Should The FBI Regulate Software?

As far as I am concerned, not when the FBI is forever encouraging computer software makers(including Microsoft) to include back doors in their software in order to allow the FBI to easily hack into any Americans computer system without their knowledge or consent. The NSA and CIA have also made similar requests given their penchant for illegally spying on all Americans. Furthermore, when the FBI makes the comment we are only going after criminals -- exactly what does that say for them, when they are breaking the law by computer hacking?

And given the advantage of entering a targeted person's computer system and the FBI's long history of entrapping people, what is to say that this agency wont place their own fabricated evidence on a targeted person's hard drive and then lie about in court? That is a primary reason why they created the Trojan Virus key logger Magic Lantern.

Given the FBI's history of COINTELPRO and perjuring themselves (testa-lying) in court, would you ever trust these agents to be honest when they were going after someone who had not committed any crimes that they could be arrested for? Not if you had a working brain in your head you wouldn't.

Through the US Media, Americans have become conditioned to believe that it is OK for the FBI to break the law as long as they are going after "criminals." We are calmly told to simply accept what the FBI does and to not challenge its authority.

However if one does their own homework and looks into many of the cases of these so called "criminals," they find that most of these people were innocent and entrapped by the FBI while being setup on trumped up charges. Many of these people were also routinely hounded by FBI agents who covertly destroyed their reputations, relationships and finances, while conducting illegal (warrantless) surveillance on them for extended periods of time.

In regard to the FBI's long-term surveillance of Americans, one must ask the following question: what are these agents doing spying on us without a warrant?

And it's clear from much of their spying that the FBI has no problem videotaping myriad Americans within the privacy of their own homes -- where the bedrooms and bathrooms of these people become a focal point of interest for the FEDS.

How do you think this situation would have played out with a beautiful young actress like the late Jean Seberg, whom the FBI was perpetrating absolutely vicious attacks against -- even going so far as accusing Jean of having an affair with a member of the Black Panther Party when she was in fact a happily married woman, and expectant mother?

The FBI even went so far as to say that a member of the Black Panthers was the father of her child. They used the US Media tabloids to perpetrate this act of libel. So would it be too far of a stretch to think that the same FBI that had planted these rumours would not have placed spy cams within the privacy of Jean's home and videotaped her undressing and perhaps even making love, to later use to blackmail her? Then dropped some hints that she had been spied upon in such a way in which to completely mortify her? This type of outright violation would surely drive many people to suicide if they became aware that they had been the target of such perverse and depraved abuse.

After all blackmail is the FBI's stock in trade -- an effective tool for controlling those whom the FEDS can't get under control in any other way. And Jean was tough. With the FBI she gave as good as she got -- until they wore her down like they do nearly all their targets, and she could no longer stand the pain and humiliation that the FBI had ruthlessly subjected her to.

And if you think that the FBI will go easy on a woman, think again, as these sadists love to attack women just as much as they do men.

Jean was just one of many Americans whom the FBI has conducted long-term warrantless spying on. And in most instances those like Jean who were harassed oftentimes to the point of suicide were never arrested for any crimes, because the FBI never found anything to charge them with. Again, this is the type of behavior that we associate with a secret police force -- a KGB, Gestapo or Mossad. The FBI has shown itself to be simply one more of the aforementioned, and has never had a legitimate place here in the United States -- at least certainly not as law enforcement.

Moreover, what the FBI is doing really has far more to do with fraud -- perpetrating criminal conspiracies to deny those whom they are attacking the right to due process of law while covertly destroying their lives. This is the FBI's real MO -- what it has existed for since 1908.

This is a vicious and unconscionable beast that we are talking about here -- an extremely destructive one in which many of its own agents suffer from sexual perversions which they appear to satisfy by spying on the rest of us within the privacy of our own homes.

And any federal agency which abuses its authority in such outrageous ways shouldn't be given any special privileges. Privileges are something that you earn -- they are not guaranteed rights.

You don't give a serial killer better weapons to go out and murder people with.

Yet this is exactly what was done with the FBI after the attacks on 9-11 when this agency -- one with an considerable criminal past -- was given sweeping powers which literally cut the legs right out from underneath the US Constitution. This particular agency is so bad that it should be dissolved altogether, given that its standard operating procedures concern severe and routine violations of the law which they have grown so accustomed to committing, that they appear to no longer even give them a second thought.

Let me be clear on this. The FBI routinely sets people up for murder, either through their organized criminal connections or by using psychological operations to drive those whom they target to suicide. This is not a legitimate police organization and never has been. It is a downright disgrace to legitimate law enforcement, and cause for great shame. A few rotten apples in a barrel is one thing, but with the FBI the entire barrel's rotten. (Sans the few would be whistle blowers too terrified to come forward with what they know).

And given the fact that the FBI is supposed to be the crown jewel of law enforcement here in the United States, its incorrigible behavior is only adding further insult to injury. The physical and emotional suffering that this agency and its employees have inflicted on the American people in the past Century are so enormous that they remain without precedent here in the United States. This modern day secret police force has always functioned like the late Hitler's Gestapo. However, it's been around nearly 10 times as long and done even more damage.

The FBI should really go the way of Hitler's Gestapo. As a country, we would all be better of without it.


Does the FBI have the authority to regulate software?
By Ryan Paul

Several bloggers have recently drawn attention to a publicly available, FCC policy document released in September. The three page document, which discusses assorted broadband regulatory issues, contains some peculiar language that has evoked the ire of many software developers and civil liberties advocates. The language in question seems to imply that our personal software selection is subject to the regulatory discretion of law enforcement agencies (emphasis added):

To encourage broadband deployment and preserve and promote the open and interconnected nature of the public Internet, consumers are entitled to run applications and use services of their choice, subject to the needs of law enforcement.

Although the FCC has not provided any official clarification on the matter, the paragraph is widely interpreted as an attack on software that does not provide law enforcement agencies with a means to spy on citizens. CNET journalist Declan McCullagh addresses the issue in the News.com VOIP blog:

But the clearest reading of the pronouncement is that some unelected bureaucrats at the commission have decreed that Americans don't have the right to use software such as Skype or PGPfone if it doesn't support mandatory back doors for wiretapping.

This doesn't surprise me very much, given the history of the FCC, a government organization accused of censorship and the erosion of consumer rights. The FCC occasionally oversteps its authority for the sake of dubious regulatory pursuits. In a nation where privacy and personal freedom are sacrificed for the "war on terror" and the FBI perpetrates illegal surveillance of law-abiding citizens, is government control of personal software consumption the next logical step? After all, as the trustworthy Alexis de Tocqueville Institute demonstrates in a study funded by Microsoft, open source software contributes to terrorism, and we can't have that, can we? ZDNet blogger David Berlind satirizes the situation:

What do we call this new sort of industry monopoly? FBIsoft? Next thing ya know, they'll pass some law that can land us in jail if we play the songs we purchase on iTunes Music Store using a device that Apple doesn't approve of. Ooops. That law has already been passed too?! (DMCA anyone?)

I would like to know exactly what the FCC means by "subject to the needs of law enforcement." I don't know about you, but I think it is time to fire the FCC.