Tuesday, November 13, 2012

The Problem with Shirtless FBI Agents

There is a great lesson to be learned in the Petraeus  Affair about the expanding surveillance state.

Advocates of the expanding surveillance state often ask, "If you have nothing to hide, why should you be concerned?" We now have the quick answer, "shirtless FBI agents."

If we are to buy into the mainstream accounts of how the Petraeus scandal broke open, it appears that a very attractive woman in Tampa, FL received what she considered to be harassing emails. From reports, the emails, did not rise to a threat level, but were more of the "stay away from my man," "stop wearing short skirts and letting your boobs hangout," type. Certainly nothing that would warrant a full scale FBI investigation.

Indeed, when the emails were first shown to the FBI's Tampa cybersecurity division, a question was raised as to whether the emails warranted an investigation.

So how did the investigation proceed along? Because of a shirtless FBI agent.

Jill Kelley, the Tampa resident who received the emails, apparently knew an FBI agent that she showed the emails to. It appears that the FBI agent was attracted to Kelley and sent her email pictures of himself, shirtless.

So when she showed him the anonymous harassing emails, he made sure an investigation would take place. He was hot for the broad. It appears he pushed the Tampa cybersecurity team and then became the whistleblower to Congress, when it seemed to him that the FBI was slowing down on the investigation.

What's important to note is that it is unlikely that any investigation would have been launched without the pushing of the shirtless FBI agent. In other words, the billions in data that the FBI has access to, with or without the flick of a subpoena, was used not to catch terrorists but at its core to help out a hot broad with big boobs. My point here is not to focus on how two generals ensnared in the scandal, but the dangers of so much data being collected on each one of us.

It's not that we are doing anything wrong, which we must fear, it is the shirtless FBI agents, CIA agents and other government operatives who have access to this data that we must fear. It is obvious that, under the right circumstances, some would inappropriately seek out data on us, which would make it easier for them to take the next step and use that data against us in God only knows what way. An agent sending shirtless pics to a married woman is not an agent that is held back by a strong moral and ethical compass.

The more and more data that is accumulated by government, the more and more data is available to shirtless governmnat agents and that is what we should fear and why the roll back of data collection and access should start now.

6 comments:

  1. it appears that this woman kelley was not guided by any moral compass either from the news reports in the last hour. These are the kinds of people that gravitate towards the evil doers in power. Stay away from both of them.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This woman went to an FBI guy, who sent her "inappropriate" emails, to help her with someone else who was sending her "inappropriate" emails?

    She was bothered by Broadwell's emails, but not the shirtless FBI agent's emails?

    Alrighty, then.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Great post, Robert!

    Whatever the reason for this affair becoming public, I do see some silver linings. I fear that many Americans are eager to elect a general as president — someone who will "take charge," casting aside such niceties as due process to "get things done." Petraeus, as everyone's favorite boy scout (credited with losing the wars less badly than his predecessors), was the most likely candidate. Now he's a laughing stock. He, Allen and Broadwell don't exactly reflect well on the beloved U.S. military.

    And that's the other silver lining. The state and its kept media have carefully crafted an image of government — and especially the military, CIA and FBI — as supremely powerful, all-seeing and all-knowing, skillfully keeping us safe from a constant barrage of threats.

    And then, once in a while, the mask falls off. We see that these security organs are run my horny, adulterous egomaniacs who are too preoccupied with chasing tits and ass to notice security breaches. Instead of the best and brightest, we see a roster of characters befitting the Jerry Springer show. And these are the people spending those enormous-and-ever-growing "defense" budgets!

    It was long overdue that some cold water was thrown on Americans' fawning over all things military. So, thank you shirtless FBI pervert — for that, at least!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Arthur Krolman, CFANovember 13, 2012 at 9:30 PM

    And as long as Americans' are looking askance on the US security state, maybe now's a good time to suggest to them the Rothbardian option of for-profit private security services. Hey a future for-profit FBI would be free to compete with the rest. "Shirtless-G-Men-R-Us" might be a good brand...or maybe "Chippendales Investigative Services"?

    ReplyDelete
  5. This is a very important point about privacy and data collection that requires a priority spot in the national dialogue.

    ReplyDelete
  6. With respect Bob, while you are right about 'shirtless agents' as A problem, it is not THE problem here.

    The problem here is that a purge is ongoing. Haven't I been posting it? Haven't I been predictive?

    Fine - more predictions. You will see this trend of firings of Generals continue until the volume makes the stories un-newsworthy.

    Here's the latest one this morning:
    Gen. William “Kip” Ward, the one-time head of the U.S. Africa Command, was demoted Tuesday and ordered to repay $82,000 he blew on extravagant trips and other unauthorized expenses.

    Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/general-demoted-extravagant-trips-article-1.1201284#ixzz2CCQdOI32

    The head of a COCOM has a very large diplomatic component. They have many, many millions of dollars to spend on foreign engagement. This guy is being demoted and retired because someone retroactively disputed the appropriateness of his budget expenditures.

    He didn't stay in Bermuda on the Government's dime without a REASON.

    And the story is that he accepted tickets from a CONTRACTOR (but not necessarily from a contractor's company).

    These regulations are mushy in nature. Personal friends who retire often end up as contractors. Should everyone cancel the Christmas presents?

    The allegations listed here - and even the total amount - are SMALL-TIME.

    WAKE UP.

    While many libertarians are busy fearing the Military, the Military is MEASURABLY the most libertarian of government employees. (Measurable by Ron Paul donations and other means).

    If you won't believe us I hope you will consider the opinions of those LEAST libertarian in government as evidenced by the 2009 DHS 'Veterans' report.


    ReplyDelete