Often itās the āoh by the wayā stories or sources buried at the end of a news article or report or in the endnotes or hyperlinks of an essay or book that knock you out ā and help you realize that things are even worse than you thought.
A Quiet Change
Take the New Yearsā Eve broadcast of the āPublicā Broadcasting Systemās Newshour. Near the end of her brief opening summary of the dayās news, the Newshourās monotonous newsreaderĀ Gwen Ifill briefly reportedĀ that the United States Commerce Department had āquietly begun allowing US oil companies āto export crude [oil, that is] for the first time in nearly 40 years.ā
As Ifill might have added, US oil companies now have an oil surplus for export because of the environmentally disastrous practice of hydraulic fracturing (fracking).Ā Ā Also unreported in the Newshour summary: the Obama administrationāsĀ move ā a volley against OPEC in the war to control global oil and gas markets ā could well signal an imminent full end to the export ban, which has existed since the OPEC-induced oil shock of the 1970s.Ā Ā This is something that the powerful US oil and gas lobby has been pushing very hard for in recent years.
As āPāBS might have further elaborated but did not, environmental groups last year warned that easing of the ban on crude oil exports would lead to the release of billions of tons of additional carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, significantly escalating the ongoing catastrophe that is anthropogenic global warming. The increased profits garnered from exporting crude oil will incentivize corporations to drill more in the US, leading to significantly increased contamination of the US environment and to more carbon emissions when that oil is burned.
The rollback and repeal of the ban is a recipe for ecological calamity. No small matter, but hardly the stuff of headline news at āPāBS, where the āPā often seems to stand for āPetroleumā given the āpublicā networkās heavy sponsorship by leading oil corporations ā and where chilling reports about what amounts to full-on capitalist ecocide are commonly mentioned in the most nonchalant, secondary, and āoh, by the way, in other newsā kind of way.
āā¦.If We Hear Anythingā
Hereās another example. It came when I clicked on one of theĀ forty-nine hyperlinksĀ inĀ a recent excellentĀ TeleSur EnglishĀ essay ā a hyperlink embedded in the following phrase: āChicago police are apparently spying on the phone conversations of protesters.āĀ Ā Being a native Chicagoan and a cell phone user who has been involved in more than a few protests in that city, I naturally followed theĀ link, which took me to aĀ report in the progressive Chicago-based magazineĀ In These Times.Ā Ā Courtesy of local activists and the online activist group Anonymous, the report contains a smoking gun.Ā Ā It has a transcript of a police radio conversation between a Chicago police officer who was patrolling a Ferguson-related BlackĀ FridayĀ Boycott demonstration and the city police departmentās āfusion centerā last November. The āfusion centerā is an intelligence and surveillance facility (technically named the Crime Prevention and Information Center) that collaborates and coordinates between the Chicago Police Department and the FBI, the federal Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and other agencies. The conversation, captured live by an activist monitoring a city police radio band, went as follows:
Officer: āYeah, one of the girls, she’s kind of an organizer here, sheās been on her phone a lot. You guys picking up any information, uh, where theyāre going, possibly?ā
Crime Prevention and Information Center: āYeah, weāre keeping an eye on it. Weāll let you know if we hear anything.ā
Note how routine the conversation sounds and reads.Ā Ā In the Chicago Police Department, it is no big thing, internally speaking, for the police to listen in on the phone conversations of activists engaged in supposedly constitutionally protected (First Amendment) free speech rights of public assembly and protest. The eavesdropping is an egregious violation of US citizensā purported constitutional protection (Fourth Amendment) against warrantless and āunreasonable searches and seizures.ā
I recommend theĀ In These TimesĀ report (investigative journalism at its best) andĀ a recent short report in theĀ Christian Science MonitorāsĀ online feature āPasscodeāĀ (covering cyber-security and electronic privacy issues)Ā Ā for more details on: the specific technology ā the StingRay (also known as an āISMI catcherā) ā thatĀ Ā allows police to (among other things) listen to track private cell phones (without the knowledge of cell phone companies); how the technology works; the military manufacturer (the Harris Corporation) that sells the technology to US metropolitan police departments; activistsā longstanding suspicion that such technologies have been deployed by local police; the struggle of activists and the ACLU to obtain public information about the eavesdropping; the manufacturerās efforts to protect itself against legal liability for abuse of civil liberties; and the number of police departments who have purchased the snooping technologies with DHS grants handed out in the name of fighting Islamist terrorism afterĀ 9/11/2001.
An Old Problem: From Imperial to Homeland Policing
Hereās how the StingRay/ISMI catcher works: it imitates a cellphone tower, inducing wireless devices in the area to link to it. From there, it accesses various forms of data on a phone, from location to phone and text logs. āIn combination with other devices and software,āĀ In These TimesĀ reports, StingRays āallow real-time listening to cell calls.ā
Itās nothing new. āUntil 2006,ā Passcode reports, āstingrays were used mostly in the war on terrorism. That is when police departments began acquiring them with grants from the US Department of Homeland Security.ā
Yet another post-9/11 example of a problem that US Founder and Bill of Rights champion James Madison warned about way back in 1799: āthe fetters imposed on liberty at home have ever been forged out of the weapons provided for defense against real, pretended, or imaginary dangers from abroad.ā
According to Passcode, reporting data form the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the problem is nationwide: āThe ACLU has identified 47 agencies in 19 statesĀ and the District of ColumbiaĀ that own StingRaysā¦.In Tallahassee, Fla., the ACLU determined through public records requests that police deployed StingRays more than 250 times between 2007 and 2014. It said that the Los Angeles Police DepartmentĀ used StingRays at least 340 times in 2011.Ā In Tacoma, Wash., theĀ News TribuneĀ reportedĀ that police thereĀ used them 179 times between 2009 and 2014.Ā TheĀ Charlotte ObserverĀ recently reported that police officials there used StingRays more than 500 times in a five to seven year span.ā
āThe Government is Not Listening to Your Phone Callsā
This, one might think, should be a leading story on CNN, at theĀ New York Times, and in other leading US āfourth estateā outlets including āPāBS: many metropolitan and state police departments in the self-declared global headquarters freedom and democracy possess and utilize the capacity to directly eavesdrop on activistsā and othersā private cell phone calls.Ā Ā Remember US president Barack Obamaās repeated statements to the American people after the chilling Edward Snowden surveillance revelations of 2013? Again and again, while making no secret of the White Houseās desire to capture and punish Snowden, Obama told āWe the Peopleā that ātheirā government is ānot listening to your phone callsā (it was only collecting supposedly innocuous metadata on calls between US citizens and overseas ābad guysā suspected of terrorist plotting). If you were like me (and many others less informed than an ACLU cyber-security specialist), you responded to that assurance with a shrugging āyeah, right, sureā and let it go, lacking hard evidence to the contrary.Ā Ā Well, hereās your evidence, as clear as day, consistent with many US activistsā longstanding assumption that their calls are monitored by authorities.
Yet more confirmation that we live in a Big Bother police state.
The government is not listening to your phone calls, except when it is.
The Chicago (and national) police eavesdropping story ought to be a headline item, at the top of the major newspaper, network and cable news cycle. Instead itās a small item in a marginal left magazine and in a relatively unknown online feature of theĀ Christian Science Monitor.
In any event, fellow US citizens and workers, beware of the StingRay when you try to organize against escalated exports of eco-cidal US crude oil to China and others destinations on our dying, overheated planet ā or against any other number of evils (including ubiquitous police surveillance) that have come to seem close to banal in the Deep State Superpowerās āhomeland.ā
There is some good news, recently sent me by a cyber-savvy comrade in Madison, Wisconsin: a new cell phone app designed specifically for detecting StingRay cell phone trackers.Ā Ā The app, called āSnoopSnitchers,ā was developed by theĀ German security researchersĀ Alex Senier, Karsten Nohl, and Tobias Engel from SRLabs. You can read more about itĀ here.
Stay as safe as you can fighting back in 2015.
Paul Streetās latest book isĀ They Rule: The 1% v. DemocracyĀ (Paradigm, 2014)
ZNetwork is funded solely through the generosity of its readers.
Donate