Your guide to the data retention debate: what it is and why it’s bad

It’s time to clarify what data retention is and the nature of the threat it poses to citizens writes Crikey’s Bernard Keane.

Crikey has been covering data retention for several years, and we’ve written tens of thousands of words in that time explaining what it is, why it’s important and the threat it poses to Australians. We know that a lot of people, especially in the media, have only started to focus on the issue in recent days, so we’ve further expanded this Q&A we prepared last year to take into account recent developments and give you a one-stop document for what will be Australia’s biggest ever mass surveillance regime.

 What is data retention?

 The compulsory retention of information about a citizen’s telecommunications and online usage, either by telcos and internet service providers themselves or by a government agency, so that law enforcement and intelligence agencies can use it to investigate crime and national security threats. The Australian version will force telcos and ISPs to retain your data.

 What sort of data is being retained?

 After seven years, we’ve now finally been told what data will be retained, courtesy of amendments to the proposed legislation (you can see them here; the relevant section is 187AA). The legislated form of the dataset is very vague and there are likely to be differences of interpretation between companies, but it consists of subscriber or account holder details, the source and destination of a communication, date, time and duration of communication, location and what services was used e.g. voice, SMS, social media, Skype, and the type of delivery services (ADSL, Wi-Fi, VoIP, cable, etc).

It will not include browsing history and appears not to include download volumes.

What will it cost?

The government has made a vague commitment to partly fund the scheme, but its cost remains unknown. There are several figures floating around. The Prime Minister, whose grasp of detail on the issue of data retention hasn’t been especially good, suggested $400 million. In evidence to the Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security that considered the issue in 2012, iiNet said it might cost $5 a month for every customer to store data; that would be a $60 a year surveillance tax on every household. In 2014 iiNet significantly increased its estimate of the likely cost to $130 a year. Remember, both companies and government agencies will not merely need to store this data, but ensure it is stored safely — the vast trove of personal data that data retention will produce will be immensely attractive to criminals (in 2012, Anonymous hackers released customer data obtained from AAPT to protest against the then-government’s data retention proposal). The alternative to expensive, highly secure storage is storage with a cheap offshore provider where your data can be easily hacked.

What happens currently?

Traditionally, telcos have retained phone records because that was how they billed you. The government claims companies have less and less need for metadata beyond the billing cycle, and given there’s a cost to storing such data, they are keeping less of it for the sort of time periods agencies prefer — usually two years. Law enforcement and intelligence agencies call this “going dark” — losing access to phone information of the kind they’ve had for decades.

However, major telcos like Telstra had rejected this argument and said they have no plans to abandon current retention arrangements. Moreover, both Elstra and major ISP iiNet say they will have to create new classes of data in order to comply with the law. This is not, strictly speaking, a “data retention” law but a “data creation” law.

Isn’t this just maintaining the status quo, if phone records have always been kept?

No. Your phone data now includes your location as your mobile phone interacts with nearby phone towers, so in effect it can be used as a tracking device. But more importantly, forget that “it’s just metadata” or “billing data”. A single phone call time and duration won’t tell anyone much about you. But in aggregate, communications data will reveal far more about you than content data. With data retention, agencies can accumulate a record of everyone you have called, everyone they have called, how long you spoke for, the order of the calls, and where you were when you made the call, to build a profile that says far more about you than any solitary overheard phone call or email. It can reveal not just straightforward details such as your friends and acquaintances, but also if you have medical issues, your financial interests, what you’re buying, if you’re having an affair or ended a relationship. Combined with other publicly available information, having a full set of phone records on an individual will tell you far more than much of their content dataever will.

And if you don’t believe us, ask the people who know: the General Counsel for the United States National Security Agency has publicly stated, “metadata absolutely tells you everything about somebody’s life. If you have enough metadata, you don’t really need content.” According to the former head of the NSA, Michael Hayden, the US government kills people based on metadata it has accumulated on them. As Edward Snowden says: “You can’t trust what you’re hearing, but you can trust the metadata.”

Read more @ http://www.startupsmart.com.au/growth/your-guide-to-the-data-retention-debate-what-it-is-and-why-its-bad/2015032714433.html

NSA Doesn’t Need to Spy on Your Calls to Learn Your Secrets

Governments and corporations gather, store, and analyze the tremendous amount of data we chuff out as we move through our digitized lives. Often this is without our knowledge, and typically without our consent. Based on this data, they draw conclusions about us that we might disagree with or object to, and that can impact our lives in profound ways. We may not like to admit it, but we are under mass surveillance.

Much of what we know about the NSA’s surveillance comes from Edward Snowden, although people both before and after him also leaked agency secrets. As an NSA contractor, Snowden collected tens of thousands of documents describing many of the NSA’s surveillance activities. Then in 2013 he fled to Hong Kong and gave them to select reporters.

The first news story to break based on the Snowden documents described how the NSA collects the cell phone call records of every American. One government defense, and a sound bite repeated ever since, is that the data they collected is “only metadata.” The intended point was that the NSA wasn’t collecting the words we said during our phone conversations, only the phone numbers of the two parties, and the date, time, and duration of the call. This seemed to mollify many people, but it shouldn’t have. Collecting metadata on people means putting them under surveillance.

An easy thought experiment demonstrates this. Imagine that you hired a private detective to eavesdrop on someone. The detective would plant bugs in that person’s home, office, and car. He would eavesdrop on that person’s phone and computer. And you would get a report detailing that person’s conversations.

Now imagine that you asked the detective to put that person under surveillance. You would get a different but nevertheless comprehensive report: where he went, what he did, who he spoke to and for how long, who he wrote to, what he read, and what he purchased. That’s metadata.
Eavesdropping gets you the conversations; surveillance gets you everything else.

Telephone metadata alone reveals a lot about us. The timing, length, and frequency of our conversations reveal our relationships with each other: our intimate friends, business associates, and everyone in-between. Phone metadata reveals what and who we’re interested in and what’s important to us, no matter how private. It provides a window into our personalities. It provides a detailed summary of what’s happening to us at any point in time.

One experiment from Stanford University examined the phone metadata of about 500 volunteers over several months. The personal nature of what the researchers could deduce from the metadata surprised even them, and the report is worth quoting:

Participant A communicated with multiple local neurology groups, a specialty pharmacy, a rare condition management service, and a hotline for a pharmaceutical used solely to treat relapsing multiple sclerosis.

Participant B spoke at length with cardiologists at a major medical center, talked briefly with a medical laboratory, received calls from a pharmacy, and placed short calls to a home reporting hotline for a medical device used to monitor cardiac arrhythmia.

Participant C made a number of calls to a firearms store that specializes in the AR semiautomatic rifle platform. They also spoke at length with customer service for a firearm manufacturer that produces an AR line.

In a span of three weeks, Participant D contacted a home improvement store, locksmiths, a hydroponics dealer, and a head shop.

Participant E had a long early morning call with her sister. Two days later, she placed a series of calls to the local Planned Parenthood location. She placed brief additional calls two weeks later, and made a final call a month after.

That’s a multiple sclerosis sufferer, a heart attack victim, a semiautomatic weapons owner, a home marijuana grower, and someone who had an abortion, all from a single stream of metadata.

Read more @ http://www.wired.com/2015/03/data-and-goliath-nsa-metadata-spying-your-secrets/

If this is the case why is Hayden so onto wanting to keep it?

Pre-Snowden NSA grunts wanted to nix phone spying: report

Memo seen by managers, but not top dog

Even before Edward Snowden spilled the beans on the National Security Agency's(NSA's) extensive surveillance programs, high-level US bureaucrats were considering spiking the program.

So says The Associated Press, thanks to unnamed sources who told the wire service the mass surveillance was disappointing as a counter-terrorism strategy.

They claim the phone collection programs missed most mobile calls, and spent too much money hoovering landlines, adding vox interceptions were not central to counter-terrorism efforts.

It flies in the face of boilerplate public responses from the spy agency that the costly and intrusive programs are worth every cent.

President Barack Obama has proposed the NSA only pull interception data from telecommunications providers on an as-needed basis, but that has yet to pass Congress.

Sources told the AP that top managers had received the proposal drafted from lower-level grunts, but it had not reached then NSA boss General Keith Alexander, who they say would probably have rejected the report.

A presidential task force also suggests the programs should be dumped, since the phone record collection leaves open the dangerous possibility of abuse by future governments.

The AP says the revelations could impact Congress' decision to renew the NSA's phone tapping warrant in June.

Read more @ http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/03/31/presnowden_nsa_grunts_wanted_to_nix_phone_spying_report/

 

The NSA almost killed its own call surveillance program years ago, report says

Read more @ http://www.businessinsider.com.au/the-nsa-almost-cancelled-surveillance-program-due-to-snowden-2015-3

 

NSA Considered Ending Phone Program Before Edward Snowden Exposed It

Read more @ https://www.takepart.com/article/2015/03/29/nsa-considered-ending-spying-program-edward-snowden-exposed-it

Report: NSA mulled ending data program

Read more @ http://thehill.com/policy/technology/237339-report-nsa-mulled-ending-data-program

‘NSA continues to operate with impunity’: Scott Rickard

American political analyst Scott Rickard has said that the US National Security Agency would continue its spying activities with impunity.

“The NSA continues to operate with impunity in having just massive amount of access to information. At the same time, the intelligence communities and the providers of the actual technology are making money,” Rickard said in a phone interview with Press TV on Monday.

Current and former intelligence officials claimed that the NSA spying program incurred considerable costs in terms of money and civil liberties.

The NSA program aimed at collecting and saving American calling records also did little if anything to stop terrorism, according to the Associated Press citing the officials.

The spying agency considered ending its secret program several months before whistleblower Edward Snowden revealed documents exposing the practice, according to the report by the Associated Press.

Some NSA officials were ready to abandon the bulk collection in 2013 even though they knew they would lose the ability to search a database of US calling records, said the unnamed intelligence officials.

“Recently, there’s been a report coming out that the NSA’s spying program was quite expensive and there were discussions on shutting it down in the past,” Rickard said. “The current conditions are far beyond that. When you look at the amount of information that’s been gathered both on the internet and the phones, it’s just tremendous.”

Read more @ http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2015/03/31/404070/NSA-continues-to-operate-with-impunity

 

US to stop collecting bulk phone records? Not really: There's a catch

Summary:Even if a crucial and controversial legal authority expires later this year, the US government will still be able to collect billions of domestic call records on Americans.

The US government will stop collecting billions of domestic call records each year, should the legal authority expire later this year.

But a loophole in a secret court order would allow the government to carry on spying on US citizens regardless of whether or not it has legal grounds.

According to Reuters on Monday, a spokesperson for the Obama administration's National Security Council conceded that it may have to wind down the bulk phone records collection program, despite being a "critical national security tool."

"Allowing Section 215 [the law that allows the collection] to sunset would result in the loss, going forward, of a critical national security tool that is used in a variety of additional contexts that do not involve the collection of bulk data," spokesperson Ned Price told the news agency.

Section 215 of the Patriot Act, which authorizes the National Security Agency (NSA) to collect calling records from phone companies in bulk -- so-called "metadata" -- expires on June 1. The existence of the phone records program was revealed by whistleblower Edward Snowden, who leaked a secret court order compelling Verizon to hand over its entire cache of customer records on a rolling basis.

However, little stands in the way of the NSA continuing to use the phone records program to conduct domestic surveillance after June 1.

A similarly secretive court order, declassified and released by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court earlier this month, suggests Congress does not need to extend the legal authority in order for the government to carry on using the program.

First reported by National Journal earlier this month, a passage buried on the final pages of the order may allow the court to rubber-stamp the continued use of the program.

Read more @ http://www.zdnet.com/article/us-bulk-phone-records-collection-secret-court-ruling/

 

Personal privacy in a data-driven world

U.S. technology companies in March, along with civil rights leaders like the ACLU and Internet advocacy groups such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation, sent a letter to Congress demanding the federal government end ongoing mass surveillance efforts in the form of its “metadata” collection of telephone records.

The letter specifically referred to Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act, a key provision of that law that gives the National Security Agency authority to collect data from virtually every phone call made in the United States. If not renewed, that provision --— which has been called unconstitutional and illegal by some policy experts — is set to expire June 1.

Government monitoring practices have become an issue of reform for several years now, a reaction to the public’s furor over the NSA’s massive surveillance initiatives brought to light by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden. Last year a bipartisan bill, the USA Freedom Act, was introduced in Congress. A Senate version of that bill would have halted the practice of metadata collection altogether; a watered-down version, passed in the House, shifted the onus of metadata collection to U.S. telephone companies. The bill ultimately died in the Senate in November.

Before that, in January 2014, President Obama proposed what the New York Times called “modest changes” to the NSA’s collection of metadata, suggesting intelligence agencies employ new search technologies in lieu of bulk collection, and, like the ill-fated House bill, suggested ceding that data gathering to the phone companies. Those new rules were finally unveiled this February. As it turns out, U.S. telephone companies are apparently leery about hoarding that content themselves, so intelligence agencies would still be in charge of collecting it until Congress decides otherwise, though there would be improved safeguards, such as purging irrelevant data after five years, and increased supervision into how it’s used. In other words, the practice of metadata collection is scheduled to continue pretty much just as before.

Read more @ http://www.odwyerpr.com/story/public/4344/2015-04-01/blog-personal-privacy-data-driven-world.html

I am betting that information was collected…… as Snowden has said many times about events like the Boston Bombings and the recent terrorist event in France….. that all that collection does not expose terrorist activity….. even though terrorism is the excuse they use to collect everything.

Harrop: How the debate over privacy vs. security changes

The pilot who crashed the Germanwings plane, taking 150 lives, was too ill to work, according to doctors' notes found at his home. But Germany's strict medical privacy laws barred the doctors from conveying that judgment to the airline.

A horrific event that could have been averted with a sharing of information happened because of laws designed to protect privacy. As typically occurs in such cases, the same public that supported such laws turns around and asks, Why didn't the authorities know?

It's really hard to get an intelligent conversation going about the balance between privacy and security. Posturing over government intrusion into our personal lives blossoms at times of calm and then wilts when terrorists hijack the headlines.

Not long ago, privacy advocates were inflaming the public over the National Security Agency's surveillance programs. In doing so, they often exploit the public's confusion on what information is collected.

Last October, CNN anchor Carol Costello grilled Sen. Dan Coats, an Indiana Republican, on NSA spying activities, in an exchange that indicated she didn't quite know what metadata is. As Coats tried to explain, metadata is information about numbers we call (the date, time and duration of each call) -- not what was said in the calls.

That's what the government computers track. If they flag a worrisome pattern, a court must grant permission for a human being to listen in on the content.

Read more @ http://www.denverpost.com/nationworld/ci_27814844/harrop-how-debate-over-privacy-vs-security-changes 

 

House Members Target Patriot Act with "Surveillance State Repeal Act"

U.S. Representatives Mark Pocan (D-Wis., photo on left) and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), who are seeking to repeal the PATRIOT Act in its entirety and combat any legal provisions that amount to American spying, unveiled their Surveillance State Repeal Act on Tuesday.

“This isn’t just tinkering around the edges,” Pocan said during a Capitol Hill briefing on the legislation. “This is a meaningful overhaul of the system, getting rid of essentially all parameters of the PATRIOT Act.”

“The PATRIOT Act contains many provisions that violate the Fourth Amendment and have led to a dramatic expansion of our domestic surveillance state,” added Massie (R-Ky.), who co-authored the legislation with Pocan. “Our Founding Fathers fought and died to stop the kind of warrantless spying and searches that the PATRIOT Act and the FISA Amendments Act authorize. It is long past time to repeal the PATRIOT Act and reassert the constitutional rights of all Americans.”

The House bill would completely repeal the PATRIOT Act, passed in the days following the 9/11 attacks, as well as the 2008 FISA Amendments Act, which permits the NSA to collect Internet communications — a program exposed by former NSA contractor-turned-whistleblower Edward Snowden.

Likewise, the bill would reform the court that oversees the nation’s spying powers, enhance protections for whistleblowers, and stop the government from forcing technology companies to create easy access into their devices.

Read more @ http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/20560-house-members-target-patriot-act-with-surveillance-state-repeal-act

Window to debate surveillance policy is closing

In two months, unless Congress acts, Section 215 of the Patriot Act will expire. The NSA has used this provision to indiscriminately collect Americans’ calling records (including the date, time, and duration of calls, but not the content of the conversations). Practically, the deadline is May 22 with Congress scheduled to head out of town for Memorial Day. Nearly two years ago, Edward Snowden’s unauthorized disclosures to the public’s surprise, revealed this bulk collection program along with the government’s broad and secret interpretation of Section 215. This was expected to trigger a vigorous debate in Congress over the appropriate scope of the government’s surveillance efforts. Yet, reform legislation, the USA FREEDOM Act, which was considered last year, has yet to even be reintroduced in this Congress.

When the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board (PCLOB) reviewed the Section 215 program last year, it concluded that Section 215 did not provide an adequate legal basis to support bulk collection. The use of this provision was especially troubling because even a close reading of the statute would not have revealed to the public that it was authorizing the ongoing collection of millions of Americans’ phone records. PCLOB concluded: “[W]e do not believe that the process surrounding the application of Section 215 to bulk collection comported with the kind of public debate that best serves the development of policy affecting the rights of Americans.” Transparency is critical to a functioning democracy, especially for laws that require Congress to balance national security with individual privacy and civil liberties. 

Read more @ http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/civil-rights/237407-window-to-debate-surveillance-policy-is-closing

 

EU citizens told to close their Facebook accounts to avoid snooping from US security services

THE European Commission has advised EU citizens to deactivate their Facebook accounts if they want avoid snooping from US security services.

This was the warning given by EC lawyer Bernhard Schima during a case brought by privacy campaigner Maximilian Schrems.

The case of Maximillian Schrems vs. Irish Data Protection Commissioner and Digital Rights Ireland Limited is focused on the current Safe Harbour framework, which covers the transmission of EU citizens’ data across to the US.

Plaintiff Max Schrems argues the agreement no longer guarantees the privacy of European residents following Edward Snowden’s revelations of widespread surveillance by the NSA.

Read more @ http://www.news.com.au/technology/online/eu-citizens-told-to-close-their-facebook-accounts-to-avoid-snooping-from-us-security-services/story-fnjwnfzw-1227281012264

 

Abandon Facebook to Avoid US Spying

Read more @ http://peacekeeper.ru/en/?module=news&action=view&id=24917

 

How a Facebook user complaint could change European data privacy

case against Facebook being heard at the European Court of Justice could transform data privacy across the entire EU.

The lawsuit, brought by Austrian Facebook user Maximilian Schrems, focuses on what US companies do with data from customers based outside the US.

His complaint seeks to stop US spies from accessing the private data of EU citizens. 

Screms said on a website he set up to publicise the case that “large internet companies (in the current case Facebook) have, pursuant to US law, allowed the US government to access European user data on a mass scale for law enforcement, espionage and anti-terror purposes.”

“Aiding these forms of US ‘mass surveillance’ may, however, violate EU privacy laws and fundamental rights.”

Schrems made contact with the Irish data regulator in August last year regarding the matter, arguing that the social network, whose European headquarters is based in Dublin, had contravened privacy laws.

Read more @ http://www.itpro.co.uk/security/24289/how-a-facebook-user-complaint-could-change-european-data-privacy

 

If all the spying is for combating terrorism why is it that terrorist events are still happening…? Why aren’t they picking up on it?  At the beginning of the Snowden revelations they said that they stopped many (something like 50) terrorist events then it was discovered they didn’t….(they lied),  there were 2 events stopped and that was from good old fashioned foot work….   I always remember what Snowden said the spying was for, and it wasn’t to stop terrorism….. its about power and economic …..

 

Encrypted communication 'biggest problem' in tackling terrorism, Europol warns

Monitoring threats to national security is becoming increasingly difficult as tech companies ramp up encryption efforts, Europol has warned.

The European Police Office's Director, Rob Wainwright, says sophisticated, encrypted online communication and hidden areas of the Internet -- known as the Dark web -- are creating problems in tracking and monitoring terrorist suspects.

Speaking to the BBC as part of 5 Live Investigates, the Europol executive said sophisticated online communication is "the biggest problem" law enforcement officers face in this duty.

"It's become perhaps the biggest problem for the police and the security service authorities in dealing with the threats from terrorism," Wainwright told the news agency. "It's changed the very nature of counter-terrorist work from one that has been traditionally reliant on having good monitoring capability of communications to one that essentially doesn't provide that anymore."

Europol says encrypted communications is often central to terrorist operations. As an example, Rodrigo Bijou from data solutions provider The Data Guild told attendees at Kaspersky's Annual Security Summit in February that groups such as ISIS and Al Qaeda are using online forums to spread propaganda, and are both developing their own communication tools and using encrypted offerings from the marketplace to communicate and organize activities.

Read more @ http://www.zdnet.com/article/encrypted-communication-biggest-problem-in-tackling-terrorism-europol-warns/

 

They are going to have to work for a living……..

Europol chief opposes computer encryption

Read more @ http://www.itproportal.com/2015/03/30/europol-opposes-computer-encryption/

 

The LEADS Act and cloud computing

Bipartisan legislation, introduced last month in the House and Senate, promises to reform and update the antiquated Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) and in the process push back against the practice by agencies of government to gain access to personal data stored on U.S. corporation servers abroad.

The legislation, called the LEADS Act, is co-sponsored in the Senate by Sens. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), Chris Coons (D-Del.) and Dean Heller (R-Nev.), and in the House by Reps. Tom Marino (R-Pa.) and Suzan DelBene (D-Wash.).

Short for "Law Enforcement Access to Data Stored Abroad," the LEADS Act's principal improvements on ECPA are in recognizing that U.S. law enforcement may not use warrants to compel the disclosure of customer content stored outside the United States unless the account holder is a U.S. person, and by strengthening the process — called MLATs (mutual legal assistance treaties) — through which governments of one country allow the government of another to obtain evidence in criminal proceedings.

One of the better examples of the need for updating ECPA centers on a government warrant served on Microsoft for the contents of the email of an Irish citizen stored on a Microsoft server in Dublin. The government's interest in this individual is reported to be in connection with drug trafficking. Microsoft denied the request and is currently embroiled in litigation, now before a federal appeals court.

At the mention of drug trafficking one imagines that many people might, at first glance, side with the government in this. But consider the same scenario, only with the countries reversed. Imagine the outrage if the Irish government demanded that a server located in the U.S. turn over to it the contents of the personal email of a U.S. citizen!

Read more @ http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/technology/237328-the-leads-act-and-cloud-computing

 

3 Reasons Apple Is Pushing for NSA Spying Reforms

Earlier this week, Apple and several other major U.S. tech companies renewed their calls for the U.S. government to reform its controversial electronic surveillance programs. In an open letter addressed to President Barack Obama, NSA Director Admiral Rogers, Attorney General Eric Holder, and several prominent members of Congress, Apple and dozens of other signatories urged the government to end the bulk data collection practices that were authorized under Section 215 of the USA Patriot Act. As noted in the letter, Section 215 of the USA Patriot Act is used as the legal basis for the NSA’s bulk collection of electronic communications metadata. The letter also asked the government to institute “transparency and accountability mechanisms for both government and company reporting” for decisions made by the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.

Apple lent its support to the letter through its membership in the Reform Government Surveillance group, a coalition of major tech companies that includes Facebook, Google, Microsoft, and Yahoo. The Reform Government Surveillance sent a separate open letter to the Senate last year that called for similar reforms. Besides tech companies, other prominent signatories to the most recent letter included the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), and Human Rights Watch.

While it’s no surprise that organizations like the ACLU and the EFF would be concerned with issues affecting privacy and electronic communications, it may surprise some people to know that Apple has emerged as one of the most outspoken opponents of the government’s spying programs following their exposure by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden in 2013. Apple’s strong stance against the government’s surveillance programs is even more surprising when considering that the company has historically received low marks from the EFF when it comes to protecting users’ data from government requests. Although Apple received the highest six-star rating in the EFF’s annual “Who Has Your Back?” report in 2014, the digital rights organization noted that the iPhone maker only earned one star in each of the previous three years. So why is Apple suddenly so gung-ho about government transparency and user privacy? Here are the three main reasons why Apple has become an outspoken opponent of the U.S. government’s spying programs.

Read more @ http://www.cheatsheet.com/technology/3-reasons-apple-is-pushing-for-nsa-spying-reforms.html/?a=viewall  


"What lies behind us and what lies before us are small matters compared to what lies within us."  ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~

Edited 1 time by PeacefulSwannie Apr 2 15 10:19 AM.