CIA Refuses to Confirm or Deny Drone Attacks Obama Brags About

Armed MQ-9 Reaper drones like this one are used by both the US military and the CIA. Photo: USAF

The Central Intelligence Agency continues to refuse to confirm or deny the covert military use of drones to kill suspected terrorists overseas, despite President Barack Obama’s and even a former CIA director’s admission of the agency’s targeted killing program.

Despite numerous public comments on the CIA’s drone attacks in far-flung locales such as Yemen from various government officials, including former CIA Director Leon Panetta and President Obama, the CIA is taking the position in court that it would have to eliminate you with one of its drones if it acknowledged the program.

So on Wednesday, the American Civil Liberties Union asked a federal appeals court to expedite a hearing (.pdf) on its Freedom of Information Act request seeking details of the drone program. Hours later, the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit set a September 20 oral argument. (.pdf)

The development comes as 26 members of Congress asked Obama, in a letter, to consider the consequences of drone killing and to explain the necessity of the program. The use of drones to shoot missiles from afar at vehicles and buildings that the nation’s intelligence agencies believe are being used by suspected terrorists began under the Bush administration and was widened by Obama to allow the targeting of American citizens. Drone strikes by the Pentagon and the CIA have sparked backlashes from foreign governments and populations, as the strikes often kill civilians, including women and children.
Continue Reading “CIA Refuses to Confirm or Deny Drone Attacks Obama Brags About” »

Sweden Will Imprison Assange When Extradited

Julian Assange will be imprisoned after he is handed over to Swedish authorities when he is extradited and will have a court hearing four days after extradition from the United Kingdom to decide if he will stay in custody, the Swedish government announced Friday.

Earlier this week, the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom decided not to reopen Assange’s appeal and upheld the decision that the WikiLeaks founder should be extradited to face sex crime proceedings in Sweden.

The UK Supreme Court has ordered that Assange won’t be handed over to the Swedes until June 28. After that date Assange will be brought to Sweden within 10 days, according to European Arrest Warrant rules, Sweden’s Office of Public Prosecutions said.

Within four days of his arrival in Sweden, a court hearing will decide whether or not Assange should be remanded in custody for questioning by prosecution. Any decision by court can be appealed, according to the Swedish prosecutors.

Assange will be brought to Sweden by the country’s Department of Corrections, which will also take him into custody. Since Assange is considered to be a flight risk, he will be kept in prison while waiting for the remand hearing.

However, the Prosecutor’s Office says Assange won’t be kept in isolation and will be able to watch TV, read newspapers and associate with other inmates.

Since December 2010, Julian Assange has been under house arrest in Britain while appealing decisions by UK courts to extradite him to Sweden. He fears Sweden will hand him over to the United States, where he may face a secret indictment on charges of espionage because of WikiLeaks publishing confidential State Department cables.

Swedish authorities have arrested Assange in his absence on suspicion of unlawful coercion, two counts of probable sexual molestation, rape and other lesser crimes against two women. Assange says the encounters were consensual.

Director of Public Prosecutions Marianne Ny will be in charge of Assange’s questioning when he arrives in Sweden. No further information will be given by her office so as not to disturb the investigation or hurt people affected by it, officials said.

FBI Ordered to Copy 150 Terabytes of Data Seized From Megaupload

The US government has been ordered by a New Zealand High Court judge to immediately prepare to copy the 150 terabytes worth of data held on Megaupload servers seized by the FBI in order to turn it over to indicted founder Kim Dotcom.

Justice Winkelmann’s order doesn’t necessarily mean that the data will be handed over to Dotcom and his associates, however, as this is subject to further legal wrangling in a later two-day hearing.

An earlier order by Judge David Harvey gave the United States 21 days to provide Dotcom’s New Zealand legal team with information relevant to the extradition case it holds, including e-mails and bank account details.

Much of the data was seized in January from 130 computers and storage devices captured in the dawn raid on Dotcom’s house in Coatesville, north of Auckland. Though the New Zealand court ordered that the items not leave the country until non-relevant portions were returned, the FBI made a copy of the data and FedExed it out of the country, arguing afterward that the copying was permitted.

NZ Crown lawyers acting for the United States are resisting the order and have applied for a judicial review of it on the grounds that the District Court could not make such a ruling under the country’s Extradition Act. The US government has also said it is not able to disclose all the information ordered within 21 days.

Included in the 150 terabytes of data are over 10 million intercepted emails and “voluminous financial records” that were obtained from different countries, not just the data seized from Dotcom’s house.

According to an affidavit by FBI agent Michael Postin, copying just 29 terabytes had taken the agency 10 days. Postin said that copying all the data could take two and a half months. Even then, some of the data could not be copied as it is encrypted, Postin stated.

Dismissing the FBI’s arguments, Justice Winkelmann nevertheless ordered the US authorities to start making copies of the information, as she says they have “ample means to do the work” and that expense to do so must be dwarfed by the other costs of an investigative and prosecutorial operation like this.

If Dotcom were extradited to the United States, the copying work won’t have been a waste of time, Justice Winkelmann added.

Earlier this week, the US Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Neil MacBride, filed papers asking for Dotcom’s request to dismiss criminal copyright be denied.

MacBride says the plea to drop the charges is a waste of court time and resources, and premature.

.WTF? — 20 New Top-Level Domain Names That Should Exist, But Never Will

Photo: schoshie/Flickr

On Tuesday, the list of new proposed top-level domains, and the companies seeking to control them, was published by ICANN.

The new contenders to the throne of .com’s dominance include Amazon with .book, Google with .youtube, and three companies seeking .sucks. There are also applications for .lol, .bar, and .beer.

While the list is interesting to read, it’s lacking in entertainment value — perhaps because the $185,000 fee to apply for consideration, which you pay even if your application is rejected, is prohibitive of amusement.

So with some help from Wired colleagues and Twitter friends, I’ve compiled a list of domain names that should exist, but never will. Most wouldn’t pass muster for technical or policy reasons. But since this is a wish list, I’ll propose them anyway, in the hope that a vast army of .keyboardcommandos can manifest them.

In no particular order, the list:

  • .inbed – As the old fortune cookie joke goes, everything sounds better with .inbed in the end. cuddlybear.inbed; miketyson.inbed (Noah Shachtman)
  • .pwned – The top-level domain that pays hackers to own a .com domain and redirect it to .pwned (Ashkan Soltani)
  • .|≠£ß∫ – A domain suffix so painfully difficult to type, it would only be appropriate for hardcore masochism-fetish sites. (Jon Phillips)
  • .wtf? – skinnyjeansandbigphones.wtf? Need we say more? (Shoshana Berger)
  • .not – Simple but effective, for the contrarian in all of us. iloveyou.not gododgers.not (Ken Denmead, Robert McMillan)
  • .amish – As part of a devilish plan to lure the Amish to the web. (Lore Sjöberg)
  • .official – Trademark owners will pony up big bucks to get a certified domain name. (Sjöberg)
  • .thatswhatshesaid – Michael Scott would be so proud. Microsoft.thatswhatshesaid and zynga.thatswhatshesaid
  • .txt – Kicking it old-school style. Think instagram.txt, where every photo gets rendered in ASCII. (Michael Calore) See also .1994
  • .dot – Just for the fun of saying it.
  • .dotdot – For those who can read between the lines. (Amy Zimmerman)
  • .dotcom – Anyone who failed to get the .com domain they wanted can settle for this lesser cousin.(Sjöberg)
  • .kahm – Same as above. (Sjöberg)
  • .ptth – Think http://AManAPlanACanalPanama.ptth It taps into the lucrative palindrome market (James Losey)
  • .onomatopoeia – Think ping.onomatopoeia. How much would Apple spend to have that domain for its rocking social-music service? A lot, I say!
  • .smh – yahoo.smh and hedidntknowwhatsmhmeans.smh (Meighan O’Toole, Zimmerman)
  • .dtf – For personal dating sites catering to those who aren’t choosy. If you don’t know the acronym, you probably don’t want to. (O’Toole)
  • .www – Not too many sites bother with the web prefix these days (especially since the web be dead), so this would take you back to the basics. Think www.geocities.www
  • .dude – You know, for sites that are for, like, dudes – beerme.dude; shessmokinghot.dude (Roberto Baldwin)
  • .sandwich – Because anything is better when it’s followed with a sandwich (Sjöberg)

Got your own idea but not $185,000? Drop it in the comment section or share it on Twitter using the #fakegTLD hashtag. I came up with that myself, and unlike those new domain name owners, I won’t charge you to use it.

Photo: schoshie

Lone Senator Blocks Renewal of NSA Wiretap Program

Photo: jdlasica/Flickr

The Obama administration wanted a quick, no-questions-asked-or-answered renewal of broad electronic eavesdropping powers that largely legalized the Bush administration’s illegal warrantless wiretapping program. That’s despite President Barack Obama’s campaign promise to revisit and revise the rules to protect Americans’ rights.

Everything seemed to be going to plan after a Senate committee approved the re-authorization in secret last month.

But Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Oregon) has stepped in to stop the bill because the government refuses to say how often the spy powers are being used.

Wyden has barred the Senate from a routine vote using a little-used legislative power — called a hold — to block lawmakers from taking a procedural consent vote. Instead, he demands a floor debate that can draw out the approval process indefinitely via the filibuster.

Wyden did the same thing a year ago with the Protect IP Act. That legislation, which would have dramatically increased the government’s legal power to disrupt and shutter websites “dedicated to infringing activities,” subsequently died a loud death in January amid a turbulent internet backlash.

The senator’s latest move targets the FISA Amendment Act. The legislation, expiring at year’s end, authorizes the government to electronically eavesdrop on Americans’ phone calls and emails without a probable-cause warrant so long as one of the parties to the communication is outside the United States. The communications may be intercepted “to acquire foreign intelligence information.”

The Senate Intelligence Committee secretly approved the measure May 22 (.pdf) for a full floor vote, and released those results days ago. In response, Wyden placed a hold on the measure late Monday. Among other reasons, he said the government should disclose how many Americans’ communications have been intercepted under the law, which was adopted in 2008 as a way to legalize the Bush administration’s warrantless wiretapping program.

“Before Congress votes to renew these authorities it is important to understand how they are working in practice,” Wyden said. “In particular, it is important for Congress to better understand how many people inside the United States have had their communications collected or reviewed under the authorities granted by the FISA Amendments Act.”

Wyden asked the Obama administration a year ago for that information. The administration replied (.pdf) that it was “not reasonably possible to identify the number of people located in the United States whose communications may have been reviewed under the authority of the FAA.”

Wyden added that the law should be amended to prevent the government “from searching through these communications in an effort to find the phone calls or emails of a particular American, unless the government has obtained a warrant or emergency authorization permitting surveillance of that American.” He and Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colorado) proposed that amendment last month, and it failed.

The FISA Amendments Act generally requires the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Court to rubber-stamp terror-related electronic surveillance requests that target Americans’ communications. The government does not have to identify the target or facility to be monitored. It can begin surveillance a week before making the request, and the surveillance can continue during the appeals process if, in a rare case, the secret FISA court rejects the surveillance application. The court’s rulings are not public.

The House Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security debated the measure last month and appeared willing to side with the Obama administration’s demands that lawmakers re-authorize the bill, as the Senate Intelligence committee did. The Senate’s measure extends the powers until June 1, 2017. The House committee has not moved its measure to the floor for a full vote.

Then-senator and presidential candidate Barack Obama voted for the measure in 2008, though he said the bill was flawed and that he would push to amend it if elected. Instead, Obama, as president, simply continued the Bush administration’s legal tactics aimed at crushing any judicial scrutiny of the wiretapping program, and his administration is now demanding that federal lawmakers extend the legislation.

The Supreme Court next term is expected to hear a constitutional challenge to the law amid allegations it violates Americans’ Fourth Amendment privacy rights.

A Wyden spokeswoman said Thursday the senator might be willing to agree to a “short term” extension of the measure, instead of seeing the spy powers lapse, in a bid to give lawmakers more time to reach a deal.