Seattle Times ‘outraged’ that FBI created fake story on bogus Times Web page to catch suspect

POSTED 8:29 PM, OCTOBER 27, 2014,

SEATTLE — The Seattle Times said Monday night it was “outraged” to learn that the FBI in Seattle created a fake news story on a bogus Seattle Times Web page to plant software in the computer of a bomb-threat suspect in order to track him down.

The FBI deception took place in 2007, according to documents obtained by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) in San Francisco.

The Times said the deception was publicized Monday when Christopher Soghoian, the principal technologist for the American Civil Liberties Union in Washington, D.C., revealed it on Twitter. Continue reading “Seattle Times ‘outraged’ that FBI created fake story on bogus Times Web page to catch suspect”

NSA mass collection of phone data is legal, federal judge rules

• Dragnet program deemed ‘controversial but lawful’

• Lawsuit brought by ACLU dismissed

NSA phone data collection deemed legal: full ruling

in Washington

theguardian.com,              Friday 27 December 2013 11.52 EST

Cell phone data records
Judge said the phone data-collection system could have helped investigators connect the dots before the 9/11 attacks. Photograph: Lucas Jackson /Reuters

A legal battle over the scope of US government surveillance took a turn in favour of the National Security Agency on Friday with a court opinion declaring that bulk collection of telephone data does not violate the constitution. Continue reading “NSA mass collection of phone data is legal, federal judge rules”

Over 700,000 people on US watch list: and once you get on, there’s no way off

Published time: December 02, 2013 20:59                                                                             

 A US Transportation Security Administration (TSA) agent checks the identification and boarding pass of a passenger as she passes through security in the terminal at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport in Arlington, Virginia (AFP Photo / Saul Loeb)

A US Transportation Security Administration (TSA) agent checks the identification and boarding pass of a passenger as she passes through security in the terminal at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport in Arlington, Virginia (AFP Photo / Saul Loeb)

The names of nearly three-quarters of a million individuals have been secretly added to watch lists administered by the United States government, but federal officials are adamant about keeping information about these rosters under wraps.

Continue reading “Over 700,000 people on US watch list: and once you get on, there’s no way off”

Top secret document reveals NSA spies on porn habits of suspected terrorists in bid to discredit them

  • Document  was revealed by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden
  • It shows  agency spied on suspected radicalizers to  harm their reputations
  • Civil liberties  campaigners have voiced concerns about the revelations
  • One says:  ‘NSA surveillance activities are  anything but narrowly focused’

By  Daily Mail Reporter

PUBLISHED: 04:50 EST, 27  November 2013 |  UPDATED: 05:58 EST, 27 November 2013

National Security Agency spies have been  tracking the online sexual activity of suspected terrorists in a bid to expose  them as hypocrites, it emerged today.

A top secret document revealed by NSA  whistleblower Edward Snowden shows the agency monitored suspected  radicalizers in a bid to harm their  reputations.

Six  targets, all Muslims, are identified as  ‘exemplars’ of how electronic  surveillance can be used to find ‘personal vulnerabilities’ to discredit  them.

The document revealed by Edward Snowdon says evidence of 'viewing sexually explicit material online' could call into question a radicaliser's devotion to the jihadist cause 

The document revealed by Edward Snowdon says evidence of  ‘viewing sexually explicit material online’ could call into question a  radicaliser’s devotion to the jihadist cause

 

The document says none of the six individuals targeted by the NSA is accused of being involved in terror plots and all are believed to currently reside outside the U.S. 

The document says none of the six individuals targeted  by the NSA is accused of being involved in terror plots and all are believed to  currently reside outside the U.S.

Continue reading “Top secret document reveals NSA spies on porn habits of suspected terrorists in bid to discredit them”

Since When Are Your Phone Calls Private, Goverment Lawyer Asks

By NICK DIVITO

MANHATTAN (CN) – Since Americans expect their phone companies to keep records of their calls, they have no basis to challenge the National Security Agency’s mass collection of that data, a lawyer for the government argued Friday.

Americans have “no reasonable expectation” to privacy when it comes to the telephone calls they make, Assistant Attorney General Stuart Delery said at a packed hearing in federal court.

“People assume that phone companies are recording phone numbers and how long the call lasted,” he said. “We know that because all of us get the bills with those details.”

U.S. District Judge William Pauley III is presiding over the trial stemming from the revelation of a then-classified court order that compelled Verizon to turn over domestic phone records for millions of Americans.

Former NSA contractor Edward Snowden leaked the document in June and has since received asylum from Russia.

Jameel Jaffer, deputy legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union, told the court that the dragnet spying program is an “abuse of the government’s investigative power.”

Continue reading “Since When Are Your Phone Calls Private, Goverment Lawyer Asks”

Government Told to Explain Need for Secrecy “But says it’s a Secret “

By JACK BOUBOUSHIAN

(CN) – The U.S. government must explain why a Feb. 19 order of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court cannot be released to the public, even in a redacted form, a FISC judge ruled.

In September 2013, Judge F. Dennis Saylor IV, one of the 11 federal judges who sits on the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), ruled that the U.S. government must consider publicly releasing classified opinions regarding the National Security Agency’s domestic spying program.

The ruling was issued in response to a complaint filed by the American Civil Liberties Union two years ago seeking the release of FISC opinions interpreting the government’s power to conduct surveillance related to terrorism under Section 215 of the Patriot Act.

Saylor noted the same day in another opinion that the “publication of FISC opinions relating to this provision would contribute to an informed debate.”

On this order, the government conducted a declassification review of a February 19, 2013 FISC opinion, and concluded Monday that, “after careful review of the opinion by senior intelligence officials and the U.S. Department of Justice, the Executive Branch has determined that the opinion should be withheld in full and a public version of the opinion cannot be provided.”

Continue reading “Government Told to Explain Need for Secrecy “But says it’s a Secret “”

Forced Decryption Fought as Self-Incrimination

 

By JACK BOUBOUSHIAN

 

(CN) – Forcing a criminal defendant to decrypt personal electronic data compels him to testify against himself in violation of the Fifth Amendment, two nonprofits said in a joint amicus brief.

The American Civil Liberties Union and Electronic Frontier Foundation filed an amicus brief in support of Leon Gelfgatt, whom the government seeks to compel to decrypt his own computers after law-enforcement personnel were unable to break the encryption themselves.

Gelfgatt, an attorney, was arrested in 2009 and charged with 17 counts of forgery connected to his alleged attempt at collecting $1.3 million from a mortgage-fraud scheme.

A superior court judge denied the government’s request, ruling that forcing Gelfgatt to decrypt the devices would amount to self-incrimination.

On appeal to the Massachusetts Supreme Court, the nonprofits urged the court to uphold the lower court’s ruling.

“Encrypting electronic data does not simply lock it up; it scrambles the data into an unreadable format. Likewise, decrypting data does not simply unlock it; rather, decryption transforms scrambled data into readable data,” the brief says. “Thus, as the Superior Court held, compelling someone to decrypt electronic data amounts to a command to explain the data. But, under the Fifth Amendment and article 12, that command is impermissible. The government cannot compel a defendant to turn unreadable data into data that can be used to put him in prison.” (Emphasis in original.)

The government’s assertion that requiring Gelfgatt to decrypt his devices would not “produce decrypted files” misunderstands what decryption does, according to the brief.

Prosecutors have promised not to look at Gelfgatt’s encryption key, which they admit is testimonial. But decryption is not, as the government claims, akin to entering the combination to a wall safe, the amici claim.

“Decryption is, instead, an act of translation and transformation,” the brief states. “Being compelled to decrypt a computer drive is like being forced to create, for the benefit of someone standing on the steps of the Boston Public Library, an English translation of every single library book written in Braille. … Similarly, decrypting electronic data does not simply unlock information. It creates a new, intelligible version of that information.” (Emphasis in original.)

The Superior Court motion judge, Justice Raymond Brassard, compared compelled decryption to finding documents 50 years ago that appear to be written in code or drawings that have a hidden meaning.

“Could the government, even though it had an interview with the defendant who acknowledged, yes, that’s a code, yes those symbols have meaning, but I decline to provide them to you, could the government force a defendant to provide such a code or such an explanation as to the meaning of drawings? I don’t think so,” Brassard said, in an opinion requested by the state.

The amici conclude: “Compelling a criminal defendant to decrypt electronic devices requires the defendant to use the contents of his mind – namely, his knowledge of a decryption key – to reassemble and unscramble information that can be used to incriminate him. For that reason, this court should hold that such compelled decryption implicates the privileges against self-incrimination guaranteed by article 12 and the Fifth Amendment.”

Cases such as these are taking root across the nation. The 11th Circuit linked forced decryption to Fifth Amendment violations in 2012, but a Milwaukee suspect was ordered to decrypt his computer earlier this year. A review of that order never came to be because the government ultimately figured out how to complete the decryption itself.

 

http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/11/01/62571.htm

Senator Dianne Feinstein claims eavesdropping on phone callls is not surveillance, nor is it protected under the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits unreasonable searches.

‘No phone call, no Internet transaction, isn’t recorded by the  NSA’: Edward  Snowden fires back at U.S. government surveillance denials

  • Senator  Dianne Feinstein claimed that the NSA’s phone-tracking is  benign
  • Whistle-blower Snowden said in a statement that it is  pervasive in nature

By  Ted Thornhill

PUBLISHED: 08:49 EST, 25  October 2013 |  UPDATED: 08:56 EST, 25 October 2013

Whistle-blower Edward Snowden has hit back at  claims by a U.S. government official that collating phone records is not  ‘surveillance’.

Senator Dianne Feinstein wrote in newspaper  recently that what the NSA is gathering is not protected under the Fourth  Amendment, which prohibits unreasonable searches.

She wrote in USA Today on Sunday: ‘The call-records  program is not surveillance. It does not collect the content of any  communication, nor do the records include names or locations.’

Statement: Snowden has said that every phone call and internet transaction made in America is logged
Statement: Snowden insisted that every phone call and  internet transaction made in America is logged
Dianne Feinstein has said that the NSA's phone call tracking does not breach the Fourth Amendment
Dianne Feinstein has said that the NSA’s phone call  tracking does not breach the Fourth Amendment

She added: ‘The NSA only collects the  type  of information found on a telephone bill: phone numbers of calls  placed and  received, the time of the calls and duration. The Supreme  Court has held this  “metadata” is not protected under the Fourth  Amendment.’

However Snowden, although he didn’t name the  lawmaker, clearly had her comments in mind when he gave a statement to the American Civil Liberties Union about phone  tracking.

He said: ‘In the last four months, we’ve  learned a lot about our government.

‘We’ve learned that the U.S. intelligence  community secretly built a system of pervasive surveillance. Today, no telephone  in America makes a call without leaving a record with the NSA. Today, no  internet transaction enters or leaves America without passing through the NSA’s  hands. Our representatives in Congress tell us this is not surveillance. They’re  wrong.’

He made the statement in support of a  demonstration against government privacy invasion taking place in Washington D.C  on Saturday.

His comment came as tensions mount between  Europe and America over the alleged monitoring of leaders’ phone  calls.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel called President Obama today to inquire about the claims (Merkel pictured in March) German Chancellor Angela Merkel has said that U.S.  spying on allies has shattered trust in President Obama’s administration (Merkel  pictured in March)

 

The National Security Agency has monitored  the phone conversations of at least 35 world leaders after being given their  numbers by an official in another government department, according to a  classified document leaked by Snowden.

The confidential memo reveals that senior  officials in ‘customer’ departments such the White House and the Pentagon were  encouraged to share their ‘Rolodexes’ of contact details with the  NSA.

The agency then added the phone numbers of  the foreign politicians to their surveillance systems and started to monitor  them.

According to the leaked document handed over  to The Guardian, one unnamed official handed  over 200 numbers – including those of at least 35 world leaders – none of whom  were named.

One of the leaders the NSA bugged was  allegedly German chancellor Angela Merkel, who accused the American government  on Wednesday of tapping her mobile phone, something the White House  denies.

European leaders united in anger Thursday as  they attended a summit overshadowed by the reports of the U.S. spying on its  allies.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2476731/Edward-Snowden-fires-U-S-government-surveillance-denials.html#ixzz2ikKjthlX Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Book by whistleblower at center of ‘Fast and Furious’ blocked by the ATF

 Published time: October 08, 2013 00:20 Edited time: October 09, 2013 09:47                                                                            

AFP Photo / Pedro PardoAFP Photo / Pedro Pardo

A book authored by an agent at the center of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives’ “Fast and Furious” gun running debacle has been rejected and barred from being published by the agency, citing concerns for morale.

Special Agent John Dodson, who became a whistleblower in 2011  when he approached Republican lawmakers in Congress with details  of a botched attempt by the ATF to allow sales of firearms in  order to build a case against Mexico’s powerful Sinaloa cartel,  has already penned a book on the saga, though it was unclear on  Monday whether it will ever see the light of day.

“This would have a negative impact on morale in the Phoenix  [field division] and would have a detremental [sic] effect on our  relationships with [the Drug Enforcement Administration] and  FBI,” the ATF’s rejection letter stated.

Current restrictions prevent federal employees from profiting  from “any source other than the government for teaching,  speaking or writing that relates to the employee’s official  duties,” ruling out the possibility for Dodson to cash in on  any book deal.

According to officials who spoke with the Washington Post, the  ATF is currently evaluating whether Dodson’s book divulges any   “law enforcement sensitive” information. Dodson could be  allowed to publish his book while receiving no monetary  compensation.

The American Civil Liberties Union, which is representing Dodson  on the matter, filed a protest on Monday with the ATF’s Deputy  Director Thomas Brandon over his agency’s efforts to block the  book’s publishing, citing a violation of Dodson’s constitutional  rights.

“It was Agent Dodson’s disclosures that helped bring the  operational failures at the Phoenix field division to light. As a  knowledgeable and informed ‘insider’ who was directly involved in  Operation Fast and Furious, Agent Dodson will add significantly  to the national conversation about gun policy,” writes the  ACLU.

Senator Charles Grassley and Representative Darrell Issa, two  Republicans who spearheaded a Congressional investigation into  the ATF’s “Fast and Furious” operation, have written a foreword  for Dodson’s book.

Responding to the ATF’s rejection of Dodson’s book, Grassley  noted that “this isn’t the first time somebody from the ATF  or another government agency has written a book.”

“Just because the ATF leadership doesn’t like the content of  the book doesn’t mean they should be able to prevent the author  from giving his side of the story,” adds Grassley.

Sen. Grassley, Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member, and  Rep. Issa, House Oversight and Government Reform Committee  Chairman, produced an expansive joint report on “Fast and  Furious” consisting of over 2,000 pages of dozens of  interviews and a review of more than 10,000 pages of documents.

That Congressional inquiry also led to accusations that the  Justice Department had withheld documents and denied access to  witnesses, which culminated in Attorney General Eric Holder being  held in contempt of Congress in June of 2012. The investigation  also led to the resignation of Arizona US Attorney Dennis Burke  and the reassignment of ATF acting director Kenneth Melson.

Dodson, who began to write his book last year, sought permission  for external employment allowing him to secure a publisher in  June, according to the Washington Times.

A manuscript was presented to Dodson’s superior in Washington in  May, and to an immediate superior in Arizona in July. According  to documents first reported by the Washington Times his request  was rejected first in Arizona in July, and backed by the ATF’s  head in that office four days later.

Testimony presented by Dodson of his first day of undercover work  in Phoenix was possibly some of the most embarrassing for the  ATF. While trailing a suspected gun runner who had just purchased  10 semiautomatic rifles from a Phoenix gun store, Dodson and  another agent sought permission to seize the guns, but were  rebuffed by superiors who hoped to instead trace the firearms  back to more significant figures within the Sinaloa drug cartel.

Dodson and some fellow ATF agents disagreed with what they  considered a large volume of arms being allowed to flow into  Mexico in the “gun walking” sting program. In one case,  two AK-47 semiautomatic rifles sold at a Phoenix gun store  monitored by the ATF were linked to the deadly Arizona shooting  of US Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry in December of 2010.

“Fast and Furious” was launched in the fall of 2009, at  which point the ATF estimated that 90 percent of firearms  recovered for tracing by Mexican authorities struggling to deal  with spiking cartel violence were originating in the US.

http://rt.com/usa/book-fast-and-furious-blocked-866/

 

AFI 36-2706, Equal Opportunity Program Military and Civilian ( DoD )

EEV: Originally a PDF document converted to word. Yes there is validation in the document that the colonist were considered extremist, as well as a Nationalism being en extremist ideology. It is by far an overly paranoid document, which can make anyone self conscious on how they dress or what music they listen too. It is actually pretty fun, yet somewhat disturbing to read.

 

 

 

INCIDENTS (EOTI) LESSON PLAN
PART I SYNOPSIS
INSTRUCTOR NAME:

 

 

INSTRUCTIONAL METHOD: Informal Lecture/Guided Discussion

LESSON EMPHASIS: Knowledge of general principles of an Equal Opportunity and Treatment Incident; to help students identify equal opportunity and treatment incidents (EOTIs) that are motivated by race, color, national origin, religion or sex.

STRATEGY: Students will understand all actions required for processing EOTIs. Through this lesson, students will recall the concepts of identifying, classifying, and analyzing, clarifying, and reporting EOTIs. As the lesson progresses, emphasis will be placed on the impact of EOTIs on the human relations climate.

REFERENCES:

1. AFI 36-2706, Equal Opportunity Program Military and Civilian

STUDENT INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIAL:

1. AFI 36-2706, Equal Opportunity Program Military and Civilian

2. AFSS Student disk containing applicable EOTI materials

AUDIOVISUAL AIDS AND EQUIPMENT: Projection Screen, PowerPoint Slide Presentation, Computer with appropriate software, Printer.

DEOMI
366 Tuskegee Airman Drive Patrick AFB, FL. 32925

LEARNING OBJECTIVES: (Cognitive) Given a lecture, students will recall the concepts of identifying, classifying, analyzing, clarifying, and reporting EOTIs. Given an informal lecture, students will recall facts relating to Equal Opportunity and Treatment Incidents, with no less than 70% accuracy on a multiple choice test.

TOPICS *Level of Learning MEASURE TIME
INTRODUCTION 5 Min
MP-I: EOTI DEFINITIONS/ELEMENTS (STS: 24.1, 24.2, 24.3)
K
CRT
25 Min
MP-II: EOTI CLARIFICATION PROCESS (STS: 24.4.1, 24.4.2, 24.4.3, 24.4.4,
24.4.5, 24.4.6)
K

CRT
20 Min
MP-III: CLOSING THE EOTI
(STS: 24.4.7) K CRT 5 Min
CONCLUSION 5 Min
TOTAL TIME: 1 Hr
* Breaks are subject to change and flow with classroom dynamics.
* Level of Learning = Knowledge (K); Comprehension (C); Application (A)

INCIDENTS LESSON PLAN PART II
LESSON DEVELOPMENT

INTRODUCTION

ATTENTION: (Slide #1)

MOTIVATION:

OVERVIEW: (Slide #2)

TRANSITION:

BODY

MP-I EOTI DEFINITION/ELEMENTS

LEVEL: K MEAS: CRT TIME:
25 Min

INSTRUCTIONAL GUIDANCE:
(Slide #3)
A. Definition:

EOTIs are distinctly different than unlawful discrimination or sexual harassment complaints and therefore have different processing procedures.

Instructor Note: Stress that for a complaint, there must be an actual complainant providing allegation(s) the EO office will clarify to determine “guilt” i.e. substantiate/unsubstantiated. In 99% of cases, an EOTI will not have a complainant. The EO office is only determining if the incident violates EO policy.

An EOTI is an overt, adverse act, occurring on or off base, directed toward an individual, group or institution which is motivated by, or has overtones based on race, color, national origin, religion or sex which has the potential to have a negative impact on the installation human relations climate. An EOTI may include subjects other than military members, retirees, or family members.

a. Incidents motivated by race, color, national origin, religion or sex are those in which the race, color, national origin, religion, or sex of those involved is perceived to have been a primary factor in its occurrence.
b. Incidents with overtones occur when race, color, national origin, religion or sex of those involved is perceived to have been a contributing factor in the occurrence or severity of the incident.
(Slide #4)
B. Elements:

Incidents may include, but are not limited to, the following elements:

a. The use of a slur(s) based on race, color, national origin, religion or sex (resulting in a physical/verbal altercation)
b. Vandalism/degrading graffiti
c. Hate group activity
d. Use and/or posting of discriminatory epithets, signs or symbols.
e. Sex offenses and other crimes are not EOTIs merely because the individuals are of different sexes, races, etc. The EO office must not report sexual offenses, to include sexual assaults, indecent exposure, obscene telephone calls, rape, child abuse, molestation or incest, as EOTIs. The EO office will immediately report sexual offenses and other

(Slide #5)

alleged crimes to Security Forces (SF) or Office of Special Investigations (OSI) for investigation and reporting through their respective systems.

EXAMPLE:

EOTI – Yes or No?

During trick or treating in base housing a Dependent Black male and a TSgt Black male were allegedly speeding. A SSgt White male yelled from his lawn for the men to “slow down.” The Dependent and TSgt left base housing and returned at a later time and made contact with the SSgt. The TSgt and SSgt began to discuss the previous situation at which time the dependent Black male reached over the TSgt and punched the SSgt in the face. The dependent Black male was apprehended by the SF personnel and transported to the law enforcement desk and cited.

QUESTION: What makes this an EOTI? Nothing. This would be considered an assault but there is no racial motivation based on the scenario.

QUESTION: What if the dependent Black male called the SSgt a disparaging term before hitting him? This may have then been classified as an EOTI as it would be race related i.e. overtones.
(Slide #6-8)
C. EOTI Classifications

EOTIs are classified as either a minor, serious or major incident based on the following criteria:

a. Minor – incidents include any of the following: Less than 10 active participants, assault, an act resulting in minor physical injury requiring no medical inpatient treatment or property damages of less than $1,000.
b. Serious – incidents include any of the following: 10 to 20 active participants, assault, an act resulting in physical injuries requiring medical inpatient treatment of less than 5 days or property damages of $1,000 to $10,000.
c. Major – incidents include any of the following: more than 20 active participants; an act that results in a death; arson; property damages in excess of $10,000; an act resulting in physical injuries requiring medical inpatient treatment for more than 5 days; or the activities of groups supporting supremacist causes, advocating unlawful discrimination, or otherwise advocating the use or threat of force or violence to deprive individuals of their civil rights when such activities constitute an immediate danger to the loyalty, good order and discipline or morale of Air Force personnel.

The EO office will use the most severe qualifying factor to determine the classification of an incident.

(Slide #9)
QUESTION: What if an incident occurs involving three active participants and resulted in death? The EOTI would be classified as major due to the death.

QUESTION: What if a local group of the KKK conducts a peaceful rally at the county court house? This would be classified as minor because there is no immediate danger to the loyalty, good order and discipline or morale of Air Force personnel. If the KKK group did the rally outside the front gate of the base, then it could be considered a major incident.

QUESTION: What if two participants were caught vandalizing a base park with racist graffiti causing $1500 in damages? This would be classified as a serious incident due to the amount of property damages.
(Slide #10) EXAMPLE 1:

On-base privatized housing – a TSgt awakens to find the word “Nigger” spray painted on his garage door. The TSgt also noticed damage to his vehicle where the perpetrator attempted to ignite a flare in the vehicle floor board. The cost of repairs was approximately $1000 for the garage door and vehicle. There was no other information provided.

This would be classified as a minor EOTI.

EXAMPLE 2:

Dining Facility – A Black A1C and a White A1C get into verbal argument in the DFAC. When they form up outside to return to class, the verbal altercation continues. The Black A1C states, “You are such a Cracker, I hate your guts.” The White A1C then punched the Black A1C in the face causing a small laceration under is right eye. There was no overnight stay required at the MDG.

This would be classified as a minor EOTI.

Transition:

MP-II EOTI CLARIFICAITON PROCESS

LEVEL: K MEAS: CRT TIME:
20 Min

INSTRUCTIONAL GUIDANCE: Ensure that students understand the importance of advising the commander on classifying the EOTI and how the Command Post utilizes the OPREP-3 message.
(Slide #11)
A. EOTI Notification

a. Review of Security Forces Blotters, which is often your main source of EOTI data.
b. SFS Phone Notification
c. OSI
d. Hospital
e. Review of Services/Club Logs
f. Command Post
g. Notification from unit
h. Individual
i. Local News/PA
(Slide #12)
B. Review Incident Details

a. Determine the type and motivation/overtones of the incident.
b. Determine classification and advise the Installation Commander of the recommended classification. The IC must concur on EOTI classification.
(Slide #13)
C. Prepare and Release EOTI Messages
At a minimum, three messages are required (initial, follow-up, and final), and must be classified as minor, serious, or major.

a. Initial Reporting:
1. Minor and Serious Incidents. The EO office will report all minor and serious incidents to the MAJCOM Assistant for EO with information copies to HQ USAF/A1Q and HQ AFPC/EO within 72 hours after notification. The EO office must forward follow-up notifications every 30 calendar-days until final action is taken.
2. Major Incidents. Report incidents categorized as major through the Event/Incident Reports (OPREP-3), RCS: HAF-XOO (AR) 7118. In addition to the OPREP-3 Report, the EO office will report incidents categorized as major by priority message to MAJCOM Assistants for EO within 24 hours of notification. The EO office must forward information copies to HQ USAF/A1Q and HQ AFPC/EO.

Instructor Note: When the EO office cannot make an exact determination, they will report those incidents as “possible” incidents. Except for instances that involve physical injury, arson or death, the EO office may use some latitude in the classification of an incident. The commander’s judgment regarding the overall significance of the incident may influence the classification.

b. Follow-up and Final Messages:
1. Send follow-up and final notifications to the MAJCOM Assistant for EO, HQ USAF/A1Q and HQ AFPC/EO every 30 calendar-days until final action is taken. The final notification will include all information previously reported in the initial notification, along with any new information gathered.

Instructor Note: Currently EO uses e-mail to report/transmit the EOTI message to higher headquarters.

Instructor Note: Sample Message Format on the AF EO CoP.
(Slide #15)
D. Clarification Process

a. Identify and interview potential witnesses. The interview process will follow the same general instructions/patterns as those conducted during a Formal Complaint.
b. Utilize SFS or off-base law enforcement reports/investigations.
c. Coordinate with other agencies as needed.
d. Determine facts and causes.
e. Analyze evidence.
f. Assess the impact on the installation/community.

Although EO is not determining a preponderance of evidence when processing an EOTI, evidence is still “weighted” during the EOTI process.
(Slide #16)
g. Write EOTI clarification report – sample report is located on AF EO CoP. Determine classification and impact on HR climate. Ensure clarification report includes corrective action, if any.
h. Coordinate clarification report with legal for sufficiency review.
i. Send clarification report and legal review to installation/center CC for final approval of classification of the EOTI.

Transition:

MP-III CLOSING THE EOTI LEVEL: K MEAS: CRT TIME:
5 Min

INSTRUCTIONAL GUIDANCE:
(Slide #17)
A. Final message
Send final message to MAJCOM EO Strategic Advisor, AFPC/EO, and AF/A1Q.

B. Complete EONet
Annotate EOTI in EONet. Ensure case synopsis is detailed and specific.

C. Complete case folder
Ensure all documentation is placed in case file.

CONCLUSION

Summary: (Slide #18)

Re-motivation:

Closure:

EQUAL OPPORTUNITY AND TREATMENT INCIDENT LESSON PLAN
PART III EVALUATION
1. Test Items (sub-located)
2. Attachment 2 (curriculum change)
3. Annual Review Checklist

EQUAL OPPORTUNITY AND TREATMENT INCIDENT LESSON PLAN
PART IV RELATED MATERIALS

1. Handouts
2. Homework
3. Reading Assignments
4. Supporting Documents
5. Instructional Aids (Slides, PowerPoint, video, etc.)
6. Class Text
7. Copyright letters and Copyright Matrix

EOTI Initial Message Example

FROM: //AFNWC Kirtland AFB NM/EO//

TO: //HQ AFMC Wright Patterson AFB OH/A1KQ//
//HQ AFPC Randolph AFB TX/EO//
//HQ USAF Washington DC/A1Q//

SUBJECT: Initial Message – Minor Equal Opportunity and Treatment Incident KV-10- 01

1. Date of Incident: 2 Mar 10

2. Time of Incident: 2325

3. Location of Incident: Enlisted Club

4. Dissident of Hate Group Activity: Unknown at this time

5. Individuals Involved:

Subject/Status

A. Subj1/Mil Grade

A1C Race

Black His/Lat

No Sex

M Unit

377
FSS
B. Subj2/Mil A1C White No M 377
LRS
C. Subj3/Mil SrA Black No M 377
LRS

6. Narrative: On 3 Mar 10, the EO office was notified by SFS personnel of an altercation that occurred at the base enlisted club on 2 Mar 10. According to witness statements, Subj1 and Subj2 were playing a game of pool when they got into a verbal argument. According to Subj1, Subj2 called him a “Black Thug” that needed to go back to the ghetto. Subj1 then hit Subj2 in the face causing a small laceration on his cheek. During the altercation, one chair was broken as the two members were fighting. Subj3 was subsequently able to separate the members before SFS members arrived on the scene. Both members were taken into custody and later released to their respective First Sergeants.

7. Primary Cause: Use of disparaging terms

8. Secondary Cause: Alcohol

9. Primary Reaction: Assault

10. Secondary Reaction: None known at this time

11. Property Damage: Broken chair valued at $55

12. Medical Treatment: Subj2 required three stitches in his left cheek

13. Adverse Media Coverage: None anticipated

14. Corrective Action Against Offenders: Pending

15. Indicate Whether or Not This Was An Isolated Incident: Appears to be an isolated incident at this time.

16. Measure(s) Used to Address Impact of The Incident on Individual(s) and/or Human Relations Climate: Not known at this time

17. Lessons Learned: N/A

18. Closing: The EO office is currently conducting a clarification. Please contact AFNWC/EO at DSN 246-5439 if there are any questions on the matter.

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA

Equal Opportunity and
Treatment Incidents (EOTI)
LESSON 0910

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA
Overview

 EOTI Definition/Elements
 EOTI Clarification Process
 Closing the EOTI

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA
Definition
EOTIs are distinctly different than unlawful discrimination or sexual harassment complaints and therefore have different processing procedures
 An EOTI is an overt, adverse act, occurring on or off base
 Directed toward an individual, group of institution which is motivated by, or has overtones based on race, color, national origin, religion or sex
 May include subjects other than military members, retirees, or family members

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA
Elem ents of an EOTI

Incidents may include, but are not limited to:
 The use of slurs based on race, color, national origin, religion or sex (resulting in a physical/verbal altercation)
 Vandalism/degrading graffiti
 Hate group activity
 Use or posting of discriminatory epithets, signs, symbols

NOTE: Sex offenses and other crimes are not EOTIs merely because the individuals are of different, sexes, races, etc.

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA
EOTI – Y es or N o?

During trick or treating in base housing a family member Black male and TSgt Black male were allegedly speeding. A SSgt White male yelled from his lawn for the men to “slow down.” The family member and TSgt left base housing and returned at a later time and made contact with the SSgt. The TSgt and SSgt began to discuss the previous situation at which time the dependent Black male reached over the TSgt and punched the SSgt in the face. The family member Black male was apprehended by SF personnel and transported to the law enforcement desk and cited.

W hat m ak es this an EOTI ?

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA
EOTI Classification
EOTIs are classified as either, minor, serious or major based on the following:
– MINOR:
• Less than 10 active participants
• Assault
• Minor physical injury requiring no medical inpatient treatment
• Property damages of less than $1,000

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA
EOTI Classification
– SERIOUS
• 10 to 20 active participants
• Assault
• Physical injury requiring medical inpatient treatment less than 5 days
• Property damages between $1,000 to $ 10,000

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA
EOTI Classification
– MAJOR
• More than 20 active participants
• Acts that result in a death
• Arson
• Physical injury requiring medical inpatient treatment more than 5 days
• Property damages exceeding $ 10,000
• Supremacist group activity when activities constitute immediate danger to loyalty, good order/discipline or morale

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA
EOTI Classification
The EO office will use the most severe qualifying factor to determine the classification of the incident

 What if an incident occurs involving three active participants and results in a death?

 What if a local group of the KKK conducts a peaceful rally at the county court house?

 What if two participants were caught vandalizing a base park with racist graffiti causing $1500 in damages?

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA
EOTI – Y es or N o?

On base privatized housing – A TSgt awakens to find the word “Nigger” spray painted on his garage door. The TSgt also noticed damage to his vehicle where the perpetrator attempted to ignite a flare in the vehicle floor board. The cost of repairs was $1000. No other information known.

Dining facility – a Black male A1C and White male A1C get into a verbal altercation while forming up to return to class. The Black A1C states, “You are such a Cracker, I hate your guts.” The White A1C then punched the Black A1C in the face causing a small laceration under his right eye. No overnight stay required in MDG.

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA
EOTI Clarification P rocess
Possible ways of receiving EOTIs:
 Review of SF Blotters – Often the main source of EOTI data
 SFS Phone Notification
 OSI
 Hospital (Emergency Room/Clinic)
 Review of Services/Club Logs
 Command Post
 Unit
 Individual
 Local news/PA

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA
EOTI Clarification P rocess
Review Incident Details:
Determine type of motivation/overtones
Determine classification
Advise installation/center CC/(director)

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA
EOTI Clarification P rocess
Title 10, prepare and release EOTI message. At a minimum, three messages are required (initial/follow- up/final)
 Initial message:
• Minor and serious must be reported w/in 72 hours
• Majors – reported through CP using OPREP-3 w/in 24 hours
 Follow-up/Final messages due every 30 days until final action is taken

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA
EOTI Clarification P rocess
 Title 10 messages sent to MAJCOM EO Strategic Advisor, AFPC/EO & AF/A1Q

 When exact determination can’t be made, report incident as “Possible”

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA
EOTI Clarification P rocess
 Identify and interview potential witnesses
 Utilize SFS or off base law enforcement reports/investigations
 Coordinate with other agencies as needed
 Determine facts and causes
 Analyze the evidence
 Assess the impact on installation/community

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA
EOTI Clarification P rocess
 Title 10, write EOTI clarification report; Title 32, Memorandum for Record
• Ensure report includes corrective action, if any
 Coordinate clarification report/memorandum with Legal Office for sufficiency review

 Send report/memorandum and legal review to installation/center CC for final approval

Note: Although EO is not determining a preponderance of evidence when processing an EOTI, evidence is “weighted” during the process

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA
Closing the EOTI
 Title 10, final message sent to MAJCOM EO Strategic Advisor, AFPC/EO & AF/A1Q

 Title 10, annotate EOTI in EONet
 Ensure case synopsis is detailed. BE SPECIFIC!

 Title 32, brief Wing Commander on final outcome; Wing CC & EO Director will determine whether or not to elevate to NGB

 Complete case folder
 All documentation in case file

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA
Sum m ary

 EOTI Definition/Elements
 EOTI Clarification Process
 Closing the EOTI

DEOMI EOAC STUDENT GUIDE
366 Tuskegee Airmen Dr. January 2013
Patrick AFB, FL 32925

EOAC – 3150 EXTREMISM

FOR TRAINING PURPOSES ONLY DO NOT USE ON THE JOB

LESSON EMPHASIS

This lesson will focus on awareness and current issues requiring the attention of future Equal Opportunity Advisors. It will also provide information that describes sources of extremism information, definitions, recruitment of DoD personnel, common themes in extremist ideologies, common characteristics of extremist organizations, DoD policies, and command functions regarding extremist activities.

RECOMMENDED READING

Seven Stage Hate Model, FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin March

OPTIONAL READING

Secretary of the Army’s Task Force on Extremist Activities Reports Threat of Extremist Groups in The Military
Timothy McVeigh
WSCA Map of Hate Groups

The following references are additional sources for current extremism information:

• Anti-Defamation League – http://www.adl.org
• Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism – http://www.hatemonitor.csusb.edu
• Know Gangs – http://www.knowgangs.com
• Political Research Associates – http://www.publiceye.org
• Southern Poverty Law Center – http://www.splcenter.org
• Teaching Tolerance – http://www.tolerance.org

REFERENCES

1. The American heritage dictionary of the English language (4th ed.). (2006). Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
2. Atkins, S. E. (2002). Encyclopedia of modern American extremists and extremist groups. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
3. George, J., & Wilcox, L. (1992). Nazis, communists, Klansmen, and others on the fringe: Political extremism in America. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books.
4. Halle, L. J. (1972). The ideological imagination. Chicago, IL: Quadrangle Books.
5. Hate group numbers up by 54% since 2000. (Feb. 2009). Southern Poverty Law Center. Retrieved from http://www.splcenter.org/news/item.jsp?aid=366#
6. Hate on display: A visual database of extremist symbols, logos, and tattoos. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.adl.org/hate_symbols/default.asp
7. Mulloy, D. J. (2004). American extremism: History, politics and the militia movement. New York, NY: Routledge.
8. U.S. Department of Defense. (2009). Guidelines for handling dissident and protest activities among members of the Armed Forces (DoD Directive 1325.6). Retrieved from http://handle
.dtic.mil/100.2/ADA320448

LESSON SYLLABUS

Sample Behaviors Level of Learning Performance Measure
A. Define key terms associated with extremism K CRT
B. Identify the seven stages of hate K CRT
C. Recognize the traits associated with extremism K CRT
D. Recognize extremist ideologies K CRT
E. Recognize extremist organizations’ recruiting motives toward DoD personnel K CRT
F. Describe strategies to combat extremism in the military K CRT
K = Knowledge C = Comprehension A = Application CRT = Criterion Referenced Test W = Written Assignment SGE = Small Group Experience PE = Presentation Evaluation

STUDENT GUIDE INTRODUCTION

As an EOA, it is important to understand and recognize extremism. While extremist groups may seek to join the military and to recruit military members to their causes, military members must reject participation in organizations that promote supremacist causes. Knowing about extremist groups will help an EOA combat extremism in the military.

The following topics will be covered in this lesson:

• Definition of the key terms associated with extremism.
• Identification of the seven stages of hate.
• Describe how to recognize traits associated with extremism.
• Describe extremist ideologies.
• State extremist organizations’ recruiting motives toward DoD personnel.
• Description of strategies to combat extremism in the military.

A. Definitions

1. Introduction

• All nations have an ideology, something in which they believe. When a political ideology falls outside the norms of a society, it is known as extremism. When extremists take their ideology to the next level and believe that it is the only right ideology to follow, it becomes supremism.

2. Ideology – A set of political beliefs about the nature of people and society; an organized collection of ideas about the best and most appropriate way to live.

3. Extremism – A term used to describe the actions or ideologies of individuals or groups who take a political idea to its limits, regardless of unfortunate repercussions, and show intolerance toward all views other than their own.

4. Extremist – A person who advocates the use of force or violence; advocates supremacist causes based on race, ethnicity, religion, gender, or national origin; or otherwise engages to illegally deprive individuals or groups of their civil rights.

5. Supremism – The belief that a particular race, religion, gender, species, belief system, or culture is superior to others and entitles those who identify with it to dominate, control, or rule those who do not. A person who believes that a certain group is or should be supreme is a supremacist.

6. Prohibited Activities

a. Individuals who hold extremist views are in conflict with the standards expected of all military members, and participation in extremism is inconsistent with the duties of military service.

b. According to DoD Directive 1325.6, military members are prohibited from any of the following activities:

• Participating in organizations that espouse supremacist causes.
• Attempting to create illegal discrimination based on race, creed, color, sex, religion, or national origin.
• Advocating the use of force or violence.
• Engaging in efforts to deprive individuals of their civil rights.

c. Active participation in any of the activities listed below with regard to extremist organizations is incompatible with military service and is, therefore, prohibited. This includes:

• Publicly demonstrating or rallying.
• Fundraising.
• Recruiting and training members.
• Organizing or leading such organizations.

d. Furthering the objectives of extremist organizations is viewed as detrimental to the good order, discipline, or mission accomplishment of the unit and is, therefore, subject to appropriate disciplinary action. As an EOA, you should assist the unit commanders in being vigilant about the existence of such activities.

e. While these activities are prohibited by members of the military, there are no such prohibitions on the general public. EOAs should become familiar with the various groups and organizations that are outside of the gate.

B. Stages of Hate

1. Introduction

• As shown so far, the extremist groups are closely related to hate groups. Understanding the stages of how hate groups develop can help you, as an EOA, watch for the behaviors that may indicate a hate or extremist group within the military.

2. Hate Stages

a. Schaffer and Navarro have identified seven stages that hate groups go through. If unimpeded, haters will pass through these seven successive stages without skipping a stage.

b. In the first four stages, haters vocalize their beliefs. In the last three stages, haters act on their beliefs. As an EOA, being able to assess the stage of hate a person expresses can help you determine the best intervention strategy required to deter the development from continuing.

3. Stage 1: Grouping – Irrational haters seldom hate alone. They feel compelled, almost driven, to entreat others to hate as they do. Peer validation bolsters a sense of self-worth and, at the same time, prevents introspection, which reveals personal insecurities. Further, individuals who are otherwise ineffective become empowered when they join groups, which also provide anonymity and diminished accountability.

4. Stage 2: Defining – Hate groups form identities through symbols, rituals, and mythologies, which enhance the members’ status and, at the same time, degrade the object of their hate. For example, skinhead groups may adopt the swastika, the iron cross, the Confederate flag, and other supremacist symbols. Group-specific symbols or clothing often differentiate hate groups. Group rituals, such as hand signals and secret greetings, further fortify members. Hate groups, especially skinhead groups, usually incorporate some form of self-sacrifice, which allows haters to willingly jeopardize their well-being for the greater good of the cause. Giving one’s life to a cause provides the ultimate sense of value and worth to life. Skinheads often see themselves as soldiers in a race war.

5. Stage 3: Disparaging – Hate is the glue that binds haters to one another and to a common cause. By verbally debasing the object of their hate, haters enhance their self- image, as well as their group status. In skinhead groups, racist song lyrics and hate literature provide an environment where hate flourishes. In fact, researchers have found that the life span of aggressive impulses increases with ideation. In other words, the more often a person thinks about aggression, the greater the chance for aggressive behavior to occur. Thus, after constant verbal denigration, haters progress to the next, more openly hostile and bitter, stage.

6. Stage 4: Taunting – Hate, by its nature, changes incrementally. Time cools the fire of hate, thus forcing the hater to look inward. To avoid introspection, haters use ever- increasing degrees of rhetoric and violence to maintain high levels of agitation. Taunts and offensive gestures serve this purpose. In this stage, skinheads typically shout racial slurs from moving cars or from afar. Nazi salutes and other hand signals often accompany racial epithets. Racist graffiti also begins to appear in areas where skinheads loiter. Most skinhead groups claim turf proximate to the neighborhoods in which they live. One study indicated that a majority of hate crimes occur when the hate target migrates through the hate group’s turf.

7. Stage 5: Attacking without weapons – This stage is critical because it differentiates vocally abusive haters from physically abusive ones. In this stage, hate groups become more aggressive, prowling their turf seeking vulnerable targets. Violence coalesces hate groups and further isolates them from mainstream society. Skinheads, almost without exception, attack in groups and target single victims. Research by the Southern Poverty

Law Center, the FBI, and the Anti-Defamation League has shown that bias crimes are twice as likely to cause injury and four times as likely to result in hospitalization as compared to non-bias crimes. In addition to physical violence, the element of thrill seeking is introduced in Stage 5. The adrenaline high intoxicates the attackers. The initial adrenaline surge lasts for several minutes; however, the effects of adrenaline keep the body in a state of heightened alert for up to several days. Each successive anger- provoking thought or action builds on residual adrenaline and triggers a more violent response than the one that originally initiated the sequence. Anger builds on anger. The adrenaline high combined with hate becomes a deadly combination. Hardcore skinheads keep themselves at a level where the slightest provocation triggers aggression.

8. Stage 6: Attacking with weapons – Some attackers use firearms to commit hate crimes, but skinheads prefer weapons such as broken bottles, baseball bats, blunt objects, screwdrivers, and belt buckles. These types of weapons require the attacker to be close to the victim, which further demonstrates the depth of personal anger. Attackers can discharge firearms at a distance, thus precluding personal contact. Close-in onslaughts require the assailants to see their victim eye-to-eye and to become bloodied during the assault. Hands-on violence allows skinheads to express their hate in a way a gun cannot. Personal contact empowers and fulfills a deep-seated need to have dominance over others.

9. Stage 7: Destroying – The ultimate goal of haters is to destroy the object of their hate. Mastery over life and death imbues the hater with godlike power and omnipotence, which, in turn, facilitate further acts of violence. With this power comes a great sense of self-worth and value, the very qualities haters lack. However, in reality, hate physically and psychologically destroys both the hater and the hated.

Hate Groups and Hate Symbols

1. Introduction

• While many extremist groups advocate violence, some extremists avoid violence at all costs. So, one cannot say that the terms extremist and hate is synonymous. However, while not all extremist groups are hate groups, all hate groups are extremist groups.

• According to the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), there were 932 hate groups active in the United States in 2009. Many of these groups follow the same ideologies, but do not necessarily work together or cooperate with each other. Extremists tend to be confrontational, so fights within a group are not uncommon. After an argument, dissidents may form another competing group or organization, or join a different one.

• As an EOA, it is impossible for you to be knowledgeable about each and every group. You can, however, familiarize yourself with the common extremist beliefs. Here are a few of these groups.

NOTE: The descriptions that follow are provided by the Southern Poverty Law Center and are given as generalizations only and may not apply to every group.

2. Neo-Confederate – Primarily celebrate Southern culture and the Civil War; some factions embrace racist attitudes toward Blacks, and some favor White separatism. The neo-Confederate movement includes a number of organizations that generally share the goals of preserving Confederate monuments, honoring the Confederate battle flag, and lauding what is judged to be Southern culture. Many have close ties to the White supremacist League of the South (LOS).

3. Black Separatist – Typically oppose integration and racial intermarriage; want separate institutions or even a separate nation for Blacks. Most forms of Black separatism are strongly anti-White and anti-Semitic, and a number of religious versions assert that Blacks are the Biblical “chosen people” of God. Other groups espousing the same beliefs would be considered racist. The same criteria should be applied to all groups, regardless of color.

4. Ku Klux Klan – Primarily against Black Americans, its members have also attacked Jews, immigrants, and Catholics. It typically sees itself as a Christian organization fighting for civil rights for Whites and is historically violent as a vigilante group. With its long history of violence, the KKK is the most infamous and oldest of American hate groups.

5. Neo-Nazi – Share a hatred for Jews and a love for Adolf Hitler and Nazi Germany; also hate other minorities and homosexuals; believe in Christian White supremacy. While its roots are in Europe, the links with American neo-Nazi groups are strong and growing stronger.

a. Racist Skinheads – Typically form a violent element of the White supremacist movement and have often been referred to as the “shock troops” of the hoped-for revolution. The classic skinhead look is a shaved head, black Doc Martens boots, jeans with suspenders, and an array of typically racist tattoos. A prominent racist skinhead term is “14/88.” The 14 stands for the “14 words” slogan coined by David Lane, who is serving a 190-year sentence for his part in the assassination of a Jewish talk show host: “We must secure the existence of our people and a future for White children.” The 88 means “Heil Hitler,” as H is the eighth letter of the alphabet.

6. White Nationalists – Espouse White supremacist or White separatist ideologies, they often focus on the alleged inferiority of non-Whites. Groups listed in a variety of other categories (e.g., Ku Klux Klan, neo-Confederate, neo-Nazi, racist skinhead, etc.) could also be fairly described as White nationalists.

7. Hate Symbols

a. As an EOA, it is important that you are knowledgeable of and alert to the symbols, logos, and tattoos that extremist groups use to identify themselves and their group

affiliation. Being aware of these symbols and what they mean can assist you in combating extremism in the military.

b. While some people may use or display extremist symbols in ignorance, extremists use these symbols to display a sense of power and belonging. Symbols are also a quick way of identifying others who share their beliefs.

c. Additional information about hate groups and extremist symbols can be found in your student guide and on the Internet. The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) maintains a database of hate group symbols. As an EOA, you should familiarize yourself with the symbols of hate; learn to recognize the symbols and what they mean so you are better prepared to support the military standards of conduct and eliminate extremism in the military.

C. Extremists Traits

1. What type of person belongs to an extremist group or follows an extremist ideology? The terms extremism or extremist are almost always applied by others to a group rather than by a group labeling itself. People within an extremist group will deny that they practice or advocate violence; instead they would more likely call themselves political radicals.

2. According to George and Wilcox, there are a number of specific traits or behaviors that tend to represent the extremist style. As a caution, we are all fallible human beings, and some of us may resort to these behaviors from time to time without bad intentions. With extremists, these lapses are not occasional; rather, they are habitual and a strongly established part of an extremist’s character.

a. Character assassination
Extremists often attack the character of an opponent rather than deal with the facts or issues raised. They will question motives, qualifications, past associations, alleged values, personality, looks, and mental health as a diversion from the issues under consideration.

b. Name calling and labeling
Extremists are quick to resort to taunts (e.g., pervert, racist, and crackpot) to label and condemn opponents and to divert others from listening to their arguments.

c. Irresponsive sweeping generalizations
Extremists tend to make sweeping claims or judgments with little to no evidence, often confusing similarity with sameness. That is, they assume that because two or more things are alike in some respects that they are alike in all respects.

d. Inadequate proof behind assertions
Extremists tend to be very fuzzy about what constitutes proof for their assertions and tend to get caught up in logical fallacies where they assume that a prior event explains

a subsequent occurrence simply because of their before-and-after relationship. They tend to project wished-for conclusions and exaggerate the significance of information that confirms their prejudices and discredit or ignore information that contradicts them.

e. Tendency to view opponents and critics as essentially evil
Extremists feel that their opponents hold differing views because they are bad, immoral, dishonest, hateful, cruel, prejudiced, etc. and not merely because they simply disagree, see matters differently, or are mistaken.

f. Dualism worldview
Extremists tend to see the world in terms of absolute good and evil, for them or against them, with no middle ground or intermediate position. All issues are ultimately moral issues of right and wrong, good or bad, with the right and good positions coinciding with their interests. Their slogan is often “Those who are not with me are against me.”

g. Tendency to argue by intimidation
Extremists tend to frame their arguments in such a way as to intimidate others into accepting their premises and conclusions. To disagree with them is to ally oneself with the devil or to give aid and comfort to the enemy. They tend to be very judgmental and moralizing, allowing them to define the parameters of the debate by keeping their opponents on the defensive.

h. Use of slogans, buzzwords, and thought-stopping clichés
For many extremists, shortcuts in thinking and in reasoning matters out seem necessary to avoid troublesome facts and compelling counterarguments. Simple slogans substitute for more complex abstractions.

i. Assumption of moral superiority over others
The most obvious assumptions are claims of racial or ethnic superiority—a master race. Less obvious are claims of ennoblement because of alleged victimhood, a special relationship with God, or membership in a special or elite class and a kind of aloof high-minded snobbishness that accrues because of the weightiness of their preoccupations, their altruism, and their willingness to sacrifice themselves (and others) to their cause.

j. Doomsday thinking
Extremists often predict dire or catastrophic consequences from a situation or from a failure to follow a specific course, and they tend to exhibit a kind of crisis- mindedness. It can be a Communist takeover, a Nazi revival, nuclear war, earthquakes, floods, or the wrath of God. Whatever it is, it is just around the corner unless we follow their program and listen to their special insight and wisdom, to which only the truly enlightened have access. For extremists, any setback or defeat is the beginning of the end.

k. Belief that it’s okay to do bad things in the service of a “good” cause
Extremists may deliberately lie or otherwise distort, misquote, slander, defame, or libel their opponents and/or critics; engage in censorship or repression; or undertake violence in special cases. This is done with little or no remorse as long as it is in the service of defeating the Communists, Fascists, or whomever. Defeating an enemy becomes an all-encompassing goal to which other values are subordinate. With extremists, the end justifies the means.

l. Tendency to personalize hostility
Extremists often wish for the personal bad fortune of their enemies and celebrate when it occurs. When a critic or an adversary dies or has a serious illness, a bad accident, or personal legal problems, extremists often rejoice and chortle about how he or she deserved it. For example, right-wing extremists celebrated the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr., and leftists agonized because George Wallace survived an assassination attempt. In each instance, their hatred was not only directed against ideas, but also against individual human beings.

m. Emphasis on emotional responses, less so on reasoning and logical analysis Extremists have an unspoken reverence for propaganda, which they may call education or consciousness-raising. Symbolism plays an exaggerated role in their thinking, and they tend to think imprecisely and metaphorically. Effective extremists tend to be effective propagandists. Propaganda differs from education in that the former teaches one what to think, and the latter teaches one how to think clearly.

n. Hypersensitivity and vigilance
Extremists perceive hostile innuendo in even casual and innocuous comments, imagine rejection and antagonism concealed in honest disagreement and dissent, and see latent subversion, anti-Semitism, perversion, racism, disloyalty, and so on in innocent gestures and ambiguous behaviors. Although few extremists are actually clinically paranoid, many of them adopt a paranoid style with its attendant projective mechanisms, hostility, and distrust.

o. Use of supernatural rationales for beliefs and actions
Some extremists, particularly those involved in cults and religious movements, claim some kind of supernatural rationale for their beliefs and actions; their movement or cause, they believe, is ordained or looked upon favorably by God.

p. Advocacy of double standards
Extremists generally tend to judge themselves or their interest group in terms of their intentions, which they tend to view generously, and their critics and opponents by their acts, which they tend to view very critically. They would like you to accept their assertions on faith, but they demand proof for yours.

D. Extremist Ideologies

1. Introduction

• As noted, an ideology is a set of political beliefs about the nature of people and society. People who are committed to an ideology seek not only to persuade but to recruit others to their belief. In U.S. history, there are many examples of extremist ideologies and movements. The colonists who sought to free themselves from British rule and the Confederate states who sought to secede from the Northern states are just two examples.

• While not all ideologists are violent in nature, it is characteristic of ideology to be action-oriented and to regard action in terms of a military analogy. How often have you heard words such as struggle, resist, march, victory, and overcome when reading about or talking to ideologists about their beliefs?

2. Ideologies

a. Nationalism – The policy of asserting that the interests of one’s own nation are separate from the interests of other nations or the common interest of all nations. Many nationalist groups take it a step further and believe that their national culture and interests are superior to any other national group.

b. Supremacy – The belief that one’s race or ethnicity is superior to all others and should dominate society. Supremacy, as with racial supremacies in general, has frequently resulted in anti-Black and anti-Semitic violence.

c. Separatism – Setting oneself or others apart based on culture, ethnicity, race, or religion.

d. Anarchism – A political ideology that considers the state to be unnecessary, harmful, or undesirable. National anarchists appeal to youths in part by avoiding the trappings of skinhead culture—light jackets, shaved heads, and combat boots—in favor of hooded sweatshirts and bandanas. They act the part of stereotypical anarchists as envisioned by most Americans outside of far-left circles: black-clad protesters wreaking havoc at political conventions and anti-globalization rallies.

e. Religion – Extremist ideology based on intolerance toward other religions. Anti- Semitism is a prime example of this ideology.

f. Eco-Warriors – Environmental activist’s who take action to fight against the exploitation of the environment and/or animals. An eco-warrior can be someone non- confrontational, such as a tree-sitter, or someone who engages in direct action.

3. Historical events

a. Jewish Holocaust – In 1933, after years of struggle and repeatedly blaming Jews for Germany’s defeat in World War I, Adolf Hitler and his Nazi followers came to power. The genocide of European Jews and others by the Nazis during World War II is one of the most radical examples of extremism. Concentration camps were built to house the Jews, who were incarcerated and forced into labor. Eventually, extermination camps were built for the sole purpose of killing the Jews, usually in gas chambers, although some were killed in mass shootings and by other means. The bodies were burned in crematoria and the ashes buried or scattered. Over 6 million Jews were killed in the Holocaust. This reign of anti-Semitism finally crashed with the suicide death of Adolf Hitler; 22 surviving top Nazis were charged with crimes against humanity. The extremist ideologies of supremacy, nationalism, and religion apply to this event.

b. Cambodia Genocide – In April of 1975, Pol Pot, once leader of the Cambodian Communist Party, effectively seized control of Cambodia by marching into Phnom Penh. Once in power, Pol Pot expelled all foreigners and began a systematic effort to purify the country. Millions of Cambodians were forced to work in the fields, where they began dying from overwork, malnutrition, and disease. Individuals accused of treason, along with their families, were brought to S-21, a prison where they were photographed, tortured until they confessed, and executed. Of the 14,200 people imprisoned at S-21, only 7 are known to have survived. After Phnom Penh was liberated by the Vietnamese Army in 1979, S-21 was converted to the Tuol Sleng Museum of Genocide. The extremist ideologies of supremacy, separatism, and nationalism apply to this event.

c. Sudan Holocaust – Since 1983, the Northern fundamentalist Muslim government of Khartoum, the capital of Sudan, has been waging war against the mostly Christian South. The northern government has been killing, displacing, and enslaving the African Christians. Over 1.9 million civilians have died, and over 4 million have been forced to flee their homes. The victims are Christians, moderate Muslims, and African traditionalists who refuse to accept the Sudan government’s policies of Arab control and conformity to Islamic rules and laws. The extremist ideologies of supremacy, nationalism, and religion apply to this event.

d. Oklahoma City Bombing – On April 19, 1995, a massive truck bomb exploded outside the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, killing 168 people, including 19 children, and injuring over 500 others. Timothy McVeigh was convicted for this crime, putting a spotlight on a militia movement seeking to retaliate against the U.S. government for its handling of the Seventh-Day Adventist cult near Waco, Texas. The extremist ideology of anarchism applies to this event.

e. Tokyo Subway Gas Attacks – On March 20, 1995, the group Aum Shinrikyo (Supreme Truth) attacked Tokyo’s subways with sarin gas, killing 12 and injuring more than 5,000. This attack has the distinction of being the world’s first mass-scale chemical terrorist attack.

f. 9-11 – On September 11, 2001, a series of coordinated attacks on America by al- Qaeda followers who hijacked planes and crashed them into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon left 2,974 people dead. A fourth plane destined for Washington D.C. was taken over by passengers and crew members who willingly sacrificed their lives in order to divert the attack.

E. Recruiting Motives

1. Introduction

• The standard hate message has not changed, but it has been packaged differently. Modern extremist groups run the gamut from the politically astute and subtle to the openly violent.

• Nowadays, instead of dressing in sheets or publicly espousing hate messages, many extremists will talk of individual liberties, states’ rights, and how to make the world a better place.

2. Recruiting Motives

a. Military personnel, public officials, and law enforcement officers are actively sought by extremist groups. Extremist leaders seek to recruit members with military experience to exploit their:

• Discipline.
• Knowledge of firearms and explosives.
• Tactical skills.
• Access to weapons and intelligence.

b. In addition, members of extremist groups like the neo-Nazis are joining the military, not to serve their country, but to receive training—specifically with regards to discipline and tactical skills—and to learn how to better defend themselves and their ideals.

c. Young extremists are encouraged by leaders to enlist in the military to gain access to weapons, training, and other military personnel. Some extremist groups even provide advice to their members on how to respond to questions from military recruiters.

d. Military members are trained to be proficient with weapons, combat tactics, and explosives, to train others in their use, and to operate in a highly disciplined culture that is focused on the organized violence of war. This is why military extremists

present an elevated threat to public safety. Even the nonviolent activities of military personnel with extremist tendencies (e.g., possessing literature, researching information via computer) can have detrimental consequences for the good order, discipline, readiness, and cohesion of military units.

F. Strategies to Combat Extremism

1. Introduction

• It is the responsibility of each and every military member to help combat extremism in the military.

• Each member should examine how his or her action or inaction can affect mission accomplishment. Just the presence of a member with extremist views can have an adverse impact on the performance of a unit. Other members who oppose or disagree with the extremist views may say or do nothing because they fear damaging the unit’s cohesiveness.

• Extremists’ views divide the unit into opposing factions, and the team concept required for mission accomplishment is lost.

2. Strategies

a. Extremism is prohibited in the military in accordance with DoDD 1325.6. Combating extremism in the military begins with the individual. Each person should:

• Examine personal viewpoints in light of military values and loyalty.
• Reject affiliation with any extremist organizations.
• Decline the distribution or circulation of extremist literature.
• Encourage others to avoid extremist affiliations and views.
• Report indicators of extremism to the appropriate command.

b. As an EOA, you should be vigilant to the signs of extremism by paying attention to:

• Surreptitious meetings.
• Off-duty clothing (e.g., skinhead dress, extremist tattoos).
• Music selections and reading materials.
• Extremist graffiti or symbols in personal and common areas.

c. In addition, you should assist the unit command to:

• Educate and counsel unit members on the incompatibility of military service with extremist views.
• Be aware of unit members’ beliefs.
• Be alert for indicators of extremist ties, views, or behaviors.

• Include questions on extremism in climate assessments.
• Enforce policy on participation in extremist group activities.
• Advise unit members of the consequences for participation in extremist activities.
• Monitor information available on extremists groups, activities, and philosophies.

SUMMARY

As an EOA, it is important to understand and recognize extremism. While extremist groups may seek to join the military and to recruit military members to their causes, military members must reject participation in organizations that promote supremacist causes. Knowing about extremist groups will help you combat extremism in the military.

This lesson was designed to increase the student’s understanding of extremist groups and organizations, enhancing their knowledge, thus preparing them as EOAs to deal with extremist identification and issues.

The following topics were covered in this lesson:

• Definition of the key terms associated with extremism.
• Identification of the seven stages of hate.
• How to recognize traits associated with extremism.
• Describe extremist ideologies.
• State extremist organizations’ recruiting motives toward DoD personnel.
• Description of strategies to combat extremism in the military.

END OF LESSON

STUDENT NOTES

Practice Test Questions Inserted Here

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA

EQUAL OPPORTUNITY
HUMAN RELATIONS EDUCATION FIRST DUTY STATION TRAINING

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA

Objective 1 of 4
Recognize EEO statutes, DOD, AF, and
local EO policies

Objective 2 of 4
Identify and recognize the forms of unlawful discrimination and sexual
harassment

Objective 3 of 4
Recall EO complaint process

Objective 4 of 4
Define and Discuss Roles and
Responsibilities

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA

Equal Opportunity

Main Point 1 of 4
EEO Statutes and EO Policy Guidance

TObtaiinedtbylJuedicial WVatch, InIc. vIia FOIA
Civil Rights Act of 1964

Prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of:

• Race
• Color
• Religion
• National Origin
• Sex
• Reprisal

AObgtaineed by JDudiciail Wsatcch, Irnc.ivima FOIAination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA)

Protects individuals who are 40 years of age or older from employment discrimination based on age.

• Hiring
• Firing
• Promotion
• Layoff
• Compensation
• Benefits
• Job Assignments
• Training

The AmericObtaainednby Jusdicial wWatch, iInct. viahFOIA

Disabilities

Act of 1990 (ADA)

Protects individuals who have a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities.

• Job application procedures
• Hiring
• Advancement
• Discharge of employees
• Compensation
• Workers’ compensation
• Job Assignments
• Job training

Genetic InforObtamined byaJudictial iWaotch, Innc. via FNOIA

ondisclosure

Act of 2008 (GINA)

Prohibits discrimination on the basis of genetic information.

• Hiring
• Advancement
• Discharge of employees
• Job Assignments
• Job training

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA
…rising to highest level.…
…merit, fitness, capability…

Promote an environment free from personal, social, or institutional barriers that prevent Service members from rising to the highest level of responsibility possible. Service members shall be evaluated only on individual merit, fitness, and capability.

Unlawful discrimination against persons or groups based on race, color, religion, national origin, or sex, is contrary to good order and discipline and is counterproductive to combat readiness and mission accomplishment. Unlawful discrimination shall not be condoned. (DODD 1350.2)

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA
…any Airman, military or civilian.…
… discriminate, harass, intimidate…

It is against Air Force policy for any Airman, military or civilian, to unlawfully discriminate against, harass, intimidate or threaten another Airman on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, (or in the case of civilian employees) age, disability, reprisal, or genetic information. (AFI 36-2706)

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA
Local Policy

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA
No Fear Act

Federal agencies will be held accountable for violations of anti-discrimination and whistleblower protection laws.
(Public Law 107-174)

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA
Dissident and Protest Activities

Military personnel must not actively advocate supremacist doctrine, ideology, or causes.
(DODD 1325.6)

Active participation that the commander finds to be detrimental to good order, discipline, or mission accomplishment is incompatible with military service and prohibited.
(AFI 51-903)

Diversity

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA

Diversity in the Air Force is broadly defined as a composite of individual characteristics, experiences, and abilities consistent with the Air Force Core Values and the Air Force mission.

• Life experiences
• Geographic location
• Socioeconomic background
• Cultural knowledge
• Educational background
• Work background
• Language abilities
• Physical abilities
• Philosophical/Spiritual perspective

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA

Equal Opportunity

Main Point 2 of 4
Unlawful Discrimination Sexual Harassment

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA

Unlawful

Discrimination

Any unlawful action or employment practice that denies equal opportunity to persons or groups based on their race, color, religion, national origin, sex, in addition to age, disability, or genetic information for DoD civilian employees.

Prejudice

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA

An adverse opinion or judgment formed beforehand or without full knowledge or complete examination of the facts. (Webster’s)

Origins of prejudice include:
• Parents/family
• Friends/peers
• Life experiences
• Media

StereotypesObtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA

A conventional, formulaic, oversimplified opinion, conception, or belief. Five basic characteristics are that stereotypes:

• Are fixed, rigid ideas
• Are either over-generalized or over- simplifications
• Are not supported by reasonable evidence
• Are driven by motives such as: fear, rationalization, and prejudice
• Have an adverse impact on our behavior
regardless of whether the implications are positive or negative

ExObtaained mby JudicialpWatchl, Inec. via sFOIA

of Unlawful

Discrimination

• One person treated unfairly/unequally than another based upon a protected category

Any group of people (cliques) belonging to same ethnicity excluding/ostracizing other groups based upon a protected category

System where a policy denies an individual or group a right or opportunity based upon a protected category

Use of disparaging terms based upon a protected category

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA
Religious Accommodation vs. Religious Discrimination

• It is DOD Policy that requests for accommodation of religious practices should be approved by commanders when accommodation will not have an adverse impact on military readiness, unit cohesion, standards, or discipline. (DODD 1300.17)

Civilians: Federal law requires an agency to accommodate an employee’s exercise of their religion unless such accommodation would impose an undue hardship on the conduct of the agency’s operations. (Title VII)

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA
Sexual Harassment

A form of sex discrimination that involves unwe lc ome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a se xual nature when . . .
• Submission to such conduct is made either explicitly or implicitly a term or condition of a person’s job pay or career (quid pro quo)

Submission to or rejection of such conduct by a person is used as a basis for a career or employment decisions affecting that person (quid pro quo)

Such conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual’s work performance or creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive work environment

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA
Sexual Harassment
Examples of Sexually Harassing Behaviors

Verbal
• Sexual comments about a person’s clothing, body, or sexual activities
• Asking about a person’s sex life,
fantasies, preferences, or history
• Whistles and catcalls
• Repeatedly asking someone on a date
Physical
• Standing close to or brushing a person’s body
• Touching a person’s hair or body
• Hugging, kissing, patting, stroking
• Touching, pinching, bumping, cornering

Non-Verbal
• Staring or leering
• Displaying sexually suggestive material
• Sexually oriented entertainment
• Sexually suggestive gestures with hands or body

Impact ofObtainUed by Jnudiciall Waatchw, Inc. vfia FuOIA l Discrimination and Sexual Harassment

• Decreased self-esteem and self-confidence

Difficulties with trust

Medical problems

Lowered productivity

Impaired relationships between co-workers

Unit cohesiveness suffers

Lack of communication

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA

Equal Opportunity

Main Point 3 of 4
EO Complaints

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA

Informal and Formal

Informal: Complainant chooses avenue for resolution
• Resolve the complaint on his/her own
• Chain of Command
• Request intervention from a co-worker
• Use the Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR)

Formal: EO Office conducts clarification
• Interview witnesses/alleged offender
• Gather data through records/reports
• Preponderance of evidence standard
• Staff through JA

**Must file complaint within 60 days of the alleged behavior

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA

Informal and Formal

**Must contact an EO Specialist with 45 calendar days from the alleged incident.

Informal: EO conducts limited fact finding inquiry
• Attempts to resolve complaint based
on remedies
• ADR

Formal: Investigated by Investigative Resolution Division (IRD)
• AF Civilian Appellate Review Office
(AFCARO) determines whether or not discrimination has occurred

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA
EO Trend Data (Military)

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA
EO Trend Data (Civilian)

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA

Equal Opportunity

Main Point 4 of 4
Roles and Responsibilities

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA
Personal Responsibility

• Set positive example on/off duty

Confront inappropriate behavior

Clarify perception vs. fact

Use chain of command

Notify within specified timelines

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA

Objective 1 of 4
Recognize EEO statutes, DOD, AF, and
local EO policies

Objective 2 of 4
Identify and recognize the forms of unlawful discrimination and sexual
harassment

Objective 3 of 4
Recall EO complaint process

Objective 4 of 4
Define and Discuss Roles and
Responsibilities

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA

EQUAL OPPORTUNITY
HUMAN RELATIONS EDUCATION FIRST DUTY STATION TRAINING

LESSON PLAN PART I

SYNOPSIS

First Duty Station Human Relations Training Version: 15 Apr 11

Note: Instructor will personalize, but will not delete content of the master lesson plan

INSTRUCTOR NAME:

EO DIRECTOR APPROVAL: _ DATE:

INSTRUCTIONAL METHOD:
Informal Lecture: 2.5 hours

LESSON EMPHASIS: This course will heighten students’ understanding and awareness of how positive human relations involvement is imperative to mission effectiveness. The lesson provides the foundation of the EO program through the discussion of DOD and AF EO policies. This lesson introduces the concepts of unlawful discrimination and sexual harassment and the impact inappropriate behaviors can have on the human relations climate. This lesson provides the basic framework for Airmen and DOD civilians to overcome the impact of negative human relations by becoming knowledgeable of the EO complaint processes, their roles and responsibility in promoting a positive human relations climate.

STRATEGY: This lesson uses a building-block approach and serves as a foundation for a series of lessons on policies, unlawful discrimination, sexual harassment, complaint processes, and roles and responsibilities. The first lesson defines key concepts and terms, such as Title VII, GINA, DOD policy, Air Force, No Fear Act and AF Diversity Initiatives, through an AF approved video. The video will provide historical background on the evolution of the EO program and will serve as an introduction to unlawful discrimination and sexual harassment.
The second lesson uses scenario based training to identify the protected categories for military and civilian personnel and forms of unlawful discrimination and sexual harassment. The third lesson outlines avenues to address concerns of unlawful discrimination and sexual harassment through discussion of the informal and formal complaint processes. The final lesson introduces the students to the requirements and expectations to address EO related matters through outlining roles and responsibilities within their span of control.

REQUIRED READING: None

REFERENCES:
1. AFPD 36-27, Equal Opportunity (EO), 22 May 09
2. AFI 36-2706, Equal Opportunity Program Military and Civilian, 5 Oct 10
3. AFI 51-903, Dissident and Protest Activities, 1 Feb 98
4. DODD 1350.2, Department of Defense Military Equal Opportunity Program, 21 Nov 03
5. DODD 1440.1, Department of Defense Civilian Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Program, 21 Nov 03
6. DODI 1325.6, Handling Dissident and Protest Activities Among Members of the Armed Forces, 27 Nov 09
7. AF/MAJCOM/Installation Policy Letters
8. 29 CFR PART 1614, Federal Sector Equal Employment Opportunity
9. Air Force Diversity Statement (Letter), SecAF, 27 Mar 2008
10. EEOC Management Directive, MD 110

STUDENT INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIAL:
EO Program Guide, Pen, Pencil, scenarios (Attachment 1), and Critique (Attachment 2)
AUDIOVISUAL AIDS AND EQUIPMENT:
Projection Screen, PowerPoint Slide Presentation, Computer, DVD/VCR

LESSON SYLLABUS:
Cognitive Lesson Objective: Given a lecture and activities, students will recognize that awareness of and involvement in positive human relations and diversity initiatives are essential to mission effectiveness.

Cognitive Samples of Behavior LEVEL MEASURE Time

Introduction 5 Min
MP I. Recognize EEO Statutes, DOD, AF, and Local EO/Diversity policies K Q 10 Min
MP II. Identify and recognize the forms of unlawful discrimination and sexual harassment K Q 30 Min

Break 10 Min
MP II cont. Identify and recognize the forms of unlawful discrimination and sexual harassment K Q 40 Min

Break 10 Min

MP III. Recall EO complaint processes K Q 20 Min
MP IV. Define and discuss roles and responsibilities K Q 20 Min

Conclusion 5 Min
Total Time 2.5 Hours
*Breaks are subject to change and flow with classroom dynamics.

Levels of Learning
K—Knowledge

Student Measurement
Critique, guided discussion/questioning, scenario training

LESSON PLAN
Part II Lesson Development

INTRODUCTION
(Instructor Developed)

ATTENTION:

MOTIVATION:

OVERVIEW:

TRANSITION:

BODY

MP I: EEO STATUTES AND EO POLICY GUIDANCE

LEVEL: K MEAS: Q TIME: 10 Min

Instructor Note: Show video or view/discuss slides if no AV equipment available

A. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
Express the following: Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: Prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, and reprisal. (EEOC)
B. Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA)
Express the following: ADEA protects individuals who are 40 years of age or older from employment discrimination based on age. It is unlawful to discriminate against a person because of his/her age with respect to any term, condition, or privilege of employment, including hiring, firing, promotion, layoff, compensation, benefits, job assignments, and training. (EEOC)

C. The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA)
Express the following: ADA protects individuals who have a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities. This applies to job application procedures, hiring, advancement and discharge of employees, workers’ compensation, job training, and other terms, conditions, and privileges of employment.

D. Genetic Information Nondisclosure Act of 2008 (GINA)
Express the following: GINA prohibits discrimination on the basis of genetic information. It creates a separate form of unlawful discrimination distinct from disability discrimination under the Rehabilitation Act.

E. DOD Policy and Air Force Policy
Express the following: DOD Policy: Promote an environment free from personal, social, or institutional barriers that prevent Service members from rising to the highest level of responsibility possible. Service members shall be evaluated only on individual merit, fitness, and capability. Unlawful discrimination against persons or groups based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin is contrary to good order and discipline and is counterproductive to combat readiness and mission accomplishment. Unlawful discrimination shall not be condoned. (DODD 1350.2)
Express the following: AF Policy: It is against Air Force policy for any Airman, military or civilian, to unlawfully discriminate against, harass, intimidate or threaten another Airman on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, (or in the case of civilian employees) age, disability, reprisal, or genetic information. (AFI 36-2706)
F. Local Policy
Instructor Note: Discuss Local Policy(ies)

G. Notification and Federal Employee Anti-discrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002 (No Fear)
Express the following: Requires that Federal agencies be accountable for violations of antidiscrimination and whistleblower protection laws and post quarterly data on its public web site relating to Federal sector equal employment opportunity complaints filed. (Public Law 107- 174)
H. Dissident and Protest Activities
Express the following: DOD policy: Military personnel must not actively advocate supremacist doctrine, ideology, or causes, including those that advance, encourage, or advocate illegal discrimination based on race, color, religion, national origin or sex or that advance, encourage, or advocate the use of force, violence, or criminal activity or otherwise advance efforts to deprive individuals of their civil rights. (DODI 1325.6)

Express the following: AF policy: Active participation, such as publicly demonstrating or rallying, fund raising, recruiting and training members, organizing or leading such organizations, or otherwise engaging in activities in relation to such organizations or in furtherance of the objectives of such organization that the commander concerned finds to be detrimental to good order, discipline, or mission accomplishment, is incompatible with military service and prohibited. (AFI 51-903)

I. Diversity
Express the following: Diversity in the Air Force is broadly defined as a composite of individual characteristics, experiences, and abilities consistent with the Air Force Core Values and the Air Force Mission. Air Force Diversity includes, but is not limited to, personal life experiences, geographic background, socioeconomic background, cultural knowledge,

educational background, work background, language abilities, physical abilities, philosophical/spiritual perspectives, age, race, ethnicity and gender. (Former Secretary Michael Wynne)

TRANSITION:

MP II: UNLAWFUL DISCRIMINATION/SEXUAL HARASSMENT

LEVEL: K MEAS: Q TIME: 90 Min

Instructor Note: Instructors MUST utilize a minimum of two scenarios and/or role play exercises during MP II (See attachment 1 for examples). One MUST be an example of unlawful discrimination and the other MUST be an example of sexual harassment.

A. Unlawful Discrimination
Express the following: Unlawful discrimination (Military): Any unlawful action that denies equal opportunity to persons or groups based on their race, color, religion, national origin, or sex. (AFI 36-2706)

Express the following: Discrimination (Civilian): An unlawful employment practice that occurs when an employer fails or refuses to hire or promote, discharges, or otherwise discriminates against any individual with respect to compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment because of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, reprisal, physical or mental disability, or genetic information. (AFI 36-2706)

B. Behaviors That Can Lead to Discrimination

1. Prejudice: An adverse opinion or judgment formed beforehand or without full knowledge or complete examination of the facts (Webster’s). Origins of prejudice include:

a) Parents/family
b) Friends/peers
c) Media
d) Life experiences

2. Stereotyping: A conventional, formulaic, oversimplified opinion, conception, or belief (Webster’s). Five basic characteristics of stereotypes:
a) Are fixed, rigid ideas.
b) Are either over-generalizations or over-simplifications.
c) Are not supported by reasonable evidence.
d) Are driven by motives such as: fear, rationalization, and prejudice.
e) Have an adverse impact on our behavior regardless of whether the implications are positive or negative.

C. Examples of Unlawful Discrimination

Express the following: Examples of discrimination include:

a) One person is treated unfairly/unequally in comparison to another based upon a protected category.
b) Any group of people (cliques) belonging to the same ethnicity excluding/ostracizing other groups based upon a protected category.
c) System where a policy denies an individual or group a right or opportunity based upon a protected category.
d) The use of disparaging terms with respect to a person’s race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability, or genetic information (AFI 36-2706).

Express the following: All of the examples listed contributes to a hostile work environment and must not be tolerated.

D. Religious Accommodation
Express the following: It is DOD policy that requests for accommodation of religious practices should be approved by commanders when accommodation will not have an adverse impact on military readiness, unit cohesion, standards, or discipline. (DODD 1300.17)
Civilians: Federal law requires an agency to accommodate employees’ exercise of their religion unless such accommodation would impose an undue hardship on the conduct of the agency’s operations. (Title VII)
Express the following: Committed to upholding the safeguards of Title VII, DOD and civilian policies promote work environments free from unlawful discrimination based on religion.
Accommodation of a member’s religious practices cannot be guaranteed at all times but must at times yield to matters of military necessity. Determination of necessity rests with the commanding officer.
Determinations regarding religious accommodation requests must be made based on reason, policy, doctrine, and law, not religious prejudice or ignorance of religious diversity within the DOD.

Instructor Note: Give examples of religious accommodation vs. religious discrimination i.e. Worship and holidays, Medical treatment ( waivers of immunization, waivers of DNA samples), drugs in sacramental usage, religious apparel; dress and appearance as forms of religious expression

E. Sexual Harassment
Express the following: According to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and Department of Defense Directive (DODD) 1350.2, sexual harassment is defined as a form of sex discrimination that involves unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature when…

1. Submission to such conduct is made either explicitly or implicitly a term or condition of an individual’s employment, or (quid pro quo)

2. Submission to or rejection of such conduct by an individual is used as a basis for career or employment decisions affecting such individual, or (quid pro quo)

3. Such conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual’s work performance or creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive work environment (hostile environment).

Hostile environment claims generally require establishing or showing a pattern of offensive behavior, while in Quid Pro Quo, a single advance may constitute harassment if it is linked to granting or denial of employment benefits. (EEOC)

Work environment is the workplace or any other place that is work connected, as well as the conditions or atmosphere under which people are required to work. For military members “workplace” is an expansive term and may include conduct on or off duty, 24 hours a day. (DODD 1350.2)

Express the following: Behaviors that may constitute sexual harassment fall into three categories: verbal, non-verbal, and physical. Keep in mind everyone has their own feelings and interpretations of what are acceptable and unacceptable behaviors.

Instructor Note: Identify behaviors of verbal, non-verbal, and physical sexual harassment. Instructor can create their own examples or use examples provided below.

F. Examples of Sexual Harassment Behaviors

1. Verbal
a) Making sexual comments about a person’s clothing, body, or sexual activities

b) Asking questions about a person’s sexual life, fantasies, preferences or history

c) Whistling or making catcalls at someone

d) Spreading rumors about someone’s sexual activities

2. Non-Verbal
a) Paying unwanted attention to someone by staring at their body, following, or blocking a person’s path

b) Displaying sexually suggestive visuals (centerfolds, calendars, cartoons, etc)

c) Sexually oriented entertainment in organizations, base facilities, or officially sanctioned functions

d) Sexually suggestive gestures with hands or through body movement (blowing kisses, licking lips, winking, grabbing crotch, lowering pants, raising skirts, etc.)

3. Physical
a) Standing close to or brushing against a person

b) Touching a person’s clothing, hair, or body

c) Hugging, kissing, patting, or stroking

d) Touching, pinching, bumping, or cornering

Express the following: These behaviors may offend “third parties,” even though they may not be directly engaged in the discussion.

Express the following: There is a fine line between sexual harassment and sexual assault. You already know the definition of sexual harassment, here is the definition of sexual assault. Sexual assault is intentional sexual contact, characterized by use of force, physical threat, or abuse of authority or when the victim does not or cannot consent. The mention of this definition is to quickly show the difference between harassment and assault. If you have other questions about sexual assault, please contact the local Sexual Assault Response Coordinator (SARC).

G. Impact of Unlawful Discrimination and Sexual Harassment
Express the following: Unlawful discrimination and sexual harassment results in a progressive negative impact on the organization as a whole. If left unresolved, unlawful discrimination and sexual harassment effects start with the victim, continue through the work center, and eventually consume the entire organization. Examples include:

1. Decrease self-esteem and self-confidence

2. Difficulties with trust

3. Lowered productivity

4. Impaired relationships between co-workers

5. Decreased productivity due to the loss of the job skill knowledge of the victim

6. Job related errors due to increased workload

TRANSITION:

MP III: EO COMPLAINTS LEVEL: K MEAS: Q TIME: 20 Min

A. Military Complaints
Express the following: Members are encouraged to use the chain of command to identify and correct unlawful discriminatory practices. This includes processing and resolving complaints of unlawful discrimination and sexual harassment. The chain of command is responsible for

creating an environment free from unlawful discrimination and sexual harassment. Two options are available:

1. Informal: The individual may resolve the complaint on his/her own, request intervention from a co-worker, use the chain of command, or use the Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR). ADR (Facilitation) may be used to facilitate communications between the disputants and may lead to the early resolution of informal cases.

2. Formal: Complaint is filed and addressed by the EO office. The complainant has 60 days from the time the alleged behavior occurred to file a formal complaint. The complainant must provide extenuating circumstances if they exceed this timeframe. The EO office conducts a complaint clarification to determine whether a formal EO complaint is supported by a preponderance of the credible evidence. The complaint clarification process includes interviewing or taking statements from persons (complainant, witnesses, and alleged offender) who may have information relevant to the complaint and gathering data from records or reports. ADR (Facilitation) may used to facilitate communications between the disputants and may lead to the early resolution of formal cases.

B. Civilian Complaints
Express the following: DoD civilians must contact an EO Specialist within 45 calendar days from the alleged incident or when they became aware of the discrimination. (29 CFR 1614.105) This allows the EO Specialist to try and resolve the complaint at the lowest possible level.

1. Informal: EO attempts to resolve complaint at the lowest level. The EO Specialist is a neutral party and is not an advocate to the complainant or to management. Attempts resolution, to include the use of ADR, based on complainant remedies. The EO Counselor has 30 days to complete the informal process unless the complainant extends the time.

2. If the EO Specialist cannot resolve the complaint at the informal stage, the complainant (aggrieved) has the right to file a formal complaint. The complaint must be filed in writing within 15 calendar days of the Notice of Right to File.

3. The complaint will be investigated by Investigative Resolution Division (IRD). The IRD investigates Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) discrimination complaints for Department of Defense (DoD) agencies. They are conducted at the request of the agency after an EEO complaint has been accepted for investigation by the agency. The Air Force Civilian Appellate Review Office (AFCARO) will make a determination of whether or not discrimination has occurred if the complainant has not requested a hearing. The formal EEO complaint process up to this point can take up 180 days. Both the agency and the complainant have appeal rights on the decision and ultimately the complainant can file in U.S. District Court.

Instructor Note: Provide local complaint trend data.

TRANSITION:

MP IV: ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITES

LEVEL: K MEAS: TIME: 20 Min

Instructor Note: Briefly explain how roles and responsibilities are applicable to everyone to ensuring a positive human relations climate.
A. Confront the behavior
B. Set a positive example on/off duty
C. Use the chain of command
D. Clarify perceptions versus fact
E. Notify within specified timelines

TRANSITION:

CONCLUSION

SUMMARY:

RE-MOTIVATION: CLOSURE:

LESSON PLAN PART III

EVALUATION

1. Guided Discussion

2. Questioning

3. Scenario Based Training

4. Critique

LESSON PLAN PART IV

RELATED MATERIALS

1. EO Program Guide

2. Instructional Aids (Slides, PowerPoint, video, etc.)

Attachment 1 (Scenarios)

Scenario: American with Disabilities Act (ADA)

A Hispanic male GS-4 is assigned to the Supply Squadron warehouse. He is usually quiet and very reliable, but shows up late one morning in torn dirty clothes and begins to yell at his coworkers. His erratic behaviors persist for a few days. Finally, his supervisor, a White male GS-14, disciplines him. He informs the GS-4 that he must be neatly dressed and treat coworkers courteously. The GS-4 explains that he has just been diagnosed as “clinically depressed” by his doctor. The GS-4 provides the doctor’s letter indicating the depression has made him stop taking care of himself and causes him to lash out at others. The GS-4 asks for an accommodation based on the Rehabilitation act. The GS-14 laughs and says, “Now I’ve heard everything.” Later, after a meeting with the Civilian Personnel Officer, the GS-14 accommodates the disability.
However, every day he jokes about the GS-4’s disability with his coworkers.

QUESTION #1: If you were the GS-4, how might YOU feel about your supervisor’s comment, “Now I’ve heard everything?”

QUESTION #2: If you were the GS-4, how would you feel about your supervisor possibly telling others about your disability?

QUESTION #3: As the GS-4, what course of action, if any, would YOU take to address this situation? Explain your rationale.

Scenario: Disparaging Remarks

A Muslim male supervisor periodically makes comments about females in the work place when they are not around. Comments include, “I don’t know why the Air Force allows women into this field, all they do is end up pregnant, and then us guys end up doing all the work,” “She must be on the rag again because she’s bitching,” and “Women are only good for one thing.” Last week, the supervisor made the following statement about one of your female co-workers, “The bitch is out to lunch.”

QUESTION #1: As a third party, what are your roles and responsibilities in handling this matter?

QUESTION #2: Could these comments be a violation of the AF EO policy or EEO statutes? If so, name the protected category being violated.

QUESTION #3: What impact can this type of behavior have on members of the unit?

Scenario: Religious Accommodation

A base exercise has just kicked off and all personnel in the unit are required to work 12-hour shifts, including the weekend. TSgt Smith and Amn Jones had already been given permission to attend church services Sunday morning by their supervisor, MSgt Ray. SSgt Larson, a Seventh Day Adventist, was also told he could attend church services, but on Sunday rather than Saturday. SSgt Larsen explains to MSgt Ray that he is a Seventh Day Adventist and worships on Saturdays and not the traditional Sundays. MSgt Ray responds with, “Look, if I give you time off on Saturday, then I’m going to have others in the unit making up a religion so they can have time off. If you want time off to worship, you’ll just have to go on Sunday like everyone else.”

QUESTION #1: What is the policy for attending a religious service during an exercise/deployment/TDY?

QUESTION #2: Was there an EO violation in this case? If so, how? QUESTION #3: What impact could this have on the individual/unit?
QUESTION #4: What avenues can be taken to accommodate religious preferences?

Scenario: Sexist Comments

A female was sitting at the snack bar eating her lunch when she overheard the conversation of a group of people, sitting behind her. Their conversation was about waitresses with big breasts and cut off tee-shirts at a particular restaurant. One voice sounded familiar when he blurted out, “Yea!!!! They were fine!!!! I would love to get into their pants! That’s what all women should do, wear cut-off tee-shirts and wait on me.” As she turned around she noticed that the individual was her supervisor. Immediately after lunch, she reported it to her NCOIC.

QUESTION #1: Was there an EO violation? If so, what was the violation? QUESTION #2: What could be the impact of the behavior on the individual/unit?
QUESTION #3: Did the female do the right thing by reporting it to her NCOIC or should she have minded her own business?

QUESTION #4: How would you have handled the situation?

Scenario: Inappropriate Comment

A Black male GS-7 is assigned to the Communications Squadron. The GS-7’s trainer, a SMSgt Asian Pacific Islander female, periodically teaches him greetings in Tagalog (a common language spoken by Filipinos). One day, while working with one of his peers who also speak Tagalog, the GS-7 decides he wants to impress him with his new language skills. The GS-7 repeats the phrase he just learned and the peer begins to laugh at him. The GS-7 wonders why he is laughing because he was told the phrase means, “How are you doing today?” The peer informs the GS-7 the phrase really means, “I am a dark monkey.” When the GS-7 later explains to the SMSgt he feels humiliated, the SMSgt tells the GS-7 not to be so sensitive, it was only a joke.

QUESTION #1: If you were the GS-7, how might you feel about the whole situation?

QUESTION #2: As the GS-7, should you address this situation to the next person in the chain of command?

QUESTION #3: Should the SMSgt be held accountable for her actions since it was only a joke?

QUESTION #4: What type of backlash could the SMSgt’s behavior lead to if the situation is ignored or trivialized?

Scenario: Sexual Harassment

Last evening, a male Airman was working after duty hours to finish some paperwork. A female MSgt, who is in his unit but not in his chain of command, stops by and sits on his desk beside him as she chats. She has a very friendly and outgoing personality and is generally well liked in the unit. She told him that he looks too serious and starts rubbing his shoulders and back. He tells her he is a little uncomfortable with her touching him. She laughs it off, pats him on the head, and leaves. Two days later the MSgt comes back to the Airman’s office. This time she stands behind him while he is working and starts rubbing the back of his head. He moves his head away from her because he is uncomfortable. She laughs and tells him to loosen up. She then states she is tired of going home to an empty apartment and invites him over for dinner.
The Airman is not sure what she means by the offer. He declines the invitation and tells her again he is a little uncomfortable. She rubs the top of his hand, tells him it would be worth his time, and offers him a rain check.
QUESTION #1: Could this situation be considered sexual harassment? Why or why not? QUESTION #2: If so, what type of sexual harassment?
QUESTION #3: How would you respond in this situation?

Scenario: Sexual Harassment

A civilian male supervisor calls his female military subordinate to his office to discuss her annual evaluation. He explains she is right on the verge of a five, the highest rating possible. He tells her she can ensure herself of a top rating if she closed the door to his office and “convinces him she deserves a five evaluation.”
QUESTION #1: Could this situation be considered sexual harassment? Why or why not? QUESTION #2: If so, what type of sexual harassment?
QUESTION #3: How would you respond to this situation?

Scenario: Sexual Harassment

Three NCO’s are out at a local bar having some drinks. Their discussion quickly turns to the new female Airmen in the shop. Sexual comments are made about her by 2 of the NCO’s. The third NCO is her supervisor and expresses that he is uneasy talking about her this way. The two NCO’s laugh it off and continue their conversation. The offended NCO tells them again the conversation is inappropriate. One of the offending NCO’s makes the comment, “Stop being gay, it’s not like we’re at work.” The Airmen’s supervisor leaves.
QUESTION #1: Could this situation be considered sexual harassment? QUESTION #2: If so, what type of sexual harassment?
QUESTION #3: How would you respond to this situation?

Scenario: Sexual Harassment

A male Captain is at a local dance club. Five female Airmen that work in his unit walk in. When he sees them he says, “Hello ladies, you look nice tonight.” After a few more drinks he approaches them again and tells them, “You girls look hot, your uniforms don’t do your body justice.” After this comment the girls do not say anything but walk off. The Captain then spots them on the dance floor. He tries to dance with them but they keep moving away. Finally they walk away from him. When they do, the Captain slaps one of them on her backside.
QUESTION #1: Could this situation be considered sexual harassment? Why or why not? QUESTION #2: If so, what type of sexual harassment?
QUESTION #3: How would you respond to this situation?

Scenario: Sexual Harassment

Two females, a civilian and an Airman, are in the break room discussing the past weekend. The civilian begins to tell the Airman about a guy she had met and “hooked up with.” The civilian goes into detail about the sexual encounter. Another female Airman in the break room overhears the conversation and asks her to stop. The civilian tells her that she is having a private conversation and if she doesn’t want to hear it she can leave. The civilian continues her story in sexually graphic detail.
QUESTION #1: Could this situation be considered sexual harassment? Why or why not? QUESTION #2: If so, what type of sexual harassment?
QUESTION #3: How would you respond to this situation?

Scenario: Religion

A SSgt notices a ring that his Airman subordinate is wearing. The ring is pewter with various symbols and writing with a red stone on the top. The SSgt asks the Airman what the symbols and writing mean. The Airman explains to the SSgt he and his girlfriend just got engaged, they are both members of the Church of Satan, and that it is customary to give each other the rings. The SSgt begins to make comments that the Airman drinks blood, kills babies, and sacrifices animals and that he can’t believe the AF would allow someone like him to wear the uniform.
The SSgt yells at the Airman telling him to get out of the office and not to come back until he gets his head on straight.
QUESTION #1: Was there an EO violation? If so, what was the violation? QUESTION #2: What should the Airman do to address the situation?
QUESTION #3: What should the SSgt have done to question the ring’s meaning? QUESTION #4: What type of impact could these types of comments have on the unit?

Attachment 2

FIRST DUTY STATION COURSE CRITIQUE

Instructor: Date: Your opinion is important to evaluate and develop curriculum. Please write the number in the box provided that corresponds to your choice, according to the rating scale below. Provide any related comments on the lines provided.
1 2 3 4 5
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree/Disagree Agree Strongly Agree

1. This course provided me with a basic understanding of equal opportunity (EO) policies and guidance. Comments:

2. This course helped me understand the definitions of unlawful discrimination and sexual harassment. Comments:

3. This course helped me understand informal and formal civilian EO complaint processes.

Comments:

4. This course helped me understand informal and formal military EO complaint processes.

Comments:

5. This course helped me understand the roles and responsibilities relating to EO issues.

Comments:

6. The scenarios/role plays/handouts helped reinforce my understanding of the learning objectives. Comments:

7. The instructor demonstrated professionalism and the needed skills to facilitate this course.

Comments:

8. What is the MOST valuable information provided or your favorite part of this course? Why?

9. What is the LEAST valuable information provided or your least favorite part of this course? Why?

10. How can we improve the First Duty Station course? Please write comments below.

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA

EQUAL OPPORTUNITY

HUMAN RELATIONS EDUCATION KEY PERSONNEL BRIEFING

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA

Objective 1 of 4
Program overview, objectives, scope and limitations

Objective 2 of 4
Recognize roles and responsibilities
Objective 3 of 4
Recall EO Complaint Processes

Objective 4 of 4
Review unit trends

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA

Equal Opportunity

Main Point 1 of 4
Program overview, objectives, scope and limitations

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA

EO Staff Members

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA

Program Objective
To enhance mission effectiveness by assisting commanders at all levels with Equal Opportunity (EO) issues and through training by providing Human Relations Education (HRE).

Scope and Limitations
The EO Office will inform commanders of problems that may adversely affect member’s behavior, health, duty performance, or mission.

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA

Equal Opportunity

Main Point 2 of 4
Roles and Responsibilities

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA
Key Personnel

• Support/enforce EO policy
• Inform members of their right to file EO complaints
• Investigate allegations of unlawful discrimination/sexual harassment
• Brief alleged offenders (military) of any allegations against him/her
• Protect members who file complaints from reprisal
• Take appropriate corrective actions as necessary
• Accommodate religious practices that will not have an adverse impact on readiness, unit cohesion, or standards of discipline
• Preserve service member’s right of expression to maximum extent
possible regarding hate group activities

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA
EO Office

• Clarify military formal EO complaints
• Conduct informal complaint processing for DoD civilian employees
• Conduct EOT Incident clarifications
• Perform Unit Climate Assessments
• Serve as SME for IG investigative officers and/or CDIs
• Conduct human relations education
• Maintain close liaison with on and off-base agencies

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA

Equal Opportunity

Main Point 3 of 4
EO Complaints

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA

Informal: Complainant chooses avenue for resolution
• Resolve the complaint on his/her own
• Chain of Command
• Request intervention from a co-worker
• Use the Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR)

Formal: EO Office conducts clarification
• Interview witnesses/alleged offender
• Gather data through records/reports
• Preponderance of evidence standard
• Staff through JA

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA

Civilian Complaints

Informal: EO conducts limited fact finding inquiry
• Attempts to resolve complaint
based on remedies
• ADR
Formal: Investigated by Investigative Resolution Division (IRD)
• The AF Civilian Appellate
Review Office (AFCARO) determines if discrimination occurred.

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA

Equal Opportunity

Main Point 4 of 4
Unit and Installation Trends/Concerns

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA

Unit/Base Trends and Concerns

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA

Objective 1 of 4
Program overview, objectives, scope and limitations
Objective 2 of 4
Recognize roles and responsibilities

Objective 3 of 4
Recall EO Complaint Processes

Objective 4 of 4
Review unit trends

Obtained by Judicial Watch, Inc. via FOIA

EQUAL OPPORTUNITY

HUMAN RELATIONS EDUCATION KEY PERSONNEL BRIEFING

LESSON PLAN PART I

SYNOPSIS

Key Personnel Briefing Version: 15 Apr 11

Note: Instructor will personalize, but will not delete any content of the master lesson plan

INSTRUCTOR NAME: _

EO DIRECTOR APPROVAL:

DATE: _

INSTRUCTIONAL METHOD:
One-on-One Discussion: 30 Minutes

LESSON EMPHASIS: This briefing should be presented by the EO Director or designee. The purpose is to provide commanders, command chiefs, first sergeants, and other senior personnel with information on the EO program, and roles and responsibilities. The briefing should leave a lasting impression about the EO staff’s professionalism and willingness to support the overall unit/installation Human Relations Climate.
STRATEGY: This briefing provides the foundation for key personnel and serves as a refresher on EO policies and procedures. The first main point highlights EO program objectives, scope and limitations. The second main point defines responsibilities of key personnel and the EO office. The third main point outlines avenues to address concerns of unlawful discrimination and sexual harassment through discussion of the informal and formal complaint processes. The final main point informs key personnel of unit, installation, and off- base trends. At the conclusion of the briefing, key personnel will review and complete the KPB overview at attachment 1.

REQUIRED READING: None

REFERENCES:
1. AFPD 36-27, Equal Opportunity (EO), 22 May 09
2. AFI 36-2706, Equal Opportunity Program Military and Civilian, 5 Oct 10
3. AFI 51-903, Dissident and Protest Activities, 1 Feb 98
4. DODD 1350.2, Department of Defense Military Equal Opportunity Program, 21 Nov 03
5. DODD 1440.1, Department of Defense Civilian Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Program, 21 Nov 03
6. DODI 1300.17, Accommodation of Religious Practices Within the Military Services, 10 Feb 09
7. DODI 1325.6, Handling Dissident and Protest Activities Among Members of the Armed Forces, 27 Nov 09
8. AF/MAJCOM/Installation Policy Letters
9. 29 CFR PART 1614, Federal Sector Equal Employment Opportunity
10. EEOC Management Directive, MD 110

STUDENT INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIAL:
KPB Outline (Attachment 1), Critique (Attachment 2), KPB Guide

AUDIOVISUAL AIDS AND EQUIPMENT:
Projection Screen, PowerPoint Slide Presentation, Computer

LESSON SYLLABUS:

Cognitive Lesson Objective: Given a one-on-one discussion, key personnel will recognize that awareness of and involvement in positive human relations is imperative to mission effectiveness.

Cognitive Samples of Behavior LEVEL MEASURE Time

Introduction 2 Min
MP I. Discuss EO program overview, objectives, scope and limitations K C 5 Min

MP II. Recognize roles and responsibilities K C 10 Min

MP III. Recall EO/EEO complaint processes K C 5 Min

MP IV. Review unit trends K C 5 Min

Conclusion 3 Min
Total Time 30 Min

Levels of Learning
K—Knowledge

Student Measurement
Critique

LESSON PLAN
Part II Lesson Development

INTRODUCTION

(Student Developed)

ATTENTION:

MOTIVATION:

OVERVIEW:

TRANSITION:

BODY

MP I: EO PROGRAM OVERVIEW LEVEL: K MEAS: C TIME: 5 Min

A. EO Office Staff
Instructor Note: Provide current office staff and office location
B. Program Objective
Express the following: The objective of the EO program is to enhance mission effectiveness by assisting commanders at all levels with Equal Opportunity (EO) issues and through training by providing Human Relations Education (HRE).

C. Scope and Limitations
Express the following: The EO Office will inform commanders of problems that may adversely affect member’s behavior, health, duty performance, or mission.

TRANSITION:

MP II: RESPONSIBILITIES LEVEL: K MEAS: C TIME: 10 Min

A. Key Personnel
Instructor Note: Briefly discuss the following responsibilities

1. Support and enforce EO policy.

2. Inform members of their right to file EO/EEO Informal or Formal Complaints with the EO Office without fear of reprisal or retaliation and their right to anonymity (for civilian complaints).

3. Ensure all personnel are free to present an EO/EEO Complaint or a Protected Disclosure to the chain-of-command.

4. Investigate allegations of unlawful discrimination/sexual harassment promptly and fairly. Provide the EO Director with a synopsis of the allegation(s), participant names and demographics, and any corrective action(s) taken (Commander Worked Issues).

5. Brief/Counsel alleged offender of the allegations against him/her and the final outcome. (military complaints)

6. Protect members who file an EO/EEO Complaint from reprisal or retaliation.

7. Take appropriate corrective/disciplinary actions to end unlawful discrimination and sexual harassment.

8. Accommodate religious practices when accommodation will not have an adverse impact on military readiness, unit cohesion, standards of discipline. (DODD 1300.17)

9. Preserve service member’s right of expression to the maximum extent possible, consistent with good order, discipline, and national security regarding participation in hate group activities. (AFI 51-903)

Express the following: The installation commander/center director reviews all EO/EEO cases on a monthly basis for consistent enforcement, timeliness, and reprisal prevention.

B. EO Office
Instructor Note: Briefly discuss the following responsibilities

1. Clarifies EO complaints for active duty, family members and retirees. Conduct complaint processing for DOD civilians. Conduct EOT Incident Clarifications, Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR), Human Relations Education and Unit Climate Assessments.

2. Maintains close liaison with on and off base agencies, establishments, advisory councils, and special emphasis groups.

3. Consults with IG investigative officers as Subject Matter Experts (SME) throughout a CDI that has allegations of unlawful discrimination and sexual harassment.

4. Provides HRE on diversity, unlawful discrimination and sexual harassment for base personnel.

5. Assists commanders in developing EO supplemental policy guidance letters for their units.

6. Apprises unit commanders of unlawful discriminatory or sexual harassment incidents when no complaint has been submitted while respecting civilians’ right to anonymity.

TRANSITION:

MP III: EO COMPLAINTS LEVEL: K MEAS: C TIME: 5 Min

A. Military Complaints
Express the following: Members are encouraged to use the chain of command to identify and correct unlawful discriminatory practices. This includes processing and resolving complaints of unlawful discrimination and sexual harassment. The chain of command is responsible for creating an environment free from unlawful discrimination and sexual harassment. Two options are available:

1. Informal: The individual may resolve the complaint on his/her own, request intervention from a co-worker, use the chain of command, or use the Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR). ADR (Facilitation) may be used to facilitate communications between the disputants and may lead to the early resolution of informal cases.

2. Formal: Complaint is filed and addressed by the EO office. The complainant has 60 days from the time the alleged behavior occurred to file a formal complaint. The complainant must provide extenuating circumstances if they exceed this timeframe. The EO office conducts a complaint clarification to determine whether a formal EO complaint is supported by a preponderance of the credible evidence. The complaint clarification process includes interviewing or taking statements from persons (complainant, witnesses, and alleged offender) who may have information relevant to the complaint and gathering data from records or reports. ADR (Facilitation) may used to facilitate communications between the disputants and may lead to the early resolution of formal cases.

B. Civilian Complaints
Express the following: A federal employee or applicant who believes that s/he has been discriminated against on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age (40 years or older), disability (mental or physical), genetic information, or who believes that s/he has been subjected to harassment (sexual or non sexual) or retaliated against for opposing discrimination or for participating in the complaint process. These individuals can file an informal complaint of

discrimination. The aggrieved must contact an EO Counselor within 45 calendar days from the alleged incident or when they became aware of the discrimination. (29 CFR 1614.105) This allows the EO Counselor to try and resolve the complaint at the lowest possible level.

1. Informal: EO attempts to resolve complaint at the lowest level. The EO Specialist is a neutral party and is not an advocate to the complainant or to management. Attempts at resolution include the use of ADR, based on complainant remedies. The EO Counselor has 30 days to complete the informal process unless the complainant extends the time.

2. If the EO Specialist cannot resolve the complaint at the informal stage, the complainant (aggrieved) has the right to file a formal complaint. The complaint must be filed in writing within 15 calendar days of the Notice of Right to File.

3. The complaint will be investigated by Investigative Resolution Division (IRD). The IRD investigates Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) discrimination complaints for Department of Defense (DoD) agencies. They are conducted at the request of the agency after an EEO complaint has been accepted for investigation by the agency. The Air Force Civilian Appellate Review Office (AFCARO) will make a determination of whether or not discrimination has occurred if the complainant has not requested a hearing. The formal EEO complaint process up to this point can take up 180 days. Both the agency and the complainant have appeal rights on the decision and ultimately the complainant can file in U.S. District Court.

Reemphasize the following: In order for the complaint to be processed at the formal stage, the initial contact must be within 45 calendar days of the date of the matter alleged to be discriminatory or, in the case of a personnel action, within 45 calendar days of the effective date or when s/he becomes aware of the personnel action. The 45-day time limit may be extended for reasons outlined in 29 C.F.R. Section 1614.105(a). To be deemed as initiating contact, the aggrieved person must state a basis (one of the Title VII categories) of his/her claim and an action must have occurred. For example, if there is a proposed action – Proposed letter of counseling issued to the aggrieved but no action has been taken, then the complaint may be dismissed based on an action that has not occurred, unless the action is part of a pattern of continuing harassment.

Express the following: Formal Complaint processing takes 1-5 years. Therefore, ADR is strongly encouraged by the Air Force. It is always the goal of the EO office to restore the work environment to mission readiness. This is beneficial to all parties.

TRANSITION:

MP IV: UNIT AND INSTALLATION TRENDS/CONCERNS

LEVEL: K MEAS: C TIME: 5 Min

Instructor Note: Provide unit and/or local complaint trend data (military and civilian) and most recent UCA data/information, Out & About information, EOTI information if applicable.

Instructor Note: Provide local off-base trends i.e. hate group activity, off-limits areas

TRANSITION:

CONCLUSION

(Instructor Developed)

SUMMARY:

RE-MOTIVATION: CLOSURE:

LESSON PLAN PART III

EVALUATION

1. Critique

LESSON PLAN PART IV

RELATED MATERIALS

1. Instructional Aids (Slides, PowerPoint, video, etc.)

2. KPB Outline

Attachment 1

KPB OUTLINE
EO PROGRAM OVERVIEW
– Staff members
– Improve mission effectiveness
– Inform commanders/center directors of problems affecting member’s behavior, health, duty performance, or mission.

RESPONSIBILITIES
Commanders
– Supports and enforces EO policy
– Informs unit members of their right to file EO complaints without fear of reprisal.
– Informs unit members, through briefings and EO supplemental policy guidance that the Air Force will not tolerate unlawful discrimination and sexual harassment.
– Informs unit members that commanders and supervisors will take appropriate disciplinary and corrective action when unlawful discrimination or sexual harassment occurs.
– Ensures every effort is made to protect the complainant’s identity when a formal EO complaint (military or civilian) is filed with the EO office.
– Ensures the alleged offender is briefed on the outcome of the Military EO case when the case is closed and advises the alleged offender of their right to appeal the outcome in this case. Notifies the EO office of the date the member was briefed.
– Investigates allegations of unlawful discrimination or sexual harassment when the complainant has elected not to file an unlawful discrimination complaint with the EO office (commander worked issue)
– Will not investigate allegations of unlawful discrimination or sexual harassment when the
complainant has filed a formal Military EO complaint with the EO office. Will investigate Civilian EO sexual harassment complaints IAW 10 U.S.C. 1561.
– Provides the EO office with a written memorandum regarding substantiated or unsubstantiated issues when handled within the unit, including CDIs
– Ensures rating officials evaluate compliance with EO directives and document repeated or serious violations IAW AFI 36-2406
– Ensures membership in groups espousing supremacist causes or advocating unlawful discrimination or sexual harassment is considered when evaluating and assigning members
– Accomplishes UCAs every two years or upon request (including special requests made by the IC/Center Director)

EO Office
– Processes informal and formal MEO/EEO complaints
– Maintain close liaison with on/off base agencies i.e. IG, SFS, special emphasis groups
– Serves as subject matter expert of IG investigations involving unlawful discrimination or sexual harassment
– Assists commanders in developing EO policy letters
– Apprises commanders of unlawful discrimination/sexual harassment when no complaint has been filed

EO COMPLAINTS
– Formal and Informal (Military)
– Pre-complaint and Formal (Civilian)
– Timelines

UNIT AND INSTALLATION TRENDS/CONCERNS
– Unit complaint trends

– Unit UCA data
– Installation/off-base trends

Printed Name/Rank SSN Date

Signature EO Director or Designatee

Organization/Office Symbol Date Assumed Position

This document contains Personal Data, which shall be safeguard pursuant to the Privacy Act of 1974. This information will only be released to authorize personnel with “Need to Know,” for Official Use Only, stored in a secure area when not in use, and destroyed by shredding when obsolete or no longer needed.

PERSONAL DATA
Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a)

KEY PERSONNEL BRIEFING CRITIQUE

Instructor:

Date:

Your opinion is important to help us evaluate and develop curriculum. Please write the number in the box provided that corresponds to your choice, according to the rating scale below.

1 2 3 4 5
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree/Disagree Agree Strongly Agree

1. This course provided me with a basic understanding of equal opportunity (EO) program objectives. Comments:

2. This course helped me understand the scope and limitations of the EO program.

Comments:

3. This course helped me recall and understand the informal & formal civilian EO complaint processes. Comments:

4. This course helped me recall and understand the informal & formal military EO complaint processes. Comments:

5. This course helped me understand my roles & responsibilities related to the EO program.

Comments:

6. The briefer demonstrated professionalism and the needed skills to facilitate this course.

Comments:

7. What is the MOST valuable information provided or your favorite part of this briefing? Why?

8. What is the LEAST valuable information provided or your least favorite part of this briefing? Why?

9. How can we improve the Key Personnel Briefing? Please write comments below.

Sharia law is now legal in Oklahoma

 

Oklahoma’s Shariah Law Ban Is Unconstitutional & Gone for Good

 

By ANNIE YOUDERIAN

 

(CN) – Oklahoma’s attempt to “specifically target and outlaw Shariah,” or Islamic law, is unconstitutional, a federal judge ruled Thursday.

Chief U.S. District Judge Vicki Miles-LaGrange in Oklahoma City permanently blocked state officials from certifying the 2010 election results for the so-called “Save Our State Amendment,” which “forbids courts from considering or using international law [and] Shariah law” when deciding cases.

Seventy percent of voters approved the constitutional amendment on Nov. 2, 2010. It had been placed on the ballot after state lawmakers passed a similar measure, House Joint Resolution 1056, about six months earlier.

Two days after the election, Muneer Awad, the former head of the Oklahoma chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-OK), challenged the amendment’s constitutionality in federal court.

He called the amendment “ridiculous” and a “gross transgression of the Establishment Clause,” as it could void legal contracts between Muslims, though courts are allowed to consider the traditions of other religions. He said no other state constitution “attaches special burdens on a religious tradition.”

“The goal was to stigmatize Islam by establishing in the public’s mind that Islam is something foreign and to be feared,” Awad argued in his motion for a preliminary injunction.

Miles-LaGrange granted a temporary restraining order on Nov. 9, followed by a preliminary injunction a few weeks later, after the judge said she needed more time to decide.

The 10th Circuit upheld that injunction in 2012, citing the state’s failure to identify a “compelling interest based on an actual problem.”

A few more plaintiffs have since been added to the amended complaint, including two Muslim faculty members at the University of Oklahoma and CAIR-OK’s current executive director, Adam Soltani. Awad moved to Manhattan last August for a job with another CAIR affiliate.

Miles-LaGrange made her preliminary injunction permanent on Thursday, saying the state “failed to assert a compelling state interest” for singling out Shariah law in its courts.

This violates the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which bars the government from endorsing a particular religion, she wrote.

The amendment cannot be salvaged by severing the references to Shariah law, she said, because its whole purpose was to ban Islamic law.

“Having reviewed the numerous statements by the legislators who authored the amendment, it is abundantly clear that the primary purpose of the amendment was to specifically target and outlaw Shariah law and to act as a preemptive strike against Shariah law to protect Oklahoma from a perceived ‘threat’ of Shariah law being utilized in Oklahoma courts,” she wrote.

She said voters approved it for the same reason — as a “referendum on Shariah law” — because all public debate, radio ads, robocalls and articles “primarily and overwhelmingly” focused on the Shariah provisions.

“While the public has an interest in the will of the voters being carried out, the court finds that the public has a more profound and long-term interest in upholding an individual’s constitutional rights,” Miles-LaGrange concluded.

The American Civil Liberties Union and CAIR issued a press release saying the judge “got it right.”

“We’re very pleased with the result, which will help secure religious freedom and equality for all Oklahomans,” said Daniel Mach, director of the ACLU’s Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief. “Throughout the case, the state couldn’t present even a shred of evidence to justify this discriminatory, unnecessary measure.”

http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/08/16/60364.htm

Revealed: How the NSA will spy on you if you just put the word Osama in an email, text message or Facebook chat

  • An message sent to a cousin named Osama  may now be enough to make any American a target of  surveillance
  • The information was couched in a set of  rules leaked by Edward Snowden about a 2008 domestic surveillance law 
  • The NSA can read the emails simply by  defining the foreign recipient, and not the American sender, as their  target

By  Daily Mail Reporter

PUBLISHED: 14:48 EST, 8  August 2013 |  UPDATED: 17:50 EST, 8 August 2013

The NSA isn’t just reading the emails of  American connected to terrorists, the agency is searching virtually all  communications Americans send across the border for the mention of anything even  resembling information about overseas surveillance targets.

New information reveals that even a Facebook  message about al-qaeda sent as a joke or an email sent to a cousin named Osama  might trip NSA surveillance software designed to filter through every message  sent from American soil to a recipient abroad.

This means that just about any message sent  overseas could be read by the NSA as computers flag potentially suspicious  message for examination by humans.

Information overload: A new report shows the NSA is doing a lot more than spying on Americans with terrorist connections, perhaps with the help of its $1.9 billion Utah Data Center 

Information overload: A new report shows the NSA is  doing a lot more than spying on Americans with terrorist connections, perhaps  with the help of its $1.9 billion Utah Data Center

 

By identifying the recipient of the emails or  text messages as the target of the surveillance instead of the sender, the NSA  sidesteps a 2008 law that allows spying on domestic soil without warrants as  long as the target was a noncitizen abroad.

This, according to a shocking New York Times report out Thursday, which cites a senior source inside the NSA.

‘To conduct the surveillance,’ reads the  report, ‘the NSA. is temporarily copying and then sifting through the contents  of what is apparently most e-mails and other text-based communications that  cross the border…[the] computer searches the data for the identifying keywords  or other “selectors” and stores those that match so that human analysts could  later examine them.’

Leaked: The revelation was at least partially couched in information leaked by Edward Snowden, which hinted at the expansive reach of the NSA's surveillance program 

Leaked: The revelation was at least partially couched in  information leaked by Edward Snowden, which hinted at the expansive reach of the  NSA’s surveillance program

 

More convenient: According to the New York Times, the agency searches virtually all emails sent from Americans to recipients overseas. Seen here is the 28-acre NSA facility outside Baltimore, Maryland 

More convenient: According to the New York Times, the  agency searches virtually all emails sent from Americans to recipients overseas.  Seen here is the 28-acre NSA facility outside Baltimore, Maryland

 

The official said the remaining emails, those  not selected by the software, are deleted.

Nonetheless, privacy proponents were in  disbelief.

‘The program described by the New York Times  involves a breathtaking invasion of millions of people’s privacy,’ American  Civil Liberties Union deputy legal director Jameel Jaffer said in a statement.  ‘The NSA has cast a massive dragnet over Americans’ international  communications, collecting and monitoring virtually all of them, and retaining  some untold number of them in government databases. This is precisely the kind  of generalized spying that the Fourth Amendment was intended to  prohibit.’

Jaffer, and undoubtedly others like him, fear  the news could equal an invasion of free speech.

Though it was previously known the NSA targets Americans with known terrorist associations, new evidence shows the agency is far less discriminating as it combs messages for names and emails related to its targets 

Though it was previously known the NSA targets Americans  with known terrorist associations, new evidence shows the agency is far less  discriminating as it combs messages for names and emails related to its  targets

 

‘The government’s scrutiny of virtually every  international email sent by Americans will have extraordinary consequences for  free expression,’ wrote Jaffer. ‘Americans will inevitably hesitate to discuss  controversial topics, visit politically sensitive websites or interact with  foreigners with dissenting views. By injecting the NSA into virtually every  cross-border interaction, the U.S. government will forever alter what has always  been an open exchange of ideas.’

The NSA, meanwhile, all but declined to  respond to the new allegations.

‘In carrying out its signals intelligence  mission, N.S.A. collects only what it is explicitly authorized to collect,’ said  NSA spokeswoman Judith A. Emmel. ‘Moreover, the agency’s activities are deployed  only in response to requirements for information to protect the country and its  interests.’

Emmel did not directly address the  surveillance of cross-border communications, but did stress that surveillance  carried out by the agency is intended to gather information about ‘foreign  powers and their agents, foreign organizations, foreign persons or international  terrorists’ and not about American citizens.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2387232/Revealed-How-NSA-spy-you-just-word-Osama-email-text-message-Facebook-chat.html#ixzz2bQlfpBws Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

‘A massive and unprecedented intrusion’: Associated Press condemns US government for seizing journalists’ telephone records without explanation

 

John Hall

Tuesday, 14 May 2013

The Associated Press news agency has condemned the US government for the unexplained seizure of records of telephone calls made by its journalists.

Describing the seizure as “a massive and unprecedented intrusion”, AP’s chief executive Gary Pruitt accused the US Justice Department of gathering records from more than 20 separate phone lines; including reporters’ private and office lines, general numbers for its New York, Washington and Connecticut offices, and the main phone line used by reporters based in the House of Representatives press gallery.

He said that the records focused on calls made between April and May 2012, adding it was unknown how many phone calls were made and received on the 20 phone lines in that time but stressing that, as over 100 journalists had access to the phones, it was possible that the records ran into the hundreds.

He went on to say that the some of the calls are likely to have been with confidential sources on a variety of topics, including sensitive information about the US government itself.

Mr Pruitt said: “There can be no possible justification for such an overbroad collection of the telephone communications of the Associated Press and its reporters.”

He added: “These records potentially reveal communications with confidential sources across all of the newsgathering activities undertaken by the AP during a two-month period, provide a road map to AP’s newsgathering operations, and disclose information about AP’s activities and operations that the government has no conceivable right to know”.

The Justice Department has provided no formal explanation for the seizures, but US Attorney Officer officials have previously stated they were conducting a criminal investigation into information contained in an AP story about a CIA operation in Yemen which was published in May last year.

White House representatives quickly sought to distance themselves from the seizure, with press secretary Jay Carney issuing a statement claiming they had only become aware of developments through media reports.

He said: “Other than press reports, we have no knowledge of any attempt by the Justice Department to seek phone records of the AP. We are not involved in decisions made in connection with criminal investigations, as those matters are handled independently by the Justice Department.”

The Republican chairman of the investigative House of Representatives Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Darrell Issa, criticised the seizure of records.

Speaking to CNN, he said: “They had an obligation to look for every other way to get it before they intruded on the freedom of the press”.

The Democratic chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senator Patrick Leahy, emailed AP a statement which read: “I am very troubled by these allegations and want to hear the government’s explanation.”

Meanwhile, the American Civil Liberties Union accused the Obama administration of “press intimidation”.

In response, the US Attorney’s Office in the District of Columbia issued a statement insisting it took its obligations to “follow all applicable laws, federal regulations, and Department of Justice policies” seriously.

It said: “Those regulations require us to make every reasonable effort to obtain information through alternative means before even considering a subpoena for the phone records of a member of the media”.

It added: “Because we value the freedom of the press, we are always careful and deliberative in seeking to strike the right balance between the public interest in the free flow of information and the public interest in the fair and effective administration of our criminal laws”.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/a-massive-and-unprecedented-intrusion-associated-press-condemns-us-government-for-seizing-journalists-telephone-records-without-explanation-8615229.html#

 

Biometric Database of All Adult Americans Hidden in Immigration Reform

The immigration reform measure the Senate began debating yesterday would create a national biometric database of virtually every adult in the U.S., in what privacy groups fear could be the first step to a ubiquitous national identification system.

Buried in the more than 800 pages of the bipartisan legislation (.pdf)  is language mandating the creation of the innocuously-named “photo tool,” a massive federal database administered by the Department of Homeland Security and containing names, ages, Social Security numbers and photographs of everyone in the country with a driver’s license or other state-issued photo ID.

Employers would be obliged to look up every new hire in the database to verify that they match their photo.

This piece of the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act is aimed at curbing employment of undocumented immigrants. But privacy advocates fear the inevitable mission creep, ending with the proof of self being required at polling places, to rent a house, buy a gun, open a bank account, acquire credit, board a plane or even attend a sporting event or log on the internet. Think of it as a government version of Foursquare, with Big Brother cataloging every check-in.

“It starts to change the relationship between the citizen and state, you do have to get permission to do things,” said Chris Calabrese, a congressional lobbyist with the American Civil Liberties Union. “More fundamentally, it could be the start of keeping a record of all things.”

For now, the legislation allows the database to be used solely for employment purposes. But historically such limitations don’t last. The Social Security card, for example, was created to track your government retirement benefits. Now you need it to purchase health insurance.

“The Social Security number itself, it’s pretty ubiquitous in your life,” Calabrese said.

David Bier, an analyst with the Competitive Enterprise Institute, agrees with the ACLU’s fears.

“The most worrying aspect is that this creates a principle of permission basically to do certain activities and it can be used to restrict activities,” he said. “It’s like a national ID system without the card.”

For the moment, the debate in the Senate Judiciary Committee is focused on the parameters of legalization for unauthorized immigrants, a border fence and legal immigration in the future.

The committee is scheduled to resume debate on the package Tuesday.

 

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/05/immigration-reform-dossiers/

Bloomberg: New Yorkers will ‘never know where our cameras are’

Published time: April 26, 2013 22:49                           

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg visits the Lower Manhattan Security Initiative on April 23, 2013 in New York City. (AFP Photo / John Moore)

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg visits the Lower Manhattan Security Initiative on April 23, 2013 in New York City. (AFP Photo / John Moore)

New York City police officials intend to expand the already extensive use of surveillance cameras throughout town. The plan, unveiled Thursday, comes as part of a drive for increased security around the US following the Boston Marathon attack.

New York City Police Department Commissioner Ray Kelly announced the plan during a press conference with Mayor Michael Bloomberg, in which the two announced that the suspected Boston Marathon bombers were planning to attack New York next. The pair said they hope to discourage criminals by using so-called “smart cameras” that will aggregate data from 911 alerts, arrest records, mapped crime patterns, surveillance cameras and radiation detectors, among other tools, according to The Verge.

You’re never going to know where all of our cameras are,” Bloomberg told reporters gathered outside City Hall. “And that’s one of the ways you deter people; they just don’t know whether the person sitting next to you is somebody sitting there or a detective watching.”

Kelly said the Domain Awareness System, nicknamed “the dashboard,” would centralize already existing data captured on the between 3,500 and 6,000 cameras already placed throughout the city with new technology developed in conjunction with Microsoft. The project is expected to take three years to complete and cost between $40 and $50 million.

Police and private security personel monitor security cameras at the Lower Manhattan Security Initiative on April 23, 2013 in New York City. (AFP Photo / John Moore)

Police and private security personel monitor security cameras at the Lower Manhattan Security Initiative on April 23, 2013 in New York City. (AFP Photo / John Moore)

 

The commissioner previously said that at least 16 terror plots had been thwarted in New York City since the attack on September 11, 2001, asserting that such  law enforcement success show that the surveillance tools put in place since then have been effective. His boast came in the face of the New York Civil Liberties Union and similar privacy advocates who have asked for more transparency on the issue of police monitoring.

The privacy issue has really been taken off the table,” Kelly said Thursday. “I don’t think people are concerned about it. I think people accept it in a post-9/11 world.”

Mayor Bloomberg agreed, using the press conference to slam the “special interests” who have objected to his policies. The American Civil Liberties Union, for one, has criticized Bloomberg’s administration for installing thousands of cameras in Lower Manhattan in a surveillance initiative that has since expanded north through Midtown.

The role of surveillance cameras played in identifying the suspects was absolutely essential to saving lives, both in Boston, and now we know here in New York City,” the mayor said Thursday. “We’ve made major investments in camera technology – notwithstanding the objections of some special interests.”

People are all worried about privacy,” he continued. “Yes, it is a concern, but given the balance you have between keeping people safe and total privacy, the direction the whole world is going is more cameras and better-quality cameras.”

 

http://rt.com/usa/bloomberg-never-know-where-cameras-477/

How metadata brought down CIA boss David Petraeus

13:59 16 November 2012 by Hal Hodson

Every move we make online leaves a trace. This is a lesson former CIA director David Petraeus and his lover, Paula Broadwell, learned in dramatic fashion a few weeks ago after an FBI investigation – begun in response to an unrelated complaint – found email records of their illicit affair.

Such troubles may seem far from the day-to-day concerns of the average internet user. But federal government searches of user data have been growing rapidly. Last week, Google released its biannual transparency report, which shows that the US government made nearly 8,000 requests for data on its users’ accounts over the past six months – one third more than the previous reporting period. Of those requests, 90 per cent were fully or partially complied with.

The search giant is far from alone. Facebook, Amazon, Yahoo and a host of similar sites all store huge amounts of our personal data. In the US, where many of the biggest internet firms are based, such data are protected under the Stored Communications Act. Law enforcement agencies require a search warrant to gain access to personal online content, just as they would if they wanted to search your home.

In the Petraeus saga, though, the country’s top intelligence officer was betrayed by metadata, seemingly anonymous recordings that internet companies make of when and where someone logged into an email account, a facebook profile or the like. While the FBI was monitoring an email account that was reportedly the source of some harassing emails, it found a series of IP addresses recorded when a user logged in from hotel WiFi networks. By cross-referencing those logins with hotel guest lists, the agency ascertained that Broadwell was the only one who could have logged in.

A second account, in which Broadwell and Petraeus corresponded about their affair by saving messages in the “drafts” folder, was also linked to Broadwell in this way. Ian Goldberg, a computer scientist at the University of Waterloo in Ontario, says the important thing to learn from the Petraeus affair is that metadata is at least as, if not more, important than the content of the emails themselves.

“Who’s talking to whom, where they are logged in from, what device are they using. That information is way less legally protected,” he says.

The problem with trying to use any internet service anonymously, says Chris Soghoian, a privacy technologist at the American Civil Liberties Union, is that once an email address can be tied to where it was accessed – whether a coffee shop, hotel or an internet café – investigators can then hunt for, say, credit card transactions or signals from a cellphone tower to place you there at that time and reveal your identity.

Goldberg is also a director of the non-profit Tor Project, which runs privacy software that is popular with internet activists and dissidents. It could have saved Petraeus and Broadwell from discovery because it bounces the route to webmail servers through a series of other computers, erasing its footprints on the way. Both Goldberg and Soghoian agree that, in the end, the advice for those seeking privacy online is simple: use Tor and turn off your cellphone.

“Look how much surveillance power the FBI has,” Goldberg says. “If they can track down the director of the CIA, what hope is there for normal people?”

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn22511-how-metadata-brought-down-cia-boss-david-petraeus.html?full=true&print=true

US rapidly increased electronic surveillance

Published: 27 September, 2012, 21:51

The US Justice Department has wiretapped the phones of more Americans in the last two years than the entire decade before it, and federal surveillance targeting the Internet usage of US civilians has surged wildly, new FOIA documents reveal.

The American Civil Liberties Union published documents late Wednesday that they received from the Justice Department in response to a Freedom of Information Act request the organization filed earlier this year. According to the papers, certain phone-tapping procedures have increased by 60 percent between 2009 and 2011, and the surveillance of email and other Internet data has been authorized in court by an increase of 361 percent during the same span.

The ACLU asked the Justice Department back in January to supply them with records regarding the annual statistics reports on the use of pen register and trap and trace devices, two methods of surveillance that can target information sent to and from phones, computers and other electronic devices. Now with proof in their hands, the ACLU can conclude again that the government had ramped up its secret surveillance of Americans with concrete evidence from the District Attorney’s office that shows rampant spy programs are targeting more and more US citizens.

Pen register and trap and trade devices, the ACLU acknowledges, are “powerfully invasive surveillance tools” that at one point consisted of physical, hard equipment that attaches to phone lines to intercept communication. Today’s technology allows surveillance to be conducted without attaching actual devices in the same manner, allowing the capturing of correspondence to be that much easier.

The devices are used to capture outgoing and incoming data pertaining to specifics communication, but do not include the actual contents of the discussion. It does, however, mean that any federal agency granted permission to place a pen register or trap and trace device can still see the “to” and “from” fields of email messages sent and received, as well as the time, date, length and numbers involved in phone conversations and records about IP addresses accessed by web browsers and basic instant messaging identification.

“Because these surveillance powers are not used to capture telephone conversations or the bodies of emails, they are classified as ‘non-content’ surveillance tools, as opposed to tools that collect ‘content,’ like wiretaps,” Naomi Gilens of the ACLU’s Speech, Privacy and Technology Project explains. “This means that the legal standard that law enforcement agencies must meet before using pen registers is lower than it is for wiretaps and other content-collecting technology.”

“Americans have a strong interest in understanding how frequently and under what circumstances their communications are the targets of pen registers and trap and trace devices. The people we communicate with through the telephone and Internet and the web pages we choose to visit can reveal a great deal about us, including the identities of our close friends and associates and what topics interest us when we engage in private sessions of reading and research,” the ACLU wrote when they filed their FOIA request earlier this year (.pdf). “It is important to Americans’ privacy and their ability to feel secure when availing themselves of new communications technologies that they understand the degree to which these technologies are subject to government surveillance.”

In a post published on the ACLU’s website this week, Gilens adds that the only paperwork necessary to tap phones and emails using the technology is a judge’s signature on a certificate that says that investigators believe the information may be relevant to a criminal probe.

“As long as it completes this simple procedural requirement, the government may proceed with pen register or trap and trace surveillance, without any judge considering the merits of the request,” Gilens adds.

In 1995, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit sharply critiques the ease in which these requests can be granted, ruling, “The judicial role in approving use of trap and trace devices is ministerial in nature.”

According to the just-released info, 37,616 pen registers and trap and trace devices were authorized to target the phone calls of Americans in 2011 alone. Barely 5,000 orders were signed in the year 2000.

http://on.rt.com/42ef1a

 

Security rules for Democratic National Convention cause concern: Banned: handbags, backpacks, soda cans, drink coolers, scarves, bike helmets, baby strollers, and non-service animals” within the hundred-square-block event zone

Charlotte police via Flickr

By Muriel Kane
Sunday, September 2, 2012 20:19 EDT

A new ordinance for “extraordinary events” put in place by the city of Charlotte, North Carolina, which is hosting the Democratic National Convention this week, have left attendees as well as protesters uncertain of what seemingly innocent possessions might be considered a cause for arrest.

Handguns and rifles, of course, are perfectly legal to carry openly under state law, although carrying a concealed weapon requires a permit.  But people could face arrest for carrying water bottles, hair spray, socks, or magic markers.

The rules explicitly ban “handbags, backpacks, soda cans, drink coolers, scarves, bike helmets, baby strollers, and non-service animals” within the hundred-square-block event zone. But what about a “container or object of sufficient weight to be used as a projectile.” The Associated Press suggests that this could “include almost anything from an apple to an iPhone.”

Two people were arrested during a demonstration on Sunday, but not as a result of the new ordinance.  One protester was wearing a mask and was allegedly found to be carrying a knife and one bystander was accused of disorderly conduct.

Charlotte City Attorney Robert Hagemann, who helped draft the ordinance, justifies it on the grounds that “while the vast majority [of protesters] are law-abiding and peaceful, expressing their First Amendment rights, a number of folks use the opportunity of large crowds and a platform to cause harm and violence.”

That does not satisfy observers like Chris Brook of the American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina, who is particularly worried about the ban on bags that are “carried with the intent to conceal weapons or other prohibited items.”  That provision seems to allow the police to perform warrantless searches and arrest anyone who refuses.

“I think it could easily lead to situations where there is some profiling going on,” Brook suggested. “For example a person wearing a business suit might be far less likely to be searched than some other individuals.”

Hagemann insists that police offers will rely on their training, experience, and common sense.  However, protest leaders have already expressed concern that the more than 5000 officers on the scene will abuse their powers, especially since they have been getting only twenty minutes of training in the new rules.

Relatively few protesters showed up at the Republican convention in Tampa last week.  More are expected in Charlotte — from the right as well as the left — but if Sunday’s low turnout is any indication, that may not happen.

“I think this is an attempt to vilify protesters,” Michael Zytkow of Occupy Charlotte told the Associated Press.  “I think it’s an attempt to prevent us from coming out and joining and expressing our rights to march on the street and express our grievances.”

Zytkow, who was arrested when he spoke for more than his allotted three minutes at the meeting where the ordinance was adopted, later tried to test the rules by rolling a cooler full of water bottles down the street at the time of a corporate shareholders meeting to which the ordinance applied.  Police ignored him.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/09/02/security-rules-for-democratic-national-convention-cause-concern/

Site appeals against court request to hand over details of tweets relating to Occupy activist charged with disorderly conduct

By Dominic Rushe, The Guardian
Monday, August 27, 2012 16:19 EDT

Twitter has lodged an appeal against a New York judge’s decision that it must hand over detailed information related to an Occupy Wall Street protester charged with disorderly conduct.

In July, Twitter was ordered to hand over almost three months’ worth of messages and other details related to the account of activist Malcolm Harris. Harris was among the hundreds of protesters accused of disorderly conduct during a protest on Brooklyn bridge last October.

Prosecutors have argued that Harris’s tweets show he knew he should not have been on the bridge. He has filed his own appeal, arguing that the judge’s ruling would hand over details of where he was and who he spoke to, as well as his tweets, and falls “so far outside the realm of a legitimate ruling that we are entitled to a pre-trial appeal”.

Twitter has argued that the posts belonged to Harris and, as such, it would be violating his fourth amendment right against unreasonable searches if it were to disclose the communications without first receiving a search warrant.

The case has evolved into a closely watched legal scrap over the extent of the US authorities’ right to access information from social networks. Twitter has previously resisted attempts by the US authorities to access the account of Icelandic MP and former WikiLeaks associate Birgitta Jónsdóttir.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has filed a motion with the court in support of Twitter. ACLU attorney Aden Fine said: “Under the first and fourth amendments, we have the right to speak freely on the internet, safe in the knowledge that the government can’t get information about our speech without a warrant and without satisfying first amendment scrutiny.

“We’re hopeful that Twitter’s appeal will overturn the criminal court’s dangerous decision, and reaffirm that we retain our constitutional rights to speech and privacy online, as well as offline.”

The New York district attorney’s office issued a subpoena to Twitter in January calling on the firm to hand over “any and all user information, including email address, as well as any and all tweets” for the period in question.

Last month Manhattan criminal court judge Matthew Sciarrino rejected most of Twitter arguments that the authorities were infringing Harris’s constitutional rights, and said that Twitter owned his messages.

Sciarrino said he would review all the material that he ordered turned over and would pass on “relevant portions” to prosecutors

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/aug/27/twitter-judge-occupy-order