Implemnting Domestic Intelligence Surveillance from the Federation of American Scientists

IMPLEMENTING DOMESTIC INTELLIGENCE SURVEILLANCE

Upon lawful request and for a thousand dollars, Comcast, one of the
nation's leading telecommunications companies, will intercept its
customers' communications under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance
Act.

The cost for performing any FISA surveillance "requiring deployment of
an intercept device" is $1,000.00 for the "initial start-up fee
(including the first month of intercept service)," according to a newly
disclosed Comcast Handbook for Law Enforcement.

Thereafter, the surveillance fee goes down to "$750.00 per month for
each subsequent month in which the original [FISA] order or any
extensions of the original order are active."

With respect to surveillance policy, the Comcast manual hews closely to
the letter of the law, as one would hope and expect.

"If your [FISA intercept] request pertains to individuals outside the
U.S., please be sure you have complied with all the requirements in 50
U.S.C. sections 105A and/or 105B," the manual says, referring to
provisions of the Protect America Act that was enacted last month.
"Requests such as these can not be honored after one year and must be
dated prior to February 5, 2008, unless extended by Congress."

Comcast will also comply with disclosure demands presented in the form
of National Security Letters. However, the manual says, "Attention
must be paid to the various court proceedings in which the legal status
of such requests is at issue."

In short, "Comcast will assist law enforcement agencies in their
investigations while protecting subscriber privacy as required by law
and applicable privacy policies."

At the same time, "Comcast reserves the right to respond or object to,
or seek clarification of, any legal requests and treat legal requests
for subscriber information in any manner consistent with applicable
law."

A copy of the manual was obtained by Secrecy News.

See "Comcast Cable Law Enforcement Handbook," September 2007:

http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/docs/handbook.pdf

The role of telecommunications companies in intelligence surveillance
is under increased scrutiny as the Bush Administration seeks to shield
the companies from any liability associated with their cooperation in
what may be illegal warrantless surveillance.

Also, there are new indications that the unauthorized warrantless
surveillance program pre-dated 9/11. The Rocky Mountain News, the
Washington Post, and others reported allegations that the government
may have penalized Qwest Communications for refusing to participate in
a pre-9/11 National Security Agency surveillance program that the
company believed might be illegal.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/12/AR2007101202485.html

The Washington Post editorialized yesterday that the telecommunications
companies should indeed be immunized against liability, as the Bush
Administration desires. Even though it is not known exactly what the
companies did, the Post said, they "seem to us to have been acting as
patriotic corporate citizens in a difficult and uncharted environment."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/13/AR2007101301069.html

Writing in Salon.com, Glenn Greenwald disputed that view, arguing that
patriotism lies in compliance with the law, not in mere obedience to
executive authority.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/10/14/rule_of_law/index.html


RIGGING DROPS FOR SPECIAL OPS

Much of the doctrinal literature concerning Army special operations is
restricted from public disclosure, often for good reasons and sometimes
for reasons that are hard to understand (Secrecy News, 01/24/07).

But one new special operations manual has been approved for
unrestricted public disclosure.

As the title indicates, "Airdrop of Supplies and Equipment: Rigging
Loads for Special Operations" (FM 4.20-142, September 2007) deals with
the proper packaging of military supplies for aerial delivery via
parachute. A copy is available here (in a very large 28 MB PDF file):

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/fm4-20-142.pdf

Also on the subject of new military publications, the Congressional
Research Service updated its report "Defense: FY2008 Authorization and
Appropriations" on September 28, 2007:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL33999.pdf