CITIZENS AGAINST HARMFUL TECHNOLOGY

Dedicated to Targeted Individuals

Subjec: 
Gangstalking

The Basis of Stazi Gangstalking

TRICKS AND FALSE SECURITY TO CORRUPT PRIVATE SECTOR OF SOCIETY
How the US is conscripting Businesses into a Surveillance Society
https://www.aclu.org/files/FilesPDFs/surveillance_report.pdf

Infragard

TIPS

Operation TIPS, where the last part is an acronym for the Terrorism Information and Prevention System, was a domestic intelligence-gathering program designed by President George W. Bush to have United States citizens report suspicious activity. The program's website implied that US workers who had access to private citizens' homes, such as many cable installers and telephone repair workers, would be reporting on what was in people's homes if it were deemed "suspicious."

TIPS would provide America with a higher percentage of 'citizen spies' than the former East Germany had under the notorious Stasi secret police.

Officially TIPS is supposed to have been cancelled due to privacy and civil rights concerns but the citizen tattle-tale, human rights violations are actually in full swing using the hoard of volunteer organizations and citizens assisting police programs.
InfraGard is a non-profit organization serving as a public-private partnership between U.S. businesses and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The organization is an information sharing and analysis effort serving the interests, and combining the knowledge base of, a wide range of private sector and government members.[1] InfraGard is an association of individuals that facilitates information sharing and intelligence between businesses, academic institutions, state and local law enforcement agencies, and other participants dedicated to prevent hostile acts against the United States.[2] InfraGard's mutual nondisclosure agreements among its members (individuals) and the FBI promotes trusted discussions of vulnerabilities and solutions that companies and individuals may be hesitant to place in the public domain and provide access to additional threat information from the FBI.

Total Information Awareness

IWATCH

Total Information Awareness (TIA) was a program of the United States Information Awareness Office that began during the 2003 fiscal year. It operated under this title from February until May 2003, before being renamed as the Terrorism Information Awareness.

Based on the concept of predictive policing, TIA aimed to gather detailed information about individuals in order to anticipate and prevent crimes before they are committed. As part of efforts to win the War on Terror, the program searched for all sorts of personal information in the hunt for terrorists around the globe.
 
According to Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), TIA was the "biggest surveillance program in the history of the United States".
The program was defunded alongside the Information Awareness Office in late 2003 by the United States Congress after media reports criticized the government for attempting to establish "Total Information Awareness" over all citizens.

Although the program was formally suspended, its data mining software was later adopted by other government agencies, with only superficial changes being made. The core architecture of TIA continued development under the code name "Basketball." According to a 2012 New York Times article, the legacy of Total Information Awareness is "quietly thriving" at the National Security Agency (NSA).
Police Chiefs across the country are supporting a “community watch” project in the name of anti-terrorism that encourages citizens to spy on each other and report any “suspicious” behaviour to police.
https://www.dhs.gov/see-something-say-something

The terroristic characteristics that are to be reported under the iWATCH program include “wearing clothes that are too big”.

The AP reports:

Using brochures, public service announcements and meetings with community groups, iWATCH is designed to deliver concrete advice on how the public can follow the oft-repeated post-9/11 recommendation: “If you see something, say something.” Program materials list nine types of suspicious behavior that should prompt people to call police and 12 kinds of places to look for it.

Nationwide Suspicious Activity Reporting Initiative

Homeland Security Alert

The Nationwide Suspicious Activity Reporting (SAR) Initiative (NSI) is a program of the United States Government used to collect and share reports of suspicious activity by people in the United States. The Nationwide SAR Initiative (NSI) builds on what law enforcement and other agencies have been doing for years — gathering information regarding behaviors and incidents associated with criminal activity — but without the customary restrictions on collecting data on individuals in the absence of reasonable suspicion or probable cause. The program has established a standardized process whereby SARs can be shared among agencies to help detect and prevent terrorism-related criminal activity. This process is in direct response to the mandate to establish a “unified process for reporting, tracking, and accessing [SARs]” in a manner that rigorously protects the privacy and civil liberties of Americans, as called for in the 2007 National Strategy for Information Sharing (NSIS). Reports of suspicious behavior noticed by local law enforcement or by private citizens are forwarded to state and major urban area fusion centers as well as DHS and the FBI for analysis. Sometimes this information is combined with other information to evaluate the suspicious activity in greater context. The program is primarily under the direction of the US Department of Justice.

Homeland Security Advisory System

Homeland Security Advisory System color chart
In the United States, the Homeland Security Advisory System was a color-coded terrorism threat advisory scale. The different levels triggered specific actions by federal agencies and state and local governments, and they affected the level of security at some airports and other public facilities. It was often called the "terror alert level" by the U.S. media. The system was replaced on April 27, 2011, with a new system called the National Terrorism Advisory System.

Fusion Centers

COPS

Fusion center

A fusion center is an intelligence gathering, analysis and dissemination state or major urban area center, which is owned by state, local, and territorial law enforcement and Department of Homeland Security entities, many of which were jointly created between 2003 and 2007 under the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and the Office of Justice Programs in the U.S. Department of Justice.

They are designed to promote information sharing at the federal level between agencies such as the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, the U.S. Department of Justice, and state, local, and tribal law enforcement. As of February 2018, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security recognized 79 fusion centers. Fusion centers may also be affiliated with an Emergency Operations Center that responds in the event of a disaster.

The National Network of Fusion Centers was established after the September 11 attacks to provide a focal point for successful collaboration across jurisdictions and sectors to effectively and efficiently detect, prevent, investigate, and respond to criminal and terrorist activity. It is a decentralized, distributed, self-organizing national asset composed of state and major urban area fusion centers and their respective nodes within each center’s area of responsibility (AoR). This composition enables the National Network to meet local needs, while providing value information to understand the national landscape of threats and criminal activity.

The fusion process is an overarching method of managing the flow of information and intelligence across levels and sectors of government to integrate information for analysis. That is, the process relies on the active involvement of state, local, tribal, and federal law enforcement agencies—and sometimes on non-law enforcement agencies (e.g., private sector)—to provide the input of raw information for intelligence analysis. As the array of diverse information sources increases, there will be more accurate and robust analysis that can be disseminated as intelligence.

A report by the House Homeland Security Committee titled “Advancing the Homeland Security Information Sharing Environment: A Review of the National Network of Fusion Centers” that was published in November 2017 had overwhelming amounts of positive feedback on the accomplishments and improvement of the network since their last review in 2013, in addition to several recommendations for future improvement in operations and collaboration. It highlights in particular the strides federal partners, namely the Department of Homeland Security, and Fusion Centers have made in sharing critical information and data across several platforms. The chairman of the committee U.S. Representative Michael McCaul was quoted in the report as stating:
Fusion centers are a key element of our homeland security because they improve partnerships at the state, local, and federal levels and help ensure better coordination of vital counterterrorism information. As threats to our homeland continue to evolve, we must take the necessary steps to mitigate gaps in threat-sharing and reporting. This latest report includes 24 recommendations that promote the sustained growth of the National Network of fusion centers and more fully integrate front-line law enforcement, first responders, and our intelligence community, contributing to a more robust national infrastructure to defend against the threat landscape.
In 1997, the office of Community Oriented Policing Services(COPS) funded the creation of a network of Regional Community Policing Institutes(RCPI) to develope and deliver innovative community policing to law enforcement agencies, local government and community members throughout a designated region.

The Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS Office) is the component of the U.S. Department of Justice responsible for advancing the practice of community policing by the nation's state, local, territorial, and tribal law enforcement agencies through information and grant resources.
Community policing begins with a commitment to building trust and mutual respect between police and communities. It is critical to public safety, ensuring that all stakeholders work together to address our nation's crime challenges. When police and communities collaborate, they more effectively address underlying issues, change negative behavioral patterns, and allocate resources.

The COPS Office awards grants to hire community policing professionals, develop and test innovative policing strategies, and provide training and technical assistance to community members, local government leaders, and all levels of law enforcement. Since 1994, the COPS Office has invested more than $14 billion to help advance community policing.

COMMUNITY POLICING IS THE GANGSTALKING PROGRAM.

Community Policing

Community policing
Not to be confused with neighborhood watch.

Community policing, or community-oriented policing, is a strategy of policing that focuses on building ties and working closely with members of the communities. A formal definition states:

"Community policing is a philosophy of full service personalized policing, where the same officer patrols and works in the same area on a permanent basis, from a decentralized place, working in a proactive partnership with citizens to identify and solve problems." —Bertus Ferreira

The central goal of community policing is for the police to build relationships with the community through interactions with local agencies and members of the public, creating partnerships and strategies for reducing crime and disorder.

Although community policing mostly targets low-level crime and disorder, the broken windows theory proposes that this can reduce more serious crime as well.

Common methods of community-policing include:
Encouraging the community to help prevent crime by providing advice, giving talks at schools, encouraging neighborhood watch groups, and a variety of other techniques.
Increased use of foot or cycle patrols.
Increased officer accountability to the communities they are supposed to serve.
Creating teams of officers to carry out community policing in designated neighborhoods.
Clear communication between the police and the communities about their objectives and strategies.
Partnerships with other organizations such as government agencies, community members, nonprofit service providers, private businesses and the media.
Decentralizing the police authority, allowing more discretion amongst lower-ranking officers, and more initiative expected from them.

Community policing is related to problem-oriented policing and intelligence-led policing and contrasts with reactive policing strategies that were predominant in the late 20th century. It does not eliminate the need for reactive policing, though successful prevention can reduce the need for the latter. Many police forces have teams that focus specifically on community policing, such as Neighbourhood Policing Teams in the United Kingdom, which are separate from the more centralized units that respond to emergencies.
The overall assessment of community oriented policing is positive, as both officers and community members attest to its effectiveness in reducing crime and raising the sense of security in a community.

Back to TI-Stalking

INFRAGARD

[if !mso]> Normal 0 false false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE
 
FBI INFRAGARD - Kill your neighbors with FBI/CACI intelligence!
« on: February 07, 2008, 08:01:06 pm »
Exclusive! The FBI Deputizes Business
By Matthew Rothschild, February 7, 2008
The Progressive Magazine
 http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=25861.80

Today, more than 23,000 representatives of private industry are working quietly with the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security. The members of this rapidly growing group, called InfraGard, receive secret warnings of terrorist threats before the public does. In return, they provide information to the government, which alarms the ACLU. But there may be more to it than that. One business executive, who showed me his InfraGard card, told me they have permission to “shoot to kill” in the event of marti0al law.

“We are the owners, operators, and experts of our critical infrastructure, from the CEO of a large company in agriculture or high finance to the guy who turns the valve at the water utility,” says Schneck, who by day is the vice president of research integration at Secure Computing.

“At its most basic level, InfraGard is a partnership between the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the private sector,” the InfraGard website states. “InfraGard chapters are geographically linked with FBI Field Office territories.”

In November 2001, InfraGard had around 1,700 members. As of late January, InfraGard had 23,682 members, according to its website, www.infragard.net, which adds that “350 of our nation’s Fortune 500 have a representative in InfraGard.”

To join, each person must be sponsored by “an existing InfraGard member, chapter, or partner organization.” The FBI then vets the applicant. On the application form, prospective members are asked which aspect of the critical infrastructure their organization deals with. These include: agriculture, banking and finance, the chemical industry, defense, energy, food, information and telecommunications, law enforcement, public health, and transportation.

FBI Director Robert Mueller addressed an InfraGard convention on August 9, 2005. At that time, the group had less than half as many members as it does today. “To date, there are more than 11,000 members of InfraGard,” he said. “From our perspective that amounts to 11,000 contacts . . . and 11,000 partners in our mission to protect America.” He added a little later, “Those of you in the private sector are the first line of defense.”

He urged InfraGard members to contact the FBI if they “note suspicious activity or an unusual event.” And he said they could sic the FBI on “disgruntled employees who will use knowledge gained on the job against their employers.”

In an interview with InfraGard after the conference, which is featured prominently on the InfraGard members’ website, Mueller says: “It’s a great program.”

The ACLU is not so sanguine.

“There is evidence that InfraGard may be closer to a corporate ..program, turning private-sector corporations—some of which may be in a position to observe the activities of millions of individual customers—into surrogate eyes and ears for the FBI,” the ACLU warned in its August 2004 report The Surveillance-Industrial Complex: How the American Government Is Conscripting Businesses and Individuals in the Construction of a Surveillance Society.

InfraGard is not readily accessible to the general public. Its communications with the FBI and Homeland Security are beyond the reach of the Freedom of Information Act under the “trade secrets” exemption, its website says. And any conversation with the public or the media is supposed to be carefully rehearsed.

Tne of the advantages of InfraGard, according to its leading members, is that the FBI gives them a heads-up on a secure portal about any threatening information related to infrastructure disruption or terrorism.

The InfraGard website advertises this. In its list of benefits of joining InfraGard, it states: “Gain access to an FBI secure communication network complete with VPN encrypted website, webmail, listservs, message boards, and much more.”

InfraGard members receive “almost daily updates” on threats “emanating from both domestic sources and overseas,” Hershman says.

We get very easy access to secure information that only goes to InfraGard members,” Schneck says. “People are happy to be in the know.”

In return for being in the know, InfraGard members cooperate with the FBI and Homeland Security. “InfraGard members have contributed to about 100 FBI cases,” Schneck says. “What InfraGard brings you is reach into the regional and local communities. We are a 22,000-member vetted body of subject-matter experts that reaches across seventeen matrixes. All the different stovepipes can connect with InfraGard.”

The FBI should not be creating a privileged class of Americans who get special treatment,” says Jay Stanley, public education director of the ACLU’s technology and liberty program. “There’s no ‘business class’ in law enforcement. If there’s information the FBI can share with 22,000 corporate bigwigs, why don’t they just share it with the public? That’s who their real ‘special relationship’ is supposed to be with. Secrecy is not a party favor to be given out to friends. . . . This bears a disturbing resemblance to the FBI’s handing out ‘goodies’ to corporations in return for folding them into its domestic surveillance machinery


Focus on Agriculture: The FBI Wants You
http://www.infragardmembers.org/modules/articles/article.php?id=45
Posted on Mon 14 May 2007 (646 reads) By Cyndie Sirekis  American Farm Bureau News

The proliferation in recent years of popular television programs and movies featuring FBI agents might lead one to believe entry into that profession is open to virtually anyone with a yearning for adventure and a belief in the agency’s motto – "Fidelity, Bravery, and Integrity." The truth, however, is that rigorous academic, fitness and security standards preclude most Americans from ever becoming FBI agents.

But farmers, ranchers and other rural residents do have a unique opportunity to help the FBI protect America’s food supply, through membership in local chapters of the FBI’s InfraGard program.

InfraGard was initially developed in 1996 to promote protection of critical information systems in the cyberspace arena. Since 9/11, it has expanded to include protection of physical as well as cyber threats to various sectors of the U.S. economy.

The food and agriculture section of the program, dubbed AgriGard, is where farmers and other rural residents have a role to play. Food and agriculture was designated a special interest group because it’s physically impossible for local law enforcement or any government agency to secure every head of livestock, field and tanker truck across the nation.

Members of AgriGard use a secure Internet portal to provide the FBI "on-the-ground" information about their local communities that may be helpful in preventing terrorism and other crimes. They are able to access current information about local threats, advisories, alerts and warnings, many of which are not available to the public. Members also may share information with each other and the FBI through the secure portal, in addition to learning about ongoing research on critical infrastructure protection.

Although electronic distribution of information is a critical element of the program, computer and Internet access is not a membership requirement. AgriGard members also attend meetings of their local chapter, where they share information with each other and representatives of law enforcement, academia, private industry, the FBI and other government agencies.