One problem that is starting to surface is that corporations and some individuals would like to see the internet lose that anonymity.  For the purposes of data mining (a lucrative business practice) and to keep online discourse regulated, some would stop at nothing to see online free speech stifled or diminished.

From ArsTechnica: “Appeals Court: First Amendment protects forum trolls”

Anonymous trolls on the Internet are allowed to remain anonymous, a judge in a California appeals court ruled yesterday. Not only that, but they’re allowed to exercise their First Amendment rights and speak their minds, no matter how scathing their comments may be. The court opinion reversed a previous decision that would have allowed Lisa Krinsky, COO of a Florida-based drug service company, to subpoena 10 anonymous Yahoo message board posters’ real names.

Why is this important to you and me?  Why should we care if trolls are “outed” or tar-and-feathered for being jerks?  Well, for one, part of the value that the Internet brings to the world is not only freedom of speech and an expectation of privacy, but it also levels the playing field and allows people a forum to express themselves with the world.  Where else could you find a place for some random person to speak loudly and receive publicity for otherwise unpopular speech?  Where else can you speak the truth without feeling the pressure that comes from your boss or colleagues, friends or family?

The problem with trying to regulate speech online or allowing for the destruction of internet trolls is you essentially move in the direction of threatening individual privacy rights and pulling the plug on internet fantasies.  Whether you love trolls or hate them, there’s something to be said for policing the words of the masses and seeking to ruin people who push unpopular opinions.  In the grand scheme of things, the trolls may get their 15 seconds of fame… before being banned or ignored, or rebutted by an equally passionate person on the other side of the argument.

We should strive to push for a highly diverse Internet with myriad ideas that as a collective work to find problems to difficult solutions.  Additionally, we should also work to protect the ‘fantasy’ aspect of online interaction.  If people want to remain anonymous, why deny them that right?  If they are not breaking the law or committing acts of terrorism, why should the courts step in to help out corporations only intent on retaliating against individuals or stifling speech?  Let’s hope we never end up on the slippery slope of Internet censorship, because once that happens, the value of the online experience is lost.  If we succumb to regulation of speech or relent on privacy rights online, the Internet will be no different a forum than the “real world” that is dominated by corporations and special interest groups with lots of money.

If some Mississippi legislators had their way, they’d put forth a law that would ban obese people from being served at restaurants.

State Rep. John Read, a Republican who is one of the bill’s three authors, says he wasn’t trying to offend anybody and never even expected the plan to become law.

“I was trying to shed a little light on the No. 1 problem in Mississippi.”

This may sound humorous as you read along, but this isn’t a spoof.  Obesity is a real problem with consequences for Americans and we’ve been unable to solve this growing epidemic without the use of drugs or surgery to solve the issue.  Of course, exercise and dieting is ideal, but helping to fight obesity isn’t like having the flu or acquiring a chronic disease that can be cured drinking a Slimfast(tm) every morning.

The question that should be asked is whether the Republican Representative crossed the line by proposing such legislation.  If you take him at his word that this was not a serious proposal, but intended to shed light on a serious problem in Mississipi, then maybe he has done his state a great service.  Obesity is much like other sensitive subjects, e.g. Affirmative Action.  No one wants to talk about it because it is a pretty prickly subject and people get hurt in the process no matter which way you roll on the issue.

Steve Holland, the Democratic chairman of the House Public Health and Human Services Committee, said in a statement he will “pocket veto” the bill. “It’s dead on arrival at my desk.”  Although he appreciates the “efforts of my fellow House members to help curb the obesity problem in Mississippi, this is totally the wrong approach.”

How can you not laugh at the public press that the issue is receiving?  First, you have a candidate with the gall to put forth such an ‘idea’, then you have a Democrat coming out to fight the ‘good fight’ and defending the rights of the obese.   Way to stick up for the little… errr, big guy? Again,this is a serious problem so why are we walking on eggshells to get to the heart of the problem?  Eventually, it may be policy makers that help America shed the weight.

About one-third of Americans are obese (30 or more pounds over a healthy weight), and 66% are overweight or obese. Even so, obesity experts are outraged by the bill.  “It would be hard to concoct something more ridiculous,” says Kelly Brownell, director of Yale University’s Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity.

I’m no Yale expert and I haven’t spent my life studying the problems with obesity like Mr. Brownell, but maybe it is good to call a spade a spade?  Instead of dealing with emotions that inevitably arise out of the hate and frustration, self-esteem problems and depression, maybe we should focus on the problem itself and find ways to encourage the masses to help combat the problem?  Maybe this noise will help push obese people to stay away from the super-size or learn more about all the foods and drinks that are most dangerous to our health.

I don’t want to be insensitive about the issue, but it’s just not a simple problem to solve.  Showing love and support isn’t everyone’s forte, so it’s a futile effort to try and control what politicians, celebrities and ‘experts’ say.  The problems that stem from humiliation, shame and guilt are not trivial and it does offend and hurt some people:

“This brings bias against obese individuals to a new and appalling level, and at a time when significant progress is being made in the effort to stop blaming obesity on the people who have it and to address the social and political conditions that drive it.

Again, I cannot agree with the expert, it seems he’s too involved and has a hard time being objective.  In my view, it never really is about blaming obese people, most people don’t think of it in those terms unless you push the issue.  How often do you think “maybe he should stop eating, doesn’t he have self-control?”  Most Americans don’t go about their lives thinking, “darn, she sure is fat, why doesn’t she just exercise or go on a diet?!”

If anything, the question most Americans are asking is “Am I fat and what can I do to keep myself looking good.”  Sadly, the same areas of society that encourage obesity indirectly (e.g. super models, strip clubs, television and Hollywood) are also the ones that discourage people from eating that extra french fry.   It’s easy to blame these vices on the problem of teenage anorexia, but in my view, both anorexia and morbidly  obese people are also suffering from severe mental disease or stress and require the help of a mental health expert in addition to a physical fitness expert.

“Are these legislators fighting to get rid of soft drinks in schools? Are they working to stop the relentless marketing of unhealthy foods to children? Are they doing anything about the fact that poor people do not have access to healthy foods?”

This is the best argument made against legislators who would dare bring up obesity under such crass legislative proposals.

Restaurants and Corporations Encourage America’s Obesity Problem

Consumers are provided incentive to purchase fatty foods because they cost a lot less than the ‘premium’ low-calorie foods.  Fast food restaurants are serving up individual meals that have as much as 50 to 75% of a typical calorie intake for the day and maybe doubling or tripling the fat intake.  Consumers do have a responsibility to moderate their intake, but with obesity you have a special self-perpetuating cycle of guilt.  People eat to deal with stress, they eat to socialize with co-workers, eat to handle depression and settle impulsive behaviors that would best be handled by psychiatric help.

While this is a problem that involves many factors, people have to be careful not to entirely shed the blame of obesity on society.  Society is part of the problem, there is no doubt about that.  We have to remain cognizant of the fact that shedding personal responsibility might be one of the biggest reasons that combating obesity has become so difficult to solve.  It won’t be long before pharmaceutical companies or scientists design a solution that won’t increase the risk of heart failure or death.  Until that happens, it is the duty of all Americans to help fend off this problem and it starts with YOU.

If you enjoyed this article, please subscribe to the news feed — free column on business and technology.  You may sign up for the e-mail version using the form located within the sidebar. 

A rise of TSA “incidents” are driving people up the wall:

Jake’s trip through Pittsburgh International ended with a TSA guard picking up a tray where his laptop was located and accidentally dropped and broke his laptop. Pieces broke off of it and Jake was furious and wanted to know how to file a damage claim.

TSA’s response: Get out of the security area now or we’ll arrest you.

TSA’s Claim office

Phone: (866) 289-9673
E-mail: tsaclaimsoffice@dhs.gov

Download TSA Claims forms

Reasons you might need this information:

1. harassment by TSA Agent
2. damaged property
3. security complaint
4. other TSA abuse

A Yahoo blogger asked the question, should you stick around and “fight for your rights” or quietly move along. It’s a good question, often when things get heated you have to ask whether you want win the “battle” or win the “war”. Sticking around to argue and make a scene might help get you a story that’ll go public and tarnish the TSA’s already negative reputation. However, if you simply want a resolution, sticking around and bickering may just get you in trouble. The last thing you want when you are traveling on business or to see family is a potential delay, missed flight, or even worse: indefinite detention. We know all know that can get ugly fast!

House passes “Safe Act”

The SAFE Act requires that anyone providing an “electronic communication service” or “remote computing service” to the public who learns about the transmission or storage of information about certain illegal activities or an illegal image must (a) register their name, mailing address, phone number, and fax number with the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children’s “CyberTipline” and (b) “make a report” to the CyberTipline that (c) must include any information about the person or Internet address behind the suspect activity and (d) the illegal images themselves. (By the way, “electronic communications service” and “remote computing service” providers already have some reporting requirements under existing law too.)

There isn’t an American alive that doesn’t want to help protect children from online perverts and predators. However, it’s a farce to think that regulating behavior by imposing ‘strict’ guidelines on Internet users is the answer. Since the government seems to have no qualms about spying on its citizens, I can see why it decided to move in this direction. It’s sad that not a single Democrat stood up against this madness.

In the end, it means nothing as far as regulating Child Pornography goes. That is, I highly doubt that anyone that is “guilty” is going to turn straight or get caught for that matter. All it’s going to do is create a situation where these perverts find ways to be discrete and covert, online.

What did the House accomplish? It continued to put the clamps down on individual liberties, rights, and privacy. It only serves to make perverts and child pornographers learn how to hide their tracks and escape the authorities and nothing positive comes of the legislation. It’s an impossible issue to really take a tough stand on, because of the nature of the issues at question, but you have to wonder if our Democrats are ever going to show some backbone and stand up on principle.

No, we don’t want fascism in America, we don’t need a police State. Take your ultra patriotism and shove it, this is America, why don’t we start acting like liberty, freedom, privacy, and the Constitution matter?

Throughout the week, countless articles have been released that attack the founder of Facebook for alleged theft of code that helped create the latest social online phenomena. All sorts of dirty laundry have been aired regarding the 23 year old Harvard grad and owner of Facebook.

It’s alleged that Mark essentially stole Facebook and he’s being sued by Tyler Winklevos and his brother Cameron, pals at Harvard. Mark Zuckerberg is now a billionaire (at least on paper) and presumably he’d have to split the pie if the court agrees with the complainant.

While it seemed things couldn’t get any worse for Mark Zuckerberg, it turns out that his company is engaging in questionable if not downright unethical practices with regard to privacy. There was plenty of concern by Facebook users that their private data was being shared and sold without hesitation. Politicians in favor of a telecommunications industry that plays the role of big brother have used social networking sites, particularly face book, as a prime example that people don’t really care about their privacy in this “new world of social networking.”

Well, they’d be wrong on that point and here’s the latest frightening revelation coming out of the Facebook camp. It turns out that they’ve been keeping track of users even after they log out!

Facebook has confirmed findings of a CA security researcher that the social-networking site’s Beacon ad service is more intrusive and stealthy than previously acknowledged, an admission that contradicts statements made previously by Facebook executives and representatives.

If you’ve been a naughty citizen and perusing the naked ladies or cheating on your wife on the side with some hot college coed you met online, there’s a possibility that Facebook knows about it! Maybe it’s time to lead a revolution against these corporate giants that are getting fat off of our personal data. Question is, how do you destroy a multi-billion dollar corporation? Is it as easy as telling people to stop using the site? Will the younger generation wake up to this nasty reality we’re embarking upon?

Time will tell, stay tuned for more exciting gossip on ‘as the Facebook turns.’

The MPAA’s “University Toolkit” –universities have been asked by the MPAA to install spying software in their networks to monitor student behavior.  The measure was taken as the MPAA and RIAA are continuing to crack down on copyright violations of their software. In a humorous twist of irony, due to copyright violations, the MPAA was prevented from using the toolkit.

The GPL (license) that comes with the “open” software includes a provision by which the code must be available upon request and licensed under the same rules that govern the original code. After several attempts to contact the MPAA, the author was forced to resort to the same tactics that the MPAA uses to harass students. A developer of the operating system Ubuntu decided to send a DMCA notice to the MPAA’s ISP and demanded that the material be taken down as infringing.

This was just too funny to pass up. Here’s the original exchange that got picked up by Slashdot (comments for your amusement) and BoingBoing before finding its way here.

The lawsuit alleges that both companies were infringing on patented technology by offering Visual Voicemail service to iPhone customers. According to Apple Insider, Klausner is seeking damages and future royalties estimated at $360 million. The suit was filed in federal court in the Eastern District of Texas. The claim argues that the sale of the iPhone, Visual Voicemail and other visual voice messaging services implemented by AT&T infronge Klausner’s patents.

The patents at issue are 5,572,576 and 5,283,818.
Patent 5,572,577 deals with the method for organizing communications via a Telephone Answering Device

A telephone answering device (TAD) which includes a means of intelligently organizing voice messages, associated entered codes such as personal IDs and home telephone numbers, and information stored in the memory of the TAD. These codes or numbers are decoded by means of the caller entering DTMF signals into the telephone which are recognized, recorded and processed by the TAD. When processed with codes and personal information previously entered into the device’s memory, the TAD displays the identity of the callers for each message, thus providing a menu of choices, i.e., a list of callers.

This enables the user to access messages in a selective manner based on the identity of the caller.The need to listen to the actual voice messages to determine the caller’s identity and the need to listen to the messages sequentially or chronologically is obviated, saving both time and effort. Additionally, because the voice message is also linked to pre-stored additional data in the data base, when hearing a message, one also can view relevant associated information, such as a fax number, etc., that might not have been left in the audio message but might be important. A remote access device is also provided that allows the user to retrieve and display the callers’ identities and select a message to be played back from a remote location.

..and Patent 5,283,818

A telephone answering device (TAD) which includes a means of intelligently organizing voice messages, associated entered codes such as personal IDs and home telephone numbers, and information stored in the memory of the TAD. These codes or numbers are decoded by means of the caller entering DTMF signals into the telephone which are recognized, recorded and processed by the TAD. When processed with codes and personal information previously entered into the device’s memory, the TAD displays the identity of the callers for each message, thus providing a menu of choices, i.e., a list of callers.

This enables the user to access messages in a selective manner based on the identity of the caller. The need to listen to the actual voice messages to determine the caller’s identity and the need to listen to the messages sequentially or chronologically is obviated, saving both time and effort. Additionally, because the voice message is also linked to pre-stored additional data in the data base, when hearing a message, one also can view relevant associated information, such as a fax number, etc., that might not have been left in the audio message but might be important.

Previously, when this issue was litigated, the big boys lost and were forced to purchases licenses. Among the juggernauts that bended previously, included Time Warner’s AOL for special voice mail features and Vonage for it’s Voicemail “Plus” services. With regard to iPhone, Klausner alleges that Apple violated its intellectual property rights byletting its users selectively retrieve voice messages using the iPhone’s inbox display.

“We have litigated this patent successfully on two prior occasions,” said Greg Dovel of Dovel & Luner, counsel for Klausner. “With the signing of each new licensee, we continue to receive further confirmation of the strength of our visual voicemail patents.”

Klausner’s lawyer’s have been busy. On Monday, they also filed claims against Comcast and Cablevision Systems Corp, as well as Ebay’s Skype. They are seeking damages and future royalties estimated at $300 million.

NEW YORK (AP) The lawsuit asserts that the above companies’ VOIP voicemail products and services infringe Klausner Technologies’ U.S. Patent 5,572,576. The patent has already been licensed to various other companies which provide the same visual voice messaging services, including Time Warner’s AOL (TWX:NYSE) for its AOL Voicemail services, Vonage Holdings (VG:NYSE) for its Vonage Voicemail Plus services as well as others, under the Klausner Patents. Cablevision’s Optimum Voicemail, Comcast’s Digital Voice Voicemail and eBay’s Skype Voicemail each violate Klausner’s intellectual property rights by allowing users to selectively retrieve and listen to voice messages via message inbox displays.

When all is said and done, these patented methods are going to net Klausner’ well over a billion dollars. Not a bad racket for Klausner, hopefully it’ll not stifle innovation in this area, though, it sounds like a lot of telecommunications had big ideas in this area of software and hardware development.

The head of the federal agency investigating Karl Rove’s White House political operation is facing allegations that he improperly deleted computer files during another probe, using a private computer-help company, Geeks on Call.

This is a pretty big issue that hasn’t received as much press as it should. Over the last few years, there’s been a laundry list of “scandals” that the Bush Administration has engaged in. I guess it depends on who you ask whether the law is being violated, but when there are so many issues going on that incriminate the government as a whole, where do you begin?

Well, Karl Rove knew where to get started when he ran into potential legal problems, it was simple really! The way to correct for violations of federal law is to violate the law again and hide the potentially incriminating data. I’m not going to get into Karl Rove’s Valerie Wilson Plame scandal, though it did involve questionable use of communications.

There are two problems we have to consider from a law and technology standpoint:

1. Co-mingling Private and Public affairs. We know it’s illegal for government officials to use public funds and equipment to conduct private or political business. It’s also illegal to conduct government business using private or politically sponsored equipment. Yet, under the Bush Administration’s two terms, White House appointees have frequently used e-mail accounts provided by the RNC. The end result is a government that is left unaccountable for certain business and activity that it conducts on behalf of the American people. Now what’s interesting about Karl Rove’s dilemma is that he allegedly used government property to conduct business that should be kept separate. By having sensitive data deleted, he clearly violated the Presidential Records Act, which requires that the White House preserve ALL records.
2. After government property was allegedly used to commit alleged illegal activity, private RNC servers and e-mail accounts were used to conduct internal business of the United States. What this does is gives potential abusers a way to cover up their tracks if they are engaging in partisan warfare on the dime of American citizens. A lot of noise was made about Hillary Clinton’s refusal to release more data from the National Archives because of the private nature of some of the data shared between her and the President. Instead of having to deal with the potential discovery of evidence of wrongdoing, the White House under the direction of Karl Rove, decided to remove any potential for “smoking guns” that might reside on the servers.

If you were paying attention over the summer, Karl Rove had five million e-mails deleted from the national archives, it was against protocol but the excuse at first was “oops, we thought the e-mails were backed up.” Now, when bad business is being done on taxpayer equipment, the excuse is “Oh, we had a virus so we had to have X amount of computers and hard drives cleaned for good measure.” I don’t know what bothers me more, the fact that we don’t have national safeguards in place to prevent this from happening, or the fact that our public officials are possibly engaging in illegal activity and removing evidence that would incriminate them. Yes, that’s also a violation of the law, there is no excuse for a public servant to engage in this kind of behavior.

For those interested in questionable government actions with respect to law and technology, Mike Huckabee is also in the news for similar actions. I’m sure a number of politicians will be implicated in this kind of activity in the future, they’re starting to catch on to the idea that technology is going to change -entirely- the way we do business and conduct government activity. Here’s the Huckabee story: “Huckabee asks Judge to dismiss lawsuit.”

“Technology has changed. You can’t go back, there’s no way to go back. And I don’t think there’s a will to go back.”

This is an interesting commentary about the future of Technology. We’ve made so much noise over the issue of the RIAA hunting down college students or even trying to dig their claws into poor people who can’t afford to buy CD’s and end up pirating stuff. It doesn’t look like users are relenting on the issue either. A lot of lawsuits have given the ‘authorities’ the deterrent factor they need, but it isn’t working.

At some point, you just have to recognize that on principle, people don’t see the downloading of movies and songs online as a big deal anymore. You can try to make this stuff illegal, but where is the enforcement mechanism? Think about Marijuana, for an example of an illegal substance that is impossible to regulate. Most people who read about the subject, can agree that Marijuana use is no more dangerous than Alcohol. In fact, when it comes to encouraging accidents and resulting in deaths, alcohol is in a league of its own. What happens when you try to enforce laws that people find arbitrary, obnoxious, or overbearing? Well here’s a nice little photo that I found on Reddit that illustrates the problem:

From the Michael Salamon blog: “Procedurally Enforcing Workflow”

A great reminder for the RIAA/MPAA: You can’t force people to follow directions they deem arbitrary. I bet if that gate spit out $100 bills people would use it! Schneier first published the photo on his Technology and Security blog.

There in lies the rub. In general, if you continue to enforce rules that are complete garbage, people are going to call you on it and your authority diminishes. This happens to governments, law enforcement officers, and it is most certainly the way of the Internet given that there is no way to regulate it through a single central authority. The United States can try and impose its views on the world, but try getting around the jurisdictional problem.

Here’s a hint: you can’t! Check out the latest tech article on the Crunch site, it reminds us all how easy it is to simply lift copyrighted content in the digital age of technology.  It’s very difficult to enforce: “Stealing books with Kindle is trivial“

I’ve been beyond angry at the “network you can trust — AT&T” over its willingness to open up customer records, bills, and Internet activity to the government. I’ve never been a sucker for the “if you aren’t doing anything wrong, what’s the big deal” pro-Government argument. Recently, it looks like the government has been putting similar pressure on other companies. For example, Amazon, Inc. has received “exigent circumstance” requests from the military for the records of thousands of users that purchased used books through their service.

While AT&T is spending billions trying to figure out how to spy on Americans, Amazon.com is defending American privacy rights.

Ars Technica‘s Timothy Lee writes:

Recently unsealed documents show that a federal judge has rejected an attempt by federal prosecutors to obtain the records of thousands of people who bought used books on Amazon. The records were sought as part of an investigation of a Robert B. D’Angelo, a Madison city employee who is accused of underreporting his income to tax authorities and operating a private business using city resources. The ruling was released after a federal grand jury handed down a 39-count indictment against D’Angelo.

Just as the government has exploited telecommunications companies to do it’s bidding, it’s now trying to go after other corporations that control information. We all know that information is knowledge, whoever controls the information controls the world. It’s no surprise that the United States government under a pseudo-fascist regime is trying to dictate to corporations how they operate. Further, they’re trying to control the Internet in order to manipulate and force “the people” into submission.

AT&T’s joint operations with the NSA and illegal wireless surveillance, as per WIRED magazine: “Whistle-Blower outs NSA spy room“

AT&T provided National Security Agency eavesdroppers with full access to its customers’ phone calls, and shunted its customers’ internet traffic to data-mining equipment installed in a secret room in its San Francisco switching center, according to a former AT&T worker cooperating in the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s lawsuit against the company.Mark Klein, a retired AT&T communications technician, submitted an affidavit in support of the EFF’s lawsuit this week. That class action lawsuit, filed in federal court in San Francisco last January, alleges that AT&T violated federal and state laws by surreptitiously allowing the government to monitor phone and internet communications of AT&T customers without warrants.

Think about it, if the government knows all about its citizens, from favorite books to sexual fantasies to privileged conversations between husbands and wife, friends and other family communications, what is sacred anymore? All this does is puts citizens in a position to distrust government, the telecommunication’s industry and gives terrorists a reason to hack phones and turn to rogue providers for their communication. If privacy is so easily disturbed by a government that wants so badly to win this “War on Terror” ™, where do you draw the line?

I am a great fan of Amazon.com now and I have to say that Ask.com’s privacy policy and desire to protect its users is equally attractive on the corporate front. If Google didn’t have a ridiculous monopoly on search, it would be even easier to abandon the government tainted companies for ‘lesser’ companies. I’ve got some major ideas to help protect citizen’s rights and make a major profit in the process, so if anyone has the resources or contacts, please feel free to contact me on the matter. I think the time has come to revolutionize the telecommunications industry, because if no one does it, the government is going to continue to get away with tampering in our everyday lives while they chase the bad guys.

Before I get any nut jobs that want to hang me for being anti-Establishment or whatever your cute phrases are for people like me, let me say I love America and what it once stood for. Today, our country isn’t the one I once knew. I am not proud of our country, in fact I’m downright ashamed of some of the fascist principles that we’ve allowed to creep into society. I don’t favor granting ‘additional’ rights to criminals or villains, but we need to buckle down and start defending our Constitution. Indeed, we need to protect and restore the rights of American citizens and citizens of the world that we’ve deprived over the last decade. Our Constitution has all but lost meaning in the United States and for us to continue to claim we’re spreading Democracy overseas while abandoning at home is hypocritical at best.

If you liked this article, you probably are of similar mind and I’d like to point you to a previous article that I wrote on topic. “The network you can trust is a fraud“

AT&T’s technology has proven useful for spying on American citizen

Freedom to Tinker : According to government documents studied by The New York Times, the FBI asked several phone companies to analyze phone-call patterns of Americans using a technology called “communities of interest”. Verizon refused, saying that it didn’t have any such technology. AT&T, famously, did not refuse.

What is the “communities of interest” technology? It’s spelled out very clearly in a 2001 research paper from AT&T itself, entitled “Communities of Interest” (by C. Cortes, D. Pregibon, and C. Volinsky). They use high-tech data-mining algorithms to scan through the huge daily logs of every call made on the AT&T network; then they use sophisticated algorithms to analyze the connections between phone numbers: who is talking to whom? The paper literally uses the term “Guilt by Association” to describe what they’re looking for: what phone numbers are in contact with other numbers that are in contact with the bad guys?

This story hits close to home, because recently, I was called paranoid and delusional for thinking that the government would bother to spy on Americans. (especially, insignificant Fred!) I’d love to agree with the sentiment so I could feel more at ease with the state of American politics. Sadly, life is rarely that simple; and I am left to wonder if the echoes and clicking sounds that come from my AT&T telephone are occurring because the service sucks or because I’ve managed to be among the lucky Americans to win the ‘potential terrorist’ lottery.

Typical cell phone interference happens… we’ve all experienced it. Yet, now we know that it could be the result of some schmuck listening in and recording my latest call to my 51 year old mother. The excuse for such an invasion of privacy? Protecting national security, of course! When I consider that there is a chance I’m on “a list”, it enrages me beyond belief. I’ve never so much as received a speeding ticket, much less plot to commit an act of terror.

Hard right wingers and some law enforcement types would say, “it is better to err on the side of caution, don’t ya think?” I’d disagree, lets err on the side of liberty and freedom from government interference in citizens’ daily lives instead of bend to the will of fear and fascism. If you want to live in fear of terrorists go right ahead, but don’t take me along for the a ride into an America that promotes pseudo fascist ideals. The tighter our wing nuts squeeze her neck, the more pain she’ll inflict on us all when their patriotic glass shatters from this grip of fear.