Advertisements

Tag Archive: Domestic Surveillance


New Police Radars Can ‘See’ Inside Homes

 

 

 

 

” At least 50 U.S. law enforcement agencies have secretly equipped their officers with radar devices that allow them to effectively peer through the walls of houses to see whether anyone is inside, a practice raising new concerns about the extent of government surveillance.

  Those agencies, including the FBI and the U.S. Marshals Service, began deploying the radar systems more than two years ago with little notice to the courts and no public disclosure of when or how they would be used. The technology raises legal and privacy issues because the U.S. Supreme Court has said officers generally cannot use high-tech sensors to tell them about the inside of a person’s house without first obtaining a search warrant.

  The radars work like finely tuned motion detectors, using radio waves to zero in on movements as slight as human breathing from a distance of more than 50 feet. They can detect whether anyone is inside of a house, where they are and whether they are moving.

  Current and former federal officials say the information is critical for keeping officers safe if they need to storm buildings or rescue hostages. But privacy advocates and judges have nonetheless expressed concern about the circumstances in which law enforcement agencies may be using the radars — and the fact that they have so far done so without public scrutiny.

” The idea that the government can send signals through the wall of your house to figure out what’s inside is problematic,” said Christopher Soghoian, the American Civil Liberties Union’s principal technologist. “Technologies that allow the police to look inside of a home are among the intrusive tools that police have.”

  Agents’ use of the radars was largely unknown until December, when a federal appeals court in Denver said officers had used one before they entered a house to arrest a man wanted for violating his parole. The judges expressed alarm that agents had used the new technology without a search warrant, warning that “the government’s warrantless use of such a powerful tool to search inside homes poses grave Fourth Amendment questions.”

By then, however, the technology was hardly new. Federal contract records show the Marshals Service began buying the radars in 2012, and has so far spent at least $180,000 on them.

  Justice Department spokesman Patrick Rodenbush said officials are reviewing the court’s decision. He said the Marshals Service “routinely pursues and arrests violent offenders based on pre-established probable cause in arrest warrants” for serious crimes.

  The device the Marshals Service and others are using, known as the Range-R, looks like a sophisticated stud-finder. Its display shows whether it has detected movement on the other side of a wall and, if so, how far away it is — but it does not show a picture of what’s happening inside. The Range-R’s maker, L-3 Communications, estimates it has sold about 200 devices to 50 law enforcement agencies at a cost of about $6,000 each.”

 

 

 

Read more

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

On Christmas Eve, NSA Quietly Releases 12 Years Worth Of Internal Reports

 

 

 

” This holiday season, the NSA participated in a longstanding media tradition—dumping a large bit of news during a busy period of time when many likely weren’t paying attention.

  The US spy agency responded to a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit from the American Civil Liberties Union by quietly releasing 12 years worth of internal reports on Christmas Eve. Several included reports were previously withheld illegally, and they became the subject of the FOIA lawsuit in 2009.

  The new trove of information has inspired a different breed of headlines, such as “Highlights From Newly Released NSA Oversight Reports Reveal Bumbling Ineptitude But No Evidence Of Systematic Abuse” from Forbes. The newly discovered errors ran the gamut, including American data being e-mailed to unauthorized recipients, data being kept on unsecured computers, and sensitive information being sent to the wrong printer.”

 

 

 

 

 

Ars Technica has more

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cops Are Scanning Social Media To Assign You A “Threat Rating”

police-social-media-threat-rating

 

 

” Online activity, purchases, and “comments that could be construed as offensive,” all contribute to your threat score.

  Imagine the following scenario: You are on your way home from work, driving down the road, when you notice police lights in your rear view mirror. You are being pulled over.

  As you sit there, on the shoulder, adrenaline rushing, simultaneously angry and nervous, the police officer, in his patrol car behind you, is sizing you up based on an algorithm that determines your “threat rating.” 

  The officer enters your license plate into a mobile application on his laptop. In a matter of seconds, this application crawls over billions of records in commercial and public databases, including all available social media engagement, recent purchases and “any comments that could be construed as offensive.” The application then determines if your “threat rating” is green, yellow, or red.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

” Imagine that you are one of our informed and frequent readers and understand the importance of police accountability and are unafraid to voice your completely peaceful, yet strong opinion about police misconduct. Imagine that you left a comment on Facebook this morning about a particular officer’s misconduct; imagine that it is this particular officer who just pulled you over.

  Up until this point, you have never committed a crime, you have never been violent, you have never even so much as run a stop sign. However, this police officer now knows that you made a comment about him punching the (insert handcuffed and helpless victim example here) on Facebook, and he literally sees red (your threat rating).

  What happens next? Does a routine traffic stop for driving 10 miles over the speed limit morph into a situation in which you now have a Smith and Wesson M&P 9mm pistol with Streamlight TLR-2s laser site being aimed just above your left ear?

  Do you receive multiple erroneous citations because this officer now has access to your personal life? Do you get cited where the officer would have otherwise let someone else go?

  Or, maybe you are a cop or a judge, or the mayor, but this application confuses you with someone else and marks you as “red,” then what? What if you are driving someone else’s car?

  The reality is, that any number of unimaginable things can and would happen next. And now, thanks to a particularly ominous product, by a company named Intrado, and the Orwellian nature of police in this country, those unimaginable situations are now a reality.

Read more at The Free Thought Project

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Congress Has Just Overruled Your 1st, 4th And 5th Amendment Rights

 

 

 

” As of today, Bill HR4681 has passed the house and senate, and is currently undergoing arbitration before being sent to the President for his signature in to law. The law says that the intelligence community can collect, retain, and disseminate all electronic communications including voice calls [without any constitutional restrictions] on all US citizens and everyone else in the world.  And they have 5 years before they are supposed to destroy the records.  However, they can keep them indefinitely if they fall into several categories of interest.

  It is all out in the open now.  Your 1st, 4th, and 5th Amendment protections are gone.  This act gives new meaning to ‘land of the free, home of the brave.’  The intelligence community isn’t doing anything in secret any more.  Americans are now living in an environment much like the days of the old Stalinist Soviet Union, where the presumption was that all conversations were monitored and one takes measures to have a ‘private’ conversations. 

  So turn up your radio or turn the water on in the sink and watch what you say on the phone or Facebook, even casual remarks on twitter may come back to haunt you in the future.  Don’t believe me, I have pasted the relevant parts of the bill below this story. Still don’t believe it? Just go to www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/4681/text and read it from the horse’s mouth.

What are you willing to do about it?

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]

[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

 

[H.R. 4681 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

H.R.4681

One Hundred Thirteenth Congress

of the

United States of America

TITLE III–GENERAL PROVISIONS

Subtitle A–General Matters

Sec. 309. Procedures for the retention of incidentally acquired

communications.

SEC. 309. PROCEDURES FOR THE RETENTION OF INCIDENTALLY ACQUIRED

COMMUNICATIONS.

(a) Definitions.–In this section:

(1) Covered communication.–The term “covered communication”

means any nonpublic telephone or electronic communication acquired

without the consent of a person who is a party to the

communication, including communications in electronic storage.

(2) Head of an element of the intelligence community.–The term

“head of an element of the intelligence community” means, as

appropriate–

(A) the head of an element of the intelligence community;

or

(B) the head of the department or agency containing such

element.

(3) United states person.–The term “United States person”

has the meaning given that term in section 101 of the Foreign

Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1801).

(b) Procedures for Covered Communications.–

(1) Requirement to adopt.–Not later than 2 years after the

date of the enactment of this Act each head of an element of the

intelligence community shall adopt procedures approved by the

Attorney General for such element that ensure compliance with the

requirements of paragraph (3).

(2) Coordination and approval.–The procedures required by

paragraph (1) shall be–

(A) prepared in coordination with the Director of National

Intelligence; and

(B) approved by the Attorney General prior to issuance.

(3) Procedures.–

(A) Application.–The procedures required by paragraph (1)

shall apply to any intelligence collection activity not

otherwise authorized by court order (including an order or

certification issued by a court established under subsection

(a) or (b) of section 103 of the Foreign Intelligence

Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1803)), subpoena, or

similar legal process that is reasonably anticipated to result

in the acquisition of a covered communication to or from a

United States person and shall permit the acquisition,

retention, and dissemination of covered communications subject

to the limitation in subparagraph (B).

(B) Limitation on retention.–A covered communication shall

not be retained in excess of 5 years, unless–

(i) the communication has been affirmatively

determined, in whole or in part, to constitute foreign

intelligence or counterintelligence or is necessary to

understand or assess foreign intelligence or

counterintelligence;

(ii) the communication is reasonably believed to

constitute evidence of a crime and is retained by a law

enforcement agency;

(iii) the communication is enciphered or reasonably

believed to have a secret meaning;

(iv) all parties to the communication are reasonably

believed to be non-United States persons;

(v) retention is necessary to protect against an

imminent threat to human life, in which case both the

nature of the threat and the information to be retained

shall be reported to the congressional intelligence

committees not later than 30 days after the date such

retention is extended under this clause;

(vi) retention is necessary for technical assurance or

compliance purposes, including a court order or discovery

obligation, in which case access to information retained

for technical assurance or compliance purposes shall be

reported to the congressional intelligence committees on an

annual basis; or

(vii) retention for a period in excess of 5 years is

approved by the head of the element of the intelligence

community responsible for such retention, based on a

determination that retention is necessary to protect the

national security of the United States, in which case the

head of such element shall provide to the congressional

intelligence committees a written certification

describing–

 

(I) the reasons extended retention is necessary to

protect the national security of the United States;

(II) the duration for which the head of the element

is authorizing retention;

(III) the particular information to be retained;

and

(IV) the measures the element of the intelligence

community is taking to protect the privacy interests of

United States persons or persons located inside the

United States. “

 

 

 

 

 

   Many thanks to Universal Free Press for providing this story . Below the reader can see who voted to rob you of your rights and who voted against Statism …

 

 

 

 

 

VOTE PARTY REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT
Alabama
YEA   R   Byrne, Bradley AL 1st
YEA   R   Roby, Martha AL 2nd
YEA   R   Rogers, Mike AL 3rd
YEA   R   Aderholt, Robert AL 4th
NAY   R   Brooks, Mo AL 5th
YEA   R   Bachus, Spencer AL 6th
YEA   D   Sewell, Terri AL 7th
Alaska
YEA   R   Young, Don AK
Arizona
YEA   D   Kirkpatrick, Ann AZ 1st
YEA   D   Barber, Ron AZ 2nd
NAY   D   Grijalva, Raúl AZ 3rd
NAY   R   Gosar, Paul AZ 4th
NAY   R   Salmon, Matt AZ 5th
YEA   R   Schweikert, David AZ 6th
YEA   D   Pastor, Ed AZ 7th
YEA   R   Franks, Trent AZ 8th
YEA   D   Sinema, Kyrsten AZ 9th
Arkansas
YEA   R   Crawford, Eric AR 1st
YEA   R   Griffin, Tim AR 2nd
YEA   R   Womack, Steve AR 3rd
YEA   R   Cotton, Tom AR 4th
California
YEA   R   LaMalfa, Doug CA 1st
NAY   D   Huffman, Jared CA 2nd
NAY   D   Garamendi, John CA 3rd
NAY   R   McClintock, Tom CA 4th
YEA   D   Thompson, Mike CA 5th
NAY   D   Matsui, Doris CA 6th
YEA   D   Bera, Ami CA 7th
YEA   R   Cook, Paul CA 8th
YEA   D   McNerney, Jerry CA 9th
YEA   R   Denham, Jeff CA 10th
YEA   D   Miller, George CA 11th
YEA   D   Pelosi, Nancy CA 12th
NAY   D   Lee, Barbara CA 13th
NAY   D   Speier, Jackie CA 14th
NAY   D   Swalwell, Eric CA 15th
YEA   D   Costa, Jim CA 16th
NAY   D   Honda, Mike CA 17th
NAY   D   Eshoo, Anna CA 18th
NAY   D   Lofgren, Zoe CA 19th
NAY   D   Farr, Sam CA 20th
YEA   R   Valadao, David CA 21st
YEA   R   Nunes, Devin CA 22nd
YEA   R   McCarthy, Kevin CA 23rd
YEA   D   Capps, Lois CA 24th
YEA   R   McKeon, Buck CA 25th
YEA   D   Brownley, Julia CA 26th
NAY   D   Chu, Judy CA 27th
YEA   D   Schiff, Adam CA 28th
YEA   D   Cárdenas, Tony CA 29th
YEA   D   Sherman, Brad CA 30th
NO VOTE   R   Miller, Gary CA 31st
YEA   D   Napolitano, Grace CA 32nd
YEA   D   Waxman, Henry CA 33rd
YEA   D   Becerra, Xavier CA 34th
NO VOTE   D   Negrete McLeod, Gloria CA 35th
YEA   D   Ruiz, Raul CA 36th
NAY   D   Bass, Karen CA 37th
YEA   D   Sánchez, Linda CA 38th
YEA   R   Royce, Ed CA 39th
YEA   D   Roybal-Allard, Lucille CA 40th
NAY   D   Takano, Mark CA 41st
YEA   R   Calvert, Ken CA 42nd
NAY   D   Waters, Maxine CA 43rd
NAY   D   Hahn, Janice CA 44th
NO VOTE   R   Campbell, John CA 45th
YEA   D   Sanchez, Loretta CA 46th
NAY   D   Lowenthal, Alan CA 47th
NAY   R   Rohrabacher, Dana CA 48th
YEA   R   Issa, Darrell CA 49th
YEA   R   Hunter, Duncan CA 50th
YEA   D   Vargas, Juan CA 51st
YEA   D   Peters, Scott CA 52nd
YEA   D   Davis, Susan CA 53rd
Colorado
YEA   D   DeGette, Diana CO 1st
NAY   D   Polis, Jared CO 2nd
NAY   R   Tipton, Scott CO 3rd
YEA   R   Gardner, Cory CO 4th
YEA   R   Lamborn, Doug CO 5th
YEA   R   Coffman, Mike CO 6th
YEA   D   Perlmutter, Ed CO 7th
Connecticut
YEA   D   Larson, John CT 1st
YEA   D   Courtney, Joe CT 2nd
YEA   D   DeLauro, Rosa CT 3rd
YEA   D   Himes, James CT 4th
YEA   D   Esty, Elizabeth CT 5th
Delaware
YEA   D   Carney, John DE
Florida
NO VOTE   R   Miller, Jeff FL 1st
YEA   R   Southerland, Steve FL 2nd
NAY   R   Yoho, Ted FL 3rd
YEA   R   Crenshaw, Ander FL 4th
YEA   D   Brown, Corrine FL 5th
YEA   R   DeSantis, Ron FL 6th
NAY   R   Mica, John FL 7th
NAY   R   Posey, Bill FL 8th
NAY   D   Grayson, Alan FL 9th
YEA   R   Webster, Daniel FL 10th
NAY   R   Nugent, Richard FL 11th
YEA   R   Bilirakis, Gus FL 12th
YEA   R   Jolly, David FL 13th
YEA   D   Castor, Kathy FL 14th
YEA   R   Ross, Dennis FL 15th
YEA   R   Buchanan, Vern FL 16th
YEA   R   Rooney, Thomas FL 17th
YEA   D   Murphy, Patrick FL 18th
NAY   R   Clawson, Curt FL 19th
NAY   D   Hastings, Alcee FL 20th
YEA   D   Deutch, Theodore FL 21st
YEA   D   Frankel, Lois FL 22nd
YEA   D   Wasserman Schultz, Debbie FL 23rd
YEA   D   Wilson, Frederica FL 24th
YEA   R   Diaz-Balart, Mario FL 25th
NAY   D   Garcia, Joe FL 26th
YEA   R   Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana FL 27th
Georgia
NAY   R   Kingston, Jack GA 1st
YEA   D   Bishop, Sanford GA 2nd
YEA   R   Westmoreland, Lynn GA 3rd
YEA   D   Johnson, Hank GA 4th
NAY   D   Lewis, John GA 5th
YEA   R   Price, Tom GA 6th
NAY   R   Woodall, Rob GA 7th
NAY   R   Scott, Austin GA 8th
YEA   R   Collins, Doug GA 9th
NAY   R   Broun, Paul GA 10th
YEA   R   Gingrey, Phil GA 11th
YEA   D   Barrow, John GA 12th
YEA   D   Scott, David GA 13th
NAY   R   Graves, Tom GA 14th
Hawaii
NAY   D   Hanabusa, Colleen HI 1st
YEA   D   Gabbard, Tulsi HI 2nd
Idaho
NAY   R   Labrador, Raúl ID 1st
YEA   R   Simpson, Mike ID 2nd
Illinois
YEA   D   Rush, Bobby IL 1st
YEA   D   Kelly, Robin IL 2nd
YEA   D   Lipinski, Daniel IL 3rd
NAY   D   Gutiérrez, Luis IL 4th
YEA   D   Quigley, Mike IL 5th
YEA   R   Roskam, Peter IL 6th
YEA   D   Davis, Danny IL 7th
NO VOTE   D   Duckworth, Tammy IL 8th
NAY   D   Schakowsky, Jan IL 9th
YEA   D   Schneider, Bradley IL 10th
YEA   D   Foster, Bill IL 11th
YEA   D   Enyart, William IL 12th
YEA   R   Davis, Rodney IL 13th
YEA   R   Hultgren, Randy IL 14th
YEA   R   Shimkus, John IL 15th
YEA   R   Kinzinger, Adam IL 16th
YEA   D   Bustos, Cheri IL 17th
VOTE PARTY REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT
YEA   R   Schock, Aaron IL 18th
Indiana
YEA   D   Visclosky, Peter IN 1st
YEA   R   Walorski, Jackie IN 2nd
YEA   R   Stutzman, Marlin IN 3rd
YEA   R   Rokita, Todd IN 4th
YEA   R   Brooks, Susan IN 5th
YEA   R   Messer, Luke IN 6th
YEA   D   Carson, André IN 7th
YEA   R   Bucshon, Larry IN 8th
YEA   R   Young, Todd IN 9th
Iowa
YEA   D   Braley, Bruce IA 1st
YEA   D   Loebsack, David IA 2nd
YEA   R   Latham, Tom IA 3rd
YEA   R   King, Steve IA 4th
Kansas
NAY   R   Huelskamp, Tim KS 1st
YEA   R   Jenkins, Lynn KS 2nd
YEA   R   Yoder, Kevin KS 3rd
YEA   R   Pompeo, Mike KS 4th
Kentucky
YEA   R   Whitfield, Ed KY 1st
YEA   R   Guthrie, Brett KY 2nd
NAY   D   Yarmuth, John KY 3rd
NAY   R   Massie, Thomas KY 4th
YEA   R   Rogers, Hal KY 5th
YEA   R   Barr, Andy KY 6th
Louisiana
YEA   R   Scalise, Steve LA 1st
YEA   D   Richmond, Cedric LA 2nd
YEA   R   Boustany, Charles LA 3rd
YEA   R   Fleming, John LA 4th
YEA   R   McAllister, Vance LA 5th
YEA   R   Cassidy, Bill LA 6th
Maine
YEA   D   Pingree, Chellie ME 1st
YEA   D   Michaud, Michael ME 2nd
Maryland
YEA   R   Harris, Andy MD 1st
YEA   D   Ruppersberger, A. Dutch MD 2nd
YEA   D   Sarbanes, John MD 3rd
YEA   D   Edwards, Donna MD 4th
YEA   D   Hoyer, Steny MD 5th
YEA   D   Delaney, John MD 6th
NAY   D   Cummings, Elijah MD 7th
YEA   D   Van Hollen, Chris MD 8th
Massachusetts
YEA   D   Neal, Richard MA 1st
NAY   D   McGovern, Jim MA 2nd
YEA   D   Tsongas, Niki MA 3rd
YEA   D   Kennedy, Joseph MA 4th
NAY   D   Clark, Katherine MA 5th
NAY   D   Tierney, John MA 6th
NO VOTE   D   Capuano, Michael MA 7th
YEA   D   Lynch, Stephen MA 8th
YEA   D   Keating, William MA 9th
Michigan
YEA   R   Benishek, Dan MI 1st
YEA   R   Huizenga, Bill MI 2nd
NAY   R   Amash, Justin MI 3rd
YEA   R   Camp, Dave MI 4th
NAY   D   Kildee, Daniel MI 5th
YEA   R   Upton, Fred MI 6th
YEA   R   Walberg, Tim MI 7th
YEA   R   Rogers, Mike MI 8th
YEA   D   Levin, Sander MI 9th
YEA   R   Miller, Candice MI 10th
NAY   R   Bentivolio, Kerry MI 11th
YEA   D   Dingell, John MI 12th
NAY   D   Conyers, John MI 13th
YEA   D   Peters, Gary MI 14th
Minnesota
YEA   D   Walz, Timothy MN 1st
YEA   R   Kline, John MN 2nd
YEA   R   Paulsen, Erik MN 3rd
NAY   D   McCollum, Betty MN 4th
YEA   D   Ellison, Keith MN 5th
YEA   R   Bachmann, Michele MN 6th
YEA   D   Peterson, Collin MN 7th
YEA   D   Nolan, Richard MN 8th
Mississippi
YEA   R   Nunnelee, Alan MS 1st
YEA   D   Thompson, Bennie MS 2nd
YEA   R   Harper, Gregg MS 3rd
YEA   R   Palazzo, Steven MS 4th
Missouri
YEA   D   Clay, Lacy MO 1st
YEA   R   Wagner, Ann MO 2nd
YEA   R   Luetkemeyer, Blaine MO 3rd
YEA   R   Hartzler, Vicky MO 4th
YEA   D   Cleaver, Emanuel MO 5th
YEA   R   Graves, Sam MO 6th
YEA   R   Long, Billy MO 7th
YEA   R   Smith, Jason MO 8th
Montana
YEA   R   Daines, Steve MT
Nebraska
YEA   R   Fortenberry, Jeff NE 1st
YEA   R   Terry, Lee NE 2nd
YEA   R   Smith, Adrian NE 3rd
Nevada
YEA   D   Titus, Dina NV 1st
YEA   R   Amodei, Mark NV 2nd
YEA   R   Heck, Joseph NV 3rd
YEA   D   Horsford, Steven NV 4th
New Hampshire
YEA   D   Shea-Porter, Carol NH 1st
YEA   D   Kuster, Ann NH 2nd
New Jersey
YEA   D   Norcross, Donald NJ 1st
YEA   R   LoBiondo, Frank NJ 2nd
YEA   R   Runyan, Jon NJ 3rd
YEA   R   Smith, Chris NJ 4th
NAY   R   Garrett, Scott NJ 5th
NAY   D   Pallone, Frank NJ 6th
YEA   R   Lance, Leonard NJ 7th
YEA   D   Sires, Albio NJ 8th
YEA   D   Pascrell, Bill NJ 9th
YEA   D   Payne, Donald NJ 10th
YEA   R   Frelinghuysen, Rodney NJ 11th
NAY   D   Holt, Rush NJ 12th
New Mexico
YEA   D   Lujan Grisham, Michelle NM 1st
YEA   R   Pearce, Steve NM 2nd
YEA   D   Luján, Ben NM 3rd
New York
YEA   D   Bishop, Timothy NY 1st
YEA   R   King, Pete NY 2nd
YEA   D   Israel, Steve NY 3rd
YEA   D   McCarthy, Carolyn NY 4th
YEA   D   Meeks, Gregory NY 5th
YEA   D   Meng, Grace NY 6th
NAY   D   Velázquez, Nydia NY 7th
YEA   D   Jeffries, Hakeem NY 8th
NAY   D   Clarke, Yvette NY 9th
NAY   D   Nadler, Jerrold NY 10th
YEA   R   Grimm, Michael NY 11th
YEA   D   Maloney, Carolyn NY 12th
NAY   D   Rangel, Charles NY 13th
YEA   D   Crowley, Joseph NY 14th
NAY   D   Serrano, José NY 15th
YEA   D   Engel, Eliot NY 16th
YEA   D   Lowey, Nita NY 17th
YEA   D   Maloney, Sean NY 18th
NAY   R   Gibson, Christopher NY 19th
YEA   D   Tonko, Paul NY 20th
YEA   D   Owens, William NY 21st
YEA   R   Hanna, Richard NY 22nd
YEA   R   Reed, Tom NY 23rd
YEA   D   Maffei, Daniel NY 24th
YEA   D   Slaughter, Louise NY 25th
YEA   D   Higgins, Brian NY 26th
YEA   R   Collins, Chris NY 27th
North Carolina
YEA   D   Butterfield, G.K. NC 1st
YEA   R   Ellmers, Renee NC 2nd
NAY   R   Jones, Walter NC 3rd
YEA   D   Price, David NC 4th
YEA   R   Foxx, Virginia NC 5th
YEA   R   Coble, Howard NC 6th
YEA   D   McIntyre, Mike NC 7th
VOTE PARTY REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT
YEA   R   Hudson, Richard NC 8th
YEA   R   Pittenger, Robert NC 9th
YEA   R   McHenry, Patrick NC 10th
NAY   R   Meadows, Mark NC 11th
YEA   D   Adams, Alma NC 12th
YEA   R   Holding, George NC 13th
North Dakota
YEA   R   Cramer, Kevin ND
Ohio
YEA   R   Chabot, Steve OH 1st
YEA   R   Wenstrup, Brad OH 2nd
YEA   D   Beatty, Joyce OH 3rd
NAY   R   Jordan, Jim OH 4th
YEA   R   Latta, Robert OH 5th
YEA   R   Johnson, Bill OH 6th
YEA   R   Gibbs, Bob OH 7th
NAY   D   Kaptur, Marcy OH 9th
YEA   R   Turner, Michael OH 10th
YEA   D   Fudge, Marcia OH 11th
YEA   R   Tiberi, Pat OH 12th
YEA   D   Ryan, Tim OH 13th
YEA   R   Joyce, David OH 14th
YEA   R   Stivers, Steve OH 15th
YEA   R   Renacci, James OH 16th
Oklahoma
NAY   R   Bridenstine, Jim OK 1st
YEA   R   Mullin, Markwayne OK 2nd
YEA   R   Lucas, Frank OK 3rd
YEA   R   Cole, Tom OK 4th
YEA   R   Lankford, James OK 5th
Oregon
NAY   D   Bonamici, Suzanne OR 1st
YEA   R   Walden, Greg OR 2nd
NAY   D   Blumenauer, Earl OR 3rd
NAY   D   DeFazio, Peter OR 4th
NO VOTE   D   Schrader, Kurt OR 5th
Pennsylvania
YEA   D   Brady, Robert PA 1st
YEA   D   Fattah, Chaka PA 2nd
YEA   R   Kelly, Mike PA 3rd
NAY   R   Perry, Scott PA 4th
YEA   R   Thompson, Glenn PA 5th
YEA   R   Gerlach, Jim PA 6th
YEA   R   Meehan, Patrick PA 7th
YEA   R   Fitzpatrick, Michael PA 8th
YEA   R   Shuster, Bill PA 9th
YEA   R   Marino, Tom PA 10th
YEA   R   Barletta, Lou PA 11th
YEA   R   Rothfus, Keith PA 12th
YEA   D   Schwartz, Allyson PA 13th
NAY   D   Doyle, Mike PA 14th
YEA   R   Dent, Charles PA 15th
YEA   R   Pitts, Joseph PA 16th
YEA   D   Cartwright, Matthew PA 17th
YEA   R   Murphy, Tim PA 18th
Rhode Island
YEA   D   Cicilline, David RI 1st
YEA   D   Langevin, Jim RI 2nd
South Carolina
NAY   R   Sanford, Mark SC 1st
YEA   R   Wilson, Joe SC 2nd
NAY   R   Duncan, Jeff SC 3rd
NAY   R   Gowdy, Trey SC 4th
NAY   R   Mulvaney, Mick SC 5th
YEA   D   Clyburn, Jim SC 6th
YEA   R   Rice, Tom SC 7th
South Dakota
YEA   R   Noem, Kristi SD
Tennessee
NAY   R   Roe, Phil TN 1st
NAY   R   Duncan, John TN 2nd
YEA   R   Fleischmann, Chuck TN 3rd
NAY   R   DesJarlais, Scott TN 4th
YEA   D   Cooper, Jim TN 5th
YEA   R   Black, Diane TN 6th
YEA   R   Blackburn, Marsha TN 7th
YEA   R   Fincher, Stephen TN 8th
NAY   D   Cohen, Steve TN 9th
Texas
NAY   R   Gohmert, Louie TX 1st
NAY   R   Poe, Ted TX 2nd
YEA   R   Johnson, Sam TX 3rd
NO VOTE   R   Hall, Ralph TX 4th
YEA   R   Hensarling, Jeb TX 5th
YEA   R   Barton, Joe TX 6th
YEA   R   Culberson, John TX 7th
YEA   R   Brady, Kevin TX 8th
YEA   D   Green, Al TX 9th
YEA   R   McCaul, Michael TX 10th
YEA   R   Conaway, Michael TX 11th
YEA   R   Granger, Kay TX 12th
YEA   R   Thornberry, Mac TX 13th
NAY   R   Weber, Randy TX 14th
YEA   D   Hinojosa, Rubén TX 15th
NAY   D   O’Rourke, Beto TX 16th
YEA   R   Flores, Bill TX 17th
NAY   D   Jackson Lee, Sheila TX 18th
YEA   R   Neugebauer, Randy TX 19th
YEA   D   Castro, Joaquin TX 20th
YEA   R   Smith, Lamar TX 21st
YEA   R   Olson, Pete TX 22nd
YEA   D   Gallego, Pete TX 23rd
YEA   R   Marchant, Kenny TX 24th
YEA   R   Williams, Roger TX 25th
NAY   R   Burgess, Michael TX 26th
YEA   R   Farenthold, Blake TX 27th
YEA   D   Cuellar, Henry TX 28th
YEA   D   Green, Gene TX 29th
YEA   D   Johnson, Eddie TX 30th
YEA   R   Carter, John TX 31st
YEA   R   Sessions, Pete TX 32nd
YEA   D   Veasey, Marc TX 33rd
YEA   D   Vela, Filemon TX 34th
NAY   D   Doggett, Lloyd TX 35th
NAY   R   Stockman, Steve TX 36th
Utah
YEA   R   Bishop, Rob UT 1st
YEA   R   Stewart, Chris UT 2nd
YEA   R   Chaffetz, Jason UT 3rd
YEA   D   Matheson, Jim UT 4th
Vermont
NAY   D   Welch, Peter VT
Virginia
YEA   R   Wittman, Robert VA 1st
YEA   R   Rigell, Scott VA 2nd
YEA   D   Scott, Bobby VA 3rd
YEA   R   Forbes, Randy VA 4th
YEA   R   Hurt, Robert VA 5th
YEA   R   Goodlatte, Bob VA 6th
NAY   R   Brat, Dave VA 7th
YEA   D   Moran, Jim VA 8th
NAY   R   Griffith, Morgan VA 9th
YEA   R   Wolf, Frank VA 10th
YEA   D   Connolly, Gerald VA 11th
Washington
NAY   D   DelBene, Suzan WA 1st
YEA   D   Larsen, Rick WA 2nd
YEA   R   Herrera Beutler, Jaime WA 3rd
YEA   R   Hastings, Doc WA 4th
YEA   R   McMorris Rodgers, Cathy WA 5th
YEA   D   Kilmer, Derek WA 6th
NAY   D   McDermott, Jim WA 7th
YEA   R   Reichert, David WA 8th
NO VOTE   D   Smith, Adam WA 9th
NAY   D   Heck, Denny WA 10th
West Virginia
YEA   R   McKinley, David WV 1st
YEA   R   Capito, Shelley WV 2nd
YEA   D   Rahall, Nick WV 3rd
Wisconsin
YEA   R   Ryan, Paul WI 1st
NAY   D   Pocan, Mark WI 2nd
YEA   D   Kind, Ron WI 3rd
NAY   D   Moore, Gwen WI 4th
NAY   R   Sensenbrenner, James WI 5th
YEA   R   Petri, Tom WI 6th
YEA   R   Duffy, Sean WI 7th
NAY   R   Ribble, Reid WI 8th
Wyoming
NAY   R   Lummis, Cynthia

 

 

   This is a despicable vote and all the Republicans that voted in favor of this bill should hang their heads in shame . 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Justice Department Defends US Marshals’ Airborne Cell Tower Spoofers; Refuses To Acknowledge Program Exists

 

 

 

 

 

 

” The Justice Department has been summoned to say a few words in defense of the US Marshals’ Cessna-mounted cell tower spoofers. And while it tried to leave a lot unsaid, it actually said quite a bit.

  The Justice Department, without formally acknowledging the existence of the program, defended the legality of the operation by the U.S. Marshals Service, saying the agency doesn’t maintain a database of everyday Americans’ cellphones.

  Because America’s criminal element is forever only moments away from permanently escaping the grasp of law enforcement, the DOJ has refused to confirm or deny the existence of technology everyone already knows exists — IMSI catchers and single-engine aircraft. The DOJ’s caginess is commendable. I’m sorry, I mean ridiculous. Here’s the same official further protecting and defending The Program That Dare Not Confirm Its Existence, using statements that indicate the program exposed by the Wall Street Journal not only exists, but functions pretty much as described.

  A Justice Department official on Friday refused to confirm or deny the existence of such a program, because doing so would allow criminals to better evade law enforcement. But the official said it would be “utterly false’’ to conflate the law-enforcement program with the collection of bulk telephone records by the National Security Agency, a controversial program already being challenged in the courts and by some members of Congress.

  No one’s conflating the feds’ airborne ‘Stingray’ with the NSA’s ongoing bulk phone records collections. All people have done is note that surveillance technology of this sort has the ability to collect (and store) millions of unrelated phone records in a very short period of time. “

 

Read the rest at Techdirt

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Americans’ Cellphones Targeted In Secret Spy Program

 

 

 

” The Justice Department is scooping up data from thousands of cellphones through fake communications towers deployed on airplanes, a high-tech hunt for criminal suspects that is snagging a large number of innocent Americans, according to people familiar with the operations.

  The U.S. Marshals Service program, which became fully functional around 2007, operates Cessna aircraft from at least five metropolitan-area airports, with a flying range covering most of the U.S. population, according to people familiar with the program.

  Planes are equipped with devices–some known as “dirtboxes” to law-enforcement officials because of the initials of the Boeing Co. BA, +0.26%  unit that produces them–which mimic cell towers of large telecommunications firms and trick cellphones into reporting their unique registration information.”

 

Market Watch

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FBI Not Happy With Apple & Google’s Encryption Policy

 

 

 

 

” Users might have praised the technology companies for efforts to encrypt their latest devices that would prevent law enforcement agencies’ hands on users’ private data, but the FBI is not at all happy with Apple and Google right now.
 
  The Federal Bureau of Investigation director, James Comey, said Thursday he was “very concerned” over Apple and Google using stronger or full encryption in their Smartphones and Tablets that makes it impossible for law enforcement to collar criminals.
  According to Comey, the Silicon Valley tech giants are “marketing something expressly to allow people to place themselves above the law.”

There will come a day – well it comes every day in this business – when it will matter a great, great deal to the lives of people of all kinds that we be able to with judicial authorization gain access to a kidnapper’s or a terrorist or a criminal’s device,” Comey told reporters.

I just want to make sure we have a good conversation in this country before that day comes. I’d hate to have people look at me and say, ‘Well how come you can’t save this kid,’ ‘How come you can’t do this thing.’” “

Hacker News

Judge Says NSA Can Continue To Destroy Evidence

 

 

 

 

 

 

” Well, this is unfortunate. After yesterday’s back and forth between the DOJ and the EFF over the ongoing destruction of key evidence in the Jewel v. NSA case, the court ordered an emergency hearing for this afternoon. About an hour before the hearing, the DOJ presented its opposition to the temporary restraining order, arguing, basically, that it would be too damn complicated to stop destroying evidence in the case. Part of this is because the data collected under the Section 702 program apparently isn’t just one big database, but is quickly fed into all sorts of other systems.”

 

 

Tech Dirt has the whole story . See also :

 

Judge Asks for More Information About NSA Spying Evidence Destruction After Emergency Hearing

Judge Changes Mind, Says NSA Can Resume Destroying Evidence

Judge Says NSA Can Continue To Destroy Evidence

FISA Court Reverses Order to Destroy NSA Phone Data -CIO.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Isn’t it Ironic: Government Surveillance Version (with Remy)

 

 

Published on Mar 20, 2014

” Remy updates the Alanis Morissette hit for a certain senior senator from California.

Approximately 2 minutes.

  Written by Remy. Video and animation by Meredith Bragg. Music performed, produced, recorded, mixed and mastered by Ben Karlstrom.

For full text, links, downloadable versions and more, go to: http://reason.com/reasontv/2014/03/20… .

Lyrics:
A Senator lady
Got the news one day
The country’s being spied on
by the NSA

So she went out defending
on each TV set
but when she found out she’d been snooped on
she got all upset

And isn’t it ironic?
I mean, don’t you think?

It’s like you’re at Chris Brown’s
and there’s punch in the fridge
or if The Bachelor
passed a geography quiz

Learning Ted Kennedy
happened to be good at bridge.
And who would have thought?
It figures.

Senator, this may surprise you
and the irony bites
but Congresspeople ain’t the only ones
with 4th Amendment rights

It’s like a minimalist
who does their laundry
with All
or if Woody Allen liked to watch
Kids in the Hall

it’s like FDR
got locked in a Honda Accord
a cheap healthcare plan
that you just can’t afford

If Oscar Pistorius
really hated The Doors
and who would have thought?
It figures.

I heard the government
is sneaking up on you.
Life has a funny, funny way
of calling you out
calling you out.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

From Brian Kolfage

 

FEBRUARY 11TH 2014 IS

The Day We Fight Back

AGAINST MASS SURVEILLANCE

 

 

 

Published on Jan 10, 2014

” For more information on the upcoming action – The Day We Fight Back – click here: https://thedaywefightback.org/?r=dp

  These are clips and excerpts from interviews featured in the upcoming documentary about Aaron Swartz called “The Internet’s Own Boy.” Sadly, Aaron took his own life on January 11th, 2013 after a two year legal battle. These clips show some of his work on SOPA, and his thoughts on the NSA.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Growing Backlash To Government Surveillance

 

 

 

 

” From Silicon Valley to the South Pacific, counterattacks to revelations of widespread National Security Agency surveillance are taking shape, from a surge of new encrypted email programs to technology that sprinkles the Internet with red flag terms to confuse would-be snoops.”

 

 

 

 

” Policy makers, privacy advocates and political leaders around the world have been outraged at the near weekly disclosures from former intelligence contractor Edward Snowden that expose sweeping U.S. government surveillance programs.”

 

 

 

 

” “Until this summer, people didn’t know anything about the NSA,” said Center for International Security and Cooperation at Stanford University co-director Amy Zegart. “Their own secrecy has come back to bite them.”

Activists are fighting back with high-tech civil disobedience, entrepreneurs want to cash in on privacy concerns, Internet users want to keep snoops out of their computers and lawmakers want to establish stricter parameters.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NSA Spying: 4th Amendment Protection

 

 

4th Amendment Protection

 

 

 

” This resource and action page is not intended to explain WHY the NSA spying program is wrong. It assumes you’re already on board with that fact. This page exists to provide you the tools needed to begin resisting it.

Passage of the 4th Amendment Protection Act in your state, county, city and town will create obstacles to implementation that will help thwart the unconstitutional spying efforts of the federal government. State laws, local resolutions, and even campus legislation are all important pieces of the puzzle to resist and nullify NSA spying. (model legislation here).

The 4th Amendment Protection Act is an important first step to stopping NSA spying. You can be sure that this one bill (and no single piece of legislation) will stop the NSA on its own. Passage of this legislation will be a big piece of the puzzle to the overall resistance. Once your state completes this first step, there are more…aggressive…measures that will be implemented to push back.

Scroll down below the map to learn more. 

While there is no silver bullet to stop the NSA, you have an option.  Wait for the federal government to give up this power, or resist it in any way possible.

These steps are just the first step of what will likely be a multi-year campaign to resist, refuse to comply, and nullify the unconstitutional NSA programs.

Once these first steps are moving forward in a number of states, the next – more aggressive – levels of resistance can take place successfully.

In the end, Rosa Parks already proved it.  Saying “No!” can change the world. “

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

OFFICIAL SIDESTEPS QUERIES ON CELLPHONE LOCATIONS

 

 

” The head of the National Security Agency sidestepped questions Thursday from a senator about whether the NSA has ever used Americans cellphone signals to collect information on their whereabouts that would allow tracking of the movements of individual callers.

Asked twice by Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., if NSA had ever collected or made plans to collect such data, NSA chief Gen. Keith Alexander answered both times by reading from a letter provided to senators who had asked the same question last summer. He also cited a classified version of the letter that was sent to senators and said, “What I don’t want to do … is put out in an unclassified forum anything that’s classified.”

Wyden promised to keep asking.

“I believe this is something the American people have a right to know, whether NSA has ever collected or made plans to collect cell site information,” Wyden said.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DOJ Sought To Surveil Several Thousand U.S. Citizens In 2012

 

 

” The Justice Department sought the authority to spy on several thousand “United States persons” in 2012, according to a letter the department recently sent to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

“These sought information pertaining to 6,233 different United States persons,” wrote Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Peter Kadzik in the letter.

The report does not specify how many of these National Security Letter requests were granted. The requests differ from typical subpoenas, because they seek only non-content information (such as phone numbers, instead of the content of phone conversations) and do not require approval from the judicial branch. “

(RELATED: Read the report)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What the Senate Doesn’t Know About FISA

 

 

” Nancy Pelosi once said that we had to pass Obamacare to see what’s in it. Last week, Congress said we shouldn’t ask what’s in the federal surveillance law even after we’ve passed it.

That’s the most charitable way to interpret the Senate’s votes reauthorizing expiring provisions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) without any major changes or new checks and balances. The FISA amendments package of 2008 allows the kind of general warrants the Fourth Amendment was intended to prevent, giving the government a blank check for snooping on Americans.

It’s not so much that senators voted by lopsided margins to continue Bush-era warrantless wiretapping nearly five years into the age of hope and change (with the Obama administration’s blessing, of course). More surprising is their lack of interest in how many people are being spied on and how likely irrelevant data belonging to innocent citizens is to be ensnared in terrorism investigations.”

 

 

Despite Concerns By Fellow Democrats And Civil Libertarians, The Senator Says There’s Ample Oversight On Spying

Ample Oversight … Where have we heard that before ? Oh yeah . The Stimulus , Fannie Mae , Freddie Mac , Pigford , Gunwalker , Benghazi , Solyndra , need we go on ? Charlie Rangel , Maxine Waters , William Jefferson , Domestic Drones , TSA ?  Secret Service , GSA ?

” However, outgoing chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee Sen. Dianne Feinsten, D.-Calif., defended the surveillance practices permitted under FISA’s current provisions. “I don’t think there’s any program that has more vigorous oversight,” she said in response to Wyden Thursday. Feinstein said that in regards to stopping domestic terrorist attacks in recent years, the surveillance program “has worked,” noting that some of the 100 arrests made over the past four years to prevent attacks on U.S. soil have been made based on intelligence gleaned under FISA.

According to the Guardian, “National Security Agency whistleblower Bill Binney has estimated that the agency has ‘assembled’ 20 trillion transactions between U.S. citizens.”

As Wyden put it Thursday, I think, when you talk about oversight, and you can’t even get a rough estimate of how many law-abiding Americans had their communications swept up by this law … the idea of robust oversight, really ought to be called toothless oversight if you don’t have that kind of information.”

InfoWars :

“In a 301-118 vote, the House of Representatives, today, passed an amendment that would extend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), a law allowing government monitoring of American communications in efforts to allegedly thwart foreign spies and terrorists.”