
	by Tom Burghardt
	July 25, 2011
	
	from
	
	GlobalResearch Website
 
	
		
			| 
			Tom Burghardt is a 
			researcher and activist based in the San Francisco Bay Area. In 
			addition to publishing in Covert Action Quarterly and Global 
			Research, he is a Contributing Editor with  
			Cyrano's Journal Today.
			 
			His articles can be read on 
			Dissident Voice, The Intelligence Daily, Pacific Free Press, 
			Uncommon Thought Journal, and  
			the whistleblowing website 
			WikiLeaks.  
			He is the editor of Police 
			State America: U.S. Military "Civil Disturbance" Planning, 
			distributed by AK Press and has contributed to 
			the new book from Global 
			Research,  
			The Global Economic Crisis: The 
			Great Depression of the XXI Century. | 
	
	
	 
	
	 
	
	Following revelations earlier this year by 
	
	The 
	Tech Herald that security firms with close ties to the Pentagon ran black 
	ops for major U.S. banks and corporations, it became clear that proprietary 
	software developed for the military and U.S. intelligence was being used to 
	target Americans.
	
	Those firms, including now-defunct HBGary Federal, parent company 
	HBGary, 
	
	Palantir (a start-up flush 
	
	with cash from the CIA's venture capital arm 
	In-Q-Tel) and Berico Technologies had partnered-up with the Bank of 
	America's law firm 
	Hunton & Williams and the 
	U.S. Chamber of Commerce and 
	devised a sub rosa plan of attack 
	
	against WikiLeaks and Chamber 
	
	critics.
	
	And when the cyber-guerrilla collective 
	Anonymous published some 70,000 
	emails and documents filched from HBGary servers, it was off to the races.
	
	In the intervening months since that story first broke, journalists and 
	researchers have turned their attention to a dark web of security firms 
	developing surveillance software for law enforcement, the Pentagon, and 
	repressive foreign governments.
	
	Last week, 
	
	Wired revealed that one such firm,
	
	TruePosition, 
	
		
		"a holding of the Liberty Media giant that 
		owns Sirius XM and the Atlanta Braves," is marketing "something it calls 
		'location intelligence,' or LOCINT, to intelligence and law enforcement 
		agencies," investigative journalist Spencer Ackerman disclosed.
	
	
	The Pennsylvania-based company has sold their 
	location services system to NSA surveillance partner AT&T and T-Mobile, 
	allowing those carriers to pinpoint "over 60 million 911 calls annually."
	
		
		"For the better part of decade," Ackerman 
		writes, "TruePosition has had contracts to provide E-911 services with 
		AT&T (signed originally with Cingular in 2001, which AT&T acquired) and 
		T-Mobile (2003)."
	
	
	Known as "geofencing," the firm explains that 
	location tech,
	
		
		"collects, analyzes, stores and displays 
		real-time and historical wireless events and locations of targeted 
		mobile users."
	
	
	Bloomberg BusinessWeek
	
	reported that amongst the 
	services TruePosition offers clients are,
	
		
		"products for safety and security 
		applications, including family monitoring, personal medical alert, 
		emergency number service, and criminal tracking."
	
	
	Additionally, BusinessWeek reports, the company 
	tailors its "enterprise applications" to corporations interested in,
	
		
		"workforce management, asset tracking, and 
		location-based advertising; consumer applications, including local 
		search, traffic, and navigation."
	
	
	But what should concern readers is the firm's 
	"government applications" market which includes everything from "homeland 
	security" and "military intelligence" to "force tracking."
	
	According to 
	
	a press release posted on the firm's web site, the,
	
		
		"TruePosition Location Intelligence 
		Management System (LIMS)" is a "a multi-dimensional database, which uses 
		probes within mobile networks to capture and store all mobile phone 
		network events - including the time and the location of events. Mobile 
		phone events are items like calls made and received, text messages sent 
		and received, a phone powered on and off, and other rich mobile phone 
		intelligence."
	
	
	Deploying technology dubbed Uplink Time 
	Difference of Arrival (U-TDOA), the system, installed on cell phone towers, 
	identifies a phone's approximate location - within 30 meters - even if the 
	handset isn't equipped with GPS.
	
	Undoubtedly the system can save lives. 
	
		
		"In one case," Ackerman reports, "a 
		corrections officer... was abducted by a recent parolee. But because 
		her cellphone was turned on and her carrier used TruePosition's location 
		tech, police were able to locate the phone along a Kentucky highway. 
		They set up a roadblock, freed the officer and arrested her captor."
	
	
	All well and good. 
	
	 
	
	However, in the hands of repressive governments 
	or privacy-invading corporations, say Rupert Murdoch's 
	
	media empire, there 
	just might be far different outcomes.
 
	
	 
	
	
	
	A Link to the Murdoch 
	Scandal?
	
	The relevance of location intelligence in general and more pointedly, 
	TruePosition's LIMS cellphone surveillance products which may, or may not, 
	have been sold to London's Metropolitan Police and what role they may have 
	played in the Murdoch News of the World (NoW) phone hacking scandal have not 
	been explored by corporate media.
	
	While the "who, what, where" aspects of the scandal are now coming sharply 
	into focus, the "how," that is, the high-tech wizardry behind invasive 
	privacy breaches, and which firms developed and profited from their sale, 
	have been ignored.
	
	Such questions, and related business entanglements, should be of interest to 
	investigators on both sides of the Atlantic. After all, TruePosition's 
	parent company, the giant conglomerate 
	
	Liberty Media currently holds an 18 
	percent stake in News Corporation.
	
	With corporate tentacles stretching from investments in TimeWarner Cable to 
	Expedia and from QVC to Starz and beyond, Liberty Media is a multi-billion 
	dollar media behemoth with some $10.9 billion in revenue in 2010, according 
	to an 
	
	SEC filing by the firm.
	
	With deep pockets and political clout in Washington the company is "juiced."
	
	In 2011, Liberty's CEO, John C. Malone, surpassed Ted Turner as the largest 
	private landowner in the United States, controlling some 2.1 million acres 
	according to
	
	The New York Times.
	
	Dubbed "Darth Vader" by 
	
	The Independent, Malone acquired a 20 percent stake 
	in News Corp. back in 2000 and,
	
		
		"was one of the main investors who rode to 
		the rescue of Mr Murdoch in the early 1990s when News Corp was on its 
		knees."
	
	
	The New York Times
	
	reported back in 2005 that 
	Malone's firm was,
	
		
		"unlikely to unwind its investment in the 
		News Corporation" because he considered "the stake in the News 
		Corporation a long-term investment, meaning that the relationship 
		between him and Rupert Murdoch, the chairman of the News Corporation, 
		was not likely to be dissolved any time soon."
	
	
	After acrimonious mid-decade negotiations that 
	stretched out over two years, the media giants cobbled together a deal in 
	2006 resulting in a $11 billion asset swap, one that gave Liberty control of 
	the DirectTV Group whilst helping Murdoch "tighten his grip" on News Corp., 
	
	according to The New York Times.
	
	
	Interestingly enough during those negotiations, investment banking firms 
	Goldman Sachs and J.P. Morgan Chase along with the white shoe law firm Hogan 
	& Hartson advised News Corp., while Liberty was represented by Bear Stearns 
	and the Baker Botts law firm, long time Bush family consiglieres.
	
	All this can be chalked-up to an interesting set of coincidences. 
	
	 
	
	However, the high stakes involved and the 
	relationships and connections forged over decades, including those amongst 
	players who figured prominently in 
	capitalism's 2008 global economic crisis 
	and 
	Bush family corruption, cannot be ignored.
 
	
	 
	
	
	A Suspicious Death
	
	Last week's suspicious death of former NoW whistleblower Sean Hoare should 
	set alarm bells ringing.
	
	When the scandal broke, it was Hoare
	
	who told The New York Times last year 
	that senior editors at NoW and another Murdoch tabloid, The Sun, actively 
	encouraged staff to spy on celebrities and others, including,
	
		
			- 
			
			victims of the
			
			London terror attacks 
- 
			
			British soldiers killed in Afghanistan 
			and Iraq  
- 
			
			the murdered teenager Milly Dowler, 
	
	...all in pursuit of "exclusives."
	
	The Guardian
	
	reported that Hoare said that,
	
		
		"reporters at the NoW were able to use 
		police technology to locate people using their mobile phone signals, in 
		exchange for payments to police officers."
		
		"He said journalists were able to use 'pinging', which measured the 
		distance between a mobile handset and a number of phone masts to 
		pinpoint its location," The Guardian revealed.
	
	
	Hoare described how reporters would ask a news 
	desk executive to obtain the location of a target: 
	
		
		"Within 15 to 30 minutes someone on the news 
		desk would come back and say 'Right, that's where they are.'"
	
	
	Quite naturally, this raises the question which 
	"police technology" was used to massage NoW exclusives and which firms made 
	a pretty penny selling their wares to police, allegedly for purposes of 
	"fighting crime" and "counterterrorism"?
	
	It was Hoare after all 
	
	who told The New York Times just days before his 
	death that when he worked for NoW,
	
		
		"pinging cost the paper nearly $500 on each 
		occasion."
	
	
	According to the Times, Hoare found out how the 
	practice worked,
	
		
		"when he was scrambling to find someone and 
		was told that one of the news desk editors, Greg Miskiw, could help."
	
	
	The Times reports that Miskiw,
	
		
		"asked for the person's cellphone number, 
		and returned later with information showing the person's precise 
		location in Scotland."
	
	
	An unnamed "former Scotland Yard officer" 
	interviewed by the Times said "the individual" who provided confidential 
	information to NoW and other Murdoch holdings,
	
		
		"could have been one of a 
	small group entitled to authorize pinging requests," 
	
	
	...that is a senior 
	counterterrorism officer charged with keeping the British public "safe."
	
	Hoare told the Times,
	
		
		"the fact that it was a police officer was 
		clear from his exchange with Mr. Miskiw."
		
		"'I thought it was remarkable and asked him how he did it, and he said, 
		'It's the Old Bill, isn't it?'"
		
		"At that point, you don't ask questions," Hoare said.
	
	
	Yet despite the relevance of the reporter's 
	death to the scandal, police claimed Hoare's sudden demise was,
	
		
		"unexplained 
	but not thought to be suspicious." 
	
	
	Really?
	
	As the 
	
	World Socialist Web Site points out: 
	
		
		"The statement is at the very least 
		extraordinary, and at worst sinister in its implications."
	
	
	Left-wing journalist Chris Marsden wrote that,
	
		
		"Hoare is the man who broke silence on the 
		corrupt practices at the News of the World and, most specifically, 
		alleged that former editor Andy Coulson, who later became Prime Minister 
		David Cameron's director of communications, was fully aware of phone 
		hacking that took place on an 'industrial scale'."
	
	
	Aside from the secret state, what other entities 
	are capable of intercepting phone and other electronic communications on "an 
	industrial scale"? 
	
	 
	
	Given Rupert Murdoch's close ties to the 
	political establishment on both sides of the Atlantic, is it a stretch to 
	speculate that a "sympathetic" intelligence service wouldn't do all they 
	could to help a "friend," particularly if cash payments were involved?
	
	How could Hoare's death not be viewed suspiciously?
	
	Indeed, 
	
		
		"the morning after Hoare's body was found," 
		Mardsen writes, "former Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Paul 
		Stephenson and his former deputy, John Yates, were to give evidence 
		before a home affairs select committee. Stephenson had tendered his 
		resignation Sunday and Yates Monday."
	
	
	Conveniently, for those with much to hide, 
	including police, 
	
		
		"the death of Hoare means that his testimony 
		will never be heard by any such inquiry or, more importantly, by any 
		criminal investigation that may arise."
	
	
	Yet, despite a pending coroner's inquest into 
	the exact cause of the reporter's death, corporate media have rushed to 
	judgment, labeling anyone who raise suspicions as being, what else, 
	"conspiracy theorists."
	
	This despite the fact, as the World Socialist Web Site reported Saturday 
	that
	
	information has surfaced,
	
		
		"regarding the extent of News International 
		links to known criminals."
	
	
	Indeed, on July 6 left-wing journalist Robert 
	Stevens reported that,
	
		
		"Labour MP Tom Watson told Parliament that 
		News International chief executive and former News of the World editor 
		Rebekah Brooks 'was present at a meeting with Scotland Yard when police 
		officers pursuing a murder investigation provided her with evidence that 
		her newspaper was interfering with the pursuit of justice'."
		
		"'She was told of actions by people she paid to expose and discredit 
		David Cook [a Detective Superintendent] and his wife Jackie Haines so 
		that Mr. Cook would be prevented from completing an investigation into a 
		murder'.
		
		"Watson added," Stevens writes, that "'News International was paying 
		people to interfere with police officers and were doing so on behalf of 
		known criminals. We know now that News International had entered the 
		criminal underworld'."
	
	
	Although Hoare had suffered from years of 
	alcohol and cocaine abuse, he was in rehab and by all accounts on the road 
	to recovery.
	
	 
	
	Hoare could have died from natural causes but this has not yet 
	been established.
	
	Pending histology and toxicology tests which will take weeks, and a 
	coroner's inquest was adjourned July 21 until said test results were in, 
	short of a definitive finding, nothing can nor should be ruled out, 
	including murder, by a party or parties unknown.
	
	While it would be a fatal exercise in rank stupidity for News Corp. to rub 
	out Sean Hoare, would others, including police or organized crime figures 
	caught up in the scandal and known to have been paid by News Corp.,
	
		
		"people to interfere with police officers" 
		and to have done so "on behalf of known criminals," have such qualms?
	
	
	 
	
	
	An Open Question
	
	We do not know if TruePosition sold LIMS to London's Metropolitan Police, 
	key players in the Murdoch hacking scandal, and the firm won't say who they 
	sell to.
	
	However, whether they did or did not is a relevant question. 
	
	 
	
	That security firms develop and sell 
	privacy-killing products and then wash their hands of responsibility how and 
	by whom their products are used - for good or ill - is hardly irrelevant to 
	victims of police repression or private corruption by entities such as News 
	Corp.
	
	The issue here are the actions taken by our corporate and political minders 
	who believe that everything in terms of smashing down walls between public 
	and private life is up for grabs, a commodity auctioned off to the highest 
	bidder.
	
	
	While we are told by high-tech firms out to feather their nests and 
	politicians that "law enforcement" require we turn over all our data to 
	police to "keep us safe," the Murdoch scandal reveals precisely that it was 
	police agencies corrupted by giant corporations which had allowed such 
	criminal behavior to go unchecked for years.
	
	And with Congress and Obama Justice Department officials pursuing 
	legislation that will require mobile carriers to store and disclose 
	cell-tower data to police and secret state agencies - all without benefit of 
	a warrant, mind you - as well as encryption back doors built into the 
	internet, we are reaching a point where a perfect storm threatens privacy 
	well into the future, if not permanently.
 
	
	 
	
	
	A Looming Threat
	
	Since LIMS 2008 introduction some 75,000 mobile towers in the U.S. have been 
	equipped with the system, 
	
	FoxNews, ironically enough, reported two years 
	ago.
	
	That same report informed us that,
	
		
		"LOCINT continues to operate in Middle 
		Eastern and Asia-Pacific nations where no legal restrictions exist for 
		tracking cell phone signals."
	
	
	TruePosition's marketing vice president Dominic 
	Li told Fox,
	
		
		"when you establish a geofence, anytime a 
		mobile device enters the territory, our system will be alerted and 
		provide a message to the customer."
	
	
	Li went on to say,
	
		
		"we realize that this has a lot of value to 
		law enforcement agencies outside of search and rescue missions. It gives 
		rise to a whole host of new solutions for national security."
	
	
	In keeping with the firm's penchant for secrecy, 
	risk averse when it comes to negative publicity over the civil liberties' 
	implications of their products, 
	
		
		"citing security concerns," Fox reported 
		that "company officials declined to specify which countries currently 
		use the technology."
	
	
	
	
	TruePosition claims that while wireless 
	technology,
	
		
		"has revolutionized communication" it has a 
		"dark side" as "terrorists and criminals" exploit vulnerabilities to 
		create "serious new threats to the security of nations worldwide."
	
	
	Touting their ability to combine,
	
		
		"location determination and network data 
		mining technologies," TruePosition "offers government agencies, security 
		experts and law enforcement officials powerful, carrier-grade security 
		solutions with the power to defend against criminal and terrorist 
		activity."
	
	
	Never mind that most of the "serious new 
	threats" to global citizens' rights come from unaccountable state security 
	agencies and international financial cartels responsible for the greatest 
	theft of resources in human history.
	
	For interested parties such as TruePosition, 
	
		
		"actionable intelligence" in the form of 
		"data mining to monitor activity and behavior over time in order to 
		build detailed profiles and identify others that they associate with," 
		will somehow, magically one might say, lead to the apprehension of 
		"those who threaten the safety of citizens."
	
	
	Unasked is the question: who will protect us 
	from those who develop and sell such privacy killing technologies?
	
	
	Certainly not Congress which has introduced legislation,
	
		
		"that would force 
	Internet companies to log data about their customers," CNET News
		
		reported 
	earlier this month.
		 
		
		"As a homeland security tool," Wired 
		reported, LIMS is "enticing." 
	
	
	Brian Varano, TruePosition's marketing 
		director told Spencer Ackerman to,
	
		
		"imagine an 'invisible barrier around 
		sensitive sites like critical infrastructure,' such as oil refineries or 
		power plants."
"The barrier contains a list of known phones belonging to people who 
		work there, allowing them to pass freely through the covered radius. 'If 
		any phone enters that is not on the authorized list, [authorities] are 
		immediately notified,'" Varano told Wired.
	
	
	While TruePosition's technology may be useful 
	when it comes to protecting nuclear installations and other critical 
	infrastructure from unauthorized breaches and may be an important tool for 
	investigators tracking down drug gangs, human traffickers, kidnappers and 
	stalkers, as we have learned from the Murdoch scandal and the illegal 
	driftnet surveillance of Americans, the potential that governments and 
	private entities will abuse such powerful tools is also likely.
	
	According to Wired while,
	
		
		"TruePosition sells to mobile carriers," the 
	company is "cagey about whether the U.S. government uses its products."
	
	
	Abroad however, Ackerman writes,
	
	
		
		"it sells to governments, which it won't 
		name. Ever since it came out with LOCINT in 2008," Varano said that 
		"'Ministries of Defense and Interior from around the world began beating 
		down our door'."
	
	
	That technological "quick fixes" such as LOCINT 
	can augment the power of secret state agencies to "easily identify and 
	monitor networks of dissidents," doesn't seem to trouble the firm in the 
	least.
	
	In fact, such concerns don't even enter the equation. As Wired reported, the 
	company "saw a growth market in a field" where such products would have 
	extreme relevance: 
	
		
		"the expanding, globalized field of homeland 
		security."
		
		"It really was recession-proof," Varano explained to Ackerman, "because 
		in many parts of the world, the defense and security budgets have either 
		maintained where they were or increased by a large percentage."
	
	
	Small comfort to victims of globalized 
	surveillance and repression that in many places, including so-called 
	"Western democracies," are already an ubiquitous part of the political 
	landscape.
	
	Consider the ease with which police can deploy 
	
	LIMS for monitoring 
	dissidents, say anticapitalist activists, union leaders or citizen 
	organizers fighting against the wholesale theft of publicly-owned 
	infrastructure to well-connected corporations (Greece, Ireland or Spain for 
	example) by governments knuckling-under to IMF/ECB demands for so-called 
	"deficit reduction" schemes.
	
	As Stephen Graham points out in his seminal book 
	
	Cities Under Siege,
	
	
		
		"as the everyday spaces and systems of urban 
		everyday life are colonized by militarized control technologies" and 
		"notions of policing and war, domestic and foreign, peace and war become 
		less distinct, there emerges a massive boom in a convergent industrial 
		complex encompassing security, surveillance, military technology, 
		prisons, corrections, and electronic entertainment."
		
		"It is no accident," Graham writes, "that security-industrial complexes 
		blossom in parallel with the diffusion of market fundamentalist notions 
		for organizing social, economic and political life."
	
	
	Creating a climate of fear is key to those who 
	seek to manage daily life. 
	
	 
	
	Thus the various media-driven panics surrounding 
	nebulous, open-ended "wars" on "deficits," "drugs," "terror" and now 
	"cyber-crime."
	
	That firms such as 
	TruePosition and hundreds of others who step in to 
	capitalize on the highly-profitable "homeland security" market, hope to 
	continue flying under the radar, we would do well to recall U.S. Supreme 
	Court Justice Louis Brandeis who strongly admonished us that "sunlight is 
	the best disinfectant."