In May 2014, I reported on my efforts to learn what the feds know about me whenever I enter and exit the country. In particular, I wanted my Passenger Name Records (PNR), data created by airlines, hotels, and cruise ships whenever travel is booked.
But instead of providing what I had requested, the United States Customs and Border Protection (CBP) turned over only basic information about my travel going back to 1994. So I appealed—and without explanation, the government recently turned over the actual PNRs I had requested the first time.
The 76 new pages of data, covering 2005 through 2013, show that CBP retains massive amounts of data on us when we travel internationally. My own PNRs include not just every mailing address, e-mail, and phone number I’ve ever used; some of them also contain:
The IP address that I used to buy the ticket
My credit card number (in full)
The language I used
Notes on my phone calls to airlines, even for something as minor as a seat change…
RTFA for the whole disgusting tale. Once again the creeps we elect to keep an eye on the creeps they employ actually spend their time helping all the creeps keep an eye on us.
The singular point that must be understood from the article is the statement by the travel writer, Edward Hasbrouck – “This is not to catch people under suspicion; this is for the purpose of finding new suspects.” Our government justifies every kind of illegitimate fishing expedition as being part of their mandate to protect us.
That they maintain a secret police mentality and bureacracy to match never enters the conversation.
The NRA has sent an email to congress, denouncing Senate Bill S.1290 proposed by Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar, because it could apply to same-sex couples – even unmarried couples.
…The bill would amend the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act to revise the definition of “intimate partner” to include a “dating partner and any other person similarly situated to a spouse.” It would also revise the term “misdemeanor crime of domestic violence” to include the “use or attempted use of physical force or a deadly weapon by a current or former intimate partner.” The bill is intended to close loopholes in the current law that allows stalkers and domestic abusers “in a current or former dating relationship who never lived together or had a child together” to purchase guns.
The bill has been gaining support in the Senate, perhaps too much support, because yesterday the NRA has decided to weigh in. They’re opposed. No surprise there. It’s the “why” they are opposed that is unusual. They fear the new language might keep gay men who were once in a stormy relationship from buying guns…
The NRA argues banning a gay man from buying a gun because of a past assault conviction on his partner would be totally unreasonable. (I would think that viewpoint probably depends on whether you’re the partner being beaten or the partner doing the beating.) The NRA email characterized S.1290 as a “bill to turn disputes between family members and social acquaintances into lifetime firearm prohibitions.”
Don’t feel too special that the NRA has decided to take a stand for gays and guns. In the same email, the NRA argued that stalkers should not be included in new federal restrictions, because stalking crimes “do not necessarily include violent or even threatening behavior.”
This is another one of those moments when you have to wonder what planet the NRA lives on?
The reality is that it doesn’t matter whether you live in a state that thinks it’s in the 19th Century or the 20th Century – or, perish the thought, even the 21st Century – violence against former partners, violence from stalkers fixated on a former partner, heterosexual or otherwise, is common.
And violence in America is often characterized by gun violence. Trying to kill your former spouse or partner with a gun is as American as you can get. Hardly makes a headline unless you take out a whole office full of people in the process.
“Abe colour” is an expression occasionally used in Japan’s domestic media. It means those government policies that reflect Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s personal views, and the term relates to his hawkish security policies. Critics claim the secrecy bill passed into law in December 2013 is said to be one such example of “Abe colour”, and it will go into effect this December.
Proper safeguards and oversight bodies were supposed to be included, but critics say that this secrecy law is still far from adequate.
One of the strongest critics of the new law comes from the Japan Federation of Bar Associations, which has asked the government to completely reconsider the law. Yoichi Eto, its representative, told Al Jazeera that “this law simply provides new powers to the government officials. It says that they are authorised to do this or that. But it has nothing to say at all about what officials must not do…
The new Japanese secrecy law also specifically targets journalists. While there is language in the text that supposedly guarantees “normal” journalistic practice, it also says that reporters and others who utilise “inappropriate means” to learn a special secret may be subject to prosecution and up to five years in prison.
What exactly constitutes “inappropriate means” to gather the news? The law is silent on this point, suggesting once again that the government and police will decide for themselves what the law mandates, once they are faced with a specific case.
Japan’s freelance investigative journalists are at particular risk, as the government may not even recognise their status as being part of a legitimate news media…
Yu Terasawa, recently cited by Reporters Without Borders as one of the world’s “100 Information Heroes” – the only person in Japan given such an honor – sees the main purpose of the law as preventing the media from revealing embarrassing information to the public. “The present government has an unusually large number of things that it wants to hide,” Terasawa said.
“This includes issues surrounding the accident at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant as well as, looking forward, possible conflicts with China, Russia, or North Korea…”
Even in the absence of the new secrecy law, the Japanese government’s actual operations are often guarded from public view. Almost every major study of Japan’s mainstream media notes its tendency to shy away from investigative political reporting and to “reveal” to the Japanese public that information simply handed to them by the public relations officials of the various ministries and other government agencies.
As Morton Halperin, former Director of Policy Planning at the US State Department, observed, “It is hard to imagine a country that less needs a secrecy law than Japan.”
I think it’s just another brick in the wall of militarism put in place by the stonemason in the White House. Obama works at what he thinks is his main task – propping up imperial America around the globe. He thinks Japan is a fitting junior partner. After all – they already have experience as part of an Axis.
Visitors to Carlsbad, New Mexico, in proper summer attire
The contractor that operates the federal government’s underground nuclear waste dump in southeastern New Mexico received a $1.9 million bonus just five days after an underground truck fire closed the facility.
The Albuquerque Journal reported Sunday that the U.S. Department of Energy awarded Nuclear Waste Partnership the funds based on an “excellent” job performance in maintaining the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in Carlsbad.
Some observers say last February’s fire and the radiation leak that followed nine days later show the contractor failed at its job.
Initial probes by federal regulators into both incidents identified a host of management and safety shortcomings.
The Department of Energy says it is not considering revising or terminating its contract with Nuclear Waste Partnership.
The company has a contract to operate the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant through 2017.
Consistency is the leading mental illness in our government. Time in office, time on the job is considered praiseworthy and a sign of qualification by the Senators and Congress-critters that dole out taxpayer dollars like so many blue ribbons at a hog-calling contest. Quality of work is meaningless.
The Waste Isolation Pilot Project was run badly enough that the chief executive at the site was fired as a result of the equipment fire and, separately, the radiation leak.
There are nations with an honorable civil service, competent, dedicated bureaucrats. The United States just doesn’t happen to be one of them.
Barton Gellman/Getty Images/AP
Edward Snowden, the former U.S. spy agency contractor who leaked details of major U.S. surveillance programs, called on supporters at a hacking conference to spur development of easy-to-use technologies to subvert government surveillance programs around the globe.
Snowden, who addressed conference attendees on Saturday via video link from Moscow, said he intends to devote much of his time to promoting such technologies, including ones that allow people to communicate anonymously and encrypt their messages…
At the HOPE hacking conference, several talks detailed approaches for thwarting government surveillance, including a system known as SecureDrop that is designed to allow people to anonymously leak documents to journalists.
Attorneys with the Electronic Frontier Foundation answered questions about pending litigation with the NSA, including efforts to stop collection of phone records that were disclosed through Snowden’s leaks.
Snowden is seen as a hero by a large segment of the community of hackers attending the HOPE conference [and the nation and the world], which includes computer experts, anti-surveillance activists, artists and other types of hackers.
HOPE in this case stands for Hackers On Planet Earth.
And if you think every kind of government snoop wasn’t doing their best to photogrqph, record and trace everyone at the conference – you’re still living in cloud cuckoo-land — watching Father Knows Best on TV.
a_v_d via Shutterstock/Salon)
A Saturday ago at the annual conference of the Faith and Freedom Coalition, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal accused President Obama and other Democrats of waging a war against religious liberty and all but openly threatened a violent revolution…“I can sense right now a rebellion brewing amongst these United States,” Jindal said, “where people are ready for a hostile takeover of Washington, D.C., to preserve the American Dream for our children and grandchildren.”
Of course, Jindal’s speech didn’t come out of nowhere. Jindal is notorious as a weather vane, not a leader. So this is a clear sign of the need to take threats of right-wing violence seriously — and to look to its justifications as formulated on the Christian right…
“Something has changed in recent years,” Frederick Clarkson notes, as “disturbing claims are appearing more frequently, more prominently, and in ways that suggest that they are expressions of deeply held beliefs more than provocative political hyperbole.” He also cites “powerful indications in the writings of some Christian right leaders that elements of their movement have lost confidence in the bright political vision of the United States as the once and future Christian Nation — and that they are desperately seeking alternatives.”
Perhaps most ominously, there is a growing convergence of theocratic and neo-Confederate thinking, Clarkson finds…
At least some of the historic culture warriors of the Christian Right seem to be considering an ostensibly unlikely coalition with the Neo-Confederate movement. The coalition would lead their followers in religious and political directions in which violence is as likely as the outcomes are uncertain…
In short, if you think that secession talk has been crazy since President Obama took office, it could get significantly worse. The sort of standoff we saw at the Cliven Bundy ranch could pale in comparison to what a religiously motivated group — certain that God is on their side — might do…
Father C. John McCloskey, a 61-year-old priest in the reactionary Opus Dei order, predicted in 2001, and again in 2012, that conservative Catholics and evangelicals would need to band together in a civil war of secession. The “secession of the ‘Culture of Life’ states,” he predicted, would emphasize “the fundamental issues of the sanctity of marriage, the rights of parents, and the sacredness of human life,” and that the secession would precipitate “a short and bloody civil war” that would break the country into what he calls “the Regional States of America.”
RTFA for more of this collective theocratic silliness. Just in case you think idjits won’t be moved to violence.
Then, just for giggles at the so-called mainstream of the Southern Right, check out these folks who still call themselves Republicans. A poll, released Tuesday, finds that 37 percent of those who supported Chris McDaniel, the Tea Party gasbag in the Mississippi Republican primary runoff would support the Confederate states if there were a second Civil War. Just 38 percent would back the United States, and 25 percent were unsure.
Yup. They’re still out there in the dark somewhere.
The FCC somehow publicly lost public comments on a petition they were mandated to create. It might not matter, anyway. Telecoms are outlobbying net neutrality advocates 3:1. That’s all that matters in all of American government. But due to one provision, the FCC was at least forced to talk about it.
In April, FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler proposed a new rule that would allow for corporations to discriminate against certain kinds of speech on the web. By rule, the commission put the proposal up for public comment.
Yesterday, the FCC’s website somehow lost public access to signatures and public comments for a petition to stop it.
Today, the commission said it was vowing to give those people a chance to file again.
…The spokeswoman also politely asked everyone to “please be assured that the commission … is committed to making sure that everyone trying to submit comments will have their views entered into the record.”
The record — if they can keep the website up and running — will show that almost all of the comments are against the new rules, which shouldn’t be a surprise. As former FCC Commissioner Robert M. McDowell pointed out today, consumers stand to gain nothing by having increased FCC oversight of the internet.
On the other end of the influence game, telecoms lobbying for the new rules are outspending their opponents 3 to 1. So you know they stand to gain something.
So, the FCC gets to take sides. Who do you think they will side with? Corporations and their paid lobbyists? That is the official lobbyists in addition to the political hacks who build their careers on donations from special business interests.
Or will they come down on the side of you and me?
Don’t hold your breath too long.
Welcome to 1965. That was when the Supreme Court ruling in Griswold vs Connecticut legalized the sale and public access to contraceptive devices. The pharmacist at the Orange pharmacy just 5 blocks from my apartment in New Haven was arrested for publicly displaying and selling condoms.
Today’s conservative-dominated Supreme Court probably would have upheld the law and his arrest. Today’s Republicans demonstrate once again their War on Women is more important than separation of Church and State, more important than women having the individual liberty to make choices about reproduction. Welcome to 1865.
Today, Senate Republicans filibustered a bill that would have walked back the recent Supreme Court hearing in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby and made sure that contraception was treated no differently from other medications in company insurance policies. The bill, promoted by Washington senator Patty Murray and Colorado senator Mark Udall and called the Protect Women’s Health From Corporate Interference Act, would have ensured that for-profit companies that provide health insurance to employees could not deny coverage of specific medications, including birth control. It exempted houses of worship and religiously affiliated nonprofits.
Nonetheless, the bill failed. Only three Republicans crossed party lines to vote for it: Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Susan Collins of Maine, and Mark Kirk of Illinois.
The bill’s defeat isn’t a surprise, but it is indicative of how extreme positions from the long-standing wars over abortion have crept into territory the American public more or less agrees on. Overwhelming majorities of Americans think birth control is morally acceptable, and two-thirds support mandated contraception coverage in health insurance plans. A majority thinks for-profit companies should have to cover contraception even if the company owners have religious objections.
But a bill solidifying those values while maintaining rights for religious groups was just shot down…
Numerous studies show that affordable, accessible contraception significantly lowers abortion rates. When women around the world are able to plan their families, they live longer, their children are healthier, they have fewer abortions, their families make more money and even their local and national economies improve. And family planning doesn’t just reduce abortion rates — it reduces infant mortality rates too.
So why do Republicans want to make it harder and more expensive to get? Because this isn’t about abortion at all. It’s about female sexuality and a conservative hostility toward it. Contraception doesn’t just have social, medical, and economic benefits; it allows women to have sex for pleasure. There are a lot of folks who find that threatening and unpleasant…
…The point of insurance is to help offset health care costs. If employers didn’t have to cover vaccinations or the setting of broken bones or brain surgery, people would still have the legal ability to get to those things, but many people wouldn’t be able to, because the cost would make them inaccessible. The same is true for birth control.
Americans understand that. It’s too bad conservatives in the Senate don’t.
‘Nuff said. Conservative creeps want to turn this country back into the sort of theocratic, bigoted, old-white-male-dominated nation exemplified by today’s Republican Party.
The War on Women is central to that ideology.
140 pairs of tidy whities, bro’
An army offensive in Taliban-dominated tribal areas of Pakistan has caused large numbers of people to flee to safer regions. Among them is shopkeeper Rasheed Rehman, who until recently counted Taliban fighters among his best customers…
Miranshah is the administrative capital of North Waziristan, close to the Afghan border. Rasheed says he had a large shop in the main market there, selling all manner of cosmetics, socks and stockings, and a few electronic items.
He says he used to earn between 100,000 and 115,000 rupees a day, and that Taliban militants were the biggest spenders. According to Rasheed, they would buy plenty of goods on every visit – and they wouldn’t haggle to get prices reduced.
“They used to prefer foreign or branded perfumes and imported body sprays. They liked the ones with a strong scent.”
In fact, Rasheed would travel especially to Islamabad and Lahore in order to procure the kind of imported merchandise the Taliban preferred…
The perfumes they bought for their womenfolk included one called Secret Love, and Blue Lady by Rasasi.
They would ask for Head and Shoulders or Clear shampoo and Dove soap.
When it came to underwear, they preferred it white – briefs or Y fronts…
Another shopkeeper from Miranshah, Sohail Masih, a tailor, confirms that the Taliban would invariably be the best customers in the market, spending 2,000 to 3,000 rupees at a time – for many people that would be two weeks’ salary.
“They would drive to my shop in big white cars with black-tinted windows and had no qualms about doling out wads of cash,” he says.
“The kind of things they would buy, well people like me can’t even conceive of buying them.”
Pointing out once again that we’re dealing with run-of-the-mill bandits, folks. Neither the average Pashtun or Pakistani nor fixated Tea Party Islamophobes have their history or facts straight. Just because gangsters and thugs claim their mission is grounded in some variant of a religion doesn’t make it so.
And that ain’t new. Petty despots have claimed their mission is one of fighting for religious freedom, ethnic liberation, sectarian justice – time and again. A significant part of the trouble is the “other side” of the conflict is often just as willing to accept that crap lie as advocacy because it fits their own matrix of hate.