How little - yet how much - has changed in the last
40 years. The COINTELPRO papers sound distinctly 21st century as they detail
the monitoring of perceived threats to “national security” by the FBI, CIA,
National Security Agency (NSA), Secret Service, and the military, as well as
the intelligence bureaucracy’s war on First Amendment protest activity.
The Church Committee investigation concluded
in 1976 that the “unexpressed major premise of the programs was that a law
enforcement agency has the duty to do whatever is necessary to combat perceived
threats to the existing social and political order.”
In addition to massive surveillance, assassinations
and dirty tricks “by any means necessary” included the creation of NSA “watch lists“ of Americans ranging “from members of radical
political groups, to celebrities, to ordinary citizens involved in protests
against their government,” with names submitted by the FBI, Secret Service,
military, CIA, and Defense Intelligence Agency. The secret lists, which
included people whose activities “may result in civil disturbances or otherwise
subvert the national security of the US,” were used by the NSA to extract
information of “intelligence value” from its stream of intercepted
communications.
We learned that there was, apparently, no easy way to
get off the FBI’s “security index.” Even after the criteria for fitting
the profile of a “subversive” were revised in the mid-1950’s, the names of
people who no longer fit the definition remained on IBM punchcards, and were
retained in field offices as “potential threats.” A card would only be
destroyed “if the subject agreed to become an FBI source or informant” or in
another way indicated a “complete defection from subversive groups.”
By 1960, the FBI had compiled 432,000 files on “subversive”
individuals and groups, and they were getting hard to handle. The following
decade brought the promise of a technological fix. Under the guidance of the
attorney general at the time, Ramsey Clark, the FBI explored the potential for “computerizing
the master index.” The goal of Clark’s Interdivision Information Unit was to
harness “automatic data processing” to put information about people collected
from external and internal sources in a “quickly retrievable form.”
Forty years later, the same “by any means necessary”
mindset is harnessed to a national surveillance industrial complex that pumps
out some 50,000 intelligence reports annually and puts about 1,600 names
every day into the FBI’s Terrorist Screening Database (which contains over a million
names, including aliases). This error-ridden “master list” is not to be confused with the
National Counterterrorism Center’s Terrorist Identities
Datamart Environment (TIDE) system, which held 640,000 identities in March
2011. There are reported to be about a dozen terrorism watch lists or
databases, and a single tip from a credible source is all it takes to get into
one or more of them, while there is no reliable way to get out.
Given the legion of local, state and federal agents
seeking out harbingers of “terrorist activity,” the fact that espousing “radical”
beliefs is grist for a Suspicious Activity Report (SAR) and the virtually
unchecked ability of FBI operatives to spy on groups without suspicion of
wrongdoing, it is not surprising that the same kind of groups that were
infiltrated and spied on by the FBI, NSA, CIA, and Department of Defense (DoD)
under COINTELPRO are featuring in Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF)
investigations and fusion center data banks. The secrecy shrouding “national
security” matters and the blurred jurisdictions that turn FOIA requests into
pieces in a “pass the buck” shell game have made it impossible to get a clear
picture of the extent of spying on protected First Amendment activity. But
leaks and oversight reports indicate that a 21st century Church Committee would
find a mention of any group that challenges the status quo somewhere in the
vast domestic surveillance labyrinth.
In his 2010 report, “A Review of the FBI’s
Investigation of Certain Domestic Advocacy Groups,” Glenn Fine, the (now
retired - and not replaced) inspector general of the Justice Department,
concludes that the FBI had “little or no basis” for investigating many advocacy
groups and individuals, and that it made false and misleading statements to the
public and Congress to justify its surveillance of an antiwar rally organized
by a peace and social justice organization, the Thomas Merton Center of
Pennsylvania. Not only did it routinely classify actions involving nonviolent
civil disobedience as “Acts of Terrorism matters,” it also, “relied upon
potential crimes that may not commonly be considered ‘terrorism’ (such as
trespassing or vandalism)” to get people placed on watch lists and their
travels and interactions tracked.
Around the country, databases have swelled with
information about antiwar and other protests that are classified as “potential
terrorist activity.” Intelligence oversight reports indicate that the Pentagon,
which defined protest in training materials as “low-level terrorism
activity,” monitored and shared intelligence on groups ranging from Alaskans
for Peace and Justice to Planned Parenthood, and used Army signals intelligence
in Louisiana to intercept civilian cell phone conversations. It was revealed
late in 2005 that the DoD had a secret database called Threat
and Local Observation Notice (TALON) maintained by its
Counterintelligence Field Activity (CIFA) unit. Among its 13,000 reports
were dozens detailing antiwar activity, along with photos of protesters.
Meetings were sometimes infiltrated and information widely shared among partner
agencies. Events classified as “threats” included the gathering of activists at
a Quaker meeting house in Lakewood, Florida, to plan a protest of military
recruiting at the local high school, a Boston protest outside a military
recruiting center and a peace march through the streets of Akron, Ohio, tailed
by local police who had been tipped off by the Pentagon.
Although CIFA was disbanded after the extent of its
spying was revealed, the TALON database has been preserved and is expected to
be part of a new repository of information housed at the Pentagon’s Defense
Counterintelligence and Human Intelligence Center. A notice in the Federal Register for June 15, 2010, states that the new
repository will have a broad domestic and homeland security mandate and will
amass personal data, citizenship documentation, biometric data and “reports of
investigation, collection, statements of individuals, affidavits,
correspondence, and other documentation pertaining to investigative or
analytical efforts by the DoD and other US agencies to identify or counter
foreign intelligence and terrorist threats.”
The Posse Comitatus Act’s substantial limitations on
the use of the military in domestic law enforcement appear to have all but
vanished. Indeed, in Washington State, John Towery - a
member of Force Protection Service at Fort Lewis who infiltrated and spied on
peace groups in Olympia and shared information with the Army, JTTF, the FBI,
local police departments and the state fusion center - is being sued by groups
claiming his undercover surveillance violated the Act. A document
leaked by WikiLeaks outlines how a “fusion cell” in a military police garrison
integrated with local, county, regional, state and federal law enforcement can
avoid the usual constraints on military intelligence by operating “under the
auspice and oversight of the police discipline and standards.” In the words of
former Olympia City Council member T.J. Johnson, who was one of the people spied on by
Towery, “The militarization of domestic law enforcement is one of the more
disturbing trends in recent years.”
Leaks from fusion centers reveal that peace groups
share a place on surveillance databases with environmental groups, animal
rights groups, student groups, anti-death penalty organizations, Muslim
organizations, conspiracy theorists, Ron Paul supporters, the American Civil
Liberties Union (ACLU), the Nation of Islam and “Black Extremists.” The Virginia Fusion Center cited various historically black
colleges and universities as potential “radicalization nodes” for terrorists.
The Maryland State Police, which works with the FBI as part of a JTTF and
shares information with the state’s fusion center, infiltrated protest activity, kept error-ridden “terrorist”
files on activists and was notified by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) about
what groups should be monitored. Bette Hoover, a retired nurse who is a grandmother and
Quaker antiwar activist, was surprised when documents came to light listing her
as a member of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) and direct
action group The Ruckus Society - organizations she never belonged to - and
placing her at demonstrations she had never attended. She now understands why
she receives special scrutiny at airports.
Given the enormous dimensions of the secretive echo
chamber in which flawed information is disseminated, it is difficult to see how
the record can ever be set straight. Once a person is in a database, there
seems to be no more inclination to delete all traces of that individual
(assuming this is even possible) than to remove an IBM punch card from J. Edgar
Hoover’s security index. The FBI today wants to keep all Suspicious Activity
Reports in its eGuardian database, on the grounds that even if there is no
connection to terrorism or crime today, one may become clear tomorrow as it
continues to add information to a person’s profile and mine information about
their associations.
In the age of the Total Information Awareness
program, there appears to be no end to the appetite for data to be stored and
mined, and all sorts of agencies want a share of the action. There was little attempt to rein in the NSA after whistleblowers Russell Tice and Thomas Tamm revealed an “overcollection”
of data of staggering proportions through the Agency’s access to the phone
calls, text messages, faxes and emails affecting the communications of “all
Americans” - including Bill Clinton. Data captured through the NSA’s
warrantless surveillance program has reportedly been systematically archived
for data mining purposes.
The US Joint Special Operations Command is meanwhile
establishing a mega fusion center at a secret address near the Pentagon
which will serve as “the offense end of counterterrorism, tracking and
targeting terrorist threats that have surfaced in recent years” and advising
domestic law enforcement “in dealing with suspected terrorists inside the US.”
It will feature a cloud-computing network combining “all elements of US
national security, from the eavesdropping capabilities of the National Security
Agency to Homeland Security’s border-monitoring databases.”
Not to be outdone, the FBI has erected a giant
Investigative Data Warehouse (IDW) containing 1.5 billion records and counting
- much of it classified - including information collected through nearly
300,000 National Security Letters, criminal records, financial records,
intelligence reports, gang information, terrorist information, open source data
and more. According to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, whose Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) litigation has brought
the data trove to light - the “future of the IDW is data mining” as the FBI
uses “link analysis” and “pattern analysis” in the hunt for “pre-crime.”
The neverending hunger for data may be one reason why
the FBI, in late 2010, raided the homes and seized computers, cell phones and
files belonging to peace and justice activists in Illinois, Minnesota and
Michigan. Twenty-three of them have been issued with grand jury subpoenas, some
for allegedly giving “material
support” to a foreign terrorist organization by meeting with groups in
Colombia and Palestine.
“We’re conflating proper dissent and terrorism,” warned former FBI agent and
whistleblower Coleen Rowley:
A secretive, unaccountable, post 9/11 homeland
security apparatus has increasingly turned inward on American citizens. The
evidence includes everything from controversial airport body scanners to the
FBI’s raids last September on antiwar activists’ homes ... Agents are now given
a green light, for instance, to check off “statistical achievements” by sending
well-paid manipulative informants into mosques and peace groups. Forgotten are
worries about targeting and entrapping people not predisposed to violence....
The massive and largely irrelevant data collection now occurring only adds hay
to the haystack, making it even harder to see patterns and anticipate events. “Top
Secret America” needs to ask itself who is more guilty of furnishing “material
aid to terrorism: - its own operatives, or the activists and protesters it so
wrongheadedly targets.
No comments:
Post a Comment