FBI Made Up 'Threats' At Peace Rally, Lied To Congress, To Justify Spying Activity

from the feeling-safer? dept

Tue, Sep 21st 2010 3:03pm — Mike Masnick

Thought the days of the FBI considering any group with an agenda that disagreed with the federal government a threat to be "infiltrated" were over? Apparently not. It's been well-established that the FBI used a ridiculously broad net in figuring out who to investigate after September 11th, targeting all sorts of groups that were clearly not terrorist fronts, including a peace rally in Pittsburgh. When the news of that came out a few years back, it got a lot of attention. The ACLU filed a Freedom of Information Act to find out the details of what the FBI was doing at such rallies, and apparently a new report by the Inspector General suggests the FBI put a lot more effort into the coverup than it did in figuring out who they should actually be watching (found via Todd McDermid):

As the inspector general put it, the FBI's elaborate, "after-the-fact reconstruction" of the Pittsburgh events, designed to fabricate a counter-terrorism rationale for the rookie's surveillance mission, "was not corroborated by any witnesses or contemporaneous documents."

Basically, the FBI put a lot of effort into faking a terrorist threat at this event that would require having an FBI agent sent there. They even created a fake paper trail, and all this resulted in FBI director Robert Mueller giving "inaccurate and misleading" testimony to Congress. Of course, this isn't new. We seem to see this all the time from the Justice Department. So why is it that we keep allowing less and less oversight over the Justice Department, when they seem to just abuse their position more and more?

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: fbi, surveillance

20 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

DMNTD, 21 Sep 2010 @ 3:26pm

Never lose objectivenes because of a name..
If you make a gang of people and give them authority..they will always be a gang first..its basic instinct. end.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Terry Jean, 21 Sep 2010 @ 3:29pm

FBI DEA
Wake up FBI, DEA lie all the time They say and do what ever they want lie in court lie to the investigators that are suppose to catch them doing wrong. Do not trust any of them Federal procecuters lie too all do what they want.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Sep 2010 @ 3:32pm

This is where private prosecution is required.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
abc gum, 21 Sep 2010 @ 5:03pm

They are just trying to live up to the legacy of J. Edgar Hoover. Hey, why not put on a dress?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
TDR, 21 Sep 2010 @ 5:29pm

So how do we shut these organizations down? Because they've clearly (especially the CIA) outlived their usefulness.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 21 Sep 2010 @ 6:44pm
  
  Re:
  I think the IRS and the govt in general has outlived their usefulness.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Sep 2010 @ 6:32pm

What is new? They have been doing that since the 1920's.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mr Big Content, 21 Sep 2010 @ 11:53pm

Typical Socialist Liberal Abuses
Shows why they can’t be trusted in Government. Aren’t you glad we voted in George Bush to clean up this mess?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wolfy, 22 Sep 2010 @ 4:07am

ALL law enforcement agents will lie, even in court, if they think it will further their aims. They claim that all thew want to do is "Protect and Serve", but the rest of the "mission statement" should read "our interests at all costs."

Never believe a cop, especially if they've got you braced.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Sep 2010 @ 5:19am

us govt is run by real mafia now
nixonized
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
rhett, 22 Sep 2010 @ 6:15am

funk the police
I don't think this article is news. It should surprise anyone. An article that would surprise us is where the general public actually won somehow.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dark Helmet (profile), 22 Sep 2010 @ 6:43am

Huh...
And they said COINTELPRO was dead....

Am I still going to be told to "take off my tinfoil hat"?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- weneedhelp (profile), 22 Sep 2010 @ 7:31am
  
  Re: Huh...
  Put it back on:
  Operation Paper Clip & MK Ultra
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9OR0ZtdvYAQ
  
  Covert Actions Against American Citizens pt1 - cointelpro
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YonLbe_DiFI
  
  Covert Actions Against American Citizens pt2 - cointelpro
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_ex1aXWois
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
ChrisB (profile), 22 Sep 2010 @ 6:50am

We do it in Canada too
In 1998, the RCMP blew up a shack near a gas well, in order to give "credibility" to an informant. It was near Hythe, Alberta, and I remember talking to my uncle (a teacher in Hythe) who was scared sh!tless. Everyone thought the shack explosion was a terriorist attack (against the Oil Industry).

For those that don't know, the informant eventually sold some dynamite to Wiebo Ludwig and Ludwig was charged with conspiracy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Montezuma (profile), 22 Sep 2010 @ 7:12am

So, baseball players lie to Congress and they get hit with charges and jail time, but the FBI(or insert any other government agency/agency head) and nothing happens? If law enforcement is caught lying in court, they get hit with all sorts of charges(misdemeanors and felonies), but this is tolerated?

I believe it is time to reorganize these law enforcement arms of the U.S. Federal Government, as there are just too many and most are not needed. National Security Letters(NSLs, i.e. printed rights violations) should be done away with, and this stupid mentality that most law enforcement(in the U.S. and abroad) has gained since September 11th needs to be dropped. Everyone you see is not a "terrorist"(new euphemism for unlabeled target) and I refuse to give up my privacy or rights while you(law enforcement) fights "terrorist"(made up targets).

Law enforcement has changed too much since I left the profession. From the looks of it, I am glad I did.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Dark Helmet (profile), 22 Sep 2010 @ 8:01am
  
  Re:
  "So, baseball players lie to Congress and they get hit with charges and jail time"
  
  Premises fail. Which baseball player that lied to congress and is now in jail are you referring to, exactly?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Sep 2010 @ 9:41am

> If law enforcement is caught lying in court, they get hit with all sorts of charges(misdemeanors and felonies),

The story I usually hear ends "prosecutor declines to press perjury charges". It's impossible to tell why they do that, but standard in-group bias (in-group = "us who send criminals to jail") seems adequate.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Overcast (profile), 22 Sep 2010 @ 10:17am

Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Gene Cavanaugh, 22 Sep 2010 @ 12:03pm

Security and oversight
At various times I held virtually every security clearance available in the US, and I can say we complete conviction: while there are occasionally valid reasons for security (and perhaps, though I don't believe it, lack of oversight), the real purpose of security/no_oversight is to protect the guilty from an informed public.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Aaron, 23 Sep 2010 @ 8:45pm

Answers
Don't worry, though, folks. More government is always the answer!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]