Kathleen Advocates Cyber-Terrorism

Skip to first unread message


Jul 26, 2005, 6:09:02 PM7/26/05
Sent to me from kathleen's spinlyme group!

This is a federal crime. A SERIOUS Federal Crime. So do what you think
is right! By the way this is almost certainly a violation of her

Remember, she's provided everyone with contact information for the FBI
in New Haven: FBI New Haven 203-777-6311

FBI Tips and Public Leads


While the FBI continues to encourage the public to submit information
regarding the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, this form may also
be used to report any suspected criminal activity to the FBI.

FBI Tips and Public Leads

Your First Name

Your Middle Name

Your Last Name

Your Phone

Your Email

Your Street 1

Your Street 2

Your Suite/Apt/Mail Stop

Your City

Your State

Your Country
Your Zip Code / Route

Please describe your information:


17607 From: Kathleen <janmusinski@...>
Date: Sun Jul 24, 2005 9:35am
Subject: Countering "counterterrorism"
Send Email

Here's an interesting thought.

If the USDOJ dot guv is in collusion (US Attorney Kevin O'COnnor
and John G. Rowland) with the NeoCons who believe in belligerence and
pre-emptive "Defence," and the USDOJ believes that it is proper to
defend the Yale criminals by inventing other people's crimes and
slamming them away forever for saying they are innocent, (which was
part of the entire plan), then everyone opposed to such abuses of power
can become a "terrorist" and jam the DOJ/FBI's email searches with
keywords like:

ammonium nitrate

Create several email addresses. Give all of
them 950 Pennsylvania Ave NW 20530 as your address.

or, 157 Church Street, New Haven, 06510

I was falsely accused of being "a dangerously
intelligent chemist," "like Ted Kaszinski," who
has "command hallucinations to kill."

This was invented for me at my DCF "trial."

Then I was crminally charged with that, and not
allowed access to the courts, since a Yale
"psychiatrist" determined I was insane to be
saying I was innocent.

Tough to figure out.

Silicon Spooks: Government Spying on the Internet
- By Shawn Ewald ©, 2002 (repost here in August, 2004)

NSA's Echelon Surveillance Network In a new novel, Digital Fortress by
Dan Brown, the National Security Agency (NSA) has built a code-breaking
supercomputer called TRANSLTR that can crack any cryptographic cipher
in a matter of seconds. Ostensibly, the purpose of this computer is to
monitor the encrypted communications of terrorist groups, but the
designer of this supercomputer recognizes the danger presented to the
privacy of ordinary citizens by his creation and invents an unbreakable
code called Digital Fortress. He threatens that, if the NSA does not
make the existence of TRANSLTR publicly known, he will distribute
Digital Fortress on the Internet.

Unfortunately, only in novels, I suspect, do NSA employees have
consciences, much less concern for the privacy of Jane Q. Citizen.
Fortunately, only in novels does the NSA have a computer that can crack
codes in seconds - even the world's most powerful supercomputer, the
Intel Paragon, would take a bit longer than a few seconds to crack a
message by brute force that was encrypted with PGP (Pretty Good
Privacy, a freely available encryption program that runs on PCs and

However, the NSA does indeed monitor all Internet communication, just
as it monitors all telephone, radio, and satellite communication, and,
therefore, our collective right to privacy is routinely violated by the
Government without our knowledge.

But what is different about the NSA's activity on the Internet has to
do with the Internet itself and the public's understanding of it. The
Internet is inherently open and insecure, which makes it incredibly
easy to monitor and intercept communication traffic like e-mail
messages, for instance. Furthermore, the majority of the American
public is largely unaware of how insecure the Internet really is - it
is interesting that, thanks largely to the mainstream media's
successful manufacturing of Internet paranoia, technophobic or computer
illiterate people are more conscious of this aspect of the Internet
than many people who use the Internet regularly. Most people have heard
about government agencies tapping phone lines or even steaming open
paper mail, but it seems that most people are not aware of the
government's routine monitoring of Internet communication traffic,
particularly e-mail traffic. This ignorance is dangerous for a society
that has become almost wholly dependent on electronic mediums of

The NSA's surveillance of Internet communication began at the early
stages of the Internet's development when it was still populated only
by government employees, university researchers, and government
contractors. Many people involved with the early Internet (known then
as ARPANet) were aware of this surveillance. In fact, Richard Stallman,
an MIT computer scientist who was then involved with the ARPANet (and
later would found the Free Software Foundation), added an optional
feature to a text editor/e-mail client that he had created called
EMACS; the purpose of this feature was to undermine the NSA's
surveillance efforts. The optional feature added randomly selected
keywords at the end of an e-mail message composed in EMACS; these
keywords (i.e. revolution, terrorist, etc.) he believed would trigger
interception by the NSA computers and, hopefully, if enough people made
use of this feature, clog the NSA's computers with irrelevant e-mail.

In former New Zealand intelligence agent Nicky Hager's book Secret
Power, one discovers that the NSA's surveillance capabilities are not
hindered by political borders. Under the code-name ECHELON, and with
the help of the British, Australian, New Zealand and Canadian
Governments, the NSA has established a global communication
surveillance network that is capable of monitoring most of the world's
electronic communication.

The ECHELON system was created by the NSA as a means to interconnect
surveillance systems that had existed in these countries since WWII,
and to put these foreign surveillance operations under the control of
the NSA. What ECHELON became was an international network of computer
systems, each intercepting all fax, telex, e-mail and satellite
communications in their region of the world. The intercepted
communications are scanned with "dictionary" programs for certain
keywords; these dictionaries not only contain keywords of interest to
the intercepting agency, but also keywords that are of interest to the
other intelligence agencies around the world involved in the ECHELON
network. If the intercepted message contains a matching keyword, it is
immediately passed on to the headquarters of the agency concerned.

Given this massive technological arsenal, how can citizens protect
their privacy on the Internet? There is one method that has proven to
be an effective monkey wrench in the Government's efficient
surveillance machine, and that is strong encryption. Despite the claims
of fiction writers, there is no such thing as an unbreakable code or
uncrackable encryption, but what good encryption can ensure is that if
someone wants to snoop on your e-mail communications they are going to
have to put a good deal of effort into it. Cracking encrypted
electronic communications is the labor-intensive equivalent of steaming
open envelopes, whereas intercepting and reading unencrypted mail is as
easy as reading the back of a postcard. Not surprisingly, the FBI and
NSA have asked Congress to outlaw strong encryption. We as citizens
should be fighting their efforts every step of the way.

In the documentation for PGP, the program's author, Phil Zimmermann,
poses the following to users who may be skeptical about the need for
publicly available strong encryption programs:

“Perhaps you think your E-mail is legitimate enough that
encryption is unwarranted. If you really are a law-abiding citizen with
nothing to hide, then why don't you always send your paper mail on
postcards? Why not submit to drug testing on demand? Why require a
warrant for police searches of your house? Are you trying to hide
something? You must be a subversive or a drug dealer if you hide your
mail inside envelopes. Or maybe a paranoid nut. Do law-abiding citizens
have any need to encrypt their E-mail?â€

The answer is obvious, of course they do. In the next issue I'll
demonstrate how to use PGP (still the best personal encryption
software, and it's free) as well as demonstrate other ways one can
enhance one's privacy and security on the Internet.
Silicon Spooks Part 2: Personal Security on the Internet

Last month, I described how the government routinely snoops on our
electronic communications and violates our right to privacy.

However, for most people, the government is the least of our troubles
when it comes to protecting our privacy when we use computers and the
Internet. Other common snoops are our bosses in our workplaces,
commercial Internet sites, and criminals. And of those three threats to
our privacy, our bosses and commercial Internet sites are the most
common threats. In this short article,

I'll try to give some tips on how to protect yourself.

But first, as promised in my last article, here is a brief tutorial on
how to obtain and use PGP. I'm going to concentrate on the PC version
of PGP because 1) it requires more explanation, 2) it is in much wider
use than the Mac version, and 3) the Mac version is easier to use and
What is PGP?

PGP is powerful encryption software. Meaning, it is a piece of software
that enables you to encrypt your data (typically documents and e-mail
Where to get PGP?

There really are only two places you can get it. The first is PGP Inc.,
and the second is at MIT - I recommend the MIT distribution site.
Which version you should get?

There are two commonly used versions of PGP available, PGP 2.6.2 and
PGP 5.0. I recommend PGP 2.6.2.

PGP 5.0 is newer and easier to use, but unfortunately it uses an
entirely new (though not necessarily better) system for encrypting your
data that is not compatible with older versions of PGP. PGP 2.6.2 has a
steeper learning curve in terms of usability but it is, hands down, the
most widely used version of PGP in the U.S. and, therefore, will enable
you to exchange encrypted messages with a much wider number of PGP
How to use PGP

Once you've downloaded and installed PGP the first thing you need to do
is generate what's called a PGP 'key pair". (Installing PGP 2.6.2 is
relatively straightforward for people who are moderately familiar with
their computer. Print out the setup.doc file in the PGP distribution
and follow the instructions for your operating system.)

To generate your PGP key pair, issue the following command at a DOS
prompt: pgp -kg

After you issue this command, PGP will ask you a few questions and
require you to do a few things to generate your key pair. The first
thing it will ask is what level of encryption you wish to use - you'll
be offered three choices:

1. 512 bits- Low commercial grade, fast but less secure
2. 768 bits- High commercial grade, medium speed, good security
3. 1024 bits- "Military" grade, slow, highest security

I recommend choosing option 3 "Military" grade encryption.

The next three things you'll be asked will be 1) choose a user ID 2)
choose a passphrase and 3) entering random keystrokes to generate your
key pair.

Your user ID should be your full name and e-mail address, for example:

Shawn Ewald shawn@...

Your passphrase can be as long as you like - it should literally be a
phrase or sentence or a long string of characters - just make sure you
can remember it. Next, you will be asked to type random keystrokes -
this helps PGP generate a truly random key pair. When prompted to do
this, just hit random keys at random intervals until PGP tells you to

Now PGP will generate a key pair that will be stored in two files:
secring.pgp and pubring.pgp. The first file secring.pgp contains your
PGP secret key, it is very important that you never let anyone see this
file, it is also very important that you make a backup copy of this
file on a floppy disk and store it in a safe place. The second file
pubring.pgp contains your PGP public key, this key can be freely
distributed once you have extracted it from pubring.pgp. To extract
your public key from your public key ring (pubring.pgp) issue the
following command at a dos prompt:

pgp -kx Shawn shawn pubring.pgp

NOTE: replace Shawn and shawn with the beginning of your own user name.

In this case, PGP will store my public key in a file called
"shawn.asc"; I can open this file with any text editor to view it. Once
you've extracted your public key, you can send it to friends so that
they can use their copy of PGP to send you encrypted messages. You can
even make it available to strangers by putting it on your web page. I,
for example, have made my PGP public key available on the web at:
How to encrypt and decrypt files

To encrypt a file, issue the following command at a DOS prompt:

pgp -es textfile -u your_userid

To decrypt a file, issue the following command:

pgp encrypted_file -o filename

NOTE: replace the words "textfile" and "encrypted_file" with the actual
names of the files you wish to encrypt/decrypt, replace "your_userid"
with your actual user ID, and replace "filename" with the name your
wish to call the decrypted file.

In both of the above examples PGP will ask you to enter your
passphrase. If your passphrase is correct it will immediately go to
Add-ons for PGP

Obviously, typing commands at a DOS prompt is not an enjoyable
experience for most people. Fortunately, there are many add-ons (mostly
for e-mail programs) available for free on the Internet that provide a
nice graphical interface and make PGP much easier to use. The best
place to look for these add-ons is at the yahoo PGP directory. Go here
and select the "PGP - Pretty Good Privacy" link.
Other features of PGP

There are many other features to PGP that I'm unable to describe in
such a brief article. So, I strongly suggest that you print out and
read the file "pgpdoc1.txt" that comes with the PGP distribution.
Other personal security measures you can take

In addition to learning about and using encryption software like PGP,
there are other aspects to using the Internet where your personal
security can be improved. The following is a list of simple things you
can do to protect yourself when using the internet.

Avoid making credit card purchases on-line

Despite the hype, secure online transactions are not nearly as secure
as many businesses would like you to believe. Furthermore, it is not
likely that online transactions will ever be as secure as real world
transactions. Be aware that you are taking a risk whenever you submit
your credit card number online.
Scan downloaded files for viruses before opening them

This is a no-brainer, but it can't be repeated enough. Get a good virus
program (like McAfee Anti-virus, IBM Anti-Virus, or Dr. Solomon's
Anti-Virus) and scan the files you download before opening them.
Never give out your password

No one needs to know your password, except you; never give it out. If
you are signing up for a service on the web that requires a password,
make a new and unique password for that service, never use your ISP
password for any service on the Internet.
Disable the "cookies" feature in your web browser

This can be done in most modern browsers. For example, to disable
cookies in Netscape Communicator:

Click the Edit menu, then select "Preferences." In the Preferences
Dialog box, select the "Advanced" category. In the "Cookies" section
select "Disable Cookies". Then click the "OK" button.

Happy surfing!
Suggested Reading and Websites:

* Secret Power: New Zealand's Role in the International Spy Network, by
Nicky Hager
* The Puzzle Palace: A Report on America's Most Secret Agency, by James
Bamford; Viking
* The Crypt Newsletter
* Secrecy & Government Bulletin
* PGP: Pretty Good Privacy, by Simson Garfinkel; O'Reilly & Associates
* Bandits on the Information Superhighway, by Daniel J. Barrett;
O'Reilly & Associates

CSS printer friendly enabled
mail to a friend Send this to


Jul 26, 2005, 7:36:36 PM7/26/05

lisasawitch wrote:

> "Sent to me from kathleen's spinlyme group"!

She posted it here as well. July 24..."Countering Counter-Terrorism",

> "This is a federal crime. A SERIOUS Federal Crime. So do what you think
> is right! By the way this is almost certainly a violation of her
> probation/parole".

Maybe. It's sure not very smart and a horrible and grotesquely
insensitive thing to suggest in light of the recent tragedies in London
and Egypt, Israel.


Jul 26, 2005, 7:54:40 PM7/26/05

More than insensitive it is stupid and yes it is criminal. And the idea
that she would attempt to compromise the ability of law enforcement
agencies to protect us from attacks simply out of vindictiveness and to
advance her own twisted personal agenda, well...

THink about it. She's ranting and raving about Karl Rove and what he
(and others) did. And what they did sucks big time no matter what side
of the political fence you're sitting on--out of pure vindictiveness
they compromised the idenity of an undercover agent threatening to
compromise and weaken our national security.

How's what she's advocating here any better?

And you can bet your bippie (I guess that is a bit dated?) that it
violates the terms of her parole.

And frankly if someone does report her, she deserves what she gets.


Jul 26, 2005, 8:00:08 PM7/26/05
Did you foward this to the FBI?

This could be serious, lets not forget Yale has had problems in the
last few months with small bombs and bomb threats.

I still feel that she could be behind this since it all started since
she has been let out of the mental hospital and lives less than a hour


Jul 26, 2005, 8:08:11 PM7/26/05
Chuck I'd rather not say whether I did or not.

Plus I sort of figured that you would definitely forward it to them.

And her parole officer.


Jul 26, 2005, 8:39:54 PM7/26/05


Jul 27, 2005, 1:50:39 AM7/27/05

Chuck wrote:

Semper Fi, dude, Semper Fi.


Jul 27, 2005, 5:38:44 AM7/27/05
I sent the exact same thing to the FBI, USDOJ, and the CIA
before I posted it here.

They obviously know I am not a terrorist, since I
had them check me out to see if I am a terrorist,
since that's what the DCF accuses me of, and
apparently told everyone I know, even the
schools and local police.

DCF should not be informing the schools and
police that a person is a terrorist, when
they know it is not true. This causes a
national security hazard, because it diverts
resources away from REAL terrorism activities.

In fact, it is probably a crime for DCF to
be telling law enforcement and the schools
that someone they know is not a terrorist,
is a terrorist.



Jul 27, 2005, 9:20:43 AM7/27/05

kathleen wrote:
> I sent the exact same thing to the FBI, USDOJ, and the CIA
> before I posted it here.

What an idiot.

> They obviously know I am not a terrorist, since I
> had them check me out to see if I am a terrorist,

Then I guess you have nothing to worry about. LOL

As if the FBI does background checks by citizens who volunteer asking
for a clean bill of health to prove that they're not terrorists. Right.

What a whack job.

> since that's what the DCF accuses me of, and
> apparently told everyone I know, even the
> schools and local police.

Gee do you think that maybe has something to do with showing up at the
Stonington schools, yelling and screaming at the principal and then
making a bomb threat?

What the FBI OBVIOUSLY know is that your ranting nonsense about Lyme
and Rico and McSweegan etc is NOT A CRIME since they have DONE NOTHING
ABOUT IT as you acknowledge.

> DCF should not be informing the schools and
> police that a person is a terrorist, when
> they know it is not true.

Yes. But when they know IT IS TRUE, they should.

> This causes a
> national security hazard, because it diverts
> resources away from REAL terrorism activities.

Something you obviously care so much about because, #1 you ask them to
devote resources to "clearing you" (because after all you're so
freaking important!) and #2 you ask them to spend substantial resources
reviewing your freaking "data binders" and endless ranting and raving
nonsenical emails #3 you propose a denial of service attack to clog up
their computers to suit your agenda of vindictiveness?

Hypocrite !

No better than Karl Rove et al kathleen.

> In fact, it is probably a crime for DCF to
> be telling law enforcement and the schools
> that someone they know is not a terrorist,
> is a terrorist.

You are a freaking terrorist.


Featured in Court & Police

Kathleen Dickson
Published on 5/8/2004

Kathleen Dickson, 46, of 23 Garden St., Pawcatuck, was charged Thursday
with being a fugitive from justice.

© The Day Publishing Co., 2004

Featured in Court & Police

Kathleen Dickson

Published on 5/9/2004

Kathleen Dickson, 45, of 23 Garden St., Pawcatuck, was charged Friday
with second-degree harassment and threatening.

© The Day Publishing Co., 2004


Let's see how you like it kathleen EVERY time you post, I will change
the title of the thread and I will post these questions until you
answer them one by one and answering them means NOT talking about
mcsweegan or former governor rowland and all your typical diversionary
crap anyway.

PLUS you are cross posting ONCE AGAIN TOTALLY OFF TOPIC and you're
selfish to do this to one newsgroups CRIMINAL to do it to multiple
newsgroups--yes here is your "crime": You are preventing people who
need help from getting help for your selfish personal reasons that you
are so completely egocentric along with delusional paranoid
schizophrenic with psychotic features that you just can't see past your
own twisted delusional psychotic personal agenda--which ought to be
about getting your kids back and solving your own enormous problems in
life instead of trying to solve anyone else's. By preventing people
from getting help you are responsible for the consequences. Surely
people are dying as a result so you are a murderer (trying out a little
kathleen "logic" here. So you are now being reported to the DOJ FBI and
CIA and WHO and UN and DCF and the federal and state courts and
homeland insanity department and all over the planet as a murderer.

How do you like them apples?

Now answer the questions. And stop the off topic cross posting. Answer
the questions TRUTHFULLY for a change. Focus on the question. If
there's a question yOU don't understand which is hard to believe given
your self declared genius IQ, let us know and we'll rephrase it.

Don't LIE as you do and don't try your diversionary tactics. Ignore
this and I will keep reposting it kathleen. Not only that but your
silence will be construed as admissions to all OF the facts listed as

PS: This is NOT "taunting" You have put your credibility at issue. You
have repeatedly said that you NEVER lie. We deserve the answers to
these questions. Straight answers.



Nope we're talking about YOU. ANSWER THE QUESTIONS

And come back and tell us when Steere or McSweegan or anyone else is
actually charged with your "Lyme Crymes" instead of telling us what
you, in all your infinite wisdom, think will happen.

Now let's talk not about who WILL be convicted but WHO already has

Here's the question list. One by one give us some answers. Your post is
just like the Bush White House trying to DIVERT attention from what
Karl Rove did to Joe Wilson--by attacking him AGAIN.

Nope answer the questions kathleen. Stop trying to change the subject.

I know you're delusional but try to focus. Here is a list of questions
for YOU. We've already heard your ramblings about 100,000 times. Now
dish some TRUTH for a change--I'm going to leave space between the
questions for your answers:

Was your case appealed and was your conviction overturned?

And what isn't true? Everything can be backed up with your own posts
kathleen. Not a big secret how people know since you posted it all

Were you charged with and convicted of threatening and harassing
Jessica Gauvin?

Did you flee to Canada?

Did you tell everyone that your case was a custody case against DCF
when the truth was that it was a criminal case against you and your
kids had been taken away many months earlier and you didn't even appeal

Did you threaten to bomb the stonington schools, joke or not?

Did you show up at your kid's safe house with a bag full of drugs
whether you meant to give them to your lawyer or not?

Come on specifically what isn't true?

You were charged tried and convicted in a court of law. Right or wrong,
admit or deny?

Now you say you've proven you're innocent.

In what court were your convictions overturned?

In fact, tell us what the charges were. Give some detail. What exactly
were you convicted of doing or threatening to do to Jessica Gauvin?

Tell us what your diagnosis was in the mental institution?

You admit or deny that your kids were taken away by child services in

Admit or deny you were charged with crimes?

Admit or deny you feld to canada?

Admit or deny you were convicted?

Admit or deny you were institutionalized in a mental ward locked wing?

Admit or deny that your convictions were never reversed, in fact you
never filed an appeal did you?

So who's lying about what?

Yeah sure, you say everyone lied about the charges. But that's not what
the court thought was it?

Did you register a website claiming on it you were working for Pfizer
at the time when you had "retired" years before?

Was Lymeraft which solicited funds for YOU, ever a proper legally
registered charity?

kathleen you're the liar here.

Do you really expect everyone to believe that the rest of the world is
crazy, not you?

And that the rest if the world has conspired to frame you? Because of
your lyme activism which you have even admitted amounts to more posting
on the internet than any real accomplishments?

Come on kathleen. What isn't true specifically issue by issue above.

Tell us specifically which items you say aren't true. We can go back
and find the posts where you admitted stuff and show what a liar YOU


Jul 27, 2005, 12:14:06 PM7/27/05

And BEFORE that psychotic lisa lymeraja annenohnimous filthy mcjerkoff
comes here claiming kathleen is being "set up" first, she says she sent
it to the FBI herself (incredible) and, second, she is the moron who
did this in the first place.

Just like she posted all the details of her life and threats to jessica
gauvin and others and the details of the bomb threat at the stonington
schools and the details of showing up at her kid's safe house with a
bag filled with drugs and the details of her trying to alienate her
children's affections from their father etc.

Hoist by her own petard.

Knock knock

Kathleen: who's there?

The FBI here to arrest you for making terroristic threats, conspiracy
to obstruct governmental operations parole violations etc.

Reply all
Reply to author
0 new messages