Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

FBI Can't Find Its Drone Privacy Reports

Posted by timothy on from the loaned-them-to-the-IRS dept.

v3rgEz (125380) writes "Programs run by the federal government are typically required to undergo a Privacy Impact Assessment if there's a chance they'll veer into monitoring the activities of citizens: The assessments help balance the risks and benefits of the program, and help guide any oversight to prevent abuse. But despite being legally mandated, the FBI and Justice Department have had a tough time producing the assessments done in conjunction with the Bureau's domestic surveillance drone program, first telling privacy advocates to file a FOIA request, and then rejecting that request, before ultimately claiming they now simply can't find the documents altogether."

78 comments

  1. SHoulda e-mailed it to Jeb Bush by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Then no problem.

  2. Good Job by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They set a good example for intelligence.

    1. Re:Good Job by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      So when is this second amendment right going to be put to use? Honestly Americans just keep slavishly knuckling under to their government whenever their civil liberties are infringed. Whether it's the NSA's illegal surveillance programs or the stingray use by the police or the FBI's privacy-invading drone program the public still does nothing. All the harping on about freedom, liberty and the need for guns in case the government needs to be replaced is all just bullshit, how much more downtrodden can you even get?!

    2. Re:Good Job by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even a cursory glance at the 2nd amendment will show it does not give you the right to use arms. Only to keep and bear them. What you speak of is in the body of the constitution - a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. So, you see, all the mouthy Slashdot people, who take it up the ass at their local NATIONAL airport, are doing the best they can.
      You can dress a sheep up in wolfs clothes, it makes the sheep feel good, but the wolf just laughs. The real problem is that people are generally nice and forgiving and have a hard time believing that their School Board director, Mayor, Congressmen and President are nothing more than sociopaththievinglyingCOXUKRS. That's no reason to shoot them.
      Just stop electing them. Unless of course, you're exactly like them. Hmmm, if you voted for George Bush, or Barack Obama, chances are in the next election you will vote for either Hillary Clinton, or whatever rat bastard the other rat bastards will shove down your throat. Because invariably, people get the government they deserve.
      Finally, please stop trotting out the bill of rights like it was written on stone tablets. The bill of rights is simply a dumbed down bunch of examples of inalienable rights. given to you by God. If you don't have a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence then you should just tear up the constitution, as Captain Kirk would say "must apply to everyone or they mean nothing." including sociopaththievinglyingCOXUKRS.

    3. Re: Good Job by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      tl;dr

    4. Re: Good Job by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It really wasn't that long... How hard is it to read a paragraph?

    5. Re: Good Job by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When it's filled with random capitalization, bold and italics and gibberish? Pretty hard.

      If we're going to bandy sci-fi quotes, "stop making your point so ineffectively!".

    6. Re:Good Job by kilfarsnar · · Score: 2

      So when is this second amendment right going to be put to use? Honestly Americans just keep slavishly knuckling under to their government whenever their civil liberties are infringed. Whether it's the NSA's illegal surveillance programs or the stingray use by the police or the FBI's privacy-invading drone program the public still does nothing. All the harping on about freedom, liberty and the need for guns in case the government needs to be replaced is all just bullshit, how much more downtrodden can you even get?!

      The Second Amendment right will be put to use when people have more to gain than to lose. That is not the case today, and really we should hope it does not become the case. How would it work anyway, this Second Amendment option? Just start shooting at FBI agents? See how far that gets you.

      As for how much more downtrodden we can get, it's a lot. A lot more downtrodden. We are not even close to being downtrodden enough to violently revolt against the government. As I said earlier, we should hope we do not get to that point.

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    7. Re:Good Job by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reading about the conditions before the French Revolution is very eye-opening. It's not "more to gain then to lose," it's more like "having nothing to lose."

      But uncoordinated small arms are pretty useless. The power of the 2nd Amendment (as currently interpreted) to enable citizens to resist their government is negligible. The premise of a well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State is simply false, and it always has been. Unsupported assertions, sure, but find me an example where a militia was actually successful at repelling a determined attacker. Keep in mind that the American Revolution can in no way be described as a war of militia; the outcome was entirely determined by French cannon.

  3. What A Coincidence by Guy+From+V · · Score: 1

    I can't find my AKM with a giggle-switch, either.

    1. Re:What A Coincidence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure when the time comes the'll "help" you find it in a little cell in cell block D.

  4. Why not ask the NSA for a copy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm fairly certain they'll have one.

    Amerikkka, land of the cowards and home of the surveillance state.

  5. Privacy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of course they can't find them; they're private.

  6. It was... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    on the same crashed hard drive the IRS used.

    1. Re:It was... by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      And across multiple laptops, and backup arrays too! Remember folks, most transparent administration in history.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    2. Re:It was... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Congrats on being one of the useful idiots still distracted by the political circus. Keep playing that party ticket!

    3. Re:It was... by Mashiki · · Score: 2

      Congrats on being one of the useful idiots still distracted by the political circus. Keep playing that party ticket!

      The only useful idiot is yourself. Otherwise, you'd be right there calling the bullshit, bullshit instead of hiding and going "oh-boo-hoo."

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
  7. Stingray? by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 2

    Has anyone checked for this regarding the Stingray cell data collection program? Since "FBI Says All Public Records Requests For Stingray Documents Must Be Routed Through It," you'd think that these should also have a privacy report -- right?

  8. There, you have your answer! by leehwtsohg · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The original question was if they did any privacy assessment report of the impact of using drones. I think by saying that they can't find any such report, the answer seems pretty obvious....

    1. Re:There, you have your answer! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You only think the answer is obvious.

      I, on the other hand, think we're dealing with a different class of people than you esteem the FBI to be. I'm awaiting the next report to the Justice Department's demands, which should go something like, "We found out what happened to our reports, you see our dog ate them."

    2. Re:There, you have your answer! by jd2112 · · Score: 2

      The original question was if they did any privacy assessment report of the impact of using drones. I think by saying that they can't find any such report, the answer seems pretty obvious....

      I think they should look where they found the IRS emails...

      --
      Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
    3. Re:There, you have your answer! by sociocapitalist · · Score: 2

      The original question was if they did any privacy assessment report of the impact of using drones. I think by saying that they can't find any such report, the answer seems pretty obvious....

      Not obvious at all actually, as it could be that they didn't do such assessments out of incompetence, which is relatively benign, or it could be that they did do the assessments and they don't want anyone to know how invasive they're being (perhaps illegally) which is a very different situation.

      --
      blindly antisocialist = antisocial
  9. The Jewish people control America, and the America by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Putin set to drop "truth bomb" on USA, will Russia blow 9/11 wide open?


    Every time we do something you tell me Americans will do this and will do that. I want to tell you something very clear, don’t worry about American pressure on Israel, we, the Jewish people control America, and the Americans know it. - Former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon

    Does Netanyahu Speak for You

  10. Lois Lerner is so happy right now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shred that data FBI agent guy, you will get a promotion and a raise, and at worst an early (paid) retirement!

  11. Lost my phone. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My phone hay left my side. So now the tech lives to find it. Only sacrificing my privacy for it. Must have deleted the files by accident.

  12. Official Govm't Excuse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    So, "we can't find the legal documents to support this activity, but we're going to carry on doing it anyway" is now an excuse sanctioned by arms of the Federal Government?
    Cool. I will have to bear that in mind, because it'll make life a whole lot easier.

    "I can't find my driver's license or vehicle title documents, but you have no grounds to stop me driving"
    "I can't find my proof of legal residency, but that doesn't give you the right to deport me"
    "I can't find any proof that I filed my taxes last year, but so what?"

    Or am I being naive in thinking that one law applies to all?

    (Captcha: "drones". Wow.)

    1. Re:Official Govm't Excuse by Sarten-X · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      You're being naive in thinking that you understand the underlying basis of the relevant "one law".

      "The law" does not guarantee you the ability to drive, remain in the country, or escape from tax penalties. However, you are guaranteed due process, where the inconvenience to you is compared to the severity of the accusation, and an established procedure is followed to ultimately determine if (and if so, to what extent) you are liable for the incident in question.

      If you can't find your license or title, you may be given a citation or even prevented from driving temporarily, but that's usually not enough to cause a judge to suspend your driving outright. Similarly, having no proof of residency won't get you deported immediately, but it will get you into the court system while paperwork is sorted out to determine what should happen. Having no paperwork for last year's taxes is practically irrelevant, since as far as I know, prior years' tax forms are not necessary to fulfill any legal mandate, but getting rid of them may make other (voluntary) processes more difficult, like contesting the IRS during an audit or establishing a financial history.

      Absolutely none of your examples are the start of an imminent path to criminal liability. There's always a point where a court will consider the impact of the case, and decide whether punishing you will likely be beneficial enough to society to justify your inconvenience. Likewise, the FBI losing paperwork isn't a reason in itself to stop drone surveillance. Rather, the issue should now begin its own due process, with various oversight committees meeting and discussing whether the risk of privacy invasion outweighs the benefits of having a drone program.

      Of course, outside of the Internet echo chamber, privacy isn't really a big deal as long as it isn't being violated intentionally to harass someone, so I fully expect the program to continue, probably with a requirement to find the reports or redo the evaluation.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    2. Re:Official Govm't Excuse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's called "plausible deniability" And it doesn't stop at govt level, corporations do it all the time.

    3. Re:Official Govm't Excuse by Sarten-X · · Score: 1

      ...and individuals do it too, but then it's often lumped in with "reasonable doubt". Everybody gets a chance to defend themselves and make things right.

      Apparently, though, it's "flamebait" to point out that world isn't as broken as the Slashdot hivemind thinks. Oi.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    4. Re:Official Govm't Excuse by khallow · · Score: 1

      Of course, outside of the Internet echo chamber, privacy isn't really a big deal as long as it isn't being violated intentionally to harass someone, so I fully expect the program to continue, probably with a requirement to find the reports or redo the evaluation.

      Or used to rob someone blind or obtain a marketing advantage in elections or the creation of policy. Or used in the future to create and maintain some nasty tyranny. For example, some future proscription list of people to imprison or kill can be created from data taken today.

      There's always a point where a court will consider the impact of the case, and decide whether punishing you will likely be beneficial enough to society to justify your inconvenience.

      Unless the rule of law no longer exists at some future time. The that point doesn't exist as well. Massive, uncontrolled, unaccountable data collection on us is not just about what the government can do to us today, but also what they can do to us tomorrow as a result of having that power.

  13. Nothing ever happens to them. by rmdingler · · Score: 3, Insightful
    They do what they will under the guise of security theatre. LEOs and TLAs routinely disregard anything remotely inconvenient for them in the pursuit of their mission.

    Any citizen paying attention a small fraction of the time can see that the rights of the governed just get in the way of these "patriots" solemn duty to protect us.

    I don't know who you blame for the way things are. Is it the fault of the violators of the Constitution or the complacence the general public seems to have regarding government malfeasance?

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

    1. Re: Nothing ever happens to them. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's the baby boomers who are to blame. They were so wrapped up in capitalism and Americanism and fear, and this is the country they built. Fucking idiots. Never took the time to think about what they were creating.

    2. Re:Nothing ever happens to them. by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      And yet it was A-OK when Lois Lerner at the IRS lost her records. Ooops! Well, better not to investigate that, let's move on.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    3. Re:Nothing ever happens to them. by Bob9113 · · Score: 1

      I don't know who you blame for the way things are. Is it the fault of the violators of the Constitution or the complacence the general public seems to have regarding government malfeasance?

      I have to place the blame with government officials. 80% of the public sways with the breeze because they are busy making the economy run and raising their families. It is both the job and the duty of elected officials to take their job as our representatives seriously; to not abuse the implicit trust of the 80% that is too busy working and raising their families to check up on the politicians' every decision. Assuming you have a sufficiently professional job, your boss doesn't check your work every day to make sure you haven't become corrupt or malevolent. It is not unreasonable to expect the same of our representatives.

      The unfortunate reality -- tested countless times through ages -- is that when government officials neglect that responsibility for too long, the club, guillotine, or musket will make a sloppy end to their hubris. The Founding Fathers were wise to lower the barriers to that path; not because it is desirable, but because once it becomes inevitable, the least suffering comes from getting it done quickly.

      --
      Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
    4. Re:Nothing ever happens to them. by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      The lost documents there were internal emails, which were normally retained for six months, and there was no clear existing requirement to keep them longer, as they weren't considered official documents. When official documents with required retention go AWOL, that's time for concern.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  14. Next to the stingray reports by wiredlogic · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's filed right next to the stingray privacy reports where they justify pissing all over the FCC's rules against operating an unlicensed transmitter.

    --
    I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
    1. Re:Next to the stingray reports by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      where they justify pissing all over the FCC's rules against operating an unlicensed transmitter.

      The FBI is a federal agency, and as such are covered by NTIA rules, not the FCC. FBI radios don't need FCC licenses, and you will not find any in the FCC ULS. It's a waste of time to complain about how the FBI isn't following FCC rules.

    2. Re:Next to the stingray reports by gl4ss · · Score: 2

      ntia only gives them assignment(license) to use their bands, not to interfere with fcc licensed bands... intercepting and decoding private comms permission then again is acquired from a judge in the form of a warrant. the rules the fbi is breaking were not made for the fbi and the fbi shouldn't have a free pass to break 'em in the first place.

      it's not a waste of time as such to complain about it. in your view fbi would be free to block all transmissions on a whim which clearly is not the case.

      they're using stingrays as they think(thought) they can get away with it without anyone noticing.. and the usage time for stingray devices is limited anyways since newer cell tech makes them obsolete so they only need to hush them for a while.

      as to the privacy report.. I suppose it's just really, really private.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    3. Re:Next to the stingray reports by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      ntia only gives them assignment(license) to use their bands, not to interfere with fcc licensed bands...

      First, wrong. Primary users have authority to interfere with secondary users in any band, whether it is pure FCC, pure NTIA, or a mix. And secondary users must not cause interference to, and must accept any interference from, primary users. It depends on the services involved, but your blanket statement is incorrect in its breadth.

      For example, the US Air Force (a federal agency operating under NTIA rules) is a primary user in a part of the amateur (FCC rules) 70cm radio band. USAF operates OTH radar in California in that band. Amateurs are thus required to reduce power or cease operation to prevent interference to that radar, and they must accept any interference from that radar. QED, NTIA rules absolutely allow a federal agency to interfere with FCC licensees.

      intercepting and decoding private comms permission then again is acquired from a judge in the form of a warrant.

      This has nothing to do with the one, very specific comment I made regarding the FBI (or any other federal agency, for that matter) breaking FCC rules.

      the rules the fbi is breaking were not made for the fbi and the fbi shouldn't have a free pass to break 'em in the first place.

      It appears you missed the point completely. The FBI is NOT SUBJECT TO FCC RULES. They are regulated by the NTIA. They don't need a "free pass" to break FCC rules any more than someone living in Germany needs a pass of any kind to break FCC rules.

      Complaints that the FBI is breaking rules they aren't subject to are going to fall on deaf ears.

      in your view fbi would be free to block all transmissions on a whim which clearly is not the case.

      I did not say that, so do not try claiming that such a stupid statement is "in my view". I said that the FBI is not subject to FCC rules, not that they have no rules.

    4. Re:Next to the stingray reports by BlueStrat · · Score: 1

      Primary users have authority to interfere with secondary users in any band, whether it is pure FCC, pure NTIA, or a mix.

      This term, I do not think it means what you think it means.

      A Primary User in radio spectrum jargon means the entity(s)/group(s) primarily licensed to use a specific piece of the radio spectrum. As such, the FBI is most definitely not a Primary User of the spectrum assigned to cellphones.

      To argue otherwise would be to argue against 80 years of FCC regulatory terms and definitions, including their interpretation and implementation to date.

      Seeing as your primary premise is incorrect, the rest of your argument is moot.

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    5. Re:Next to the stingray reports by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      A Primary User in radio spectrum jargon means the entity(s)/group(s) primarily licensed to use a specific piece of the radio spectrum.

      You have just provided a perfect example of a tautology. Primary users have primary licenses. Ok. What I gave is the practical result of that definition. Primary users, no matter which agency they get their license from, can cause interference to secondary users. That's the correction to the original statement I replied to that NTIA cannot issue licenses to agencies that would interfere with FCC licensed users.

      As such, the FBI is most definitely not a Primary User of the spectrum assigned to cellphones.

      I didn't say they were.

      Seeing as your primary premise is incorrect, the rest of your argument is moot.

      Seeing as you didn't understand what was being said ... show me where I said that the FBI was a primary user of any frequency allocated to cell phone services. Or are you saying I am incorrect in the fact that the NTIA can authorize agencies to use frequencies that will cause interference to other licensed users? That's my "primary premise" in what you replied to.

      Now read again: what I said was 1) The FBI does not operate under FCC rules (a fact.) 2) The FBI operates under NTIA rules (another fact.) 3) Both the FCC and the NTIA can issue licenses for operations that will interfere with other licensed users (another fact). Stop trying to put words in my mouth.

  15. Re:Stingray? - Saw one UP CLOSE! by gabrieltss · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I was looking at houses in Wisconsin and looked at the below house. There is a cell tower on it that is fenced in. The realtor told us that the property the cell tower is on is owned by a . We drove up to the fenced in area around the cell tower and to the right of it is a brick building with a big steel door on it it that has a sign that says "Property of the Federal Government". There are big black cables going right from the cell tower into the brick building and back out again. It's a DIRECT tap off the cell phone tower!

    https://www.google.com/maps?q=...

    --
    The Truth is a Virus!!!
  16. IRS all over again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Two years later, after the techs actually get the harddrives. We might actually know the truth. It has been said.

    1. Re:IRS all over again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True.

  17. Hope and Change. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

    Good thing Obama promised us "Hope and Change" and how he was going to run "the most transparent administration ever". Would hate for him to actually just be more of the same of his predecessor.

    1. Re:Hope and Change. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i think when you say "rope and chains" with your mouth full, you could mistakenly hear it as "hope and change".

  18. Owww! My balls is on everyone! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ignore whatever the Government does with your new Smart TV.

  19. Re:Stingray? - Saw one UP CLOSE! by Obfuscant · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The realtor told us that the property the cell tower is on is owned by a .

    Owned by an "invisible agency"?

    There are big black cables going right from the cell tower into the brick building and back out again. It's a DIRECT tap off the cell phone tower!

    Makes for a great conspiracy theory, but all fluff and no bite. It is very common for towers to have several co-located radio systems. Every location I know of in this area has several agencies all on the same tower. One coastal site I work at has Verizon, Coast Guard, and state radios.

    You should realize that the 700/800MHz antennas for public service and feds look identical to the same band antennas that cell phone carriers use, and even different bands can be hard to differentiate from a distance. Especially when the federal systems are trunking and need the same kind of directionality that cell systems do. A "tap off the cell phone tower" is meaningless scare-mongering. You don't tap the tower.

  20. Perhaps.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perhaps they could find the missing documents with a drone?

  21. Re:Stingray? - Saw one UP CLOSE! by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 3, Informative

    And Stingray devices are inherently mobile -- you aren't going to see one fixed-mounted like this.

  22. Re:Stingray? - Saw one UP CLOSE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Kinda interesting to see so many vehicles there, especially the dark SUV parked right up at the cell tower, that guy isn't visiting some other nearby building. Sites like this are usually unattended about 8750 out of the 8760 hours in a year, but that one looks like it has a manned facility there. Was it empty when you checked it out?

  23. Probably because by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The originals are/were in the process of being "lost" and in the meantime "copies" are "being made" ahem.. "found".

  24. put mulder and scully on the case by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    put mulder and scully on the case

    1. Re:put mulder and scully on the case by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty sure this information is gathering dust in the x-files office, it's about time to bring back Fox and Scully!

  25. How about asking the by singlevalley · · Score: 1

    default backup guys? It is now common knowledge that free backups are available for all your information at a single source.

  26. Who woulda thunk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I doubt it has anything to do with dumping incriminating evidence into people's backyards to de-falsify their accusations...

    I mean they'd probably happily admit to that before daring us to try to do anything about it.

  27. Ask the NSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The NSA probably has a copy of it, maybe they will find it.

  28. No, yet that have no issue maintaining my file. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    subject.

  29. These will never be used on domestic soil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anyone remember when these drones started about 10-15 years ago, it was a bold direct statement that this technology would never be used on domestic soil.

    Anyone remember all the promises? Now they are flying these around in our cities!

    1. Re:These will never be used on domestic soil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anyone remember when these drones started about 10-15 years ago, it was a bold direct statement that this technology would never be used on domestic soil.

      Remember when Google started and people were antsy about the data mining being done on their search queries. Google said that it was OK because the data couldn't be connected to a specific person. Now, they want your real name and phone number to make a Google account.

    2. Re:These will never be used on domestic soil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Someone, in the past couple of days, has suggested that we start searching for beautiful, expensive, obscure things. this way, we can 'tune' the search engines to serve us beautiful ads, or give some publicity to obscure things etc. domestic soil, i don't think you are considering the 'broadest' explanation of that term. for example, if you have an embassy in a foreign country, the embassy grounds are 'domestic soil'. I hope other countries understand this.

  30. What are you going to do about it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So what are you guys planning down their. Your government has given you much reason to revolt... is this not what your founding fathers warned you about?
    Common get it... don't be chicken. :)

  31. Re:Next Step by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

    I wouldn't have gone quite that far. But I think maybe it is time the FBI went the way of the dodo... because according to this, they already did.

  32. Re:Stingray? - Saw one UP CLOSE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Ever see any US gov't property that had signs, "Property of the Federal Government"? Not me, and I've seen hundreds or thousands of "Property of U.S. Government" signs. (I used to work for the government.)

    As someone else mentioned, Stingrays are small, mobile devices.

    There are thousands of mobile towers, most of them for cell service, some for 2-way radio systems, some for use by licensed amateurs. One could look in an FCC database to see who owns the license of transmitters at that site.

  33. Re:Next Step by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How is this a Troll post? It's a legit feeling for many around the country now.
    Although I think he mispelled NSA.

  34. We all know where it is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's at Jim's house of course!

  35. You don't understand how govt documents work by ArgumentBoy · · Score: 1

    The FBI is simply undertaking a minor delay tactic. Given current trajectories, I believe they have calculated that within a short time frame American citizens will have no remaining privacy. Then they can check the box (I am morally certain there is one) that says, "no discernible effect on citizens' privacy." Then they will be happy to post it.

  36. What a load! by sabbede · · Score: 1

    The FBI "lost" their privacy assessment? No. I don't buy it.

  37. Re:Next Step by canadiannomad · · Score: 1

    Yeah, I think the FBI has control of the moderation system....

    --
    Hmm, the humour and sarcasm seem to have been be lost on you.
  38. This theater is giving me a headache by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm confused at following the plot here.
        Somebody did something bad and lost (or never had) a Get Out of Jail Free Card.

    If they are above the law,
      why bother to setup a system they were not going to follow?
      perhaps they like the illusion that they are not.

    If they are not above the law,
        why does the guy stuck without the get out of jail free card not go to jail?
        same answer

    Best case, they truly believe they are doing the right thing and the illusion is necessary to get er done.
    Worst case, they're wrong and 1984 showed up a bit later than predicted.

    This is all very exciting.
    I just can't wait for the next episode.
    On second though, maybe I can.

    ps, For those who think it's evil to make fun of this, it's better to laugh than cry.
     

  39. Re:Next Step by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How is this a Troll post? It's a legit feeling

    "Dem niggers need ta go back ta africa" is also a "legit feeling". But that doesn't make it not a troll.

  40. Doesn't matter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That report doubtless never existed in the first place. The FBI knows that even if they got caught nothing would happen to them. What makes you think they are going to bother writing such a report now, even one spun in their favor? All that is going to happen is some FBI official will make a public statement claiming the FBI is above the law and everyone will think that is grand and forget about it. While in truth what should happen is all government surveillance drone use in this country would cease immediately until such a report is generated and approved. But everyone here knows that is never going to happen.

  41. Badges? by yusing · · Score: 1

    Badges? We don't need no steenking badges.

    --

    "You must try to forget all you have learned. You must begin to dream." -- Sherwood Anderson

    1. Re:Badges? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A little shampoo and some elbow grease and your badgers will smell fresh as a daisy.
      cpatcha: incisive

  42. Aha! by blue9steel · · Score: 2

    So they publicly admitted to committing a federal crime, I'm sure criminal prosecutions will be following swiftly then? Oh wait sorry, I forgot that the law only applies to little people.

  43. no reports no operating drones until...simple by __aanbvm4272 · · Score: 1

    Let me get this straight; The FBI can not investigate itself losing a report? Let us see how long it would take them to "find" the reports if all future drone spying is dependent on them releasing the report first. Of course national security will never allow such a "tool" to be turned off. They need 24hr operation on everyone in case the citizens have had enough corporate thuggery, right? The latest headlines; "Now we've seen it all, Drones used for keeping agents happy...Federal Boob Inspectors"

  44. Re:Stingray? - Saw one UP CLOSE! by gabrieltss · · Score: 1

    There was no one there on the Sunday I went to look at it.

    --
    The Truth is a Virus!!!