by Christine Tomlinson

Are Constitutional guarantees still available to the citizenry? There are three issues pertaining to the NSA Domestic Surveillance program that should be of great concern to all citizens. These issues are:

A) intrinsic violations of privacy by the very nature of the technology of the program

B) collateral damage in the execution of the program

C) lack of oversight in the choice of targeting of the surveillance program

Using Network Pattern Analysis and Detection (NPAD) the NSA is able to "pull relationships" among signal events (intercepts) out of a soup of (cellular) phone traffic, financial traffic and Internet traffic (predominantly unencrypted emails but also source and target links of encrypted emails or emails which have been decrypted). The intercepts allow an analyst to infer relationships between subjects that are the interactors in an intercept.

Relationships are pulled out by detecting the presence of "indicators" such as keywords, voice prints or characteristic financial transactions. When a threshold of relationships is reached then a warrant may be sought from FISA based on the "probable cause" presumably indicated by the relationships.

To get to this point however requires that a significant amount of conversation or email content be examined to trigger reasonably interesting relationships and herein lies issue A. In an effort to screen traffic to and from the United States (assuming that the data collection is so limited - making it foreign intelligence) essentially ALL traffic has to be screened for indicators - presumably one classified aspect of the program is just how much traffic is subject to screening, is it done by sampling or by exhaustive brute-force examination of each and every event. This is the "warrantless" surveillance aspect of the program which many are attending to in the press. The FISA warrants come in after some probable cause has been established and then perhaps archived signals are re-examined for full content and new events are selected based on the identities of subjects related to cell phones, IP addresses, bank accounts and so on in the original relationships.

Proponents of the program will argue that privacy is not violated until a person attends to the content of an intercept and that there are many many intercepts that are only examined by the automated elements of the NPAD system since presumably most intercepts are not significant to the NPAD. So no privacy is violated in these "negative" cases.

It is on this point that somewhat of a majority of US citizens seem complacent regarding the program as an invasion of their privacy. "I'm not doing anything wrong and the bad guys are out there so I'll cede a bit of privacy realizing the rapid advance of technology and the need to uncover the bad guys as early and efficiently as possible."

Thus far the program has been subject to no operational oversight other than by the administration which has already exhibited little regard for the principles of checks and balances. Gen. Hayden and other spokes persons for the administration argue that the speed with which events happen and the speed with which the NPAD operates make it impractical to have oversight on an intercept by intercept basis. This is certainly true as the sheer magnitude of the number of intercepts precludes any human assessment case by case.

So let's assume that the NPAD is really useful at picking out significant relationships and winnowing down the set of intercepts that a human has to look at to a manageable number in terms of the number of analysts that are available. Some (most?) of these intercepts will be false-positives - they will turn out to be innocuous - and this is one of the real dangers of the program - collateral damage in the intelligence operation: Otherwise innocent persons can be mis-identified as targets of interest in the "long war". Now such persons may well be "cleared" early on by the initial analyst's examination of intercepts - the person's privacy has been violated irretrievably at this point; or the person may not be cleared until some rather nasty experiences are thrown their way - for example the attorney in Oregon who was mistakenly arrested and reluctantly released after some weeks by the FBI as being involved in the Madrid bombings.

The point needs to be understood that individuals are apparently identified based on impersonal indicators alone - not just because a "known bad guy" is on one end of the line; otherwise there is no useful reason that the bad guy isn't under FISA warrant and associated phone numbers, voice prints and so on are used as indicators to pull out phone calls involving the bad guy, for example.

So issue B is collateral damage and frequency of its occurrence.

The third issue arising from no third-party oversight is more sinister. It is the question of who is overseeing the targeting of the NPAD. In other words who is making the decisions about what sorts of indicators and patterns are being used to trigger human attention? The power of such a system and the lack of oversight of its targeting certainly would permit it to be used for investigating all sorts of things that someone would find objectionable -- child pornography rings, drug rings, in fact pretty much any sort of organized activities (Quakers protesting a war of choice) -- that might be construed as "not in the national interest".

So issue C is the lack of apparent oversight in the targeting of the NPAD.

These latter two issues are not receiving much if any attention and are at least as important as the first issue. This type of technology is a more effective Big Brother capability than Orwell imagined. --Christine Tomlinson is publisher of Bush Watch.

Hot Air America

Dear Loyal Air America Radio Listeners:

As you are aware, beginning July 11th, Air America Radio will broadcast exclusively with XM Satellite Radio.This partnership is giving us an extra leg to stand on, allows us to develop more programming, and moves us forward into the future with a strong foundation.

[Since you have invested in a Sirius radio and a one-year subscription to Sirius programs,] we recognize that [cutting all ties with Sirius Radio] has inconvenienced you. We greatly value your support for Air America Radio and would like to offer you a special promotion from Air America Radio and XM Radio, which we intend to send out next week [,but we're not going to tell you what it is in this letter].

Thank you very much for expressing your concerns to us, for your patience during this time of transition, and most important of all, for your continued support for Air America Radio.

Kind regards,

Air America Radio

--------------------------

Dear Air America,

Your business ethics are egregious. What crap! I tried to call several times and so forth and you all simply shuttle callers to the waste basket. Your sense of supporting a "community" is a crock. You're as much a part of the problem as the rest of the infotainment business. Simply making money off of a disaffected part of the US public is obnoxious. Making money while providing service would be a model that others could follow, but NOOOOOO! You have to stoop to the same low level as the rest.

We'll be protesting this silliness on progrressive web sites, as will others.

ciao,

Christine

Showdown Time

Dear Christine, Within a matter of days, the Senate could face a truly momentous decision - one with consequences that will reverberate across America for decades to come. Senator Frist, the Republican Majority Leader, has a plan to make President Bush's judicial nominations immune to a Senate filibuster. If he can convince enough Republican Senators to go along, the nomination and confirmation of judges will become a tightly-controlled, one-party affair. We're working hard to make sure the Senate doesn't cross this dangerous line. Here's how you can help: Please Call Your Republican Senators Now!... There is so much on the line in this debate. And, I am convinced that if we mobilize as quickly and effectively as possible, we can prevent the Senate from taking the dangerous course that Republican leaders have called for. Remember, we're fighting for the strength and vibrancy of democracy itself. Sincerely, John Kerry

P.S. If you need extra incentive for making those calls: * Imagine a world in which every appointment to the federal judiciary is a tightly-controlled, one-party exercise. * Imagine the kinds of judges that will sit on the federal bench - even on the Supreme Court -- if George W. Bush never needs a single Democratic vote. * Imagine the kind of decisions those judges will make that will directly affect your life and your constitutional rights.

Dear John, I've tried the Austin numbers of the Republican senators, but either they are busy or the numbers provided are to fax machines. In any event, this is just plain silly to imagine that the two Texas state senators give a flip about what a few people in Texas think. What you need to do is stand the ground and bring the flipping government to a halt in the likely event that the anti-filibuster rule is enacted. Frist, Delay, and the rest of the so-called GOP leadership is simply running on arrogance, and this fascist state is unacceptable. ciao, Christine

Christine, I agree, the Dems must close Congress down if the Repubs remove their right to filibuster against totally unacceptable Bush judicial nominees. I hope that Kerry and his Dems will do better upholding their filibuster rights than they did unholding our Constitutional rights by capitulating to the Repubs on the Schiavo bill. best, Jerry

If a congressman introduced legislation to declare that the ratio of the distance around a circle to its diameter was 9.2376, most of us would laugh and assume that he wouldn't get re-elected. Or would we or would he? This in fact happened (see Petr Beckmann, "A History Of Pi," p. 174) in 1897 in Indiana as H.B. 246 and was passed unanimously by the house on January 18, 1897. The bill was introduced by Edwin J. Goodman, M.D. The correct value is 3.14159... and building anything based on the legislated value would lead to vast numbers of lawsuits as buildings and bridges fell down, land wouldn't be surveyed properly and no one would know what they owned. The value of Pi isn't subject to legislation, but the size of a gallon is. So there is a long history of legislative abuse in this country. The above is certainly not the only one just one of the more obviously absurd ones.

People who are supposedly educated and therefore have developed some critical thinking skills still engage in believing things that are either patently not in accord with common experience or are indeterminate. To the extent that these beliefs don't lead to behaviors that are threatening to the rest of us then they can be reasonably tolerated.

However, today we find a significant 20 - 40% of American sheeple behaving based on beliefs that are as absurd as believing that pi is 9.2376. Yes, it is absurd to believe that 'the bible' is the literal word of 'god and to legislate, kill, torture, cajole and 'educate' based on these beliefs. This is where it becomes no longer reasonable to tolerate such beliefs.

For many sheeple, religion isn't functioning as an institution that helps to create a context in which life and in particular, but not exclusively, human life can flourish. Rather, these institutions are being used as the basis of acting out in remarkably childlike ways. In the U.S. we are increasingly being governed by people engaging in magical thinking and mass delusion. Similar situations are happening in the 'Islamic world' and the clash of two groups of children on the playground brought us 9/11 and Iraq-II.

It is no longer, if it ever actually was, reasonable to be tolerant of other's beliefs when they wreak such havoc on the planet. Humans are the result of an evolutionary process - this is not a belief but an expression of a way of characterizing our experience of the world. It is no less grounded in observation than that apples fall out of trees and hit the ground. It is magical thinking to believe that there is some 'big other' tinkering with the bit by bit construction of reality. This kind of thinking is remarkably inconsistent. It simply doesn't make sense to believe that a 'loving god' put a helpless fetus in a crack whore's womb so it could be born addicted in pain and agony.

Compassion in the world arises from beings such as ourselves recognizing the essence of reality-itself and behaving with compassion to create nurturing contexts in which people can flourish and attain their fullest potential whatever it may be. As we have evolved ever more potent technologies that are capable of mass death in the short term and via effects such as global warming, in the longer term; it becomes every person's obligation to engage the world around us with discernment and to challenge and resist efforts by the sheeple to behave in childish ways and to hold and act on beliefs that are inimical to life. There are some who claim that the 'left behind' series represents a significant group of people that want to encourage destruction of the environment and so forth in the belief that this is in accord with Revelations and will presage the rapture and the return of the Messiah. This kind of belief is blatantly dangerous to life and it is not appropriate to tolerate in the name of liberal or progressive correctness. It's just foolish to do so.

We were horrified and repulsed by Jones-town and there was a great increase in efforts to identify cults and de-program and intervene on behalf of family members that got taken in by such groups with 'weird beliefs.' By the time Waco rolled around, however, the rising of a mass cult of dangerous beliefs had taken hold in the legislature and was soon to take over the White House. Finally, we ended up with an Attorney General who anointed himself with Crisco, held prayer meetings in the Justice Department, and blurred the distinction between the Constitution and the Bible. The current administration has continued to blend dangerous 'religious' beliefs and prosecution of a Calvinist agenda in which the 'haves' are blessed and the 'have nots' need to work harder.

It really is time to resist with the pen, pocketbook, and vote every belief that encourages abdicating personal and collective responsibility. Believing that 'god' will make it right in the end foolishly mortgages our future by turning Pascal's wager* on its head. --posted 03.31.05

*"Blaise Pascal offered a pragmatic reason for believing in God: even under the assumption that God's existence is unlikely, the potential benefits of believing are so vast as to make betting on theism rational." Internet Encyclopedia

In the last 24 hours I've seen "Bush's Brain" a documentary film based on the book by Slater; read Paul Krugman's piece on vote fraud; and read an article about a woman in Italy who was fined 80 euros for wearing a full veil in public.

As many are writing these days, there is an acute illness throughout the world and focused in many ways on the United States. Globalization is responsible for this state-of-affairs to the extent that it has connected peoples that were otherwise only vaguely aware of each other. The real source of this illness is the primitive archaic drive to defend US from THEM. As real and virtual crowding of our collective geographic, psychological and spiritual space becomes stifling most of us become increasingly uncomfortable and experience increased anxiety. The primitive response is to lash out at those who are not us since if they can be made to go away then our space will be less confined.

The core of most peoples' sense of identity is a combination of exoteric culture and an interior sense of religiosity. This means that we have a strong "religious" component to the US versus THEM responses. We are locked globally in a wide variety of religiously motivated battles: Israel vs Palestine; America versus al Qaeda; Hindu India versus Muslim Pakistan; evangelical christians versus gay americans; skin heads versus jews and blacks; and on and on.

We have a bush that claims 'I've heard the call. I believe God wants me to run for President.' But let's be absolutely clear. Religiosity is NOT the same thing as "living a spiritual life". Most of what is claimed in the name of religion is based entirely on pursuit of wealth, fame, reputation, power and avoiding loss, blame, disrepute and mundane powerlessness. These pursuits are NOT what ANY of the world's great spiritual movements have taught at their core.

In the last debate, Bush and Kerry both acknowledged that we should "love our neighbor like we love ourselves". The problem is that we actually don't like ourselves very much at all and so we don't like our neighbors either. That is we already really do follow the "Fool's Golden Rule". The correct statement of the rule is "Love your neighbor and yourself". If this isn't immediately clear, spend an hour or two contemplating just what the words mean.

So we have a background of moral and religious pathology and against this background there is the 2 Nov 2004 debacle coming up. Let me just state the conclusion: "Karl Rove and company have created a machine over the past decades that has as its goal 'Win at any cost' for the sake of THEIR vision of who should survive and be in power." This is reflected in other countries by weird events such as Howard being re-elected in Australia, a woman being fined for wearing a veil in the civilized and cultured country of Italy. In our own country the "Defense of Marriage Act" and the debate in the Supreme Court about whether we should fry kids under 17 who commit murder.

We are told in the press that Kerry won all three debates and yet tracking polls that are made public suggest that either there is no movement or that there is trending for bush. What a crock! The polls are part of the Rove machine's approach to controlling the outcome of the election; just like Sproul's discarding of Democratic voter registrations and Florida's Kafkaesque hurdles to wrongly disenfranchised voters from 2000 getting back on the rolls for 2004.

The polls act as propaganda to influence voter anticipation and since many people like to vote with the winner, then the perceived winner by the polls will influence who these people vote for. It is therefore really beneficial for Rove and bush to have the polls showing astoundingly bizarre trends toward bush after Kerry wins all 3 debates in the perception of the public. The debates had the largest viewership of any in recent memory and beat out baseball playoffs. So 1) there is a lot of interest in the country about this election and it isn't because everyone's for bush but wants to see Kerry do the debate thing; and 2) large majorities in debates 1 and 3 and a simple majority in debate 2 observed that Kerry performed in a more presidential manner than bush; and YET polls are trending towards bush??

The democrats are responding more competitively this season than they have in 40 years or so and that's interesting but will prove completely ineffective in the face of the widespread grasp of the mechanisms of influence and voting fraud that are mastered under Rove. The question is not whether Kerry or bush will win on 2 Nov but how blatant will the fraud be that defeats Kerry. If it's blatant enough the question will be whether enough people declare that the country is now inoperative as Ralph Nader has been hoping. The tipping point is at hand of that there is little doubt; however, unlike past circumstances, the technology to suppress popular concern is well in hand so the sepia-toned underground lives of the cyberpunks are the more likely result rather than a succesasful storming of the Bastille. --10.15.04