I will be giving testimony at MIAC oversight committee Tuesday, July 28, 2009

OFallenBrent:

Here are a few links that I consider to be very important to see before addressing the MIAC Committee. I am also going to give some commentary because you might not have the time to puzzle this out.

Missouri House Bill 1138: Would introduce "an oversight committee within the Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC)." These committee members woulld be from the MO House of Representatives.
http://www.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bills091/biltxt/intro/H...

Congressional Research Report for Congress, "Fusion Centers: Issues and Options for Congress." Pages 13-14 outline the federal regulations which govern most fusion centers. A quote from page 14: " The question, to which there is no definitive answer, raised here is how aggressive should fusion centers be in pro-actively collecting and analyzing intelligence that may go beyond that which may be entered into criminal intelligence systems that fall under federal law? Which entity at the federal level is auditing the activities of fusion centers to ensure civil liberties are not violated? Given that these centers are creations of state and local governments, should an entity of the federal government be the ultimate arbiter of civil liberties protection?" You also might look at page 54 of this report, which discusses the CFR regulations in more detail and in an understandable way. BTW if you have time, take a look at their discussion of fusion center funding. You really should also ask about fusion center funding: I was told by the MD ACLU that MD's fusion center is entirely federally funded. Other centers are either entirely funded by their states or receive a combination of federal or state funding. Find out the answer to that for MIAC. Here's the link: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/RL34070.pdf

Now on the Code of Federal Regulations. 28 CFR part 23 concerns "Criminal Intelligence Systems Operating Policies," which is fancy language for regulations regarding the collection of information about organized groups of criminals, such as those who do "loan sharking, drug trafficking...gambling, extortion...and corruption of public officials" (you get the picture without the full list). Law enforcement has a difficult time getting the information they need to catch these types of criminals unless they have some way of sharing the information among various police departments and other law enforcement agencies--an "interjurisdictional criminal intelligence system." A fusion center, composed as it is of various participating law enforcement agencies, federal, state, and local, is an example of this type of criminal intelligence system--therefore they should be governed by this regulation.

28 CFR 23.20 is especially important to those who are concerned about the monitoring of peaceful dissidents such as ourselves. 23.20 (a) states that "a project shall collect and maintain criminal intelligence information concerning an individual only if there is reasonable suspicion that the individual is involved in criminal conduct or activity...". I would point out, BTW, that this is based on the Fourth Amendment, which protects against "unreasonable searches and seizures...and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause...".

23.20 (b) states that "a project shall not collect or maintain criminal intelligence information about the political, religious or social views, associations, or activities of any group...or other organization unless such information directly relates to criminal conduct or activity and there is reasonable suspicion that the subject of the information is or may be involved in criminal conduct or activity." The Modern Militia Movement Report that MIAC put out does not conform to this standard, as far as I am concerned. This report profiled entire groups of people precisely because of their political beliefs.

The rest of 28 CFR 23.20 concerns itself with how the information is to be disseminated, protected, and eventually purged by the agencies collecting the information. This is pretty technical stuff, but it did figure in the original Maryland Freedom of Association and Assembly Protection Act (MD HB 182) which ultimately did not pass; the newer version (HB 311) eliminated all of those safeguards, which is why I made the statement in my letter to Bob Dixon that MD HB 311 as passed would allow Maryland's fusion center to continue to operate without significant oversight.

Link to the Code of Federal Regulations:
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=14e...

Now, to sum up what I would ask if I were at the hearing tomorrow:

1. How is MIAC funded? If it is state or partially state funded, I would make the point that elected state officials should have the right to oversee its workings. If it is exclusively federally funded, I would still raise concerns about whether a federal agency should be permitted to operate without oversight within the state of Missouri.

2. Is the Missouri Information and Analysis Center following the guidelines laid out by the Code of Federal Regulations? As things stand now, there exists no significant oversight over fusion centers on the state or federal levels, and because of their secretive workings, there is no way to truly determine if they are following these regulations--regulations which are based upon the First and Fourth Amendments of the Constitution. BTW I would also point out the important differences between regulation, which is administered internally within departments, and legislation, which is introduced and overseen by officials elected by the people.

3. I would raise concerns about the role of the federal government in the legislation pending before the MO House of Representatives. It is very important that persons who believe they have been unfairly spied upon be able to retain their right to request information from the fusion centers with whatever freedom of information requests are available through the State of Missouri. In Virginia this right was taken away from its citizens through direct interference of the federal government in Virginia's legislative process.

I am out of time...I have to go out to dinner at a friend's house now. If you have any questions or concerns, though, please feel free to email me or contact me through this thread...I will stay up late if necessary to give you the information you need. I have a lot of research about fusion centers that I can share; I really wish you had posted your thread a few days earlier so I could have more time to communicate with you.

Again, please consider printing out my letter to the MIAC committee and hand delivering it to them. Missouri House Bill 1138 might be the last significant chance any state has at overseeing the workings of a fusion center...and they really need the accumulated wisdom of the failures of other states in their efforts.

Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.
Thomas Jefferson

here is the link:

http://www.infowars.com/secret-state-police-report-ron-paul-...

-------------------------------------------------------
"I think it would be a good idea"

Mahatma Gandhi,
when asked what he thought of Western civilization

to start...Amica Jefferoni's Letter to Bob Dixon...click on her link to read the full letter...great questions to Bob Dixon

http://www.dailypaul.com/node/98054

* I will try to find more..I know there were several posts with links on the agency relationships
*****
"I truly wish that real life would no longer surpass the worst excesses of my nightmarish imaginings... Arthur Silber **

trap that they'll point out that it wasn't said that C4L people were terrorists or that someone couldn't get pulled over for just having such bumper stickers. The truth is, why publish specific information about any group of people unless there was the intention to act on that information? If the argument that they weren't going to act on the information was to stand, why did they spend money on the report in the first place when they could have spent money on education that could or even should be acted upon?