Thursday, June 4, 2015

Thursday 06-04-15

Does not surprise me in the least

FBI behind mysterious surveillance aircraft over US cities


Jun 2, 3:27 AM (ET)By JACK GILLUM, EILEEN SULLIVAN and ERIC TUCKER
(AP) In this photo taken May 26, 2015, a small plane flies near Manassas Regional Airport...Full Image




 

WASHINGTON (AP) — The FBI is operating a small air force with scores of low-flying planes across the country carrying video and, at times, cellphone surveillance technology — all hidden behind fictitious companies that are fronts for the government, The Associated Press has learned.
The planes' surveillance equipment is generally used without a judge's approval, and the FBI said the flights are used for specific, ongoing investigations. In a recent 30-day period, the agency flew above more than 30 cities in 11 states across the country, an AP review found.
Aerial surveillance represents a changing frontier for law enforcement, providing what the government maintains is an important tool in criminal, terrorism or intelligence probes. But the program raises questions about whether there should be updated policies protecting civil liberties as new technologies pose intrusive opportunities for government spying.
U.S. law enforcement officials confirmed for the first time the wide-scale use of the aircraft, which the AP traced to at least 13 fake companies, such as FVX Research, KQM Aviation, NBR Aviation and PXW Services. Even basic aspects of the program are withheld from the public in censored versions of official reports from the Justice Department's inspector general.
(AP) In this photo taken May 26, 2015, a small plane flies near Manassas Regional Airport...Full Image
"The FBI's aviation program is not secret," spokesman Christopher Allen said in a statement. "Specific aircraft and their capabilities are protected for operational security purposes." Allen added that the FBI's planes "are not equipped, designed or used for bulk collection activities or mass surveillance."
But the planes can capture video of unrelated criminal activity on the ground that could be handed over for prosecutions.
Some of the aircraft can also be equipped with technology that can identify thousands of people below through the cellphones they carry, even if they're not making a call or in public. Officials said that practice, which mimics cell towers and gets phones to reveal basic subscriber information, is rare.
Details confirmed by the FBI track closely with published reports since at least 2003 that a government surveillance program might be behind suspicious-looking planes slowly circling neighborhoods. The AP traced at least 50 aircraft back to the FBI, and identified more than 100 flights since late April orbiting both major cities and rural areas.
One of the planes, photographed in flight last week by the AP in northern Virginia, bristled with unusual antennas under its fuselage and a camera on its left side. A federal budget document from 2010 mentioned at least 115 planes, including 90 Cessna aircraft, in the FBI's surveillance fleet.
(AP) Graphic shows three distinct flight paths over major U.S. cities conducted by the...Full Image
The FBI also occasionally helps local police with aerial support, such as during the recent disturbance in Baltimore that followed the death of 25-year-old Freddie Gray, who sustained grievous injuries while in police custody. Those types of requests are reviewed by senior FBI officials.
The surveillance flights comply with agency rules, an FBI spokesman said. Those rules, which are heavily redacted in publicly available documents, limit the types of equipment the agency can use, as well as the justifications and duration of the surveillance.
Details about the flights come as the Justice Department seeks to navigate privacy concerns arising from aerial surveillance by unmanned aircrafts, or drones. President Barack Obama has said he welcomes a debate on government surveillance, and has called for more transparency about spying in the wake of disclosures about classified programs.
"These are not your grandparents' surveillance aircraft," said Jay Stanley, a senior policy analyst with the American Civil Liberties Union, calling the flights significant "if the federal government is maintaining a fleet of aircraft whose purpose is to circle over American cities, especially with the technology we know can be attached to those aircraft."
During the past few weeks, the AP tracked planes from the FBI's fleet on more than 100 flights over at least 11 states plus the District of Columbia, most with Cessna 182T Skylane aircraft. These included parts of Houston, Phoenix, Seattle, Chicago, Boston, Minneapolis and Southern California.
Evolving technology can record higher-quality video from long distances, even at night, and can capture certain identifying information from cellphones using a device known as a "cell-site simulator" — or Stingray, to use one of the product's brand names. These can trick pinpointed cellphones into revealing identification numbers of subscribers, including those not suspected of a crime.
Officials say cellphone surveillance is rare, although the AP found in recent weeks FBI flights orbiting large, enclosed buildings for extended periods where aerial photography would be less effective than electronic signals collection. Those included above Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport and the Mall of America in Bloomington, Minnesota.
After The Washington Post revealed flights by two planes circling over Baltimore in early May, the AP began analyzing detailed flight data and aircraft-ownership registrations that shared similar addresses and flight patterns. That review found some FBI missions circled above at least 40,000 residents during a single flight over Anaheim, California, in late May, according to Census data and records provided by the website FlightRadar24.com.
Most flight patterns occurred in counter-clockwise orbits up to several miles wide and roughly one mile above the ground at slow speeds. A 2003 newsletter from the company FLIR Systems Inc., which makes camera technology such as seen on the planes, described flying slowly in left-handed patterns.
"Aircraft surveillance has become an indispensable intelligence collection and investigative technique which serves as a force multiplier to the ground teams," the FBI said in 2009 when it asked Congress for $5.1 million for the program.
Recently, independent journalists and websites have cited companies traced to post office boxes in Virginia, including one shared with the Justice Department. The AP analyzed similar data since early May, while also drawing upon aircraft registration documents, business records and interviews with U.S. officials to understand the scope of the operations.
The FBI asked the AP not to disclose the names of the fake companies it uncovered, saying that would saddle taxpayers with the expense of creating new cover companies to shield the government's involvement, and could endanger the planes and integrity of the surveillance missions. The AP declined the FBI's request because the companies' names — as well as common addresses linked to the Justice Department — are listed on public documents and in government databases.
At least 13 front companies that AP identified being actively used by the FBI are registered to post office boxes in Bristow, Virginia, which is near a regional airport used for private and charter flights. Only one of them appears in state business records.
Included on most aircraft registrations is a mysterious name, Robert Lindley. He is listed as chief executive and has at least three distinct signatures among the companies. Two documents include a signature for Robert Taylor, which is strikingly similar to one of Lindley's three handwriting patterns.
The FBI would not say whether Lindley is a U.S. government employee. The AP unsuccessfully tried to reach Lindley at phone numbers registered to people of the same name in the Washington area since Monday.
Law enforcement officials said Justice Department lawyers approved the decision to create fictitious companies to protect the flights' operational security and that the Federal Aviation Administration was aware of the practice. One of the Lindley-headed companies shares a post office box openly used by the Justice Department.
Such elusive practices have endured for decades. A 1990 report by the then-General Accounting Office noted that, in July 1988, the FBI had moved its "headquarters-operated" aircraft into a company that wasn't publicly linked to the bureau.
The FBI does not generally obtain warrants to record video from its planes of people moving outside in the open, but it also said that under a new policy it has recently begun obtaining court orders to use cell-site simulators. The Obama administration had until recently been directing local authorities through secret agreements not to reveal their own use of the devices, even encouraging prosecutors to drop cases rather than disclose the technology's use in open court.
A Justice Department memo last month also expressly barred its component law enforcement agencies from using unmanned drones "solely for the purpose of monitoring activities protected by the First Amendment" and said they are to be used only in connection with authorized investigations and activities. A department spokeswoman said the policy applied only to unmanned aircraft systems rather than piloted airplanes.
---
Associated Press writers Sean Murphy in Oklahoma City; Joan Lowy and Ted Bridis in Washington; Randall Chase in Wilmington, Delaware; and news researchers Monika Mathur in Washington and Rhonda Shafner in New York contributed to this report.
---
View documents: http://apne.ws/1HEyP0t

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20150602/us--fbi_surveillance_flights-e2320f0d2a.html


DEA eavesdropping tripled, bypassed federal courts

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration more than tripled its use of wiretaps and other types of electronic eavesdropping over the past decade, largely bypassing federal courts and Justice Department lawyers in the process, newly obtained records show.
The DEA conducted 11,681 electronic intercepts in the fiscal year that ended in September. Ten years earlier, the drug agency conducted 3,394.
Most of that ramped-up surveillance was never reviewed by federal judges or Justice Department lawyers, who typically are responsible for examining federal agents' eavesdropping requests. Instead, DEA agents now take 60% of those requests directly to local prosecutors and judges from New York to California, who current and former officials say often approve them more quickly and easily.
Drug investigations account for the vast majority of U.S. wiretaps, and much of that surveillance is carried out by the DEA. Privacy advocates expressed concern that the drug agency had expanded its surveillance without going through internal Justice Department reviews, which often are more demanding than federal law requires.
Wiretaps — which allow the police to listen in on phone calls and other electronic communications — are considered so sensitive that federal law requires approval from a senior Justice Department official before agents can even ask a federal court for permission to conduct one. The law imposes no such restriction on state court wiretaps, even when they are sought by federal agents.
"That law exists to make sure that wiretap authority is not abused, that it's only used when totally appropriate," said Hanni Fakhoury, an attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation. "That's a burden. And if there's a way to get around that burden, the agents are going to try to get around it."
USA TODAY obtained the DEA's wiretapping statistics under the Freedom of Information Act. The figures include every order authorizing or extending electronic eavesdropping. Some orders could be counted more than once, if they include the collection of both voice calls and text messages, for example.
DEA Spokesman Joseph Moses said agents' increased use of wiretaps reflects "the proliferation of communication devices and methods" used by the drug traffickers. He said the wiretaps have been critical for agents to penetrate the networks high-level traffickers use to control their operations.
The legal safeguards for wiretaps are supposed to be the same in both state and federal courts. To tap into communications, police must persuade prosecutors and a judge that they have probable cause to think that the communications will contain evidence of a crime, and that they have no other way to build their case. But how judges and prosecutors interpret those requirements can vary among jurisdictions.
"Within Justice, it was a rigorous standard," said Stephen T'Kach, a former lawyer in the Justice Department office responsible for approving wiretaps. "In the states, you have 50 different standards for what's going to be enough."
Moses said DEA agents were "making no attempt to circumvent federal legal standards and protections by instead pursuing state wiretap authorizations." Instead, he said, the rapid growth of state-authorized eavesdropping reflects local prosecutors' increased willingness to take on complex wiretap investigations, which often involve teams of local police and federal agents. At the same time, he said, some federal prosecutors "may be unable to support wire intercept investigations due to manpower or other resource considerations," so agents take their cases to state officials rather than see them dropped.
The DEA records do not indicate which state courts have approved the ramped-up surveillance, but state court records and statistics compiled by the federal courts' administrative office offer some indications.
For example, judges in the Los Angeles suburb of Riverside, Calif., authorized more wiretaps in 2013 than any other jurisdiction in the country and significantly more than any federal court, according to records compiled by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. The number of wiretaps approved there nearly doubled between 2013 and 2014, to 602, according to California's attorney general.
John Hall, a spokesman for Riverside County's district attorney, said he could not comment on whether the office had approved wiretaps for federal investigators because the applications often are sealed. Court records there show prosecutors submitted some wiretap applications at the request of the DEA.
State court judges in Buffalo and San Diego also approved DEA wiretap requests, according to court records.
"There was always some heartburn in Justice when DEA was going into state courts," T'Kach said. That was tempered, he said, because state wiretap laws must include all of the safeguards federal law requires, and there was no suggestion that evidence gathered through state-court wires was being thrown out of court later.
How often that happens is difficult to measure. Agents said many of the cases in which state judges authorize wiretaps end up being prosecuted in state courts, where challenges to wiretap evidence are less common. According to records the district attorney submitted to California's attorney general, for example, only about 2% of the 1,400 wiretaps authorized in Riverside County over the past five years were later challenged in state court.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/06/02/dea-wiretap-surveillance-tripled-in-state-courts/28330503/

No comments:

Post a Comment