Category Archives: International Association of Chiefs of Police

Targeted Interstate Photo Sharing (TIPS): Homeland Security, NLETS and the IACP Target Your Biometric Driver’s License Photo

target dl 1

Kaye Beach

Dec. 29, 2012

In the modern surveillance state it’s all about the biometrics, especially facial recognition which allows for at-a-distance identification and investigation of individuals without their knowledge or consent-no warrant required!

Very few realize that upon issuance of a state driver’s license, a state identification card, or any other form of government issued photo ID, we are having our facial biometrics captured by high resolution photography.  The analog cameras in every state have been replaced with high resolution digital cameras that capture, map, digitize, and database our facial features for use with facial recognition technology.

The federal REAL ID Act was passed in 2005.  The first (and most important!) benchmark of REAL ID is capture and retention of the driver’s license applicant’s facial image.

A Picture Is Worth a Thousand Words

The following is from an article published in Nov. of this year by the Police Chief, the official magazine of the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP);

(“Image” means biometric image which is quite different than a simple photograph)

“In 2006, the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Science and Technology (S&T) Directorate gave the International Justice and Public Safety Network (Nlets) funds to implement driver’s license image sharing between the states. Nlets is a nonprofit organization owned by the 50 states that has connections to every federal, state, local, and military law enforcement agency in the United States. If an agency’s technical capabilities allow, officers can query state driver’s license databases from a mobile or a desktop device and obtain an image in a manner of seconds.”

A Picture Is Worth a Thousand Words, From The Police Chief, vol. LXXIX, no. , November 2012. Copyright held by the International Association of Chiefs of Police, 515 North Washington Street, Alexandria, VA 22314 USA

Your state department of public safety or DMV driver’s license database provides your biometric data which tethers your body to other unique biographical data such as your social security number, age, address and more.  As a tool for surveillance and control, your faceprint is invaluable.

 “Today, more than 25 states have implemented this technology and are providing law enforcement images. In the next year, at least 12 more states will implement this technology.” A Picture Is Worth a Thousand Words

Now,  law enforcement can, simply by taking your picture, identify and investigate you as you go about your business in public without you even being aware that this is happening.

“For some time now, officers have been able to retrieve images through a mobile device while on the street to help identify individuals.” A Picture Is Worth a Thousand Words

The truth is that they cannot do this everywhere, yet.  While the technology is in place there is still the issue of access to be dealt with.  This is a legal and not a technical matter.  As we know, if the government has the technical ability to do something, they believe that they should be able to do it.  In other words, the law must conform to the capability of the technology and not the other way around.  Policy, once (somewhat) grounded in principle is now rooted in practice so now if they can do it, they will do it and they are doing it.

Undercover cops secretly use smartphones, face recognition to spy on crowds

This kind of surveillance is damaging.   Psychologically, pervasive surveillance, or even the possibility of it, is universally understood to change the behavior of those subjected to it.  It induces conformity of behavior and of thought as well.  As the range of surveillance grows, our ability to simply be, to exercise our free will, shrinks.

“Nlets will not consider photo sharing a success until it is implemented in all 50 states” link

Targeted Interstate Photo Sharing (TIPS)

“Nlets and DHS S&T have been working to expand the use of images in public safety. A new DHS/Nlets project called Targeted Interstate Photo Sharing (TIPS)” A Picture Is Worth a Thousand Words

NLETS formerly the National Law Enforcement Telecommunications Service is now THE INTERNATIONAL JUSTICE & PUBLIC SAFETY NETWORK

NLETS

“links together every state, local, and federal and International law enforcement (INTERPOL), justice and public safety agency for the purpose of exchanging critical information.”  http://www.nlets.org/

As this law enforcement writer notes,

“when we engage in innovative law enforcement technology solutions, we need to take extra care to adequately address the security and privacy of personally identifiable information.”  

And who does the writer fear, is not adequately addressing the security and privacy of our personally identifiable information?  Good old NLETS.

Read; When the Cops are Worried About Your Privacy-You Should Worry Too!

NLETS role has always been to serve the state’s law enforcement needs, but that role, as noted by NLETS, is changing.

From Hot Trends and Innovations at Nlets 2012 Slide # 42

While Nlets is 45 years old this year, we have always taken the “child” role, with the States being the “parent”

–In recent years, the child is becoming the parent in many aspects.

Why? For one thing NLETS is now being funded and thus, directed by the federal government.

nlets grant funders Hot trends innovations ppt 2012Slide # 47

Slide # 17

From Hot Trends and Innovations at Nlets 2012

PROJECT SPONSOR

Department of Homeland Security

When lines of authority are blurred, power naturally defaults to the highest level.  The states are not ‘partners’ with the federal government in matters that require state authority over their jurisdiction.

From the Legal Information Institute;

Jurisdiction-The term jurisdiction is really synonymous with the word “power”

Jurisdiction is the territory within which a court or government agency may properly exercise its power

State and local policing is a jurisdictional matter and the states and local governments have conceded their authority in this.  Informational jurisdiction is no exception and in fact leads physical control.

What is revealed in this IACP Nov. 2012 article is that the Department of Homeland Security has funded an international non-governmental organization, the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP), to manage the operational issues of the endeavor; Targeted Interstate Photo Sharing (TIPS).

“The DHS S&T has funded the IACP Technology Center to provide a practitioner group to advise Nlets on operational issues. These experienced practitioners will provide input on how this technology can be used in the field.”

What that means is that we are in trouble. 

The IACP is an international, non-governmental organization accredited by the United Nations and has been instrumental in bringing about profound changes to our nation politically, technologically and culturally.  There has been a great paradigm shift in our nation since 9-11 that spans all agencies of government.  This shift affects every aspect of our lives and has practically decimated the US Constitution and Bill of Rights.  US citizens, regardless of their political persuasion, are united in astonishment as they witness the slash and burn abrogation of one cherished right after another.

There is no sector of our society left untouched by the new paradigm and each has its own specialists attending to the transformation in their particular realm.  In the realm of policing, it is the IACP who is in charge of nurturing and tending this transformation.

Here is just one example;

Intelligence Led Policing and Fusion Centers: How the IACP Helped the USA to Cross the Rubicon

I hate to share information like this without providing you with any solutions.  I have been working diligently for years to find a way for us to protect our biometric data which is the key to our government’s efforts to create the most effective and efficient surveillance society ever experienced on this earth.

Although I have found no solution in legislation, no real willingness by enough of our elected representatives to do what they took an oath to do; to protect our liberty I do still recommend that you contact your state representative and tell them if you have concerns about open access to your data contained in the state Dept. of Public Safety database.  Tell them that you expect them to protect your personal information from being freely shared and used on a whim to track and spy on you.  They need to hear concerns from their constituents.

It is clear that we cannot stop the government from sharing this information in ways that will hurt our ability to control our own lives.   If we want to protect ourselves we must remove our biometrics from the system by either not giving it to them in the first place or taking legal action to remove it.

That is what I am trying to do, remove my biometric data from the system.  There is just no good reason for it being collected in the first place and no one ever informed me or you of what was being taken from us when we applied for our state driver’s license and they certainly never warned us about the repercussions of trusting them with our most personal information.

Read more about my lawsuit

My Real ID Reckoning

Latest update and request for support

Stop Biometric ID!  Kaye Beach needs your support for lawsuit

Advertisements

Examiner.com: No Guns for Anyone – Sheriff Whetsel and Gun Control

Kaye Beach

Oct. 26, 2012, updated Oct. 29, 2012

I hate to be an absolutist but after years of studying the International Association of Chiefs of Police, it is my firm opinion that any Sheriff candidate associated with the organization is pretty much a no go.  There are a number of police associations to choose from and a choice to band together with this one is out of them all has to be the product of a pronounced ideology that for many Americans, especially pro Second Amendment Americans, is repulsive.

Alan Gottlieb, founder of the Second Amendment Foundation, was also critical of the IACP, which he told Cybercast News Service “represents a lot of appointed police chiefs from a lot of totalitarian and dictatorship countries where human rights are constantly violated and freedom of the press doesn’t even exist.”

“There isn’t a gun-control proposal that this organization hasn’t supported. . .” 

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/international-police-chiefs-advocate-more-gun-control

I think that any officer of the law that does not trust law abiding citizens with a gun, doesn’t deserve our trust.

This excellent article posted today at the Examiner.com takes a look at the latest IACP anti-gun Resolutions and points out the fact that Sheriff John Whetsel was a past President of the International Association of Chiefs of Police.  Whetsel, as IACP President, in 1995,  actively worked to suppress right to carry legislation in the states including Oklahoma.

No Guns for Anyone – Sheriff Whetsel and Gun Control

Here is  1995 internal IACP strategic plan document to undermine or eliminate right to carry legislation.

The plan was to kill the bills if possible and if not to encumber the legislation with a number of burdensome requirements to deter lawful citizens from obtaining a permit.
For example, Item 5 on page 6 of the document suggests making it a criminal offense, a felony rather than a misdemeanor,  to carry with an expired permit.
Another example is item #14 on pg 7. Require a separate CCW permit for each individual weapon and limit permit holders to one gun purchase per month.

President Clinton thanked John Whetsel personally in 1994 for his help in passing the Brady and Crime Bills.  The “Crime Bill” that Clinton makes reference to is actually ‘The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act’  This was the Act that established a ban on “Assault Weapons” which lasted from 1994 to 2004.  Clinton Whetsel 1994

The Examiner.com looks into this a little deeper here

I have been barking about the International Association of Chiefs of Police for years.

The IACP is an international, non governmental organization accredited by the United Nations and is a ‘Member of the UN POLICE COMMUNITY’ http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/sites/police/community.shtml

This organization has been instrumental in bringing about profound changes to our nation politically, technologically and culturally and not necessarily for the better.  They are the thought leaders, the change agents in American law enforcement.

You would be hard pressed to find even one of the Ten Amendments to the  US Constitution that the policies pushed by the IACP has not insulted but one of the most telling positions taken by the organization is their stance on the Second Amendment.

Steven Spingola, a well respected former homicide detective sums the IACP up very well as;

“a global organization that views the American Constitution as an obstructionist document.”

The IACP has a long history of anti-Second Amendment stances.

They have actively supported every piece of gun control legislation since the 1960’s. The organization is long time, bitter enemies with the NRA and other pro-Second Amendment groups.

IACP President, Quinn Tamm,  in 1971 actually said that a brick was a safer weapon for self defense that a handgun.

Nothing has changed since then. (See the 2012 Resolutions issued by the IACP)

For a litany of anti-gun antics from the IACP in recent times, read this.

The IACP opposes;

•expansion of concealed carry
•50-caliber rifles
•private sales of gun
•gun shows
•so-called “assault” weapons

The IACP Supports;

•Limiting the number of handguns law abiding citizens can purchase
•five-day “cooling off” or waiting periods
•Legislation to allow federal health and safety oversight of the firearms industry.
•State, local, and tribal governments mandating specific storage methods of guns
•Repealing  the Tiahrt Amendment, a federal law that protects sensitive federal gun trace data from general access.
•Gun surrender programs

This international organization is highly political.  Some of the activities of the IACP include lobbying and testifying before Congress, doing research and policy development, setting professional standards and providing accreditation for US police departments.  The IACP promotes and writes guidelines for police technology, trains and educates law enforcement as well as managing and administering numerous programs for the federal government.

But Whetsel asserts that law enforcement is not about politics.

If that is so, why choose to forge ties with an incredibly political organization like the IACP?

John Whetsel at the 2011 IACP Conference

Sheriff Whetsel has a deep and longstanding and continuing relationship with the IACP. He attends IACP yearly conferences and is a member of the IACP Executive Committee and an active member of at least one IACP subcommittee.

And it is all very convenient to say it is not about politics when he is under pressure to defend his ideology that as the Sheriff absolutely does matter!  I have spent many hours at the state capitol and have witnessed the Sheriff’s armed lobbyists working diligently on highly political matters and the Sheriff.  As you can imagine the Sheriff has quite a lot of pull up there, you know, where they make laws that impact the free exercise of your rights.  And Whetsel, like the IACP,  does not have a reputation of  being very concerned with protecting any of those Ten Amendments.

The IACP Denies Large Donation from Taser Intl. Associated Foundation Buys Influence

Kaye Beach

Oct 24, 2012

USA Today published this story, ‘Police group receives donation from Taser stun-gun maker’ on Oct 22, 2012.  It is  about the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) accepting a 300,000 donation from the foundation associated with Taser International which raises serious concerns since this organization has great influence over police department policy nation wide.

The IACP is an international, non governmental organization. Some of the activities of the IACP include submitting legislation, lobbying and testifying before Congress, doing research and policy development, setting professional standards and providing accreditation for US police departments.  The IACP promotes and writes guidelines for police technology,  trains and educates law enforcement as well as managing and administering numerous programs for the federal government.

Of course the IACP denies that the money curries any favor with them but consider what a notorious anti-gun foundation bought for their cause with the IACP in 2007.  (below)

Police group receives donation from Taser stun-gun maker

by Kevin Johnson, USA TODAY

Published: 10/22/2012 12:19am

WASHINGTON — The nation’s largest association of police chiefs, which has advised thousands of its members on the appropriate use of stun guns, accepted a $300,000 donation from the foundation associated with Taser International, the biggest supplier of stun guns to law enforcement.

The contribution to the International Association of Chiefs of Police Foundation (IACP), the organization’s philanthropic arm, represents the latest in a series of controversial relationships Taser has established with police, the primary source of the Arizona-based company’s lucrative business.

. . .IACP and Taser officials said they found nothing wrong with the gift. . .But law enforcement and criminal justice analysts said the donation raises questions about the IACP’s ability to engage in future reviews involving the technology and whether the contribution represented a de-facto endorsement.

Read more

In 2007, another Foundation  supplied the IACP with hundreds of thousands of dollars.

The IACP, with support from the Joyce Foundation, a notorious anti-gun organization, held a national firearm violence summit in Chicago, “to address the issue fully and create a viable national strategy” for gun control.

Press release http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/magazine/index.cfm?fuseaction=display_arch&article_id=1470&issue_id=42008

The Joyce Foundation got what they paid for as their anti-gun philosophy has been enshrined in IACP policy which informs many police departments across the nation.  (See the 2007 IACP Great Lakes Summit on Reducing Gun Violence.  Link)

“The Joyce Foundation has pumped tens of millions of dollars into the coffers of gun ban groups over the years. The Violence Policy Center (VPC), an unashamed promoter of a total ban on handguns, collected more than $1 million of Joyce money just in 2005 and 2006. In 2000, the Joyce Foundation paid a VPC advisor and former Handgun Control, Inc. board member to edit a “Second Amendment Symposium” issue of the Chicago-Kent Law Review. That slim volume contains nearly half the anti-individual rights articles ever published on the Second Amendment.

The IACP newsletter proudly notes that the Joyce Foundation has “made more than $30 million in grants to groups seeking public health solutions that offer the promise of reducing gun deaths and injuries in America.”

This year, the Joyce Foundation invested heavily in IACP. They paid IACP over $500,000 to host “The Great Lakes States Summit on Gun Violence,” and then to issue the report from the conference. That comes out to nearly $11,000 per page, but the Joyce Foundation got what it paid for. . .”

Chris W. Cox, Follow the Money, Nov. 15, 2007  wwwnraila.org

The IACP hasn’t been resting on its laurels since 2007 either.  In 2011 the organization, in conjunction with the Joyce Foundation,  produced this guidebook;  Reducing Gun Violence in Our Communities Leadership Guide for Law Enforcement on Effective strategies and Programs

http://www.theiacp.org/Portals/0/pdfs/GunViolenceReductionGuide2011.pdf

The IACP also provides this eye popping checklist of goals and tasks to help law enforcement agencies measure their progress in the IACP’s recommended gun control efforts.

http://www.theiacp.org/Portals/0/pdfs/GVR_page-2_TAS-Planning-Guide.pdf

There has been a great paradigm shift in our nation since 9-11 that spans all agencies of government.  This shift affects every aspect of our lives and has practically decimated the Constitution and Bill of Rights.  US citizens, regardless of their political persuasion, are united in astonishment as they witness the slash and burn abrogation of one cherished right after another.

There is no sector of our society left untouched by the new paradigm and each has its own specialists attending to the transformation in their particular realm.  In the realm of policing, it is the IACP who is in charge of nurturing and tending this transformation.

Global Police Chief’s Association, with Big-Time Congressional Pull, Lobbies against Anti-Big Brother Legislation

Kaye Beach

September 1, 2011

The International Association of Chiefs of Police  is getting called on the carpet for their support of tech tyranny.   Retired homicide detective, Steve Spingola, very aptly refers to  “a global organization that views the American Constitution as an obstructionist document.”

Read on. . .

WALES, WI, September 1, 2012 — Retired Milwaukee Police Department Detective Steve Spingola has taken the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP)to task for lobbying against Congressional Bill H.R. 2168, also known as the “Geolocational Privacy and Surveillance Act.”

In his “Spingola Files” blog, the retired homicide detective encourages the public to contact their federal representatives to voice support for the bill, which would prohibit private entities and government agents from ascertaining the location of cellular devices — via GPS or ‘Stingray’ technology — absent a search warrant signed by a magistrate or judge.

http://www.badgerwordsmith.com/spingolafiles/2012/09/01/police-chiefs-association-lobbys-against-anti-big-brother-legislation/

Spingola refers to the ICAP as “a global organization that views the American Constitution as an obstructionist document.”

“While technology is advancing at light speed,” wrote Spingola, “the laws required to regulate intrusive electronic surveillance are moving through the halls of congress and state legislatures at a snail’s pace.”

“It is time for the American public to step-up to the plate,” Spingola said. “The alternative is the post-9/11 security-industrial complex and their K Street lobbyists creating an electronic iron curtain.”

On the Web:

http://www.wuwm.com/programs/lake_effect/lake_effect_segment.php?segmentid=9105

http://www.badgerwordsmith.com/spingolafiles/2012/08/22/update-more-info-on-cell-phone-tracking-police-authors/

# # # #

You are being tracked-the National Vehicle Location Service

Kaye Beach

April 1, 2012

You know what would really be disturbing?  If all of the ALPR (Automatic License Plate Recognition) tag scanning cameras (both public and private) were taking all of the millions of tags that they were capturing indiscriminately and uploading them into a searchable,  central database.  Remember that ALPR systems not only collect the tag number of the vehicle but also the exact time and location of the vehicle.  Now THAT would be very disturbing!    We could effectively be tracked wherever we go.

As a Los Angeles Police Department Chief of Detectives explained, “the real value” of ALPR “comes from the long-term investigative uses of being able to track [all] vehicles—where they’ve been and what they’ve been doing.” http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1956787

Well, they ARE doing it.  Want to see how many?

National LPR database counter

What is NVLS?

NVLS stands for National Vehicle Location Service and is a service delivered in conjunction with National Vehicle Service – NVS (http://www.nvsliens.org/) to LEA’s via the NLETS messaging system. The LPR data delivered as part of the NVLS web portal comes from a nationwide LPR data repository managed by Vigilant Video containing both private and publicly gathered LPR data.

Read more
Take a look at Vigilant Video’s PowerPoint;

NVLS_Tier_I_R1

Naturally, the first I heard of it was through the International Association of Chiefs of Police in their agenda for what I call The IACP’s Big Brother Fest 2010. (They have one every year)  If you are feeling brave,  take a look for yourself.   Forewarned is forearmed.

Here is a great article about Vigilant Video’s incredible new service.

Private company hoarding license-plate data on US drivers

January 12, 2012 | G.W. Schulz

Capitalizing on one of the fastest-growing trends in law enforcement, a private California-based company has compiled a database bulging with more than 550 million license-plate records on both innocent and criminal drivers that can be searched by police.

The technology has raised alarms among civil libertarians, who say it threatens the privacy of drivers. It’s also evidence that 21st-century technology may be evolving too quickly for the courts and public opinion to keep up.

. . .Meanwhile, police around the country have been affixing high-tech scanners to the exterior of their patrol cars, snapping a picture of every passing license plate and automatically comparing them to databases of outstanding warrants, stolen cars and wanted bank robbers.

The units work by sounding an in-car alert if the scanner comes across a license plate of interest to police, whereas before, patrol officers generally needed some reason to take an interest in the vehicle, like a traffic violation.

But when a license plate is scanned, the driver’s geographic location is also recorded and saved, along with the date and time, each of which amounts to a record or data point. Such data collection occurs regardless of whether the driver is a wanted criminal, and the vast majority are not.

While privacy rules restrict what police can do with their own databases, Vigilant Video, headquartered in Livermore, Calif., offers a loophole. It’s a private business not required to operate by those same rules.

Read More

Intelligence Led Policing and Fusion Centers: How the IACP Helped the USA to Cross the Rubicon

Kaye Beach

Jan 12, 2011

Part I

This is part one of a long dissertation on fusion centers.   This segment mostly deals with the ideology of intelligence led policing and the beginnings of fusion centers which I think is critical to understanding the threats to our freedoms posed by them.

Fusion Centers and Intelligence Led Policing –A New Paradigm

Fusion Centers are DATA FUSION CENTERS.

Fusion centers are really data fusion centers. The physical centers aren’t much to see because the real work happens in the computer networks.  Since 9 11, the US government has enthusiastically embraced the idea that by collecting, collating and sharing massive amounts information about all of us, criminals and terrorists can be identified preemptively.

The principal role of the fusion center is to compile, analyze, and disseminate criminal/terrorist information and intelligence and other information (including, but not limited to, threat, public safety, law enforcement, public health, social services, and public works) to support efforts to anticipate, identify, prevent, and/or monitor criminal/terrorist activity.   Source http://www.scribd.com/doc/19251638/Fusion-Center-Guidelines-Law-Enforcement

Would you be surprised to know that public schools are one of the data sources for fusion center? How about health and medical information?

This is what fusion centers do, they collect and share information.  This is supposed to help us to catch terrorists or criminals but it is also a darn good method to control the masses.  Think about it-large data sets are prerequisite for any effective social control.  That is true no matter whether it was 100 years ago or today.

Fusion centers were largely funded by the federal government and they took off beginning in the mid 2000’s.  As of 2011, there are officially 73 fusion centers in the US and each state has at least one.  http://www.dhs.gov/files/programs/gc_1301685827335.shtm

The International Association of Chiefs of Police

The not-so-fabulous idea of fusion centers has been driven, hell-bent-for-leather by the International Association of Chiefs of Police or IACP for short. They can’t take all the credit for them but if you start poking around you will find the same thing I have, that the IACP gets lots of the credit.  Why is this important?  Number one, The IACP is a non-governmental organization.  Want to know more about them?  Try filing a Freedom of Information Act request.  You won’t get anything because as a non-governmental organization they aren’t accountable for squat.  Problem number two, the IACP is an international organization. And if there is not enough wrong with a non-governmental, international organization driving policy that represents a marked departure from long established American ideals (such as the presumption of innocence) this NGO was granted Consultative Status by the United Nations in 1974 (pg. 71). link  As I have said many times before, I am sure the UN is a swell organization but policy that is otherwise accepted internationally often run afoul of cherished precepts established by the US Constitution.

“. . .unprecedented initiatives have been undertaken to reengineer the law enforcement intelligence function.” 2004   link

And if you still don’t see a problem, wait till you see what the IACP thinks about the Second Amendment.

In March 2002, a year before the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, the International Association of Chiefs of Police called for a national plan for sharing intelligence.  The recommendations of the IACP led to the drafting of a National Criminal Intelligence Sharing Plan in October 2003. This policy institutionalized Intelligence Led Policing nationwide.

The National Criminal Intelligence Sharing Plan, developed by Global in partnership with the IACP, is the first of its kind in this country — and promises to bring us closer to achieving the goal, expressed at your 2002 Summit, of “intelligence-led policing.” From The Police Chief, vol. 74, no. 4, April 2007

According to the National Criminal Intelligence Sharing Plan, criminal intelligence is “information compiled, analyzed, and/or disseminated in an effort to anticipate, prevent, or monitor criminal activity.”

I will be accused of being an incorrigible libertarian (as if this is a bad thing!) but I have to say it.  Here is where we really crossed the Rubicon. This national intelligence policy along with many others that have followed, have turned traditional policing on its head. If I didn’t feel so bad for us first, I’d really pity the cops. Civilian policing has necessarily been fairly tightly limited to reacting or responding to crimes.  The reason is that pesky constitution of ours and the presumption of innocence that is foundational to the sort of justice system the US claims to aspire to.

A quick rundown on the policy development of fusion centers from the Electronic Privacy Information Center–  In May 2004, the Department of Justice announced its progress in implementing the National Criminal Intelligence Sharing Plan. The announcement made public the decision to create a Criminal Intelligence Coordinating Council (CICC) that would be managed by Global. By December 2004, the push for a national Fusion Center initiative received a boost when the Department of Justice sponsored Global Infrastructure/Standards Working Group published A Framework for Justice Information Sharing: Service Oriented Architecture (SOA). States using local, state, and federal funds created information Fusion Centers. In August 2005, Global published the Fusion Center Guidelines.

All of the above named organizations are seeded with IACP members or are heavily influenced by the IACP or both.   For example;  “Global represents the IACP . . .This influential group works to address the many policy, privacy, connectivity, and jurisdictional issues that hamper effective justice information sharing.” –THE HONORABLE DEBORAH J. DANIELS, 2007

Intelligence Led Policing: A Turning Point in Policing in the US

Intelligence Led Policing is based on the UK’s National Intelligence Model.  The US and UK, while similar in many respects, nonetheless have one major difference that makes the implementation of Intelligence Led Policing in the US fraught with difficulty.  The US Constitution guarantees certain rights to the citizens of this nation that are not recognized by government of the UK.  Americans have a justified expectation that the government instituted to protect life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness will always afford due respect for the autonomy and privacy  of law abiding individuals.

Intelligence-Led Policing in the United States
Biot Report #474: November 02, 2007
United States domestic law enforcement authorities, like their counterparts in Great Britain, have moved to an ―intelligence-led policing paradigm, as described elsewhere. (1) The terrorist events of September 11, 2001 prompted a March 7-8, 2002, Summit in Alexandria, Virginia, of over 120 criminal intelligence experts from across the U.S., titled Criminal Intelligence Sharing: Overcoming Barriers to Enhance Domestic Security. Funded by the US government and organized by the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP), the Summit became a turning point in policing in the U.S. (2)

The 2002 IACP sponsored Summit participants examined closely the United Kingdom’s National Intelligence Model.  Read more or access document here; IACP Intelligence-Led-Policing-the-New-Paradigm 2007 111

Criminal Intelligence Sharing: Overcoming Barriers to Enhance Domestic Security

Intelligence-led policing is part of a larger trend of blurring the distinction between national security and domestic policing, or the state’s military and police functions.  This ‘blurring” is purposeful and deliberate.  Many policy watchers have been tracking the fast disintegration of boundaries separating government functions since 9 11 with dismay.  Most recently the issue has gained some attention with the passage of the NDAA which would allow the military to indefinitely detain terror suspects, including American citizens, without charge or trial.

Intelligence Led Policing is based on Utilitarian philosophy

The Intelligence-Led Policing (ILP) mission is to gather, analyze, and disseminate intelligence data, in an effort to thwart the next terrorist attack or prevent the commission of a major felony. In applying a utilitarian philosophy to prevention efforts, the “greatest good for the greatest number,” is to detect preoperational terrorist acts and prevent another 9/11.  –Thomas J. Martinelli, International Association of Chiefs of Police LINK

We often remind ourselves that it is better to let ten guilty men go free than to put one innocent in jail.  The Utilitarian’s think it is the other way around and now we are all guilty until proven otherwise.

Utilitarianism-Natural rights?  Nonsense on stilts!

Utilitarianism is a form of consequentialism, where punishment is forward-looking.  Justified by the ability to achieve future social benefits resulting in crime reduction, the moral worth of an action is determined by its outcome.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justice

In other words-The Ends Justifies the Means

Jeremy Bentham is one example of a famous Utilitarian philosopher.  Bentham lauded state power over citizens and referred to the idea of natural rights as “nonsense on stilts”

Bentham was  also the designer of the Panopticon which was an institutional total surveillance structure that was described by Bentham as “a new mode of obtaining power of mind over mind, in a quantity hitherto without example” Link The Panopticon was designed to induce a perception of permanent visibility in its subjects for the purpose of social control. “What matters” according the Jeremy Bentham, “is that he knows himself to be observed”

Intelligence Led Policing is based upon collecting, sharing and analysis of information.   High tech surveillance devices and information sharing across all levels of government without regard to jurisdiction are two key features of Intelligence Led Policing and this school of thought is central to the functioning of state fusion centers.

The Panopticon and Intelligence Led Policing have a lot in common;

Intelligence-led policing is future focus in Rochester, 2010

“You’re less likely to do something (wrong) if you think somebody’s watching,” McAleer said. Or even, maybe , foreseeing. Computerized analysis of crime data might give officers a lead on where to be to prevent crimes.. . . “This is the direction of policing in this country,” he said. Read more

Welcome to “The New Paradigm”

The IACP has been the tip of the spear in ushering in “The New Paradigm” (as Intelligence Led Policing is often referred to) in policing and national security.  Fusion Centers are part and parcel of this New Paradigm.

The New Paradigm according to the International Association of Chiefs of Police;

“. . . means that all the physical and conceptual walls associated with the modern, sovereign state—the walls that divide domestic from international, the police from the military, intelligence from law enforcement, war from peace, and crime from war—are coming down.” Source-THE NEW PARADIGM—MERGING LAW ENFORCEMENT AND COUNTERTERRORISM STRATEGIES Secure Cities 2006 http://www.scribd.com/doc/21970726/IACP-Intelligence-Led-Policing-2006-New-Paradigm

Intelligence Led Policing represents a profound philosophical shift in American policing.  The United States police have operated under individual rights oriented and evidence based form of policing for 200 years.  The New Paradigm requires collecting and analyzing massive amounts of data, not limited to criminals or suspects but about all us.   It is preemptive rather than reactive.  The New Paradigm wants our police forces to be part of the ever expanding intelligence apparatus.

If some subversive organization wanted to eradicate those infernal, constitutional sticking points that make harmonizing the USA into an internationalized system so awkward, it couldn’t do better than to set into motion a standardized, nationalized domestic surveillance and control construct based on preemptive, preventive, risk based, rather than rights based,  policing.

Oklahoma Cops Thoroughly Probed in Order to Serve

Kaye Beach

Feb 24, 2011

The modern surveillance state demands to know all.   It never forgets,  never forgives.

The police background checks are already quite  thorough.   Is it ok to demand access to every nook and cranny of someones life because they want to be an law enforcement officer?  How about an Paramedic, a letter carrier?

Oklahoma police department wants prospective officers Facebook passwords as part of background check

The Norman, Oklahoma Police Department wants prospective officers to turn over their Facebook passwords as part of a background check for the job. “We’re actually hiring based on the quality of a person and you judge that through a variety of tools including a background investigation that talks to previous employers to friends to relatives to neighbors and up to and including their Facebook account,” said Captain Tom Easley from the Norman Oklahoma Police Department.

Read More

My first thought?  Smells like theInternational Association of Chiefs of Police. This international association operates under the code of ethics of an international body.  We have a Constitution in our country.  This is a problem.

The IACP appears to have quite a lot of power and influence at the DOJ all the way down to city police departments. They have been responsible for some of the most anti-american justice and policing policy that has besieged us since 9 11 when “everything changed”

The International Association of Chiefs of Police and the New Paradigm of Policing2

Yes. Our subversive friends at the IACP are pushing this hard.  Its called “Cybervetting”

In the opinion of the IACP

“The Internet is merely a new source to identify and collect information about people’s behavior.”

On December 30, 2010 the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) released a report on their yearlong study of police cybervetting policy, “Developing a Cybervetting Strategy for Law Enforcement.” The report was a collaborative effort by the IACP and the Defense Personnel Security Research Center (PERSEREC).  Read More

Police recruits screened for digital dirt on Facebook, etc.

Updated 11/12/2010

Law enforcement agencies are digging deep into the social media accounts of applicants, requesting that candidates sign waivers allowing investigators access to their Facebook, MySpace, YouTube, Twitter and other personal spaces.

Some agencies are demanding that applicants provide private passwords, Internet pseudonyms, text messages and e-mail logs as part of an expanding vetting process for public safety jobs.

Read more

City jobs too-

If you’re planning to apply for a job with the city of Bozeman, Mont., be prepared to hand over much more than your references and resume.

The Rocky Mountain city instructs all job applicants to divulge their user names and passwords for “any Internet-based chat rooms, social clubs or forums, to include, but not limited to: Facebook, Google, Yahoo, YouTube.com, MySpace, etc.”

People that seek to avoid intrusive practices like giving up your biometrics for the “privilege” of driving or your 4th Amendment rights  to fly will soon find thier world getting very small.

I  refused to allow a digital (biometric) facial image capture at my doctors office this week and was informed that this might indeed be required in order for me to get my examination.

Upon checking further the receptionist found that it was not required-yet anyways.  I guess paying a doctor with my own money for an appointment is soon to become a “privilege” as well.  Yes.  We will all encounter greater and greater demands from us for access to all sorts of things.  Things like buying, selling or traveling.   In fact, you can bet on it.

“If You See Something, Say Something” Re-Branding the Brown Shirts



Kaye Beach

Feb 17, 2010

Think the comparison is extreme? It’s your call.

DHS expands ‘see something, say something’ campaign to fusion centers

Sept 15, 2010

Read More Here

DHS Expands If You See Something Say Something Campaign

Nov. 15, 2010

Read More Here

Secretary Napolitano Announces Expansion of “If You See Something, Say Something” Campaign to Walmart Stores Across the Nation

Release Date: December 6, 2010

Read More Here

If You See Something Say Something Expands To Federal Buildings

Dec 8, 2010

Read More Here

Secretary Napolitano Announces “If You See Something, Say Something™” Campaign Partnership with NBA

Release Date: February 15, 2011

Read more Here

When the snitching starts getting in your face at
Wal-Mart, you kind of have to start paying attention.  I’m so glad I quit that great American institution back when they started chipping under drawers. Before the next Homeland Security outrage turns our attention away from Ms. Napolitano’s wally-world endeavor, I’d like to take a little peek behind the curtain.

Where did “If You See Something, Say Something” come from?


See Something, Say Something is just a slogan for a much broader project– Suspicious Activity Reporting or SAR.

What is a SAR?

Suspicious Activity Reporting (SAR) is the process of documenting the observation of behavior that may be indicative of intelligence gathering or pre-operational planning related to terrorism, criminal, or other illicit intentions.

Nationwide SAR Initiative (NSI)

Integrates state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies’ SAR processes into a nationwide standardized and institutionalized effort

More

The program is tied into the Fusion Centers’ Nationwide SAR Initiative (NSI)


The Fusion Center Guidelines states that, “nontraditional collectors of intelligence, such as public safety entities and private sector organizations” will ‘fused’ with law enforcement data” (formerly known as “criminal justice information” which indicated correctly that “law enforcement data” should be concerned with  legitimate criminal investigations)

“The Nationwide Suspicious Activity Reporting (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. . .” (Emphasis mine)

This is NOT what law enforcement has been doing for years! Remember “reasonable suspicion“? How about “probable cause”?

Many, many laws and policies have been changed. It used to be that only legitimate criminals and suspects were permitted to be entered into a system of criminal records. The reason for this is obvious.

The Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs (OJP) in 1993 explained the reason very well.

“Because criminal intelligence information is both conjectural and subjective in nature, may be widely disseminated through the interagency exchange of information and cannot be accessed by criminal suspects to verify that the information is accurate and complete, the protections and limitations set forth in the regulation are necessary to protect the privacy interests of the subjects and potential suspects of a criminal intelligence system.” (Emphasis mine)

Things have changed.

The goal is information sharing across all jurisdictions, inter agency, interstate, international, public-private.  This goal is not limited to Fusion Centers or policing, it is ALL information.

Welcome to the ISE!


ISE stands for “Information Sharing Environment”

“The mission of the ISE is to improve the management, discovery, fusing, sharing, delivery of, and collaboration around terrorism-related information to enhance national security. . .”

Partners in the ISE

“The ISE is a partnership of five primary communities—Defense, Intelligence, Homeland Security, Foreign Affairs, and Law Enforcement”. . .These communities, moreover, cut across all levels of government in our federal system, involving state, local, and tribal partners as well as the private sector and international partners. . .”

The Program Manager of the ISE says;

“The scope of the ISE is best described in terms of end-to-end counterterrorism and homeland security mission processes—such as watchlisting, screening, and suspicious activity reporting—along with supporting core capabilities and enablers.”

Of course a partnership like this is too good to limit to simply terrorism.

“Key to progress in building the ISE, has been a relentless focus on identifying, integrating, and sharing best practices. Broad adoption of best practices raises confidence, lowers risk, and accelerates adoption, use, and reuse resulting in a strong return on investment by mission partners. In particular, the adoption of best practices has utility beyond the terrorism information sharing mission, extending both across complementary missions and into new mission areas unrelated to terrorism.” (Emphasis mine) LINK

America, we are now operating under a New Paradigm.


Here is another peep into the “New Paradigm”


Vision 2015

The Vision is “A Globally Networked and Integrated Intelligence Enterprise”

Enterprise is a buzzword being used throughout government these days. I don’t know about you, but the word “enterprise” brings to mind business and profit for me, not government.

Now the UK got the jump on plastering creepy Orwellian eyes posters all over their public transit centers.  In 2002 UK travelers got treated to these uber-spooky ads


Our government has many new policies that few are aware of but campaigns like “If You See Something, Say Something” have many wondering just what the heck is going on.

SAR (Suspicious Activity Reporting) is a pervasive, nationwide snitching program modeled on LAPD’s Special Order #11.

LAPD Special Order #11 was a Los Angeles Police Department order that compels LAPD officers to begin reporting “suspicious behaviors” to create a stream of “intelligence” about a host of everyday activities that will be fed to the local fusion center.

LAPD Special Order #11, dated March 5, 2008, states that it is the policy of the LAPD to “gather, record, and analyze information of a criminal or non-criminal nature, that could indicate activity or intentions related to either foreign or domestic terrorism,” and includes a list of 65 behaviors LAPD officers “shall” report.

The list includes such innocuous, legal activities as:

– taking measurements

– using binoculars

–  taking pictures or video footage “with no apparent esthetic value”

– abandoning vehicle

– drawing diagrams

– taking notes

– espousing extremist views

Read More about the SARs initiative

But what is responsible for this upending of the presumption of innocence in our country?

There is a connection between the creepy “UK Secure Beneath the Watchful Eyes” and the US’s new snitch mandates.

Intelligence Led Policing or ILP

The ILP strategy was first developed in the United Kingdom and then flourished in Australia. . .  (What do those two countries have in common?)

What or Who has been the driver behind COPS and Intelligence Led Policing?


WHEREAS, the IACP recognizes that in the aftermath of the September 11th atrocities, there is a need to address the deficiencies that exist in this country in the collection, analysis and dissemination of Criminal Intelligence; and

WHEREAS, the Executive Committee of the IACP recognized the need to address these deficiencies and to ensure that state and local law enforcement is involved in the Intelligence process; and

WHEREAS, at the direction of the IACP Executive Board, the Police Investigative Operations Committee convened the IACP Criminal Intelligence Sharing Summit in March of 2002; and

WHEREAS, the findings of that Summit, issued in a report in August of 2002, led to the creation of the Global Intelligence Working Group, which is a Federal Advisory Committee as defined under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA); and

WHEREAS, the Global Intelligence Working Group has created the National Criminal Intelligence Sharing Plan, a plan which is consistent with the IACP Summit Report; now, therefore, be it

RESOLVED, that the IACP will strongly support the National Criminal Intelligence Sharing Plan as a valuable tool to remedy the deficiencies in the existing methods of collecting, analyzing and disseminating criminal intelligence, that the IACP encourages all law enforcement to utilize this tool in creating and/or bettering its efforts in the area of Criminal Intelligence, and that the Federal Government also support these efforts.
LINK

IACP Resolutions 2002 – 2010

Others have noted the conspicuous placing of new policy that is contrary to our American form of government that was charged with protecting our legal and natural rights first and foremost.

From 2003;

Big Brother Gets Bigger: Domestic Spying & the Global Intelligence Working Group

by Michelle J. Kinnucan

With virtually no media coverage or public scrutiny, a major reorganization of the US domestic law enforcement intelligence apparatus is well underway and, in fact, is partially completed.

. . . A month after September 11, 2001, the Investigative Operations Committee of the International Association of Chiefs of Police recommended that its leadership convene an Intelligence Sharing Summit in March 2002, described above. Summit participants examined closely the 2002 United Kingdom’s National Intelligence Model. (Intelligence Led Policing)
(Emphasis mine)

The primary outcome of the Summit was creation of the Global Intelligence Working Group, which comprised approximately 30 intelligence professionals. This group developed the National Criminal Intelligence Sharing Plan.

. . .The Summit proceedings were compiled by the IACP in a report entitled, Criminal Intelligence Sharing: A National Plan for Intelligence-Led Policing at the Local, State and Federal Levels Recommendations from the IACP Intelligence Summit (IACP Report). The Summit and IACP Report were both partially funded by the DOJ.

. . .The GIWGs intelligence reorganization effort is linked to the Homeland Security Act, but extends far beyond concerns about terrorism. (Emphasis mine)

A main selling point for the greater use of local police in domestic intelligence is the omnivorous spying potential of the widely adopted Community Oriented Policing Services or COPS model. The IACP Report asserts, It is time to maximize the potential for community policing efforts to serve as a gateway of locally based information to prevent terrorism, and all other crimes, through the timely transfer of critical information from citizens to their local police agency and then across the intelligence continuum.

Read the entire article

The 2001 IACP Report states that;

“that the real need is to share all – not just terrorism-related – criminal intelligence”

The Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) was established in 1994. You may remember the COPS program was supposed to hire 100,000 new police officers around the country. The COPS program has received incredible support and funding from the Obama administration.

Niki Raapana gives us this interesting bit of COPS history;

In the spring of 1999, the City of Seattle began working with COPS to write sustainable development visions for all 37 neighborhoods.

Planning groups followed the guidelines laid out in the WA State Growth Management Act of 1990 combined with suggestions recommended at the 1992 Earth Summit and advisors from COPS.

COMPASS was a COPS creation that expanded the GIS (Geographic Information System) database.

Niki Raapana writes;

One of the core elements of the COMPASS initiative is the creation of a data infrastructure which contains information from a variety of sources. These data will include extant social indicator data (e.g., employment statistics; housing information; land use data; school data; hospital records; asset mapping) and a host of safety information (e.g., incident-based crime data; arrest statistics; calls for service; court and corrections data; victimization surveys; and fear of crime data).”

Read More-“Join the Quiet Revolution” by Niki Raapana

In a 2008 interview then COPS director, Carl Peed talks about the expansion of Community Oriented Policing after 9-11;

“A few months after September 11, the COPS Office funded the International Association of Chiefs of Police to hold a Criminal Intelligence Sharing Summit which led to the National Criminal Intelligence Sharing Plan. Five years later, we held another summit to discuss the progress made and to set the course for the future.”

The International Association of Chiefs of Police with their distinctly utilitarian bent as detestable as it is should not be the focus of outrage though. (Utilitarianism embodies the “the ends justify the means” school of thought) There are an untold number of organizations operating all across our country and meeting with great success in their goals of subverting our Constitution. That they would try is no surprise to anyone. What is astounding is that we have permitted and even embraced their aims.

If we want to restore our country it will be up to us to demand that our representatives stop delegating the authority granted by us over to unaccountable, unelected bureaucrats.

We will have to teach ourselves what is not being taught in our schools and universities-The US Constitution and our Bill of Rights.

We have to know both our legal
and natural rights so that we can demand the appropriate restraint.

Big Brother is ALL Business

Is Lockheed Martin Shadowing You?

William D. Hartung

How a Giant Weapons Maker Became the New Big Brother

Have you noticed that Lockheed Martin, the giant weapons corporation, is shadowing you?  No?  Then you haven’t been paying much attention.  Let me put it this way: If you have a life, Lockheed Martin is likely a part of it.

True, Lockheed Martin doesn’t actually run the U.S. government, but sometimes it seems as if it might as well.  After all, it received $36 billion in government contracts in 2008 alone, more than any company in history.  It now does work for more than two dozen government agencies from the Department of Defense and the Department of Energy to the Department of Agriculture and the Environmental Protection Agency.  It’s involved in surveillance and information processing for the CIA, the FBI, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), the National Security Agency (NSA), the Pentagon, the Census Bureau, and the Postal Service.

. . .A For-Profit Government-in-the-Making

If you want to feel a tad more intimidated, consider Lockheed Martin’s sheer size for a moment. After all, the company receives one of every 14 dollars doled out by the Pentagon. In fact, its government contracts, thought about another way, amount to a “Lockheed Martin tax” of $260 per taxpaying household in the United States, and no weapons contractor has more power or money to wield to defend its turf. It spent $12 million on congressional lobbying and campaign contributions in 2009 alone.

Not surprisingly, it’s the top contributor to the incoming House Armed Services Committee chairman, Republican Howard P. “Buck” McKeon of California, giving more than $50,000 in the most recent election cycle. It also tops the list of donors to Sen. Daniel Inouye (D-HI), the powerful chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, and the self-described “#1 earmarks guy in the U.S. Congress.”

Add to all that its 140,000 employees and its claim to have facilities in 46 states, and the scale of its clout starts to become clearer.  While the bulk of its influence-peddling activities may be perfectly legal, the company also has quite a track record when it comes to law-breaking: it ranks number one on the “contractor misconduct” database maintained by the Project on Government Oversight, a Washington-DC-based watchdog group.

Read More

 

Dec 9, 2010

Lockheed Martin Gives Gift of Support to International Association of Chiefs of Police Foundation

“Lockheed Martin has been a driving force on our board and a leader in our fundraising efforts,” said Chief Michael Carroll, Chief of the West Goshen Township, Pennsylvania Police Department and Chairman of the IACP Foundation. “Their tremendous philanthropic dedication to Foundation programs and initiatives is an outstanding example of truly committed corporate citizenship”

Hera’s an oldie but a goodie!

2008

Lockheed wins $1 billion FBI biometric contract

FBI awards Lockheed Martin a 10-year contract to design, develop, test, and deploy a next-generation biometrics-based identification system

Miami-Dade police buy drones

Jan 8, 2010

I’ve been waiting for this one.

How did I know?

The IACP (International Association of Chiefs of Police) is my always-reliable crystal ball for predicting police state outrages upon America.

“There is an immediate need by state and local public safety personnel for unmanned aerial systems“– Donald Shinnamon, head of the aviation committee for the International Association of Chiefs of Police

Source:CNET News August 9, 2007  Police agencies push for drone sky patrols

Intelligence-Led Policing in the United States
Biot Report #474:

November 02, 2007
United States domestic law enforcement authorities, like their counterparts in Great Britain, have moved to an ―intelligence-led policing paradigm, as described elsewhere. (1) The terrorist events of September 11, 2001 prompted a March 7-8, 2002, Summit in Alexandria, Virginia, of over 120 criminal intelligence experts from across the U.S., titled Criminal Intelligence Sharing: Overcoming Barriers to Enhance Domestic Security. Funded by the US government and organized by the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP), the Summit became a turning point in policing in the U.S. (2)

Read more or access document here; IACP Intelligence-Led-Policing-the-New-Paradigm 2007 111

Miami-Dade police buy drones

Miami New Times News

By Tim Elfrink Thursday, Dec 9 2010

In places such as Kabul, Gaza, and Baghdad, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) hovering over homes, following suspects, and tracking enemies of the state are a daily reality.

So where are the high-tech drones buzzing to next? Miami-Dade County, natch!

The Miami-Dade Police Department is poised to become the first large metro force using drones in its aerial missions. The department finalized a deal to buy a drone called T-Hawk from defense firm Honeywell and officially applied for permission from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) last month to begin flying it around the county.

What’s not clear is how cops will sort out the raft of thorny privacy questions hovering around plans for using this powerful, new eye in the sky.

“At this point, it doesn’t really matter if you’re against this technology, because it’s coming,” says P. W. Singer, author of Wired for War and an expert on drones. “The precedent that is set in Miami could be huge.”

Read More

I guess the UK was getting ahead of us..

Police Drone “Air Robot” Leads to Arrest in UK

and this one…

Jan. 23, 2010 UK Police Will Use Spy Drones To Monitor Population

Police in the UK are planning to use unmanned spy drones, controversially deployed in Afghanistan, for the “routine” monitoring of antisocial motorists, protesters, agricultural thieves and fly-tippers, in a significant expansion of covert state surveillance. more

Our “New Paradigm” in policing was imported via the IACP from the  Kent police in the UK

If you do any looking into the Kent police, you might find a disturbing focus on “anti-social” behavior.

The IACP explains-

Intelligence-Led Policing

The Intelligence-Led Policing (ILP) mission is to gather, analyze, and disseminate intelligence data, in an effort to thwart the next terrorist attack or prevent the commission of a major felony. In applying a utilitarian philosophy to prevention efforts, the “greatest good for the greatest number,” is to detect preoperational terrorist acts and prevent another 9/11. Read more subversive tripe from the IACP

“In my college years, Utilitarianism was described as one of the most destructive philosophies ever constructed against the principles of Natural Law and the Rights of Man. Utilitarian followers believed all rights are granted by the government, since history shows governments have the power to take all rights away.”– Ronald Glenn  Source: Communitarianism, Anyone?  February 22, 2010 by Ronald Glenn