Showing posts with label Homeland Security. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Homeland Security. Show all posts

Sunday, January 10, 2010

Israeli Proposes Absurd Mind Reading Technology at Airports

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
January 8, 2010

Not only does the government want to see your naked body in full, living color, they also want to read your mind. “A would-be terrorist tries to board a plane, bent on mass murder. As he walks through a security checkpoint, fidgeting and glancing around, a network of high-tech machines analyzes his body language and reads his mind,” reports the Associated Press.

featured stories   Israeli Proposes Absurd Mind Reading Technology at Airports

Jackson and Lee



What would your reaction be if you saw a big blow-up of this image on a wall at the airport?


An Israeli company is developing a system that matches high technology up with and behavioral psychology. It’s called WeCU, short for “We See You” (the same way Big Brother sees you). It projects images on a wall and monitors reactions of people. “If you strolled through an airport and saw a picture of your mother, Givon explained, you couldn’t help but respond.” Or if you were a terrorist, the logic goes, you’d respond to a terror group logo or other familiar imagery. The reaction to these images could be a darting of the eyes, an increased heartbeat, a nervous twitch or faster breathing, said company CEO Ehud Givon.

If the system observes suspicious behavior, a person is detained and interrogated. “One by one, you can screen out from the flow of people those with specific malicious intent,” Givon said.

Okay, now the problems begin to arise. We are told the underwear bomber and the shoe bomber and a number of other would-be bombers (all of them in fact false flag patsies) are from al-Qaeda, an organization without formal structure and no branding or logo (unlike Hezbollah or Hamas). The only readily identifiable image associated with al-Qaeda is the face of the late Osama bin Laden.

If a large photo of Osama was plastered on the wall at the airport, what would your reaction be? You’d certainly dart your eyes. You may even stand there with your mouth open. You’d likely get special treatment by TSA goons.

How about a lie detector test? The Ministry of Homeland Security has actually proposed this. “One system being studied by Homeland Security is called the Future Attribute Screening Technology, or FAST, and works like a souped-up polygraph,” reports the Associated Press. “It would subject people pulled aside for additional screening to a battery of tests, including scans of facial movements and pupil dilation, for signs of deception. Small platforms similar to the balancing boards used in the Nintendo Wii would help detect fidgeting.”

FAST project manager Robert Burns said the system could be made to work passively, scanning people as they walk through a security line.

How many false positives such a harebrained idea would produce is not addressed.

U.S. officials are considering the Israeli model for airport security. Israel practices profiling. “At Ben-Gurion Airport, Jewish Israelis typically pass through smoothly, while others may be taken aside for closer interrogation or even strip searches.” In other words, if you are an Arab or a Palestinian, you will be strip searched and be subjected to body cavity searches.

Imagine the predictable result of this: thousands of people who look like Arabs pulled aside with the ultimate result of producing chaos in airport operation. Don’t count on the dim bulbs hired by the TSA to be capable of telling the difference between Arabs and Mexicans.

This idea, however, thrills the neocons. Blogger and concentration camp apologist Michelle Malkin went on Fox News the other day and said Arabs should be profiled and get the same sort of treatment Arabs endure in Israel.

Finally, the Cato Institute believes airport security should be privatized. Jim Harper, director of information policy at Cato, “concedes that privatizing airport security is probably wishful thinking, and the idea has not gotten any traction.”

Of course it has not gained any traction. Because the idea is not to catch supposed terrorists (who are demonstrably false flag patsies) but is rather part of a government effort to condition the public that it is normal (even patriotic) to submit to unreasonable, dangerous, and invasive “security” measures. Airports are incubators for tyranny and the emerging police state. It has nothing to do with your safety and security. It’s all about conditioning you to submit to government.

Wednesday, January 6, 2010

The Great Airport Scanner Scam

James Ridgeway
Pacific Free Press
January 6, 2010

Scan, baby, scan. That’s the mantra among politicians at all levels in the wake of the thwarted terrorist attack aboard a Detroit-bound passenger jet. According to conventional wisdom, the would-be “underwear bomber” could have been stopped by airport security if he’d been put through a full-body scanner, which would have revealed the cache of explosives attached to Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab’s groin.

Within days or even hours of the bombing attempt, everyone was talking about so-called whole-body imaging as the magic bullet that could stop this type of attack. In announcing hearings by the Senate Homeland Security Commitee, Joe Lieberman approached the use of scanners as a foregone conclusion, saying one of the “big, urgent questions that we are holding this hearing to answer” was “Why isn’t whole-body-scanning technology that can detect explosives in wider use?”

Former Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff told the Washington Post, “You’ve got to find some way of detecting things in parts of the body that aren’t easy to get at. It’s either pat downs or imaging, or otherwise hoping that bad guys haven’t figured it out, and I guess bad guys have figured it out.”

Read entire article

Wednesday, December 30, 2009

Secret CIA Jails in Lithuania: Legacy of Nazi Collaborationism

by Nil Nikandrov
Global Research, December 30, 2009
Strategic Culture Foundation

The «Amber Rebuff» was the code name of the operation jointly carried out by the CIA and Lithuania's Department of Homeland Security during which they transferred supposed Al Qaeda militants captured in Afghanistan to the country. In Lithuania, they were subjected to interrogation with tortures with the goal of obtaining information about Muslim extremist groups.

The Lithuanian parliament's inquiry into the hosting of secret CIA jails is unbelievably perfunctory, if at all trustworthy. The findings are inconclusive: the jails did exist but it is unknown whether inmates were actually brought to them, and aircrafts of undeclared origin did land in Lithuania, but it has not been proven that they were used to carry Al Qaeda militants. Since no complaints have been received from the supposed victims of abuse, there is essentially nothing to discuss.

In contrast, the facts unearthed by the Lithuanian media prior to the parliamentary inquiry were quite serious. It appears that at least two secret jails concealed from the public and the human rights watchers were illegally operated in Lithuania in 2002-2005 by the CIA.

One of the jails was sited in Rudnikai and disguised as a part of a special training center of the Public Security Service of the Ministry of Interior, the other - in Antaviliai, a village where residences are owned by influential politicians and businessmen. The distances between Vilnius and the jails were 40 and 20 km respectively, and the CIA operatives together with their Lithuanian partners mainly used the Antaviliai center, evidently to save time on commuting. The site used to be a riding complex which its former owners were - under pressure from the authorities - forced to sell to ELITE-LLC, a company created by the CIA with the help of its residents in Panama (Start Finance Group and INK Holding).

The CIA had to resolve several serious problems to organize the “Amber Rebuff”. Rolandas Paksas, then President of Lithuania, opposed the plan on the grounds that it breached the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and the European Human Rights Convention, both of which have been signed by Lithuania. Moreover, under Lithuanian law arrests without court warrants — least tortures - are illegal.

It took the CIA little time to get rid of the defiant Paksas. Less than a year after being elected, he was impeached due to allegations of corrupt ties with the Russian business and of other types of mischief. Roughly at the same time, three Russian diplomats in Lithuania were accused of spying and deported from the country, quite likely on the US initiative to prevent the «Amber rebuff» from being watched. Valdas Adamkus, a senior-aged US citizen and a big fan of G. Bush, was elected as the new Lithuanian President. His creed was that Lithuania must contribute to the US cause regardless of any objections. Besides, Adamkus felt that Lithuania was indebted to the US for supporting its bid for the NATO membership.

Interestingly, in 2003-2006 the US Embassy to Lithuania was headed by Stephen Donald Mull, a career CIA operative who played an important role in Poland in the Solidarity epoch. At that time Mull served as the Political Counselor at the U.S. Embassy in Warsaw and was regarded as a major trouble-maker by the Polish security for his active involvement with local dissenters. The climate in which he worked in Lithuania was absolutely different — the country's leadership is both friendly to the US and receptive to material stimuli (Lithuanian journalists still wonder how the $5 mln delivered to the country at the initial phase of the «Amber rebuff» were spent. Mull certainly knows the answer, but he will never tell).

Mull was in charge of the whole operation involving the secret CIA jails in Lithuania. The Lithuanian side was represented by Arvydas Pocius и Mecys Laurinkas, who at different times served as heads of the Department of Homeland Security, and by its deputy director Dainius Dabasinskas. Only the most trusted Lithuanian agents were employed in the operation, some of them assisting the US operatives in conducting interrogations with noise and light tortures, electric shocks, watering, putting plastic bags on the victims' heads, etc. Lithuanians tried to do their best for the their bosses (this is how Lithuanian operatives privately call their US colleagues).

An old friend of mine — a Lithuanian journalist — told me about the reasons for «pessimism and panic» among the Lithuanian security agents who were involved in the «Amber rebuff». He has information, which he cannot make available to the public due to concerns over his own safety, that there is no clarity what eventually happened to some of the inmates of the secret CIA jails in Lithuania. What if the information surfaces? My friend says such is the explanation behind the nervous reaction of the Lithuanian authorities to the publicity now surrounding the whole story. If the EU starts to investigate it, chances are the world is going to face revelations about the Vilnius analog of Abu Ghraib.

Perhaps, this is the reason why President Dalia Grybauskaite keeps reiterating she had nothing to do with the story of the CIA jails in Lithuania, despite having «indirect suspicions» concerning the matter. She even expressed the noteworthy view that a thorough investigation could make Lithuania a target for international terrorists. Previously, a similar hypothesis was aired by a CIA spokesman who said that commenting on the information about the secret jails in Lithuania would pose a threat to the lives of millions of people and would thus be irresponsible.

The exact number of inmates who had been to the CIA jails in Lithuania is unknown. In most cases, eight individuals are reported to have been held in the Antaviliai torture chamber by the time it was closed in November, 2005. The truth is that chartered planes from Afghanistan came to Lithuania with certain regularity, and the number of people tortured had probably been some ten times higher. When the parliamentary inquiry was in process, Arvydas Anusauskas, the head of the parliament's National Security and Defense Committee, said some of the facts about the CIA jails could not be made public due to national security regards and obligations to the US partners.

The US Embassy and the CIA station in Lithuania (Daniel Gage, head of the economy department of the US Embassy to Lithuania is particularly active) are taking urgent measures to block the efforts made by the parliament and the media to find out more about the torture centers in Lithuania. President Dalia Grybauskaite is confronted with increasing pressure from the rightists conservative (pro-US) media. She is charged with the authoritarian style, the pro-Russian orientation, and the communist past simply because she has no intention to sacrifice her reputation to help the cover-up.

Prime Minister Andrius Kubilius and former presidents Algirdas Brazauskas and Valdas Adamkus are among the politicians who adopted a defensive stance in connection with the matter (saying the jails could have existed but no inmates were held, saying neither «yes» nor «no», etc.). They are trying to convince the public that the information about the secret CIA jails in Lithuania is all «myths and fantasies». Arvydas Anusauskas, the head of the National Security and Defense Committee, is secretly playing on their side.

It is getting increasingly clear that the imitation of an inquiry by the Lithuanian legislators will not make the European Parliament happy. The position of the EU over the case is harsh: European Commissioner for Justice Franco Frattini said if the facilities were indeed hosted, it was a serious violation of the EU norms and the country in question would face sanctions. Dick Marty, a member of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, called for achieving full clarity concerning the problem. He said that unwarranted secrecy should not preclude the complete disclosure of the information about what had been going on near Vilnius, and everyone involved must finally come clean. Only time will show what results can a potential EU investigation yield.

One should keep in mind that - on Mull's request - in late 2005 the Department of Homeland Security urgently destroyed all documents and evidence pertaining to the secret CIA jails where inmates had been tortured. Late at night fragments of the equipment were dumped into the Neman. In 2007, the Antaviliai secret jail was taken over by the Department of Homeland Security: - the CIA passed the installation to its partners as a symbol of their cooperation in the name of freedom and democracy.

P.S. A response to the scandal in Internet — just one of many — read: «After some 50 years, nostalgia for the days when Lithuanian collaborationists excelled in the ranks of the Nazi police is still alive. Or is it a prerequisite for the adoption of NATO standards in Lithuania?» INOforum (22.11.09)


Tuesday, December 29, 2009

Leaked: Homeland Security’s Post Underwear Bomb Airplane Rules

Gizmodo
December 28, 2009

Editor’s note: The new rules do not apply to the elite and their nomenklatura.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Transportation Security Administration
Aviation Security Directive
Subject: Security Directive
Number: SD 1544-09-06
Date: December 25, 2009
EXPIRATION: 0200Z on December 30, 2009
This Security Directive (SD) must be implemented immediately. The measures contained in this SD are in addition to all other SDs currently in effect for your operations.
INFORMATION: On December 25, 2009, a terrorist attack was attempted against a flight traveling to the United States. TSA has identified security measures to be implemented by airports, aircraft operators, and foreign air carriers to mitigate potential threats to flights.
APPLICABILITY: THIS SD APPLIES TO AIRCRAFT OPERATORS THAT CARRY OUT A SECURITY PROGRAM REGULATED UNDER 49 CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS (CFR)1544.101(a).
ACTIONS REQUIRED: If you conduct scheduled and/or public charter flight operations under a Full Program under 49 CFR 1544.101(a) departing from any foreign location to the United States (including its territories and possessions), you must immediately implement all measures in this SD for each such flight.

1. BOARDING GATE

1. The aircraft operator or authorized air carrier representative must ensure all passengers are screened at the boarding gate during the boarding process using the following procedures. These procedures are in addition to the screening of all passengers at the screening checkpoint.
1. Perform thorough pat-down of all passengers at boarding gate prior to boarding, concentrating on upper legs and torso.
2. Physically inspect 100 percent of all passenger accessible property at the boarding gate prior to boarding, with focus on syringes being transported along with powders and/or liquids.
3. Ensure the liquids, aerosols, and gels restrictions are strictly adhered to in accordance with SD 1544-06-02E.
2. During the boarding process, the air carrier may exempt passengers who are Heads of State or Heads of Government from the measures outlined in Section I.A. of this SD, including the following who are traveling with the Head of State or Head of Government:

1. Spouse and children, or
2. One other individual (chosen by the Head of State or Head of Government)
3. For the purposes of Section I.B., the following definitions apply:

1. Head of State: An individual serving as the chief public representative of a monarchic or republican nation-state, federation, commonwealth, or any other political state (for example, King, Queen, and President).
2. Head of Government: The chief officer of the executive branch of a government presiding over a cabinet (for example, Prime Minister, Premier, President, and Monarch).

2. IN FLIGHT

1. During flight, the aircraft operator must ensure that the following procedures are followed:
1. Passengers must remain in seats beginning 1 hour prior to arrival at destination.
2. Passenger access to carry-on baggage is prohibited beginning 1 hour prior to arrival at destination.
3. Disable aircraft-integrated passenger communications systems and services (phone, internet access services, live television programming, global positioning systems) prior to boarding and during all phases of flight.
4. While over U.S. airspace, flight crew may not make any announcement to passengers concerning flight path or position over cities or landmarks.
5. Passengers may not have any blankets, pillows, or personal belongings on the lap beginning 1 hour prior to arrival at destination.

AIRCRAFT OPERATOR ACKNOWLEDGMENT: The aircraft operator must immediately provide written confirmation to its assigned PSI indicating receipt of this SD.
AIRCRAFT OPERATOR dissemination required: The aircraft operator must immediately pass the information and directives set forth in this SD to all stations affected, and provide written confirmation to its PSI, indicating that all stations affected have acknowledged receipt of the information and directives set forth in this SD. The aircraft operator must disseminate this information to its senior management personnel, ground security coordinators, and supervisory security personnel at all affected locations. All aircraft operator personnel implementing this SD must be briefed by the aircraft operator on its content and the restrictions governing dissemination. No other dissemination may be made without prior approval of the Assistant Secretary for the Transportation Security Administration. Unauthorized dissemination of this document or information contained herein is prohibited by 49 CFR Part 1520 (see 69 Fed. Reg. 28066 (May 18, 2004).
APPROVAL OF ALTERNATIVE MEASURES: With respect to the provisions of this SD, as stated in 49 CFR 1544.305(d), the aircraft operator may submit in writing to its PSI proposed alternative measures and the basis for submitting the alternative measures for approval by the Assistant Administrator for Transportation Sector Network Management. The aircraft operator must immediately notify its PSI whenever any procedure in this SD cannot be carried out by a government authority charged with performing security procedures.
FOR TSA ACTION ONLY: The TSA must issue this SD immediately to the corporate security element of all affected U.S. aircraft operators.
FOR STATE DEPARTMENT: Retransmittal to appropriate foreign posts is authorized. Post must refer to STATE 162917, 201826Z Sep 01, Subject: FAA Security Directives and Information Circulars: Definitions and Handling, for specific guidance and dissemination.

Gale Rossides
Acting Administrator

Thursday, January 22, 2009

NSA Analyst: Spying Far More Widespread than Previously Believed

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
January 22, 2009

On January 21, former National Security Agency analyst Russell Tice appeared Keith Olbermann’s MSNBC show. Tice, who helped expose the NSA’s warrantless wiretapping in December 2005, told Olbermann government programs designed to spy on the American people are more extensive and far reaching than previously admitted. “The National Security Agency had access to all Americans’ communications — faxes, phone calls, and their computer communications,” Tice said. “It didn’t matter whether you were in Kansas, in the middle of the country, and you never made foreign communications at all. They monitored all communications.”

During the Bush administration, it was claimed the intercepts involved foreign communications and the intelligence gathered was integral to the conduct of the so-called global war on terrorism. In order to get around the warrant requirements of FISA, a bill authorizing the use of United States Armed Forces against those supposedly responsible for the attacks on September 11, 2001, was passed (Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists). The authorization granted Bush the authority to use all “necessary and appropriate force” against those whom he determined “planned, authorized, committed or aided” the September 11th attacks, or those who harbored said persons or groups. AUMF allowed the Bush administration to avoid FISA and Wiretap Act restrictions.

But according to Tice, the NSA program was not limited to alleged al-Qaeda members, as Attorney General Alberto Gonzales claimed at the time, but included “news organizations and reporters and journalists” in the United States. The data “was digitized and put on databases somewhere.” It was not simply journalists, however, the NSA spied on and likely continues to spy now.

“Spying on Americans by the super-secret National Security Agency is not only more widespread than President George W. Bush admits but is part of a concentrated, government-wide effort to gather and catalog information on U.S. citizens, sources close to the administration say,” Doug Thompson wrote for Capitol Hill Blue on December 27, 2005. “Besides the NSA, the Pentagon, Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Department of Homeland Security and dozens of private contractors are spying on millions of Americans 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year.”

According to Thompson and his sources in the government, the “Pentagon has built a massive database of Americans it considers threats, including members of antiwar groups, peace activists and writers opposed to the war in Iraq.” In response to publicity, the Pentagon claimed it was “reviewing the files” to determine if the information was necessary to the conduct of the putative war on terrorism. “Given the military’s legacy of privacy abuses, such vague assurances are cold comfort,” Gene Healy of the CATO Institute told Thompson. “There’s a long and troubling history of military surveillance in this country,” added Healy. “That history suggests that we should loathe allowing the Pentagon access to our personal information.”

In addition to spying by the NSA and the Pentagon, documents released in 2006 revealed the FBI and its Joint Terrorism Task Force monitored and infiltrated several nonviolent activist groups. “Labeling law abiding groups and their members ‘domestic terrorists’ is not only irresponsible, it has a chilling effect on the vibrant tradition of political dissent in this country,” Ann Beeson, Associate Legal Director of the ACLU, said at the time.

According to a Washington Post report, the NSA has turned over information to the Defense Intelligence Agency, FBI, CIA and Department of Homeland Security.

Although the NSA monitors all communications — faxes, phone calls, and computer communications — it is impossible to collect all of this data, according to Tice. “What was done was sort of an ability to look at the metadata … and ferret that information to determine what communications would ultimately be collected,” he told Olbermann.

Obviously, the NSA, FBI, CIA, DIA, and the Department of Homeland Security are not interested in “every conversation I had with my little nephew in upstate New York,” as Olbermann sarcastically put it. They are primarily interested in the communications of “domestic terrorists,” or those opposed to government policies.

Well before president Truman established the NSA in 1952, government cryptologists were spying on Americans under the Armed Forces Security Agency’s Project Shamrock, a program that worked with telegraphic companies to turn over the telegraphic correspondence of Americans to the government. “The NSA kicked its spy campaign into high gear in the 1960s,” writes Earl Ofari Hutchinson. “The FBI demanded that the NSA monitor antiwar activists, civil rights leaders, and drug peddlers. The Senate Select Committee that investigated government domestic spying in 1976 pried open a tiny public window into the scope of NSA spying,” but this window was slammed shut in the name of national security. “The few feeble Congressional attempts over the years to probe NSA domestic spying have gone nowhere. Even though rumors swirled that NSA eyes were riveted on more than a few Americans, Congressional investigators showed no stomach to fight the NSA’s entrenched code of silence.”

More recently, Congress has not only “showed no stomach” when it comes to illegal and unconstitutional spying of Americans, it has worked hand-in-hand with the executive and intelligence agencies to facilitate this process. In essence, the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security serve as a domestic political police force little different than the NKVD of the former Soviet Union. The domestic political police force in the United States, like the NKVD’s Special Board, is interested in “socially dangerous” people, that is to say people opposed to the government.

Unlike Stalin’s NKVD, the FBI and Homeland Security have yet to engage in a Great Purge of arrests, interrogation, torture, imprisonment, and deportation. Bush, however, through the Military Commissions Act and other draconian legislation, has set the stage for a political purge, especially if another false flag attack occurs in the United States. Executive Orders associated with FEMA stand ready to suspend the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and round up “socially dangerous” people and send them to newly constructed KBR concentration camps.

Unfortunately, far too many people naively believe all of this will change under Barack Obama. Mr. Obama, however, is merely a figurehead and window dressing packaged for public consumption, a friendly and smiling face slapped as a deceptive cover on the secret government of the bankers. If and when push comes to shove — another manufactured terrorist attack or civil disturbances related to an economic depression — Obama will pen an executive order sending “socially dangerous” people to concentration camps.