OIG Hotline investigators, my understanding is that the three major credit unions. Equifax, TransUnion and Experian, are all signatory to Infragard.
In a circumstance such as mine, as an FBI whistleblower, the participation of the major credit unions in "watchdog" activities prompted by the FBI and compensated by Infragard represents a substantive obstacle.
Why are the impediments daunting, given FBI access to these organizations' data?
My husband and I have been threatened by FBI affiliates with online identity theft if I do not comply with FBI demands for my silence over the agency's engagement in knowingly falsified law enforcement reporting against law-abiding American citizens.
Identity theft can involve not just defamation, but also devastating financial harms toward those targeted. If a "target's" identity has been appropriated in the commission of crimes or fraud online, his or her personal credit access can be rescinded. If a "target's" identity has been appropriated in accessing large lines of credit or loans, he or she can be impoverished.
Far right factions of the FBI have the capacity and the reach to compensate third parties for precisely this sort of predation toward law-abiding "targets of interest."
Under ordinary circumstances, a law-abiding American citizen would be able to place a fraud alert, for a monthly subscription fee, on his or her account with Equifax, TransUnion, and/or Experian. Typically, this protection allows subscribers to be immediately notified of suspicious activity online utilizing their identities. In addition, it normally offers a $1,000,000 insurance policy against financial losses sustained as the result of online identity theft.
For "targets of interest," however, the circumstances are not "normal." If a "target" places a fraud alert on her credit report with Equifax, the company will begin combing all online sources for all information affiliated with her name, her social security number, her debts, her transactions, etc. It will also aggregate social media activity and communications purporting to be affiliated with her in any manner whatsoever.
When far right segments of the FBI have engaged in knowingly falsified law enforcement reporting against this particular "target," that falsified information will also, very likely, be aggregated from online sources by Equifax. Fake messaging, falsified emails, fake photos, AI-generated films bearing the likeness and name of a "target" -- all of this and more can be gathered by Equifax as representing their customer.
Later, given that Equifax is signatory to Infragard, the FBI can communicate with credit union personnel to direct the dissemination of false information about this "target of interest" in any manner the agency chooses.
In this way, the credit union can become an ongoing repository of disinformation about a law-abiding American citizen.
While the FBI has initially contracted for the false information from third parties, and contracted with third parties to place the information in certain locations online, it now contracts with Equifax to aggregate that information in one place and disseminate it on demand.
Equifax's "customer" believes she is subscribing to a service that will protect her from online identity theft, while in reality, Equifax's privacy policy allows the company to engage, at the direction of FBI personnel, in acts of repeated and ongoing defamation that are certain to have devastating effects on the life of the "target."
The "target," in trusting Equifax, has effectively signed away her privacy protections, not buttressed them.
And so we arrive at the question of how to proceed when the FBI has turned Equifax, TransUnion and Experian into tools of totalitarian control over the American electorate.
As an FBI whistleblower, I will simply observe that neither I nor my husband have, heretofore, experienced any problems with financial or credit predation associated with online identity theft. The occasional attempt by someone to extend a false charge on our credit cards has been easily rectified by our credit card companies.
If, after recent threats by FBI affiliates, we now experience serious financial losses due to online identity theft, the FBI will certainly be implicated in the crime.
The parallel concern of online impersonation by FBI affiliates in the perpetration of falsified law enforcement reporting remains yet more pressing. Can law-abiding Americans retain their right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness when far right FBI personnel are committing crimes online in the guise of "targets of interest"?
Unfortunately not.
Even so, harms to the reputations of law-abiding "targets of interest" should not be facilitated by Equifax, TransUnion, and Experian as extensions of totalitarian control over the American public.
Law-abiding Americans should retain their sovereignty over their names, their likenesses, their opinions and their conduct as these are represented in the public sphere. Falsehoods should not become a weapon used to ensure silence, obedience or complicity with corrupt factions of the far right within law enforcement agencies.
The threats of FBI personnel to "ruin" the lives of informants or "targets" if they do not comply with unethical demands should not be facilitated by the credit unions, which were formed with the ostensible goal of serving the public, not preying upon it.
Certainly, Equifax, TransUnion and Experian should not be in the business of silencing FBI whistleblowers for pay from Infragard.
At this time, my husband and I will not be subscribing to the credit unions' services due to the unique risks represented by their relationships to the FBI.
FBI Director Christopher Wray should not attempt to impoverish my family through contracting with online identity thieves to wreak havoc with my family's finances.
If he does, I will be identifying those harms in a public forum and with a persistence that knows no end.
I hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct.
Lane MacWilliams
No comments:
Post a Comment