FBI exploits female employees and took part in distribution of child pornography

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • AtTheMurph

    SHOOTER
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 18, 2013
    3,147
    113
    Just out of curiosity, has any attempt been made to verify this or are we just taking Russia's propaganda machine as fact now? RT is literally Russia's fake news machine, the modern equivalent of Pravda.
    You are free to read the actual justice report if you'd like rather than resorting to ad hominem attacks on the media outlet that published it.


    "The Issue
    During the course of our investigation, the OIG learned that SAs sometimes used photographs of young female support staff employees to pose as minor children or sex workers to entice sexual predators on various social media websites. These employees were not certified UCEs or certified OCEs. In the instances we reviewed in connection with the OIG investigation, the employees’ faces were blurred and the employees were clothed. However, the SA who was the subject of the OIG’s investigation did not document which employees were used, obtain written consent from the employees, document the websites on which the photographs were posted, or document when the photographs were posted. The SA said he was “fishing” on social media sites but not recording which sites he used. The SA did not inform the support staff employees’ supervisors that the employees were involved in UC operations, and the SA advised the support staff employees who provided photographs to not tell anyone, including their supervisors, about the UC operations. Both the SA and the SA’s supervisor told the OIG that they could not produce any documentation regarding how the photographs were obtained or used. Additionally, the FBI had no documentation or information regarding whether the photographs still appear on the websites or how long the photographs appeared on the websites, during which time the photographs could have been—and potentially could still be— downloaded, copied, or further disseminated. The OIG believes that this conduct poses potential adverse consequences for non-UCE/OCE employees participating in UC operations, including potentially placing them in danger of becoming the victims of criminal offenses."
     

    BehindBlueI's

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    29   0   0
    Oct 3, 2012
    25,897
    113
    You are free to read the actual justice report if you'd like rather than resorting to ad hominem attacks on the media outlet that published it.

    It's not "ad hominem" if it's fact, and it is. RT is Russia's state media and is the spiritual successor of Pravda. Their reason to exist is to spread pro-Russian propaganda and to spin or create news that paints Russia favorably and weakens other world players.

    For example "The FBI did..." instead of "An FBI agent, in violation of FBI policies did..."

    Which is true if you read the report? Which is designed to further attack the credibility of the institutions of our country, sow dissent, etc?
     

    rooster

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    Mar 4, 2010
    3,306
    113
    Indianapolis
    RT is Russia's state media and is the spiritual successor of Pravda. Their reason to exist is to spread pro-Russian propaganda and to spin or create news that paints Russia favorably and weakens other world players.
    And CNN/Fox/msnbc/ect are all propaganda tools of the current government. Don’t believe it? Watch some of the White House press briefings.

    When the only places that will publish information not favorable to the current administration are foreign news sources then that’s what I watch.

    and yes I vetted it elsewhere prior to posting but I chose this particular article because it brought the two instances together in one piece. Though separate incidents together they speak a culture and organization that needs to be cleaned out top to bottom.
     

    BehindBlueI's

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    29   0   0
    Oct 3, 2012
    25,897
    113
    And CNN/Fox/msnbc/ect are all propaganda tools of the current government.

    CNN, etc. definitely have their own spins but are not state media. They spread the ideology of their internal leadership and economic incentive. No different than Civil War era media, just on a larger scale. But they don't answer to Biden and didn't answer to Trump, etc. and the US gov't doesn't fund or own them. RT is literally part of Russia's state media, owned by and funded by the Russian government.
     

    HoughMade

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 24, 2012
    35,757
    149
    Valparaiso
    Offering someone the chance to obtain what they believe to be child porn is not entrapment...and may not be a crime if they did obtain it.

    I see this more of trying to use this "tool" to figure out who's out there looking for the stuff.

    That being said, there's a way to do this that isn't exploitive of staff, or at least follows the proper procedures.

    ...and do the female staffers believe they were exploited or is that someone else's opinion? It's very possible that they wanted to be part of the team bring down some creeps...but proper safeguards and procedures were not followed. Curious if they have a bunch of staffers who have learned to beat crows feet.
     

    JettaKnight

    Я з Україною
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Oct 13, 2010
    26,541
    113
    Fort Wayne
    TL\DR. So the FBI used some photos of hot young employees to catch kiddie diddlers and now those photos are out on the internet. Am I getting this right?

    Seems like there's worse things than that...


    And are American "patriots" now trying to say that Russian state-owned media is a good information source? :n00b:
     

    printcraft

    INGO Clown
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    16   0   0
    Feb 14, 2008
    39,043
    113
    Uranus
    CNN, etc. definitely have their own spins but are not state media. They spread the ideology of their internal leadership and economic incentive. No different than Civil War era media, just on a larger scale. But they don't answer to Biden and didn't answer to Trump, etc. and the US gov't doesn't fund or own them. RT is literally part of Russia's state media, owned by and funded by the Russian government.

    I understand the distinction you are trying to make... but they are still a willing participant and operate in league with the left.
     

    BehindBlueI's

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    29   0   0
    Oct 3, 2012
    25,897
    113
    I understand the distinction you are trying to make... but they are still a willing participant and operate in league with the left.

    Maybe, but they do it on their own for their own reasons, not because they'll be arrested if they don't.

    Part of having freedom of the press is they are free to be biased.
     

    rooster

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    Mar 4, 2010
    3,306
    113
    Indianapolis
    On the subject of news sources, foreign and domestic, Yes they have a motive and bias against the US, but that motive and bias is what drives them to do real investigative journalism regarding stories not favorable to America.

    If we understand that bias while looking through them I see no harm in it. It’s no different than how you don’t watch Fox News for information critical of the Republican Party or expect CNN to bash the dems.

    Do you want to find out what Uncle Sam is really up to or do you want the sanitized version that fits the dem or R narrative?
     

    BehindBlueI's

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    29   0   0
    Oct 3, 2012
    25,897
    113
    If we understand that bias while looking through them I see no harm in it.

    Well, "Now, it seems certain elements of the Bureau have moved on to exploiting female employees as “bait” in yet another immoral subterfuge." is not really investigative journalism. It's narrative building. Look at how you titled this thread vs the reality of the situation.

    Fact: Female employees were photographed (clothed) and (with faces blurred) the photos were uploaded as basically fake profiles to get suspects to contact and solicit them.

    Is that immoral? Were they "exploited" or did they volunteer? The investigation that was linked only finds fault that they weren't properly set up as UC (undercovers), etc.

    Fact: The FBI busted "Playpen" but did not immediately take down the site. When cops identify a dope house, they tend to not shut it down immediately, they observe who will come and go and builds a case. I've watched robberies happen because that was how I was building a case against the serial robbers. Is that immoral?

    Results, per FBI, of Playpen:

    • At least 350 U.S.-based individuals arrested
    • 25 producers of child pornography prosecuted
    • 51 hands-on abusers prosecuted
    • 55 American children successfully identified or rescued
    • 548 international arrests, with 296 sexually abused children identified or rescued

    Was it more moral to immediately destroy it and not rescue some 350 children?

    Did you read any of that or look into it? Does "FBI takes over child porn server, rescues 350 children" put a different image in your head than "FBI distributes child porn"? The first is they are doing important work and saved children in the process. The second is those agents are a bunch of perverts and the FBI sucks, which is how this thread is titled. That's the harm.
     

    indyartisan

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    38   0   0
    Feb 2, 2010
    4,313
    113
    Hamilton Co.
    Who are the major shareholders of CNN?
    All of the mainstream media companies?
    Your food?
    Your pharmaceuticals?
    Your phone, computer and internet?
    Your bank?
    Car and truck manufacturing and the fuels they run on?
    Airlines?
    Basically every major corporation on the planet?
    The same names are always at the top of the list.
    Blackrock and Vanguard.
    Who are the biggest shareholders of Blackrock and Vanguard?
    Blackrock and Vanguard are.
    Who sets their policy?
    Who controls the narrative?
     

    BehindBlueI's

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    29   0   0
    Oct 3, 2012
    25,897
    113
    Who are the major shareholders of CNN?
    All of the mainstream media companies?
    Your food?
    Your pharmaceuticals?
    Your phone, computer and internet?
    Your bank?
    Car and truck manufacturing and the fuels they run on?
    Airlines?
    Basically every major corporation on the planet?
    The same names are always at the top of the list.
    Blackrock and Vanguard.
    Who are the biggest shareholders of Blackrock and Vanguard?
    Blackrock and Vanguard are.
    Who sets their policy?
    Who controls the narrative?

    Is this some illumnati thing?

    I mean, yeah Blackrock and Vanguard are going to "own" big chunks of pretty much any large publicly listed company, because combined they have something like 16 trillion dollars under management. Add in Charles Schwab and Fidelity and you're at something like 33 trillion dollars.

    They have giant mutual funds and ETFs that hold the stocks, and clients (Pension funds, 401ks, individual investors, etc.) buy shares, Vanguard doesn't "own" like you're presenting. That's how brokerage houses work.
     

    indyartisan

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    38   0   0
    Feb 2, 2010
    4,313
    113
    Hamilton Co.
    Is this some illumnati thing?

    I mean, yeah Blackrock and Vanguard are going to "own" big chunks of pretty much any large publicly listed company, because combined they have something like 16 trillion dollars under management. Add in Charles Schwab and Fidelity and you're at something like 33 trillion dollars.

    They have giant mutual funds and ETFs that hold the stocks, and clients (Pension funds, 401ks, individual investors, etc.) buy shares, Vanguard doesn't "own" like you're presenting. That's how brokerage houses work.
    You believe that they do not set the narrative of the MSM for their benefit?
     

    BehindBlueI's

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    29   0   0
    Oct 3, 2012
    25,897
    113
    You believe that they do not set the narrative of the MSM for their benefit?

    Do I think someone from vanguard goes to CNN and tells them what to air? No. But Vanguard and Fidelity mutual funds make up about half of my net worth (and maybe more depending on who my pension fund is investing in), so I'm probably in on it somehow.
     

    AtTheMurph

    SHOOTER
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 18, 2013
    3,147
    113
    It's not "ad hominem" if it's fact, and it is. RT is Russia's state media and is the spiritual successor of Pravda. Their reason to exist is to spread pro-Russian propaganda and to spin or create news that paints Russia favorably and weakens other world players.

    For example "The FBI did..." instead of "An FBI agent, in violation of FBI policies did..."

    Which is true if you read the report? Which is designed to further attack the credibility of the institutions of our country, sow dissent, etc?

    it is an ad hominem attack as you are calling into question the source rather than the actual reporting.

    An FBI employee acts on behalf of the FBI. You cannot disassociate the actions of employees and the employer, at least not in today's world were responsibility is institutional and not individual. If an FBI agent arrests you were you arrested by the individual agent or by the FBI? Who do you sue when you were arrested wrongly?
     
    Top Bottom