Labels: Alberto Gonzales, doj, Greg Palast, Karl Rove, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., US Attorney firings

Do you smell something burning? Josh Marshall over at TPM does, and I agree. He's been all over the increasingly titillating story of US Attorney firing scandal. Things are about to get kicked into high gear this week with Attorney General Alberto Gonzales set to appear before the US Senate Tuesday. Josh points out this story from The Albuquerque Journal, and gives this ominous analysis:

No one disputes that Domenici's call to Iglesias was at best inappropriate. But there's been a lack of direct evidence that Iglesias's refusal to bow to political pressure led directly to his firing. Now we have that evidence. And it's not Kyle Sampson or even Alberto Gonzales whom Domenici went to to get sign off for Iglesias's ouster. It was right to the president. And the available evidence now points strongly to the conclusion that the final decision to fire David Iglesias came from the President of the United States.

Once more, with feeling!

Labels: Alberto Gonzales, doj, Josh Marshall, US Attorney firings

"I'm not doing anything wrong, so let them monitor whatever they want," is a commonly heard mantra of Americans willing to forfeit their right to privacy for the perception of security. I heard it myself just yesterday when a politically minded grandmother called into a show on a major network regarding the crimes committed by the FBI.

If you encounter such an argument around the water cooler or at the dinner table, here are a few gems you can bust out to force some critical thinking on the part of your mark (Warning: Cognitive dissonance resulting from these tactics can produce unpredictable responses in some citizens who are already scared, manipulated, and entranced).

Set the stage by discussing the nature data-mining. Avoid the term "data-mining" because the word data scares people. It's techno-babbly jargon. Use terms like dragnet, it's folksy. Ask your mark if they're a criminal; this will get their attention immediately. Naturally they'll say "No." Then ask if anyone they communicate with via phone or email has ever committed a crime. Typically the truth will be yes, but your mark will say no as the scenarios start playing through their mind (you've just planted a seed...watch it grow). Now ask if any of the friends or family of people they communicate with have ever committed a crime. Hopefully the mark will start to see the problems with wide spectrum data collection. Use props if necessary - salt and pepper shakers work.

Here's a helpful tidbit if you're by a computer:

It's an analysis of the sexual relationships of a high school. Nearly everyone is connected. If this were an investigation of criminal or terrorist activity, everyone in the network would be put to the question. It's neither fair, nor just, but that's what we're buying into if we support unchecked powers of surveillance and data collection. In such an environment everyone is guilty.

Another important point to make clear is the aspect of time. Once data is collected, it doesn't go away...ever. If you haven't spoken to someone in ten years, and suddenly they re-enter your life, can you be sure they haven't engaged in some questionable activities that would draw the attention of investigators?

Finally, what does being investigated by the feds mean anyway? Why should anyone be concerned if they haven't done anything wrong? Guilt by association. Does your mark work with children? Do they work at a company with state or federal contracts? Do they themselves work with other people's sensitive information: financial, medical, educational records? When the FBI or another agency pulls you in for an "interview" consider yourself flagged. That promotion you were counting on? A choice transfer? A move to a more desirable shift? You might not get thrown into a gulag, but your life will be impacted just the same.

Write to your Senators and Representatives and respectfully request that Congress ask for the resignation of Robert S. Mueller and Alberto Gonzales (They've offered their resignations before, why not now?). The law has been broken under their watch. They have abused their authority and squandered public trust...again. It's time for them to step down.

UPDATE: Full DOJ OIG report (pdf, 36MB).
UPDATE: Senator Schumer (D-NY) Calls For Gonzales to Step Down
UPDATE: New York Times editorial blasts Gonzales

Labels: Alberto Gonzales, Charles Schumer, doj, fisa, nsa, patriot act, Robert S. Mueller, technology, tia, warrantless wiretaps

Via mefi:

Ah, yes! And so it begins. Not content with using new powers of enforcement and prosecution to simply crack down on sites peddling glassware in clear violation of the War on Drugs (tm), the DOJ has also begun collecting intelligence in a new pseudo-war right here at home.

"The leading public Internet site dedicated to online copyright piracy was seized by the Justice Department today. Assistant Attorney General Michael Chertoff and Paul J. McNulty, U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia today announced the seizure of www.iSONEWS.com (warning: read on before clicking that link) as part of a previous plea agreement entered into by a defendant convicted of violating the criminal copyright laws."

Do I sound like a broken record when I say, "But wait, it gets better”?

If you go to iSOnews.com you're likely to arrive at one of two sites. One site is a DOJ notice concerning:
1. The official seizure of the site dated February 26, 2003, and
2. The guilty plea entered by the server's owner David M. Rocci, 22, of Blacksburg, Va. to charges of conspiring to import, market and sell circumvention devices known as modification (or "mod") chips in violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

The other site is a mirror of the original iSOnews.com as it appeared before the announcement of this seizure.

Like the DEA case a few days ago, it is likely that visitors to this site are flagged and filed in the grand DOJ database. It is also likely that this has been the case since the date of the defendant's guilty plea: December 19, 2002.

This is the beginning of the end. Anyone possessing a large number of copies of copyrighted material will likely be targeted should these new DOJ powers withstand even a single appeal.

I guess the entertainment industries have finally found a way to end internet file trading without spending a dime.

By downloading copyrighted data, you're aiding the terrorists.

Labels: dea, doj, fisa, p2p, tia