[FedCom] Gov't 'intercept' policies ---

Sat, 20 Jul 2002 19:45:23 -0400

Ken,

Thanks for the input.  My post was intended to ripple some gray matter here.
It may very well do that.

A number of other lists on qth have similar threads going.  In more than a
few instances, the thread spiraled into a rather un-civil e-flame-thrower
spat.  This list may be a better and more concentrated venue for this topic.
We could 'take off the gloves ' (as long as it's not personal or offensive)
and really have a lively debate.

Although this topic potentially affects all aspects of the radio comm
avocation (and ham radio as well), the ARRL seems unwilling to expand much
political capital for aspects of the hobby outside the confines of 'amateur
radio'.

I did spend quite a few years (about half a lifetime) in military and
government service - a lot of it in communications. I still operate under
both my DOD and amateur call signs.  Now that I've retired, I do have rather
strong tuggings from both side - the need to be secure and the need to have
a very open society.

Let the posts roll in...

73
Frank

 ._._.
----- Original Message -----
From: "ken windyka" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2002 7:27 PM
Subject: Re: [FedCom] Gov't 'intercept' policies ---

> Well Frank you sure like to fan the fires of paranoia don't you?  ;)
>
> In the past hobbyists have gotten into problems with federal law
enforcment
> for the following type of activities:
>
> *Posting detailed channel plans:  designations/usage/frequencies; obtained
> from official sources  -- in one specific recent incident the information
> came verbatim off what was probably an operations plan communications
annex
> (it's unknown whether the annex was classified OR had an Official Use Only
> designation) BUT the feds wanted to know from the hobbyists where he got
> the information (the hobbyist did not know it was classified/OFUO
> information).. I'd bet that the hobbyist gave up the "source".    I've
> found even at recent military open houses/air shows that folks don't want
> to give out much specific information.
>
> *Following a surveillance operation -- Hobbyists decided to follow in
their
> vehicle the surveillance vehicle that was tailing another vehicle.
Unknown
> to the hobbyists, there was another counter suveillance team providing
> protection to the surveillance team, who after the "take down" took place
> stopped the hobbyists.
>
> *Letting the neighborhood know about surveillance activities --- One
> hobbyist actually knock on the door of an a suspect under suveillance &
> informed him about the surveillance.
>
> *Posting DETAILED current information about surveillance in a specific
> location --  This is probably going to at least place the hobbyist on a
> "watch list" and might even trigger a background information investigation
> -- If you do decide to post this information PLEASE be sure you also post
> your public library card account number to make it easier for the
> investigators!!! ;)
>
> It's unclear/unknown what technical expertise the terrorist "sleeper
cells"
> in the United States have achieved.  A good guess would be that at least
> the major support elements would have sigificant technical expertise to
> include counter surveillance techniques.   Remember that encryption
> transmission on a specific federal radio frequency(ies) (and/or other
> local/state goverment frequencies) can very well be the "Red Flag" to
> someone who is planning/engaged in illegal activities (read "Family Of
> Traitors" (John Walker navy comm officer who gave detailed info to
> Russians)).  When you couple this with readily available equipment such as
> frequency counters/sniffers, scanner reaction tuning, etc. it basically
> make the encryption surveillance method highly likely to be discovered.
So
> unless previous intelligence shows the suspects as being technically
> challenged, a good guess would be the feds are using digital cellular/pcs
> more on these types of activties with perhaps frs/gmrs/amateur OR some
> specific low power business frequencies for portable w/t's comms close
> range car to car, which can also result in discovery BUT may be buried in
> with other comms & make it more difficult for those under surveillance.
>
> BTW, anyone who posts information on this list as well as others can
> request from the list moderator/owner that the information be removed from
> the archieve.  I know that on the list that I own (non qth.net list) I
will
> remove a post upon the request of the posting party.
>
> Ken
> Springfield MA Monitoring Area
>
> At 02:06 PM 7/20/02 -0400, A10382 wrote:
> >Hi Radio Fans,
> >snip.....snip......
> >"Just because you're paranoid, it doesn't mean that no one is watching".
> >
> >In these times of 'heightened security', even the government is paranoid.
> >Please be careful with your posts and not appear to foster or support any
> >potentially illegal activity -- it may come back to haunt you.  As many
of
> >the recent Senate hearing 'guests' have discovered, what you put into an
> >email will be around for a long, long, time.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> FedCom mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/fedcom
>