via The Huffington Post
On March 29, 2009, I was traveling through Lambert-St. Louis International Airport carrying approximately $4,700 in cash. I'm the Director of Development for Campaign for Liberty, a political organization that grew out of Congressman Ron Paul's presidential campaign and promotes constitutional principles of freedom. The cash was money the Campaign for Liberty had received at our Regional Conference in St. Louis -- the proceeds of ticket sales, t-shirts, stickers, books, etc. -- that I was transporting back to our office in Virginia. The price for bringing my organization's cash box through TSA screening? TSA agents detained me for half an hour of harassing questioning.t.
Of course, carrying cash on flights within the United States is not illegal. My case was one of many troubling incidents in which the TSA attempted to transform its limited search authority into a license to invade people's privacy by performing sweeping, unfounded searches that have nothing to do with keeping flights safe. The only difference between others who have been subjected to these types of illegal searches and myself is that I was equipped with a pocket edition of the U.S. Constitution and my iPhone. And I wasn't afraid to use either.
Although my knowledge of the law was limited, I did not believe that I should have to surrender my constitutional rights because I chose to travel by plane. I knew I was not doing anything illegal or suspicious. I also knew the government's interest in investigating me had nothing to do with flight safety. There was no suggestion I was carrying anything dangerous to anyone on board or the plane itself. The TSA agents focused their entire interrogation on the fact that I was carrying $4,700 cash. Based on that, they held me in an interrogation room to investigate me; I remained polite but insisted on at least being informed of my rights under the Constitution.
You don't have to believe my characterization of the interrogation. I recorded audio of the incident with my iPhone. Two things emerge clearly from the recording: first, the agents were not plausibly investigating evidence of a risk to flight safety; and second, they were not interested in informing me of my legal rights. When a combination of TSA agents and police officers crowded the room, the interactions became like something you'd see on a television police drama.
I was repeatedly asked where I worked, what I was doing with the money, where I got the money, and a host of other unnecessary questions. My response? "Am I legally required to answer?" I was told I would be taken to see the FBI and the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), asked if I needed to be handcuffed, and informed, "If you have nothing to hide, just answer the questions." Upon my final statement that I was looking for direction as I did not understand the law, I was informed, "We're gonna help you understand the law," and I was lead down the hall to be further investigated, I was told, by the FBI and/or DEA. Although I never did end up speaking with the FBI or DEA, it's worth listening to the audio of my interrogation to get a clear sense of the situation.
The law states that TSA agents should be able to search for weapons and explosives, things that could pose a threat to flight safety. But extending their searches to fishing expeditions for general law enforcement purposes - searches TSA agents are not trained to perform - only serves to distract from that task.
On June 18, 2009, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a lawsuit on my behalf in federal court, charging TSA with violating my constitutional right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. My focus was on principle rather than financial gain, and I did not seek money in the lawsuit. Rather, my case asked the court to order TSA screeners to conform their searches to the Constitution's requirements. Under the Constitution, TSA screeners do not have the unlimited ability to search and detain passengers. Search procedures designed for purposes other than screening for weapons and explosives exceed TSA's authority and violate passenger rights, and we hoped a court order could generate a policy from TSA that respected all travelers' liberties.
What a difference a lawsuit makes... Eight days before the government's response was due in our case, TSA issued a new policy directive making clear that its safety screening procedures would be strictly limited to passenger searches for the purpose of safeguarding flight safety. In combination with other directives issued in the wake of our lawsuit, TSA's policy now makes clear that passengers should not experience the kind of suspicionless detention and questioning I had been subjected to.
In light of this victory, yesterday the ACLU informed the court of our intention to voluntarily dismiss the suit. The Constitution draws a critical distinction, which these new directives reflect: when subjecting individuals to blanket, suspicionless searches, TSA agents must adhere to their limited mandate of protecting flights against weapons or explosives. The new policy is clear: passengers are no longer forced to check their constitutional rights at the airport counter, and that is a victory for all.
(Read more inside ..)
How My Lawsuit Against the TSA Made Airports Safe For the Constitution Again
Woman Deemed "Not Bright Enough to Marry"
EXCLUSIVE by Alison Smith-Squire 18/10/2009
A pregnant young woman,whose wedding was halted by social workers in an extraordinary row over whether she is bright enough to marry, is to have her baby boy forcefully removed from her at birth.
Kerry Robertson, 17, who has mild learning difficulties, was this week told during a meeting with social workers they believe she is also not ëintelligent enoughí to look after her baby, due in January.She will be allowed just a few hours with her baby, whom she has already named Ben. But she and fiance Mark McDougall, 25, will not be allowed to leave the hospital with Ben and he will then be placed with foster parents.
She said yesterday: "I couldn't believe it when they told me I wouldnít be allowed to bring my baby home. I feel sick all the time.
"I am so upset I donít know what to do with myself. I know I am having a little boy and so I have already started buying baby clothes and am getting a nursery ready for him. But now I can't take it in. I don't want to think about January and I canít stop crying."
Last month Kerry, who is 26 weeks pregnant, was told her wedding was being halted just 48 hours before she was due to walk up the aisle because, according to social services, she 'did not understand the implications of getting married'.
Her fiance Mark, an artist, added: "Seeing Kerry so upset is absolutely heartbreaking and I am very worried that all this stress she is under will affect our unborn baby's health.
"We're just devastated by this and at the moment we just don't know how we are going to cope in January. We have both already bonded with Ben and I can't even begin to think what it will be like coming home without him.
"It seems unbelievably cruel but social workers told us that after an hour or two with Ben, he will be placed into the care system. They added neither Kerry nor myself will be allowed to remove him from the hospital.
"Social services are ruining our lives. They say they don't believe Kerry has the mental capacity to look after a baby but this is nonsense. Kerry isn't even being given a chance to prove herself as a parent. Yet, she is enjoying her pregnancy and would be a great mum."
Mark said he would be happy to take on full responsibility for his son.
He added: "However, social workers just told me at the meeting to be quiet. As we are not married - because social workers would not let us marry - it seems I have no rights as a dad at all.
"Kerry's grandmother is trying to apply for custody of Ben but social services have already told us it is unlikely she will be successful.
"It seems social services have their hearts set on taking him away from all of us for good. It looks like Ben will eventually be put up for adoption. We feel totally helpless as there seems to be no way of stopping them."
Kerry, from Dunfermline, Fife, has been in the care of her grandmother since she was nine months old after her parents were unable to look after her, with welfare overseen by social services at Fife Council.
In January, she met Mark, from Arbroath and when she became pregnant, they planned to marry.
But their plans were dramatically halted when in September, two days before their church wedding, two social workers arrived at the flat they had shared for four months and told them because of Kerry's learning difficulties, their forthcoming marriage was illegal.
Under Scottish law, a registrar may refuse to marry a couple if he believes one or both the parties lack the mental capacity to understand what the institution of marriage is about.
In a highly unusual step, the registrar at Dunfermline Register Office refused to sanction the marriage after Fife Council wrote a letter of objection.
Mark said: "Everything was organised, from the church to Kerry's wedding dress.
"Yet, despite arguing with the social workers that we loved one another and didn't want our baby to be born to unmarried parents, they wouldn't budge and we were forced to cancel our 40 guests."
However, Kerry, who is still waiting to undergo an official psychological assessment, says her learning difficulties are not as severe as Fife Council make out.
"Last year I volunteered to help disabled children at my local primary school," she says, "I have friends, a family who supports me and a fiance who loves me. I do everything for myself."
Meanwhile, Mark points out that whilst his fiance 'is not terribly academic', she can read and write.
"She is a loving caring person, who is enjoying being pregnant and would be a good mum," he says, "I didn't even know she had learning difficulties until we'd been dating for two months and anyone who meets Kerry can see for themselves she is just a normal girl.
"For the first time in her life Kerry was truly happy. We were both looking forward to having out baby. But now our lives have been totally turned upside down and we are living a nightmare."
Stephen Moore, Executive Director, Social Work Service said: "Much of the work we do is governed by legislation. Complex decisions are made that balance risk and welfare while supporting people at times of personal or family need.
"We cannot discuss details of individual cases for reasons of confidentiality but give assurance that we will always work with people for the best outcome for all involved."
Originally posted at the UK Mirror.
(Read more inside ..)
Boston Launches "Flu Shot Tracking"
By Stephen Smith, Globe Staff
Using technology originally developed for mass disasters, Boston disease trackers are embarking on a novel experiment - one of the first in the country - aimed at eventually creating a citywide registry of everyone who has had a flu vaccination. The resulting vaccination map would allow swift intervention in neighborhoods left vulnerable to the fast-moving respiratory illness.
The trial starts this afternoon, when several hundred people are expected to queue up for immunizations at the headquarters of the Boston Public Health Commission. Each of them will get a bracelet printed with a unique identifier code. Information about the vaccine's recipients, and the shot, will be entered into handheld devices similar to those used by delivery truck drivers.
Infectious disease specialists in Boston and elsewhere predicted that the registry approach could prove even more useful if something more sinister strikes: a bioterrorism attack or the long-feared arrival of a global flu epidemic. In such crises, the registry could be used to track who received a special vaccine or antidote to a deadly germ.
"Anything you can do to better pinpoint who's vaccinated and who's not, that's absolutely vital," said Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research & Policy at the University of Minnesota. "I wish more cities were doing this kind of thing."
Boston is believed to be the first city to embrace this particular approach to tracking vaccinations against the seasonal flu, estimated to kill 36,000 people each year in the United States, principally the elderly.
But when Boston bought the monitoring system from a Milwaukee company in 2006, emergency authorities had a far different use in mind: tracking people injured in big fires, plane crashes, or other disasters.
"When there's a large catastrophic event, people end up in a variety of healthcare facilities," said Dr. Anita Barry, Boston's director of communicable disease control. "Of course, their family members and loved ones are trying to find out where they are and how they're doing."
To see how well the system would work, emergency crews tested it at the Boston Marathon and the Fourth of July extravaganza on the Esplanade. The trial proved successful.
"If we can make it work in the Boston Marathon medical tent, then you have to think about making it so that it can work in other environments as well - whether it's a community clinic or a doctor's office or a flu shot clinic," said Rich Serino, chief of Boston Emergency Medical Services. Thus, the idea to use the registry as a flu vaccine tracker was born.
Every autumn in medical offices across the country, flu vaccine floods in. The perishable medical product must be delivered to millions in a matter of months.
Keeping track of that cache of vaccine - and which patients are getting it - is a daunting proposition.
In some medical offices, the information is entered into electronic medical records. At Boston's health department, nurses fill out paper forms.
But there's never been any way to systematically monitor whether, for example, Dorchester has lower vaccination rates than the North End.
"When you're working in one clinic, you don't have a good sense of that," said Dr. Alfred DeMaria, top disease doctor at the Massachusetts Department of Public Health. "But if you're tracking multiple clinics in real time, you can see where the uptake is better and where it's less, and then focus on outreach."
Today's experiment, which does not require any additional direct spending, is a first step toward that.
When people arrive for their shots, they will get an ID bracelet with a barcode. Next, basic information - name, age, gender, address - will be entered into the patient tracking database. There will be electronic records, too, of who gave the vaccine and whether it was injected into the right arm or the left, and time-stamped for that day.
The resulting trove of data could be used to figure out why some patients had to wait longer than others to be vaccinated. "When all is said and done," said Jun Davantes, director of product management at EMSystems, the company that makes the technology, "Boston will be able to identify where there are certain bottlenecks in the process and hopefully improve it the next time around."
Ultimately, city health authorities said, they envision creating a network across the city that would allow public and private providers of flu shots to add data to a registry.
But acknowledging patients' privacy concerns, officials promised that if a citywide system were implemented, only a limited amount of information would be gathered - all sitting behind an encrypted firewall.
"I have had people say, 'Oh, that's so big brother,' " said Laura Williams, EMS deputy chief of staff. "But in truth, the unique identifier is unique to the incident. It's not like you will go to the hospital, and they'll say, 'You're the one who got the flu vaccine at 10 o'clock yesterday at the Boston Public Health Commission.' "
Stephen Smith can be reached at stsmith@globe.com.
© Copyright 2009 The New York Times Company
(Read more inside ..)
The Surveillance State Threatens All of Us
By By Philip Giraldi
When you hear the word "security" or "safety" watch out. They are the two buzz words that are most often used by the government, whether federal or local, to fearmonger. Fear can be used to drive bad policies that otherwise would be rejected. It has consequences, internationally, nationally, and locally. Around the world Americans fight wars because they are afraid that if they do not do so they will be attacked by terrorists. Nationally, the Department of Homeland Security grows and grows, compiling extensive data bases on citizens who have done no wrong. Locally, police forces grow larger and larger in spite of falling crime rates. What is certain about the consequence of fear is that those who sell it to increase government powers do so in the full knowledge that it will cost lots of taxpayer money and will also wind up infringing on civil liberties. Make no mistake, the post 9/11 United States is moving gradually towards becoming a police state-lite and no one seems to care very much. But don't worry, it is all happening to make you more safe and secure.
The creep of government and the march of surveillance technology go hand in hand. In Maryland and other states, the push to use ostensibly innocuous technology to enable police to monitor the public has accelerated. There has been some debate in the Washington area about the increasing use of speed cameras, but those who are opposed are usually silenced by the "safety" argument. It is reported that Montgomery County in Maryland has deployed hundreds of cameras and is raking in $53,000 a day in fines. The cameras are sited on busy roads and record the license plates of vehicles going a pre-set speed over the posted limit. Many are located where the speed limit drops, making them electronic speed traps. The fine is mailed to the owner of the car automatically and there is no appeal and no way to determine if the camera was malfunctioning. If the fine is not paid, penalties are added on to it and the offending vehicle has its re-registration blocked.
Governments use "safer" to justify anything and have done so in the past to curtail constitutional rights through abominations like the Patriot Acts and the Military Commissions Act. Burgeoning technologies like speed cameras raise serious personal liberties issue that no one is choosing to address. Why should the government have the ability to monitor the movements of a vehicle belonging to a citizen under any circumstances? Does anyone know for sure that the speed cameras are not sending their information to some data base at the Department of Homeland Security? Maybe they already are. It is difficult to know as there is no real oversight to the process and it is easy to connect data bases. If the cameras are not being multi-tasked yet just wait until someone figures out what a wealth of information they might be collecting. And when they begin recording information on law abiding citizens the government will claim that it is for everyone's safety and security.
Those who might argue that collecting traffic data electronically is not threatening might want to consider that information only has meaning when someone figures out how to use it. The employment of apparently innocuous data bases to police the public has been around for a while. Shortly after 9/11, CIA was sending officers all over the world, many traveling on authentic US passports issued in false names. An officer I know who was returning from Asia presented his passport to the immigration officer at Dulles Airport. The airport flipped through it, slid it through a scanner, punched a couple of numbers and then asked "What kind of car do you own?" All of the fake passports apparently had some linked data bases that were provided to make them appear more authentic, which is referred to as backstopping. In this case, the immigration officer was able to pull up additional information from state of Virginia records relating to the traveling officer who, unaware of the DMV link, was arrested, and spent a few uncomfortable hours in the slammer before being bailed by CIA security. That was in 2002. The all-information all-the-time security state has been much empowered and improved since then and it is to be presumed that there now exists an electronic data base on every citizen.
Local governments have an interest in developing ingenious ways to fine the citizenry to raise money but the more important issue is the government's willingness and ability to electronically monitor people's lives. The National Security Agency already has the technical capability to monitor all telephone calls taking place within the United States in real time. To judge how close we Americans are to complete surveillance it is helpful to look at the example of Europe, where state intrusion has been a fact of life for many years. The United Kingdom, which is now the most constantly and thoroughly technically surveilled country on earth, provides some hint of what the United States might become in a few years. The British government routinely monitors telephone calls and e-mail messages. Cameras provide continuous coverage of the centers of most cities and there is monitoring of all major roads and bridges by CCTV linked to monitors.
To cite only one example, back in March the British media was reporting the disappearance of Claudia Lawrence. Lawrence was working as a chef at a university in York when she disappeared. A BBC report included the following: "It was initially thought Miss Lawrence had disappeared after setting off on the three-mile walk from her home to work the following morning. But she does not appear on any CCTV footage from her normal route."
On the basis of the CCTV, the police ruled out her having walked to work, which means that they were able to reconstruct a three mile route through the city with reasonable assurance that they had not missed Lawrence on the CCTV footage. That the police would be able to do that and no one bats an eyelash for privacy reasons is astonishing, a level of government surveillance that is several generations beyond speed cameras. It is reminiscent of Winston Smith in 1984 whose television was watching him while he was doing exercises in front of it. Maybe George Orwell knew what was coming.
And then there is the real ID. Janice Napolitano, Director of Homeland Security, has backed off from the real ID concept that would have united all relevant data bases on the federal, state, and local levels to create an identity card that would be required for all US citizens and resident aliens. Reportedly, a number of states balked at the expense of integrating their data bases, but there is a fundamental civil liberties issue that is much more important. A huge data base on all citizens incorporating detailed personal information is a formula for control by the state that essentially renders null and void the US constitution. Can Napolitano make a case that the creation of the real ID will end terrorist threats? Of course not. The sponsors of Real ID might be well intentioned and honorable, but they should understand that in the wrong hands electronic invasion of privacy can become another tool taking away individual rights and liberties and transferring control to the government. No one really knows whether a national ID it would really make anyone safer or more secure. Many European countries already have identity documents that are similar to the proposed real ID, yet they have suffered from terrorist attacks and continue to have thousands of illegal immigrants.
The creep towards the technological control of the entire US population continues. It is particularly dangerous because it is largely unregulated, free of any judicial process. There is no sign that the Obama Administration will do anything to stop the development of new technologies and policing imperatives because more government in everyone's lives is really what the Democratic Party is all about. When government officials start talking about everyone's safety the people should be aware that those promises are essentially empty and that exchanging liberty for the promise of security will eventually lead to the loss of both.
Copyright © 2009 Campaign for Liberty
(Read more inside ..)
ID Cards for 1.1 Billion Citizens
Project leader: Nandan Nilekani has been chosen to lead the ambitious project
India is planning to provide its 1.1 billion-plus citizens with ID cards.
Entrepreneur, Nandan Nilekani has been chosen to lead the ambitious project which will be the second largest citizens' database in a democracy, with China being the biggest.The government believes the scheme, which will be finalised over three years, will aid the delivery of vital social services to the poorest people who often lack sufficient identification papers.
It also sees the scheme as a way to tackle increasing amounts of identity fraud and theft and, at a time of increased concern over the threat of militant violence, to boost national security and help police and law officials.
Like Britain's £5billion ID cards plan, due to roll out in 2011/12, India's scheme is not without controversy.
Observers have raised questions including how the cards will actually improve the delivery of services and also concerns that the scheme could be disruptive.
In an interview in The Independent today associate fellow of the Asia programme at Chatham House, Charu Lata Hogg, said: 'It cannot be denied that the system of proving identity in India is complicated and confusing.
'But a system of national ID cards can technically introduce a new route to citizenship.
'This could be used as a security measure by the government which leaves migrant workers, refugees and other stateless people in India in limbo without access to public services, employment and basic welfare.'
(Read more inside ..)
Man Sues DHS
St. Louis Today Newspaper. Man Sues Over Search Click Herehttp://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/laworder/story/463A9FCB9CC562DC862575DA000C76B1?OpenDocument (Read more inside ..)
Bierfeldt v. Napolitano
On March 29, 2009, Steven Bierfeldt was detained in a small room at Lambert-St. Louis International Airport and interrogated by Transportation Security Administration (TSA) officials for nearly half an hour after he passed a metal box containing cash through a security checkpoint X-ray machine. Today an official lawsuit was brought against Janet Napolitano and the Department of Homeland Security.On June 18, 2009, the ACLU filed a complaint on behalf of Bierfeldt, charging that TSA is subjecting innocent Americans to unreasonable searches and detentions that violate the Constitution. See the official legal document and listedn to the recording by clicking here. (Read more inside ..)
City to Fine Citizens for Throwing Out Food Scraps
SAN FRANCISCO - Trash collectors in San Francisco will soon be doing more than just gathering garbage: They'll be keeping an eye out for people who toss food scraps out with their rubbish.
San Francisco this week passed a mandatory composting law that is believed to be the strictest such ordinance in the nation. Residents will be required to have three color-coded trash bins, including one for recycling, one for trash and a new one for compost — everything from banana peels to coffee grounds.The law makes San Francisco the leader yet again in environmentally friendly measures, following up on other green initiatives such as banning plastic bags at supermarkets.
Food scraps sent to a landfill decompose fast and turn into methane gas, a potent greenhouse gas. Under the new system, collected scraps will be turned into compost that helps area farms and vineyards flourish. The city eventually wants to eliminate waste at landfills by 2020.
Chris Peck, the state's Integrated Waste Management Board spokesman, said he wasn't aware of an ordinance as tough as San Francisco's. Many cities, including Pittsburgh and San Diego, require residents to recycle yard waste but not food scraps. Seattle requires households to put scraps in the compost bin or have a composting system, but those who don't comply aren't fined.
"The city has been progressive, and they've been leaders and it appears that they're stepping out of the pack again," he said.
Fines to be enforced in 2010
San Francisco officials said they aren't looking to punish violators harshly.
Waste collectors will not pick through anyone's garbage, said Robert Reed, a spokesman for Sunset Scavenger Co., which handles the city's recyclables. If the wrong kind of materials are noticed while a bin is being emptied, workers will leave what Reed called "a love note," to let customers know they are not with the program.
"We're not going to lock you up in jail if you don't compost," said Nathan Ballard, a spokesman for Mayor Gavin Newsom who proposed the measure that passed Tuesday. "We're going to make it as easy as possible for San Franciscans to learn how to compost."
A moratorium on imposing fines will end in 2010, after which repeat offenders like individuals and small businesses generating less than a cubic yard of refuse a week face fines of up to $100.
Businesses that don't provide the proper containers face a $500 fine.
Proponents: Others will follow SF's lead
Sean Elsbernd, one of the two supervisors who opposed the proposition that passed 9-2, said the measure was "over-the-top" and that calls to his office Wednesday were critical of the new law.
"This is just going to aggravate and aggrieve homeowners who are doing their best," said Elsbernd.
But proponents say it is important to get people's attention about the importance of keeping those biodegradable materials out of landfills.
Ballard predicted that recycling food scraps eventually will seem as ho-hum as saving aluminum cans and newspapers.
"That used to seem like such a chore," he said. "Now we do it every day."
Newsom was expected to sign the measure if the board passes it in a final vote next week.
Copyright 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31265662/
MSN Privacy . Legal
© 2009 MSNBC.com
(Read more inside ..)
Federal Government Ceases Poker Winnings
Winning $10,000 in an online poker tournament made him eligible for the upcoming World Series of Poker, the game's premier event, where hundreds of players -- amateur and professional -- descend on Las Vegas from around the world to play for a multimillion-dollar pot.
To register, he simply had to cash a check cut by a company that processed payments for the poker Web site Pokerstars.com and use the $10,000 to buy into the series.
When he went to cash the check from Account Services Wednesday, it bounced, he said.Read the full article here.
(Read more inside ..)
