Muslim and Jewish Women in Nazareth

'We can live in peace'...John Lennon (photo: Dafna Tal)

Mahzor

Mahzor

New York Public Library

Churches

Sarajevo Haggadah

Mah Nishtanah

Sarajevo haggadah

Antaea Darom

Israeli women's art

Action

Torah as music

Ben Heine

Action

ceramic bowl

Mohammad Said Kalash, "Offering Reconciliation" exhibit (photo: Ilan Amihai)

Action

Punch and Judy/Pinchas and Jamila

Avi Katz

Action

David Grossman

Ben Heine

Action

Eldrige Street shul

Lower East Side

Action

Dove

Ben Heine

Action

Two birds

Hoda Jamal

Action

Israeli and Palestinian boys

from documentary, Promises

Action

Cat in the Hat

Yiddish version

Action

Daylight through the Wall

Banksy: graffiti art on Separation Wall

Action

Maurice Sendak's Brundibar set

New Victory Theater (photo: Nan Melville/NYT)

Action

Daniel Barenboim, West-Eastern Divan Orchestra

Palestinian-Israeli musical ensemble (photo: Kerstin Joensson/AP)

Action

Great Day on Eldrige Street

N.Y.'s klezmer greats celebrate shul rededication (photo: Leo Sorel)

Action

Joint Appeal for Peace

(Avi Katz)

Joint Appeal for Peace

Ketubah, Ancona, Italy (1772)

(Jewish Theological Seminary library)

Ancona ketubah

Posts Tagged ‘nsa’

NSA and AT&T Snooping: Big Brother is Listening!

Thursday, April 13th, 2006
at&t logoAT&T: “Your world. Delivered. To the NSA”

Boy, if I were an AT&T customer I sure wouldn’t be after reading this spooky story from the NY Times about the company’s cooperation with the NSA in intercepting customers communications and passing it along to the feds:

Mark Klein was a veteran AT&T technician in 2002 when he began to see what he thought were suspicious connections between that telecommunications giant and the National Security Agency.

…Now Mr. Klein and a few company documents he saved have emerged as key elements in a class-action lawsuit filed against AT&T on Jan. 31 by a civil liberties group, the Electronic Frontier Foundation. The suit accuses the company of helping the security agency invade its customers’ privacy.

Statue of Liberty spying cartoon(cartoon: Nick Anderson)

Mr. Klein’s account and the documents provide new details about how the agency works with the private sector in intercepting communications for intelligence purposes…

The equipment, which Mr. Klein said was installed by AT&T in 2003, was able to select messages that could be identified by keywords, Internet or e-mail addresses or country of origin and divert copies to another location for further analysis…

The technical experts all said that the documents showed that AT&T had an agreement with the federal government to systematically gather information flowing on the Internet through the company’s network…

“This took expert planning and hundreds of millions of dollars to build,” said Brian Reid, director of engineering at the Internet Systems Consortium in Redwood City, Calif. “This is the correct way to do high volume Internet snooping.”..

Mr. Klein said other AT&T technicians had told him of such installations in San Jose, Calif.; Los Angeles; San Diego; and Seattle…

The Internet hubs there carry a significant amount of international traffic. The network designer and other experts said it would be a simple technical matter to reprogram the equipment to intercept purely domestic Internet traffic.

Which means that the feds easily could and probably are intercepting purely domestic traffic–a clear violation of the Foreign Surveillance Act. We need to find out once and for all and definitively whether or not the NSA engages in this type of clearly ilicit activity. Will Congress ever have to nerve to pursue this? Unfortunately, I doubt it. But one can always hope.

Let this be a lesson to all of us about our ISPs. I’ve asked my telephone company (Qwest) and ISP (Comcast) to tell me whether they cooperate with the NSA and what their policy is regarding federal internet surveillance. They haven’t even bothered to reply. We each have a responsibility to pressure our providers to be more transparent about this matter. Even more important, we need to pressure our federal legislators to protect our privacy rights by reining in the NSA snoopsters and providing guidelines for telecommunication providers to follow. Otherwise, our lives will be an open book to spies and federal bureaucrats.

Republican Congresswoman Calls for Full NSA Congressional Hearings

Wednesday, February 8th, 2006

The NY Times reports that Heather Wilson (R, NM), chair of the House Intelligence Subcommittee on Technical and Tactical Intelligence (and with direct oversight of the NSA), called for full congressional hearings regarding the NSA spying program:

Heather WilsonHeather Wilson, Republican breaks rank with Bush on NSA (photo: Ben Chrisman/AP)

A House Republican whose subcommittee oversees the National Security Agency broke ranks with the White House on Tuesday and called for a full Congressional inquiry into the Bush administration’s domestic eavesdropping program.

The lawmaker said in an interview that she had “serious concerns” about the surveillance program. By withholding information about its operations from many lawmakers, she said, the administration has deepened her apprehension about whom the agency is monitoring and why.

The reason why Ms. Thomas should not be dismissed lightly by Dick Cheney and friends is that she has her national security bona fides. First, she was an Air Force officer and is the only female veteran in Congress. Second, she was a National Security Council aide for the first Pres. Bush. This is a formidable woman who, while a Republican, has an independent streak:

The Times places Wilson’s qualms in the context of growing Republican sentiment calling for review and reform of the NSA program:

The congresswoman’s discomfort with the operation appears to reflect deepening fissures among Republicans over the program’s legal basis and political liabilities. Many Republicans have strongly backed President Bush’s power to use every tool at his disposal to fight terrorism, but 4 of the 10 Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee voiced concerns about the program at a hearing where Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales testified on Monday.

A growing number of Republicans have called in recent days for Congress to consider amending federal wiretap law to address the constitutional issues raised by the N.S.A. operation.

My only concern, should congressional Republicans actually persuade the imperial Bushites to come down off their high horse on this issue, is that Congress will basically incorporate warrantless eavesdropping of the type “authorized” by the President into the exiting FISA statutes. Essentially, what could happen is that Bush gets everything he wants AND it’s now declared legal. The reason for my fear is that congressional Democrats have shown no stomach lately for standing up for principles like civil liberties. Because national security is tricky ground for them, they’re liable to withdraw from the field rather than fight for restraint of some of Bush and the spymasters’ worse impulses.

In this most partisan of times, it is rare that a Republican has the gumption to take on her president in the way that Wilson has:

She said she realized that publicizing her concerns over the surveillance program could harm her relations with the administration. “The president has his duty to do, but I have mine too, and I feel strongly about that,” she said.

Good for her. But I’d suggest that she start wearing her Air Force helmet and watch out for “incoming” from the White House. She may be in for a rough ride from the Cheneyites.

AT&T, MCI and Sprint Customers, Uncle Sam’s Listening In

Tuesday, February 7th, 2006

USA Today reports that at least three U.S. telecoms are cooperating with the NSA spying program:

Statue of Liberty spying cartoon(cartoon: Nick Anderson)

The National Security Agency has secured the cooperation of large telecommunications companies, including AT&T, MCI and Sprint, in its efforts to eavesdrop without warrants on international calls by suspected terrorists, according to seven telecommunications executives.

The executives asked to remain anonymous because of the sensitivity of the program.

AT&T, MCI and Sprint had no official comment.

Almost as troubling to me is this passage:

Telecommunications executives say MCI, AT&T and Sprint grant the access to their systems without warrants or court orders. Instead, they are cooperating on the basis of oral requests from senior government officials.

One of the reasons for doing it this way is there is no paper trail which is convenient for both the government and the telecoms. When those nasty supoenas land on your doorstep the evidence is all in your head, not on the page, which can dramatically hinder a congressional investigation.

If you’re a customer of any of these benighted companies, call the office of their legal counsel to complain. And if you’d get an answer out of them, blog about it. I have asked my phone company, Qwest, and my ISP, Comcast, to tell me whether they’ve cooperated. Guess what, they thought silence was the better part of valor. What does it take to make the telecoms do the right thing and respond to their customers?

Hat tip, Media Matters.

ACLU Calls for Special Prosecutor in NSA Spy Scandal

Thursday, December 29th, 2005

The ACLU ran a hard-hitting ad in the New York Times on December 22nd which noted the similarities between Nixon’s illegal wiretaps against alleged domestic “terrorists” and Bush’s warrantless NSA snooping against U.S. citizen he deems “terrorists.” The group calls for Attorney General Gonzales to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate these charges. Give your congressmember a call to tell them that you support not only Congressional hearings, but appointment of a special prosecutor and impeachment if it comes to that.


Did FISA Judges Consent to Physical Break-Ins to Obtain Evidence?

Wednesday, December 28th, 2005

Martin Garbus has been covering the legal/constitutional angle of the NSA scandal for Huffington Post. While he is a well-known First Amendment attorney, he is not the most elegant or thorough writer in the world (one wishes the HP staff would edit him a bit). But so far there are not many constitutional lawyers saying much about impeachment so he fills a useful niche in the political debate.

He came up with an arresting tidbit in tonight’s HP column:

…The public shall also learn about the FISA judges’ misuse of the FISA courts and their warrants. The courts were created to permit eavesdropping and electronic surveillance, not physical break-ins.

The facts will show that the Bush administration, with the knowledge, and at times, the consent of the FISA judges, conducted illegal physical break-ins – break-ins that to this day, the involved person, is unaware of.

There are a few problems with this statement. It is unsourced. One assumes that someone of Garbus’ legal background might have sources in the government apparatus or among lawyers representing some of those the NSA surveilled who might know more about this claim and possibly substantiate it further. Of course, there is a possibility that Garbus is pulling a Drudge on us and that his charge is unfounded. But I sure put enough credence in it to bring it to your attention.

****UPDATE: After I posted this as a diary entry at Daily Kos, an expert on FISA pointed me to the Cornell Law School website which contains all of the FISA statutes. The problem with what Garbus wrote above, at least as I read him, is that he is dead wrong. FISA DOES indeed permit physical searches (which Garbus calls “break-ins”). In fact, FISA statutes even permits warrantless physical searches:

“…the President, acting through the Attorney General, may authorize physical searches without a court order under this subchapter to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to one year”

If I’m misunderstanding what Garbus intended to say, then it’s possible there is some truth to his statement. But barring that, I think it’s incumbent on the progressive media to ensure that its claims are authenticated, accurate and credible. Otherwise, it’ll be too easy for the other side to dismiss us as cranks and hysterics.
*****

If the charge is true it means that not only has Bush co-opted the NSA to commit illegal acts; but he has now co-opted the FISA court to do so as well. Garbus is essentially accusing federal judges of condoning violations of federal law which is a damn serious proposition. I’d like to know what Garbus means by “illegal break-ins.” I don’t know FISA well enough to say what it permits and what it doesn’t; but I’m assuming that Garbus implies that the break-ins were warrantless or possibly approved due to prior illegal NSA snooping.

I sure hope Eric Lichtblau at the Times, who “owns” this story will address Garbus’ charge in future NSA-related articles in the NYT.

Justice Department’s Al Qaeda Prosecutions in Jeopardy?

Wednesday, December 28th, 2005

I wonder if one year ago (or however long ago the NY Times agreed to a request from the Bush Administration to mothball the Lichtblau-Risen story about NSA spying) Eric Lichtblau could’ve pictured himself one day well on the way to earning his first Pulitzer Prize. In fact, if I were on the Pulitzer Committee I’d just close down the category for Best Series because it’s got to go to this intrepid reporting team which first uncovered the scandal that will rock the Bush Administration perhaps till the end of its final term.

Statue of Liberty spying cartoon(cartoon: Nick Anderson)

In today’s Times, Lichtblau amplifies on a report from Salon.com published December 23rd (which I just blogged about here), regarding Iyman Faris’ potential claim against Bush for using illegal NSA intercepts in its case against him:

Defense lawyers in some of the country’s biggest terrorism cases say they plan to bring legal challenges to determine whether the National Security Agency used illegal wiretaps against several dozen Muslim men tied to Al Qaeda.

The lawyers said in interviews that they wanted to learn whether the men were monitored by the agency and, if so, whether the government withheld critical information or misled judges and defense lawyers about how and why the men were singled out.

The expected legal challenges, in cases from Florida, Ohio, Oregon and Virginia, add another dimension to the growing controversy over the agency’s domestic surveillance program and could jeopardize some of the Bush administration’s most important courtroom victories in terror cases, legal analysts say…

David B. Smith, a lawyer for [Iyman] Faris, said he planned to file a motion in part to determine whether information about the surveillance program should have been turned over. Lawyers said they were also considering a civil case against the president, saying that Mr. Faris was the target of an illegal wiretap ordered by Mr. Bush.

When I write here and elsewhere that Bush’s NSA spying may cost him almost every one of the hitherto successful Justice Department prosecutions of U.S. supporters of Al Qaeda, I write this not out of vindication or triumph. The fact is that a good number of these people are real terrorists with real malevolent motives against this country and its citizens. We should all mourn that George Bush’s monarchical pretensions may have in effect destroyed his ability to fight terror effectively in this country. It seems highly likely to me that NSA intelligence would have been used in most or all of these cases. And once (notice I do not say “if”) Bush’s order is found to be illegal, any such cases go up in a whiff of smoke. And that is a tragedy, but one of Bush’s making and for which he must take responsibility (fat chance that happening).

There’s another point worth mentioning–this legal strategy is not a slam-dunk. The Justice Department will be fighting tooth and nail every single request for information about the NSA program and its relevance to individual cases. These defendants turned plaintiffs will first have to prove standing and then they’ll have to get a federal judiciary which often finds in favor of the executive in national security matters to find in favor of some very unsavory individuals who mean the United States no good. But in the end, these judges will realize that while the plaintiffs may be unsavory, the constitutional principle represented in their claim is intrinsic to our liberty as Americans. And that can never be unsavory.

James Bamford: “If you want to eavesdrop on U.S. citizens, you go to court. If you don’t, you go to jail”

Tuesday, December 27th, 2005

Body of Secrets : Anatomy of the Ultra-Secret National Security Agency
Salon profiles James Bamford, a former Navy intelligence analyst and author of the first, and definitive book about the NSA from the inside out: The Puzzle Palace. Bamford is to the agency what Bob Woodward is to the presidency: a confidant, a chronicler and even perhaps a promoter at times. But Bamford is flat-out opposed to Bush’s executive order. And Salon’s Michael Scherer characterizes his unequivocal views:
The Puzzle Palace : Inside America\'s Most Secret Intelligence Organization

Bamford believes the president clearly broke the law, and he has called for a special prosecutor to investigate. “What you have here is the administration going around the only protection the public has from the NSA, and doing it on their own. That’s how Richard Nixon got in trouble, and one of the reasons he left office.”

For Bamford, there is only black and white when it comes to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, a 1978 law that specifically requires warrants for any NSA wiretapping of U.S. citizens. “If you want to eavesdrop on U.S. citizens, you go to court. If you don’t, you go to jail,” Bamford says. “If you want to change the law, you go to Congress.”

Bamford also quotes this telling, chilling and clairvoyant passage from Senator Frank Church, chief advocate of the 1978 FISA law:

“That [NSA] capability at any time could be turned around on the American people and no American would have any privacy left, such [is] the capability to monitor everything: telephone conversation, telegrams, it doesn’t matter,” Church declared then. “There would be no place to hide.”

Salon’s coverage of this story is second only to the New York Times, which broke the initial story.

NSA Training Its Spy Satellites on U.S.?

Monday, December 26th, 2005

The NSA spy scandal just seems to get bigger and messier with each passing day. Thanks to Slate for pointing me to today’s [Los Angeles Times->http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-spy25dec25,0,1480152,full.story?coll=la-home-headlines], which suggests the likelihood that NSA spy satellites are pointed at the United States allowing NSA to intercept virtually all domestic telecommunications traffic. While the story’s authors point out that they have not found anyone in government to specifically confirm these charges, a significant number of national security experts believe it is a virtual certainty that this is what the NSA is up to:

NSA surveillance cartoon(cartoon: Mike Lucovich/Atlanta Journal & Constitution

“It’s really obvious to me that it’s a look-at-everything type program,” said cryptography expert Bruce Schneier, who has written several books about security.

Schneier and others suspect that the NSA may be turning its satellites toward the United States and gathering vast streams of raw data from many more people than disclosed — potentially including all e-mails and phone calls from the United States to certain other countries

The Times story expands on the nature and history of the cooperation between telecommunications companies and the NSA:

Phone companies and others have cooperated with U.S. agencies including the NSA for years. In the early 1990s, AT&T agreed to use an NSA-designed chip to ensure that law enforcement had access to phone calls.

And AT&T has a database code-named Daytona that keeps track of phone numbers on both ends of calls as well as the duration of all land-line calls, according to a business executive who has been briefed on the system.

“This started as a way for phone companies to dig out fraud,” the executive said Saturday. After Sept. 11, intelligence agencies began to view it as a potential investigative tool, and the NSA has had a direct hookup into the database, he said.

Bruce Schneier gives the lie to Bush’s protestations that the NSA intercepts are “limited” in nature:

After such massive volumes of information are collected, they are searched for suspicious language. The administration could thus argue that only hundreds of people were monitored because those conversations were the ones that were flagged because they contained suspicious words, Schneier said.

“If a computer looks at all e-mail and says ‘bing’ once, is that monitoring one person or millions?” Schneier asked. “The Bush numbers are depending on that subterfuge.”

One former senior Pentagon official who has overseen such “data mining” said he also believed the NSA was probably conducting such wholesale surveillance.

“It’s a reasonable hypothesis,” the official said, adding that he believed it was necessary against savvy terrorists who would otherwise remain undetected.

Here, a former NSA analyst gives a typical example of what such an intercept might look like and it makes me shiver:

One former NSA signals-intelligence analyst, Russell D. Tice, said the agency has long had such ability.

“I’m not allowed to say one way or another what the NSA is or is not doing. But the technology exists,” said Tice, who left the NSA this year.

“Say Aunt Molly in Oklahoma calls her niece at an Army base in Germany and says, ‘Isn’t it horrible about those terrorists and Sept. 11?’ ” Tice said: That conversation would not only be captured by NSA satellites listening in on Germany — which is legal — but flagged and listened to by NSA analysts and possibly transcribed for further investigation.

All you would have to do is move the vacuum cleaner a little to the left and begin sucking up the other end of that conversation,” Tice said. “You move it a little more and you could be picking up everything people are saying from California to New York.

Here is one of the more chilling passages in the article which also provides a credible explanation why Bush and his spymasters decided they could not comply with FISA (aside from the BS defenses they’ve been slinging):

In interviews, current and former intelligence officials said communications technology was so advanced that it would probably be next to impossible for the NSA to filter out all of the U.S.-based electronic communications even if it wanted to when casting a wide net for terrorists…

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act was not designed to accommodate data-mining projects, and some experts and knowledgeable former U.S. officials suspect that that is why the administration is circumventing it.

Because data mining entails tracing potentially millions of innocent links to find a few suspicious ones, authorities would immediately encounter problems establishing probable cause to proceed. Then, the experts say, authorities would have to obtain warrants under the surveillance act for vast numbers of phone numbers and e-mail addresses.

I hope that when (or should I say “if”) Congress finally gets around to rewriting FISA to incorporate the problems arising from this NSA program, that members do not throw up their hands in frustration and say they can’t see any way to effectively monitor such technology. There must be ways to utilize such technology while still respecting individual civil liberties. And if there are not, then we need to outlaw the technology’s use for this purpose until its advocates can come up with proper safeguards.