Think about arriving at the airport from a foreign country. You are tired from a long flight, anxious about your baggage, and thinking about meeting your family in the arrivals area. You may not have seen them in years. Perhaps it is your first time in the United States. Perhaps you do not speak English well. Perhaps you plan to ask for asylum. Perhaps you are coming from a country where interactions with people in uniform generally involve bribery, intimidation, or worse.
The FBI and U.S. Customs and Border Protection work closely together to turn these vulnerabilities into opportunities for gathering intelligence, according to government documents obtained by The Intercept. CBP assists the FBI in its efforts to target travelers entering the country as potential informants, feeding the bureau passenger lists and pulling people aside for lengthy interrogations in order to gather intelligence from them on the FBI’s behalf, the documents show. In one briefing, CBP bills itself as the “GO TO agency in the Law Enforcement world when it comes to identifying individuals of either source or lead potential.”
When the FBI wants to find informants that fit a certain profile — say, men of Pakistani origin between the ages of 18 and 35 — it has at its fingertips a wealth of data from government agencies like CBP.
The FBI gives CBP a list of countries of origin to watch out for among passengers, sometimes specifying other characteristics, such as travel history or age. It also briefs CPB officers on its intelligence requirements. The CBP sifts through its data to provide the bureau with a list of incoming travelers of potential interest. The FBI can then ask CBP to flag people for extra screening, questioning, and follow-up visits. According to the documents, the FBI uses the border questioning as a pretext to approach people it wants to turn informant and inserts itself into the immigration process by instructing agents on how to offer an “immigration relief dangle.”
It is no surprise that law enforcement closely monitors border crossings for criminals or terror suspects. The initiatives described in these documents, however, are explicitly about gathering intelligence, not enforcing the law. A person doesn’t have to be connected to an active investigation or criminal suspect in order to be flagged; the FBI might want them for their potential to provide general intelligence on a given country, region, or group. The goal, according to an FBI presentation on an initiative at Boston’s Logan Airport, is “looking for ‘good guys’ not ‘bad guys.’”
A U.S. Customs and Border Protection officer patrols outside of the departures area at Miami International Airport in July 2016.
Photo: Lynne Sladky/AP Images
Signs of the informant-recruiting pipeline have been noticed outside the government. Human rights and immigration attorneys interviewed by The Intercept said it was very common for Muslim clients in particular to be questioned at the border upon returning from an international trip, and then contacted by FBI agents within days.
“One client was straight-up approached at the airport by FBI agents as he was returning from his honeymoon,” said Diala Shamas, a lecturer at Stanford Law School, who worked as an attorney with Creating Law Enforcement Accountability & Responsibility, or CLEAR, an initiative providing legal services to communities in New York impacted by counterterrorism policies.
The documents reviewed by The Intercept imply that the program is in place at airports nationwide, something the source confirmed. They do not include extensive data on how many passengers are targeted for intelligence purposes, except for a two-month period at Boston’s Logan International Airport. According to that data, in January 2012, nearly 6,000 passengers were screened through FBI databases, and CBP conducted 47 inspections. Thirty-two of those individuals were referred to “investigative squads,” but only two generated an intelligence report of value.
The systematic targeting of travelers for the FBI’s intelligence purposes helps explain widespread reports of Muslim travelers, both immigrants and U.S. citizens, experiencing invasive questioning and searches at airports and border crossings. The FBI has also reportedly threatened individuals with deportation or delayed their visa applications indefinitely as agents try to convince them to cooperate. Others have alleged they were placed on the no-fly list after they refused to talk to the FBI.
The targeting is also an example of how the FBI has enlisted other agencies in its post-9/11 transformation into a hybrid intelligence and law enforcement agency where counterterrorism is the top priority. The bureau’s use of informants ballooned after 9/11, reaching more than 15,000 within about six years — and that only includes people officially opened on the FBI’s books as confidential human sources.
Many others pass on information in more informal ways. These documents show the expansion of counterterrorism and intelligence-gathering missions through efforts like Joint Terrorism Task Forces, wherein an agency like CBP — not traditionally considered part of the intelligence community — works side by side with the FBI. The documents boast of CBP’s “JTTF Footprint,” with dozens of officers assigned to task forces around the country.
Neither the FBI nor CBP responded to specific questions about the documents. An FBI spokesperson said that “the FBI uses a myriad of lawful investigative methods and sources of information to support investigations, including the use of Confidential Human Sources,” adding that “all Confidential Human Source relationships with the FBI are voluntary.”
In a statement, CBP detailed its process for screening passengers for potential threats, and said, “Some secondary inspections produce information that is invaluable to our interagency partners. CBP shares information with its law enforcement partners in accordance with U.S. law and [Department of Homeland Security] policy regarding civil rights and civil liberties.”
Photo: Chris Hondros/Getty Images
Placement, Access, Willingness
An April 2012 unclassified CBP presentation aimed at FBI agents, titled “US Customs and Border Protection Overview/Capabilities,” notes that the “airport is a great place to spot/assess” sources. After all, “travelers are already expecting law enforcement interaction,” and with the “wide variety of travelers,” agents “can look for passengers fitting key demographics as needed.”
In order to do this, the FBI makes use of the massive amount of information that CBP collects on travelers and cargo entering and exiting the country as part of its regular mission to control the border. CBP flags incoming passengers and shipments for possible extra screening according to rules based on perceived threats, a process sometimes referred to as “threshold targeting.” The targeting could be based on country of origin, but also “travel pattern, age, name, origin,” or they could be “scenario-based,” “list based,” or “affiliate based,” according to the “Overview/Capabilities” document. Travel to Yemen, Pakistan, or Somalia is also singled out as something that might be flagged. (This type of screening based on travel pattern appears to have put Ahmad Khan Rahami, accused of the bombings in Manhattan and New Jersey in September, on authorities’ radar, though the extra screening reportedly did not turn up any immediate concerns. Terror watchlists also factor into the targeting rules.)
CBP provides the FBI with a list of passengers arriving from “countries of interest” at a given airport over the next 72 hours. The FBI runs those names against its own databases and searches for them in public records, looking for any associations or background knowledge in which the FBI might have an interest, which can include ties as benign as geographic origin or knowledge of a particular demographic group.
A slide describing CBP and FBI cooperation to screen passengers and recruit them as informants.
A 2012 FBI memo, classified secret, describing the process as it works in Boston’s Logan Airport, insists that it is at CBP’s discretion whether to actually flag the person for an extra screening or interview, and that the FBI “merely provides all available intelligence related to the traveler.” FBI slideshows, however, imply a more active role — giving briefings on intelligence requirements to CBP officers and encouraging them to view their job from an “intelligence perspective.”
When the individuals arrive, CBP pulls them aside and questions them for the FBI to determine their “placement, access, and willingness”; in other words, what information they could obtain, and whether they would be open to cooperation. According to the Logan memo, the FBI could be present for those interviews.
A CBP briefing to the Buffalo, New York, Joint Terrorism Task Force, an interagency group comprised of federal and local law enforcement, including the FBI and CBP, notes that “important information elicited” during the CBP interview includes place of birth, “not just country but district/village,” and “current/former employment.” Another document gives sample questions such as, “What is the individual’s tribal/clan affiliation (if any)?” “What physical location(s) of interest does the person live/work/spend time?” and “Does the individual have established contacts overseas? (family/friends, etc.)”
“Prior coordination can help make interviews as quick or as long as necessary,” another CBP presentation notes.
The CBP materials indicate that as part of secondary inspections, CBP can search “pocket litter,” documents, and cellphones. The April 2012 presentation promises a “full cell dump, including #s, text messages, pictures, etc.” at certain airports. (It also notes, “We don’t do laptops.” It’s unclear whether this is for legal or technical reasons at all or just some airports; in recent years, judges have ruled that government agents needed reasonable suspicion to search electronics, but in 2012, the legality of those searches was still unsettled.)
All of this helps the FBI form a detailed profile of the life history and habits of a potential informant. Armed with that information, members of the local Joint Terrorism Task Force visit the individual at home to evaluate him or her as a recruit, the Buffalo briefing says.
“The initial interaction with CBP provides the JTTF with a pretext to visit the individual,” it adds.
Photo: Tony Gutierrez/AP Images
The Immigration Dangle
When potential informants are not U.S. citizens, they may be particularly vulnerable to pressure from the FBI. Indeed, the bureau is counting on people thinking that FBI involvement in immigration decisions is normal, the documents indicate. In reality, FBI agents are expressly forbidden from promising immigration benefits to potential informants or threatening deportation.
A presentation from the FBI in Buffalo and the JTTF in Rochester, New York, describing an initiative to cultivate sources in the Yemeni community, appears to show one way the FBI skirts the prohibition. An officer from the local Joint Terrorism Task Force — which could be FBI, local police, or perhaps another agency — follows up with a potential source identified at the border. “If subject is deemed ‘recruitable,’” the slides state, then a “series of overt interviews set into motion.” If the person is “not recruitable,” then “NO HARM. Subject believes that the interview is part of the immigration process.”
The presentation also mentions an “immigration relief dangle,” presumably referring to the practice, widely reported but officially denied, of offering immigrants help with their legal status in exchange for information. Under the heading “Immigration Relief,” the presentation suggests that agents “pick subjects in line for immigration relief … who will ultimately receive their benefit anyhow,” or “require a lesser administrative burden to receive immigration relief/benefit.”
CBP is not the only U.S. government agency in possession of information on immigrants that the FBI can plumb. Though the documents provided to The Intercept mostly focus on CBP, they also contain material revealing the FBI’s interactions with the State Department and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE.
An FBI presentation on “Exploiting US visa data” runs through State Department processes, advising agents to check visa documentation and interviews for “skills, organization memberships,” and “associates,” and to “exploit family member visa information.”
Another FBI presentation, outlining the roles of different agencies in JTTFs, mentions ICE detention centers as a place for “source development,” noting “an average population of 32,000 detained aliens and … over 1.6 million aliens in removal proceedings.”
“The folks who are not citizens have more vulnerabilities in terms of their immigration status being used as a carrot or stick,” said Shannon Erwin, executive director of the Muslim Justice League in Boston. “But we’re concerned about U.S. citizens too; anytime they speak to the FBI they might inadvertently compromise themselves.”
A slide from FBI training materials teaching border officers to view their jobs from an intelligence perspective.
Intelligence Gathering or Profiling?
Human rights and immigration attorneys interviewed by The Intercept said that they have had many clients in recent years — most of them Muslim — who fit this pattern of CBP questioning closely followed by a visit from the FBI.
Some people were questioned as part of a security screening or at the gate before their departure, while others were pulled aside on arrival and sometimes held for hours, their luggage and electronics searched. Oftentimes the clients were bewildered as to why they had been singled out, other than the fact of their religion or nationality. Some reported that FBI agents were involved, while others didn’t know which agency interrogated them, or were afraid to ask. Many assumed they had no choice but to answer any question put to them by someone in a uniform.
Over the years, American Muslims and travelers from majority-Muslim countries have reported being asked at the border how frequently they prayed, and for information about their mosques or tribal connections. Last year, The Intercept reported on a questionnaire used by ICE that included questions such as “What house of worship do you attend” and “Do you have any friends or relatives who have been martyred in defense of their beliefs?”
For the most part, the clients of the attorneys interviewed for this article declined to speak on the record, because they feared retaliation from the authorities or because their immigration status was still unsettled. Masih Fouladi, a legal advocate with the Council on American-Islamic Relations for the Los Angeles area, recounted the recent experience of one man he represents, a U.S. citizen of Indian background who is in his 20s.
CBP officers stopped him coming home from a trip to Canada and questioned him for about three hours. They asked him “what mosque he attends, about his social media use, about the shootings in San Bernardino,” according to Fouladi, as well as about his trip and plans for future travel. He told CBP that he planned to make a pilgrimage to Mecca, in Saudi Arabia.
A few months later, the young man got a visit from the FBI. “They started by saying, ‘We just want to get some information on people at the mosque you attend, or from your travel, you’re not in any trouble, actually you could really help us,’” Fouladi said. The man declined to answer the agents’ questions and contacted a lawyer, but he has since experienced delays and questioning each time he has flown internationally.
An American political analyst at an international NGO, who asked not to be named because of the sensitivity of his work in the Middle East, was subjected to several hours of questioning when he returned to the United States after a research trip in May. Border officers asked him about his contacts in the country and looked through his phone. An officer said they were part of a new task force at the airport and asked if they could be in touch with further questions, gave vague offers of help in his future travels, and texted him a few times after he left the airport.
The analyst described the officers’ efforts and knowledge of the region as “pretty amateurish,” but even as a U.S. citizen, he said, he was intimidated and unsure how much information he was obligated to give up. The next several times he flew, he received extra screening, but no more interviews.
Federal law enforcement agents have broad authority to search and question people at the border; in fact, border agencies are even exempt from recent attorney general’s guidance barring racial profiling in law enforcement operations, although the CBP spokesperson told The Intercept that CBP follows those guidelines.
The presentation on threshold rules obtained by The Intercept states that the rules are “not profiling, targeting.”
The documents provided to The Intercept do not mention religion, although the country examples they use are majority Muslim countries with a connection to terrorism: Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia. Several documents mention “clan” and “tribal” affiliation, something attorneys reported that Somali and Yemeni travelers are often asked about.
Diala Shamas, the former CLEAR attorney, said that she prepared her clients “to recognize a line of questioning by CBP officers that goes beyond legitimate questions — whether related to their identity, border enforcement, the safety of the flight, or customs enforcement — and into the realm of intelligence gathering.”
Farhana Khera, president of the group Muslim Advocates, also said she found the FBI’s exploitation of new arrivals troubling.
“One of our fundamental concerns about this kind of intelligence gathering happening at the border is it is an inherently coercive context,” she said.
Ramzi Kassem, a professor at CUNY School of Law who directs the CLEAR project, emphasized that “the mission of Customs and Border Protection is emphatically not intelligence gathering or source recruitment.”
“Tasking CBP officers with duties they are neither trained nor equipped to perform leaves lots of room for error and bias. The cost of this ill-conceived initiative will inevitably be borne by travelers returning from countries with large Muslim populations, which seem to draw the program’s focus,” he said.
Documents published with this article:
U.S. Customs and Border Protection Overview/Capabilities
CBP Role in CHS Development
CBP and FBI Targeting Flowcharts
CBP/JTTF Briefing – Buffalo
Exploiting U.S. Visa Data
HUMINT initiative at Logan Airport
IOIL Reports from an Intelligence Perspective
Logan Annex CHS Development Initiative
Placement, Access, Willingness questions
Source Targeting & Recruitment Initiative and additional slides
CBP/JTTF: Confidential Human Source Development Program
CBP and ICE Overview
CBP & FBI’s Airport Initiative Intelligence Focused Secondary Inspections
That may be a somewhat functional illusion, which they may even condition you to entertain in order to exploit it whenever they decide.
;-) “from the appropriate authority” … police actually talk and think like that
People describing how was life in Nazi concentration camps related how easily you could make Nazi officers dodge you: just by pretending you had lice.
For those of you who don’t know how to get pigs and their smell off your life and five senses (and if you believe there is a one-time occasional, “irrelevant” relationship with them you should stop reading now), what you do is play stupid and act publicly and loud. Ask for explanations like you can’t understand them (something they do is tell you about something you know and thought to be private as a way to debase you morally (they think)), like you are trying to make sense of what they are saying and never offer them any kind of interpersonal attention. Talk always about general topics, act like you can’t understand secrecy … “Oh, I was talking to my students about it during a civics class I was covering once, even though what I teach is Chemistry. You know, what you are saying I find interesting, it makes me think of Plato’s allegory of the cave …” ;-)
The kinds of people they use as police don’t even understand the need for things to make sense or having to discuss them, they have just enough brains to “follow orders”. I have been harassed by police since I was a child and I could tell you story after story of my experiences some of which would make you laugh your head off.
Let me relate to you a story about someone I know well enough who works at the UN where they constantly do those kinds of TSA b#llsh!t to people (which, by the way, was a practice institutionalized by the controlling Catholic Church). They would first fish you into a benignly seeming enough social situation and get you going to then gradually set up their b#llshit (by initially asking you innocuous, benign questions; inviting you into rooms or visiting your spaces (say a guy walks up to you in your classroom and you assumed he/she is another teacher) and/or the parochially looking person, wearing expensive shoes who wants to “interview you” seems like he/she can’t do harm to anyone/anything on earth) … In the case of that person (after analyzing profiles created by Nazis, perfected by the stasi and recycled by gringos) they knew he had some sophisticated ego and liked to read autobiographies … so they told him (accompanying the talk with all kinds of reaffirming mannerism) that “he would be very impressed about the kinds of people he would be shaking hands with …” I asked him what did they effing mean and he told me they meant shaking hands with someone from the Rockefeller family or such b#llsh!t … I couldn’t tell at that moment if I should laugh and be puzzled. What do they even fucking mean!?! Why should I effing care about shaking hands with those @ssh0l3s?!? Were they saying that to you with a straight face?!?
then you either aren’t such a kind observer and/or you don’t “know” so many people.
Also, what they have done, e.g., in NYC is a large “‘awareness’ network” of snitches (some of them paid) called “nexus”, they use to harass people, just for not wanting to become snitches for them, “cooperate” (as they say).
They have shoplifting prevention dudes at all kinds of shops, “neighborhood watch” watching out for pedofiles, “security officers” and janitors in buildings …, who depending on where you are they tell them to watch out for, harass that guy (sending them your picture (I have repeated noticed, tested it)), so they assume you are a notorious “shop lifter”, “child molester”, “criminal” …
It is called Zersetzung and, yes, torture is within its spectrum.
https://www.ted.com/talks/hubertus_knabe_the_dark_secrets_of_a_surveillance_state
https://ipsoscustodes.wordpress.com/2015/05/27/zersetzung-made-in-u-s-a/
That kind of logical logic doesn’t apply to police states. I mean, even Orwell’s 1984 would not even be good as children’ literature in our times.
RCL
Also, when they give you sh!t, don’t forget to document and report it as well as expose their cr@p as publicly as you can. I expect to be harassed especially when I am at airports, hospitals and academic institutions here in the U.S./NYC. Here is my “latest and greatest” b#llsh!tting experience with the TSA
https://ipsoscustodes.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/tsa_spirit_airlines_bs06_-address.pdf
RCL
I have travelled extensively over the last 25 years and my 2 passports are full of stamps for all manner of “exotic” places. The reason I have 2 passports (Legally) is that alarm bells sound in the US if you have an Iranian stamp, and you can easily lose a few hours telling you life story, and a US stamp would often get you scrutinised verrry closely entering say Tripoli or Iraq…..so 1 passport for 1 side and 1 passport for the other side….simple and effective and legal.
I have also been asked on at least a dozen occassions if it would be OK if someone “From the appropriate authority” contacted me to discuss things I may have seen during my travels. On one occassion this was followed up, but though I am a trained observer, I have never actually seen anything that would be of the slightest interest to “The appropriate authority”. I would have thought it quite commonplace for this sort of thing to happen, and it seems strange that agencies would make the approach to request assistance using intimidation and coercion……thats a pretty dumb approach that is guaranteed to get a very negative response…most people I know do not react favourably to being pushed about by big brother, and simply clam up, “I know nothing, saw nothing and am saying nothing!”
Who actually cares whether people get secondary screening at the airport and whether the questions are about social interactions / customs. If you don’t like them, turn in your visa and GTFO. It’s really that simple.
If you think the line of questioning is inappropriate, simply refuse to answer. Let the cards fall where they may. Being whiny little bitches about it makes you look guilty.
The whole world’s a prison, but few inmates notice…
Well, if they are targeting individuals at the border, wonder what they are doing inside the country. Seems to follow that if they are coercing, bullying, harassing, stalling, delaying people AT the border, they likely don’t stop inside it either.
How many of these people have a telephone pole near their house with a mysterious black box attached to it? Or whose license plate triggers a follow every time they pass a license plate reader? Or who hear a squeaky set of brakes outside their homes late t night on the hour? Etc. ad nauseum.
These coercive campaigns really sound like personalized torture for some.
Thanks for covering this targeted aspect of it. In the old days, they called it ‘putting the squeeze’ on someone.
“Travelers”, now we are not even calling them undocumented immigrant, its travelers. What a joke, illegal immigration is the true litmus test on honest and dishonest debate in America. If America can’t even have enforceable borders, you can’t have a social safety net, or laws in general, since most are based on property ownership in the first place. Sad you can’t be “liberal” without being anti American. Mass migration destroys the middle class, and lower income jobs, taxes society and divides America…and so much more. But globalists like it, so it is pushed ad nauseam.
“Travelers”, now we are not even calling them undocumented immigrant, its travelers.
Are you implying that all of the people referenced in the above article are illegally entering the country? I would think that airports would be the least secure way to do that and the most likely way to be discovered doing it since you have to have documentation of all sorts – passports, at the very least for international travel – that would make the illegal part a bit far-fetched to assume.
Then there’s also the fact that our government and the airlines do significant screening on ALL passengers, with international governments/airlines lending an assisting hand for flights coming or going to the US. That has been the case since 9/11, which you might know if you’d done any “traveling” of your own.
if illegal immigration is the true litmus test on honest and dishonest debate in America then you have failed simply by coming here and insisting that all people traveling to and from our country from certain, specific “other” countries should all be addressed as, at minimum, undocumented immigrants irrespective of their actual proven status.
Immersion in the certainty of bigotry may lend you a kind of tarnished righteousness, but “honesty” has little if anything to do with that.
The problem with a program like this is it instills distrust in authorities, so if they do know something they will be less likely to get involved or report it based on these actions. And if someone they know has gone through this and then had something happen to them, you are giving people reason to blame the government for it, essentially driving people towards terrorism. The entire program is a disaster waiting to happen.
The malfeasance here is mind-boggling. Whenever the TSA spends time harassing a “good guy” solely because he won’t be an unpaid spy, that is time taken away from hassling possible “bad guys”. And the total time they can hassle people is limited not only by funds but by the economic damage it does to the country to make people afraid to fly. So if the TSA has any purpose at all, they are knowingly compromising this purpose in order to avoid a cheaper and more sensible solution, namely, to simply recruit spies for pay, with bonuses for tips that pan out.
erm, yeah, CBP. Oh who can tell all these different enforcers apart!
Wow..I always wanted to be a G man. Give me a gun, and a badge, a Dick Tracy watch, and if possible one of those kewl decoder rings I’ll help them out!
There is absolutely nothing wrong with profiling. It’s a tried and true law enforcement tactic.
Profiling, like stereotypes, exist for a reason. I’m baffled as to why this is so difficult to comprehend.
“There is absolutely nothing wrong with profiling. It’s a tried and true law enforcement tactic. ”
Just a guess, but I think it has something to do with the US Constitution. Otherwise, what could possibly be the problem with discriminatory focusing on one group of people?
“…nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
True, but law enforcement still has to make decisions. Do you stop the guy who fits the profile, or the guy carrying the bomb? It’s an important decision because you can’t recruit everybody and your sting operations have to look convincing in order to keep the funds flowing. Personally, if it was my sting operation, I would recruit the guy who fits the profile because the public is always reassured when the bad guy fits their expectations.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with profiling. It’s a tried and true law enforcement tactic.
Apparently you are uninformed about how little evidence exists for your assertion. Let’s explore stop-and-frisk, the NYC policy of harrassing minorities in the belief – mistaken it turns out – that they will yield more drugs and/or weapons when suddenly searched for no apparent, or Constitutional, reason.
Analysis Finds Racial Disparities, Ineffectiveness in NYPD Stop-and-Frisk Program
http://www.nyclu.org/news/analysis-finds-racial-disparities-ineffectiveness-nypd-stop-and-frisk-program-links-tactic-soar
Perhaps they are simply profiling the wrong people:
rt.com/usa/stop-frisk-whites-drugs-weapons-667/
(the https://www. has been removed from this second link to avoid issues this site has had in the past with comments posting more than one link)
I suggest we start profiling the white suburbs of major cities in light of these research results. I’m baffled as to why our law enforcement agencies find it so difficult to comprehend who the most likely perpetrators are wrt illegal possession of drugs and weapons.
I know you’re not really baffled. But for those who might be: first you create a profile of a criminal type that the public supports putting in jail. It doesn’t have to be racist; it could be hippies, homeless people or whatever. Do it according the current public mood, which in America just happens to be racist. If you are then careful to exclusively target that profile, you will find that all the criminals who are caught will fit the profile, thus proving that your profile was correct.
Plan the work. Work the plan. It’s the secret to successful policing (and many other things).
Why don’t you super journalists go do some actual meaningful work and check out this story? I know it is about Hellary, but it could be important.
http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index2131.htm
The FBI is always on the lookout for patsies to take the fall for its own false-flag operations.
I also find it unlikely that the FBI is looking for informants. When someone gives them information about a terrorist (the Boston bombers, the Orlando night club shooter), they generally ignore it. As you suggest, it is more likely they are looking for patsies for their next sting operation.
This only makes sense. Real terrorists can be quite dangerous, so it’s best not to mess with them. Patsies on the other hand can be selected to ensure they’re incapable of actually using a weapon. This makes for safer, more successful operations.
I do fear the article is damaging to national security, as it will make it much harder for the FBI to recruit patsies.
They tried that with the Boston Marathoners and it didn’t work out too well.
I am curious how the NGOs in different countries do their recruiting. like the School of Americas . I always wondered where they get their students from.
I believe Tim Kaine did a 9 month stint under his Coro fellowhip in Honduras before returning to Harvard. Diane Feinstein was an alumnus too.sterling people!…i believe he helped helped identify future leaders at that school in El Progresso Honduras..too. I wonder if that included activists. Who knows? McCaine met with a bunch future leaders in Syria too like Baghdadi, the consummate leader.
Its always a warming thought looking at all the massive outreach efforts we go through to get the job done. Fortunately for him Tim left just before all hell broke loose there with the Contras. Mission accomplished! The Lords work is never done!
The Orlando killer worked out fabulously with the G4S people.
So Kudos to the Recruiters for an outstanding job, whether FBI , or just a Christian In Action doing it..Its just one success story after another.
Ya know..its true what they say Cora..
“when the going gets weird..the weird turn pro” Hunter Thompson.
Travel light peoples and safely.
Meeting people is all part of the journey through life.
wow. I heard a number the other day of the population of the FOP being 300,000. i think there are 500,000 standing military. 22,000,000 federal state and local government employees – dont know if that includes mil and pol. and now CBP!? CBP? Here’s another 3 letter combo that needs to ring a bell. WTF. and FYI, when you build an industry that suspects nobody but everybody, i mean JHC! It’s getting to the point that one’s ROI will be absorbed in a super hoover fashion. Is not America now approaching the defence black hole state of existence destined to suck the life out of everything, not just the money, but purpose of life itself?
http://gizmodo.com/astronomers-spot-a-massive-black-hole-that-s-gone-rogue-1787450161
Counter terrorism being methods designed to dissuade questioning the fbi’s motives or refusing to talk to them and exercise legal rights in doing so.
An April 2012 unclassified CBP presentation aimed at FBI agents, titled “US Customs and Border Protection Overview/Capabilities,” notes that the “airport is a great place to spot/assess” sources. Makes sense-corrupt border officials working with fbi must do wonders for xenophobic targeting and persecution of innocents.
This type of screening based on travel pattern appears to have put Ahmad Khan Rahami, accused of the bombings in Manhattan and New Jersey in September, on authorities’ radar, though the extra screening reportedly did not turn up any immediate concerns. I rest my case.
FBI slideshows, however, imply a more active role — giving briefings on intelligence requirements to CBP officers and encouraging them to view their job from an “intelligence perspective.” A lack of intellect is clearly preferable, however.
“Prior coordination can help make interviews as quick or as long as necessary,” another CBP presentation notes. Strip searches and sexual assault, anybody? Maybe some rape just in case?
In reality, FBI agents are expressly forbidden from promising immigration benefits to potential informants or threatening deportation. Explicitly.
CBP is not the only U.S. government agency in possession of information on immigrants that the FBI can plumb. Good terminology by the way. Very forthright.
CBP is not the only U.S. government agency in possession of information on immigrants that the FBI can plumb. Agents probably respond less “psychotically” to hi as opposed to hello, considering people have hearts that pump blood throughout the body.
“others were pulled aside on arrival and sometimes held for hours, their luggage and electronics searched. Oftentimes the clients were bewildered as to why they had been singled out, other than the fact of their religion or nationality. Some reported that FBI agents were involved, while others didn’t know which agency interrogated them, or were afraid to ask. Many assumed they had no choice but to answer any question put to them by someone in a uniform.” Good old fascism, eh?
“Over the years, American Muslims and travelers from majority-Muslim countries have reported being asked at the border how frequently they prayed, and for information about their mosques or tribal connections.” Translation-Why is it you don’t desire hate and are afraid of us being violent and hateful towards you?
“Ramzi Kassem, a professor at CUNY School of Law who directs the CLEAR project, emphasized that “the mission of Customs and Border Protection is emphatically not intelligence gathering or source recruitment.”” Chickens are plants too.
“The man declined to answer the agents’ questions and contacted a lawyer, but he has since experienced delays and questioning each time he has flown internationally.” Thumbs up and proud to know said man is Canadian. Watch for nsa/fbi/CIA (oops) sweepers on this comment though. Theft is actually easier to committ than murder.
“Federal law enforcement agents have broad authority to search and question people at the border; in fact, border agencies are even exempt from recent attorney general’s guidance barring racial profiling in law enforcement operations, although the CBP spokesperson told The Intercept that CBP follows those guidelines. Chickens are plants too.
“The presentation on threshold rules obtained by The Intercept states that the rules are “not profiling, targeting.”” False nsa shills.
“The documents provided to The Intercept do not mention religion, although the country examples they use are majority Muslim countries with a connection to terrorism: Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia. Several documents mention “clan” and “tribal” affiliation, something attorneys reported that Somali and Yemeni travelers are often asked about.” US state sponsored terrorism, that is.
“Diala Shamas, the former CLEAR attorney, said that she prepared her clients “to recognize a line of questioning by CBP officers that goes beyond legitimate questions — whether related to their identity, border enforcement, the safety of the flight, or customs enforcement — and into the realm of intelligence gathering.”” I want to go hide somewhere after reading this. What’s Glenn Greenwald’s book called again?
““Tasking CBP officers with duties they are neither trained nor equipped to perform leaves lots of room for error and bias. The cost of this ill-conceived initiative will inevitably be borne by travelers returning from countries with large Muslim populations, which seem to draw the program’s focus,” he said.” I certainly am glad I don’t have to storm a hell’s angels hideout anytime soon.