SB 483 is Scheduled!

SB 483 is on the agenda and due to be heard sometime within the next 48 hours.

There are many reasons you should be concerned and the specific language is bad enough, but if you want the bottom line, SB 483 will ultimately allow foreign government access to our records. There is just no solid reason to believe otherwise.

Please, contact your Representatives if you have not yet done so!

Additionally, please see Alert on SB 483 (also a link at the the top of this webpage) for more info.

I wanted to share with you a letter I wrote for House members detailing the most critical problems with SB 483.  Please share it with others as rapidly as possible!

I hope it brings more clarity to the issue and the importance of stopping this bill now.

Thanks!

AxXiom

NOTE: HJR 1003, the Tenth Amendment Resolution is also scheduled for hearing before committee tomorrow at 3pm.

 

====================

 

Sample letter on SB 483

 

Dear Representative

I am very concerned about SB 483.

There are several critical issues with this bill, but I will try limiting my remarks to just the most worrisome aspects.

First, this bill proposes to allow direct access to our digital photos and other information through the Department of Public Safety. Further, it allows the DPS Commissioner to grant access to this data at his sole discretion

“Any record required to be maintained by the Department may be released to any other entity free of charge when the release of the record would be for the benefit of the public, as determined by the Commissioner or a designee of the Commissioner”

Here is the problem. Digitized photos may be easily converted easily to biometric code by simple and readily available software. This is one of the reasons that digital photographs are the biometric of choice by Homeland Security, also digital or computerized photos are easy to obtain and sidesteps the problem of getting people to agree to allow their biometrics to be collected. Most people would not know that a photo can be used this way and in some cases (CCTV) may not even know they have been photographed at all. This is one of the core problems with Real ID which was prohibited by the legislature last year.

Then consider that “seamless” sharing of personal data with other states, the private sector, federal agencies and even international bodies is named as THE primary goal of Fusion Centers. http://www.it.ojp.gov/documents/fusion_center_guidelines_law_enforcement.pdf

SB 483 states;

“The Commissioner of Public Safety is authorized to establish procedures and enter into agreements with any other law enforcement agency of this state or political subdivision of this state for the purpose of providing direct electronic access to the photograph or image in computerized format of any person who has been issued a driver license or identification card by the Department of Public Safety.”

 

The language here is qualified by “state” would be more reassuring if it were possible to actually confine digital information to physical space. I have no reason to doubt that the intentions here are good but saying that the information will only be shared with agencies within the state will not make it so. Any information that is digitally transferred cannot be readily confined to any particular space. It is disingenuous to suggest otherwise.

DPS may be completely honorable and scrupulous in sharing only with other state-based agencies but it is impossible to control how those agencies manage that information once they have access to it. It is also impossible to say what hidden agreements exist between those agencies and their affiliates. In addition, this policy completely runs counter to every federal information sharing policy that is available for public review.

Furthermore, Fusion Centers are federally funded and the very purpose for their existence, as evidenced by the documents that describe the core concept of Fusion Centers, is to promote “seamless “information sharing across the board.

Our state driver’s license alone provides an unparalleled, concentrated source of biographical data but as I was examining the Oklahoma DPS website to get a sense of what other records DPS manages I read HB 3115, the OCIVS bill that provides an online system of insurance verification (and more) and found that the OCIVS program strangely exempts itself from public scrutiny in regards to some of the information it handles and the manner it is used, from public record. The rules specifically mention exemption from the Oklahoma Public records Act.

 

See rules 9 and 11;

http://www.dps.state.ok.us/OCIVS/3326.pdf

The Oklahoma Public Records Act says that; “The purpose of this act is to ensure and facilitate the public’s right of access to and review of government records so they may efficiently and intelligently exercise their inherent political power.”

So, while the citizens’ most personal information, (meaning biometrics- a unique numerical representation of our very bodies) is opened to a vast range of agencies, public, private and international, the citizens right to know just what is being done with their information is restricted.

 

Social Security Numbers are not nearly so intimate of an identifier as biometrics and the controversy of using in this manner is still hotly debated today! On this point alone the citizens of this state will rightfully feel betrayed and will want an answer as to why our state legislature would allow their law-abiding constituents to be so exposed.

In the just released testimony regarding the Science and Technology Directorate before the House Subcommittee on Homeland Security “Science and Technology Research and Transitioning Products in to Use” the purpose of digitized image sharing is made clear;

 

Information Sharing/Management

Established and piloted digital image exchange specifications for the NLETS Image Sharing Program (NISP) to enable state and local law enforcement personnel to query and retrieve driver’s license photos across state lines via the NLETS network. DHS S&T partnered with the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) to examine the technical, policy, and privacy challenges of enabling law enforcement personnel to share interstate driver’s license photos for field identification and threat assessment functions. In addition to DHS and NIJ, agencies participating in the interstate photo sharing program include the International Justice and Public Safety Information Sharing Network (NLETS), the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators. . .

NLETS-International Members: Those criminal justice agencies under the authority of a foreign government that may be assigned Nlets control terminal responsibilities http://www.nlets.org/ourMembers.aspx

SB 483 will ultimately allow foreign government access to our records. There is just no solid reason to believe otherwise.

The section on “People Screening” from the “Directorate” testimony should put an end to any speculation about what the future holds for Americans’ essential liberties in this “New Era” of information sharing although the system has been described in numerous other policy papers as well, for example the NIEM and the Global Justice Information Initiative or GLOBAL.

The below is from the Fusion Center Guidelines;

Fusion Center Guidelines-Developing and Sharing Information in a New Era

http://www.it.ojp.gov/documents/fusion_center_guidelines_law_enforcement.pdf

Data fusion involves the exchange of information from different sources—including law enforcement, public safety, and the private sector-. . . The fusion process turns this information and intelligence into actionable knowledge. Fusion also allows for relentless reevaluation of existing data in context with new data in order to provide constant updates

 

This is known as” data mining” and previous attempts to implement such a system has been repeatedly struck down, most notably with the halting of John Poindexter’s Total Information Awareness plan and the MATRIX.

Total Information Awareness- http://epic.org/privacy/profiling/tia/

The MATRIX- The Multistate Anti-Terrorism Information Exchange (MATRIX) pilot project leverages proven technology to assist criminal investigations by implementing factual data analysis from existing data sources and integrating disparate data from many types of Web-enabled storage systems. This technology helps to identify, develop, and analyze terrorist activity and other crimes for investigative leads. Information accessible includes criminal history records, driver’s license data, vehicle registration records, and incarceration/corrections records, including digitized photographs, with significant amounts of public data records. This capability will save countless investigative hours and drastically improve the opportunity to successfully resolve investigations. The ultimate goal is to expand this capability to all states.

http://www.privacyinternational.org/article.shtml?cmd%5B347%5D=x-347-205261

If you read about these programs, you will see that the system in being placed today does not vary significantly.

The word “No” doesn’t seem to mean anything to DHS or the lawmakers of this nation anymore and we are tired of having these programs reconstituted and shoved down our throats.

Real ID has been soundly rejected by the majority of states but yet it keeps being forced on the people by either breaking it apart and implementing the elements of it separately as in the case of SB 483 or by simply changing the name and hoping we don’t notice.

From the beginning of these United States, the idea of searching citizens without probable cause and set procedure has been an idea that the American psyche cannot tolerate. The abuse of colonists by British soldiers who would rifle through their belongings at will is credited with being a significant motivator of the Revolutionary War.

These overarching information sharing policies all do exactly the same thing and the only reason it has been permitted to the degree that it has is because a “virtual search” is not as immediately obvious as a physical one. However, the risk involved to the citizen is the same or worse owing to the fact that much of the information being used to profile us may be incorrect and most of us have no idea about it much less the ability to do anything about it.

Here is an example of the work of Fusion Centers that has many American outraged;

http://www.firearmscoalition.org/images/news/miac-militia-2009.pdf

Don’t be surprised if this guide to identifying dangerous extremists and subversives includes you or your family members.

Heavy pressure from Missouri citizens has led to somewhat of a backpedaling on the report but I have been studying these centers and I contend that the MIAC report is exactly the sort of “intelligence” that these centers are expected to produce. There is strong desire on behalf of the US government to perfect the predictive and preemptive aspects of domestic intelligence through application of various “technology” that proposes to calculate a person’s intent before any crime has been attempted.

From the “Directorate’s” testimony;

“The Directorate is developing a variety of technologies and knowledge products that can assist our law enforcement officers in differentiating between law-abiding individuals and those who mean to break our laws or do us harm”

Here is a small sample of the technological wonders in store for us that was highlighted in recent testimony;

“Screening Passengers by Observation Technique (SPOT) program of MobileSPOT technology”

“Future Attribute Screening Technology (FAST) Theory of Malintent “

“a real-time stand-off system to identify behavioral indicators associated with hostile intent and deception in real time”

And state that; “The latest analysis provides statistically significant support that persons demonstrating select behavioral indicators are more likely to possess banned/illegal items.”

And “These behavioral indicators distinguish deceptive from non-deceptive subjects at a statistically significant accuracy rate and are enabling the development of an automated deception detection prototype and training/training simulation materials”

In the words of Supreme Court Justice, Louis Brandeis;

“The makers of the Constitution conferred the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by all civilized men—the right to be let alone.”

I hope that the Oklahoma lawmakers will give this bill a closer look and take appropriate action to safeguard the rights of the people of this state.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

 

 

 

RFID-People Tracking. Gotcha!

Drive-by reader for RFID drivers licenses and passport cards

Hacker and researcher Chris Paget has demonstrated the ability to read the globally unique serial numbers on RFID chips in passport cards and electronic drivers licenses in the purses and pockets of pedestians on the street from a passing car, at least 30 feet (9 m) away, and to make cloned copies that broadcast the same ID numbers, using a laptop computer and commercial surplus hardware bought on eBay for $250.

This should be no surprise to anyone.  Pasport cards and electronic drivers licenses (EDLs) for US citizens, like the RFID-enabled I94 (entry-exit) forms that foreign visitors are required to carry throughout their stay in the US, were deliberately designed to ensure that they could be read at this range, and from inside a car.  The idea was for border guards to be able to read the chips for all the passengers in an approaching vehicle, before the vehicle reaches a border checkpoint.  In practice, they’ve been plagued by readability and reliability problems, so they haven’t served this purpose at the borders.  But they have made it possible for third parties to track people carrying these cards, from a distance.

RFID “passport cards” and RFID drivers licenses were a response to popular outrage at the imposition of passport requirements, as part of the “Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative” (WHTI), for US citizens crossing the Mexican and Canadian borders, whether by air or by land or sea.  (We filed formal protests of both these rules as a violation of travelers’ civil liberties and human rights, as guaranteed by the Constitution and by international treaties.)  As a sop to those whose only complaint was about the passport fee, not the infringment of rights, the government offered an option to individual travelers to obtain a passport card, and for states to offer an optional “electronic drivers license”.  (These are currently available in Washington and New York, two of the most populous states on the Canadian border.)  While the fee for a passport card or the surcharge for an electronic drivers license is less than the fee for a passport, the tradeoff for card holders is that both passport cards and EDLs contain longer-range RFID chips than those in RFID passports.

ICAO document 9303, which sets the standards for passports (including “e-passports” with RFID chips), includes specifications for credit card-sized travel documents (passport cards or national ID cards used as travel documents).  The ICAO standards call for these cards to use ISO 14443 type RFID chips — the same short range “proximity” RFID chips used in RFID passports. In practice, these have been demonstrated to be readable from at least 3 feet (1 m) with the crudest equipment, but they are still considered to have a relatively short range.

Instead of following the ICAO standards for short-range ISO 14443 “proximity” RFID chips, the Departments of State and Homeland Security specified longer-range ISO 18000-6C “vicinity” RFID chips for passport cards and EDLs.  These are supposed to be readable from at least 10 m (30 feet), although presumably with suitable equipment they could be read from much further away.  The government knowingly and deliberately prioritized the enabling of longer-range surveillance and tracking over compliance with ICAO standards.  Long-range surveillance and tracking is a feature, not a bug.

Getting a booklet-style e-passport with an RFID chip is no protection: RFID passports can’t be read from quite as far away, but they could still be easily read by equipment that would fit in (for example) a piece of luggage rolled through an airport by an idenity thief. The only way to avoid being tracked wherever you go is (1) not to carry an e-passport, passport card, or EDL, (2) wrap it in metal foil whenever you aren’t actually required to be displaying it or exposing it for reading, or (3) get the Obama Administration and/or Congress to end the passport requirment and the use and deployment of RFID chips in identity documents

http://www.papersplease.org/wp/2009/02/03/drive-by-reader-for-rfid-drivers-licenses-and-passport-cards/

 

“Enhanced” Driver’s Licenses-Papers Please!

 

Excellent Article on Enhanced Driver’s Liscense

From “Papers Please!”  Blog

DHS considering hackable long-range RFID as “alternative” to REAL-ID

Chris Strohm of the National Journal’s CongressDaily reports:

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, a former governor of Arizona, said Monday that her office is participating in a working group established by the National Governors Association to review the so-called Real ID law, which Congress passed in 2005 while under Republican control.

“What they’re looking at is whether statutory changes need to be made to Real ID,” Napolitano said after a speech to Homeland Security employees marking the sixth anniversary of the department’s creation.

“They are looking at whether some version of an enhanced driver’s license that perhaps creates options for states would be feasible. They’re looking at what the fiscal impact would be particularly given that states have no money right now,” she added.

“I would expect that over the course of the spring we’ll be rolling something out,” she said.

So-called “enhanced” drivers licenses, already being issued in Washington and Vermont, contain a remotely-readable long-range (“vicinity”) RFID chip, in violation of ICAO international standards for only shorter-range RFID chips in travel documents, with a globally unique identification number to permit anyone within range to track the card or the movements of the person carrying it.  Hackers have already demonstrated, in on-camera real-world tests on the streets of San Francisco, that these enhanced drivers licences and the passport cards that use the same type of RFID chips have succeeded in their design goal of being readable from inside or outside a moving car as it passes by.

This is no “solution” to the problems of the REAL-ID Act, and no improvement.

As we’ve argued in our proposals to the administration and Congress, the only solution to REAL-ID is repeal.  Until Congress takes that essential action, states and citizens should continue their refusal to comply with REAL-ID.

EPIC News Your Rep. Could Use SB 483 more than just harmless Data Swapping

Spotlight on Surveillance

September 2007	Proposed ‘Enhanced’ Licenses Are Costly to Security and PrivacyThis month, Spotlight shines on “enhanced” driver’s licenses, run by the Department of Homeland Security in conjunction with Arizona, Vermont, and Washington as part of the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (“WHTI”). The so-called “enhanced” driver’s licenses are being proposed to fulfill WHTI requirements. An “enhanced” driver’s license or identification card contains more data and different technology than current licenses and ID cards. Citizenship designations and wireless radio frequency identification (“RFID”) technology chips will be added to the cards. Under the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative, these new cards will be used as border identity documents. Arizona, Washington and Vermont are creating such RFID-enabled cards through pilot programs.
June 2007	“National Network” of Fusion Centers Raises Specter of COINTELPROThis month, Spotlight shines on fusion centers, which have received $380 million in federal grants and millions more from state governments. There are 43 current and planned fusion centers in the U.S., and some states have more than one. A “fusion center,” according to the Department of Justice, is a “mechanism to exchange information and intelligence, maximize resources, streamline operations, and improve the ability to fight crime and terrorism by analyzing data from a variety of sources,” which includes private sector firms and anonymous tipsters. When local and state fusion centers were first created, they were purely oriented toward counterterrorism, but, over time and with the escalating involvement of federal officials, fusion centers “have increasingly gravitated toward an all-crimes and even broader all-hazards approach.”
	.
March 2007	Federal REAL ID Proposal Threatens Privacy and SecurityMore than two years after Congress rushed through passage of the REAL ID Act, the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) announced on March 1 proposed regulations that would turn the state driver’s license into a national identity card. The estimated cost of the plan could be as high as $23.1 billion, according to the federal government. The Department of Homeland Security regulations for Real ID would  (1) impose more difficult standards for acceptable identification documents that could limit the ability of individuals to get a state drivers license; (2) compel data verification procedures that the federal government itself is not capable of following; (3) mandate minimum data elements required on the face of and in the machine readable zone of the card; (4) require changes to the design of licenses and identification cards (4) expand schedules and procedures for retention and distribution of identification documents and other personal data; and (5) dictate security standards for the card, state motor vehicle facilities, and the personal data and documents collected in state motor vehicle databases.
February 2007	Proposed Federal Budget Funds Questionable Surveillance ProgramsPresident Bush’s $2.9 trillion budget proposal for Fiscal Year 2008 is a 4.2 percent increase over last year’s budget. Agencies, other than the departments of State, Defense and Homeland Security, will receive increases of about 1 percent, less than the rate of inflation. Assistance to state and local law enforcement for community policing and local prosecutions has been cut by 70 percent. The proposed budget includes funding increases for several questionable surveillance programs, among them: Secure Flight, Automated Targeting System, and Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative PASS Card, Transportation Worker Identification Credential, Employee Eligibility Verification program, and the national DNA database.
August 2006	Homeland Security PASS Card: Leave Home Without ItThe Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 mandated that, by January 2008, the departments of Homeland Security and State develop and implement a plan to require U.S. citizens and foreign nationals to present a passport or other documents to prove identity and citizenship when entering the United States from certain countries in North, Central or South America. This program is called the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative, and its impact is the greatest upon U.S. citizens who routinely cross the border. Accepted documents for U.S. citizens will be either a valid U.S. passport or the proposed People Access Security Service (PASS) card, which, if adopted as proposed, would include a long-range wireless technology that would create an increased security risk.
June 2006	Treasury’s International Finance Tracking Program of Questionable LegalityOn June 23, 2006, news articles by the Los Angeles Times, New York Times and Wall Street Journal described a massive Treasury Department program to secretly review international financial transactions, including those of American citizens and corporations. The Treasury Department has requested $58.6 billion for Fiscal Year 2007. Its Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, which includes the international finance tracking program, would receive $90 million.
May 2006	Veterans Affairs’ Security Failures Put Data of Military Personnel at RiskVeterans Affairs has been in the news recently because of a huge information security breach that resulted in the theft of unencrypted data affecting 26.5 million people. The agency has estimated that it will cost between $100 million to $500 million to prevent and cover possible losses from the data theft. Though the theft occurred on May 3, 2006, the agency waited until May 22 to inform those who were affected. The delay was just one of many failures by Veterans Affairs in this incident. For Fiscal Year 2007, Veterans Affairs has requested $80.6 billion, $1.3 billion of which is for the agency’s information technology systems.
March 2006	IRS’s Inadequate Security Leaves Taxpayer Data Largely UnprotectedThis month, Spotlight surveys the Internal Revenue Service amidst recent questions concerning its information-sharing regulations and security systems. Recently, IRS has come under fire for issues related to individual privacy. Government reports have found that the agency has poor physical and electronic security, and it has had considerable trouble with its contractors improperly accessing and collecting sensitive taxpayer information.
February 2006	Anti-terrorism Funds Wrongly Spent on Highway Safety ProgramsThis month, we Spotlight the Highway Watch program, a cooperative agreement between the Department of Homeland Security’s Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and the American Trucking Association (ATA). About $40 million in federal funds have been spent on the program, and $4.8 million in funds have been requested for Fiscal Year 2007. The program aims to provide anti-terrorism training to “truck and bus drivers, school bus drivers, highway maintenance crews, bridge and tunnel toll collectors and others” so that they will be able to “recognize and report suspicious activity.” However, the Highway Watch program began as, and continues to be, a safety awareness program. As such, it should not receive anti-terrorism grants from Homeland Security.
December 2005	D.C.’s Camera System Should Focus on Emergencies, Not Daily LifeTens of millions in federal homeland security funds have been allotted to surveillance systems such as the Washington D.C. Metropolitan Police Department’s Closed Circuit Television System (CCTV). The D.C. cameras are turned on only during major events and in emergency situations, but after the July bombings in London, D.C. Mayor Anthony Williams called for more federal funds to expand the use of the camera surveillance system. Mayor Williams “also proposed adding cameras to neighborhoods, parks, recreation centers and commercial areas throughout the city.” Camera surveillance networks are proliferating in cities across the country, but studies show that such systems have little effect on crime. It is more effective to place more officers on the streets than have them watching people on monitors. The systems also raise privacy issues. Without tight legal controls on the use of camera surveillance systems, there are significant risks of misuse or abuse.
November 2005	Facial Recognition Systems Have an Ugly Effect on Personal PrivacyIn Fiscal Year 2006, the federal government plans to add facial recognition checks to all visa applications, which already include fingerprint biometrics. This is despite the Government Accountability Office’s estimate that incorporating biometric systems into visas would cost from $1.3 billion to $2.9 billion for startup, and $700 million to $1.5 billion for annual operating costs. New U.S. passports and national identification cards created under the REAL ID Act of 2005 will both include digital photographs that can be linked to facial recognition systems. However, several tests, including those conducted by the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) and the Department of Defense, show that facial recognition systems can be easily befuddled by uncooperative subjects and changes in the environment, such as positioning or lighting. Such facial recognition systems create significant privacy risks because the technique is surreptitious, the prospects for extensive profiling are clear, and there are no laws that currently regulate these systems to prevent abuse.
October 2005	Registered Traveler Card: A Privatized Passenger IDThe government has spent about $20 million on a test version of the Transportation Security Administration’s Registered Traveler program. The pilot program began a year ago and recently ended at five airports; however, a private business is continuing the program at Orlando International Airport and there are plans to expand the air traveler prescreening program to many airports across the nation. No money has been allotted toward the program in the Fiscal Year 2006 budget; however, TSA continues to pay $30 to $50 apiece for background checks on applicants and members of the private program, named “Clear” and operated by Verified Identity Pass Inc.
August 2005	Unmanned Planes Offer New Opportunities for Clandestine Government TrackingUnmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), also called drones, “are defined as a powered aerial vehicle that does not carry a human operator, uses aerodynamic forces to provide lift, can fly autonomously or be piloted remotely, can be expendable or recoverable, and can carry lethal or nonlethal payloads.” The different types of UAVs can range in cost from $350,000 to $4.5 million each. For Fiscal Year 2006, the Department of Homeland Security is budgeting $58 million for operation and maintenance of deep water assets, including funds for UAVs. The Homeland Security Appropriations Act provided $10 million for the use of UAVs in border security for Fiscal Year 2005.
June 2005	Transportation Agency’s Plan to X-Ray Travelers Should Be Stripped of FundingAirport security has undergone significant changes since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. Recently, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) announced a proposal to purchase and deploy “backscatter” X-ray machines to search air travelers at select airports. TSA said it believes that use of the machines is less invasive than pat-down searches. However, these machines, which show detailed images of a person’s naked body, are equivalent to a “virtual strip search” for all air travelers. This proposal, along with the agency’s controversial plan to profile air travelers, shows extraordinary disregard for the privacy rights of air travelers. The Department of Homeland Security is requesting $72 million to invest in detection systems, which includes funding for the backscatter machines, which cost between $100,000 and $200,000 each.
May 2005	More Cities Deploy Camera Surveillance Systems with Federal Grant MoneyThe Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has requested more than $2 billion to finance grants to state and local governments for homeland security needs. Some of this money is being used by state and local governments to create networks of surveillance cameras to watch over the public in the streets, shopping centers, at airports and more. However, studies have found that such surveillance systems have little effect on crime, and that it is more effective to place more officers on the streets and improve lighting in high-crime areas. There are significant concerns about citizens’ privacy rights and misuse or abuse of the system.
April 2005	Homeland Security ID Card Is Not So SecureThe Department of Homeland Security Access Card (DAC) has vulnerabilities associated with its use of radio frequency identification (RFID) and Bluetooth technologies, biometric identifiers and PIN backup system. But there are also risks that come from the DAC’s “mission creep”; the Department also wants the card to be used as a payment device for everyday items. The Department requests $6 million for the DAC program in FY 2006.Exchange with CNET News.com Phil Libin’s May 17, 2005 column EPIC’s response (also available in pdf) Related News News articles questioning cost and effectiveness of DHS programs: [part 1] [part 2]

---

EPIC Home Page | EPIC Privacy Page

STOP SB 483!

STOP! SENATE BILL NO. 483 -

By: Jolley and Lamb of the Senate and Terrill of the House.

An Act relating to public safety; amending 47 O.S. 2001, Section 2-110, as last amended by Section 1, Chapter 199, O.S.L. 2005 (47 O.S. Supp. 2008, Section 2-110), which relates to the release of records by the Department of Public Safety; directing the Department of Public Safety to establish procedures for access to computerized images; prohibiting use of images by certain persons; establishing consequences for unintended use; and providing an effective date.

 

It looks like we have not made any headway at all in trying to educate our state representatives about the threat to our safety and security that government data collection and sharing presents. 

 

Get used to the new “Fusion” of information Oklahoma because our legislature is going right along with the program!

 

What is The Program? 

  Read for yourself, straight from the horse’s mouth.

http://axiomamuse.wordpress.com/2009/03/29/dhs-directorate-update-people-screening-tech/

 

Read the section on “people screening’

It will not be hard to figure out which of our officials are complicit in this.  But, maybe I should not speak this way.  How will those of us who know we were not born to be ruled over by all-seeing masters survive this transition?  How do you reconcile the “quaint” notion that you should be free from scrutiny as long as you don’t harm others or their property?  I do not wish to have my life, my person under constant observation and judgment.  This is a violation that carries with it implicit threat of force.  It is coercion.  We may as well all have the ankle bracelet of the mobile prisoner.  Do you think that this system will support the liberty that is our birthright?

Science and technology has been issued a Directorate.  We are to be pre-judged.  Our behaviors and physiology scrutinized using devices and algorithms unknown to us.  We are in the game, whether we like it or not, the rules of the game are unknowable.

Fusion Centers

As of February 2009, there were 58 fusion centers around the country. The Department has deployed 31 officers as of December 2008 and plans to have 70 professionals deployed by the end of 2009. The Department has provided more than $254 million from FY 2004-2007 to state and local governments to support the centers. 

The Homeland Security Data Network (HSDN), which allows the federal government to move information and intelligence to the states at the Secret level, is deployed at 27 fusion centers. Through HSDN, fusion center staff can access the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), a classified portal of the most current terrorism-related information.  http://www.dhs.gov/xinfoshare/programs/gc_1156877184684.shtm

But time is short on this particular aspect of it-we have to stop SB 483!

 

Here is the problem:  (excerpts from SB 483)

  ”the release of records by the Department of Public Safety”

  The Commissioner of Public Safety is authorized to establish procedures and enter into agreements with any other law enforcement agency of this state or political subdivision of this state for the purpose of providing direct electronic access to the photograph or image in computerized format of any person who has been issued a driver license or identification card by the Department of Public Safety. 

 

 Any record required to be maintained by the Department may be released to any other entity free of charge when the release of the record would be for the benefit of the public, as determined by the Commissioner or a designee of the Commissioner.

For the entire text, go to http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/TextOfMeasures/TextOfMeasures.aspx

And click SB 483

 

So, this bill would allow direct access, meaning no need for a warrant, no paper trail, no form to sign.

  Just Ask! 

The Commissioner or whomever he designates can arbitrarily decide when to release this data and whom to release it to.  If it is for the benefit of the public, in the commissioner’s opinion-that is reason enough to allow access.  

 Since when is the “benefit of the public” enough to over ride our Fourth Amendment guarantee?

** go to http://axiomamuse.wordpress.com/urgent-kill-sb-483/  DOWNLOAD the flyer at the bottom of the page and distribute to your Representatives**

‘The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.’

Just because this manner of searching you doesn’t tickle doesn’t mean it is legal.  Probable cause, the presumption of innocence, these concepts that do not apply with our government anymore.

This kind of data sifting is referred to as being non-invasive. 

Physically it is not, unless you end up on the receiving end of an arrest due to an error or perhaps a strip search as this lady did.  She maintains that the outstanding ticket she was apprehended for was paid. “They said I had an unpaid ticket, but the ticket had been paid off back in 2003 or 2005,” Since when is a traffic ticket grounds for degradation?

 Oh, she did have a tail light out too.

 Understand this little piece of legislation is only one small aspect of the overarching plan to combine multiple sources of information about citizens in order to monitor them and analyze their “transactional footprint” for the purpose of preempting crime or terrorism.  If you saw the movie Minority Report, then you get the picture and if you read the Missouri Information Analysis Center  (MIAC) Strategic Report you can see just how valuable the “Fusion” concept is.

  Everything we do leaves a trail of data in our wake.  The intent is to bring all of our information together in order to comb it for anomalies.  Don’t dare to be different-conformity is the best way to avoid trouble.

 The Fusion concept is the method by which the MIAC came up with a report that put a large number of innocent citizens under suspicion by Law Enforcement.  It’s also a very effective method to shut you up. I bet the tyrants of history would have given their eyeteeth for something like this. 

 This is the minimum list of data sources that the Fusion Center

 

Oklahoma does have a federally funded Fusion Center and Public Safety is one of the key sources of data.  This is why SB 483 is more than what it might seem at first glance.

 

  In the Fusion Center Guidelines Developing and Sharing Information and Intelligence in a New Era Guidelines for Establishing and Operating Fusion Centers at the Local, State, and Federal Levels document,  one recommended method of partnering with these various agencies is ;

 

5. Utilize Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs), Non- Disclosure Agreements (NDAs), or other types of agency agreements, as appropriate

 

The Commissioner of the Oklahoma Dept. of Public Safety, Kevin L. Ward admitted that the department was utilizing a Memorandum of Understanding.  At this time, it is not known what parties are the beneficiaries of this memorandum agreement.

 Our lawmakers who passed this bill in the Senate (late Thursday March 26)and the Committee of Public Safety , headed by Rep. Sue Tibbs, (unanimously) early on the 27^th,  are agreeing to the transfer of our information, possibly without even knowing who will have access to it.

 It now goes to the House.

  And while open ended agreements to collect and share data on citizens slides through the OK. State Legislature like pudding through a goose, measures like SB 289 that would offer us some protection, suffers from a critical case of constipation. 

 It will not be enough to call just your Representative about this.   I suggest calling and emailing yours as well as several others.

 http://www.okhouse.gov/Members/MemberListing.aspx

If you are willing and able to give this issue some personal attention that would be most effective. I plan be at the Capitol on Monday to take information to our legislators and would be grateful for some assistance. 

 

 If you would like to help, send me an email at ladyaxiom@yahoo.com 

***********************************

 

Here is an Alert issued tonighg by OK-SAFE

 Calls, emails and faxes needed ASAP - starting Monday, March 30, 2009!
Known among concerned citizens as the “direct electronic access” bill, language contained in SB 483 makes the DPS a gateway agency for the distribution of personal biometric information (digitized photo) of unsuspecting citizens and is linked to the controversial fusion center being developed in Oklahoma.  Enrollment in a global biometric identification system is a concern for all, especially Christians. 
   SB 483 has moved out of the OK Senate, and is now on the House calendar -  it is imperative that calls begin on Monday, March 30, 2009 and continue this week to stop this bill.  Problems with SB 483:

• SB 483 (page 4) would give the Commissioner of DPS the authority to enter into “agreements” with other state agencies and allow these other agencies “direct electronic access” to the DPS database of computerized photos.

  · The “agreements” refers to Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between state entities (see 28 CFR Part 23, www.iir.com/28cfr/FAQ.htm). Who is involved? What do the MOUs agree to? ALL MOUs should be disclosed before this bill is even considered.
· Why access the photos and not the fingerprint data? The computerized photo is the most desired biometric data; fingerprint data is considered “old” tech and is not usable for remote surveillance.
· Due to the increased prevalence of surveillance cameras and CCTV, allowing “direct electronic access” to the DPS photo databases allows for more “remote surveillance and identification.”  Can you say Big Brother Is Watching You? (Not even politicians would be exempt from surveillance.)                                                                               
· Due to the size, complexity, and interconnectivity of today’s computer systems, and the unknown number of “agreements” between state agencies and/or the private sector, it is not possible to secure or keep the data accessed within the four walls of this state.  There is no such thing as “downstream only” information sharing.
· The federal government funds the fusion centers – it is only logical that they would want access to the data.  Arkansas state officials have confirmed that federal access is allowed. 
· Allowing  “direct electronic access” to the DPS database is ripe for abuse.    It is essential that the legislators Vote NO on SB 483!
 
Please call your House Representative and ask him/her to vote NO on SB 483. To find your OK House Rep. click here.  Calling several Representatives will help, too!    The OK Capitol toll free number is 1-800-522-8502.   OK-SAFE, Inc. thanks you for your prompt action on this important issue.  
Check out the new information page on Fusion Centers www.ok-safe.com .

DHS Directorate Update-People Screening Tech

Kaye Beach

March 29, 2009

I just found this online and have been shocked into a rare state of speechlessness but expect to be fully recovered by Monday morning when I will visit the Capitol to ask our legislators to PLEASE STOP THIS!

The below is just what I copied and pasted because it jumped out at me.  You can find the entire article at http://www.dhs.gov/ynews/testimony/testimony_1238089175289.shtm

Testimony of Acting Under Secretary Bradley I. Buswell, Science and Technology Directorate, before the House Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Homeland Security, “Science and Technology Research and Transitioning Products Into Use”Release

Date: March 26, 2009

Rayburn House Office Building
(Remarks as Prepared)

Good Morning, Chairman Price, Ranking Member Rogers, and distinguished Members of the Committee. I am honored to appear before you today to update you on the progress of the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) Science and Technology Directorate (S&T Directorate). I also plan to detail the Directorate’s many accomplishments from the past year; discuss current programs on track to provide future technological capabilities to our customers, the operating components of DHS and our Nation’s first responders; and describe how our efforts are helping to unify the Department.Process

Basic Research. The Directorate’s basic research portfolio addresses long-term research and development needs in support of DHS mission areas that will provide the nation with an enduring capability in homeland security. This type of focused research investment has the potential to lead to paradigm shifts in the nation’s homeland security capabilities through investment in our universities, government laboratories, and the private sector.

 

 

People Screening

The Directorate is developing a variety of technologies and knowledge products that can assist our law enforcement officers in differentiating between law-abiding individuals and those who mean to break our laws or do us harm. As we conduct this research, we are diligent in honoring the rights of Americans. S&T works closely with the DHS Privacy Office and the Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties (CRCL) to ensure that our research protects both individual rights and homeland security. Furthermore, we have a robust internal privacy compliance framework in place to ensure that all S&T-funded research that involves or impacts Personally Identifiable Information is reviewed and approved in advance by the Department’s Privacy Office. We are also collaborating with CRCL to conduct Civil Liberties Impact Assessments (CLIAs) of S&T research that could impact civil liberties. To support this program’s customers, the Directorate:

• Deployed Mobile biometric collection technologies with the Coast Guard to identify migrants and smugglers attempting to illegally enter the United States through the waters near Puerto Rico and the Florida Straits. The program has resulted in a total of 3,143 people interdicted at sea, 269 brought ashore for prosecution – with 152 convicted so far. It is estimated that it has reduced the flow of illegal immigration in this area by 60 percent.
• Successfully demonstrated proof-of-concept technologies to acquire high resolution, high quality single fingerprints without require physical contact. The success of this effort has resulted in coordination with DoD on future year efforts to develop less intrusive, culturally acceptable fingerprinting technologies. The demonstrated technologies also allows for the possibility to examine three-dimensional features of fingerprints for recognition, providing revolutionary capabilities for fingerprint matching and latent fingerprint examiners in the future.
• Co-sponsored with the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) the creation of the Multiple Biometrics Grand Challenge (MBGC) in order to improve face recognition performance. Early results of small data sets show near 100 percent performance when fusing face and iris biometrics together – a critical advancement for biometrics to function in non-contact applications.
• Performed initial validation of behavioral indicators associated with possession of contraband, such as weapons, false documents, and illegal drugs. The latest analysis provides statistically significant support that persons demonstrating select behavioral indicators are more likely to possess banned/illegal items. These indicators leverage those used by DHS operational customers such as TSA and CBP.
• Demonstrated proof of concept with TSA’s Screening Passengers by Observation Technique (SPOT) program of MobileSPOT technology, a hand-held device that will enable the extension of TSA security layers beyond the checkpoint area by enabling SPOT Behavior Detection Officers (BDOs) to wirelessly share information that is currently exchanged manually or not at all.
• Conducted preliminary laboratory validation of behavioral indicators associated with verbal deception within a primary or secondary interview environment. These behavioral indicators distinguish deceptive from non-deceptive subjects at a statistically significant accuracy rate and are enabling the development of an automated deception detection prototype and training/training simulation materials.
• Demonstrated a real-time stand-off system to identify behavioral indicators associated with hostile intent and deception – the first step in developing a deployed system to detect hostile intent in real time.
• Deployed deception-detecting techniques and support materials to TSA and local law enforcement to provide them with behavioral indicators of hostile intent.
• Developed and conducted initial validation of the Future Attribute Screening Technology (FAST) Theory of Malintent (the intent to cause harm) for a primary screening environment, identifying specific cues that are diagnostic of malintent.
• Demonstrated FAST initial sensor integration and command and control framework.
• Convened the Community Perceptions of Technology (CPT) Panel to understand and incorporate community perceptions in the development and deployment of critical technologies within the United States such as microwave vehicle stopping technology, Raman spectroscopy for standoff detection of explosives, mobile biometrics, and acoustic non-linear technology for standoff threat detection.

In the upcoming year, the Directorate will execute malintent detection protocols with over 400 volunteer subjects to test theories and support data analysis; deliver a multi-modal (face, iris, finger) biometrics test and evaluation framework for government-sponsored multi-modal vendor tests that set the stage for incorporation of multi-biometric collection and fusion to support higher throughput screening applications; create a multi-biometric reference research database that will be used to evaluate biometrics algorithms and system performance for use by DHS operational components and continue to improve technical performance through industry and university challenge problems; develop technologies, in coordination with DoD, to collect multiple fingerprints for biometric matching without requiring physical contact; and develop technologies and procedures to enhance screener-performance and reduce human fatigue and injury while reducing training requirements and overall cost.

Established and piloted digital image exchange specifications for the NLETS Image Sharing Program (NISP) to enable state and local law enforcement personnel to query and retrieve driver’s license photos across state lines via the NLETS network. DHS S&T partnered with the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) to examine the technical, policy, and privacy challenges of enabling law enforcement personnel to share interstate driver’s license photos for field identification and threat assessment functions. In addition to DHS and NIJ, agencies participating in the interstate photo sharing program include the International Justice and Public Safety Information Sharing Network (NLETS), the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, the North Carolina Highway Patrol, and the South Carolina and Virginia State Police.

Developed a handheld device software application that retrieves digital photographs from the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to enable law enforcement personnel away from their office or vehicle to quickly query, retrieve, and view California driver’s license photographs on a range of handheld devices (PDAs), greatly enhancing their ability to positively identify individuals in the field. This application was certified by California Department of Justice, and nearly 500 federal, state, and local law enforcement personnel throughout Southern California are currently participating in its operational testing.

• to enable agencies to seamlessly share justice information.

• Deployed the Spatial Temporal Visualization (STV) and Criminal Activity Network (CAN) visualization toolset to the Tucson Police Department. The STV tool enables crime analysts to plot suspicious or criminal incidents near critical infrastructure and explore distribution of those incidents by time period while the CAN visualization tool integrates CBP License Plate Reader data with a local criminal record set to reveal links among subjects who routinely crossed the border and are known offenders in the Tucson region.

Established and piloted digital image exchange specifications for the NLETS Image Sharing Program (NISP) to enable state and local law enforcement personnel to query and retrieve driver’s license photos across state lines via the NLETS network. DHS S&T partnered with the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) to examine the technical, policy, and privacy challenges of enabling law enforcement personnel to share interstate driver’s license photos for field identification and threat assessment functions. In addition to DHS and NIJ, agencies participating in the interstate photo sharing program include the International Justice and Public Safety Information Sharing Network (NLETS), the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, the North Carolina Highway Patrol, and the South Carolina and Virginia State Police.

Developed a regional communications architecture – the State, Regional, and Federal Enterprise Retrieval System (SRFERS) – to facilitate data sharing and software integration between multi-jurisdictional criminal justice agencies separated by physical and political boundaries. SRFERS uses existing information infrastructures, such as the International Justice and Public Safety Information Sharing Network, the Automated Regional Justice Information Sharing (ARJIS) network and state networks in place to demonstrate connectivity and exchange data in real time across state lines. Through these existing networks, SRFERS provides a toolkit—consisting of successful architectural models, technical specifications for open source messaging applications, transactions and scripts, templates for information sharing agreements, and technical and policy documentation guidance—to enable agencies to seamlessly share justice information.

Deployed the Spatial Temporal Visualization (STV) and Criminal Activity Network (CAN) visualization toolset to the Tucson Police Department. The STV tool enables crime analysts to plot suspicious or criminal incidents near critical infrastructure and explore distribution of those incidents by time period while the CAN visualization tool integrates CBP License Plate Reader data with a local criminal record set to reveal links among subjects who routinely crossed the border and are known offenders in the Tucson region.

During the coming year, the Directorate plans to continue with the AZLink, and SRFERS development efforts currently underway along with continuing to deploy CIIMS, NISP, STV CAN visualization toolset and new data cubes for the ICEPIC system. New efforts will be initiated including the piloting of systems analyzing fusion center information usage and sharing; suspicious capability reporting; developing a HSPD-12-related identity management system broadly applicable across the Federal government; and piloting a geospatial analytics tool for use in fusion centers that will support situational awareness and critical decision making.

 

 

2008 AAMVA to build REAL ID verification hub

 

AAMVA to build REAL ID verification hub

By Michael Hampton

http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2008/06/22/aamva-to-build-real-id-verification-hub/
Posted: June 22, 2008 2:27 pm

The American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators received a no-bid contract worth millions of dollars to implement a “verification hub” connecting state and federal databases under the REAL ID program.

AAMVA, which already maintains a database of commercial drivers in every state, was believed to be the company that would get the contract for the verification hub which, when completed, will allow states to electronically verify documents such as birth certificates and Social Security cards with other states and with the federal government.

The database begins with a $17 million REAL ID Demonstration Grant awarded to the state of Missouri, which will then pass on that cash to AAMVA to do the actual work of developing the system. Four other states, Florida, Indiana, Nevada, and Wisconsin, received $1.2 million grants to be the first states to connect to the new database.

The grants were a portion of nearly $80 million in grants awarded to 48 states and territories to implement various parts of REAL ID in those states. Every state and territory which applied for funding received at least $300,000, according to DHS. Only Alaska, Idaho, Louisiana, Montana, New Hampshire, Oklahoma and Washington state did not apply for funding. Many of those states are not participating in REAL ID.

That $80 million is a drop in the bucket compared to the estimated $11 billion price tag for REAL ID. It’s like getting two cents when you need $30.

AAMVA calculates the final costs of building out the database would reach as high as $130 million. AAMVA maintains its driver’s license database through a contract with EDS Corp. of Plano, Texas.

Meanwhile, EDS currently charges AMMVA a maintenance fee for maintaining its commercial driver records. That charge, according to sources, is $0.08334 per month for each record. Under REAL ID, then, EDS could become responsible for maintaining up to 240 million driver records across the United States, potentially netting EDS as much as $240 million per year merely for maintaining commercial driver records. – Homeland Security Today

Homeland Stupidity was the first to note that AAMVA would likely get the contract for the central database which linked the states together under REAL ID.

DHS has said the central verification hub will not diminish privacy or put people at risk. And I have a million bushels of Iowa corn to sell you.

“Personally identifiable information, beyond the minimum information necessary to appropriately route verification queries, will not be stored,” reads a statement on the DHS web site regarding the verification hub. Sounds good, right? Take a second look. It’s a carefully worded statement. That “minimum information necessary” just happens to include, well, all your most important identity information: your name, birthdate, Social Security number, driver license number, address, and perhaps a few other things I can’t think of offhand. That’s more than enough to keep a corrupt employee or a hacker in stolen identities forever.

“Americans overwhelmingly want secure identification, and this funding will help those states working to provide it,” said Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff. “We’ve made it more affordable for states to implement REAL ID by dramatically cutting costs and providing various and considerable funding options, and we’re requesting additional funding next year.”

If Americans overwhelmingly wanted REAL ID, why didn’t Congress just bring it up for a vote on its own merits, instead of sneaking it in the back door attached to an Iraq war funding bill?

It seems to me that Americans overwhelmingly want to be safe. But what threats do Americans really face? Terrorism doesn’t even belong on the radar; it’s too rare an occurrence. Accidents and crime certainly do belong on the radar. But the biggest threat to any given American’s security is his own government. These are the people who can harm or kill you and get away with it.

When you consider privacy (and by the way, privacy is a form of security; by giving it up you make yourself more vulnerable) you must consider that the government, the only institution which can get away with unjustly hurting or killing you – and which routinely does so – has all your information, and they can change the “rules” at any time.

This is just one more way in which the government is putting you in danger

Partisan Politics Trumps Supreme Law-People of Maine Lose to the Game

House Republican Office________________________________________________________________________

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE For more information:

March 26, 2009 Jay Finegan, 287-1445
Rep. Cebra Disappointed by Democratic

Rejection of Sovereignty Resolution for the State of Maine
AUGUSTA – State Rep. Rich Cebra expressed disappointment that legislative leadership today blocked his resolution to reaffirm the sovereignty of the State of Maine, as guaranteed by the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
The 6-4 vote in the Legislative Council followed party lines, with all six Democrats voting to bar the resolution from consideration by the Legislature. All four Republicans on the council voted to allow the resolution, LR 722, to proceed. Bills and resolutions submitted after the deadline for legislation must be approved by the council to advance to full consideration.
“It’s unfortunate that the Democrats won’t stand up for the sovereignty of our state and for limiting the intrusion of the federal government into Maine affairs,” said Rep. Cebra (R-Naples). “They must like being told how to run the State of Maine from Washington. But the framers of the Constitution included the 10th Amendment for a good reason. The amendment says that the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution are reserved to the states and to the people.
“I find it very disturbing that the central government in Washington now runs roughshod over states’ rights,” he added. “And it is equally disturbing the Maine’s majority party will not even allow a discussion about our sovereignty to be heard. It was not the federal government that created the states. The states created the federal government, but they were careful to limit its powers to things like providing for the common defense.”
Rep. Cebra submitted his resolution as part of a growing movement across the country by citizens who want the federal government to respect the limits placed on it by the 10th Amendment. He patterned his resolution after one that passed the Oklahoma Legislature last year. The Oklahoma resolution states in part that “many federal mandates are directly in violation of the 10th Amendment.”
Rep. Cebra said he objects to mandates from Congress that force Maine to spend money or otherwise “submit to federal rule,” he said. He listed such things as the Real ID law and federal funding programs which, he said, “force the states to implement programs and provide services in accordance with the desires of federal authorities. Medicaid is one example and federal highway regulations are another.”
###

Missouri Highway Patrol Retracts MIAC Report

 

Highway Patrol chief retracts militia report; will change review process for MIAC reports

http://primebuzz.kcstar.com/?q=node/17825JEFFERSON CITY | The Missouri State Highway Patrol on Wednesday retracted a controversial report on militia activity and will change how such reports are reviewed before being distributed to law enforcement agencies.

The announcement followed a press conference in which Lt. Gov. Peter Kinder suggested putting the director of public safety on administrative leave and investigating how the report was produced.

 

The controversy revolves around a report prepared last month by the Missouri Information Analysis Center, a so-called “fusion center” for local, state and federal law enforcement agencies to collaborate on domestic security issues.

The report concerns militia movements in Missouri and across the United States and describes how they have evolved over the last several years.

It suggests that domestic militias often subscribe to radical ideologies rooted in Christian views and opposition to immigration, abortion or federal taxes. The report also says it is “not uncommon” for militia members to support third-party political candidates and names former presidential candidates Ron Paul, Bob Barr and Chuck Baldwin specifically.

The eight-page report is labeled “unclassified” but “law enforcement sensitive” and includes numerous editing and design errors, including a misspelling of President Barack Obama’s name.

On Wednesday afternoon, Highway Patrol Superintendent Col. James F. Keathley released a memo saying the report did not meet the patrol’s standard for quality and would not have been released if it had been seen by top officials.

“For that reason,” Keathley wrote, “I have ordered the MIAC to permanently cease distribution of the militia report.”

The memo says the report was compiled by an employee of the information analysis center and reviewed only by the center director before being sent to law-enforcement agencies across the state.

In the future, Keathley wrote, reports from the center will be reviewed by leaders of the Highway Patrol and the Department of Public Safety. The patrol will also open an investigation into the origin of the militia report.

Conservatives in Missouri and nationally have criticized the report for lumping people with conservative political persuasions in with domestic terrorists and potentially opening them to harassment from law enforcement.

The controversy has been aired on blogs, cable news programs and conservative radio.

In an earlier response, the center had released a statement reaffirming its “regard for the Constitutions of the United States and Missouri” and expressing regret that “any citizens or groups were unintentionally offended by the content of the document.”

And earlier this week, Department of Public Safety Director John M. Britt retracted the portions of the report that noted third party and Republican presidential candidates by name. Gov. Jay Nixon, a Democrat elected last year, has publicly defended the report as well.

Republicans said the earlier statements did not go far enough, and on Wednesday morning Kinder criticized the report for suggesting that only issues championed by conservatives motivate domestic terrorists.

The report “slanders” opponents of abortion and critics of illegal immigration, he said.

“Under the guidance of the present director, who apparently must think it is Nixon’s secret service, the Department of Public Safety has taken on the new and sinister role of political profiling,” Kinder said.

Also troubling Kinder said, the report makes no mention of Islamic terrorists or those who might subscribe to ideologies associated with liberals, such as environmental radicals.

“Let’s be very clear: There are extremists and ultra extremists in every group mentioned above,” Kinder said, referring to anti-abortion and border security activists. “But not just in these groups.”

Kinder said Britt should be suspended and that the state legislature should investigate how the report was prepared.

To reach Jason Noble, call 573-634-3565 or send e-mail to jnoble@kcstar.co

Public Schools, Signs of Suicide with NEW FREEDOM for All

The New Freedom Commission on Mental Health has implemented a plan that every parent must know about

It is too late to prevent it, it is already here, in your schools and expanding as I type these lines.   I became aware of this frightening situation about 5 years ago and I credit this knowledge for removing every last shred of naivete I had regarding the true nature of government.  By its works we can know it and  it isn’t like we were never warned.

“Government is not reason. It is not eloquence. It is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.”

—-George Washington

We should never “trust” government; the concept just does not apply. Government is force; its opinions are enforceable upon us. There is no living and let live in matters of government.  I found this quote by Albert Camus “By definition, a government has no conscience. Sometimes it has a policy, but nothing more” I admit that I have no idea who Albert Camus is but he sums up what I was trying to convey very nicely.  Thank you Mr. Camus!

You cannot apply the concept of faith or trust in that which has no heart.

Government as an entity is more a machine than anything.  It runs on wealth and when pure wealth gets scarce, its system is designed to process and extract wealth from nearly anything including you, including your children.  Don’t waste your energy getting angry, instead start whacking it back to a manageable size before you find your life and all that you love taken, processed and used for fuel.

The government was created by us in order to safeguard our natural and legal rights.  When it starts making choices outside of its design and that is the near mathematical formula of the law which is the design we chose for it and us, then the world we know is turned on its head.  There is the Rule of Law or not.  It is that simple.  The Constitution is the design that conforms it to Law and it is not tolerant of very much tinkering before it will cease to operate in a predictable manner.

On April 29, 2002, The New Freedom Commission on Mental Health was established by executive order for the stated purpose of helping catch those Americans that are suffering from mental illness that fall through the cracks of the system.

On July 22, 2003 The New Freedom Commission released a plan to fix the system. “Achieving this goal will require greater engagement and education of first line health care providers–primary care practitioners–and a greater focus on mental health care in institutions such as schools, child welfare programs, and the criminal and juvenile justice systems. The goal is integrated care that can screen, identify, and respond to problems early”

Read the Report issued by the President’s New Freedom Commission http://www.mentalhealthcommission.gov/reports/FinalReport/FullReport-05.htm

In fact, what this “New Freedom Commission” did was expand a program that has been so successful in Texas that in 2004 according to the Texas Comptroller, Carole Keeton Strayhorn, 60% of foster children were taking major psychotropic medications. This Texas news investigation (below/video) in 2005 pins the figure at 2out of 3 foster kids.

While my focus here is on our kids, I noted that our new county sheriff put emphasis on mental screenings and treatment for each person arrested. Compassionate?  Some may think so but it is also part of TMAPs brilliant plan to find every possible hapless customer for state funded pharmaceutical treatment.  This is just forced drugging gussied up as compassion.  I bet there is an enormous story there but first things first.

The Dallas Morning News

Sat, 13 Nov 2004

[. . . ]Her investigation shows that 60% of children in the Texas foster care system are being drugged with powerful psychotropic drugs that have not been approved for children. Yet, “Children as young as 3 are receiving powerful, mind-altering drugs.”

[. . . ] The Houston Chronicle reports that Risperdal and Zyprexa – made up half of the drugs prescribed to foster children in Texas. These drugs are among the most dangerous of psychotropic drugs. They carry new FDA-required warnings about diabetes, blood clots and strokes.

http://www.ahrp.org/infomail/04/11/13.php

News Investigation.  2 out of 3 Texas children drugged

Psychotropic Medication Patterns Among Youth in Foster Care 2008

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/121/1/e157

 

This program is called the Texas Medical Algorithm Project or TMAP.

“TMAP is a Trojan horse embedded with the pharmaceutical industry’s newest and most expensive mental health drugs. Through TMAP, the drug industry methodically compromised the decision making of elected and appointed public officials to gain access to captive populations of mentally ill individuals in prisons and state mental health hospitals.”

This statement was made by Allen Jones in a 2004 report detailing what he found out about this program.  A former a former inspector with the Pennsylvania Office of Inspector General, Mr. Jones became aware of TMAP after it was introduced as the “model program” recommended by the Presidents New Freedom Commission on Mental Health and was being introduced as PennMAP in his state.  He goes on to say;

“TMAP opened the doors of the Texas prison system, juvenile justice system and Texas state mental health hospitals to the unlimited influence of major pharmaceutical companies in expanding the usage and marketing of their most expensive drugs.”

Not only are these children being medicated for their “illnesses”, but it was being done with the newest, most expensive and powerful of these meds on the market. The Texas Medical Algorithm Project was implemented in Texas in 1995 and this is the “model” program that has given rise to the mental health screenings being performed on schoolchildren nationwide as a way of increasing business for the psycho-pharmaceutical industry.

Allen Jones came forward and revealed what many already suspected, that the New Freedom Commission’s recommendations,  based on TMAPs- the Texas Medical Algorithm Project, was nothing more than a pharmaceutical industry profiteering plan.

This is a psychiatric prescription drug prescribing plan for professionals that are funded by the state’s dollars.  TMAP scoops up hundreds of millions of state money by implementing a prescription formulary that mandates that the newest, most high-powered and expensive drugs be used over the older and more thoroughly researched ones.  This scheme was produced by the very same pharmaceutical companies that contributed generously to the development and promotion of TMAPs along with University of Texas psychiatrists and state officials who stood to profit from it. TMAP personnel used unethical methodology to arrive at the forgone conclusion that the newer, more expensive pharmaceutical were the best. These are the drug companies involved in financing and creating and marketing TMAP ; Janssen Pharmaceutica, Johnson & Johnson, Eli Lilly, and Austrazeneca Pfizer, Novartis, Janssen-Ortho-McNeil, GlaxoSmithKline, Abbott, Bristol Myers Squibb, Wyeth-Ayerst Forrest Laboratories and U.S. Pharmacopeia.  TMAP featured patented drugs from these companies.

The level of complicity between these companies and numerous public officials to make money from directly inflicting misery on the innocent people in state care is the most disgusting example of corruption I have encountered to date.

This devious program has been slipped right past the noses of parents and installed in our schools under programs coordinated by NAMI National Alliance on Mental Illness and Columbia University.  Have you heard of TeenScreen?  How about SOS-Signs of Suicide? This is the one that was operating in my daughters school last year.  I went in to view the program’s guide sheets myself.  You are not allowed to have make any copies or take any information out of the school.  After all the study I had already done on these type screenings I was still appalled when I read their “task checklist” There were yes or no boxes for the entire procedure.  If the student’s screening indicated a problem;

Did you notify parents?  Yes   No

Provide a reference?       Yes   No

Did parents agree to follow up   Yes   No

If Yes, did they do so in a timely and appropriate manner?  Yes   No

If No, did you notify DHS (child services)?  Yes   No

The last one had me out of my chair!  Understand that unlike the type of permission needed for leaving school grounds as in a field trip, this screening did not require that you sign a form to give permission.  That is known as active consent.  You need only do nothing for your child to be included in a mental health screening that opens them up to a referral to a psychiatrist and a 90% chance of being prescribed a drug.  All you have to do with the form you receive is nothing and you have just unwittingly opened your family up to a visit from DHS.  This is known as passive consent.  You must sign the form and be sure it gets back to the teacher on time for your child to be allowed to opt out.

I spoke to a number of parents about the SOS program, not even 1 had any clue as to what this program was about.  It did save my daughter from sitting alone the day the screening was held though.

DRUG MONEY-The half-million dollar grant to SMH pictured above is just the tip of the iceberg. Click here to see the drug company connections concerning the grants to SMH from Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Solvay, Abbott Labs, Wyeth, Forest Pharmaceuticals, The Robert Johnson Foundation, AstaZeneca and GlaxoSmithKline. We have the actual tax returns and grant reports showing how much and when these grants were received by SMH. Drug companies have provided this program with at least $4,985,925.00 up to 2008. Eli Lilly alone has poured over $3,920,425.00 into the program from 1996 to 2008.

The SOS guide I read spent a good deal of time on getting your references in order.  Making sure that the contact info was up to date and the professionals ready to receive clients.

An expose’ of NAMI (TeenScreen) done in 1999 by Mother Jones states;

The National Alliance for the Mentally Ill (NAMI) bills itself as “a grassroots organization of individuals with brain disorders and their family members [. . . ]

It’s certainly well funded by the industry: According to internal documents obtained by Mother Jones, 18 drug firms gave NAMI a total of $11.72 million between 1996 and mid-1999. These include Janssen ($2.08 million), Novartis ($1.87 million), Pfizer ($1.3 million), Abbott Laboratories ($1.24 million), Wyeth-Ayerst Pharmaceuticals ($658,000), and Bristol-Myers Squibb ($613,505).

NAMI’s leading donor is Eli Lilly and Company, maker of Prozac, which gave $2.87 million during that period. In 1999 alone, Lilly will have delivered $1.1 million in quarterly installments, with the lion’s share going to help fund NAMI’s “Campaign to End Discrimination” against the mentally ill.

In the case of Lilly, at least, “funding” takes more than one form. Jerry Radke, a Lilly executive, is “on loan” to NAMI, working out of the organization’s headquarters[. . . ] She(Laurie Flynn, Exec. Dir. NAMI) characterizes Radke’s role at NAMI as “strategic planning

In 1997, TeenScreen was established in Tulsa Oklahoma.  It was the first in the nation.

According to a 2003 Tulsa World newspaper article, Mike Brose, executive director of the Mental Health Association in Tulsa, stated: “To the best of my knowledge, this is the highest number of youth suicides we’ve ever had during the school year — a number we find very frightening.”http://www.psychsearch.net/teenscreen.html

By 2003 The Executive Director is frightened by a record number of youth suicides.  6 years of TeenScreen that claims suicide prevention as a top priority and the numbers increase!  There is plenty of indicators that this sort of diddling around may actually worsen the situation.  Read this statement posted on NAMI’s own website by the Head of the organization-the same organization running the TeenScreen scam.

Jane Pearson, PhD, head of the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI), in an article published on the NAMI website, has stated: For example, a prevention program designed for high-school aged youth found that participants were more likely to consider suicide a solution to a problem after the program than prior to the program.” http://www.teenscreentruth.com/teenscreen_quotes.html

There is ample exidence to show that they are completely aware that these programs actually INCREASE suicide in teens!

Another good one:

Former TeenScreen director admits there is no suicide epidemic

Rob Caruano, former TeenScreen director stated to a reporter for the South Bend Tribune: “Teen suicides, while tragic, are so rare that (any) study would have to be impossibly huge to show a meaningful difference in mortality between screened and unscreened students. You’d have to be screening almost the whole country to reach statistical significance.” Maybe this is why he is no longer a director of TeenScreen, since their main PR campaign is that there is an increasing “epidemic” of teen suicides. In fact, suicides in pre-24 year olds has been decreasing since 1996. Studies also indicate that a large number of teens who commit suicide are already in the care of psychiatrists and are on psychiatric drugs.
-South Bend Tribune, December 22, 2004

Here is a list of Oklahoma TeenScreen school sites-I do not know when this list was last updated. http://www.teenscreen-locations.com/Oklahoma.htm

Now, how do these twisted sisters get the pharmaceutical customer fishing scams in our schools to begin with?

I’ll let them tell you in their own words;

Laurie Flynn: “Now, here is something very important, in this day at this time, are we all familiar with the red states and the blue states? You need to know that the key to making stuff happen, ahh, in this day and age, is really what we might want to call, the green states. That is to say, the states where the key member, senator or member of the house, sits on a committee that appropriates money.”
“And those states become very important targets, and those localities become very important localities, so we wanted to be visible in those kinds of places. So here you see that not only was Florida a good place for us, because of Governor Bush and our friend Jim McDonough in the Office of Drug Control, but because there was a couple of key members of Congress without whose support, health legislation does not pass and does not get funded.”

“Similarly in New Mexico we had both opportunity, with the new Governor, we had opportunity with the new Secretary of Health, we had Senator Bingaman and Senator Dominici, different parties, both interested in stuff that benefits their voters in New Mexico, both interested in this program.”

“And so, on and on you see, that each of the sites where we’ve tried to have multiple TeenScreen locations, tend to crosswalk with key members of Congress…”

“Pennsylvania has proven to be a particularly important site because of Senator Spectre, Arlen Spectre, who had a very close, ahh, primary, and we were all lighting candles and praying for him, mostly because he’s Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee and he was sold on this program and we really wanted to see him hang around long enough to sign a check for some of the growth of the program.”

Flynn: “We were also able to promote this by placing some public service advertisements in major newspapers as well as newspapers that go to Capitol Hill…”

“One of the things that we did was to mail a copy of our report ‘Catch Them Before They Fall’ and we mailed a model resolution, ahh, to all the 50 states, we sent this as a very friendly, ‘Here’s some information you might like to use since you’re on a health committee’ – we mailed it only to people who were in key committees – ‘you might like to have this resolution, to introduce the notion that every child should be screened for mental illness, at least once in their youth, in order to identify mental illness and prevent suicide.’ So we offered them up some language and some tools, and a surprising number of folks, in fact, introduced it exactly the way we sent it and made some real strides with it.”

See?  It’s easy, as easy as your state representatives are anyways…..

Here’s a real giggle for you.

NAMI TeenScreen Rep: “We’re trying to look at how we could reach out to the community and offer that [TeenScreen] for families that are home-schooling.”

That’s a riot!  Great comic relief NAMI!  These are the people that are going to help us to deal with reality?

What about homeschooled children?

More WaCKy quotes from these Evil Penguins HERE

Congress Fails to Protect Parental Rights in Mental Health Screening Programs

http://www.hslda.org/docs/news/hslda/200506/200506280.asp

Representative Ron Paul (R-TX-14) introduced an amendment last week to House Resolution 3010 saying that “none of the funds made available in this Act may be used to create or implement any new universal mental health screening program.” The amendment was defeated 97-304 in a late afternoon vote on June 24, 2005.

Last year, Congress passed the Consolidated Appropriation Act, H.R. 4818, which provided $20 million in funding for state grants in order to change their current mental health care system. HSLDA and other pro-liberty groups are concerned that states will use these grants to implement some form of mandatory, comprehensive mental health screening.

Representative Paul’s amendment to H.R. 3010 would have alleviated the concerns about this type of system. However, powerful interest groups within the psychiatric community were adamantly opposed to the amendment and its protections for parental rights. The amendment was considered under short notice and consequently the voice of homeschoolers was not clearly heard.

The voting record is available at http://www.hslda.org/docs/news/hslda/200506/200506280.asp.

The government was created by us in order to safeguard our natural and legal rights.  When it starts making choices outside of its design and that is the near mathematical formula of the law which is the design we chose for it and us, then the world we know is turned on its head.  There is the Rule of Law or not.  It is simple.  The Constitution is the design that conforms it to Law and it is not tolerant of very much tinkering before it will cease to operate in a predictable manner.

If you are bewildered to find your country operating with less and less predictability then break out your toolbox and unroll the design sheet and get busy. We can argue later about the original design, what is missing or can be improved, but right now we have to get the machine back in order first because our construct has been, extended, added upon, subtracted from and all around jury-rigged to the point where the original design is almost completely obscured.  The other alternative is to stand back and let it go and pray that it topples before it destroys everything. We have allowed our government to become an unwieldy, enormous clanking monster. It will feel no remorse in devouring you or your children, it has no conscious.

3/25/09

AxXiom

***************************************

**I want to know who the players are in our state.  I will share what I find and encourage you to personally seek answers from school administrators, health care professionals, state officials-anyone that plays a part in this scheme.  I know that many involved do not realize what they do, we have to let them know.

For the interview(highly reccommended), click link at bottom.John Whitehead of the Rutherford Institute interviews Allen Jones.

http://www.rutherford.org/oldspeak/articles/interview/oldspeak-jones.htm:

A Lone Wolf Talks on the Drug Leviathan
By John W. Whitehead
10/13/05

When Allen Jones was appointed lead investigator in July 2002 in a case concerning off-the-books payments from pharmaceutical companies, he had no idea that his discoveries would cost him his career and propel him to the core of President George W. Bush’s national drug policies. An investigator for the Pennsylvania Office of the Inspector General (OIG), Jones’ findings in the case showed that the drug company Janssen had paid honorariums to key state officials who held significant influence over the prescriptions issued for state institutions such as prisons and mental health hospitals.  Although the accounts receiving these payments were marked for “educational grants,” funds were being channeled to state employees who developed guidelines recommending new, more expensive drugs rather than older, cheaper drugs with safe, proven effects.   These companies were influencing officials with trips, perks and lavish travel accommodations as a means of inducing the officials to endorse their products. Jones discovered that one of the new drugs being recommended, Risperdal, has been shown to have potentially lethal side effects such as ketoacidosis, coma and possibly death.

After initially revealing his discoveries to OIG managers, Jones was taken off the case but told that he could pursue it on his own. In the words of the OIG supervisor who took Jones off the case and participated in threatening him, “Drug companies write checks to politicians… on both sides of the aisle.” When Jones went public with his findings, he was escorted out of his workplace and told not to reappear on OIG property.  Jones then filed a suit against his supervisors, claiming that OIG’s policy of barring employees from speaking to the press is unconstitutional. Jones also claims that he is being harassed by his superiors and Pennsylvania governmental institutions in order to “cover up, discourage, or limit any investigations or oversight into the corrupt practices of drug companies and the corrupt public officials who have acted with them.” Jones’ attorney, John Bailey, has called the case “a critical test of the right to a free press.”  Bailey said, “If they shut the employee up and they have all the documents locked up in a drawer, there is no free press.”

The Pennsylvania formulary investigated by Jones (known as PennMap) is based on the Texas Medication Algorithm Project (TMAP), which was named as a model program by President Bush’s New Freedom Commission on Mental Health. Patients who had previously been treated with the new medications were researched, and files showing positive results were selected and reported on. Unsurprisingly, TMAP research “confirmed” that the new drugs were safer and more effective than older treatments. Ignoring the increasing body of contrary findings, TMAP Dr. Peter J. Weiden, a member of the project’s expert consensus, stated that the guidelines promoted by the programs are based on “opinions, not data” and that “most of the guideline’s authors have received support from the pharmaceutical industry.”

Just as Jones feared, the corruption extends much further than the Pennsylvania state health care systems. These flawed results are the basis for President Bush’s New Freedom Commission on Mental Health, which has announced its intent to administer a nationwide mental health screening. Bush also backs the controversial TeenScreen program, which is designed to diagnose mental illness in teenagers but has been shown to be coercive and unreliable. Jones firmly stated that “the same political/pharmaceutical alliance that generated the Texas project was behind the New Freedom Commission” and was “poised to consolidate the TMAP effort into a comprehensive national policy…with expensive, patented medications of questionable benefit and deadly side effects.”

Allen Jones has become the poster boy for the battle against the government as he pursues his case against OIG officials. He is hopeful that his efforts fighting industry and governmental corruption will not go to waste.

Read the Interview Here http://www.rutherford.org/oldspeak/Articles/Interviews/oldspeak-jones.htm

.