If you have any other files you'd like to contribute, e-mail them to
bj496@Cleveland.Freenet.Edu.
------------------------------------------------
Full Disclosure Newsletter
Welcome to the Full Disclosure Newsletter. The text of Full Disclosure No. 32 has been combined with our catalog in this compact form to introduce you to our publications. Please note that regular issues of Full Disclosure are 8 8-1/2x11 pages mailed by first class mail in an envelope. See catalog or end of this document for information on how to subscribe.
Fax-on-Demand
The Superior Broadcasting Company operates a Fax-on-Demand service. In addition to our marketing and other public documents, it has additional information on many of the topics covered in this newsletter.
If an article here has ``Fax Doc:'' at the end of it, you can get more information on the topic from our Fax-on-Demand service. Simply call (708) 356-9646 from your fax machine. Press 4 to select the subscribers only section, you will then be prompted to enter the desired document numbers. You can choose up to four documents per call. There is no charge (except for the
phone call). We hope to compile newsletters and additional information in bound volumes.
PGP Exportable?
Pretty Good Privacy (PGP) a share-ware type encryption program. It is claimed by many to be the best encryption you can get for your email and other personal computer files. The author, Philip R. Zimmermann, has received some flack (including grand jury inquiries) because the program has been
distributed outside the United States. It is claimed by some that the export of encryption products is prohibited -- and that might be true for most such products.
Yet, Attorney Will Dwyer, suggests it might be otherwise in the case of PGP. Since PGP is in the public domain (as defined by the export regulations), there can be no prohibition on its world wide distribution.
The feds are molesting Zimmermann, his outlets, and his communications channels because they think he exported a defense article on the State Department's Munitions List in violation of the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR)(22 CFR 121-130).
What's the article? Auxiliary military equipment in the form of cryptographic software (22 CFR 121.1). What's software? Information on the operation of computers (Webster). What's ``public domain''? Information published and available at bookstores, through subscription, and in public libraries (22 CFR 125.1(a)). What exports on the Munitions list are not subject to the controls of ITAR? Information which is in the ``public domain'' (22 CFR 125.1(a)).
As Will Dwyer puts it ``here's my library card.'' However, the feds concern
on this matter is due to a fear of losing control of information.
Philip Zimmermann has created a method by which the average person can keep their affairs out of the hands of big brother.
Contact: Will Dwyer, 400 S. Beverly Dr, Suite 214, Beverly Hills, CA 90212. Fax: (310) 858-7458. Internet: ae309@lafn.org
K-12 Student Records: Privacy at Risk
The U.S. education system is rapidly building a nationwide network of electronic student records. This computer network will make possible the exchange of information among various agencies and employers, and the continuous tracking of individuals through the social service, education and criminal justice systems, into higher education, the military and the workplace.
WHAT IS THE ISSUE?
There is no adequate guarantee that the collection and sharing of personal
information will be done only with the knowledge and consent of students or their parents.
Changes Are Coming to Student Records
National proposals being implemented today include:
* An electronic ``portfolio'' to be kept on each student, containing personal essays and other completed work.
* Asking enrolling kindergartners for their Social Security Numbers, which will be used to track each student's career after high school.
* Sending High school students' transcripts and ``teachers' confidential ratings of a student's work-related behavior,'' to employers via an electronic network called WORKLINK.
At the heart of these changes is a national electronic student records
network, coordinated by the federal government and adopted by states with federal assistance. Information they want to collect includes:
* month and extent of first prenatal care, * birthweight, * name, type, and number of years in a preschool program, * poverty status, * physical, emotional and other development at ages 5 and 6, * date of last routine health and dental care, * extracurricular activities, * type and hours per week of community service, name of post * secondary institution attended, post secondary degree or credential, * employment status, * type of employment and employer name, * whether registered to vote.
It also notes other ``data elements useful for research and school management purposes'':
* names of persons living in student household, * relationship of those persons to student, * highest level of education for ``primary care-givers,'' * total family income, * public assistance status and years of benefits, * number of moves in the last five years, * nature and ownership of dwelling.
State and local agencies theoretically design their own information systems, but the handbook encourages them to collect information for policymakers at all levels.
Among the data elements are:
* evidence verifying date of birth, * social security number, * attitudinal test, * personality test,
* military service experience, * description of employment permit (including permit number,) * type of dwelling, * telephone number of employer.
WHO CAN ACCESS THIS COMPREHENSIVE INFORMATION?
Officers, employees and agents of local, state and federal educational agencies and private education researchers may be given access to individual
student records without student or parent consent, according to the federal Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974 (20 USC 1232g) and related federal regulations (34 CFR 99.3). Washington state law is similar.
CONTACT: Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility - Seattle Chapter, P. O. Box 85481, Seattle, WA 98145 (206) 365-4528. Internet: cpsr-seattle@csli.stanford.edu
Fax Doc: 3201 / 2 pg.
Suing Your Federal Government for Civil Rights Violations
By David C. Grossack, Copyright 1994 by David C. Grossack (summary).
On the occasion of the 200th anniversary of the Bill of Rights, many
attorneys may not realize that these rights each contain within them an
intrinsic enabling authority for the purpose of redressing violations of these rights by those federal employees entrusted to uphold and protect them.
It is worth remembering that the authors of the Bill of Rights were heavily influenced by Anglo-Saxon legal theorists such as Sir William Blackstone, who declared that there were ``three absolute rights... the right of personal security, the right of personal liberty and the right of personal property.'' Blackstone believed the principal aim of society is to protect individuals in the enjoyment of these absolute rights which were vested in them by the immutable laws of nature.
Blackstone's ideas became embodied in the Federalist papers, and in the writings of James Madison on property interests, which he defined in quite broad terms:
In its larger and juster meaning, it embraces every thing to which a man many attach a value and have a right, and which leaves to every one else the like advantage... [A] man has a property in his opinions, and the free communication of them. He has a property of peculiar value in his religious opinions, and in the profession and practice dictated by them. He has a property very dear to him in the safety and liberty of his person. He has an equal property in the free use of his faculties, and free choice of the
objects on which to employ them.
``The protection of these faculties'' Madison wrote in The Federalist No. 10, ``is the first object of government.''
As Madison might have anticipated, and as modern students of law and history may realize, in the pursuit of its various other objectives, the federal government from time to time treads on these rights and ``faculties'' and on the natural rights of mankind whose protection is found in the Ninth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
The dilemma on how to obtain compensation for victims of ``constitutional torts'' by federal actors remained essentially unresolved until the case of Bivens v. Six Unknown Narcotics Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971).
Bivens has had more impact on the accountability of federal government officials than perhaps any other decision in the history of American law. The central issue in Bivens was whether the Fourth Amendment of the Federal constitution created an implied right of action.
Litigants who seek to bring claims against federal officials for abuses of their authority have been confused concerning the proper way to characterize their actions in the pleadings. Generally speaking, how one drafts a complaint and not what evidence is to be introduced determines whether a claim can survive as a federal cause of action. Tully v. Mott Supermarkets, Inc., 337 F. Supp 834, D.N.J. (1972).
Federal employees may become personally liable for constitutional deprivation by direct participation, failure to remedy wrongs after learning about it, creation of a policy or custom under which constitutional practices occur or gross negligence in managing subordinates who cause violations. Gallegos v. Haggerty, Northern District of New York, 689 F. Supp 93).
We must not forget the words of Justice Louis Brandeis:
Decency, security and liberty alike demand that government officials shall be subjected to the rules of conduct that are commands to the citizen. In a government of laws, existence of government laws, existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. Our government is the potent, omnipresent teacher, for good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a
lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for the law, it invites every man to come a law unto himself. It invites anarchy. (United States v. Olmstead, 277 U.S. 438 (1928).
Contact: David C. Grossack, Esq., Citizens Law Institute, PO Box 90, Hull, Massachusetts 02045. Phone: (617) 925-3906.
Fax Doc: 3202 / 3 pg
The Danbury SSN Project
Clint Danbury like many of us is upset with the uncontrolled private use of Social Security Numbers (SSN). He became particularly enraged after his SSN
was publicly passed around. Nobody at the Social Security Administration
(SSA) cared. He finally discovered:
In September of 1993 (perhaps an earlier date) the SSA came out and gave their official written approval for unrestricted use of the SSN by private individuals and private organizations for any purpose, including fun and amusement. The pamphlet is entitled ``Your Social Security Number'', is SSA
Publication 05-10002, and dated September/1993. You can get a copy by calling them at 1-800-772-1213.
On page 9 of that pamphlet, they have finally removed all restrictions on the private use of the SSN; and they've put it in writing:
``Because there is no law concerning the use of a person's Social Security number by a private individual or organization, Social Security has no control over such use.''
Many companies are collecting, using and distributing SSNs for their own
commercial purposes (for example the Credit Bureaus). Clint has his own
ideas. He wants to collect as many SSNs and names as possible and put them on t-shirts to bring awareness to the public nature of SSNs.
He wants to focus on famous people, law-makers and the like, but is will to
accept anyone's SSN. He is also collecting a list of all the public places SSNs can be found.
Contact: Please send full names and social security numbers of anyone you know, including government officers and employees, to me via e-mail or at Box 750037, Petaluma, CA 94975-0037, internet: Danbury@NetAcSys.Com A SASE bring you more information.
Fax doc: 3203 / 1 pg
James Bond?
Black and White or Color Video Sunglasses... Designed to blend with standard commercial lenses, the Video Sunglasses incorporate a built in micro CCD camera and FET amplified microphone that allows the capture, in perfect focus and hi-fidelity, of every image and sound being experienced by the eyeglass
wearer.
A miniature (approx size of 9-volt battery -- and powered by 9-volt battery) audio / video transmitter is also available from the same company.
Contact: Electronic Security Products, Inc., 563 Maude St, South Hempstead, NY 11550. Phone: (516) 538-2005 / Fax: (516) 481-1980.
NCIC Missed the Boat!
Or, are Federal Privacy laws too limiting? You would think that the FBI's National Criminal Information Computer (Center) -- which all law enforcement agencies are already linked to -- would be the perfect information sharing resource for law enforcement...
The following appeared in Law Enforcement Product News (Sept/Oct 1994):
Track Criminal -- GREAT -- with the LAW ENFORCEMENT COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK
Coast to coast, PC-based tracking, case management, bulletin board resource system with COLOR PHOTOS and over 150 fields (most having unlimited entries) of data per record. Join hundreds of criminal justice agencies accessing hundreds of thousands of records.
Upgrade most existing PC's with the L.E.C.N. GREAT network package. Very low cost as the LECN is a not for profit, tax exempt, 100% LAW ENFORCEMENT SUPPORTED AGENCY with a volunteer board of Distinguished Police Chiefs and Sheriffs.
TRACK GANGS, GRAFITII, CAREER CRIMINALS, DRUG GROUPS, POSSES, OUTLAW MOTORCYCLE GANGS, CREWS, TAGGERS and MORE. Keep local records and share nationally. Many other features are also included. Designed and managed by law enforcement for law enforcement. Continually improved through user suggestions. HELPS SOLVE MAJOR CRIMES ON A DAILY BASIS. Join a proven and rapidly growing network.
MEMBERSHIP AND INFORMATION RESTRICTED TO GOVERNMENT CRIMINAL JUSTICE AGENCIES.
... of course, the advatage to the above is the lack of any oversight, or accountability to the people. Anything done with NCIC is subject to regulation and audit by the Congress. Anything done with LECN is restricted only by the secrecy they can impose.
Profiling?
Here's a situation in which ``profiling'' by a government agency is already causing a problem.
Recall that recently on eff-activists there was brief discussion regarding the use of ``profiles'' in advertising efforts, in the context of interactive
TV.89E
Some participants favored what was perceived as a probable improvement in the efficiency of such advertising. Others saw distinct dangers, especially if profiles were marketed or traded among private sector entities, or if government became more involved.
This particular situation is quite disturbing because it involves a state tax
agency, and as everyone can appreciate, here is an example of where one is effectively presumed guilty until proven innocent, and is subject to asset seizure pending resolution as well as possible forfeiture.
A correspondent is trying to defend himself against some aggressive actions by the Arizona Department of Revenue. He has discovered that Arizona Revised Statutes section 42-117 permits the Department of Revenue, at its discretion, to assess a personal income tax which is based on a ``statistically valid sampling method.'' Although this option is seldom used, it is being applied in his case due to partial loss of records during a move.
In other words, your Arizona tax can be based on your profile, irrespective of your income or expenses.
Worse, Arizona Department of Revenue cites ARS 42-113 through -115 as
requiring one to keep records for four years after filing. Yet it asserts that there is no statute of limitations for audits - it can audit a filing at any time, and can presumably apply the statistical sampling method retroactively if it so desires.
Obviously, this situation goes well beyond profiling to determine who to audit. These and other, equally onerous provisions comprise a pit of despair.
Ironically, Department of Revenue asserts that ``all laws are presumed to be constitutional.''
Does unrestrained profiling start to look a little ugly by now? It ought to. If there's money to be made, or power to be wielded, neither Constitutional law nor existing statutory law holds much sway.
This piece was posted on the internet. It raises as many questions as it answers. First and foremost, what information is being profiled? Is it other Department of Revenue records, U.S. Census Bureau records? Private Database company records?
Additionally, it is a trend in government to do things the easy -- not the right way. The IRS has a number of methods of determining income when records are lost. Bank deposit method, increase in net worth, and a combination of
the two. Both are designed to made the determination accurately. However, they are tedious and time consuming. The idea of profiling throws accuracy out the window for ease.
Inside FINCEN
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network
FinCEN OS Division, 3833 N. Fairfax Dr, Arlington, VA 22203.
(1) 196 Employees (a) 48 investigators from IRS, DEA, POSTAL, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION, CUSTOMS, Etc. (b) 100 analyst (2) 2 SECTIONS (a) Office of strategic analysis. (b) Office of tactical support. (3) All states have a designated FINCEN representative through which local law enforcement agency's can obtain information from FINCEN. (4) FINCEN does not conduct investigations. (5) FINCEN runs the name you submit to them through forty different systems in searching for information. (6) The approximate turnaround time on each request is one (1) day. The turnaround time on an emergency request for information is from minutes to one (1) hour. (7) BANK SECRECY ACT FORMS
4789 CTR - Currency Transaction Report 4790 CMIR - Currency & Monetary Instrument Report 2981 FBAR - Foreign Bank Account Report 8362 CTRC - Current Transaction Report of Casinos 8300 - 8300 - Report of Cash Transactions (Car Dealers, Vending Machine Oper. Etc). (8) Banks maintain list of businesses / individuals who are exempt from ctr reports. (9) IRS has information from CTR forms on data base. (10) CUSTOMS has information from CMIR forms.
There is approx. $260, billion dollars in circulation. The government knows where $80, billion dollars of that money is.
Procedure for requesting search through FINCEN: Obtain and complete the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network Subject Information Form and either mail or fax the completed form to FINCEN.
A Sample FINCEN Search
PLEASE NOTE:
FinCEN utilizes various commercial, Federal regulatory and Federal law enforcement databases as sources of its information. Although we believe this information to be reliable, it should be verified from other sources prior to taking any legal action.
This Limited Query Response is provided to you for your assistance in obtaining leads and as a basis for further research and/or investigation.
Authorization was received from [xxxx] Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms on XX-XX-91 to disseminate ATF TECS II information in this report.
According to DEA records neither [xxxx] nor [xxxx] have a positive record in DEA files.
WARNING:
The enclosed Financial Database information was collected and disseminated under provisions of the Bank Secrecy Act and U.S. Department of the Treasury
regulations implementing the act. (31 U.S.C. 5311, et seq; 31 CFR Part 103.) The information is sensitive in nature, and is to be treated accordingly. The information may be used only for the purpose stated to Treasury, Customs and/or the IRS when the request was made. The information cannot be further released, disseminated, disclosed or transmitted without prior approval of the Secretary of the Treasury or his authorized delegate. Unauthorized release of such information may result in criminal or civil sanctions.
DATABASES ACCESSED
Attached [to follow next issue] are brief descriptions of the nature and content of each database queried in connection with the case.
Also attached is all positive and negative data retrieved from these databases.
Hack This!
By Konrad Roeder
I would like to relay a story that happened while I was buying a pizza pan at the local Service Merchandise store recently. It seems that the store has installed a signature recording device (made by MicroBilt) that records the customer's signature when buying items on credit.
The particular customer, an intelligent looking east indian fellow, refused to sign his credit card on the pad and raised a big fuss with the saleslady. She tolerated his story at first and then called the manager over.
Little Big Brother Appears!
The manager insisted that the signature pad was necessary to authenticate the large number of credit card transactions that Service Merchandise gets. He
also said it makes it easier to keep track of their paperwork.
The customer repeated that he did not want his signature on file on some
computer and insisted that either he would buy the merchandise using the old credit card method or he would just walk out and buy his color TV elsewhere.
Money Beats Little Big Brother
The manager then made a long distance call to some problem clearing bureau after which he reached down below the cash register where he pulled out the old standby credit card imprint machine. The manager kindly apologized and then helped the man carry his new TV to his car.
What's the Deal?
All of this gets me to thinking. Did this man know something I didn't? Well I can see how you could get concerned when your signature is recorded in some
computer.
Hacker's Delight
Just think, some computer hacker could mailorder some diamond jewelry and ``sign'' the order with a slightly altered form of his ideal computer sample hacked from Service Merchandises' validation computer. Then, the merchandise could be shipped to some far away address where the merchandise is signed for on a similar pad the Federal Express guy carries around with him.
What was once a secure method of authenticating a transaction is about to go by the way of wax seals in the middle ages. Anyone can come along and
digitially forge your handwritten signature. (And, no forensic scientist with the FBI will know the difference). If this happens, you would have to spend the rest of your life paying for the merchandise since ``computers don't lie.''
The moral of the story -- be careful of what you sign -- and on what!
Contact: Internet: kr@cybernet.cse.fau.edu
How to piss off the cable company
By Kevin Gilmore
[Ed Note: I believe the importance of this article is not based on one's like or dislike of the ``cable company,'' but rather the vulnerabilities of
technology.....]
It seems to me that this Impulse Pay Per View is just ripe for causing the cable company serious grief. Here's how.
For systems like sci-atlanta, zenith and pioneer (and probably others) that
use the reverse channel from the cable box back to the cable company to
authorize events, there is a data stream sent from the box around 50 mhz or so. So one way to cause trouble is to transmitt back up the cable line the appropriate frequency at lets say -10dbm one hour before and then 1 hour thru any major PPV event. That way no one can buy the event, Everyone that actually wanted to buy the event gets pissed off, The cable company looses revenue, lots and lots of complaints on the phone.
Better yet is to build a monitoring device plugged into lets say the parallel port of any pc, watch the line for all authorized box numbers, and then start creating new authorization information, using those box numbers lets say every 10 seconds. At then end of the month lots of people get huge PPV bills, lots of pissed off people, Many, Many phone calls to cable company. At least for sci-atlanta systems based on the 8580 or 8590 this is absolutely trivial.
And the phone method that TCI uses can be buggered to. It relys on the fact that caller id tells the TCI computer who you are, and then authorizes you.
You could use the *67 feature to delete your caller id, then build or buy one of the fake caller id generators to generate random numbers... Well you get the idea. Especially if you have some neighbor you hate, and you know his phone number...
Well, its just a thought... With the cable companies giving us lots of channels we do not want, and refusing to give us channels we do want, maybe its time to throw a monkey wrench into their lucrative pay per view revenues.
Contact: Internet: gilmore@casbah.acns.nwu.edu
Reader Feedback
Here's a few of the letters we've received... let us know what you think. Send us those clippings, inside information or other tidbits the world should know about.
Full Disclosure Live!
Dear Glen:
I have recently found your program on shortwave and it is most informative. I seem to have found that I am further behind on techonlogy than I thought. Not its time to get caught up. I am looking forward to your Info Junkie Delight and listening to your broadcast in shortwave.
- CO, Jack, AL
Hello Full Disclosure Live!
I've been listening to your program sunday nites for some time now. Love the information that your program runs across the airwaves, especially about social security numbers! Would your believe I went to rent a movie the other day and they asked me to give my SS#! Of course, I refused. It's getting pretty bad when they ask you for that number just for that purpose!
- GP, Washington, PA
Dear Sirs:
Thanks, I just got the fax number, I regularly listen to your program on
5.810 mhz, it is indeed a very good program and well worth the air time. So, please keep up the excellent transmissions.
A couple of points that I would like to make about the privacy rights, here in Northern Ireland and the whole of the United Kingdom. We are restricted so much here. For example, it is illegal to listen to police, army, fire or even to listen to commercial aircraft, let alone to say that they use certain frequencies to transmit on. So we do not even have the right to listen to radio -- unless we do it their way!
Here in North Ireland, much to the amazement of many we are subject to ``big
brother.'' Yes, if you leave the country you can guarantee it is logged in the system! Maybe you could not care what happens in the rest of the world. The point I am making is that you don't have the live in the third world countries to be subject to suppression, from the power of government control.
- John, Lisburn, Northern Ireland
Gentlemen:
I am a first time listener to your program! Please send me your Info Junkie
Delight -- ASAP, enclosed is $2.00 and $2.90 stamps. Really great show -- boggles the mind when one learns about all this stuff. Can't wait to get your info!
P.S. Pennsylvania is currently trying (demanding) to get everyone's SS# on their drivers' license. We have photo license so this would tie your picture with your SS -- meaning everything about you would be tied together at Pennsylvania Department of Transportation -- I've opted to drive without one!
- SM, Albion, PA
Using Human Body as Power Source for Implantable Transponder
Dear Glen:
The following account is ``anecdotal'' and, therefore not absolute evidence. The account is my true experience and, I believe, points the way to the truth.
In the early 1980's, I was instructed by someone in a communications technology course. This fellow was involved in research and design for a government connected employer. Therefore, he had mucho bucks and plenty of work to do. In retrospect, I can not understand why he would waste his time teaching -- maybe he was a recruiter (Fortune 500, DOD, CIA, DIA)? The course material is unimportant except to the story. It's available in any engineering text on radar.
Two ``encouragements'' were revealed by the instructor. One was given before
the whole class during one of the sessions and one given privately to me. These ``encouragements'' may have been part of his recruit selection operation. I was the top student, the only one to exempt the final exam. This may explain why I was given the second ``encouragement.'' I was not recruited our class was not too creatively minded.
Encouragement #1: How would you (class) design a system to defeat police radar?
Encouragement #2 (to me privately) What do you think about a radio powered by the human body?
My response, rather dull-headed: ``What? Implant it in the mastoid sinus?'' pointing with my finger to a point behind my ear. I recalled a Gregory Peck movie in which this was done. The instructor went along with my point,
indicating that implantation was possible, but immediately returned to the problem of using the body as a power source. I believe I said it should be possible, and commented no further, feeling uncomfortable discussing something I knew nothing about.
Several years later I discovered an article and ordered schematics and info package for a device to over-ride and control the speed display on police radar. it is reasonable to have expected that some of the brighter students could have applied the math, theory and technology of the course material to
design such a system if not the subassemblies. The instructor only asked for a system (block diagram) not a component level schematic.
Since encouragement #1 was ``do-able,'' I assume encouragement #2 was
likewise doable. Since encouragement #1 was evidently already reduced to
working hardware at the time it was presented to us students, I assume
encouragement #2 was working in prototype form also, in the early 1980's.
Radios of a size small enough to implant were horse and buggy technology in the 1980's. They were concealed along with a microphone and battery in Martini Olives in the 1960's.
Encouragement #2 was outside my discipline, electrical engineering, although some of my physics and chemistry I had encountered may have been useful.
I think the instructor was a tormented soul that wanted someone with whom he
could share his exciting experiences at work, but did not want to do prison time for breaching defense technology or DARPA secrets. However, if he encouraged us to use creative thinking and the basics which we already had at our disposal to arrive at solutions on our own or a class, it would be legal. And we would have been recruited -- maybe forcibly.
The information in this account, though limited, indicates that the technology for using the body as a power source for radio implants may have existed in the early 1980's. This supplements the current dialog over implantable and injectable microchips for I.D. and microchip transponders. Transponders, of course, need a power source.
- George Zimmerlee, N4XDC, 89 Rhodes Dr, Marietta, GA 30068.
Losing our Freedom
Hi Glenn:
I am sitting her listening to you talk to the radio host on the Kansas City station (KCMO). You should have told the audiance that you can listen to any radio transmission but cellular, but a big but you can not repeat what you hear. You are going a long ways towards losing us some of our freedoms by only telling part of the story, and getting the politicians intersted in making their dirty dealings even harder to keep track of. Just my opinion. BTW I used to recieve your Full Disclosure magazine on an irregular basis. Apparently my subscription ran out. How much does it cost now a days? I would like to resubscribe.
Please understand I don't disagree with some of your positions I would just hate to end up where I could only listen to PUblic radio ( which seems very similiar to Radio Havana CUba. This only gets us into the same situation as most of the rest of the world. Looking forward to hearing from you.
- ZE, Kansas City, MO
My Chat With the White House
By Glen L. Roberts
August 12, 1994
WH: This is April.
FD: Yes, I was calling to see I could get the title of Wendy Smith.
WH: Can I ask who I am talking to?
FD: I am Glen Roberts with the Full Disclosure News Service.
WH: And I'm just curious what are you look for her title for?
FD: I'd also like to get a phone number where I can reach her at.
WH: I'm not certain that Wendy generally talks to the press. I'm just curious what, for what reason you want to get in touch with her.
FD: I wanted to
WH: I can help you get in touch with her if you want me to.
FD: I wanted to talk to her about some phone calls from Air Force One.
WH: Ok, is there a reason you want to talk to her?
FD: Because --
WH: It's odd, we don't usually get press requests for her, that's all.
FD: Ok, basically she was making phone calls from Air Force One today and they were being monitored by average citizens out there and we wanted to get her comments on, the use of radio telephones from Air Force One and the public listening in.
WH: Ok, and you're from Full Disclosure News Service?
FD: Right.
WH: Is that a publication?
FD: We have a magazine and a radio show.
WH: And, are you in Milwaukee?
FD: No, I am in the Chicago area.
WH: And you were listening to the call?
FD: I have information that she placed calls from Air Force One that were being monitored by the public.
WH: Like a ham radio or something?
FD: Like a police scanner, like something you buy at Radio Shack for $99
WH: Ok. Ok, and you want to talk to her about the substance of the call or you want to talk to her about the
FD: The publicness of the calls and whether she is aware the calls are
monitorable by any of the 12 million people in the U.S. with police scanners and things of that nature.
WH: Ok.
FD: Also, I was interested in what her title was because I just had a name and didn't know what her position was.
WH: Yeah. Um. What was your name?
FD: Glen Roberts
WH: And your phone number?
FD: (708) 838-4478
WH: Ok. Ok and what would you just. What was the conversation you overhead just for my information.
FD: My information is she placed a phone call or two from Air Force One that was broadcast for anyone who wanted to listen in on it.
WH: Ok, and you don't what the substance of the call was or who they to.
FD: I have some notes on that, but I would like to talk to her about it.
WH: Ok, well, I'm trying to help you out, but I am just. I'd like to know what I'm. What's she's gonna have to respond to before I, you know, get in touch with her. I'm sure she's interested.
FD: Well you can pass on it and she can call me back or not. Um, you know, but we like to talk to people and get their views on it and not have somebody telling people what to say.
WH: Ok, I'm not doing that at all.
FD: I don't want somebody to prepare a speech or a --
WH: No. No, I was not even insinuating that. I'm sure she would be interested in who she was talking to, when she talked to you. I was obviously a private phone call so, I don't want her to be totally caught off guard. You know what I mean?
FD: That's really the point of my call. Is it really a private phone call. Are the phones on that plane presented to the users of them as being private phone calls or are they being presented as gee there are 12 million people with police scanners that can tune in.
WH: Right.
FD: Because additionally, New York Mayor Giuliani made calls from Air Force One today.
WH: Um hmm.
FD: I'm not sure if you can put me in contact with him or if I should go
WH: Yeah, if you want to talk to him, you should probably talk to his office.
FD: Right.
WH: Ok, well, I will do my best to get in touch with her. She's obviously on the road right now. Our communication to that site is somewhat limited, because of the, because the trip was obviously not planned. The decision to go wasn't finalized until last night. Our communication was not up to what it normally is for a trip.
FD: And your name is?
WH: My name is April.
FD: Can you give me the direct number there?
WH: Sure, it's 456-2580. Ok, if you don't hear from me, you can call back. But, I will try and get in touch with them. Like I said we don't have phones set up like we normally do on the road. But, I will do my best to reach them.
Subscribe to Full Disclosure Now!
Full Disclosure is the newsletter that keeps you up to date on privacy, surveillance, technology and government. Subscribe today and stay informed. Every issue is sent by First Class Mail in an envelope!:
Subscribe to Full Disclosure for TWENTY FOUR issues and your choice of any one of the following reports is your absolutely free. Just choose your report and include this coupon with your paid subscription to Full Disclosure for twenty four issues.
#100 How to Spy on Anyone Without Getting Caught #101 Your Social Security Number #102 Directory of Elect Surveillance Equipment Suppliers #103 Remote Mind Control Technology #104 Freedom of Information Act Guide
#108 Bust the Bureaucrats #109 FBI Black Bag Jobs #110 The FBI and Your BBS (check only one)
Return this coupon with payment for your twenty four issue subscription: Superior Broadcasting Co., Box 734, Antioch, IL 60002
------------------------------------------------
(This file was found elsewhere on the Internet and uploaded to the
Radio Free Michigan archives by the archive maintainer.
