Is the FBI an agency out of control?

Originally posted 006/30/2011 on lubbockonline.com

Kevin Gosztola at Alternet.org looked at 5 types of FBI abuse of power. That abuse of power was, and is, assisted by the FISA court. The FISA court is supposed to oversee the FBI investigations, but unless oversight means rubberstamping electronic surveillance (1506 requests in 2011, 1506 approved) it's falling down on the job.

The court also granted "National Security Letters" on 14,000 people. National security letters pretty much give the FBI full access to your life:

They were also generous with granting “national security letters," which allow the FBI to force credit card companies, financial institutions, and internet service providers to give confidential records about customers’ subscriber information, phone number, email addresses and the websites they’ve visited. The FBI got permission to spy on 14,000 people in this way. Do they really think there are 14,000 terrorists living in the US?

With that backdrop, Kevin tells us that the FBI is seeking greater investigative power, and tells us of 5 types of investigations that show the last thing the FBI needs is more power:

1. Warrantless GPS tracking (I blogged about this last year)
2. FBI Targeting WikiLeaks and Bradley Manning Supporters. The FBI intimidated peole involved with the "Bradley Manning Support Network," a legal grassroots organization, for one.
3. FBI Spied on Children While Using 'Roving Wiretaps,' Intentionally Misled Courts on Freedom of Information Act Requests. Comparing documents from different FOIA requests discovered the deception.
4. FBI Entrapment of Muslims.
5. The Criminalization of Travel by the FBI. Vocal activists (not terrorists) are targeted because of disagreement with policy and travel abroad.

I think you should go read the whole article. It's 6 pages, but they're short, and the details he provides are compelling. The last point strikes me a little harder than the others because if I travelled internationally, I could be one of the people targeted. As it is I'm just a harmless crank who blogs in Lubbock, TX and occasionally emails congressmen and the President on issues I feel strongly about. But how long before that isn't enough to protect me from harassment?

Are you a better codebreaker than the FBI's best?

Originally published 4/01/11 on lubbockonline.com/glasshouses

Did you read "Encyclopedia Brown" growing up? One of the stories involved Encyclopedia learning to decode the product codes on items in the grocery store. That got me interested in cryptography. I'm still interested, but I've learned that I lack the patience required to be a really good cryptographer. But if you've always had a secret yearning to play secret agent and a desire to one up the FBI, I have just the thing. Michael Cooney of the "Layer 8" blog at Networkworld reports that the FBI is seeking help decrypting some notes found on the body of a murdered man in 1999.

This isn't an April Fools joke. The FBI has placed images of the notes here. If you like decoding those cryptograms in the Sunday paper you might give it a shot. The FBI's experts haven't been able to in 12 years, but right now they're hoping a fresh set of eyes and a different way of looking at the problem will work where experts haven't. They are also hoping that someone may be able to show them samples of similar code.

One interesting aspect of this code is that it may have been a code the victim had been using since he was a child. That made me wonder if maybe this isn't a code, but a language that was developed over 30 years or more. Maybe the FBI is looking for the wrong thing.

The FBI story is here.

 

Edited @ 11:09 to remove comment tags hiding some of the text.

Tell your representative, "Let the Patriot Act expire"

The new Republican majority in the house outsmarted themselves by pushing the extension of three provisions of the Patriot Act as an emergency vote. That made a 2/3 majority vote necessary to pass the extension. The extension failed to pass today by just 7 votes.

An extension is still possible if a regular vote can be scheduled before February 28th. Hopefully that won't happen. The three expiring provisions are wonderful for a police state, but slow death to a society founded on the ideal that government exists for the governed, not the other way around. They are:

• the provision allowing court approved roving wiretaps - those are taps that do not have to specify one location or device but can be moved as desired. This means that devices only peripherally related to the suspect can be tapped.
• the provision that allows court approved access to "any tangible thing" as long as it's related to a terror investigation. The concern here is that there is no check on this provision. It specifically prohibits using things or activities protected by the First Amendment, but as we learned last week, the FBI is not above violating civil liberties.
• Third is the provision that allows the surveillance of foreign nationals because they are foreign nationals. No connection to known or suspected terrorists or criminals necessary. The ultimate expression of "us vs them" mentality. Why are all the people protesting SB1070 screaming about this one?

The terrorist threat is real. It's not going away. But giving up our civil liberties does less to protect us than it does to provide the government access to our lives that it should not have. The biggest domestic contributor to the success of of the 9/11 attacks was lack of communication between intelligence agencies and even lack of communication within agencies. The Department of Homeland Security was created in part to correct that problem, but two years ago we learned that there has been little or no improvement. Giving government agencies access to more information when they don't even communicate the information they have effectively does nothing to improve security and much to invite abuse. Write your representative and tell him to let these provisions expire.

FBI may have violated U.S. citizens civil liberties 40,000 times since 9/11

The EFF released a report (pdf) last month on FBI violations of our civil liberties - of the rules that dictate how the FBI can investigate us. It covered the time period from 2001 to 2008, and showed disturbing trends in FBI investigations.

According to the EFF analysis of documents they received from freedom of information lawsuits the FBI may have had 40,000 violations in that time. The violations that were reported often weren't reported for years. The violations ranged from oversight guideline violations (failure to make reports to oversight organizations) to constitutional violations.

Part of the problem is that President Bush relaxed and even removed many of the rules on oversight of FBI operations. Without oversight any agency is likely to overstep it's bounds. President Obama has reinstated some of those controls, but hasn't clarified just what that means. This has some people concerned that the changes may be window dressing. But only time will tell.

FBI faking terrorist threats?

In an interesting piece on Alternet.org, Seth Freed Wessler asks, "Why are the Feds cultivating their own 'Homegrown Terrorists'?"

An intriguing question. I hadn't asked myself that question, but I had wondered that the thwarted terrorist attacks we've heard about seemed to involve young men duped into believing they were being recruited by Islamic terrorists. But none of them ever actually communicated with terrorists. Apparently none of them actually had any plans to commit terrorist acts until recruited by the FBI.

Mr. Wessler gives a brief recounting of the case of Antonio Martinez. Martinez converted to Islam, and was eventually approached on Facebook by the FBI, who set him up with (fake) explosives and a plan to use them. Martinez never had contact with any actual terrorists, and other than comments on Facebook saying he supported Jihad, wasn't looking for contacts. So what exactly made him a terrorist threat?

A former FBI agent who has been involved in the defense of persons arrested using these techniques claims that the majority of such cases are bogus - and even rely on hysteria more than hard evidence. In an interview on PBS's Frontline, former agent James Wedick lays out all the problems with the case against Hamid and Umer Hayat, a father and son convicted of planning a terrorist attack. Based on Wedick's interview and the FBI response given to Frontline, I tend to think Seth Wessler may be onto something.

Sitting here it's hard to be sure what's the truth. But it is interesting that in recent history the terrorists who were stopped were setup by the FBI, and the terrorists who almost succeeded were ignored by our intelligence community.