Audit says FBI used patriot act illegally

[shesulsa]

Updated: 2:45 p.m. PT March 9, 2007
function UpdateTimeStamp(pdt) { var n = document.getElementById("udtD"); if(pdt != '' && n && window.DateTime) { var dt = new DateTime(); pdt = dt.T2D(pdt); if(dt.GetTZ(pdt)) {n.innerHTML = dt.D2S(pdt,((''.toLowerCase()=='false')?false:true));} } } UpdateTimeStamp('633090771430100000');

WASHINGTON - The FBI improperly and, in some cases, illegally used the USA Patriot Act to secretly obtain personal information about people in the United States, a Justice Department audit concluded Friday.


And for three years the FBI has underreported to Congress how often it forced businesses to turn over the customer data, the audit found.


FBI agents sometimes demanded the data without proper authorization, according to the 126-page audit by Justice Department Inspector General Glenn Fine. At other times, the audit found, the FBI improperly obtained telephone records in non-emergency circumstances.

LINK TO FULL ARTICLE

 

[Shuto]

I would be concerned about this revelation if it was exposed by the Washington Post or NY Times but since it was exposed by the govt itself, I'm not that concerned. It would appear that the govt's own check and balances are working.
A bigger concer to me is all of the personal information being collected and shared by private industry. Who is watching them? Not to mention the lack of security protecting this information in some cases.
Privacy... what privacy?

 

[michaeledward]

Businesses send out their privacy policies almost semi-annually. That many of us choose not to read those privacy policies is not a reflection on the businesses. Of course, it is quite probably government regulation which mandates distribution of those privacy policy statements.

What is interesting is that Shuto says that if the abuse was first reported by the Fourth Estate, it would be a larger warning for him. I will point to the villification of the major newspapers when they first reported on the warrantless wiretaps, the recording of financial transfers, and the instinctive denials for reporters to testify before the recent federal Grand Jury in the Valerie Plame leak case.

I am less likely to extend an olive branch to government for violating its own provisions just because those violations were self-acknowledged. What is the correction mechanism? How will Pennance be done?

NSL's, as applied, are the opposite of what our government is supposed to be; warrantless, invisible documents of compliance. A company issued an NSL must comply, and comply silently, or suffer grave consequences. It seems to me they are like the 'Knock on the Door' in many totalitarian regimes past and present.

Is this where I am supposed to say, I told you so?

 

[Don Roley]

From the article,

The audit blames agent error and shoddy record-keeping for the bulk of the problems and did not find any indication of criminal misconduct.

Still, "we believe the improper or illegal uses we found involve serious misuses of national security letter authorities," the audit concludes.

There has always been problems of people in government taking liberties with the powers given them. Individual police officers have often been accused and convicted of abusing their authority. That does not seem to be the case here, but it seems that in addition to the oversite that caught these cases, there needs to be better education of the officers in what they can and can't do.

 

[Blotan Hunka]

NO DON! Im telling you its a vast conspiracy by the Bush administration to take over the world!!

 

[Flying Crane]

I work in a financial institution, and part of the duties of my group is to respond to subpoenas, grand jury subpoenas, and NSLs. We have had FBI agents call us and attempt to get documents by simply demanding them over the phone. We told them to serve us with a grand jury subpoena, or an NSL, or else get lost. They never made these blatant phone attempts prior to the Patriot Act. Could this be just "poorly trained" agents acting inappropriately? Perhaps. I personally suspect it is a practice encouraged by the higher-ups. There is no way for us to go back and call them to task for it, so they just get away with it. They try to bully us into simply handing over documents and information. If we fall for their act, they get what they wanted without going thru the proper channels. If we stand our ground, then they can always come back with an NSL or subpoena, if they really want the docs. I think they are just playing the odds, to see what they can get without going thru the channels. It's BS, but I am very very proud of the team I work with, for standing up to these clowns.

 

[theletch1]

My first thought when I read the title to this thread was ..."Hell, who hasn't?"