It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
WASHINGTON - In the 50 years that Grant Goodman has known and corresponded with a colleague in the Philippines he never had any reason to suspect that their friendship was anything but spectacularly ordinary.
But now he believes that the relationship has somehow sparked the interest of the Department of Homeland Security and led the agency to place him under surveillance.
Last month Goodman, an 81-year-old retired University of Kansas history professor, received a letter from his friend in the Philippines that had been opened and resealed with a strip of dark green tape bearing the words “by Border Protection” and carrying the official Homeland Security seal
Originally posted by brill
Use email instead and encryption, the best you can find.
[edit on 6-1-2006 by brill]
Originally posted by NumberCruncher
They opened his mail, big deal .....
But i think this 81 year old is being a bit paranoid if he really beleives that he is "under Surveilance", limited resources have much better uses.
Originally posted by SonOfDaedalus
Originally posted by brill
Use email instead and encryption, the best you can find.
[edit on 6-1-2006 by brill]
Heres a thought - "Do you really think that there is any encryption software, anywhwere that is commercially available, that the NSA can't crack?"
Hehe, just to stir the pot a little bit.
Other than that it was na interesting read about Homeland Security's paranoia.
Originally posted by NumberCruncher
They opened his mail, big deal .....
Originally posted by Valhall
Originally posted by NumberCruncher
They opened his mail, big deal .....
Are you serious? What a totally myopic statement to make.
Originally posted by NumberCruncher
Why is it ? We are at war with Terrorism and Islamic radicals, correspondence has always been subject to scrutiny in times of war.
Id rather they opened suspicious mail and the likes than ignored everything in the name of "civil Libertys"
Originally posted by NumberCruncher
Originally posted by Valhall
Originally posted by NumberCruncher
They opened his mail, big deal .....
Are you serious? What a totally myopic statement to make.
Why is it ? We are at war with Terrorism and Islamic radicals, correspondence has always been subject to scrutiny in times of war.
Id rather they opened suspicious mail and the likes than ignored everything in the name of "civil Libertys"
However, Mohan declined to outline what criteria are used to determine when a piece of personal correspondence should be opened, but said, “obviously it’s a security-related criteria.”
Originally posted by brill
Use email instead and encryption, the best you can find
[edit on 6-1-2006 by brill]
Originally posted by Valhall
Originally posted by NumberCruncher
Why is it ? We are at war with Terrorism and Islamic radicals, correspondence has always been subject to scrutiny in times of war.
Id rather they opened suspicious mail and the likes than ignored everything in the name of "civil Libertys"
So what made it "suspicious"? What do you know that makes you so ready to say this is a "get over it" event?
Originally posted by NumberCruncher
National security is there to protect you!
Originally posted by loam
Originally posted by NumberCruncher
National security is there to protect you!
I have no beef with that statement....but only to the extent that there is accountability in the process.
If you accept that the government can open your mail with nothing more than a mere suspicion and no meaningful process to prevent potential abuses, how certain would you be that such power would NEVER be abused?
I remain dumbfounded that so many are prepared in the name of the War on Terror to dispense with such safe-guards in the system. While the government is protecting us from terrorism, who is protecting us from the government?
Think abuses wont happen? Try to identify a single example in human history where unfettered power was not abused. Why is now so different?
Originally posted by SonOfDaedalus
One the note of encryption, do you really think that the NSA, Australia's Defence Signals Directorate, etc. would actually let commercial encryption software enter the market if they could not thoroughly break the key?
Very unlikely, I say.