Is Threat of Surveillance New Reality for Law Firms?

, The Am Law Daily


For many lawyers who represent foreign governments, the recent revelation that the U.S. National Security Agency's Australian ally has been privy to communications between an American law firm and its international client comes as no surprise.

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Continue to Lexis Advance®

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at

What's being said

  • not available

    There are three broad parts to surveillance: Overall, Focused, Intrinsic 1.- Overall surveillance is performed to shed light on domestic security; from perspectives of domestic and international sources. 2.- Focused broad business surveillance is to glean information about foreign economic relationships concerning partnership structures of multinational corporations and their theoretical risk outcome projections. 3. Intrinsic surveillance of prime candidate individuals involved in formulating business and legal strategies which will impact the host country conducting the surveillance.Surveillance here may take on a more sinister aspect, which may involve the targeting of key individuals; namely the lawyers that are involved in secret ( simply for competitive advantage) contractual arrangements. The `crossing-the-line`` aspect occurs when telecommunications monitoring isn`t sufficient for the surveillance analysts and personal `tele-bio` feedback control mechanisms are needed to be physically installed in targeted individuals via microchips. The `clandestine`` methodologies for installation and monitoring are too sophisticated to outline here and therefore advise all lawyers who are involved in secret but legal corporate activities to scan themselves with a multi-range micro frequency indicator – especially after visiting a medical clinic for any reason in another country or even in the U.S.A. or Canada. Microchips can be inserted and be almost invisible to the eye, under the skin, scalp, lower back or elsewhere to resemble ie. cartilage, implantable with a syringe . They vary in size and function and all have high tech capability for much greater than simply tracking purposes. Typically the more sophisticated ones resemble human tissue as the layers of silicone microchip circuitry ( chip stacking) enveloped in a protein based substance are hermetically sealed and thus less likely for rejection by the immune system upon insertion. The reality is that it is happening and these control mechanisms do affect the human `bio`` systems including thought processes. They are totally illegal without permission or a court order but the `cover-up `capability` is beyond comprehension to most....for now..Fact : The microchip industry has a vast arsenal-inventory of variable multi-use human implantable microchips and there are insufficient laws to protect the public and specifically from key targeted individuals.Capt. Gary Kassbaum M.M.

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article #1202643519884

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.