Important: A Patriot Act research request (read between lines)

[BevHarris]

I was told by Alex Jones today that there is an ACLU lawsuit about improperly grabbing evidence under the auspices of the Patriot Act, and when the ACLU filed the suit, they were then threatened with criminal penalties if they revealed the fact that they had filed the suit, or anything about the suit. The ACLU was informed that they would be prosecuted under the Patriot Act if they revealed that they were claiming misuse of the Patriot Act in their lawsuit.

Is that an accurate description of that situation? As I understand it, the fact that the ACLU has this suit, and has this threat of criminal prosecution if they say a word about their lawsuit, was leaked. That's the only reason we know. Now, you can't believe everything you hear. I don't know if this situation is even for real, but need to know immediately, along with all the details possible, if it is.

I need to know as much as possible about about the legal ability to shut people up, especially, journalists.

I would also like to get tips about this VoteHere hack. If it turns out to be contrived in order to go fishing on Diebold, we've got and effort to shut up a journalist through concocted evidence, using the Patriot Act.

Tell me everything you know about Jim Adler. Email me privately, [e-mail]. I'm interested in anyone who has seen him, when, and who he was with. I especially want to know anything about his cash flow situations over the past 12 months, both personal and company.

What was the date that Admiral Bill Owens bowed out of VoteHere? What new board members have been installed?

And Andy Stephenson, watch your back. You are going into the belly of the VoteHere beast when you challenge the Washington State Secretary of State.

Chairman of VoteHere: Ralph Munro, former Washington S.O.S.

Assistant state elections director in Washington: Pam Floyd -- she had previously been with VoteHere for three years. Handled the ill-fated Pentagon "SERVE" project for Washington, thought it was the best thing since sliced bread.

Current Washington S.O.S. Sam Reed: the protege of, and former assistant S.O.S. for, Ralph Munro.

Bev

[lectrobyte]

1. It's Alex Jones

I'd have more faith in it if I didn't remember years of his show on Austin Access TV talking about the black helicopters and secret code numbers on the back of road signs directing the NWO troops to round up gun owners. That's not to say that this might be true though.

[RBHam]

27. You, sir, are ignorant

If you've ever even VAGUELY researched Mr. Jone's work you'd be praising his heroic efforts.

The New World Order is upon us, at our throats, and knee jerk judgementalists like you are their greatest allies.

[John_H]

28. LOL! Chuck Harter for Preznit!!!

[Southpaw Bookworm]

2. I believe I heard this story reported yesterday

Can't remember where though. But indeed, this is an accurate representation of what I heard. ACLU had to negotiate with Justice in order to be able to even announce that they had filed the suit.

:scared:

[NMDemDist2]

3. Bev, Democracy Now! did a piece on the ACLU suit

yesterday Here is the "headline"

"Anti-Patriot Act Lawsuit Sealed By Gov't
The American Civil Liberties Union revealed Wednesday that it had filed a lawsuit three weeks ago to challenge aspects of the Patriot Act but the group has been barred from releasing the text of the lawsuit because the government claims it would violate secrecy provisions of the Patriot Act. The ACLU's associate legal director Ann Beeson said, "It is remarkable that a gag provision in the Patriot Act kept the public in the dark about the mere fact that a constitutional challenge had been filed in court. President Bush can talk about extending the life of the Patriot Act, but the ACLU is still gagged from discussing details of our challenge to it." The ACLU is challenging a provision in the Patriot Act that gives the FBI power to request financial records and other documents from businesses without a warrant or judicial approval. The ACLU released a redacted version of the lawsuit Wednesday. The full lawsuit remains under seal."

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/04/29/1513208&mode=thread&tid=25

Hope that helps you keep up your excellent work. Thanks for all you do!

edit spelling

[RedEagle]

7. How could a lawsuit violate secrecy of the Act?

I mean, isn't the Act a matter of record? What would be secret about what the Act said?

[NMDemDist2]

8. well therein lies the rub i fear eom

[bain_sidhe]

4. The PATRIOT act has a provision that

the organization that the feds request info from can't tell the people who they requested info ON that the feds have requested information on them. So I *think* the deal with the ACLU lawsuit is that, if they made it public, it would be the same as telling that the feds had requested info.

Here's the ACLU's press release about it:

http://www.aclu.org/SafeandFree/SafeandFree.cfm?ID=15555&c=262

(note to moderators, I'm assuming because it's a press release that it can be reprinted in its entirety... that's the POINT of a press release, right?)

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

NEW YORK – The American Civil Liberties Union and New York Civil Liberties Union today disclosed documents in an extraordinary sealed case in federal court involving the Patriot Act’s expanded “National Security Letter” power. The ACLU lawsuit challenges the constitutionality of a provision that allows the Federal Bureau of Investigation to demand sensitive customer records from businesses without judicial oversight.

The ACLU said it was forced to file the lawsuit about the National Security Letter power under seal to avoid penalties for violating a strict gag provision, which it is also challenging on First Amendment grounds. The case was filed in the Southern District of New York on April 6.

It took nearly three weeks to reach an agreement with the government that allowed the ACLU to disclose anything about the case without fear of penalty. Certain details about the lawsuit remain under seal.

“The National Security Letter provision allows the FBI to demand the sensitive records of innocent people in complete secrecy, without ever appearing before a federal judge,” said Jameel Jaffer, an ACLU staff attorney.

“Before the Patriot Act, the FBI could use this invasive authority only against suspected terrorists and spies,” Jaffer said. “Now it can issue National Security Letters to obtain information about anyone at all. This should be disturbing to all of us.”

The fact that the government agreed only under pressure to allow disclosure of parts of the legal complaint, the ACLU said, demonstrates that the gag order is unnecessarily broad and restrictive.

“It is remarkable that a gag provision in the Patriot Act kept the public in the dark about the mere fact that a constitutional challenge had been filed in court,” said Ann Beeson, ACLU Associate Legal Director. “President Bush can talk about extending the life of the Patriot Act, but the ACLU is still gagged from discussing details of our challenge to it.”

In legal papers, the ACLU argues that the National Security Letter provision violates the First and Fourth Amendments because it authorizes the FBI to force disclosure of sensitive information without adequate safeguards. The FBI can issue a National Security Letter without obtaining prior judicial approval, without demonstrating a compelling need to justify the disclosure, and without specifying any mechanism that would allow a recipient to contest the demand.

The lack of such safeguards, the ACLU said, allows the government to unmask anonymous speakers, violating a tradition of anonymous speech that goes back to the Federalist Papers. Protecting this right is especially critical given the large number of Internet users who use pseudonyms to engage in legitimate political speech.

The ACLU first obtained information about the use of National Security Letters last March through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit. Information about that lawsuit, including some of the records the ACLU obtained from the FBI, are posted at www.aclu.org/patriotfoia.

The ACLU has led opposition to controversial portions of the Patriot Act, filing a challenge to Section 215, another provision that allows the FBI to gain access to sensitive records, and filing briefs before the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to oppose expanded wiretaps. With support from a broad right-left coalition, the ACLU has also encouraged passage of approximately 300 local resolutions against anti-civil liberties portions of the law, and has urged Congress to leave in place the “sunsets” for Patriot Act provisions set to expire in 2005.

The defendants in the NSL lawsuit include Attorney General John Ashcroft and FBI Director Robert Mueller. The case is assigned to Judge Victor Marrero.

A special feature about the case, including the redacted complaint, is online at http://www.aclu.org/nsl.

Attorneys in the case are Jaffer, Beeson and Sharon McGowan of the ACLU, and Arthur Eisenberg of the New York Civil Liberties Union.

[drfemoe]

5. google news

http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&edition=us&ie=ascii&newsclusterurl=http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/04/04/29/204201.shtml%3Ftid%3D103%26tid%3D99

=

http://tinyurl.com/3xq7h

also: http://www.aclu.org

[Andy_Stephenson]

6. Kick

:kick:

[RedEagle]

9. First Amendment

Used to protect journalists, did it not?

Is Novak under heat for his leak? That was a national security issue, was it not?

[slaveplanet]

10. refeed (night owlers)

http://sce.m2ktalk.com:8010/listen.pls

of show in question....interview starts in 5min

[ParanoidPat]

11. Bev, you're a law abiding citizen, tell us yes or no......

.....if you were served with a warrant under the misnamed "Patriot Act" and were asked to turn over the server logs and contact information of all of your members, would you obey the law? :evilgrin:
(Read between the lines! :) )

(This is for Mr. Mike, you should consider signing up here and using this forum as a research tool for your investigations. We have some awesome researchers here! I know you guys are a little understaffed and have budget problems and all. Just a thought. Have a good weekend! :hi: )

On Edit: Added link to H.R.3162 - the USA PATRIOT Act.

[Andy_Stephenson]

12. Remember the chicken boners...

and the moral of that fair feathered story.

[ParanoidPat]

14. How could I ever forget chicken boners? Now back to VoteHere.....

.....For those of you who missed the VoteHere part of the BBV story, here's a little 'background' information about the company. First a couple of links to their original story about the alleged "hack". A CBS VoteHere "hack" story and a Seattle PI.com "hack" story

Notice that they claim to know who he is and where he lives! You would think they would have picked him up by now. :shrug:

Here's a New Scientist VoteHere code release story where Jim asks for the world to let him know what we think of his product. :)

Since he asked for it I've included some contact information so the world can let him know! :hi:

Jim Adler
President & CEO
VoteHere, Inc.
Pacific Plaza
155 108th Ave NE
Suite 425 Bellevue, Washington, 98004
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-Mail: [e-mail]
Web Blog: http://www.votehere.net/blog.html
General Information:
Business Address:
3101 Northup Way, Suite 250
Bellevue, Washington, 98004-1449
Phone: [phone]
Toll Free: 1 888 457 6863
Fax: [phone]
E-Mail: [e-mail]
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Http://www.votehere.net

Here's some basic info about the company.....

President and CEO: Jim Adler
Chief Scientist: C. Andrew Neff, Ph.D
VP, Gov Affairs: Deborah Brunton
VP, Bus Devand Marketing: Victor Woodward
VP, IT and Operations: Scott Axworthy
VP, Human Resources: Susan Webber, Ph.D
VP, Finance/Operations: Glenn Sumida
Dir, Prod Development: Eric A. Peterson
Election Operations Manager: Pam Floyd
VoteHere.net's Board of Directors includes:
Ralph Munro, former Secretary of State of Washington State
Richard L. Green, Chairman
Jim Adler, President and CEO
Harvey N. Gillis
David Bullis
Tom Simpson
Staff Size: n/a
Investors: In Nov. 2000, the company announced $10 million in financing from a group of investors, including Compaq Computer, Cisco Systems and Northwest Venture Associates. $1.5 million in seed financing was obtained back in October 1999.Total financing in the company now stands at about $17 million.
Revenue (past 12 months): n/a
Customers: VoteHere.net is leading the industry and nation in conducting secure internet elections.
A few elections they have handled:
Maricopa County, Arizona - Presidential Election Online Voting Trial
Sacramento, California - Presidential Election Online Voting Trial
San Diego, California - Presidential Election Online Voting Trial
Cornell University Election
Boeing SPEEA contract vote
Presidential Preference Primary
KSU Student Governing Association Election
Virtual Vote 2000 Presidential Primary
Alaska Republican Straw Poll
Iowa ISPAC
Iowa Municipal Election

And last but not least, a couple of E-Mail archives for you researchers to slog through to see what he's been doing and with whom.....

Caltech E-Mail Archive
IEEE E-Mail Archive

Happy hunting! :evilgrin: (See what I mean Mike? We can be a lot of help if you just let us! No warrant required! Just ask. :) )

[RedEagle]

18. Not Direct, But Relevant

I borrowed this from Bigtree's post (Thanks Bigtree!)-


Cheney's chief of staff, Lewis "Scooter" Libby pegged as Plame name leaker

Edited on Sat May-01-04 03:19 AM by bigtree
Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, has been pegged as a possible leaker of the name of CIA operative Valerie Plame to a syndicated columnist, according to a new book by former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, Plame's husband.

http://www.ksat.com/news/3253566/detail.html

______________________________________________

I. Lewis Libby, Vice President Cheney's Chief of Staff and Assistant to the Vice President for National Security Affairs was a Northrup-Grumman consultant. Libby served on the advisory Board for RAND Corporation's Center for Russian and Eurasian Studies. He was managing partner of Washington office of international law firm Dechert, Price and Rhoads. He also served in the Department of Defense under Pres. George H.W. Bush.


Here's a Northrup-Grumman relationship to Cheney. Northrup-Grumman is one of the defense contractors behind the Election Task Force (?), the lobby group that pushed the HAVA Act through.

Although Pat's list on VoteHere people does not include Admiral Bill Owens and former CIA Robert Gates (old information/new information?, these people were/are involved in VoteHere, and Owens would have the defense industry ties, in addition to the SAIC ties.

Note that Harris Miller, of the ITAA meeting fame, is doing PR about the California efforts. Miller is a direct link to the Election Task Force. The non-paper companies formed a group with the ITAA to "market" DRE's and "change public perception." It's been said that VoteHere was busy in DC lobbying at the same time for HAVA, maybe with this group.

We know that Senator Ensign of Nevada had submitted an amendment that probably would have mandated the paper ballots. But between the morning when MITCHELL of Kentucky (one of the HAVA authors and against paper) read it on the floor and it was voted on in the afternoon, the teeth had been knocked out of it.

Keep in mind what Wilson said on Dateline last night. This administration never admits or corrects a mistake, they just go after the people who outed them.

The problem with BBV, is it's a grass roots movement. PEOPLE protecting democracy. It's our country, our vote. It's not the purview of defense contractors or anyone else to tell us how the voting system will work. Voting is to be done in the light of day, in a way everyone can participate. Voting should never be consolidated. Democracy works because it is de-centralized, not centralized. The efforts to centralize voter registration is anti-democratic. They want to eliminate paper records there, too. It is because of the very cumbersome way that democracy works, that helps protect it.

HAVA was written with alarm bells about VOTER fraud. It's very condusive to INSIDER fraud. Voter fraud can't happen on a large scale. It's not great but it's not even a speck on the amount of fraud that can happen on the inside. Consolidation and centralization are all friends of INSIDER FRAUD.

Going back to Florida, the media frenzy was directed towards chads. Dan Spillane has pointed out that machines that produced chads should never have been certified in Florida in the first place. But the real culprit was probably where you were not supposed to look, in the optical scan, as Greg Palast has found and the 16,022 negative votes shows. LOOK HERE NOT THERE.

But they couldn't rely on those methods the next time around because more areas would be inclined to do some hand counting. So, feed the perception that we need new whiz bangs to vote on and, voila, DRE's. While they were at it, they used portions of the disabled community to push them through. (Someone in NC, I think, had filed a case against the NFB and Diebold over their ATM's. Diebold had not made them as accessible as needed and ended up contributing to the NFB and still do, I believe. Sequoia helped fund "studies" that were cited in the Weber case in California) Congress is stampeded, again, and HAVA is born- a disaster for voters but a blessing for corporate entities. All that messy paper and PROOF done away with, under the auspices of, "We don't want to be Florida."

State and local entities lose more control of their election process. Seems to me that's kind of anti-Republican, too, besides anti-Democrat. This is kind of tricky. You can't leave all the states to their own devices or you have voter disenfranchisement in some places, yet, it's obvious there must be some federal standards to insure that states cannot deprive voters of the right to vote.

So where are our representatives on this? Both parties should be up in arms.

Well, that got kind of long! Apologies.

By the way, there are some lawyers working hard for voting freedom. Contributions to blackboxvoting.org not only help Bev in helping us,
but also help to try and cover some of their out-of-own-pocket expenses. It's the least we can do for true defendors of freedom.

[RedEagle]

19. Why Bev and not Adler?

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1423658,00.asp


"Chief executive Jim Adler said VoteHere was confident IT KNEW THE IDENTITY OF ITS HACKER AND HAD ALREADY TURNED OVER "MEGABYTES OF EVIDENCE" to the FBI and Secret Service. It also repaired the hole in its computer network the intruder used to gain entry in October over the Internet, he said.

U.S. authorities confirmed the investigation but declined to comment further."

(HERE'S THE 'SET UP')-

"Adler would not identify the company's chief suspect but said he thinks the person was linked to the debate over the security of electronic voting. The same individual may be tied to the theft in March of internal documents from Diebold Election Systems of Canton, Ohio."

(Look up "spoofing", especially as it relates to the Internet or radar or.....)

"WE CAUGHT THE INTRUDER, IDENTIFIED HIM BY NAME. WE KNOW WHERE HE LIVES," Adler said. "We think this is political. There have been break-ins around election companies over the last several months, and we think this is related."

(What break-ins? The Diebold files were on an open, unprotected FTP site. No break in. Adler should be specific about the other 'alleged' break ins. Even the "Jaguar-pulls-a-Diebold and leaves Sequoia's code out in the open for all" hadn't happened yet, and that's not a break in)

"VoteHere, which is privately held, disclosed the federal investigation to stress that the break-in did not affect the integrity of its voting technology, Adler said. The company also wanted to pre-empt any criticisms of electronic voting based on public disclosures of its internal records."

(Pre-empt criticism of electronic voting- how can anyone criticize? Those allegedly pilfered records have not shown up anywhere. And if they had the guy nabbed, they darn well had the ability to watch and see where the records went, now didn't they?)

"I have no problem debating the merits of electronic voting with anyone, but breaking and entering is not an appropriate forum for technology debate," Adler said."

(None of the information obtained about voting companies has come from breaking and entering. It's all been hanging out on the laundry line for all to see, or leaked by an insider with a conscience and some true patriotism left. Insider leaks happen all the time. The press has been using them for years, mostly to the benefit of the citizens of this country)

"Adler said the intruder accessed internal corporate documents and may have copied sensitive "source code," blueprints for software. But Adler said VoteHere planned eventually to reveal that source code, which is protected under patents, for review by outside security researchers.

"Given the political sensitivity to this issue, we felt it was important to get out on this," Adler said."

(Gee Jim, I don't think anyone would have been the wiser if you hadn't blabbed. I mean, it has the appearance of honesty on your part and all, but you have to turn around and try to link an alleged hack to a leak that involves another company. (I'm sure you know the difference between the two and that a leak would in no way involve the abilities a hack implies) Why is this 'politically sensitive?' Your stuff isn't in any voting system yet. What's the danger, if it's so darn good, of a hacker getting it anyway? But no, you have to make accusations against the advocates for honest, clean, accountable voting. What have you got to fear from people who are only trying to secure democracy for the future of our children?

Let's see, Bill Owens, Cheney; Wally O'Dell, Cheney.... Maybe VoteHere isn't so far removed from Diebold at all)

[RedEagle]

20. Geeezzz....Owens is tied to Titan too

Again borrowed from another post:

"Titan Stockholders Invest in Permanent War


VOTE NO ON MERGER... Here are my reasons for
voting no.

Titan is now profitable and has significant sales and significant backlog of orders. . They are further reducing expenses, and they are a clearly established succcessful contractor in an important area of our nation's defense."

(I was trolling aroung looking up stuff on Bill Owens last night, and he's involved with Titan too!
Just what is the defense contractors interest in our elections again?)

[BevHarris]

29. Operations Manager: Pam Floyd - Here's where she is now:

She is the assistant state elections director for Washington State and was in charge of the SERVE Internet voting project.

[Room101]

13. Kick -nt

.

[Timefortruth]

15. kick nt

[ParanoidPat]

16. Limerick Kick.....There once was a company named VoteHere...

.....My feelings for which I can't quote here
They count votes out of sight
Not out in the light
our concerns they dismiss like we're dopes here.

O.K., Sorry! :evilfrown:

:kick:

[ParanoidPat]

17. How about a Haiku kick.....

Words fall on deaf ears
Sinking like the winter sun
VoteHere's chance to shine :)

:kick:

[RedEagle]

21. Kick!

Research, research...

[ParanoidPat]

22. Kick!

OK! OK! :crazy:

[RedEagle]

24. Ooops, Sorry Pat

You're one person who definitely doesn't need to be coached to do a little looking around!

I was implying that people should get busy finding out about Mr. Adler and VoteHere and connections, connections, connections.

:loveya:

[ParanoidPat]

25. It just as well, and a damn good thing you stopped me......

.....If you hadn't kicked this my next :kick: would have been a song, and Jebus, NOBODY wants THAT! :evilgrin:

[loudsue]

23. The closer we look, the dirtier it gets....

Holy cow....these guys couldn't be more obvious in their attempts to control our votes.

And that's the point: Don't they know that it's OBVIOUS that they are trying to control the voting machines AND the votes???

And where in the hell are our so-called "representatives"??????

Answer: In bed with the perps.

:kick:

[Joanne98]

26. kick

[RedEagle]

30. Kick!

[RedEagle]

31. Kick!