From: Schaaf, Libby Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2013 4:22 PM To: Luby, Oliver Cc: Schaaf, Libby Subject: FW: Domestic Awareness Center. Comments, research, and links for Dan Kalb and Oakland City Council. Oliver has your office responded to this? Bruce (on Libbys email). From: jim emkey [mailto:letswakeupoakland@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2013 2:02 PM To: Luby, Oliver; Kalb, Dan; Kernighan, Pat; Gerard, Jennie; District 3 Intern; Farmer, Casey; Wald, Zachary; Schaaf, Libby; Gallo, Noel; Burgos, Claudia (was Jimenez); Brooks, Desl ey; Reid, Larry; At Large; Jones, Andre; Chan, Ada; Maher, Sean Subject: Domestic Awareness Center. Comments, research, and links for Dan Kalb a nd Oakland City Council. Hi, I am the guy who "complained" to you(Oliver Luby) on the phone last week. Than ks for your time. I am extremely concerned with the continued surveillance state in this countr y. I am extremely disappointed that you do not take the residents of Oakland's privacy concerns, a nd 4th amendment protection of our privacy, more seriously. I am extremely disappointe d Mr. Kalb was enthusiastic about this new technology to continue to keep watch on the city of Oakland, without raising questions about any privacy matters, until they were eventually brought up by many at the meeting, including a lawyer from the ACLU. Mr. Luby told me in our phone conversation that taking free money is a no-brai ner for a politician. As a newcomer to politics I'm glad to see that Mr. Kalb is already p art of the "good ole boys" Maybe you can make more of a name for yourself by standing up to what your constituents are actually trying to tell you. We are concerned about the growing surveillance and police state in this country and this city in particular. I, and many speaking out, are tryin g to tell you we are not ok with being watched and listened to 24/7. I am not OK with the expansion o f the DHS. I am interested to know how the missing councilmembers would have voted. Mr. Reid, and Ms. Brooks. We already live in Oakland a NON CONSTITUTIONAL ZONE! http://www.aclu.org/technology-and-liberty/fact-sheet-us-constitution-free-zone . http://www.storyleak.com/media-live-in-post-constitutional-america/ In Dan's clause to the proposal he states. "The city wants to ensure public co nfidence in the DAC" How has/will he done/do this?. Do you find that the public has any confid ence in the protection of data? Do you have any confidence that the DHS or others won't use this info? How are you in City Council going to ensure us that our information will not be reviewed, stored, decimated, and used to spy on us.How can you prove to Oakland they won't . Will you blindly trust safeguards put in by a "corrupt" contractor? What will you do abou t it if they do? Will you accept the responsibility in this experiment with the 4th amendment? Am I being paranoid? Not really. I follow the news. I actually listen to what the NSA whist le-blowers are trying to tell us. Ed Snowden is but one of many who are telling us not to trust the intelligence gatherers. What they are saying loud and clear is this. "Big brother is here, We are being spied on in many ways we don't even think about. They lie to us and tell us that this data is ano nymous and is "metadata" They lie. It is used for politics, blackmail, spying on loved ones a nd personal enemies. It is used by people with very little govt clearance. "More than half o f SAIC's (44,000)employees have security clearances." There are too many stories out there to not be concerned about this. https://www.eff.org/es/nsa-spying/faq http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130805/10035024070/dea-not-only-gets-intellig ence-data- then-is-instructed-to-cover-up-where-it-gets-info.shtml I asked what Mr. Kalb's reaction was when he heard what Ed Snowden is trying t o tell us. Mr. Luby was vague in the response, saying to the effect of "he's not sure exactly b ut suspects he is concerned" Well can I please ask again, What was Mr. Kalb's reaction to the NSA 's over reach into our 4th amendment. ? http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/31/nsa-top-secret-program-online-data If the answer is that he is very concerned, can you tell me why would he vot e to hand the contract to build the network infrastructure to a company that" cloaks its opera tions in great secrecy" and whose" biggest projects have turned out to be colossal failures," , a company that makes money on our wasteful and overspending govt. as the 4th largest defense contract,company.? SAIC The very same company that helped the NSA and CIA spy o n the US and LIE about it. Not only that but the newest scandal just revealed by Snowden is the Xkeyscore the complete and total collection of everything we do on the internet, this technology was developed by... can you guess? Not only that but every time the whistle-bl owers mention another program, as far as I can tell, SAIC is behind it. Also look up.project " Stellar Wind". "Trailblazer", Turbulance" http://cryptome.org/2013/08/nsa-xkeyscore-saic.htm This article from 2007(!) reads like a horror story. please comment. http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2007/03/spyagency200703 "And no contractor cloaks its operations in greater secrecy....a mounting collec tion of government audits and lawsuits brought by former employees for a variety of reas ons, some of them personal and some coming under federal whistle-blower statutes...a review by Vanity Fair of thousands of pages of documents, including corporate e- mail messages, offers disturbing revelations about the company's inner workings, its culture, and its leadership...--. .. In recent years the company has obviously made many missteps, and yet SAIC's influence in Washington seems only to grow, impervious to business setbacks or even to a stunning breach of security..--...SAIC has displa yed an uncanny ability to thrive in every conceivable political climate. It is the invi sible hand behind a huge portion of the national-security statethe one sector of the governm ent whose funds are limitless and whose continued growth is assured every time a politician utters the word "terrorism".....Often they do this work outside the p ublic eye, and with little official oversighteven if it involves the most sensitive matters of national security...--.. In recent years the company has obviously made many missteps, an d yet SAIC's influence in Washington seems only to grow, impervious to business setbac ks or even to a stunning breach of security..--....Beyster aggressively packed his com pany with former generals, admirals, diplomats, spies, and Cabinet officers of every kind to fill the company's board of directors and the upper echelons of its staff. These were the kinds of people who would always have easy access to the agencies they had left behindand who someday might even go back into government. And if you left SAIC to go back into government service, you had considerable incentive to keep SAIC's continuing goo d fortunes in mind...--.....SAIC executives have been involved at every stage of t he life cycle of the war in Iraq. SAIC personnel were instrumental in pressing the case that weapons of mass destruction existed in Iraq in the first place, and that wa r was the only way to get rid of them. Then, as war became inevitable, SAIC secure d contracts for a broad range of operations in soon-to-be-occupied Iraq. When no w eapons of mass destruction were found, SAIC personnel staffed the commission that was s et up to investigate how American intelligence could have been so disastrously wrong.. .-- ...Once the project was under way, the SAIC manager overseeing the job realized that the work would cost much less than the amount SAIC had negotiated... his SAIC superiors suggested that he "harvest money out of [his] project and send it up t he corporate ladder..Was SAIC using the same formula in thousands upon thousands of other contracts it had with the government?.."" So it seems to me that we accepted the $2m grant, and gave it to a wasteful,secr etive,nefarious, defense contractor that has sold meta-data software that was used to collect any thing and everything illegally used by NSA and CIA etc. What did I miss. ? How much more are you planning on giving them to lie, spy, and violate our rights? We do NOT have to accept money from crooked, bloated, ineffective government a gencies under the guise of Protecting us Oaklanders. Say no to the DHS, help declare Oak land a Constitutional Zone. Help us fight back against a Big Brother State. This is a report on DHS by Homeland Security Committee, chairman Rep Bennie Thom pson in 2008 "DHS leadership has permitted a system of waste, abuse, mismanagement, vague contractual terms, overspending, bonuses for bad performance, contractors being hired to oversee contractors and the same missteps over and over again...A casual look at some of the Departments efforts leads to disturbing findings: $5 million dollar a mile fences; TWIC cards that cant be read; Ships that dont fit into ports; Formaldehyde soaked trailers that make the occupants sick, and An information sh aring program that law enforcement personnel do not want to use." or this. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/09/september-11-homeland-security- spending_n_953288.html "It opened a floodgate of money for private industry to sell scanners and other devices," said Charles Perrow, a Yale sociology professor who has called the creation of DHS "T he disaster after 9.11""A lot of money was kind of thrown at the problem," said John Gannon, a former deputy director of the CIA.....You certainly had an insufficient and an inexperi enced contracting team," said former DHS Inspector General Clark Kent Ervin. "And you certainly had rapacious contractors." Listen to what these reports are saying. DHS wastes money in a big way and throw s it a defense contract teams. Sounds exactly what this City Council wants to do. I hope this helps you guys connect these dots. Stand up to them. Let this become a big talking point in Oa kland. Lets get everyone talking about it. You will be considered, stand up politicians. will ca use debate on real issues, and will help the unaware get involved in what is really going on. A wi n, win, win. This can help cause national debate. Remember this Oakland issue was on reddit. You h ad a student from Harvard saying she is debating your interesting decision in her class. You have Ed Snowden and others bringing attention to this. You at least need to take a good hard look at SAIC and think seriously about lea ving them out of your final equation. According to an article in the east bay express,in 2011 there were 1871!! open r equests for analysis of crime scene data. Let's stop accepting and spending money on ineffec tive totalitarian surveillance, and start being hands on and actually spending money on things Oak land does not have that most Police Dept do. OPD has requested 1.3 million for 13 full time staffers . Oakland has an avg o f 30 open criminal cases, 6x the state avg. Oakland has a response time at 14.8 mins. double the ti mes of SF, Anaheim, Fresno, Sacramento. Can you show me how any of the surveillance has lowered this extremely high number. How do these other cities manage such a better level of efficiency than Oakland in m ost statistics. How has shotspotter specifically improved these times or numbers. ?(I'm guessing I will just have to research that myself too) Is this new technology effective? All this spying by the NSA , all of this erod ing of our bill of rights, all of this about non constitutional zones. This technology just doesn't deter any crime or "terrorism" Please point me to one report or reason that this surveillance syst em will help protect us from crime(terrorism) Since the Patriot Act was introduced in 2001, and with hundreds of millions of phone calls recorded, they maybe, might have caught ONE, that is 1. http://www.democracynow.org/2013/8/1/nsa_confirms_dragnet_phone_records_collecti on effectiveness of CCTV http://www.no-cctv.org.uk/caseagainst/london_cameras_versus_clearup.asp What kind of research or time has Mr. Kalb or city council spent looking into the DAC and its legality? Why did he on July 9th, sound excited? "sounds good to me!" On July 16 th he tried to imply that the public should be aware of , and be there to inform him on things he didn't know "I wish you guys were here 2 weeks ago for the public safety meeting" , like having the OUSD feed go to the DAC, and not having any plans or knowledge of what they would do conce rning storage of the data. Why didn't Mr. Kalb or anyone else raise additional questions about the Lic Pl ate reading technology.? ACLU specifically raised this point that was either missed or ignor ed by everyone there. This should NOT be part of the DAC. Do you know what kind of video analytics DAC would be capable of in July '14? Ms. Gibson McElhaney asked if there was "video movement or facial recognition technology?" The spokesman just referenced the facial rec, does this mean there WILL be video mov ement analysis? What this an oversight, or what would that mean exactly? Are you able to tell me any more info on Shot Spotter technology. ? How many a re now in Oakland? How many are in district 1? What is the effectiveness ? What have you d one to ensure they are not listening to and storing conversations on the street? Oh yeah I had to inform Mr. Luby on the fact that the people who run that company lied to us. Can you please do something about that? Comments? http://www.southcoasttoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20120111/NEWS/20111033 9 "ShotSpotter officials say their acoustic sensors, set up to detect gunfire, ar e not designed to record conversations on the street. However, court documents show that audio sur veillance helped provide specific details that enabled police to string together the seque nce of events that ended in the fatal shooting of Pina, 20, in the South End. The apparent ability of ShotSpotter to record voices on the street raises que stions about privacy rights and highlights another example of how emerging technologies can p ose challenges to enforcing the law while also protecting civil liberties.....On Jan . 6, during bail arguments for Jonathan Flores, 20, who is charged with murder, Assistant Distric t Attorney Dan Hourihan said ShotSpotter recorded the arguing and yelling at the corner of Dartmouth and Matthew streets." Questions every politician should ask of themselves. When will you consider t he war on terror over? What liberties are you ok with losing, and what would be going to far? Then I would ask why a $2m port grant for terrorism includes surveillance of ALL residents. I look forward to any response, I look forward to any further discussion on th ese issues. I am not going away. I have only recently(2+years)begun to dig into the constr aints that the government has been putting on the American people. I am supposed to be a free p erson. I am supposed to be protected and represented by people that swore an oath to the CON STITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES. I'm guessing you've read this part , its at the very top. SECTION 1. All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Am ong these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting p roperty, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy. I will personally hold all of you accountable for voting against anything you' ve sworn to from this point forward. I am going to do my best to promote these ideals. I helped start a youtube channel to keep an eye on your guys."WakeUpOakland" I am going to use my many pe rsonal oakland contacts and start promoting the rights we have as free Americans leavin g in the free state of California. The great people of Oakland deserve to have their liberties protected, our public servants to listen the people. We need the Police to Protect and Serve. N ot spy, intimidate, and violate rights. We need our Fire Dept to come up with local plans and polici es that don't tie into DHS money and rules. As a resident in district one in Oakland, I now put Mr. Kalb and the city co uncil on notice. I am watching you. I'll leave you with this. As Philip Dick put it in an interview for SF Eye magazine in 1996: "Any government which assumes that the population is going to do something evil has already lost its franchise to govern. The tacit contract between a government and the pe ople governed is that the government will trust the people and the people will trust the governme nt. But once the government begins to mistrust the people it is governing, it loses its mandate t o rule because it is no longer acting as a spokesman for the people, but is acting as an agent of per secution". Love Jim.