EFF Uncovers Widespread FBI Intelligence Violations 268
An anonymous reader writes "EFF has uncovered widespread violations stemming from FBI intelligence investigations from 2001 — 2008. In a report released today, EFF documents alarming trends in the Bureau's intelligence investigation practices, suggesting that FBI intelligence investigations have compromised the civil liberties of American citizens far more frequently, and to a greater extent, than was previously assumed. Using documents obtained through EFF's Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) litigation, the report finds: Evidence of delays of 2.5 years, on average, between the occurrence of a violation and its eventual reporting to the Intelligence Oversight Board; reports of serious misconduct by FBI agents including lying in declarations to courts, using improper evidence to obtain grand jury subpoenas, and accessing password-protected files without a warrant; and indications that the FBI may have committed upwards of 40,000 possible intelligence violations in the 9 years since 9/11."
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Not a lot statistically. (Score:4, Interesting)
The summary makes it seem like a big number but if the FBI has ~36K people working for it that's just over 1 violation per employee in those 9 years. I'd expect to make at least one mistake in 9 years.
Re:You think??? (Score:2, Interesting)
no its always been bad, its the same how we view wars http://www.ted.com/talks/steven_pinker_on_the_myth_of_violence.html [ted.com]
basically we learn more about it faster then it gets better
Re:Actually, it is a lot less (Score:2, Interesting)
So because you don't understand math they are wrong? Seems like that's more your problems than theirs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance
I blame TV shows like 24, MI-5, and Law & Orde (Score:5, Interesting)
You know the shows I'm talking about: the ones that show spooks and law enforcers breaking their own ethical rules (and everyone else's) in the obsessive pursuit of goals and people who have been quietly pre-convicted outside of any court or due process. They just KNOW the person is guilty... they just have to concoct some a-moral scheme to PROVE it!
These shows plant the seed that such behavior is acceptable. It can't help but have repercussions in the real world, humans being as impressionable as they are. It's "the end justifies the means" yet again. Judicial impartiality? What's that?
Re:Of course they did (Score:5, Interesting)
Just for a moment let's give the public a mite more credit. I peg them at "we're upset but what can we really do?"
60's style protests don't work anymore. The tempo is wrong - Gov makes a 3/4 concession, keeps 1/4 of the evil, then slides a nasty twist on their concession as a dessert. Thing is, there's no "timeline" on this one - there's no "are we done yet" to know when we can do the 50's period of recovery. It's a thundering case of cabin fever where we all go crazy.
Re:percentages are important (Score:5, Interesting)
It is clear that the third is the case, and that at this point revolution is the only recourse the American people have to bring their government to heel. Bush started these abuses, Obama is continuing them, and it will get worse. The TSA is groping us; the big banks are plundering our country as fast as they can; Guantanamo is still operating; Congress is proposing a kill switch for the Internet rather than fess up to the misdeeds exposed by Wikileaks; and we still don't have any jobs worth a damn here.
How much more evidence do you need, America?
Re:Of course they did (Score:5, Interesting)
Lobby. They have computers, they have word processors. 1 letter and a mail merge reaches a whole lot of politicians. I've done it and it works. They will ignore an email but a respectful single page letter gets a lot of attention. So apathy is a pretty good description.
Best regards
John Citizen
Re:Of course they did (Score:5, Interesting)
Well, what I would see happening is a serious civil "unrest". It would be when the people take back their power from the government, and act in ways the people want.
Consider what has happened in the past. Not only in the short past of the United States of America, but all around the world.
Those with the ability organize and do things for change. That isn't misguided attempts [usatoday.com] drawn from the rantings of a horrible example of a pseudo-leader [google.com].
It is all of us, forming to stand up against what is wrong. "Legal" methods may not be enough. A letter writing campaign, and a few hundred of your friends standing on the sidewalk in front of the Congressional buildings with signs and chanting the slogan of the moment obviously has no effect. The 60's style protests didn't work in the 60's. They are, and always will be, an ineffective form of protest.
I have to say the following disclaimer. Assume it's in huge bolt text, flashing at you. I AM NOT RECOMMENDING, SUGGESTING, OR OTHERWISE INCITING ANY ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES.
Before anyone reads any farther, go read that statement again. If you still don't get it, put down your gun and your beer, sober up, and read it again until it makes sense.
So what would it take to bring change?
60's sit-ins, peaceful protests, peaceful assemblies, petitions, letter writing campaigns, and free-love-ins, just won't work. Well, I'm still for the free-love-ins, but we'll save those for another conversation. :)
The "Rally to Restore Sanity" brought about 250,000 people to Washington DC, and countless others who couldn't attend who supported from home. I was one of the later, as I couldn't afford to drive, fly, or walk to DC.
With 250,000 people standing there wanting to make change, they made speeches, and went home. The folks in power may have noted that something happened, but really their appearance didn't do anything except raise the total tourism dollars for DC by a little for 2010.
If you have 250,000 people who believe in your side enough to even show up, you have an army. Imagine those people walking into the US Capitol Building (and other assorted buildings) [wikipedia.org].
I would personally be proud to walk to the front of the group, stand in front of the representatives who are doing wrong and say "Sir, I represent these people, citizens of the United States of America. We do not believe that you are representing the needs, wants, and beliefs of the constituents who you have sworn to represent. We as the representatives of your constituents we respectively ask you to resign immediately and exit this building."
There are plenty of people among us, who would be excellent leaders. We wouldn't accept corruption. We have better morals than to take bribes in any form.
That sir, is how you make change in a totally non-violent way. Not one shot is fired. Not one person is injured (except for maybe the occasional trip and fall hazard). The only violence would come from the law enforcement professionals who some may take an unconstitutional stand against the people.
It is said that we have the "Four boxes of liberty", the soap, ballot, jury, and ammo boxes. There is no need to go to the fourth, unless the powers that be decide to use it against the citizens standing up for their rights. In reality, a couple hundred thousand people standing there saying "we want change", and really meaning it, do not have any reason to use violence. Well, except for possibly gently moving anyone who may try to block their way. You can be assured that someone in a uniform will