Fake GWOT illegal spying interfering with real crime investigations

[Mort Zuckerman]

To: emcsw...@nasw.org, zerh...@od.nih.gov,
Spin...@yahoogroups.com, kshe...@calea.org, fit...@gmail.com,
patrick.f...@usdoj.gov, model...@sbcglobal.net,
jdr...@nejm.org, let...@courant.com, Jgerb...@cdc.gov,
michae...@po.state.ct.us, con...@po.state.ct.us, executive-
edi...@nytimes.com, managin...@nytimes.com, news-
ti...@nytimes.com, the-...@nytimes.com, biz...@nytimes.com,
for...@nytimes.com, me...@nytimes.com, nati...@nytimes.com,
dv...@cdc.gov, brigidc...@optonline.net, tr...@hotmail.com,
illino...@aol.com, jle...@courant.com, tinaj...@yahoo.com,
jhorn...@fff.org, thomas...@usdoj.gov,
thoma...@po.state.ct.us, kur...@washpost.com,
georg...@washpost.com, p...@allegorypress.com,
commissi...@po.state.ct.us, FalN...@aol.com,
brans...@comcast.net, vts...@comcast.net, o...@po.state.ct.us,
freet...@charter.net, scott....@po.state.ct.us,
govern...@po.state.ct.us, attorney...@po.state.ct.us,
randall...@usdoj.gov
Cc: fra...@ucia.gov, dr-ahma...@president.ir,
eugener...@washpost.com, hor...@courant.com,
bmi...@newstimes.com, tr...@hotmail.com, rast...@aol.com,
billc...@gmail.com, amcg...@rms-law.com, rjmu...@aol.com,
paulcrai...@yahoo.com, sidney_b...@yahoo.com,
criminal...@usdoj.gov, karla.d...@usdoj.gov,
christophe...@usdoj.gov, richar...@yale.edu,
harol...@yale.edu, james.p...@yale.edu, inq...@aldf.com,
ly...@idsociety.org

Subject: Fake GWOT illegal spying interfering with real crime
investigations

Date: Oct 16, 2008 10:06 AM

ARTICLE BELOW
========================================
That's why they're called HomeLame Stupidity.

Many people switch to internet phone to avoid
the illegal GWOT spying. But don't forget, the illegal
wiretapping is something DCF had done for years
before the PATRIOT Act; they're allowed to via CT
Statute. In this way, the DCF lie to the "judges" about
what they learned from the illegal spying since the
"judges" can't really reveal they know about the illegal
spying to DCF victims. The lies proceed especially
against scientists who can prove with the scientific
data that all psychotropics are brain damaging, since
brain damaging children is what DCF *does* for a living:
http://www.actionlyme.org/BUNNEY_YALE_BRAIN_DAMAGE.htm

http://www.actionlyme.org/DCF_GRADUATARDS_SPEAK.htm
^^^Listen to the children themselves talk about the brain
damage they received courtesy of DCF.

Yale's Psych Department head, Ben Bunney, specializes in
the brain damage caused by psychotropics. I guess I mean,
"specializes in cowardice," since he never confronts
BigPharma with his evidence. Consider: The entire
Psych Department at Yale and all of DMHAS and DCF would
have to close down and these tards would then have to
actually *work* for a living...

You all pay for this stupidity. 23% of Americans are
got guv welfare queens.

KMDickson
ActionLyme.org
RelapsingFever.org
=========================

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article4951864.ece
From The Times
October 16, 2008
Internet phone calls are crippling fight against terrorism
Sean O’Neill and Richard Ford

The huge growth in internet telephone traffic is jeopardising the
capability of
police to investigate almost every type of crime, senior sources have
told The Times.

As more and more phone calls are routed over the web – using software
such as Skype
– police are losing the ability to track who has called whom, from
where and for
how long.

The key difficulty facing police is that, unlike mobile phone
companies, which retain
call data for billing purposes, internet call companies have no reason
to keep the
material.

Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary, outlined plans yesterday for a huge
expansion
of the Government’s capability to access data held by internet
services, including
social networking sites such as Facebook and Bebo, and gaming
networks.
Related Links

* Bomber brainwashed over the internet

* Deadly loners who don’t show on the radar

* Fears over 'Big Brother' database

The move follows growing concern among police and the security
services that serious
criminals and terrorists are using websites as a way of concealing
their communications.

At present security and intelligence agencies can demand to see
telephone and e-mail
traffic from communication service providers, such as mobile telephone
companies.
But rapid expansion of new providers, such as gaming, social
networking, auction
and video sites, and technologies, such as wireless internet and
broadband, present
a serious problem for the police, MI5, Customs and other government
agencies.

Communications data is now a key weapon in securing convictions of
both terrorists
and serious criminals. It also plays a central role in investigations
into kidnappings
and inquiries into missing and vulnerable people.

In the Metropolitan Police service alone last year, 54,000
applications were approved
for officers to have access to communications data including to whom
and when a
phone call, text message or e-mail was sent – but not the content. A
total of 650
applications concerned investigations into tracing missing or
vulnerable people.

“Communications data forms an important element of prosecution
evidence in 95 per
cent of serious crime cases,” a security source said. “We could not
begin to start
to solve any kidnap in this country without access to the data.”

Overall there were 519,260 requests for communication data last year
with the vast
majority coming from the intelligence services, police and other law
enforcement
organisations, such as the Serious Organised Crime Agency and HM
Revenue & Customs.

Under Ms Smith’s plans, police and the security services will not be
able to access
the content of the communications but will know each website visited,
and to whom
and when a phone call was made or a text message or e-mail was sent.
If this raises
suspicions, ministerial approval can be sought to intercept what is
being sent and
read the content.

The police and the security services say that it is becoming difficult
to locate
data because there are now so many communication service providers.
The use of multiple
user names is also thwarting efforts to identify individuals.

In a speech to the Institute for Public Policy Research yesterday, the
Home Secretary
said that changing technologies were presenting challenges to
collecting data. A
consultation paper next year would outline “some way or other to
collect that data
and store it”. Legislation could follow later in the year or in 2010.

Ms Smith said: “The communication revolution has been rapid in this
country and
the way in which we intercept communications and collect
communications data needs
to change too. If it does not, we will lose this vital capability.”

She gave warning that the alternatives to more electronic data being
stored would
be expensive and invasive. “If you want to maintain your ability to
identify where
the user of a mobile phone is, let’s say . . . it may well be that the
only other
alternative to collecting that data would be a massive expansion of
surveillance
and other intrusive methods of tracking.”

The Times has learnt that police chiefs are to begin a discreet
lobbying exercise
in favour of the new powers. “This is a hugely important issue,” a
senior source
said. “To lose the capability to collect phone data would be
disastrous.”

Opposition MPs and privacy groups attacked any further extension of
state power
as Orwellian. A leaked memo written by sources close to the so-called
interception
modernisation programme said that officials in the Home Office viewed
a giant database
as “impractical, disproportionate, politically unattractive and
possibly unlawful
from a human rights perspective”.