I bet you thought just the FBI sent them out, huh, readers?
Guess again in fascista AmeriKa:
"Pentagon Review Faults Bank Record Demands" by MARK MAZZETTI and ERIC LICHTBLAU
WASHINGTON, Oct. 13 — An internal Pentagon review this year found systemic problems and poor coordination in the military’s efforts to obtain records from American banks and consumer credit agencies in terrorism and espionage investigations, according to Pentagon documents and interviews.
In response to the review, Defense Department officials have ordered changes intended to strengthen legal safeguards and impose new training standards for use of the letters, which are used to examine the financial assets of American military personnel and civilians involved in military investigations. But military officials said the review had reinforced their judgment that the program had operated within legal limits.
The problems at the Pentagon that are described in the documents appear to mirror some of those confronted by the F.B.I., where an internal investigation this year into the bureau’s use of thousands of national security letters found widespread problems and little oversight in the way the demands for records were issued.
The newly disclosed documents, totaling more than 1,000 pages, provide additional confirmation of the military’s expanding use of what are known as national security letters under powers claimed under the Patriot Act. The documents show that the military has issued at least 270 of the letters since 2005, and about 500 in all since 2001. The documents were obtained through the Freedom of Information Act by two private advocacy groups, the American Civil Liberties Union and the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
The New York Times first disclosed the military’s use of the letters in January, and senior members of Congress and civil liberties groups criticized the practice on grounds that it seemed to conflict with traditional Pentagon rules against domestic law enforcement operations. Vice President Dick Cheney, however, defended the practice as a “perfectly legitimate activity” used to protect American troops and investigate possible acts of terrorism and espionage.
The documents raise a number of apparent discrepancies between the Defense Department’s internal practices and what officials have said publicly and to Congress about their use of the letters. The documents suggest, for instance, that military officials used the F.B.I. to collect records for what started as purely military investigations. And the documents also leave open the possibility that records could be gathered on nonmilitary personnel in the course of the investigations.
[Aren't you tired of this lying, totalitarian, fascista government, readers?]
Military officials said in interviews that their review of the national security letters showed that they had been used exclusively to gather information on people connected to the Defense Department — including active duty personnel, civilians, contractors, reservists and their families — in cases where there was reason to suspect a possible terrorist or espionage threat.
Investigators, for instance, could use the letters to examine the assets of a military contractor who seemed to have sudden and unexplained wealth, said Maj. Patrick Ryder, a spokesman for the Defense Department.
“You’re an analyst, but you suddenly start coming to work in a Ferrari,” Major Ryder said. “That might warrant further investigation.” He said policy prohibited the military from using the letters to collect records on nonmilitary personnel.
[But that doesn't mean they won't do it. After all, how would we know?
Sooooo, the Pentagon can LOSE BILLIONS in Iraq, be OVERCHARGED by Halliburton, and keep funding NO-BID CONTRACTS, yet they are going to ass-probe their own employees, huh?
THIS MILITARY DICTATORSHIP FUCKING STINKS!!!!]
However, numerous internal memos and policy guidelines issued by Defense Department agencies on their use of the letters made no such distinction and, in some cases, seemed to encourage the gathering of records on nonmilitary personnel. A 2003 memo from the naval investigative service on the Navy’s use of the national security letters, for instance, said in reference to the leader of the Sept. 11 hijackings: “If the target of a terrorism investigation is Mohammed Atta, an N.S.L. may be issued for the records of Atta, as well as others, if those records are relevant to the investigation of Atta.”
Civil liberties advocates said recent controversy over the Department of Defense’s collection of information on antiwar protesters made them suspicious of the assertion that the letters had been used exclusively to focus on military personnel. “We are very skeptical that the D.O.D. is voluntarily limiting its own surveillance power,” said Melissa Goodman, a staff attorney for the A.C.L.U.
After the Times article was published, Pentagon officials scrambled to get a better grasp of how the letters had been used, according to e-mail messages contained in the documents. One official demanded a review and said he wanted answers, not “finger-pointing.”
The documents indicate that even as the use of the national security letters expanded, there was little central coordination at the Pentagon over how the letters were used.
The questions led to a three-week internal review and to recommendations for broad changes in the way the letters are used. The recommendations included “more specific guidance” on how the military should use the letters, more standardized training, and a review of legal authority and guidelines.
The lack of centralized training and coordination was the biggest shortcoming identified in the review, according to a military official who spoke on condition of anonymity.
Toby Sullivan, the Defense Department acting deputy under secretary for counterintelligence and security, said in a statement that the review showed that the military’s use of the letters was “proper, authorized, and in accordance with the governing statutes.” But he added that the issues identified in the review “highlighted some potential areas for standardization.”
The Pentagon general counsel’s office took part in a broader review of the letters ordered by the director of national intelligence, officials said, but that review’s findings were not known.
Documents also show that the National Security Agency claims authority to use the letters seeking financial data on people connected with counterintelligence investigations. Its use of the letters had not been previously disclosed. The documents indicate that the N.S.A. used the letters to gather records for a small number of its employees during internal security inquiries.
The military regards the letters as voluntary and “noncompulsory,” since it does not have legal authority to require financial institutions to turn over records. But Pentagon officials acknowledge in the internal documents that the requests are rarely turned down, and some of the sample letters included in the documents contain language like “compel disclosure” and warn that informing bank customers that their records are being turned over “may result in danger to the national security of the United States.”
[Yeah, DON'T TELL ANYBODY we are doing this!
Sig Heil, you fucking fascista assholes!
I'll see you hang in hell, fuckers!!!!!]
Much of the material was blacked out, and officials declined to provide the full, unredacted review. The advocacy groups that obtained the records called on Congress to conduct a full review.
The documents also include a potentially significant discrepancy on the question of when the military works with the F.B.I. in issuing records demands. The F.B.I. has broader authority to issue national security letters; its demands are, by definition, mandatory and, unlike the Defense Department, it collects phone and Internet records as well as financial documents.
The Pentagon indicated to Congress earlier this year in one memo that it used the F.B.I. to issue national security letters only in cases where there was a joint investigation by the two agencies—usually, officials said, when the target was someone outside the Defense Department.
But the military’s internal documents appear to contradict this assertion. The military review prepared this year says that the bureau had been issuing some national security letters on behalf of the military in cases that were strictly military investigations, with no joint role by the F.B.I.
[Do you get tired of the lying like me, readers?]
This is significant, said Anthony D. Romero, executive director of the A.C.L.U., because the military’s legal authority to demand records is much narrower than that of the F.B.I. “If the Defense Department is using the F.B.I. as its lackey to get information it could not get on its own,” Mr. Romero said, “they’re conspiring to evade the limits placed by law.”
[This whole government is one law-breaking, looting, mass-murdering enterprise, isn't it?]
