Another Day In Big Brother Land - Part I

Another Day In Big Brother Land is a short story in many parts. And chronicles the events around one citizen's life. While the actual events depicted are made up for the most part, they are based on True Events, existing laws and technology and its uses as they exist today! And this is what makes the incidents so unsettling - that the laws and technology is in place right here, right now as you read, and it is often being used exactly as it is described in the story.

The Letter

Bob Newbury sat down and wrote a letter. The news item he had just read infuriated him so much he just had to pen his thoughts. And once written, he whipped off a copy from his color laser printer - a printer he'd bought to print off the photos he took as part of his photography hobby - and sent it to the newspaper - anonymously, of course, because Bob was a freedom and privacy advocate who loathed how govt was taking away our freedoms and privacy little by little, and he trusted them even less.

He had all but forgotten about it when four days later two men - with a third waiting in the car at the curb - came to his door. They were from the government and wanted to talk to him about his letter.

It seems he had written some words and phrases that triggered a "Suspect Person Report" (SPR) in the newspaper office. The SPR alerts are automatically sent to the FBI. And the FBI then trace the letter back to its sender.

Bob knows that cops - ALL cops - consider there that are two types of people in the world... Cops and Everyone else. And that if you aren't a cop, then you are not to be trusted. Bob also knew the mistrust extends then to other cops not in your type of police work. Which is to say, Feds distrust state cops. Internal Affairs distrust all cops bar Internal Affairs. And so on. So Bob knew the two men at his door considered him almost as bad as a criminal, if for no other reason than he wasn't a cop.

Tweedledee spoke first. "We'd like to talk to you about a letter you wrote, Mr Newbury. May we come in?" and he motioned to open the screen door which he knew was locked because he had tried it before knocking. They always try it before knocking so they know if it is open and you have opened your wooden door, it is harder to deny them entry when they start coming in uninvited.

But Bob knew their tricks and the screen door was his protection. That is why it didn't have insect screen as the mesh but security mesh - it looks like insect screen but is made of thicker metal and cannot be cut or broken into. And it is also why he had a screen door that had five locking points when locked - three in the door pillar, one in the top of the door's frame and one that went into the floor.

To the officer's request Bob said, "Excuse me, I'll be right back." He turned from the officers and in full sight of the men, went to the small kitchen table behind him. He grabbed the micro-cassette recorder that he had been dictating into when they had knocked on his door and returned. He clicked the Record button and then said, "Please repeat what you said. I am recording this conversation."

The two officers looked at each other, said nothing, turned and walked away.

Bob spoke into his tape recorder, "The two men who came to my door, with a third man waiting in the car, and who asked about a letter I had written, just walked off after I asked them to repeat what they said on tape. As I look out the window I see the license plate number is 555-XVD and the car is a black Lincoln Town Car. The time is now 12:36 hours on Thursday, November 18, 2004" and he clicked off the recording.

He knew which letter they were talking about. And he could guess why they might want to ask him about it. He had, after all, been fairly blunt with what he wrote. But what concerned him was HOW they had tracked the letter to him. He had printed it from paper he hadn't handled directly by printing off five copies and sending the fifth copy. He had only handled the paper by its edges. And he'd made sure not to leave prints on the envelope or stamp. So if it wasn't his fingerprints they used to find out who sent it - and he didn't think it was because even if they had lifted his prints they didn't have a copy of his prints on file - then it was something else. But what?

At first he thought it could have been traced back to him through the mail. The post office's stamp that gets stamped on the postage stamp could be coded. So it can be determined where mail was dropped off to be delivered. The spooks could have then gone and got surveillance footage, spotted him dropping it off and got his license plate number, and traced him that way.

To see if this was how they may have discovered him he took a trip to the same post box he dropped the mail into. He was extremely cautious as he didn't want to be filmed doing his reconnaissance. He needn't have worried though. There were no camera's to be found anywhere. So they didn't find him that way. Nevertheless, next time, he vowed, he would take mail to the post office by bicycle so there would be no license plate numbers to track. Better to be safe than sorry. Because you never knew when cameras would be installed.

He didn't think they traced him through the laser toner as he only used original toner. So they didn't get him by analyzing the toner, discovering it was made by a third party who only distributes in two stores, and then got footage of those stores. The original toner he used could be bought pretty well anywhere. At any office supply store as well as toner refill businesses.

For the life of him he couldn't figure it out. So he got online, logged in to his secure email system and typed a message to a friend of his - a fellow freedom and privacy advocate - encrypted it with PGP and sent it off.

He did have PGP on his email software at home but he preferred not to use it to send and receive encrypted email. He figured if the govt came and took his computer, they would ask him for the password anyway. And besides, they would know who he had been sending emails to. So by using an online email system, only he knew of its existence.

The secure email service he preferred to use is called MailVault and it also uses PGP. He likes it because no matter whereabouts in the world he may be, he can check his email. So he doesn't have to reconfigure access codes for checking through his internet provider. And, a lot of his contacts also use MailVault, so the email they send each other never leaves the MailVault system.

When he first got online he didn't think too much about encrypting email. Then one day one of his "friends" pointed out that sending unencrypted email was like sending a postcard - anyone could read it - whereas sending encrypted email was like sending a letter in an envelope - no-one could read it. So he decided that encrypted email was the way to go and had opened two accounts with MailVault. An account only he and his closest freedom and privacy friends knew of, and one he used to request information from businesses and the like. He called this second one his "throw away" account, because if needed he could just shut it down without any loss to him.

Anyway. Within the hour his friend emailed him back. As they are both advocates of freedom and privacy, they have a tendency to get to the point quickly in the emails they send. For instance, the email he sent asking for ideas simply said, "Visit from Feds today over letter I'd sent to newspaper. No fingerprints on paper or envelope. No hidden surveillance cameras at PO. How could they have tracked me?"

When he saw his friend's email in his inbox he entered his pass-key to unencrypt it and saw, "One possibility at this link: http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1093&u=/pcworld/118664&printer=1. Get new printer. Buy second hand from private sale."

He followed the link and saw the following...

Government Uses Color Laser Printer Technology to Track Documents

WASHINGTON--Next time you make a printout from your color laser printer, shine an LED flashlight beam on it and examine it closely with a magnifying glass. You might be able to see the small, scattered yellow dots printed there that could be used to trace the document back to you.

According to experts, several printer companies quietly encode the serial number and the manufacturing code of their color laser printers and color copiers on every document those machines produce. Governments, including the United States, already use the hidden markings to track counterfeiters.

Peter Crean, a senior research fellow at Xerox, says his company's laser printers, copiers and multifunction workstations, such as its WorkCentre Pro series, put the "serial number of each machine coded in little yellow dots" in every printout. The millimeter-sized dots appear about every inch on a page, nestled within the printed words and margins.

"It's a trail back to you, like a license plate," Crean says.

...and this was just the first few paragraphs. The rest of the article revealed how it all began in an effort to "help stop counterfeiting" when color printers first came on the market, and how the tracking by the govt was only used as such - only used to help stop and catch counterfeiters. But he knew differently, didn't he? Because he had just had two gummit men come to his door and they had tracked him thanks to this system the printer manufacturers had put in place in their product. A system they felt no need to tell the consumers about.

The words of his friend echoed in his mind... Get a new printer. Buy second hand from private sale.

Yes. This was the trick. That way, if they tracked it all they would end up with is the address of the original owner and not him. So he'd buy a printer from a private citizen - can't trust the second hand stores not to record details and pass them on - and he'd pay cash and not want a receipt. And to make doubly sure, he'd get a black and white printer only.

To overcome his lack of a color printer for the photos he took, he figured a color inkjet photo printer might do. After all, they were for his enjoyment and it wasn't like he was selling them.

Having decided to get a second hand black and white laser printer from a private seller, he now needed to dispose of his current color laser printer. He thought about selling it. But knew if the buyer did something with it then he'd have more goons come knocking on his door. And that was something he didn't want. So the only option was to destroy it. But first, a replacement printer.

He hopped in his car and drove down town into a cell phone store and bought a pre-paid cell phone. He'd use that to call around to buy his new second hand printer and could dispose of the phone after he was done. And thus no record of him looking for an another printer would appear on his phone bill.

Arriving home with his new cell phone which he immediately put on to charge, he logged online to his anonymizing service, which disguised his IP so no-one would be able to trace his web surfing back to him, and headed for the online newspaper classifieds. As he surfed the various listings he jotted down the phone numbers and a brief description for later calling.

With his classified browsing done he began calling the numbers listed in the ads. After a few calls he found the printer he wanted and arranged to go see it, and buy it if it was suitable.

Checking the bus schedule, he worked out the time table and which bus he would have to catch to see the printer. Knowing which bus he was going to catch he drove to near the bus stop and parked around the corner, got out of his car and walked to the bus stop carrying a dufflebag. If the printer was the right one he would put it in his dufflebag and catch the bus back.

He decided to use a bus to buy the printer because he didn't want any possible way for him to be linked with the printer. He thought if he sent another letter which was somehow traced, it would be traced to the previous owner. The cops would question the previous owner and may learn which car the new owner was driving. But if he walked up to the house and left on foot as well, then the best anyone could do was track him to the bus stop he got off at.

Arriving at the house, he introduced himself as Steve Thorn and asked to see the printer. It was hooked up to the computer and had a few sheets of paper in it. He fired up Windows Wordpad, typed in a few sentences and clicked to print it. It printed fine. Next, he opened up the printer's "Toolbox" software and ran it through the self-test. It passed with flying colors. And after checking that all the installation disks and ancillary items were in order, he paid cash for it, tucked it in his dufflebag and walk off back to the bus stop. Ready to resume his normal activities secure in the knowledge the government could not track him using embedded printer serial numbers.

Guilty By Association

During the phony "Cold War", it is rumored that when Americans went to visit the USSR, they would be questioned upon their return. Questioned to find out any secrets about the USSR they may have stumbled upon. And questioned - though it won't be admitted - to find out if they were "communist sympathizers" who may have gone to the USSR to pass on secrets or learn stuff for later "activation".

Movies were even made that depicted normal every day Joes and Janes who were "sleepers" for the ghastly USSR communist machines. And upon activation they would go to hypnotically implanted locations, gather the weapons they had been trained in, and blow stuff up.

I suppose the idea behind such movies was to scare us into not trusting even our neighbors, because they might be commy bastards.

And even today, with the phony War on Terror (War on Freedom more likely), we have the govt urging us to report anything and everything that could be terror related. And to help get more people to report, you can do so anonymously. Things like this...

Last month, while waiting in line to pay at a gas station, the Muslim couple in front of me bought an International Phone Card. He could speak a bit of English, she couldn't. And when asked how much credit they should get, she told him which card to buy.

Terribly mysterious, right? I mean, they live in a house presumably with a phone. And yet want to make an international call using an anonymous phone card.

This is the kind of thing the govt would like reported. And I had thought about blogging about it earlier. But figured I would soon hear the knock of govt fists on my door wanting to know which gas station. And upon being told which one, they would have gone down and confiscated the surveillance tapes. And probably fingered innocent people as worthy of being watched. People who had done nothing other than be Muslims. And then infringed upon those people's property rights - all in the name of fighting the phony war on terror.

I decided I'd rather not have the govt come knocking on my door and implicating me in the deprivation of someone else's property rights. So I said nothing, until now, over a month after the date and at a point when the tapes are long erased and re-recorded over.

Of course, the govt would view it as, "they might have been up to no good." And I agree. They "might" have been. But unless they have actually done something, they are not guilty of anything. They have hurt no-one.

And this recollection is what came into my head when I heard about the "terror suspect" caught in Australia. Apparently he had gone to Afghanistan to train in a terror camp. And apparently Bin Laden had asked him to be a "sleeper" in Australia until he was needed. And now he is in custody.

What is his crime?

He has shot no-one. He has bombed no-one. He doesn't have elaborate equipment at the ready to launch an attack on Australia. As far as I can ascertain, he is in custody soley on the ground of having gone to Afghanistan and trained in a camp there.

I am not saying he is not a bad man who wants to kill thousands of people who have done him no wrong. I am pointing out that he is guilty by association. And that he has actually committed no punishable crime.

And it concerns me a govt can just up and arrest people because they might, maybe, one day, at some time in the future, do something wrong.

We are already fined left, right and center for things we might do. Such as being booked for speeding because we might have a crash and hurt someone. Running a stop sign without stopping because we might have a crash, and so on. It's bloody ridiculous the things we adults get in trouble for. We are treated like kids.

And now we have a govt who can arrest you because you might do something bad one day. And this is a dangerous ability to condone. Because while you may cheer it is "them" that is getting done. One day it will be you. And when that day comes, there probably will not be anyone else left to defend you against such govt actions.

It's like the story: when the Nazis came for the Jews I said nothing because I was not a Jew. When they came for the blacks I said nothing for I was not black. When they came for the Catholics I said nothing for I was not a Catholic. When they came for the Anglicans I said nothing because I was a protestant. And when they came for me, there were no people left to say anything.

We need to realize, we live under the same laws as each other. The same laws that protect us from govt, protect the criminals too. And the same laws that infringe upon the rights of criminals, also allow the govt to infringe upon our rights. And THAT is what concerns me about this case... about a man who is arrested while he has actually committed no crime and infringed upon no-one's property rights. He is guilty until proven innocent. And like all govt things, the creep will widen this net. Then it will be a direct danger to you and me but it will be too late to complain because you condoned it early on.

I Am Old School, Apparently

Chatting to a client today about this and that. Conversation turns to taxes and tax deductions. He is puzzled why I would prefer to buy a cheaper second-hand Widget instead of the brand new widget that costs four times as much but which would give me good tax deductions.

I told him "I would rather have $100 and pay $30 tax, instead of not have $100 just to save paying $30 tax."

His reply was, "Oh, you're old school."

"Yeah but my way I get to keep $70 whereas the other way sees me without $100 just so I don't have to pay $30 tax" I replied.

"Yep. You're old school" he said in a kind of smug condescending way.

It's like car rego" I added. "I only pay half rego every six months because it makes sense."

He asked why I should do that even though it works out more expensive.

And I told him it's like this. "Imagine I get my rego bill and it's $600 for the year - or $300 for six months. If I have $600 I can take $300 and pay rego and then use the other $300 to run ads, which will generate more than $300 worth of business in six months. I will get my original $300 back and then some."

A light went on in his head. He could see the sense in this. But I still don't think he sees the sense in keeping $100 and paying $30 tax, over spending $100 on a depreciating widget just to avoid $30 tax.

I felt like saying, "Hey, if you want a $30 rebate after spending $100, you can send me $100 all day long and for every $100 you send me I'll send you back $30."

But I refrained myself. And drove away wondering how silly the "new school" think must be. And trying to figure out what "old school" really means. I concluded, "Old school means 'making as much money as you can and paying tax on it' whereas new school is 'spend as much money as you can on things which go down in value, just so you don't pay tax'."

I'll stick with old school, thanks.

You Are Under Arrest For Smoking

When informed that smoking was not allowed, Sharon Stone's character in Basic Instinct says something like, "What, are you going to arrest me for smoking?"

At the time we all laughed, because the idea of being arrested for smoking seemed absurd. It seemed so 1903 - when a lady was, in fact, arrested for smoking in public in New York city.

But now, it isn't quite so funny, is it?

You've got Smoking Bans being forced onto restaurants and drinking establishments in England and Australia and the USA.

Those in favor of such bans are jumping for joy at how now workers can work in those workplaces without fear of getting a breathing disease. And other people can now go out without being forced to breath in the smoke.

Yet I find these new laws unsettling.

For one, they are infringing upon the property rights of the business owner. It is their business, their property, their building. If they want to allow someone to smoke in it, it is their decision. Otherwise you accept that the government owns businesses. And you accept that business owners are the property and slaves of the government and must do what the master says.

If it is wrong for me to come into your business and tell you what you can and cannot allow inside your own business, then it stands to reason it must be wrong for the government to do so.

What is illegal for an individual to do (infringe on another person's property rights) MUST be illegal for a government to do as well. Otherwise we accept the government is master and we are its slaves.

Also, with regard to the workers now working in a smoke free workplace, I say, they all knew smoking was permitted BEFORE they were employed. And no-one forced them to work there. If they don't like smoke so much, then don't get a job working in a smoke-filled workplace.

When you choose, of your own volition, to work under certain conditions, you have no right to complain about those conditions. The same choice you exercised to work in that business in the first place can be exercised to leave that business and seek work elsewhere. No-one is forcing you to work there.

The same applies to those who frequent such places. If they do not like going into a smoke-filled place, then they should not go into such places. And if they do decide to go into such places of their own free will, then they have no right to complain.

It is as simple as that. NO other argument stands up because they imply a right of the government to dictate and rule over - in a slave/master fashion - people and businesses as they see fit. The government is making moral codes for people and that is not its job! It's job is nothing other than protecting the property rights of the people. NOT to infringe upon those rights at its whim due to populace outcries and lobby group pressures.

When our state leader was questioned on the smoking ban he and his leftist party forced onto all restaurants and other eateries, his response was a typical lefty one - we are doing it for people's health and that is more important than anything else.

I disagree.

While health is important, and a conscious entity's health is paramount, without freedom all the health in the world matters not. For if we take our state's chief lying bastard's words to their logical conclusions, we would all have optimum health while living in 12 x 12 prison cells. We would have zero freedom but would receive all the health (government approved of course) that we wanted. We would not be free to seek out our own health practitioners. We would all be forced to subjugate ourselves to the gummit health care providers. We would live as prisoners, but at least we would experience govt sanctioned and approved health.

Obviously, health is not more important than everything else. And for the head lying bastard to use this claim to justify a property right infringement, shows the depths these power-mongers will go to, to wrest more power from us and into their hands.

Is there a solution to the smoking ban?

Yes. A business owner can form a group made of ALL restaurants, bars, clubs and cafes, and they can ALL go on strike for one week. The business owners can all shut their doors. Teaching a lesson to the gummit and the worker's unions about who is really in charge. - Can you imagine the chaos that would ensue if all restaurants, bars, clubs and cafes closed for a week?

Of course, this would never happen. There would always be one business that would open in the hopes of capturing all the business. So another solution is needed. And there are two.

Solution # 1: Close the business. This would put people out of work. So much for the precious smoke-free jobs. They would all be gone because patrons would stop visiting those bars and clubs. As something like 70% of the patrons of those places smoke, the business would lose so much revenue it would be forced to close its doors. (This is already happening in New York - BUT - the lobby groups who pushed it through have phony statistics to show business has not been effected. While the restaurant association {who has correct figures being the actual association involved with restaurant owners} shows closures and massive loss of business - none of it reported by the leftist press who see all leftist workings as infallible and business owners as scumbags who deserve whatever they get.)

Solutions # 2: Remodel the business to include a large undercover outdoor area where smoking can take place. Have only a small indoor place which would basically see orders being taken for outside delivery. This would require a large capital investment. And the business may not recoup its investment because it would be seeing the large investment being spent without an increase in patronage. The investment would only keep the existing customer numbers. As it is tough already, the extra repayments needed to carry the expenditure, could put the business under.

The resulting effect of the bans will be as if many businesses had gone on strike. Thousands of people will be put out of work due to decreased patronage - which means less revenue - and business closure.

To stem this I see the gummit getting back into the act and allowing smoking in certain places under certain conditions. And basically issuing Smoking Licenses - like they issue alcohol licenses. And the control of smoking will have been effected, with the gummit making additional revenue.

Although, I can see the growth of smoking clubs, as well. Where people go to have a cigarette or cigar. Maybe such clubs would even apply for a liquor license. HA! (They wouldn't be a pub or bar that allowed smoking, they would be a smoking club that sold alcohol.)

And this smoking ban will be the tip of the ice-berg. For once this has been regulated there is not much of a step to regulate other aspects of the hospitality industry. How much longer before bread is deemed bad for us. And all bread is banned from restaurants et al, for fear we will get fat? Or banning red meat due to mad cow disease? Or banning coffee because it contains caffeine? I'm sure you get the picture.

The right to allow smoking or not allow smoking should have been left in the hands of the businesses in question. If there was enough outcry for non-smoking pubs and clubs, the free market system will have seen one emerge to capture the market. And upon seeing the success of it, other pubs and clubs would have emerged and existing ones followed suit. The fact it hadn't happened (bar the exceptions below) should have been an indication of the poor "non-smoking" market for pubs and clubs.

Fast food restaurants like McDonald's, Hungry Jacks, Pizza Hut, and so on, are all non-smoking. They were able to regulate themselves.

Other businesses are also able to regulate themselves. This government induced and forced ban is just another instance, in a long line of instances, of the government infringing upon our property rights and treating us like slaves.