Saturday, August 17, 2013


OMNI FBI NEWSLETTER #2, August 17, 2013. Compiled by Dick Bennett for a Culture of Peace and Justice.   (#1 Feb. 1, 2011).

My blog:
War Department/Peace Department
See:  CIA/FBI Newsletter

See:   ACLU, CIA, COINTELPRO, Empire, Homeland Security Agency, Intelligence Agencies, Militarism, National Security State, Patriot Act, Privacy, Secrecy, Spying, Surveillance, War on Terror, and more.

Contents of #1

President Obama Seeks Greater Wiretap Power

FBI Database

Raids in September

   Minneapolis and Chicago



Related Information:  Film on FBI Sting

Contents of #2

Susan Herman (former ACLU President), "Taking Liberties” (essay): Unprecedented, Unchecked Spying and Erosion of Privacy

Susan Herman, Taking Liberties (book), What We Lost After 9/11

Catholic Workers Terrorists?  FBI Investigates Casa Maria

FBI (the Unamericans) Investigates William T. Vollmann

Robinson, FBI Stings Muslims

Seth Rosenfeld, Subversives, the FBI’s War on Student Radicals and Reagan’s Rise to Power

Aaronson, FBI’s Manufactured War on Terrorism Against Muslims

Spannaus,  Chronology, How Obama Expanded Bush-Cheney Domestic Spy Dragnet

FBI, George W. Bush, Spying Google Search

Amy Goodman, Democracy Now:  From Martin Luther King, Jr., to Edward Snowden

FBI, Obama, Spying Google Search



SUSAN HERMAN, “Who’s Watching the Watchers?”  Civil Liberties (ACLU Newsletter, Winter 2012).   “The ACLU has seen plenty of government overreach in its time, but nothing like the unchecked spying and erosion of privacy of recent years.” –Dick



‘Taking Liberties’ — New Book on What We All Lost After 9/11

   Text Size  
Published: Tuesday, 6 Sep 2011 | 10:38 AM ET
By: Susan Herman|ACLU President and author of, "Taking Liberties"






GUEST AUTHOR BLOG: The Fourth Amendment is good for business and essential for democracy by Susan Herman, ACLU President and author of, "Taking Liberties: The War on Terror and the Erosion of American Democracy."
Post-9/11 surveillance measures have made it far too easy for the government to review our personal and business records, telephone and e-mail conversations, and virtually all aspects of our lives.
For example,
·                                 Under the so-called “library provision” of the USA PATRIOT Act, the government can demand that custodians of records – including librarians, schools, social work institutions, and internet service providers (who, in these days of cloud computing, have access to a mind-boggling array of information about us) – turn over those records without having to explain to a court why they want those records, or whether the person who is the subject of the records has done anything suspicious.
·                                 Under the expanded “National Security Letter,”the FBI and other agencies can demand some records from telecommunications and financial services providers without any court order at all and then gag the recipients.
·                                 Patriot Act amendments let the government spy on Americans using a Cold War era statute designed for tracking the covert activities of Soviet agents.
Taking Liberties: The War on Terror and the Erosion of American Democracy
The Constitution’s Fourth Amendment, our principal protection against unreasonable searches and seizures, generally requires government agents to convince a neutral and detached magistrate that they have “probable cause” before conducting an arrest, or searching or seizing property.
But the very goal of these provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act and other post-9/11 surveillance measures is to let the government avoid this protective protocol.
The role of the courts in reviewing applications for eavesdropping or other types of searches and seizures is reduced; the power to spy on innocent Americans expanded.
What’s wrong with giving the government this broad power just in case, some people ask?
Why should I care whether the government knows what I am doing if I am not doing anything wrong?
But diluting Fourth Amendment protection is dangerous.
"Our ancestors who wrote the Fourth Amendment feared the potential for political repression, selective use of power, and, ultimately, a police state."
President, ACLU & Author, "Taking Liberties"
Susan Herman
As Supreme Court Justice and Nuremberg prosecutor Robert Jackson once warned, “Uncontrolled search and seizure is one of the first and most effective weapons in the arsenal of every arbitrary government.”
Our ancestors who wrote the Fourth Amendment feared the potential for political repression, selective use of power, and, ultimately, a police state. In fact, their insistence on having their “persons, houses, papers, and effects” (in the words of the Fourth Amendment) protected against government agents searching for seditious literature or for untaxed tea or rum was one of the principal causes of the American Revolution.
Uncontrolled search and seizure is also bad for business.
When customers/clients/patrons know that any information they share with their bank, school, or social work agency is only one easy step away from government eyes, they may be reluctant to create those records by sharing information in the first place.
And it is not only surveillance authority that has been expanded post-9/11.One Patriot Act provision allowed seizure of the assets of an American charity, KindHearts for Charitable Humanitarian Development, with no warning and no hearing, even though the charity was not on any blacklist. And the government opportunistically employed a statute designed for detention of material witnesses to arrest an American citizen, Abdullah al-Kidd, despite the fact that they lacked probable cause to believe he had done anything wrong. He was never called to testify at any proceeding.
September 11: Ten Years Later - A CNBC Special Report
Some belittle Fourth Amendment principles as “technicalities.”
But as scholar Elaine Scarry noted, the post-9/11 powers distort the Constitution’s vision of the relationship between the individual and the state. “The Patriot Act inverts the constitutional requirement that people’s lives be private and the work of government officials be public.”
The Fourth Amendment protects more than just our “persons, houses, papers, and effects.”
It protects our democracy.
Email me at  And follow me on Twitter@BullishonBooks



“The FBI’s Terrorist Investigation of Casa Maria” by Michael Komba.   Casa Maria Catholic Worker Newsletter (July 2011).  The FBI in 2003 accused Mr. Komba of breaking a window at an army recruiting center, ordinarily a vandalism charge, but upgraded to terrorism because a recruiting center.   Years later he acquired his file that disclosed he was investigated along with many other opponents of the wars.   Let’s all recognize how grossly distorting is the so-called War on Terror, which quickly became both foreign and domestic McCarthyism.   So let us all prepare not to be intimidated by our police bullies.   A big help:   Howard Zinn, who had a 423 page FBI file, wrote an essay entitled “Federal Bureau of Intimidation,” in which he urged us all to expose bully agents (not all).   --Dick

REPORT — From the September 2013 issue

Life as a Terrorist: Uncovering my FBI file By William T. Vollmann

Download Pdf
William T. Vollmann’s “Life as a Terrorist” will be posted to the website on Thursday, August 22. Our apologies for the delay.
[A devastating expose of FBI behavior: “secret, exclusive, mysterious, cruel, afraid, dangerous, and monstrously ignorant” (to quote John Steinbeck on the KKK, p. 45 in the article.  –Dick]

“Deploying Informants, the FBI Stings Muslims”

   |    This article appeared in the July 2-9, 2012 edition of The Nation. Behind nearly every "foiled terror plot" lurks a government informant sent to entrap hapless young Muslim men.  --Dick


It wasn’t long after he met the man called Shareef that Khalifa Al-Akili began to sense he was being set up. Within days of their seemingly chance meeting, Shareef was offering to drive Akili, a 34-year-old Muslim living in East Liberty, Pennsylvania, to the local mosque for prayers. Shareef told Akili he was “all about fighting” and “had a lot of resources at his disposal.” But when Shareef began to probe Akili about his views on jihad and asked him if he could obtain a gun, Akili grew nervous. “I begin to try to avoid him, but would still see him due to the fact that he lived two minutes’ walking distance from my apartment,” Akili said later. In January of this year, Shareef showed up with a “brother” who called himself Mohammed and was keen to meet Akili. Mohammed told Akili that he was a businessman from Pakistan involved in jihad. “He kept attempting to talk about the fighting going on in Afghanistan, which I clearly felt was an attempt to get me to talk about my views,” Akili recalled. “I had a feeling that I had just played out a part in some Hollywood movie where I had just been introduced to the leader of a terrorist sleeper cell.”

The US government relies heavily on the testimony of self-styled terrorism experts in prosecuting the "war on terror." But how credible are they?

Related Topics

Out of curiosity, Akili did an Internet search on the cellphone number he’d received from Mohammed. Much to his surprise, he discovered that the man was, in fact, an FBI informant named Shahed Hussain, who had played a pivotal role in at least two major terrorism-related sting operations in recent years. In a lengthy posting on his Facebook page recounting these events, Akili wrote, “I would like to pursue a legal action against the FBI due to their continuous harassment.” He also set up a press conference in Washington with Muslim civil liberties groups to publicize his fear that he was being entrapped. But it was too late. In mid-March, Akili was arrested and charged with being in possession of a .22-caliber rifle at a shooting range several years earlier, an act deemed illegal because of a decade-old drug conviction. Though his arrest was on nonterrorism-related charges, at his bond hearing FBI agents and US Attorneys told the judge they’d seen unspecified “jihadist literature” at his apartment and also alleged that he’d told one of the informants of his desire to go to Pakistan and join the Taliban. The judge ordered Akili held without bail.
“The government is basically saying [the charges have] nothing to do with the informant,” Akili’s attorney, Markéta Sims, told me. “But I’ve been doing this a long time, and I’ve never heard of someone being charged with felony possession for handling a gun at a shooting range.”
The FBI has employed informants ever since its inception as the Bureau of Investigation in 1908. In 1961 director J. Edgar Hoover established the Top Echelon Criminal Informant Program, in which FBI field offices were instructed to develop live sources in the “organized hoodlum element.” By 1975 the Church Committee found that the bureau was employing more than 1,500 domestic informants. But while the FBI has long used undercover informants to infiltrate criminal networks and build cases against potential suspects, in the domestic front of the “war on terror,” informants have come to play a far more proactive role in surveilling communities deemed suspect by the bureau.
According to the Center on National Security at Fordham Law School, there have been 138 terrorism or national security prosecutions involving informants since 2001, and more than a third of those have occurred in the past three years. Nearly every major post-9/11 terrorism-related prosecution has involved a sting operation, at the center of which is a government informant. In these cases, the informants—who work for money or are seeking leniency on criminal charges of their own—have crossed the line from merely observing potential criminal behavior to encouraging and assisting people to participate in plots that are largely scripted by the FBI itself. Under the FBI’s guiding hand, the informants provide the weapons, suggest the targets and even initiate the inflammatory political rhetoric that later elevates the charges to the level of terrorism.
Before he approached Akili, Hussain was pivotal in securing convictions in 2006 against two Muslim men in Albany, New York—an imam and a local pizza shop owner. He had lured the two into a loan transaction that prosecutors later alleged was a deal to launder the proceeds of an illegal missile sale, though neither man had any prior criminal record or history of violence. In a separate case in 2008, Hussain was dispatched to Newburgh, New York, where he spent nearly a year enticing a group of indigent African-American and Haitian men, some of whom converted to Islam in prison, with offers of as much as $250,000 to participate in a plot to bomb a Bronx synagogue and Jewish community center. After the men were convicted at trial, the judge in the case, Colleen McMahon, said it was “beyond question that the government created the crime here” and criticized the FBI for sending informants “trolling among the citizens of a troubled community, offering very poor people money if they will play some role—any role—in criminal activity.” The men were sentenced to twenty-five years in prison.
The FBI’s expanded deployment of informants over the past decade is the result of a mandate to catch terrorists before they can strike next, an effort that has fundamentally refocused the bureau from its traditional law enforcement mission to gathering intelligence on potential threats. Within a year of the 9/11 attacks, the FBI had reassigned nearly half its field office positions formerly devoted to the “war on drugs” to the new “war on terror” and launched nearly 3,000 new counterterrorism investigations. Since then, the bureau has been increasingly devoted to counterterrorism efforts: its current $8.1 billion budget allocates $4.9 billion to intelligence and counterterrorism, approximately $1.7 billion more than all other federal crimes combined.
Informants are crucial to producing the raw field intelligence that the bureau uses to justify these vast new expenditures. Under the FBI’s Domain Management program, modeled after the NYPD’s CompStat initiative, FBI Director Robert Mueller holds periodic “accountability” meetings with field offices, in which his agents report on a series of intelligence-gathering metrics in the geographic areas they oversee—among them the production of raw intelligence gathered by informants or electronic surveillance compiled in “information reports” and disseminated to law enforcement agencies. These informants operate in a post-9/11 environment of relaxed guidelines that allow the FBI to engage in lengthy and extensive surveillance of individuals and communities with little or no evidence of any wrongdoing afoot. Where once agents needed to have a “predicate” to launch such an investigation, these days none are required.
The FBI has kept the details of the full scope of its informant network a closely guarded secret. It has not revealed the number of official and unofficial informants (the latter known as “hip pockets” in bureau parlance) on its payroll; or how much it budgets for these informants; or what kinds of targets they track, particularly in Muslim communities. In its 2008 budget request the FBI disclosed that it had been working since November 2004 under a classified presidential directive that mandated an unspecified increase in “human source development and management.” In 2009, after civil liberties groups sued for some of these details under the Freedom of Information Act, the bureau made public its internal investigative guidelines but redacted nearly the entire section on “undisclosed participation” of confidential informants.
* * *
Though relatively few informant-driven investigations have led to the discovery of actual “homegrown” plots, the Muslim community for years has reported instances of people being approached by informants trying to enlist them in violent jihad. At times the informants have been so aggressive they have quickly raised suspicions. At a California mosque in 2010 one FBI informant, Craig Monteilh, advocated violent jihad so vehemently that the mosque’s members sought and received a restraining order against him. Monteilh, a former fitness instructor paid $177,000 over the course of his service with the FBI, participated in what the bureau dubbed Operation Flex, in which he was assigned to monitor gyms and mosques across Orange County, California, home to the country’s second-largest Muslim population. “We started hearing that he was saying weird things,” college student Omar Kurdi later told a reporter. “He would walk up to one of my friends and say, ‘It’s good that you guys are getting ready for the jihad.’”
Once the restraining order was issued, Monteilh was effectively done as an informant. His work became public a few months later when he was convicted on grand larceny charges in an unrelated incident. He subsequently sued the FBI, alleging the agency had revealed his informant status, leading to an attack by a fellow prisoner during his incarceration. He also gave a statement in support of a suit filed against the bureau by the ACLU that named the then head of the Los Angeles office, J. Stephen Tidwell, who had made a point of visiting a mosque in Irvine in June 2006 and telling the congregants that the FBI would not spy on them. “If we’re going to mosques to come to services, we will tell you,” he said. “We don’t want you to think you’re being monitored. We would come only to learn.” The next month, agents under Tidwell deployed Monteilh to the very same mosque.
According to Monteilh, his handlers in Operation Flex instructed him to identify potential militants or, failing that, to “pay attention to people’s problems”—such as marital or business difficulties—and assess whether individuals might be susceptible to rumors about their sexual orientation “so that they could be persuaded to become informants.” His handlers also told him that “everybody knows somebody,” meaning that people from Afghanistan, for example, would inevitably have family members or acquaintances with ties to the Taliban—information the FBI could use to “threaten…and pressure them to provide information, or could justify additional surveillance.” Monteilh said the agents also gave him the green light to have sex with Muslim women for investigative purposes. “They said if it would enhance the intelligence, go ahead and have sex,” he told a reporter. “So I did.” When Monteilh asked his handler, agent Kevin Armstrong, about the FBI’s broad latitude in conducting the investigation, he said Armstrong told him that on national security matters, “Kevin is God.”
In 2005 the FBI’s Office of the Inspector General found “serious shortcomings” in the bureau’s Criminal Informant Program. The report, which examined some 120 cases, including those related to terrorism, found that 87 percent of the investigations involving informants contained violations of the FBI’s own guidelines. Among the chief violations were the failure of agents to caution informants about the “limits of their activities,” the “failure to report unauthorized illegal activity” by their informants, and the issuance of “retroactive approvals” for illegal acts the informants had already committed. The report noted that since 2001 the rules had been loosened at the FBI’s request to reflect the new emphasis on intelligence gathering, and by extension the bureau’s dire need for informants. In testimony before Congress in May 2002, FBI Director Mueller argued that requiring agents to read “verbatim instructions” to their informants, “written in often intimidating legalese, [was] proving to have a chilling effect, causing confidential informants to leave the program.”
When inspectors asked the FBI to identify a terrorism investigation in which an informant had played a “pivotal role,” the bureau cited the work of Mohamed Alanssi, who in 2005 had secured the conviction of a well-known Yemeni cleric and his assistant. The two men were charged with funding Al Qaeda and Hamas. What the report didn’t mention was that Alanssi, in a fit of pique at his handlers (who he claimed owed him money for his services as an informant in as many as twenty terrorism prosecutions), had set himself on fire in front of the White House and ended up being deemed so unstable that at the trial of the two Yemenis, he was asked to testify for the defense.
* * *
For Muslims approached by the FBI to become informants, the consequences of declining such requests can be dire. Ahmadullah Niazi, one of the mosque members who reported the FBI’s own informant, Craig Monteilh, after hearing him talk about planning a terrorist attack, was later contacted by agents and asked to become an informant himself. When he refused, he found himself arrested on charges of lying to immigration officials after he allegedly denied having family ties to a member of Al Qaeda. Prosecutors ultimately withdrew the charges, but Niazi said by the time the case was dismissed, both he and his wife had lost their jobs.
In 2010 Tarek Saleh, a Brooklyn cleric, alleged that the FBI derailed his green card application after he declined its request to travel to Afghanistan and make contact with a relative who was allegedly part of Al Qaeda. “To use me as a bait to trap people, I cannot do this job,” Saleh said.
Tarek Mehanna, a 29-year-old US citizen convicted this year of advocating violent jihad through his writings and translations of various texts, claims that the criminal case against him was initiated after he rebuffed the overtures of FBI agents to become an informant. “They said that I had a choice to make: I could do things the easy way or I could do them the hard way,” Mehanna said at his sentencing. “The ‘easy’ way, as they explained, was that I would become an informant for the government, and if I did so I would never see the inside of a courtroom or a prison cell. As for the hard way, this is it.”
With the FBI’s expanding operations overseas, such cases are not limited to the United States. In one instance in 2010, FBI agents and other American officials contacted Yonas Fikre, a Muslim American from Portland, Oregon, while he was visiting family in Sudan. Fikre declined to be questioned without a lawyer present and rejected a request to become an informant. He subsequently received an e-mail from a State Department address: “Thanks for meeting with us last week in Sudan. While we hope to get your side of the issues we keep hearing about, the choice is yours to make. The time to help yourself is now.” A year later, while traveling in the United Arab Emirates, Fikre was arrested by local security forces, who detained and tortured him for three months, he alleges, asking many of the same questions the FBI had posed to him. One of his interrogators told him he was being held at the behest of the United States.
Attorneys at the CLEAR (Creating Law Enforcement Accountability & Responsibility) project, based out of the City University of New York School of Law, have represented dozens of people since 2009 who have been approached by the FBI for voluntary interviews; they say the threat of retribution for those who refuse to become informants is real. “The FBI approaches the vast majority of our clients as potential informants to partake in mass surveillance of Muslim communities, unconnected to any real criminal investigation,” said Amna Akbar, a supervising attorney at CLEAR. “The bureau is aggressively attempting to cultivate informants in Muslim communities by using coercion, pressure tactics and intimidation.”
As an example, Akbar cites the case of Mohammed Tanvir, a 28-year-old from Pakistan who in October 2010 found himself on the Department of Homeland Security’s “no fly” list following more than a year of fending off requests from FBI agents to become an informant. In 2009, after returning from a visit to his wife in Pakistan, Tanvir says agents appeared at a 99 Cent Store in the Bronx where he worked to question him. “They said they had been following me,” Tanvir recalled. “They had photos of me riding the train to work.” The agents told Tanvir they’d heard from his co-workers at a previous construction job that he had been to Taliban training camps in Afghanistan, a claim Tanvir denies; he says that Indian immigrants at the worksite called him “Taliban” to taunt him about his Pakistani nationality. The agents nevertheless pressed him to become an informant, asking him to focus on the South Asian community in New York City, and offered him money and other enticements, such as bringing his wife to the United States and paying for his parents to make religious pilgrimages from Pakistan to Saudi Arabia. “We need people like you to just watch around your community,” Tanvir says the agents told him. He also says they wanted him to go to Afghanistan to infiltrate militant training camps and “report on what is going on there.” Tanvir, who insists he has no knowledge of the training camps, declined the FBI’s request despite threats that he would be deported back to Pakistan—a prospect that frightened him because his family depended on the money he was sending from the United States.
Tanvir says the FBI first approached him in 2007, after he wired money to help a childhood friend from Pakistan who had been detained in Mexico for overstaying his visa. At the time the agents merely questioned him, but once they’d set their sights on him as a potential informant, he says they called him repeatedly, showed up at his workplace, and threatened to arrest him if he refused to take a polygraph and undergo further questioning. Eventually, Tanvir says, he stopped taking their calls.
Akbar says the FBI placed Tanvir on the “no fly” list as retaliation for his refusal to work as a paid informant. In May CLEAR sent a letter to the FBI threatening to sue if Tanvir isn’t removed from the list. Regardless of the outcome, Tanvir—a green card holder who once hoped to settle in the United States—says that as a result of his ordeal, he is now seeking to return to Pakistan permanently.

Also in This Forum

We Recommend

Assailed by the right as a fiction, anti-Muslim bias is all too real for those who live with it.
Sharia is as unthreatening to the US legal system as the ideas in the Old Testament. Yet bigoted hysteria is fueling legislation that actually undermines our courts.

About the Author

Petra Bartosiewicz
Petra Bartosiewicz, a freelance writer living in Brooklyn, New York, is writing a book on the Justice Department’s...

Also by the Author

·                                 BOOKS
·                                 AUTHORS
·                                 COMMUNITY


The FBI's War on Student Radicals, and Reagan’s Rise to Power

Seth Rosenfeld   Farrar, Straus and Giroux

Email Print
Seth Rosenfeld Subversives


     Subversives traces the FBI’s secret involvement with three iconic figures at Berkeley during the 1960s: the ambitious neophyte politician Ronald Reagan, the fierce but fragile radical Mario Savio, and the liberal university president Clark Kerr. Through these converging narratives, the award-winning investigative reporter Seth Rosenfeld tells a dramatic and disturbing story of FBI surveillance, illegal break-ins, infiltration, planted news stories, poison-pen letters, and secret detention lists. He reveals how the FBI’s covert operations—led by Reagan’s friend J. Edgar Hoover—helped ignite an era of protest, undermine the Democrats, and benefit Reagan personally and politically. At the same time, he vividly evokes the life of Berkeley in the early sixties—and shows how the university community, a site of the forward-looking idealism of the period, became a battleground in an epic struggle between the government and free citizens.
     The FBI spent more than $1 million trying to block the release of the secret files on which Subversives is based, but Rosenfeld compelled the bureau to release more than 250,000 pages, providing an extraordinary view of what the government was up to during a turning point in our nation’s history.
     Part history, part biography, and part police procedural, Subversives reads like a true-crime mystery as it provides a fresh look at the legacy of the sixties, sheds new light






Sign up to receive information about new books, author events, and special offers.
Jump to:
·                                 Book Excerpts
·                                 Reviews
·                                 About the Author
·                                 Buy the Book
·                                 From the Publisher
[See Rosenfeld’s reply in The Nation (March 11/18, 2013) to Steve Wasserman’s review.  –Dick]

The Terror Factory: Inside the FBI’s Manufactured War on Terror shows how the FBI has, under the guise of engaging in counterterrorism since 9/11, built a network of more than 15,000 informants whose primary purpose is to infiltrate Muslim communities to create and facilitate phony terrorist plots so that the bureau can then claim victory in the war on terror.
An outgrowth of Trevor Aaronson’s work as an investigative reporting fellow at the University of California, Berkeley, which culminated in an award-winning cover story in Mother Jones magazine, The Terror Factory reveals shocking information about the criminals, conmen and liars the FBI uses as paid informants, as well as documents the extreme methods the FBI uses to ensnare Muslims in phony terrorist plots—which are in reality conceived and financed by the FBI.
The book offers unprecedented detail into how the FBI has transformed from a reactive law enforcement agency to a proactive counterterrorism organization–including the full story of an accused murderer who became one of the FBI’s most prolific terrorism informants–and how the FBI has used phony terrorist plots to justify spending $3 billion every year on counterterrorism.


“Compelling, shocking, and gritty with intrigue.”
Publishers Weekly
“A real eye-opener that questions how well the country’s security is being protected.”
Kirkus Book Reviews
The Terror Factory is a well-researched and fast-paced exposé of the dubious tactics the FBI has used in targeting Muslim Americans with sting operations since 2001.”
Reason magazine
“This is investigative reporting at its best. This is a story that the major media has been afraid to look at, much less commit the resources to report it out. Now Trevor Aaronson has done it. For the first time a documented investigation into the domestic terrorism program is available to the general public. And the story this dogged reporter tells has been garnering growing attention. Is it possible that we have in fact created the very threat we fear? Are we in danger of destroying the fabric of our freedom in our panic to preserve it? Read Aaronson’s groundbreaking report and make up your own mind.”
–Lowell Bergman, Pulitzer Prize-winning Professor of Investigative Reporting
“Aaronson explains just how misguided and often deceptive FBI terrorism sting operations have become. In case after case, he demonstrates how the money being spent is more about producing theater than about federal agents arresting suspected terrorists.”
–James J. Wedick, former FBI Supervisory Agent
“This is the kind of journalism that should prompt Congressional hearings. The Terror Factory offers a rare combination of meticulous data-driven reporting with personal narratives about the lives ruined – and careers made – by the FBI’s rampant use of informants. Aaronson is an expert guide through a hidden counter-terrorism network of con men, and through the changes in technology and the FBI itself that paved the way for this new era of law enforcement. The Terror Factory is a damning exposé of how the government’s front line against terrorism has become a network of snitches at the end of their ropes, and FBI agents desperate to thwart a terrorist plot even if it means creating one.”
–Will Potter, Green is the New Red: An Insider’s Account of a Social Movement Under Siege
“A disturbing window into America’s war on terror. In story after story, Aaronson reveals in detail how the FBI and its informants are creating crime rather than solving it. This is an important piece of journalism.”
–Alexandra Natapoff, author of Snitchin

This chronology appears in the June 14, 2013 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.

How Obama Expanded and Consolidated
the Bush-Cheney Domestic Spy Dragnet

by Edward Spannaus
[PDF version of this chronology]
What follow are some of the known critical nodal points in the process of the consolidation of the dragnet surveillance and data-mining program over the post-Franklin Roosevelt years; much more is still unknown and hidden behind classification barriers.
1940s: The British-U.S. Arrangement
·         1943: The U.S. and Britain formalize wartime signals intelligence cooperation, with the BRUSA (Britain-USA) agreement, providing for sharing of information.
·         1945: Operation SHAMROCK is inaugurated, a program under which the three largest U.S. cable companies—Western Union, ITT World Communications, and RCA Global—provided to theNational Security Agency (the U.S. military's signals intelligence agency), and its predecessors, copies of all cable traffic entering and leaving the United States. Western Union and ITT gave the NSA microfilms of cable messages; RCA provided NSA with complete copies of all cables, and later, magnetic tapes, when its operations were computerized.
·         1947: Britain and the United States signed the U.K.-U.S.A. Security Agreement, also known as "UKUSA," or the "Secret Treaty." This represented President Harry Truman's treasonous policy of establishing an Anglo-American "special relationship"—a repudiation of FDR's policy. With a year, the other signatories—Canada, Australia, and New Zealand—had joined. Subsequent agreements provided for standardized codewords, security agreements, and procedures for dissemination of information. The two principal agencies involved are the U.S. NSA and Britain's Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) at Cheltenham.
·         All of the above arrangements continued and expanded throughout the 1950s, and up to the present day.
1960s: NSA Operations Expand
·         In the early 1960s, the U.S. Justice Department and FBI started providing the NSA with names of Americans whom the FBI believed to be involved in certain domestic criminal and political activities, so that NSA could expand its "watch list." In 1967,Maj. Gen. William Yarborough, the Army's Assistant Chief of Staff for Intelligence, requested information pertaining to civil disturbances, and during the late 1960s into the mid-1970s, the Army, CIA, FBI, and DIA all were sending requests for intercept intelligence to the NSA, the subjects of which included domestic anti-war and civil rights activists, including Dr. Martin Luther King.
·         In 1969, the domestic surveillance program was formalized under the code name MINARET, pertaining to, inter alia,"individuals who may foment civil disturbance or otherwise undermine the national security of the United States." British Intelligence's GCHQ Cheltenham also provided intercepts to the NSA which were then passed on to other U.S. intelligence agencies.
1970s: Military Spying Exposed
·         1971: Congress began investigating military spying on U.S. citizens.
·         1972-74: the "Watergate" scandals exposed Nixon's use of domestic intelligence agencies and the IRS to surveil and target his political enemies.
·         In 1972, the U.S. Supreme Court, in the landmark case U.S. v. U.S. District Court, held that the President's Executive Powers cannot override the Fourth Amendment's requirement for a warrant, in a case involving domestic electronic surveillance.
·         In August 1975, the House Select Committee on Intelligence Activities, headed by Rep. Otis Pike (D-N.Y.), held hearings on NSA domestic surveillance, in the course of which CIA Director William Colby disclosed NSA's interception of international communications, and during which NSA Director Lt. Gen. Lew Allen testified in an open hearing for the first time.
·         In October 1975, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Activities—known as the "Church Committee" for its chairman, Sen. Frank Church (D-Id.)—publicly identified the SHAMROCK AND MINARET programs by name for the first time.

Church opened the hearing on Oct. 29, 1975 by stating that "Just as the NSA is one of the largest and least known of the intelligence agencies, it is also the most reticent. While it sweeps in messages from around the world, it gives out precious little information about itself.... Today, we will bring the agency from behind closed doors." On Nov. 6, 1975, the Church Committee made public its report on SHAMROCK.
·         After the release of the Committee's Final Report in 1976, Senator Church warned that tyranny would result if the NSA "were to turn its awesome technology against domestic telecommunications." Were this to happen, Church warned, "That is the abyss from which there is no return."
·         1978: In response to the Church and Pike Committees' findings of abuse, including widespread violations of the Fourth Amendment's prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures, Congress passed the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which confirmed, once and for all, that the Fourth Amendment does apply to domestic electronic surveillance. FISA required a particularized showing of probable cause before an individual in the U.S. could be subject to electronic surveillance, or his records seized, in a foreign intelligence or national security case.
1980s: Cheney Rejects Controls
·         Rep. Dick Cheney, the senior Republican on the Joint Congressional Iran-Contra Committee, commissioned a "Minority Report," written largely by his aide and future legal counsel David Addington, proclaiming that Congress has no power to infringe on Executive power in matters of war and national security. It was well-known that Cheney never accepted the findings of the Church Committee, and looked for any and every opportunity to repudiate them.
·         When Cheney became Secretary of Defense (1989-93), and later Vice President (2001-09), he had his chance to put these views into action.
1990s: Emergence of Data-Mining
·         In the late 1990s, the U.S. Army's Intelligence and Security Command (INSCOM), in conjunction with the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and other agencies, developed a data-mining program using "link analysis" also known as "associational analysis," for use in terrorism investigations and other matters, such as technology transfers and espionage related to China. This program became known generically as"Able Danger"—although Able Danger was reportedly a narrower program, feeding "actionable" intelligence into the military's Special Operations Command (SOCOM) for hunting down and killing terrorist suspects.
·         In early 2000, the data-mining program was shut down by the Pentagon, because it had been retaining information on U.S. citizens. However, according to various reports, SOCOM simply relocated the program to a private contractor where it continued.
9/11 and Its Aftermath
·         2001: The Patriot Act-Plus. Shortly after the Bush-Cheney Administration took office in early 2001, it began approaching the top telecommunications companies, seeking NSA access to their customer records. Dick Cheney personally sought the participation of Qwest Communications in the program, but Qwest refused, after finding out that the NSA had no warrant from the FISA Court or any other legal authority to obtain such records.
·         On Oct. 4, less than four weeks after the Sept. 11 attacks, President George W. Bush signed an order authorizing the NSA's domestic wiretapping program, which went operational on Oct. 6. Quickly, the NSA made new approaches to the telecommunications companies, seeking access to all their traffic. These included the three largest: AT&T, Verizon, and BellSouth. The legal justification was cooked up by Cheney's lawyer David Addington and second-rank Justice Department attorney John Yoo, bypassing normal channels. It is thought that these still-secret legal opinions reflected Cheney's longstanding dogma that the President's war powers, under Article II of the Constitution, override any legislative restrictions such as FISA.
·         On Oct. 23, Rep. James Sensenbrenner introduced the USA Patriot Act, junking a previous bi-partisan bill. The bill was rapidly passed by the House and Senate, over heavy Democratic opposition, and was signed into law by President Bush on Oct. 26. Among its most notorious provisions are those allowing the FBI to obtain records without a court order or a subpoena, through the use of National Security Letters, and its Section 215, which allows the FBI and others agencies to obtain records and other materials through secret warrants issued by the FISA Court.
2002: Secret Presidential Order
·         A secret Presidential order authorized the NSA to conduct domestic surveillance, overturning 25 years of law and regulations. Congressional leaders were summoned to Cheney's office for a secret briefing on the program. This was what is known as a "special access program," so sensitive that relatively few people even know about it. According to some sources, the program was code-named "Stellar Wind."
·         In a parallel development, the Defense Department's Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) created the Information Awareness Office, also known as the Total (or Terrorist) Information Awareness (TIA) Office, a data-mining program run by Adm. John Poindexter, best known for his role in the Iran-Contra affair. The idea of TIA was to create a huge, centralized database consisting of government and commercial records, including bank records, credit card and telephone bills, travel records, and so on, and then to look for "suspicious" associations and patterns.
·         In the Summer of 2002, AT&T technician Mark Klein learned of secret rooms being constructed at two AT&T switching facilities in San Francisco, from which the NSA tapped into fiber-optic cables connecting AT&T's WorldNet service to other Internet providers. Klein thought the arrangement was part of TIA. Only persons with an NSA security clearance were allowed to enter the secret room. Similar NSA secret rooms were being built in other AT&T facilities around the country.
2003: Under Congressional Pressure, a Shift
·         After a public uproar, Congress pretended to shut down the TIA program, but in fact, the program was shifted into the Pentagon's classified ("black") budget, and continued to operate within the NSA, and under the auspices of DOD contractors such as SAIC and Booz Allen Hamilton. In 2002, former NSA Director Mike McConnell, then heading Booz Allen's intelligence division, wanted Poindexter to give the entire TIA program to Booz Allen, but Poindexter was reportedly reluctant to give one firm so much control over it, so Booz Allen got part of it, as did other private contractors, where the TIA program carried on—as it continues to do up to the present. The unprecedented amount of data which the NSA collects today, sweeping up all telephone and Internet traffic, is useless unless the agency has the means to mine through it and analyze it—and that's what Poindexter's TIA and its offshoots were designed to do.
·         (Former NSA Director Michael Hayden told the National Journalon June 10, 2013, that the NSA's massive data-collection and surveillance system was developed by, and is almost entirely run by, private defense contractors. According to author and NSA expert James Bamford, these contractors include at least two Israeli firms: Narus, which processes the information obtained from AT&T for the NSA, and Verint, which does the same for Verizon data.)
·         On July 17, 2003, Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) the senior Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, was so alarmed by a secret White House briefing on the NSA program, that he sent a private, handwritten letter to Cheney, expressing his concerns over the surveillance program, and saying it reminded him of Poindexter's TIA program. Neither Cheney nor anyone else ever answered Rockefeller's letter.
2004: An Open Battle
·         By March 2004, Justice Department lawyers were becoming so concerned about the legality of the NSA surveillance program that they were considering refusing to re-certify it. The new Deputy Attorney General, James Comey, told Attorney GeneralJohn Ashcroft that the program might be illegal. The Justice Department's balking over recertification led to the dramatic confrontation in Ashcroft's hospital room on March 10, where White House lawyers, acting at the direction of Cheney, attempted to get an ill and sedated Ashcroft to reauthorize the program, but were blocked by Comey and FBI Director Robert Mueller. When the White House reauthorized the program the next day, without DOJ approval, Comey, Ashcroft, and all the top DOJ leadership threatened to resign en masse unless the program was changed.
·         Apparently overriding Cheney, Bush agreed to some modifications. There are many indications that Comey's concern was not just with the publicly acknowledged Terrorist Surveillance Program, but with a much broader NSA program—probably Stellar Wind, the dragnet sweep of all telecommunications. Administration officials have said in public testimony that there are other, secret programs which they cannot discuss in open hearings.
2005: More Exposure
·         In a series of articles in December 2005, the New York Timesexposed the Bush Administration's surveillance and eavesdropping on U.S. citizens without a court order. The warrantless surveillance program, operating since 2002, represented a sharp break with the previous practice of obtaining FISA Court warrants for any domestic spying. The Timesreported how the NSA had obtained access to the communications streams of the major telecommunications companies.
2006: More Uproar
·         As the uproar over the warrantless wiretap program continued, the Washington Post reported that the NSA was sharing this information with the FBI, CIA, the Department of Homeland Security, and other military agencies. USA Today named the private telecommunication companies involved.
·         In February, a long-time NSA employee, Russell Tice, told a House Government Reform subcommittee that he was concerned about the legality and constitutionality of another "special access" program being conducted by the NSA. Tice said this program was different and more far-reaching that the one disclosed by the New York Times, but he said he could not discuss it because of its highly classified nature.
2007: FISA Court Gets Right To Violate 4th Amendment
·         In January 2007, the Bush Administration announced that, henceforth, the FISA Court would authorize any surveillance previously conducted under the President's Terrorist Surveillance Program. If this were true, it constituted a narrowing of the program.
·         But, in August, Congress passed the "Protect America Act of 2007," which expanded Executive power to conduct international surveillance, and allowed the FISA Court, for the first time, to issue blanket authorizations rather than individualized warrants—thus completely obliterating the protections provided by the Fourth Amendment. It also eliminated the previous requirement to show that a target was an agent of a foreign power; now the collection simply had to be related to foreign intelligence gathering. It legalized the ongoing NSA tapping into telecommunication facilities.
·         Within a month, the Bush Administration obtained access toMicrosoft's Internet traffic, under the newly launched PRISMprogram.
2008: Obama Weighs in for Spying
·         In July, then-Sen. Barack Obama reversed his previous stance, and voted for the FISA Amendments Act of 2008, which made most of the 2007 "Protect America Act" permanent, and which also gave retroactive immunity to the telecommunications companies which had been handing over customer records and data to the FBI and other agencies through the NSA.
2009: Obama Protects Warrantless Wiretapping
·         At the beginning of January, Federal courts started dismissing civil suits that had been brought against telecommunications companies, citing their immunity under the 2008 law.
·         In April 2009, the Obama Administration moved to have another civil suit thrown out of court, on the grounds that any litigation over the Bush Administration's warrantless wiretapping program would require the government to disclose "state secrets." The Administration aggressively invoked "state secrets" in other cases to defend the NSA surveillance program, and fought for the broadest immunity for telecommunications providers.
2010: Still Sharing with the British
·         By 2010, and probably before, the British GCHQ was given access to PRISM's sweep of Internet traffic, enabling British Intelligence to circumvent British law. Between June 2010 and May 2012, GCHQ generated 197 intelligence reports for MI5 and MI6, according to the June 7 Guardian. (It has been reliably reported that, for decades, U.S. and British intelligence used each other to spy on their own citizens, thus circumventing their own country's prohibitions against domestic surveillance.)
2011: Extending the Patriot Act
·         On Jan. 6, 2011, NSA officials and others broke ground for the construction of the NSA's new $2 billion data storage and analysis center in Bluffdale, Utah.
·         In the Spring, with key parts of the Patriot Act up for renewal, President Obama demanded a longer extension of the law (until December 2013), than did the Republicans (who wanted it extended only to the end of 2011). Obama's White House claimed that this was needed to provide "certainty and predictability" to the intelligence agencies. In May, Obama signed the bill which extended key provisions of the Patriot Act—including Section 215—until 2015.
2012: Massive Expansion of Surveillance
·         In April, the New York Times reported that the NSA was still engaged in intercepting purely domestic communications, beyond the limits set by Congress.
·         That same month, NSA whistleblower William Binney said that surveillance had increased under Obama, and that the NSA's data-mining program has become so vast that the government has assembled 20 trillion transactions of U.S. citizens with other U.S. citizens, including phone calls, e-mails, credit card purchases, and Internet searches.
·         In June, at the insistence of Obama and the intelligence agencies, Congress passed a five-year extension of the 2008 FISA Amendments Act. Senators Ron Wyden and Mark Udallwarned of "a loophole in the law that could allow the government to effectively conduct warrantless searches for Americans' communications" (see Wyden's remarks, previous article).
2013: The Latest Revelations
·         On June 5-6, the London Guardian revealed a secret FISA Court order requiring Verizon to turn over all customer records to the NSA on a daily basis. "The unlimited nature of the records being handed over to the NSA is extremely unusual," the Guardianreported, and also cited the "numerous cryptic public warnings" by Wyden and Udall, that the Obama Administration was relying on "secret legal interpretations" of its spying powers, so broad that the American public would be "stunned" to learn the scope of it.
·         On June 6-7, the Guardian and the Washington Post revealed the existence of the PRISM program involving the leading Internet firms and providers.
·         On June 7, the Guardian reported that the British GCHQ Cheltenham has had access to the NSA's PRISM system since at least June 2010.
·         On June 7, President Obama acknowledged the reported activities and fully defended them, in terms almost identical to those used by George W. Bush after the disclosure of the NSA spying program in 2005.
·         The London Daily Telegraph) reported on June 8 that members of the British Parliament's Intelligence and Security Committee, which monitors the work of MI5, MI6, and GCHQ, would be coming to the U.S. to meet with senior figures from the NSA and the CIA.

GOOGLE SEARCH GEORGE W. BUSH, FBI, SPYING, August 17, 2013  [This Search turned up mainly internal sparring (FBI flip-flops, Senate to question), but it also offered the preceding useful chronology by Spannaeus.  –Dick]

1.                             Ex-President Bush Lied To FBI Director About Warrantless ...
Jan 27, 2012 - Former President George W. Bush lied to FBI Director Robert Mueller in the Oval Office to protect White House programs that secretly ...

2.                             News for George W. Bush, FBI, Spying

1.                  Justice Department Launches Fresh Probe Into FBI Spying
Foreign Policy (blog) ‎- 3 days ago
President Obama's decision to put his intelligence director in charge of setting up a review of NSA spying didn't exactly inspire confidence that ...
2.                  OPINION: FBI leader flip-flops on domestic spying‎ - 1 day ago
Huffington Post‎ - 5 days ago

3.                             Obama nominee to head FBI defends NSA spying in Senate testimony
Jul 10, 2013 - The deputy attorney general under George W. Bush, James Comey, ...rubber-stamps NSA and FBI spying operations and has emerged as a ...

4.                             What's the Problem with Unchecked Government Spying? Visit the ...
Aug 5, 2013 - More recently, C. Boyden Gray, President George H.W. Bush's lawyer, had used the FBI to uncover information about Denver's drug habits.

5.                             FBI Nominee Lands Amid Spy Uproar -
Jun 21, 2013 - President Barack Obama formally nominated James Comey as Federal... President George W. Bush, to replace Robert Mueller as FBI director.

6.                             George W. Bush's domestic spying - SourceWatch's...spying
Bush administration's domestic spying programs. Main article: George W. Bush'sdomestic spying. Sub-articles: Bank records spying · Phone records spying ...

7.                             OPINION: FBI leader flip-flops on domestic spying - Your West ... days ago - OPINION: FBI leader flip-flops on domestic spying - Your West Valley News: .... Greenwald demonstrates that under George W. Bush, the ...

8.                             Images for George W. Bush, FBI, Spying

9.                             FBI Nominee Pressed Over NSA Spying, Waterboarding, IRS ... › Politics
Jul 9, 2013 - Comey, nominated as the next FBI director by President Obama in May, deputy attorney general under President George W. Bush.

10.                         A Chronology: How Obama Expanded and Consolidated The Bush ...
Jun 14, 2013 - In the early 1960s, the U.S. Justice Department and FBI started ... 11 attacks, President George W. Bush signed an order authorizing the NSA's ...

11.                         Senators to Question FBI Nominee on Spying Programs | DoD Buzz › Cyber Security
Jul 8, 2013 - Senators to Question FBI Nominee on Spying Programs ... general at the Justice Department during the George W. Bush administration.

with Amy Goodman & Juan González
·                                 Home
·                                 Stations
·                                 Past Shows
·                                 Topics
·                                 Blog
·                                 Get Involved
·                                 Events
·                                 Español
·                                 About
·                                 DONATE


America’s Real Subversives: FBI Spying Then, NSASurveillance Now

By Amy Goodman with Denis Moynihan
As the 50th anniversary of the 1963 March on Washington approaches, commemorating that historic gathering where Martin Luther King, Jr. gave his famous "I have a dream" speech, it is important to recall the extent to which King was targeted by the government’s domestic spying apparatus. The FBI operation against King is one of the most shameful episodes in the long history of our government’s persecution of dissenters.
Fifty years later, Edward Snowden, who is seeking temporary asylum to remain in Russia, took enormous personal risk to expose the global reach of surveillance programs overseen by President Barack Obama. His revelations continue to provoke worldwide condemnation of the United States.
In a heavily redacted, classified FBI memo dated January 4, 1956 — just a little more than a month after Rosa Parks was arrested for refusing to give up her seat on a bus to a white passenger — the Mobile, Alabama, FBI office stated that an agent "had been assigned by [redacted] to find out all he could about Reverend Martin L. King, colored minister in Montgomery and leader in the bus boycott … to uncover all the derogatory information he could about King."
The FBI at that time was run by its founding director, J. Edgar Hoover, who was deploying the vast resources he controlled against any and all perceived critics of the United States. The far-reaching clandestine surveillance, infiltration and disruption operation Hoover ran was dubbed "COINTELPRO," for counterintelligence program.
The FBI’s COINTELPRO activities, along with illegal operations by agencies like the CIA, were thoroughly investigated in 1975 by the Church Committee, chaired by the Democratic US senator from Idaho, Frank Church. The Church committee reported that the FBI "conducted a sophisticated vigilante operation aimed squarely at preventing the exercise of first amendment rights of speech and association." Among COINTELPRO’s perverse activities was an FBI effort to threaten Martin Luther King, Jr. with exposure of an alleged extramarital affair, including the suggestion, made by the FBI to King, that he avoid embarrassment by killing himself.
Following the Church committee, Congress imposed serious limitations on the FBI and other agencies, restricting domestic spying. Among the changes was the passage into law of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). FISA compelled the FBI and others in the government to go to a secret court, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, in order to engage in domestic wiretapping.
Then came September 11, 2001, and the swift passage of the USA PATRIOT Act, granting broad, new powers of surveillance to intelligence agencies, including the FBI. Section 215 of that act is widely criticized, first for allowing the FBI to obtain records of what books people are signing out of the library. But now, more than 10 years later, and thanks to the revelations that have come from the Snowden leaks, we see that the government has used this law to perform dragnet surveillance on all electronic communications, including telephone "metadata," which can be analyzed to reveal intimate details of our lives, legalizing a truly Orwellian system of total surveillance.
In what is considered to be a litmus test of the potential to roll back the Obama administration’s domestic spy programs, a bipartisan coalition of libertarian Republicans and progressive Democrats put forth an amendment to the latest defense authorization bill. Justin Amash, a Republican, and John Conyers, a Democrat, both of Michigan, co-sponsored the amendment, which would deny funding to the NSA to collect phone and data records of people who are not subjects of an investigation.
The White House took seriously the potential that its power to spy might get trimmed by Congress. On the eve of the debate on the Amash/Conyers amendment, House members were lobbied by NSADirector General Keith B Alexander, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, as well as by hawkish members of the congressional intelligence committees.
The amendment was narrowly defeated. A full bill that would similarly shut down the NSA program is currently in committee.
Thanks to Edward Snowden, and the journalists who are writing stories based on his whistleblowing, we now know that the Obama administration is collecting oceans of our data. Martin Luther King Jr was a dissident, an organizer, a critic of US wars abroad and of poverty and racism at home. He was spied on, and his work was disrupted by the federal government.
The golden anniversary of the March on Washington is 28 August. Deeply concerned about the crackdown on dissent happening under Obama, scholar Cornel West, professor at Union Theological Seminary in New York, wondered if "Brother Martin [King] would not be invited to the very march in his name."
© 2013 Amy Goodman; distributed by King Features Syndicate


1.                             Obama Nominee to Head FBI Defends NSA Spying in Senate ...
Jul 10, 2013 - The deputy attorney general under George W. Bush, James Comey, provided an unqualified endorsement of massive and illegal National ...

2.                             Obama nominee to head FBI defends NSA spying in Senate testimony
Jul 10, 2013 - The deputy attorney general under George W. Bush, James Comey, provided a sweeping endorsement of NSA surveillance programs at a ...

3.                             News for Obama, FBI, Spying

1.                  OPINION: FBI leader flip-flops on domestic spying ‎- 1 day ago
This is the same FBI that, under Bush and especially Obama, has engaged in even more warrantless spying on us. Greenwald goes on.

4.                             America's Real Subversives: FBI Spying Then, NSA Surveillance ... 25, 2013 - America's Real Subversives: FBI Spying Then, NSA Surveillance Now ...reach of surveillance programs overseen by President Barack Obama.

5.                             Is the FBI Spying on Obama? Nicaraguan President Believes So › News  Webmaster  Web Blog
Jul 22, 2013 - Barack Obama could be spied on. Not even the United States president is safe from the FBI, Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega believes.

6.                             Obama Restricts Spying In Mosques While Spying Everywhere Else ... › IBD Editorials
Jun 12, 2013 - The White House assures us that tracking our every phone call and keystroke is to stop terrorists, and yet it won't snoop in mosques, where the ...

7.                             Spy vs. Spy: Feds now want reports from retailers - WorldNetDaily
Jul 11, 2013 - Only days after Barack Obama ordered all federal workers to watch their colleagues and report whatever suspicious behavior, the FBI has ...

8.                             Report: FBI Can Remotely Turn on Phone Microphones for Spying ...
Aug 2, 2013 - In the wake of the NSA domestic spying scandal that broke in early June, ... Now you know why , the government is giving out free Obama ...

9.                             Obama Spying Scandal: NSA and FBI fight back with claims that ...
Jun 19, 2013 - Uploaded by JewishNewsOne
The director of the United States' National Security Agency has claimed that the Agency's Orwellian ...

10.                         Obama's Choice To Head The FBI James Comey Signed Off On ...► 7:40► 7:40
Jul 15, 2013 - Uploaded by Matthew Filipowicz We discuss how Barack Obama's nominee to head the FBI, James Comey, signed off on ...

11.                         Images for Obama, FBI, Spying

12.                        FBI under pressure to explain drone use, as Obama names new ...
Jun 21, 2013 - As President Obama nominates a new FBI director, the bureau is coming under rising pressure from lawmakers to explain the limits of its ...


No comments: