equipped with facial recognition and even the ability to sniff out emanations from chemical and biological weapons, as well as airborne pathogens. It will be able to travel up to 18 mph, and later models will include the ability to maneuver curbs and other terrain.

"It can see, hear, feel, and smell and it will roam around autonomously 24/7," said CEO William Santana Li, a former Ford Motor executive.

 

"When the robot detects a crime being committed, it alerts the police. Then the camera turns on and the footage will be public to the entire community." Knightscope chief executive William Santana Li said.

 

"We like to try and solve the big problems" Li added when asked why the robot had been created.

The robot comes in two principal models: the K10, designed for open spaces, and the K5, which is better suited to more enclosed environments.

  

Security bots are one of the healthier subsets of the robotics industry. iRobot, maker of the popular Roomba vacuum bot, supplies both consumer and military-grade bots that perform a multitude of functions from cleaning floors, pools, and gutters to aiding bomb squads. And a number of smaller companies and research university projects have cooked up everything from consumer robots for personal property to helicopter drones for surveillance purposes.

 

Where the robotics industry has been lacking is in providing public spaces and large businesses with an all-purpose and highly capable bot that anyone in need of security and surveillance can employ, with military-grade guts that detect deviations from everyday activity.

 

"Our plan is to be able to cut crime by 50 percent in an area. When we do that, every mayor across this planet is going to be giving us a call," Li said confidently.

 

The K5 is being designed with the Sandy Hook Promise (Profit) in mind. It hopes to have its bot one day patrolling schools because "you are never going to have an armed officer in every school," Li said.

http://knightscope.com/tag/schools/

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/robot-vigilantes-replace-cops-3-80-hour-1429476 

http://news.cnet.com/8301-11386_3-57614255-76/this-crime-predicting-robot-aims-to-patrol-our-streets-by-2015/ 

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/03/science/coming-soon-a-night-watchman-with-wheels.html?_r=0

Knightscope K5 or 'Dalek' you be the judge:

 

 

'DALEKS' from Doctor Who: