A few years ago, an ordinary Canadian woman
received an extraordinary visitor -- a government investigator with a shady
mission. He had come to question her about a recent telephone call.
Apparently, Canada's Communication
Security Establishment (CSE), working covertly with Echelon,
the secret surveillance system established by a partnership between the USA,
Great Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand,[2]
had picked up several
trigger words during her conversation with a friend. Two of the words were
"shot" and "killed." Never mind the innocuous context --
glib clichés such as "he shot himself in the foot" and "I could
have killed him."[3]
The computer system wasn't partial to usage. In the end, her explanation satisfied the
CSE investigator. But
what about the words you and I use in our email and telephone conversations?
Growing systems of
government surveillance.
To bypass domestic laws protecting the privacy of their own citizens, the Echelon
partners have been spying on each other's citizens for years. It's simple. Since U.S. laws
supposedly protect our individual privacy, our
government cannot officially monitor domestic phone lines. But, like England
and its other partners, it can freely spy on the citizens of other
nations. Then it simply shares the coveted information with the
corresponding government. The others return the favor.
Similar secret surveillance systems have
already been established in Western nations as well as in Russia and China. On
the British isles, this digital spy, "may soon be required by the
British government to be connected to the networks of Internet service
providers." It will be "capable of 'sniffing' traffic
between the ISP and citizen's computers, gleaning information upon
demand."[4]
Don't
think it couldn't happen in America. Earlier this week, when President
Clinton announced his campaign for privacy protection, he never mentioned
the FBI's secret spy system, Carnivore. This intrusive surveillance
program continues to wiretap the Internet, hidden from public scrutiny by a
blanket of deceptive White House promises.
True, Janet Reno says she will keep an eye
on Carnivore. "I'm taking a look at it now to make sure that we balance
the rights of all Americans with the technology of today,'' she promised.[5]
But don't clap yet. Many of her
promises have proven every bit as hollow as those spoken by our
president.
Yet,
there is hope. According to an article titled, Big
Brother in the black box,
(link has become obsolete)
"Some ISPs are vowing to resist the FBI's new Carnivore
surveillance system, which has the potential to keep tabs on all of
the communications on an ISP's network." (Emphasis added)
Legalizing the
"black box".
Most people want to keep the government out of their private communications.
Yet, their leaders around the world are determined to move ahead with their
agenda for social control. So, to win public consent for unpopular laws,
they have perfected two totalitarian strategies: crisis management and
propaganda. The two go hand-in-hand. Both need the public media to deceive
and persuade.
The British government argues that vast
Internet surveillance is needed to combat "sophisticated modern
crime" such as pedophilia, drug smuggling, and terrorism.
"The powers in the bill are necessary and proportionate to the threat
posed by 21st century criminals," says Charles Clarke, the Home Office
official in charge of the controversial bill.
The public, bombarded with scary media
messages, feels the problem and wants a solution. But while the government's
answers may calm the crisis, it also strengthens the arm of the government
and creates new and larger threats to freedom. Consider the dangers hidden
in the solution to this particular problem. If passed, the measure, titled
Regulation of Investigatory Powers Bill, would:
-
"give
the authorities here broad powers to intercept and decode e-mail
messages and other communications between companies, organizations and
individual."
-
"be
able to require anyone using the Internet to turn over the keys to
decoding e-mail messages and other data."
-
"give
the government new powers to require Internet service providers to
install 'black box' surveillance systems... controlled by the domestic
security service, M.I.5."
-
"require
companies to install and maintain the 'black boxes' at their own expense
and according to technological specifications set out by the government."
-
allow
"mass surveillance of Internet activities without judicial warrant
or adequate oversight."[6]
The
new law, which is expected to pass,
would allow the British government "to tap into and monitor electronic communications
for a host of reasons." The New York Times mentions three:
-
"to
protect national security"
-
"to
safeguard the country's well-being"
-
"to
prevent and detect serious crime"[7]
Threatening our
freedom. The
hidden dangers in this system cannot be fully understood unless we look at
the comprehensive meaning of "national security" and
"well-being" -- the first and second points listed above. In
today's global context, well-being points to "mental
health" and "solidarity." Human resources as well as
communities around the world will be "assessed" based on their
lack of conflict, willingness to conform, and participation in politically
correct consensus groups and community service. (See The UN Plan for Your Mental Health)
In the same vein, UN references to
"national security" or "public order" refers to the
absence of dissent or conflict. These words and phrases echo through the
texts of human rights treaties. (See Trading U.S.
Rights for UN Rules) Their vision is solidarity and their mission is to
create utopian community oneness based on shared values defined by globalist
leaders. To them, anything less than social solidarity in every community
could stir conflict and incite violence. In this context, dissenters become
foes; facts or beliefs that clash with its vision of unity become threats to
peace; and the uncompromising truths of biblical Christianity become
intolerable, even dangerous to public safety.
These "human rights" restrictions
are already filtering into American culture with the consent of a nation
persuaded that we indeed face a crisis in values. But the government
solution doesn't fix the problem; it only uses the problem to manipulate
public opinion. For example, any Christian website that promotes biblical
standards for right and wrong could be targeted for censorship by Cyber
Patrol, the world's most powerful Internet thought police. Owned by The
Learning Company, America's "premier developer of educational
software," it has formed some powerful "partners"
around the world. These include AOL, AT&T, Bell Atlantic, CompuServe,
IBM, Microsoft, Netscape, Scholastic Network, and others. Its website
shows the categories in its CyberNOT
Block List, a list of offenses that determines which websites should
be screened to protect schools and families that buy their service. These
dangers include Violence/Profanity, Nudity, Sexual Acts, Intolerance,
Satanic/Cult, Drugs, and Militant/Extremist.
Notice "Intolerance" amidst the
more obvious threats. CyberPatrol warns us that "any picture or text
that elevates one group over another" would be considered intolerant.
Their filters now "protect" children and schools across the
country from visiting American Family Association and other Christian
websites simply because they present God-given warnings and view Christian
truth and lifestyles as superior to pagan alternatives.
An international "Declaration
on Principles of Tolerance," prepared by UNESCO and signed by
its member nations, defines the new global standard for right and wrong.
Notice that all nations would be responsible for fulfilling this
international contract through "analysis
of root causes and effective countermeasures, as well as research and
monitoring...."
Though the U.S. didn't sign this
anti-Christian Declaration, our leaders are fueling the transformation.
Consider how these UNESCO's decrees would undermine our Bill of Rights:
-
"Tolerance
is respect, acceptance and appreciation of the rich diversity of our
world's cultures. It is not only a moral duty, it is also a
political and legal requirement."
-
"Tolerance
involves the rejection of dogmatism and absolutism."
-
"Tolerance...
means that one's views are not to be imposed on others."
-
"Intolerance...
is a global threat."
-
"Scientific
studies and networking should be undertaken to coordinate the
international community's response to this global challenge, including
analysis of root causes and effective countermeasures, as well as
research and monitoring... "
-
"Tolerance
promotion and the shaping of attitudes of openness, mutual listening and
solidarity should take place in schools and universities, and through
non-formal education... at home and in the workplace."
-
"Promote
rational tolerance teaching methods that will address the cultural,
social, economic, political and religious sources of intolerance-- major
roots of violence and exclusion."
We are facing a second American revolution.
This time, its leaders aim to reverse everything that made America sovereign
and free. In their new world order, constitutional rights and Biblical
absolutes would be considered obsolete, dangerous and divisive -- even
prohibited in many instances. Every human resource would be pressured to
conform and monitored for compliance.
Those who expose the strategies behind this
re-invention of our government, nation and world will be watched,
inconvenienced and eventually silenced. (See The Enemy Of The
People and A Terrorist? Me?) It has happened
before. When America forgot the lessons of history, it opened the door to
the downward slide that brings oppression and tyranny.
It's time to take a stand. Let's pray for
God's mercy, remember the warnings of our founding fathers, and fight the
battle of faith for the freedom they won for us because they loved truth and
liberty more than their own lives.
_____________________________________________________________________
For more information, read the first four
footnotes below and A National Information
Systesm: Executive Order #13011.
__________________________________________________________________
[1Sarah
Lyall, "British
Authorities May Get Wide Power to Decode E-Mail", New York Times
International, July 19, 2000.
[2]
According to the CSE website,
Canada's Communications Security Establishment, which corresponds to the
U.S. National Security Agency, works
together with the other four Echelon partners:
"Strictly speaking, CSE is only part of Canada's
SIGINT effort. A civilian agency of the Department of National Defence,
CSE processes SIGINT, produces analyses, and disseminates reports to
Canadian and allied consumer agencies. The actual collection of the SIGINT,
however, is conducted by the Canadian Forces Supplementary Radio System
(SRS), a component of the Canadian Armed Forces that operates under the
direction of CSE.
"CSE and the SRS in turn work in close co-operation
with the giant American and British SIGINT agencies, the National Security
Agency (NSA) and Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ),
Australia's Defence Signals Directorate (DSD), New Zealand's Government
Communications Security Bureau (GCSB), and a number of other SIGINT
agencies in a global intelligence alliance known informally as the UKUSA
community. CSE maintains permanent liaison
officers at NSA HQ at Fort Meade, Maryland (CANSLO/W) and GCHQ in
Cheltenham, UK (CANSLO/L)."
[3]This
privacy-invasion happened in a small Canadian town. A concerned
Canadian Member of Parliament (who prefers not to reveal his name for
obvious reasons) reported the incident to Carl Teichrib, a respected Canadian researcher who relayed the story to
Berit. To learn more about human resource management in Canada, read Carl Teichrib's report:
A
New World Agenda: Canada's Role in Sustainable Development.
[4]
From Big
Brother in the black box. For more information, see Technology
of FBI's 'Carnivore' still a mystery
[5] From FBI's
Carnivore under surveillance.
[6] Lyall,
see [1]
[7]
Ibid.
Email this page