
FBI Drops Law Enforcement as 'Primary' Mission - dredmorbius
http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2014/01/05/fbi_drops_law_enforcement_as_primary_mission
======
fiatmoney
You know, within my lifetime there was an actual state-level adversary with
actual nuclear weapons, an active campaign of support of terrorist
organizations far more effective than Al Qaeda, and a well-funded espionage
program with real, live agents in the most sensitive parts of the US and
allied governments. But somehow _this_ threat is worthy of pooping our
collective pants over.

~~~
philwelch
You mean the era of J. Edgar Hoover and COINTELPRO, which spied on every
domestic activist group and potential subversive from Vietnam war protestors
to Martin Luther King? The same FBI that assassinated Fred Hampton? Or a CIA
that operated with zero oversight, ran drugs, orchestrated coups, committed
assassinations, and experimented on people to see whether LSD was a truth
serum?

You think that's a government that's in control? You think all these abuses
and expansions of power are a new thing?

~~~
VladRussian2
>You mean the era of J. Edgar Hoover and COINTELPRO, which spied on every
domestic activist group and potential subversive from Vietnam war protestors
to Martin Luther King?

they were forced to prioritize their limited resources and abilities somehow.
Thanks to technology advancements, today the NSA is spying on everybody who
uses any technical means of communications.

>The same FBI that assassinated Fred Hampton?

try to gather a group of armed young black men in an appartment in a city
today and see what happens. Or imagine if "Occupy" guys were armed.

>Or a CIA that operated with zero oversight, ran drugs, orchestrated coups,
committed assassinations, and experimented on people to see whether LSD was a
truth serum?

CIA black prisons around the world. Extra-judicial renditions and torture.
Drones. The only change here is that the effects of LSD are well known today
so no more experiments. I mean with LSD. The stuff they experiment with today
is much more interesting.

~~~
philwelch
What happens today is less of a change in direction and more of a logical
extension in what covert agencies have always been doing.

NSA has always done dragnet surveillance as long as it's been feasible. Look
up Echelon.

~~~
rhizome
I'm not even sure the word "logical" is necessary there, and I haven't seen
any indication that the activities are anything other than a _continuation_ of
what Hoover started.

------
Alex3917
I heard a story from a friend the other day who told me about a terrorism
investigation in his apartment building. Apparently some guy doused a hotel
with gasoline. The NYC counterterrorism unit traced him using image search on
Facebook using a photo from the hotel security cameras. They found a picture
of him on his mom's Facebook page, got her phone number, and used that to
locate him.

~~~
pstuart
I bet the driver's license database would be handy too.

~~~
saraid216
Handy, but less useful. Facebook picture albums have a larger variety of the
same face, and is more likely to be up-to-date, and often contain relationship
information for help in actually tracking someone down.

------
Theodores
Wondering what 'national security' actually was, I find this on the Wikipedia
page for it:

"There is no single universally accepted definition of national security."

With 'law enforcement' you have an idea what the laws are, you know what the
word 'enforcement' means and you can therefore have an idea of what the FBI is
supposed to be doing.

What is this 'national security' thing they speak of? Does it mean it is okay
to do COINTELPRO style stuff?

~~~
dreamdu5t
We are living under martial law. The NSA isn't even operating under civil law,
but martial law (procedure and customs entirely decided outside of court
proceeding, outside of the rule of law, and based on military interpretations
of the law).

People just don't realize this yet, or won't admit to it because they're still
in denial.

------
tiler
If the FBI's main objective was law enforcement, then wouldn't the general
populace expect them to pursue other Federal agencies that are actively
breaking the law? Where as, if the FBI states their main objective as
'National Security' they can turn a blind eye to the the other law breaking
Federal agencies as long as these agencies are acting within the interests of
'National Security'.

And in truth, many citizens are law breakers. And many of the laws that are
broken today may not even exist in a couple of years. Where as, ensuring
'National Security' is a non-transitory objective.

~~~
Udo
I agree with you, except for this:

 _> And many of the laws that are broken today may not even exist in a couple
of years._

In practice, laws are not rolled back but grow like an ever-expanding mesh.
This also relates to your comment that many citizens are law breakers: we're
moving toward a future where _every_ citizen breaks the law on a daily basis,
simply by virtue of living their lives. Combined with arbitrary draconian
punishment guidelines, this opens up the fascinating possibility of selective
enforcement as a means to weed out unwanted elements. It's a world where
pretty much everyone can be taken out of circulation on a whim, and where the
threat of overwhelming legal action can be used to enhance compliance.

------
jboydyhacker
When Bush created "Homeland Security" I thought for sure it was a matter of
time before that name was changed back to something less fascist sounding. Now
I'm surprised the trend is still continuing after all these years with
"security" creep into an excuse for broader state power.

~~~
AnthonyMouse
"Homeland Security" is already the Orwellian name. What is now the Department
of Defense was known from 1789 to 1947 as the Department of War. It's the same
sort of thing. If you want to call "Homeland Security" what it really is, it
would be the Department of Surveillance and Imprisonment.

------
gaius
As a Brit, I thought the _entire point_ of the FBI was to tackle crimes that
individual states couldn't due to jurisdiction not crossing state lines (nor
should it). Sort of like Interpol within one country. So who does that now?

------
saraid216
> What's not in question is that government agencies tend to benefit in
> numerous ways when considered critical to national security as opposed to
> law enforcement.

That's incredibly depressing to read.

------
drdeadringer
Sometimes I wonder why the alphabet soup surrounding intel-gathering isn't
collapsed into one department, something that could be called "Homeland
Security" or similar.

~~~
zachrose
United Stated Office of Unspecified Services (U.S.O.U.S.) would be my first
pick.

~~~
koenigdavidmj
Office of Unusual Size? I don't think that exists.

~~~
drdeadringer
It does in swamps. Isn't DC built on one?

------
zequel
"We rank our top 10 priorities and CT [counterterrorism] is first,
counterintel is second, cyber is third.."

I'd love to know how they're doing on #3, I'm not optimistic.

------
saosebastiao
Cool. One less agency trying to put people through our nation's god awful
federal court system, and one more agency that can get slated for dissolution
when people finally get sick of being raped and spied on for their own good.

~~~
joe_the_user
Uh...

They're putting people through the court system and double. It's just now they
entrap foolish immigrants with fabricated plots that the immigrants just to
commit a little to before they get rushed through those courts.

~~~
greenyoda
Not to mention that "terrorism" is a very nebulous term. I've heard of
schoolchildren being investigated for "making a terroristic threat". Their
crime? Pointing their finger at another kid and yelling "bang". And of course,
the FBI can investigate all those people on Facebook who joke about "killing
someone". Busting kids is a much less risky way for FBI agents to make a
living than chasing after the Mexican drug cartels.

------
puppetmaster3
Holly shit.

