Latest Revelations on the FBI's Data Mining of America

An anonymous reader writes "You probably already knew that the FBI was data mining Americans in the "search" for potential terrorists, but did you know that they're also supposed to be looking for people in the U.S. engaged in criminal activity that is not really supposed to be the province of the federal government? Now the feds are alleged to be data mining for insurance fraudsters, identity thieves, and questionable online pharmacists. That's what they're telling us now. What else could they be looking for that they are not telling us about?"

Re:Among other things?

[ArcherB]

After the J Edgar Hoover bit, the FBI is in no position to blackmail anyone.

Call me when they find Osama. Or all those "lost billions" in government funds.


Actually, it's the CIA that is tasked with finding Osama. Well, unless Osama is somewhere in the US and commits a crime that crosses state lines or something.

But, but ...

[bi_boy]

But if you have nothing to hide .... oh yeah [slashdot.org].

Re:don't trust the governmetn

[Anonymous Coward]

From the immortal writings of Douglas Adams:

The major problem -- one of the major problems, for there are several - one of the many major problems with governing people is that of whom you get to do it; or rather of who manages to get people to let them do it to them.
To summarize: it is a well known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it. To summarize the summary: anyone who is capible of getting themselves made [insert office here (the original uses "President")] should on no account be allowed to do the job. To summarize that summary, people are the problem.

That is the FBI's job.

[flyingfsck]

You should get annoyed when the CIA does that. As long as it is the FBI, it is OK. That is what they are supposed to do. It is called 'Police Work'.

Re:Nothing to hide

[leereyno]

You're arguing from the flawed premise that privacy is about hiding one's sins. It is not. Privacy is about liberty, about the right of each individual to personal sovereignty. That which is private is beyond the legitimate purview of the state, or of society. Privacy is not about the things that people do wrong in secret. It is simply the sum of all that is not public.

You claim you have nothing to hide, but you do. If you were forced to walk down main street without a stitch of clothes on, defecate into a bucket in plain sight, and then present the contents to passers-by for inspection, I guarantee that your respect for privacy would be improved tremendously. It would be even further improved if the details of your paycheck, credit card statements, and bank balance were to be presented to the world via a large electronic billboard on your front lawn. If this idea truly does not bother you, then I invite you to publish those financial details here. Put your money where your mouth is.

The long and short of it is that there are aspects of each person's life that they and they alone have the rightful authority to regulate. The only way to ensure that this right is not abridged or undermined is to keep those aspects secret.

Privacy is the first protector of liberty.

Re:republicansarefuckingfascists

[MikeJ9919]

The largest federal powergrab in the history of the United States? Have you read any history?

Some better examples:

(1) The Reconstruction Congress forcing the ratification of the 14th Amendment as a condition for readmitting the Confederacy to the Union. This eventually gave the federal government final say over whether just about anything the states did was Constitutional.

(2) The massive expansion in size and spending of the federal government under Roosevelt, claiming the right to regulate practically anything under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. Would you believe that the Supreme Court determined that a man growing wheat for his own family's consumption could be prevented from doing so because that consumption, taken together with others doing the same thing, would overall reduce the national demand for wheat? You should, because it not only happened, it's still good law. In fact, the only pushback against it has come from...wait for it...Republicans.

(3) Abraham Lincoln unilaterally suspended habeas corpus on United States soil as applied to United States citizens.

You were saying?

Re:That's Pre-Homeland Security

[OriginalArlen]

Seems as good a point as any to mention that the EFF's continuing legal fight for information on illegal surveillance has turned up definitely evidence that Gonzales was lying [eff.org] when he acted all surprised to hear that NSLs (National Security Letters, the things you're not allowed to tell anyone about if you get one.) Turns out the FBI were well aware NSLs were being abused for routine (non-terrorist) surveillance. In fact Gonzales had been sent a report on one such incident the week before he testified - under Oath - to Congress that there were no such problems.

I'm actually starting to feel slightly hopeful for the first for years - this century, in fact! - that the tide of BigBrother-dom is going to get rolled back somewhat. The first cracks in the dam are appearing as the end of the Dubya regime approaches. It's just like Saddam's generals doing deals with the US through back-channels in 2002-3. Except without the bombs and bullets and such, obviously.

Re:I can see a use for this.

[mooingyak]

Actually, they are criminal offenses. If you ever take a closer look at the question, it's usually phrased something like "Have you ever been convicted of a crime (other than moving violations)?"

They're generally misdemeanors and are so prevalent that nobody treats it as a criminal record.