Slashdot Mirror
New FBI Operations Manual Increases Surveillance
betterunixthanunix writes "The New York Times is reporting that the new FBI operations manual suggests a broad increase in surveillance. Denoted the Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide, the manual officially lowers the bar of acceptability when it comes to engaging in surveillance activities, including allowing agents to perform such surveillance on people who are not suspected terrorists without opening an inquiry or officially recording their actions. The new manual also relaxes rules on administering lie detector tests, searching through a person's trash, and the use of teams to follow targeted individuals. It should be noted that these guidelines still fall within the general limits put in place by the attorney general."
0 comments, because they're watching
They are running out of things to do, ways to spend/waste tax payer dollars...
Why is the federal government so in love with polygraph machines given the scientific community's near-complete dismissal of polygraphs as valid?
(The cynical side of me says it's because they give superiors and judges a reason to pass their opinion as judgement on someone without any real evidence...)
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
Obvious troll is obvious.
yes, just as the TSA's vigilance has stopped many terrorists including the underwear and shoe bomber. and planes no longer drop out of the sky like hail.
...about this manual it is a good idea to regularly defecate into your trashcan.
"they" are going to keep trashing the Constitution; and 90%+ of "We The People" are going to continue to just sit there and take it. .sig
Want to join a tireless, irate minority that's actually, measurably turning the tide? We're gathering. We're winning. See my
Part of the Second American Revolution!
so is getting your crotch fondled without probable cause, or getting your bank account frozen for a month while bill checks bounce just because you deposited or spent more than your "usual" amount of money....but since we're now a police state instead of a democratic republic with rights none of that matters anymore
So, nothing is really different about what they could do, within the law, they're just being told by their executives that they should do more, within the law.
I see why this should be controversial. It appears that their policy has been not to do everything they could.
As the GOVcorps continues to take money out of the economy/circulation they know this causes stress on the people and want to catch any uprising so to fill the 180 FEMA detention camps across the country. If you doubt the reduction of currency in circulation then where did all the trillions (10+) go that so many countries are doing the bailout dance? Wikileaks showed that Israel has intentionally kept the Gaza strip on the brink of economic collapse.... for their sense of control. the "Trillion dollar bet" of the 90's drained south east Asia. Sept 10, 2001 Donald Rumsfeld stated 2.3 trillion of pentagon spending is unaccounted for and later there seems to be 9.7 trillion of bailout money is "We don't know where it went".... So the US doing the same to its people as Israel to the Gaza strip, simply requires more of the big brother watchful eye...And YES things are intentionally going to get worse.
All others aside, why is trash such a big deal? I was under the impression that anyone can look through anyone's trash provided it was on the sidewalk/street.
just a codification of what they've been doing all along since 9/12/2001.
The second casualty in (endless) war is the true Rule of Law.
You have "Unconstitutional" confused for "Inconvenient".
According to the summary and TFA, and the USAG, the changes are still constitutional. You may disagree with USAG, but you should doubt that the SCOTUS will.
BTW, these are all things that the agents can do, physically, at any time, and any abuse of that ability is still unconstitutional. It's just that now they don't have to go through red tape to get legitimate actions approved administratively. It wasn't a matter of getting a warrant before, and it isn't now. So it allows lower-level cops to abuse your rights, instead of requiring an executive decision to abuse your rights, if anyone's going to use these tools illegally.
So the whole "unreasonable search and seizure" part (Fourth Amendment) of the constitution doesn't really apply?
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
Yeah.. So?
For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
Its not a police state and there not all bad.
...and I pity the fool digging through my trashcan.
I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.
I like this line at the very end:
But she rejected arguments that the F.B.I. should focus only on investigations that begin with a firm reason for suspecting wrongdoing.
Is anyone else somewhat appalled that they don't need a "firm reason for suspecting wrongdoing" to waste time and money on an investigation? Add that to everything about this manual, and it kind of seems like the FBI is wasting enormous amounts of taxpayer money running around looking into random BS instead of focusing on serious issues. Even if we forget about the trampling of rights of innocent people here, and forget about them spending our money helping the MPAA/RIAA sue people, the mere fact that they are willing to investigate without a firm reason is bothersome from a "you-work-for-me-and-you're-wasting-time" perspective.
Please detail for us in what ways the FSP is "actually, measurably turning the tide". Don't just say "read the site"; who has time to trawl through the whole site? Spell it out for us. Or stop making empty boasts.
My impression of the FSP is that it will never reach the 20,000-signature mark, and the fewer than 1,000 members that have moved (or were already there) have made some impact on local politics, perhaps a little at the state level, and none at all at the national level. I'd be delighted to hear I'm wrong.
Unreasonable search and seizure of your trash which you left out on the curb and if you live in a city are paying money to the city to take from you?
It applies only if what the cops do is actually unreasonable.
Googling your name to see if you're a flamboyant crook isn't unreasonable.
Paywall? Seriously?
The three laws of thermodynamics:(1) You can't win. (2) You can't break even. (3) You can't even quit.
there is no cause for alarm, your elected government
is operating at normal and safe levels to protect you
against threats it has identified to the good of its members, and you
.
this legislation is no cause for alarm, and should be
regarded as normal and regular. Please augment any
feelings of dissatisfaction, fear, or confusion with your
regularly scheduled, preferred docu-drama-comedy sitcom lineups as
provided by your television. Those wishing to consume may do so at
or above their levels of discretionary spending, with or without regard
to this legislation or its details as the legislation has been designed to
be compatible with existing models of american consumerism.
Good people go to bed earlier.
It's getting worse by the day ... http://inthearena.blogs.cnn.com/2011/06/07/daniel-ellsberg-all-the-crimes-richard-nixon-committed-against-me-are-now-legal/ .. "Daniel Ellsberg: All the crimes Richard Nixon committed against me are now legal"
When I read this story in the local paper (probably a NYT or AP version, likely shrunk) it made it sound like that many of these things they've already been doing but that they required "opening an official investigation" or something to that effect, which involved some oversight but a ton of bureaucracy and turning the wheels of process.
The net effect seemed to be that they could continue to do some of this stuff, except it would require less organizational oversight and more personal discretion.
THIS is the part I find shocking. I read a story recently about an IRS agent who makes a point of running plates on sports cars he sees on the streets and then checking to see if the people who own the car list enough income on their taxes to justify the ownership. If it seems fishy, he then does a criminal audit.
Even though the people may be cheating on their taxes, this strikes me as kind of rogue behavior that I'd hope the FBI would be restrained from.
Is it reasonable for the FBI to go trolling through your life online, databases, trash, surveillance squads, and attending your meetings looking for random evidence of crime without having any "reasonable suspicion" of a specific crime?
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
A lot more are listed over at http://www.ronpaulforums.com/forumdisplay.php?253-New-Hampshire
Part of the Second American Revolution!
Surprisingly, the FBI waited to give out these new powers to their agents until just _after_ the Congress approved renewal of the PATRIOT Act. Wouldn't want to risk losing a few votes by doing it beforehand, while they were whining about how they needed to keep all the power they had.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
Many of the people moving to NH from Mass are doing so to escape "Taxachusetts" and to embrace the NH culture. Look at the towns near the border: some of the most staunch pro-liberty State Reps are from there.
Part of the Second American Revolution!
They are always watching you. No matter what you type, text, or tweet, they can and will read it and you will never even know.
After facebook facial recognition technology comes to fruition, your behavior patterns will be analyzed and recorded, and you may be 're-programmed' to fit back in to society nicely. If you fail to comply with the surveillance overlords, you must be prepared for the inevitable consequences.
The 'land of the free and the home of the brave' thanks you in advance for your cooperation.
Have a nice day.
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
You have "Unconstitutional" confused for "Inconvenient".
According to the summary and TFA, and the USAG, the changes are still constitutional. You may disagree with USAG, but you should doubt that the SCOTUS will.
It may not be common, but it does happen. There are two nuggets in this particular link. First, Alberto Gonzales claimed that the Constitution does not guarantee the right of habeas corpus -- just that, IF you already have the right, it can't be denied to you. Anyone familiar with the Constitution will understand that Gonzales' interpretation of the Constitution WRT habeas corpus is simply asinine. Second, in the linked article, Dean states that the Supreme Court has, in fact, rebuffed Gonzales' notion that the Constitution does not guarantee the right of habeas corpus (which, in all truth, I was not aware of until reading the article). I'm not saying that SCOTUS will always get it right when the AG gets it wrong, but sometimes SCOTUS does act as an effective brake on an otherwise out-of-control executive branch, fortunately. In this case, however, I'm not entirely sure I would count on SCOTUS to reign in the FBI. To my non-lawyer mind, some of these look sufficiently grey to possibly not trigger the "reasonableness" clause of the 4th Amendment (for example, searching through your trash, since, IIRC, there is precedent that once you put your trash on the curb, it's not an invasion of your privacy to search through it).
BTW, these are all things that the agents can do, physically, at any time, and any abuse of that ability is still unconstitutional. It's just that now they don't have to go through red tape to get legitimate actions approved administratively. It wasn't a matter of getting a warrant before, and it isn't now. So it allows lower-level cops to abuse your rights, instead of requiring an executive decision to abuse your rights, if anyone's going to use these tools illegally.
MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
What terrorists? One attack in a decade makes "such measures necessary"?
Israel, Northern Ireland and Spain are laughing. Ok, snickering, you don't laugh about the schoolyard bully, even if you learn that he's afraid alone in the dark. Home of the brave, my ass.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I may not be exactly thrilled by the FBI doing those things, but quite frankly IMHO*, what you publish publicly on-line and what meetings you publicly attend IRL aren't going to trigger the "reasonablness" provision of the 4th Amendment, no. That's kind of what "public" means. Should the FBI be required to get a warrant before reading your private e-mails or private Facebook (as an example) posts? Yes*. But if you post something in a public forum (for example, here on /.), all bets are off.
*These are my "interested layman" opinions. I am not now, nor have I ever been, a lawyer, and since I am therefore unqualified to provide it, this is NOT legal advice. Use this information at your own peril.
MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
"if you're not doing anything wrong, you've got nothing to hide"
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Not to mention it is too fucking cold up there for too much of the year.
Pick somewhere more temperate....and friendly (think more southern in direction).
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
You are doing those things in public, so yes.
So they're late with the implementation, what else did you expect from government?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Nice defeatist attitude. Might as well just give up and move to Canada or Europe. We'll manage without you.
The simple idea behind it all is that there is no way in hell you could possibly heed ALL laws ALL the time. I'm fairly sure I broke a law today. Without even noticing. Why? Because I don't know all the laws, duh. And since more and more laws make less and less sense intuitively, you're prone to breaking the rules sooner or later.
Now, if you've already been watched, they already got something to nail you with. Needn't be much. Playing your music a little too loud at odd times, letting your dog shit where it's not supposed, crossing the street at the wrong place, anything will do. Will anything of this be used to arrest you? Not really. At least as long as you don't become a "troublemaker". Like someone asking where certain money goes, or someone questioning the handouts to business or anyone else "inconvenient". Then you will get harassed with it 'til you realize that it's better for you if you didn't mess with the powers that are and let them get away with corruption and squandering.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
The surveillance society, like that in the novel 1984, continues to relentlessly expand, but most of us don't need to worry. Even though our emails, phone calls, purchases, banking, and records of most every thing we do and places we go are being stored and data-based indefinitely, most of us needn't be concerned. Why? Because most of us are insignificant harmless sheep, that's why. The only time we'll need to be concerned with this issue is if at some point we decide to try to think for ourselves and voice an idea that is unpopular with our rulers, expose corruption, or set right an injustice. Otherwise, don't worry, be happy.
"Every object the individual uses, every transaction they make and almost everywhere they go will create a detailed digital record. This will generate a wealth of information for public security organizations, and create huge opportunities for more effective and productive public security efforts." - EU Council Presidency paper
"The technotronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values. Soon it will be possible to assert almost continuous surveillance over every citizen and maintain up-to-date complete files containing even the most personal information about the citizen. These files will be subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities." - Zbigniew Brzezinski, political scientist, geostrategist, and statesman, United States National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter from 1977 to 1981
"The technological capacity that the intelligence community has given the government could enable it to impose total tyranny. And there would be no way to fight back, because the most careful effort to combine together in resistance to the government, no matter how privately it was done, is within the reach of the government to know." - U.S. Senator Frank Church, 1975
"About 90% of Americans are walking around with a portable tracking device all the time, and they have no idea." - Christopher Calabrese, lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union's Washington office, What Your Cell Phone Could Be Telling the Government, By Adam Cohen, 2010
"The new rules make clear, for example, that if the person with such a role is a victim or a witness rather than a target of an investigation, extra supervision is not necessary."
Ah, wow. Another example of potential bad guys getting more rights than victims/witnesses. Making something up here- "Oh, he was a victim of wire fraud. Let's go investigate HIM!" The whole article is scary (and I probably just make some list by saying that). We know that are rights have been eroding due to things like the Patriot Act, but now they going to just release agents to roam wild with NO supervision. Every group has a few bad apples; what are the odds that at least some in the 14,000 agents are going to abuse these new rules? Ever see "Unlawful Entry?" IMDB- http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0105699/
Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
Not bad. A dozen legisletors isn't very much out of 424, but it's enough to swing some close votes. I especially like the jury nullification bill; we should have those everywhere!
It does seem like the progress so far, however, is mostly with excessively intrusive but minor "nanny-state" measures such as seat belt laws or regulations, and not with more odious things such as abuses of government power or police power, or Constitutional violations. For example, does NH have a recognized right to videotape law enforcement officers acting in their official capacity? We've seen many cases recently where people have done this and have been threatened by officers (at least once at gunpoint), arrested, and/or charged with violating the officers' privacy. Makes it kind of hard to document abuses and get something done about them.
Does NH have a sunshine law? How good is it? Is it being followed?
Has the legislature tried to keep the TSA patdowns and nude x-ray machines out of the state? The Texas legislature passed something along those lines recently.
How about a law making it harder for the state and federal governments to wiretap or server-tap without a warrant?
Not mine by choice, but none of this should come as a surprise to anyone that's been awake in class. Tax dollars have been used to purchase access to commercial databases for their data mining pleasure for years now. A complicit Supreme Court allows them to go onto private property to plant tracking devices on vehicles, ISP's and telco's roll over and provide whatever they ask (for a fee, of course), and the list goes on. The new handbook codifies everything they've already been doing, just to create a more favorable legal footing when challenged in court.
There are other ways to deal with universal surveillance. I mention some here: :-) "
http://www.pdfernhout.net/on-dealing-with-social-hurricanes.html
"And our second biggest advantage is that our communications are monitored, which provides a channel by which we can turn enemies into friends.
A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
Then leave, or fight, or STFU. Who needs whiners?
Um, no. It's not the terrorists who won. It's the tyrants in government. The question is whether they can make it stick.
Yep. But what can we do about it? Vote for the Republican in 2012? Get the Democratic Party to nominate someone else?
My guess is he'll lose in 2012 because he's pissed off his base. Then we have four years to try to get a decent Democrat for 2016. Sure as hell no one in the GOP will fight the tide. And third parties are useless with the current voting system.
It should be pointed out that the FSP's success is also in large part due to a lot of New Hampshire Republicans being really libertarians and not so much the crony capitalists of the national Republican Party. They aren't interested in funneling large sums of public cash into their campaign contributor's pockets like many Republicans are nationwide. They've generally stayed true to what the GOP advertises itself to be economically: small government and low taxes. They've generally steered clear of the religious conservatives, and really distanced themselves from the nutcases.
Actually, New Hampshire Democrats have also pretty well stayed clear of the worst of their ilk too. There's not a lot of talk of corrupt union arrangements or unnecessary environmentalist hysteria (both parties pay close attention to legitimate environmentalist hysteria because it could be important for the tourist industry).
There's a lot about New Hampshire's government, both its people and its structure, that makes it very responsive to its citizens. It's one of the things I miss about living there.
I am officially gone from
Another source of anti-polygraph info. 60 Minutes did an anecdotally interesting test. In addition, let's look at this from a (politically motivated?) prosecutor's perspective. We can presume the prosecutor is politically motivated, not truth or justice inclined, because of the insistence on using a scientifically unreliable instrument. Say the accused is:
*Since the prosecutor will now take the position that polygraphs are unreliable and use other evidence to convict.
That may be, but it has the large advantage of being an early presidential primary state. There isn't likely any other state where a 20,000 vote swing could have much if any influence on national politics.
Part of the Second American Revolution!
I couldn't agree more. I've come to realize, after moving here, that NH is really the only state where this would work. Indeed, the FSP has a great document detailing 101 such reasons.
Part of the Second American Revolution!
That is good news. Thanks for taking the time to answer.
Just out of curiosity, would it be okay if we canned TSA so we'd all be free to carry firearms on to planes? Seems like a basic American right to me. How about battering rams to open cockpit doors, Americans won't be truly free unless they have this basic human right. Sticks of dynamite, the American Constitution would be travesty if these weren't allowed on.
Ummm...I am a bit confused about the reference to hail though. Are planes falling like hail in your area? Maybe you could contact your local sheriff. I'm sure s/he'd know what to do about that. Personally, I think you should get a crash helmet, it won't stop the big pieces but you could like it with tin foil for protection.
Special Agents with the IRS are expected to find some of their own cases. The thinking is that if a Special Agent understands how illegal tax avoidance works, he'll recognize it when he trips over it in daily life. SAs are allowed a bit of flexible time and access to (mostly, though not exclusively) public information sources to try to develop a case before it becomes an official case.
This isn't nearly as nefarious as it seems. Markers of illegal tax avoidance are sometimes so obvious that something really should be done.
Much of this sort of thing doesn't work out, of course. When I was an Officer (not an Agent and not a Special Agent) I helped do a background check on a prominent local businessman who had not paid taxes in the past. His tax liabilities had been written off as uncollectible. There's an automated check that happens yearly but if he had gone a few more years without paying the statute of limitations for collection would have run out.
Then he started appearing in local TV commercials in a quarter-million dollar car. When a local businessman starts prominently featuring such a bauble in his commercials, the obvious and by far most often correct assumption is that he's just putting it in the commercials to write it off. An "OI" (Other Investigation) form was filled out, dropped in a folder, and we were covered to do a compliance check on the local celebrity in question.
It turns out that his business had taken off quite well in the previous couple of years. He had paid off all his old debts, going back years, and was completely current in all ongoing obligations.
The OI form (which was literally a half-page, nearly blank form intended just to create a record of why we were looking at things we're not supposed to under normal circumstances) got a short sentence explaining that all was well. Then the folder went off to the federal records depository.
Does that really seem all that sinister?
I'm retired now but I occasionally run into situations that simply stink. From the retail establishment that doesn't close the cash drawer (to keep transactions off the books) to the apparently-no-job guy with the big family from Mexico who pays cash for a million-dollar home and idly tells the realtor that he's buying so he'll feel safe, to the employment agency that smurfs all their accounts offshore every night through banks on Indian reservations - there are lots of situations where it's obvious that there's no *normal* reason to do business that way.
If you're an IRS SA and one of those situations slaps you in the face you'd be crazy to not make a cursory check to see if there's an investigation to be made.
As for the "routine checks on fancy cars" - let's just say that one of the most obvious markers of funny business is too much car. Guys are just stupid like that.
The US is following a well worn path of history for empires.
Stage 1: Rebellion/Founding phase
Stage 2: Idealistic phase
Stage 3: Consolidation phase
Stage 4: Expansion phase
Stage 5: Golden Age
Stage 6: Over expansion phase
Stage 7: Inward/Xenophobic phase
Stage 8: Repression/Autocratic phase
Stage 1: Rebellion/Founding phase
Anytime the ruling class treat their citizens as the enemy, rebellion will sooner or later follow. The Arab world proves this. Though, it seems that Americans have a high treshold for being repressed, probably due to the social opium of mass media and entertainment.
I'm curious now, what's your attitude? is it optimistic? Victorious? Challenging? Why?
"Science can amuse and fascinate us all, but it is engineering that changes the world. " - Asimov.
10E10^100 interesting words and or phrases.
DEA meatsack
Project gamma tango
NEA
PETA
DES
NSa project talent tangerine
Rotten Amygdaloid
Oscar Mergatroid
Beat Under Control
Joylon West is a nazi
No elephants died in the making of the CIA
EAT MORE MEAT
MKumbrella
Fist of God
Technoeroticgodhood
Meme
Elvis is a patriot
Dood 41
I'd go on a Vegan diet but the delivery time from Vega is too long. --brownkitty
To be honest, if you're using taxpayer money + FBI field agents to act as garbageman, I am not going to be too worried about anything you might find.
You're obviously too incompetent to be a threat to me.
I am John Hurt.
A law enforcement officer's method for finding out whether or not something is actually unreasonable is to go ahead and do it, and see if anyone sues them.
I am John Hurt.
As long as it's cool that I do the same to them, totally.
Normally I don't care what FBI Agent #123132 and Agent #809823 are chatting about while watching surveillance videos, but the fact that they tend to do it in a dark room and only when their boss isn't around makes me suspicious that they might not have my best interests in mind. ;-)
I am John Hurt.
Just determined, that's all. Not going to give up on the United States or its people. Not going to give in to the bastards who want to turn it into a police state. We're sovereign citizens, everything the government does is ultimately up to us, and if the US goes down the tubes, it'll be our fault and no one else's.
BURN YOUR TRASH.
I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
Yes, but will I realize this before I'm disappeared? (Um, no.)
I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
Probably not. But then, that was not part of the spec.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.