dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
uniqs
13

EGeezer
Premium Member
join:2002-08-04
Midwest

4 edits

EGeezer to jvmorris

Premium Member

to jvmorris

Re: FBI:paying cash cup of cofee: 147;Potential terrorist activi

said by jvmorris:

From a quick bit of Google surfing, it appears that this came into the general public domain as a consequence of quite a few local law enforcement agencies simply publishing these flyers on their websites. (So much for my query as to how they figured out what an internet cafe was so that they could send them the flyer.)

I had to go off to other pursuits involving Happy Hour two for ones, so thanks for your followup internet archeology.

This little fiasco is why one should never, ever, publish LES or FOUO/FIUO stuff to the public arena. I'm mildly surprised the flyer (or slide from a presentation) wasn't disclaimed or at least classified FIUO.

EDIT - added -

Based on the disclaimer at the bottom of the page, which I and probably everyone else skipped over, the whole flap is a tempest in a teapot(paragraph breaks added for ease of reading). I note the grant year cited was 2007.

This project was supported by Grant Number 2007-MU-BX-K002, awarded by the Bureau of Justice Assistance, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice.

Each indictor(sic) listed above, is by itself, lawful conduct or behavior and may also constitute the exercise of rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. In addition, there may be a wholly innocent explanation for conduct or behavior that appears suspicious in nature.

For this reason, no single indicator should be the sole basis for law enforcement action. The totality of behavioral indicators and other relevant circumstances should be evaluated when considering any law enforcement response or action.

When you google the grant number, you will see a whole set of "communities Against Terrorism" documents for various business sectors

Also see
»www.llr.state.sc.us/POL/ ··· tion.PDF

»info.publicintelligence. ··· ores.pdf

»www.columbuspolice.org/U ··· fold.pdf

»www.ascpskincare.com/con ··· tors.pdf

»www.ilministorage.org/im ··· ties.pdf

So there.

jvmorris
I Am The Man Who Was Not There.
MVM
join:2001-04-03
Reston, VA

jvmorris

MVM

If you've been sitting around on the veranda at Captiva drowning yourself in tequila sunsets, . . .

Yes, while the grant was awarded in 2007, many grants are multi-year and I think that was likely the case in this instance.
Digging through the program documentation on SLATT, SAR, and CAT, it becomes obvious that these flyers were just one small component of a massive program. Even after the contract was completed, the flyers had to be created, reviewed, approved, and distributed.

I think the oldest date I've seen on any of the various PDFs I've looked at is mid-March 2011, so they may only have been in existence for about a year. I didn't bother to check the dates on the modified versions on some LEA websites, which is where I suspect the public leak originated.

There are published SLATT documents from 2010 that talk about the CAT program and rather generally about the details, but they never mention these flyers, so I think they likely didn't exist at all (in any sort of final form) until sometime in 2010 or later.

fatness
subtle

join:2000-11-17
fishing

fatness to EGeezer

to EGeezer
said by EGeezer:

Based on the disclaimer at the bottom of the page, which I and probably everyone else skipped over, the whole flap is a tempest in a teapot

That legal weasel-speak paragraph was noticed in the first topic on these flyers. »Do You Like Online Privacy? You May Be a Terrorist

It does nothing to minimize the heavy-handed stupidity of the flyers. It's just some budding government PR lawyer's idea of CYA that would please a boss.

EGeezer
Premium Member
join:2002-08-04
Midwest

EGeezer

Premium Member

That settles it. They definitely want us to report anyone paying for coffee with cash.

ashrc4
Premium Member
join:2009-02-06
australia

ashrc4 to fatness

Premium Member

to fatness
said by fatness:

said by EGeezer:

Based on the disclaimer at the bottom of the page, which I and probably everyone else skipped over, the whole flap is a tempest in a teapot

That legal weasel-speak paragraph was noticed in the first topic on these flyers. »Do You Like Online Privacy? You May Be a Terrorist

It does nothing to minimize the heavy-handed stupidity of the flyers. It's just some budding government PR lawyer's idea of CYA that would please a boss.

Click the "Term of use" on the home site of the flyer and it suggest that "IF YOU ARE DISSATISFIED WITH THIS WEB SITE, OR ANY PORTION THEREOF, YOUR EXCLUSIVE REMEDY SHALL BE TO STOP USING THE WEB SITE."

And assertions aside for a minute it only suggests that "What should i consider suspicious."

Suspicious does not = guilty.....No matter how hard one tries.

fatness
subtle

join:2000-11-17
fishing

fatness

said by ashrc4:

And assertions aside for a minute it only suggests that "What should i consider suspicious."

It "suggested" some quite stupid reasons for being "suspicious".