FBI Admits It's Not Really About Law Enforcement Any More; Ignores Lots Of Crimes To Focus On Creating Fake Terror Plots

from the how-is-that-making-us-safer? dept

Mon, Jan 6th 2014 11:09am — Mike Masnick

A couple years ago, it was revealed that the FBI noted in one of its "counterterrorism training manuals" that FBI agents could "bend or suspend the law and impinge upon the freedoms of others," which seemed kind of odd for a government agency who claimed its "primary function" was "law enforcement." You'd think that playing by the rules would be kind of important. However, as John Hudson at Foreign Policy has noted, at some point last summer, the FBI quietly changed its fact sheet, so that it no longer says that "law enforcement" is its primary function, replacing it with "national security."

Of course, I thought we already had a "national security" agency -- known as the "National Security Agency." Of course, while this may seem like a minor change, as the article notes, it is the reality behind the scenes. The FBI massively beefed up resources focused on "counterterrorism" and... then let all sorts of other crimes slide. Including crimes much more likely to impact Americans, like financial/white collar fraud.

Between 2001 and 2009, the FBI doubled the amount of agents dedicated to counterterrorism, according to a 2010 Inspector's General report. That period coincided with a steady decline in the overall number of criminal cases investigated nationally and a steep decline in the number of white-collar crime investigations.

"Violent crime, property crime and white-collar crime: All those things had reductions in the number of people available to investigate them," former FBI agent Brad Garrett told Foreign Policy. "Are there cases they missed? Probably."

The article correctly notes that this has had a big impact:

The reductions in white-collar crime investigations became obvious. Back in 2000, the FBI sent prosecutors 10,000 cases. That fell to a paltry 3,500 cases by 2005. "Had the FBI continued investigating financial crimes at the same rate as it had before the terror attacks, about 2,000 more white-collar criminals would be behind bars," the report concluded. As a result, the agency fielded criticism for failing to crack down on financial crimes ahead of the Great Recession and losing sight of real-estate fraud ahead of the 2008 subprime mortgage crisis.

The article accurately notes how the FBI has basically started ignoring a tremendous amount of financial/white collar crime, but unfortunately never bothers to do the flipside: to look at whether or not the FBI has been even remotely effective in the whole "national security" aspect that is now its "primary function." Because, from the evidence we've seen, it seems like a disaster. Rather than tracking down and capturing actual terrorists (remember how the FBI knew all about the Boston bombers, but did nothing about them?), it seems like the FBI has been coming up with ways to keep itself busy that have nothing to do with really protecting national security.

So... what has the FBI been doing? Well, every time we hear anything about the FBI and counterterrorism, it seems to be a case where the FBI has been spending a ton of resources to concoct completely made up terrorism plots, duping some hapless, totally unconnected person into taking part in this "plot" then arresting him with big bogus headlines about how they "stopped" a terrorist plot that wouldn't have even existed if the FBI hadn't set it up in the first place. And this is not something that the FBI has just done a couple times. It's happened over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again. And those are just the stories that we wrote about that I can find in a quick search. I'm pretty sure there are a bunch more stories that we wrote about, let alone that have happened.

All of these efforts to stop their own damn "plots" screams of an agency that feels it needs to "do something" when there's really nothing to be done. Thousands of agents were reassigned from stopping real criminals to "counterterrorism" and when they found there were basically no terrorists around, they just started making their own in order to feel like they were doing something... and to have headlines to appease people upstairs. The government seems to have gone collectively insane when it comes to anything related to "terrorism."

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: fake plots, fbi, fud, law enforcement, national security, nsa, own plots, terrorism

62 Comments

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

Reader Comments

The First Word

“

Before and After.....

Let's recognize it for what it really is.......

Before: FBI Fact Sheet

After: FIB Fact Sheet

—Web_Rat

”

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

TheResidentSkeptic (profile), 6 Jan 2014 @ 11:13am

Under What Program
Anyone who believes bullet #2 has not been paying attention to the new meaning of words from our government agencies.

Let's see how that really reads...

"We just have a file on everyone IN the united states - citizen or not"

"We just happen to have 350 million files, which just happens to match the number of people in the US".

Or the other game:

First, define "keep". Second, define "file"

"we don't have a FILE on them, just a lot of records about them".

Hey.. I'm getting pretty good at this game... maybe they will call me and offer me a job - after all, they and/or the NSA have my contact information...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 6 Jan 2014 @ 11:45am
  
  Re: Under What Program
  Do you have experience in the movie business? It appears that they are in need of writers with special expertise in "plot development."
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 6 Jan 2014 @ 5:16pm
    
    Re: Re: Under What Program
    You mean like how the FBI foils its own terrorist plots?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - IronM@sk, 7 Jan 2014 @ 8:23am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Under What Program
      /facepalm
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- jupiterkansas (profile), 6 Jan 2014 @ 12:49pm
  
  Re: Under What Program
  There are probably a few infants who haven't had files started yet, so the statement is true.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - John Fenderson (profile), 6 Jan 2014 @ 1:03pm
    
    Re: Re: Under What Program
    Very few. New parents are heavily pressured into getting SSNs for their newborns the very day that they're born. That certainly goes into a new file.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - nasch (profile), 6 Jan 2014 @ 9:30pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Under What Program
      New parents are heavily pressured into getting SSNs for their newborns the very day that they're born. That certainly goes into a new file.
      
      Sure, but at the FBI? It's not impossible, but is there any evidence that the FBI keeps a database of newborns?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 7 Jan 2014 @ 12:30am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Under What Program
        Sure, but at the FBI? It's not impossible, but is there any evidence that the FBI keeps a database of newborns?
        
        Well, there has to be someone who keeps putting all those babies on the no-fly lists.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Celeste Guanini, 10 Jan 2017 @ 11:24pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Under What Program
        Yeah- just read anything that Masnick or these other great writers write about the way the FBI and the NCMEC, ICAC et al distribute child porn from their very own Playens there in Virginia, Maryland, and Georgia ( and som of it is even hosted on the servers at the University of Virginia, and more)-and of course in the databases of our pals the Israeli's an the Ausssies, and the Canadians.
        
        The FBI has the biggest child porn collection in the world, and lots of babies in it.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- ModernSurvival, 14 Jan 2014 @ 12:27pm
  
  Re: Under What Program
  The FBI likely doesn't keep a file on every citizen, they don't have to. Folks like the NSA do so for them.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Jan 2014 @ 11:21am

It's kinda true.
They can say that because all the data is with the NSA.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Jan 2014 @ 11:22am

What the hell is the purpose of DHS then? ATF? And the NSA (National Security Agency - duh)?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 6 Jan 2014 @ 12:14pm
  
  Re:
  Technically, the NSA collects the stuff and when it finds something interesting it passes it off to the FBI if it's a domestic matter or the CIA if it's a foreign one to look into. The ATF's basic job is that of a tax collector specifically tailored to those taxes created at the end of prohibition including the NFA of 1934 and various other taxes that have been added since then to alcohol, tobacco and firearms. DHS is a "do something" agency created domestically as a knee jerk reaction to 9-11.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 6 Jan 2014 @ 3:40pm
  
  Re:
  DHS was supposed to join all the intel together from all agencies so the fbi doesnt forget to share with the cia and nsa in whatever order ..so they dont drop the ball again like they did with 9/11
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Vincent Clement (profile), 7 Jan 2014 @ 10:18am
    
    Re: Re:
    ...or drop the ball like they did with the Boston Marathon bombers.
    
    It's okay to travel to a part of the world known for terrorist activities and return back to the USA and then have a foreign intelligence agency ask the FBI to look into a few guys. But it is not okay for you to travel if the name of your 2-year old son matches a name on the no-fly list and then the same thing happens when he is 8-years old.
    
    Yup, DHS is doing a wonderful job fighting terrorism.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - any moose cow word, 7 Jan 2014 @ 2:34pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Except you got that one backwards, it was the NSA that dropped the ball with 9/11. They knew who the hijackers were and what they had been up to before they entered the US, but then failed to report any of it to the FBI.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ima Fish (profile), 6 Jan 2014 @ 11:24am

But bringing actual criminals to justice is so gosh darn hard. Can't we just agree that it's easier for the FBI to make up its own "crimes" and then stop those "crimes"?! Yeah, I think we can.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- BeeAitch (profile), 6 Jan 2014 @ 5:28pm
  
  Re:
  I clicked the (imaginary) "sad but true" button.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
voiceover (profile), 6 Jan 2014 @ 11:34am

As a result, the agency fielded criticism for failing to crack down on financial crimes ahead of the Great Recession and losing sight of real-estate fraud ahead of the 2008 subprime mortgage crisis.

Yeah, but that white-collar stuff ain't sexy. Kinda boring in fact. Makes my head hurt just thinking about it. Back to bed.

(the success of American Hustle gives lie to that tho'. Maybe we just need a few more movies with Bradley Cooper and Amy Adams and the FBI might rediscover an interest?)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Jan 2014 @ 11:38am

FBI's logic
So in other words.

FBI: White collar crimes, what white collar crimes? They're too hard to find because they don't exist.

*Fat wall street banker runs by behind the FBI, carrying large bags of money*

Banker: Woohoo! I'm rich for giving out giant toxic loans to fools who I knew would never pay them back, and then I lied to other buyers and sold the toxic loans at a huge profit, let them take all the loss! And I don't care that people like me are going to cause a great recession and hundreds of billions of dollars worth of economic damage!

FBI: And anyway, we'd rather put more cooks in the kitchen of national security. Because you know that old saying, 'you can never have too many cooks in the kitchen'.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 6 Jan 2014 @ 12:01pm
  
  Re: FBI's logic
  You need to get your facts straight...not all bankers are fat and they have people who carry their bags of money for them.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 6 Jan 2014 @ 12:17pm
    
    Re: Re: FBI's logic
    And they have enough money to sue you for defamation you stereotyping bigot.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 6 Jan 2014 @ 5:05pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: FBI's logic
      It's not defamation if it is true
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - BeeAitch (profile), 6 Jan 2014 @ 5:31pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: FBI's logic
        Um, High Court-low court?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 6 Jan 2014 @ 1:19pm
    
    Re: Re: FBI's logic
    not all bankers are fat and they have people who carry their bags of money for them.
    ... and many, if not most, do really well at living up to cockney rhyming slang... especially the merchant ones.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Ed Allen, 6 Jan 2014 @ 1:00pm
  
  Re: FBI's logic
  I still think that uttering "national security" should be immediate grounds for a treason investigation. No executions but getting barred from both government service and lobbying for life seems perfectly reasonable to me.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Baldaur Regis (profile), 6 Jan 2014 @ 11:53am

Before: Follow the money to catch the crooks.

After: Follow the money to catch the gravy train.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
silverscarcat (profile), 6 Jan 2014 @ 11:53am

So that's why...
The financial crisis has had zero people go to jail.

Seriously, FBI, I know you can read this, get people to investigate that. There is ZERO chance that the banks didn't commit crime. In fact, I can point out that they committed theft and fraud with ease.

You can't crash the economies of Western Europe and North America and not do something illegal in the process.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- BeeAitch (profile), 6 Jan 2014 @ 5:35pm
  
  Re: So that's why...
  You can't crash the economies of Western Europe and North America and not do something illegal in the process.
  
  Define "illegal". /s?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - silverscarcat (profile), 7 Jan 2014 @ 7:32am
    
    Re: Re: So that's why...
    Everything is illegal in some form or another. There isn't a person alive that doesn't commit some crime.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- any moose cow word, 7 Jan 2014 @ 2:43pm
  
  Re: So that's why...
  Technically, with so many statutes on the books, everyone at some point or another has committed a crime. It's merely a matter of the government not being committed to enforcing the laws. Now, they're not even committed to enforcing the important laws either. Apparently "nationally security" has nothing to with stopping crime.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - John Fenderson (profile), 8 Jan 2014 @ 11:14am
    
    Re: Re: So that's why...
    Not only that, nearly everyone breaks at least one law every single day.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
mattshow (profile), 6 Jan 2014 @ 11:56am

Most tragically of all, the number of agents assigned to investigate files with a paranormal or supernatural element to them has fallen from 2 to 0 since 2008.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DannyB (profile), 6 Jan 2014 @ 11:58am

The FBI's counterterrorism focus didn't affect everything
I'm sure the FBI's new focus on counterterrorism didn't affect their investigation of alleged copyright infringement.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- any moose cow word, 7 Jan 2014 @ 2:45pm
  
  Re: The FBI's counterterrorism focus didn't affect everything
  That's part of "national security" now.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Jan 2014 @ 12:04pm

Warnings
You mean the FBI warnings at the beginning of a movie are not true?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- sorrykb (profile), 6 Jan 2014 @ 12:13pm
  
  Re: Warnings
  Anonymous Coward wrote
  You mean the FBI warnings at the beginning of a movie are not true?
  
  No, they're true, because Piracy = Terrorism.
  Or didn't you get that memo?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 6 Jan 2014 @ 12:27pm
    
    Re: Re: Warnings
    THAT kind of piracy isn't, but it supports it.
    
    http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2008/03/us-attorney-general-piracy-funds-terror/
    
    The then USAG said it so it MUST be true. Right?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- John Fenderson (profile), 6 Jan 2014 @ 1:04pm
  
  Re: Warnings
  Those warnings have never really been true.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Jan 2014 @ 12:11pm

Good Times
In the not too distant future white collar criminals will look back at their lucrative careers and think of these times as the "Golden Years".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- BeeAitch (profile), 6 Jan 2014 @ 5:46pm
  
  Re: Good Times
  Kind of like the Robber Barons of the late 19th century?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
KoD (profile), 6 Jan 2014 @ 12:48pm

Why wouldn't the FBI want a piece of that pie? Solving crimes and capturing criminals is not nearly as fun as thwarting contrived plots and bagging terrorists.

Coming soon...
Copyright infringement added to list of terroristic activities (to make sure the FBI keeps its largest customer).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Internet Zen Master (profile), 6 Jan 2014 @ 1:50pm

So...
If they're not investigating crime anymore, then what does FBI stand for?

Federal Bureau of Inquisitors?

Federal Bureau of Interrogation?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- ryuugami, 7 Jan 2014 @ 12:39am
  
  Re: So...
  If they're not investigating crime anymore, then what does FBI stand for?
  
  Funding Before Investigation.
  
  (At the risk of killing the joke by explaining it, I have to point out that the meaning of "before" taken here is "has a higher priority then".)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Web_Rat (profile), 6 Jan 2014 @ 1:51pm

Before and After.....
Let's recognize it for what it really is.......

Before: FBI Fact Sheet

After: FIB Fact Sheet
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
afisher, 6 Jan 2014 @ 3:03pm

FBI
The problem is how to FIX the problem. Anyone believe that petitions would work? Changing administration? OK, how about "smaller gov't". Anyone here actually believe that we-the-people would actually have a say in who is retired / fired.

There are excellent books on the foibles of the FBI and CIA. Now, some may agree there is a problem, but until we have a solution - we are no better than OWS - although they actually had some positive outcomes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- John Fenderson (profile), 6 Jan 2014 @ 3:10pm
  
  Re: FBI
  You're looking for a single solution. It doesn't exist. Real change driven by the citizenry is possible -- it's been done over and over in US history. The thing is that never once did that change come quickly or because of a single kind of action.
  
  The bonfire of change is fueled with lots and lots of kindling. Petitions? Yes. Voting? yes. Writing to your congresspeople? Yes. Demonstrating? Yes. All of these things, and more, are needed -- and it works.
  
  People who worry that we have no way to fix the problem are simply ignorant of history (not to mention expressing a fatalism that works to make real change much more difficult.) The way forward is clear, and the past shows us what it is.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Pragmatic, 7 Jan 2014 @ 6:12am
    
    Re: Re: FBI
    ^This. A million times this.
    
    Is everyone paying attention?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Jan 2014 @ 3:49pm

This is no different than the war on drugs for years and years the cia was bringing in the drugs ad putting the cartels into place >>> fast forward to pre 9/11 ... cia trains then hangs them out to dry pow ..the war on terror .. when our intelligence (i say intelligence and chuckle)fails they go all out ..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
OldGeezer (profile), 6 Jan 2014 @ 3:51pm

I have read that because of the FBI shifting all their resources after 9/11 for several years child porn also flourished with thousands of "Lolita" and "preteen" sites going unchecked for years. It has probably been more Google's efforts to report these sites that most of that has been curbed than any efforts by the FBI. Using Windows Explorer which had no Ad Block in the early 2000's It was not unusual to get pop ups boldly advertizing these sites while clicking on sites that had absolutely nothing to do with any kind of pornography.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Jan 2014 @ 4:11pm

Ah, the old "national security" banner. Whoever waves this banner around is above the law, because they operate under the secret laws of tyrants.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Jan 2014 @ 4:43pm

Like I said before, it's much easier to go after a non existing problem (or a problem that other agencies are already going after) than it is to go after a real problem (that few others are going after).

"National security" is such an abstract term these days that it can basically involve doing nothing (or, at least, nothing difficult) whereas fraud is a much more practical and common crime and catching those that commit fraud requires some effort.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 6 Jan 2014 @ 4:44pm
  
  Re:
  Basically the FBI is taking the easy way out. They want to get paid the most for doing the least amount of work and what better way to convince the government to throw more money at them than to claim they are responsible for national security. It's for the children!!!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 6 Jan 2014 @ 4:55pm
  
  Re:
  and, if you think about it, when the government created the department of homeland security (& the TSA) and it started creating all these expensive national security departments where do you think all that money came from? Some of it likely cut into the budgets of other agencies like the FBI. Now the FBI sees how much these other national security agencies receive and now that the FBI is receiving less they can't afford to do as much to stop criminals and they want more money like these other agencies so they start playing to the whole national security bandwagon to get more federal funding. The end result is that the Department of national security, by diverting money away from what used to be a more efficient and experienced FBI (among other law enforcement agencies) towards a new and inexperienced department of homeland security, has made us less safe.
  
  and that's one of the problems with trying to 'fix' national security by always creating new agencies. These new agencies cost money and that diverts resources away from existing more experienced and hence more efficient law enforcement agencies towards new less experienced and hence less efficient law enforcement agencies which makes us less safe.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 6 Jan 2014 @ 5:00pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Not to mention spreading the same amount of resources across more agencies to do basically the same thing creates coordination problem. Each agency has fixed costs before they can become productive and by having multiple agencies do essentially the same thing you are re-duplicating all those fixed costs which means the same amount of money is being used less efficiently and so we are less safe.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 6 Jan 2014 @ 11:10pm
    
    Re: Re:
    You're absolutely right. And I'm sure when the government realise this as well, they will react by creating the Security Coordination Agency (to better coordinate the agencies), the Security Training Agency (to ensure the new agents will be as experienced and effective), and the Security Funding Department (to ensure that all the agencies are getting the funding the need) to deal with the problem you just raised.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 7 Jan 2014 @ 6:51am

Everyone seems to think terror plots are created to make the FBI's work easier. As if TPTB really care how hard the FBI works. No-one mentioning that fake terrorism serves to keep the masses scared, controllable and willing to relent unconditionally to any entity that claims to protect them. When the enemy and the guardian are one and the same, we are little more than drone, slave prisoners. It is a totalitarian dictatorship, nothing less. Democracy is a lie, a moral weapon to conquer nations and beings.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
kamo, 10 Jan 2014 @ 9:23am

"remember how the FBI knew all about the Boston bombers, but did nothing about them?"

It's a sad situation when all the juicy conspiracy plots turn out to be simple incompetence...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Jan 2014 @ 3:13am

Fbi chasing copyright terrorests, anyone? We'll blame the economic meltdown on that...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Michael Price, 14 Jan 2014 @ 8:20am

Taking the nonexistent focus off.
From memory the FBI wasn't all that good at finding financial crime when it was actually trying.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Richard Drennan, 18 Jun 2015 @ 1:55pm

FBI is bullshit
when you try to report something all they say is hire a lawyer... they DO NOT investigate corruption.... This is BULLSHIT... You would think they are there for JUSTICE when in FACT they are not...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Miguel Lahunken, 8 Mar 2018 @ 1:52pm

Past Nit Picking
The FBI had a record on me as thick as a telephone book since before I was eighteen years old. What for? A school teacher, who was a freemason, ratted on me for writing in runes, in the Fifties. Why? During World War II, Tokyo Rose told Afro-Americans that they were allies. In reciprocation, some Afro-Americans joinied in communities, rejected the Latin alphabet, and wrote in Katagana, Hinagana, and Kanji. These Afro-Americans were called "Japanese Beetles". This term came to be used to refer to any American who preferred another script, for personal use, against the Latin alphabet. And, these people were put under surveilance for the rest of their lives. "Big deal". I give them the "fig gesture", and I don't mean the khechari mudra.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]