Pentagon, FBI misusing secret info requests:

[Bob26003]

Pentagon, FBI misusing secret info requests: ACLU

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20071015/pl_af...BkW462HCj2s0NUE

WASHINGTON (AFP) - The Pentagon has misled Congress and the US public by conniving with the FBI to obtain hundreds of financial, telephone and Internet records without court approval, civil-rights campaigners said Sunday.

The American Civil Liberties Union, which has successfully challenged key planks of US anti-terrorism legislation, said it had uncovered 455 "National Security Letters" (NSLs) issued at the behest of the Department of Defense.

Before the ACLU's challenge, the USA Patriot Act had allowed the FBI to issue gag orders to prevent those receiving NSLs -- usually Internet service providers, banks and libraries -- from disclosing anything about the request.

Beyond the gag orders, the ACLU said its analysis of the letters showed the Pentagon and FBI had collaborated "to circumvent the law" and "provided misleading information to Congress" about the nature and reach of the requests.

"Once again, the Bush administration's unchecked authority has led to abuse and civil liberties violations," ACLU executive director Anthony Romero said.

The claim came as Democrats and Republicans battle in Congress over updating the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which critics say has been abused by President George W. Bush to spy on Americans.

"At the very least, it certainly looks like the FBI and DoD are conspiring to evade limits placed on the Department of Defense's surveillance powers," Romero said.

While the Federal Bureau of Intelligence enjoys broad powers of surveillance under the Patriot Act, the Pentagon's authority is more limited and it is normally expected to go through the FBI for such information.

The documents show that in many cases, the FBI has merely acted as a front for the Pentagon, enabling defense officials to gain access to records they are "not entitled to receive," according to the ACLU.

The group said it had obtained the records after suing the two government agencies under the Freedom of Information Act.

"The expanded role of the military in domestic intelligence gathering is troubling," said Melissa Goodman, staff attorney with the ACLU's National Security Project.

"These documents reveal that the military is gaining access to records here in the US -- in secret and without any meaningful oversight."

Pentagon spokespersons were not immediately available Sunday to respond to the report.

[ships-cat]

This is a very disturbing story.

First off, who are the "Federal Bureau of Intelligence" sited in the article ? Is this just a typo error of Federal Bureau of Investigation, or is it a seperate agency ?

Secondly, why is "The Pentagon" asking for records ? Do they have any statutory investigative powers ? I thought the FBI was responsible for counter-intelligence and counter-terrorism ?

Meow Purr.

[Unlimited]

The FBI is a rogue agency...they are constantly breaking the law to get the "job" done...

[ships-cat]

Be that as it may... does anyone know why the Pentagon would be getting involved in domestic surveilance ? do they have a remit for this ?

meow Purr.

[Celumnaz]

The Clinton era Proved there is misuse of power in the FBI etc... they Did spy on American citizens and used illegally aquired confidential information to their advantage domestically.

From what understand, these intercepts are between other nations as the communication travels through the network hubs on US soil, and communication outbound to suspect areas.

Don't see how anyone can be perturbed by this, and not by Clinton's Eschelon/Carnivore. To me it's like complaining there might be a speck dirt in the mud soup.

But I wouldn't mind disbanding the FBI one bit. CIA, IRS, ATF, FED... get rid of all of em.

[AROCES]

Let's hear the respond then from the Agencies. At the moment this just a tool for Congress who are against the Patriot Act.

[ninjadude]

Let's hear the respond then from the Agencies. At the moment this just a tool for Congress who are against the Patriot Act.

That's kind of like asking Al Qaeda if they really do terrorism. You have to have "independent" investigation or at least bi-partisan. You swallow government BS hook line and sinker.

[Bob26003]

Be that as it may... does anyone know why the Pentagon would be getting involved in domestic surveilance ? do they have a remit for this ?

meow Purr.

What about the NSA?

It's simple cat........ They know they can get away with it. The Pentagon has a long history of spying on peaceful protesters and dissidents of all sorts.

The Right Wing of this Country is stupid enough to give them a free pass to illegally surveil citizens...... Do you really think they would let that go to waste?

This so called war on terror has been a War on our rights, and a boost for radicalism.

The sheep in this country believe ANYTHING is justified so long as you say you are fighting terrorism.

Even illegal searches and seizures.

Edited October 17, 2007 by Bob26003

[AROCES]

That's kind of like asking Al Qaeda if they really do terrorism. You have to have "independent" investigation or at least bi-partisan. You swallow government BS hook line and sinker.

So, you don't want to hear or give those in the agency a voice and just do an independent investigation? You are worst than those who you accuse of wrong doing then.

And you swallow the ACLU BS hook, line and sinker.

Edited October 17, 2007 by AROCES

[ships-cat]

I know many of you are Americans, so I'm suprised nobody has answered my request.

What statutory rights or obligations does the Department of Defence have to carry out surveilance on people within the borders of the US ? (other than serving military personnel)

Meow Purr.

[Celumnaz]

American, but not a lawyer. I think it falls under a reasonable search and the fed govt. has that right. I also am not convinced they're "spying on private citizens" for internal politics as the Clintons did. It's only "domestic spying" because the equipment is here, the communications spied on are between other reasonably suspect nations and outward bound communications to reasonably suspect nations.

to me, the biggest fear comes from, say some leftist celebrities or politicians, who have made contact over there and they don't want it to be known by the general public how traitorous they've been behaving, providing fodder for propaganda and/or actively colluding to undermine current US policy.

I guess it's the same kind of trepidation I felt with the Clinton's Eschelon and Filegate combined with what they Did with info as Waco, Ruby Ridge, Elian... true police state stuff. Kept me from joining the NRA or signing up to Alex Jone's site

[ships-cat]

American, but not a lawyer. I think it falls under a reasonable search and the fed govt. has that right. I also am not convinced they're "spying on private citizens" for internal politics as the Clintons did. It's only "domestic spying" because the equipment is here, the communications spied on are between other reasonably suspect nations and outward bound communications to reasonably suspect nations.

to me, the biggest fear comes from, say some leftist celebrities or politicians, who have made contact over there and they don't want it to be known by the general public how traitorous they've been behaving, providing fodder for propaganda and/or actively colluding to undermine current US policy.

I guess it's the same kind of trepidation I felt with the Clinton's Eschelon and Filegate combined with what they Did with info as Waco, Ruby Ridge, Elian... true police state stuff. Kept me from joining the NRA or signing up to Alex Jone's site

Err... thanks for tha Celumnaz... but my point was... why are the DoD involved ? I thought the FBI was responsible for all aspects of domestic counter-intelligence (e.g. chasing spies) and counter-terrorist activities ? At the same time, I was not aware that the DoD had ANY responsibility or authority to get involved in surveilance operations within the US ? So why are they seemingly involved here ? What is their statutory authority ?

Meow Purr.

[Celumnaz]

not a lawyer, don't even understand the tax code I pay to the thieves at the IRS. Under impression the CIA is like the international version of the FBI so it should be them, or the NSA to Connect the Dots and then Forward the information to the appropriate dot-connected department in a timely manner... but then since the military complex is involved with the whole operation overseas I think it'd be good for them to have that information themselves to know where to go and strike if/when needed asap. Still see it as a speck of dirt in the mudbowl, but it makes for good political posturing while wasting resources.

[ninjadude]

So, you don't want to hear or give those in the agency a voice and just do an independent investigation? You are worst than those who you accuse of wrong doing then.

And you swallow the ACLU BS hook, line and sinker.

Yet you won't believe the IAEA, UN, countless military, and Iran itself. You want to believe only whenever it fits your neocon agenda.

And yes I believe an organization whose sole goal is the defense of the bill of rights over an administration of known liars. The question is, why don't you? It would seem that you do not support the constitution.

Edited October 18, 2007 by ninjadude

[AROCES]

Yet you won't believe the IAEA, UN, countless military, and Iran itself. You want to believe only whenever it fits your neocon agenda.

And yes I believe an organization whose sole goal is the defense of the bill of rights over an administration of known liars. The question is, why don't you? It would seem that you do not support the constitution.

Unlike you, I believe seriousness of an accusation does not make one guilty.

Maybe your ACLU should give those in their agencies their right too to defend themselves as well?

See, you only support the constitution when it is leaned towards your interest.

[Bob26003]

I know many of you are Americans, so I'm suprised nobody has answered my request.

What statutory rights or obligations does the Department of Defence have to carry out surveilance on people within the borders of the US ? (other than serving military personnel)

Meow Purr.

NONE....... The military is supposed to stay the **** out of civilian law enforcement except for extreme emergencies................

There is a latin term for the concept........ It is known as the Posse Comitatus act. And Bush has violated it by using the NSA and Pentagon to spy on American citizens.

But do you think the right wingers give a damn? Hell no.......

They are nitwits

========

Bam ! Found it

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act

Posse Comitatus Act

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

• Ten things you may not know about Wikipedia •

Jump to: navigation, search

The Posse Comitatus Act is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385) passed on June 16, 1878 after the end of Reconstruction. The Act was intended to prohibit Federal troops from supervising elections in former Confederate states. It generally prohibits Federal military personnel and units of the United States National Guard under Federal authority from acting in a law enforcement capacity within the United States, except where expressly authorized by the Constitution or Congress. The Posse Comitatus Act and the Insurrection Act substantially limit the powers of the Federal government to use the military for law enforcement.

The original act referred only to the United States Army. The Air Force was added in 1956, and the Navy and the Marine Corps have been included by a regulation of the Department of Defense. The United States Coast Guard is not included in the act as it has federal law enforcement duties as part of its primary mission. This law is often mentioned when it appears that the Department of Defense is interfering in domestic disturbances.

==========

Legislation

The whole text of the relevant legislation is as follows:

Sec. 1385. - Use of Army and Air Force as posse comitatus

Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.

Also notable is the following provision within Title 10 of the United States Code (which generally concerns organization and regulation of the armed forces and Department of Defense):

[10 U.S.C.] § 375. Restriction on direct participation by military personnel

The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe such regulations as may be necessary to ensure that any activity (including the provision of any equipment or facility or the assignment or detail of any personnel) under this chapter does not include or permit direct participation by a member of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps in a search, seizure, arrest, or other similar activity unless participation in such activity by such member is otherwise authorized by law.

Edited October 18, 2007 by Bob26003

[Bob26003]

But, like I said before: in the warped mind of an extremist bush supporter...... Anything is justified so long as you say you are doing it to fight terrorism or prevent dissent.

Edited October 18, 2007 by Bob26003

[ships-cat]

Thanks for the background on Posse Comitatus Bob... I was vaugly aware of this, but didn't know the specifics.

I'm still very baffled though. Why is the miltary involved? My impression was that the Military doesn't just "up and do something"... it has to have orders (or standing orders), and it has to have a structure. If the "Pentagon" are asking for wiretaps or personal information, then it means there is a formal department or unit dedicated to that mission, with a beurocracy and heirarchy, budget, special training, equipment etc. What is this department ?

I've heard of the DIA (defence intelligence agency), but I thought that this was involved in tactical intelligence relating to the armed forces of other countries. (counting tanks etc, or helping with battlefield intelligence in times of war).

More to the point, WHY would the military get involved ? You've got the FBI doing domestic anti-terrorism and counter-espionage investigations: they do this all the time, have dedicated departments and staff, and are presumably therefore very good at it.

If the subject(s) under investigation are abroad, or about to enter the country, then the CIA (or perhaps the NSA) have the ability to track them, and alert the FBI/Homeland Security accordingly.

So with all those resources available, WHY is the miltary supposed to be getting involved ? What could they possibly "bring to the table" that the FBI and CIA couldn't already ?

On the face of it, this story doesn't seem to make sense.

Any enlightenment please people ?

Meow Purr.

[pallidin]

The use and importance of military involvement with respect to potential terrorist activities is directly related to the changing environment on how "terrorists" conceive, communicate and act on their intentions.

Terrorists intentions are confusion and disruption of the culture under "attack"; often with deadly consequences utilizing unconventional warfare tactics.

As such, the military, both trained and equiped with countermeasures outside the scope of conventional engagment is demanded and required.

[Celumnaz]

The Act was intended to prohibit Federal troops from supervising elections in former Confederate states.

You'll need a team of lawyers to straighten it out.

I'm for disbanding these organizations, so to me it's all one big cluster**** that doesn't need to be straightened out, but wiped.

Between the Patriot Act (which I'm against) and several other terrorism related bills, it's a back and forth thing.

Simplify it. Connecting the dots was apparently important in recent history.

Information travelling from agency to agency with time delays and additions/subtractions to information is something the left complained/complains about.

The communications are only "domestic" because the Equipment is here, the communications are between other nations or outgoing to other nations for the most part.

But there's a segment that truely fears, and not for privacy or fist amendment or they'd be all over Clinton's Eschelon, yet they're not. So the fear is that they'll be found out in an unseemly posture.

unless participation in such activity by such member is otherwise authorized by law

Dems don't even know what they voted for. When they (RINO's included tho) vote for *insert govt. position* to have power, they're drooling with anticipation of having that power for themselves.

[Bob26003]

Thanks for the background on Posse Comitatus Bob... I was vaugly aware of this, but didn't know the specifics.

I'm still very baffled though. Why is the miltary involved? My impression was that the Military doesn't just "up and do something"... it has to have orders (or standing orders), and it has to have a structure. If the "Pentagon" are asking for wiretaps or personal information, then it means there is a formal department or unit dedicated to that mission, with a beurocracy and heirarchy, budget, special training, equipment etc. What is this department ?

I've heard of the DIA (defence intelligence agency), but I thought that this was involved in tactical intelligence relating to the armed forces of other countries. (counting tanks etc, or helping with battlefield intelligence in times of war).

More to the point, WHY would the military get involved ? You've got the FBI doing domestic anti-terrorism and counter-espionage investigations: they do this all the time, have dedicated departments and staff, and are presumably therefore very good at it.

If the subject(s) under investigation are abroad, or about to enter the country, then the CIA (or perhaps the NSA) have the ability to track them, and alert the FBI/Homeland Security accordingly.

So with all those resources available, WHY is the miltary supposed to be getting involved ? What could they possibly "bring to the table" that the FBI and CIA couldn't already ?

On the face of it, this story doesn't seem to make sense.

Any enlightenment please people ?

Meow Purr.

What could they possibly bring to the table? Don't be so naive ships cat.

[ships-cat]

What could they possibly bring to the table? Don't be so naive ships cat.

No, but seriously Bob. What could they contribute that the CIA, NSA and FBI can't already do ?

And you havn't addressed my other question: what section of the Military is capable of doing domestic surveilence, and what legal right (or obligation) are they working under ?

Meow Purr.