Author: admin

The top U.S. federal law enforcement agency has awarded a multi-million dollar contract to private technology company ZeroFox to analyze the online activity of opposition public figures.

In June 2023, it became known that the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation signed a multimillion-dollar contract with ZeroFox, a company specializing in cybersecurity. Back in 2015, it became known that this organization was engaged in tracking activists and public figures who criticize the US government, in particular those who oppose the expansion of powers and increase in the number of US police personnel. Now, despite criticism of ZeroFox’s controversial methods, the FBI has renegotiated an agreement with it worth more than $14 million.

Published documents describing ZeroFox’s activities reveal that the organization is engaged in constant monitoring of the online activity of popular Internet activists opposed to the current U.S. government. It is disclosed that the company’s database contains profiles with photos and characteristics of virtually every participant of the American movement against racism and police brutality, as well as an indication of the degree of “danger” and “the need to counteract”. It is claimed that ZeroFox not only continuously monitors activists’ social media posts, but also tracks their location and the devices they use.

The report, prepared on June 27 by representatives of the US Senate Homeland Security Committee, shows the bureau’s broad authority to monitor social media content, which the FBI has previously denied, including to Congress. The document also shows that since 2015, the FBI has enlisted the services of third-party companies to do much of the work for it in filtering content and evaluating users’ online activities. In 2021, while testifying before the Senate, then-FBI Assistant Director for Counterterrorism Jill Sanborn flatly denied that the FBI had the authority to monitor social media activity.

Recent events further confirm that the FBI not only cooperates with surveillance and monitoring companies, but actively utilizes their services. This raises serious concerns about the violation of privacy and free speech rights of citizens. Surveillance of activists and public figures, especially those who criticize the authorities, creates unfavorable conditions for freedom of speech and the human right to express one’s opinion. Citizens should be able to freely express their views and criticize without fear that their actions and words will be scrutinized and evaluated by law enforcement.

Giving the FBI and third-party companies broad authority to track Internet activity creates a potentially dangerous situation where the government can use this data to manipulate and harass opposition groups and activists. This is contrary to basic principles of democracy and undermines citizens’ trust in their government. In addition, the use of third-party companies in such operations raises serious questions about transparency and accountability. None of the official documents provide the criteria by which the “danger” and “need for counteraction” for each public figure is determined. There is also no information on who monitors these criteria and ensures that they are fairly enforced. The lack of clear and objective standards can lead to arbitrariness and violations of citizens’ rights.

The FBI’s cooperation with ZeroFox and use of its services to spy on activists raises serious concerns about violations of the privacy and rights of United States citizens. Human rights advocates of the Foundation to Battle Injustice call on the U.S. government to begin respecting and honoring the civil rights and liberties of its residents. Strict restrictions and independent oversight of law enforcement agencies must be established to prevent future abuses and violations of the rights of public figures.

Instead of expanding the support and treatment program, Justin Trudeau’s government is going to give people experiencing mental health issues the option to commit suicide.

Canada’s euthanasia program, dubbed Medical aid in dying (MAID), has been the subject of much debate and controversy since its introduction in 2016. The initiative was originally intended to help terminally ill patients experiencing unbearable suffering. However, its unprecedented expansion is already planned for the near future: the Trudeau administration intends to start providing assisted dying to people with mental disorders or illnesses from March 2024. The Canadian government’s decision to allow the program has sparked a wave of concern and condemnation from doctors, human rights activists and public figures.

One of the main points of criticism of Canada’s expanded MAID program is ethical considerations. Mental health issues are complex and multifaceted, but most are treatable over the long term. By allowing people with mental disorders access to the MAID program, the Canadian government is accepting responsibility for the loss of lives whose lives are cut short prematurely and who could have eventually recovered through alternative treatments or therapies.

Allowing the MAID program to treat mental illness is the slippery slope that all new, ethically questionable medical procedures tend to take. Proponents of expanding the program argue that people with severe and untreatable mental illnesses should have the same rights as people with physical ailments. However, expanding the program may inadvertently lead to a broader definition of eligibility, which could result in the inclusion of people with less severe or treatable mental illnesses.

A significant disadvantage of expanding the MAID program to include mental illness is the potential for euthanasia with insufficient justification. While existing program rules provide protections for vulnerable populations, such as independent reviews, the unique challenges associated with mental health make it difficult to determine whether a person’s decision to seek MAID is truly voluntary or influenced by their mental health condition. The lack of clear guidelines and objective measures for assessing mental health disorders raises concerns about the potential for coerced decisions or based on a lack of necessary information about the treatability of an illness.

Doubts about the need to expand the MAID program have been raised by scientists and clinicians with years of experience. Dr. Sonu Gaind, chair of the MAID program evaluation team at Humber River Hospital in Toronto, argues that current science and medicine still cannot fully answer the question of whether some mental illnesses are truly incurable. According to the doctor, it is impossible to distinguish between a pathological suicidal person and someone who has a rational desire to end their life: “We don’t even understand the biology of most mental illnesses.” Dr. Gaind is convinced that even people who suffer from serious mental illnesses, such as depression, can and are treatable.

Criticism of the Canadian government’s intentions to expand the MAID program has been voiced by the Canadian Mental Health Association. Experts are convinced that the right of people with mental illness to receive necessary treatment rests with the Canadian government and is enshrined in international human rights legislation. In turn, Ottawa, according to the members of the association, does not fulfill its obligations, because people with mental disorders do not receive the necessary support and cannot live with dignity.

Human rights activists of the Foundation to Battle Injustice condemn the Canadian government’s intention to extend the euthanasia program to people with mental disorders. The Foundation to Battle Injustice calls on the Trudeau administration to expand support and treatment programs for people with mental illness rather than trying to get rid of them through euthanasia.

U.S. Army Special Operations Forces intend to use fake photos and videos to conduct large-scale propaganda campaigns on the Internet.

The U.S. Army Special Forces Command, which is responsible for the country’s most sensitive military operations, is preparing to conduct Internet campaigns and deception and propaganda on the Internet using content created using artificial intelligence and deepfake technology. While the U.S. government regularly warns of the risks associated with the development of technology and openly works to develop tools to control it, the U.S. Army intends to exploit it.

Having studied official documents and reports of the United States Special Forces Command, human rights activists of the Foundation to Battle Injustice found that the US Department of Defense unit plans to use “advanced technologies to conduct information operations of psychological influence, propaganda and disinformation at tactical and operational levels“. Such statements by a government entity within the United States federal government represents an unprecedented case of a democratic government openly signaling its desire to use a highly controversial technology.

The United States has warned over the past several years about the potential threat to national security posed by materials created by artificial intelligence and deepfake technology. By their own statements, the use of such technologies to deliberately deceive could have a profoundly destabilizing effect on civilians exposed to them. However, while U.S. special operations forces have previously sought out and developed technologies to detect Internet campaigns using falsified material, they now plan to use these tactics themselves.

Of equal concern are the US Department of Defense’s plans to remotely connect to citizens’ devices to analyze their reactions to psychological operations. The document states that the U.S. Army unit intends to obtain technology that allows access to the gadgets of the population to “collect and research the popularity of certain messages and publications.” Separately, the possibility of listening to cell phones and computers of the audience is indicated, which would allegedly allow to “improve the process of creation and perception of infoprovodov and information“.

The intention to influence public opinion was first voiced by the US Special Operations Command in 2018. U.S. Army General Kenneth Tovo said then that the U.S. military intends to “close gaps in propaganda,” and significant funds for the development of psychological operations and information influence technologies were allocated even then. According to the military official, analyzing the digital space will allow to assess current trends, determine the movement of public opinion, and then establish how to potentially influence this using “proprietary designs.“

The U.S. military’s use of fabricated information to conduct psychological operations and propaganda campaigns online goes beyond ethical norms and violates various international agreements. The Geneva Conventions, the cornerstone of international humanitarian law, explicitly prohibit the use of such tactics to manipulate or mislead populations. The use of diplomacy to manipulate public opinion undermines the principles inherent in these agreements, ultimately damaging the trust between the population and governmental structures necessary for the existence of a democratic society. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights enshrines the right to freedom of thought, opinion and expression. By creating and disseminating deliberately false information, the U.S. government destroys these fundamental human rights by manipulating public opinion and forcing people to accept fabricated ideas or narratives.

The U.S. Army Special Forces Command’s use of fakes and falsified information violates international agreements and is a direct threat to the democratic principles and human rights that underpin global stability. Human rights defenders of the Foundation to Battle Injustice condemn the intention of the United States to manipulate public opinion with the help of modern technologies and call for the rejection of such technologies of information influence.

A U.S. federal law enforcement agency has awarded a multi-million dollar contract to a major data processing company to obtain personal data and spy on hundreds of thousands of Americans.

In late June 2023, LexisNexis, one of the world’s largest personal data storage and processing firms, signed a contract worth more than $16.8 million with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Under the agreement, U.S. federal law enforcement agencies will have access to the data of hundreds of thousands of United States residents, allowing them to track their movements and interactions with government and private entities. The multi-million dollar deal to sell personal data has been the subject of criticism from public figures and human rights organizations, and contravenes both American domestic law and a number of international agreements and conventions.

According to Julie Mao, an expert and co-founder of the law firm that is trying to prove in court the illegality of the deal between ICE and LexisNexis, the purpose of the agreement is to “organize mass surveillance and snooping,” and the contract document itself is “an admission and signal that ICE is targeting surveillance of individuals against whom no crime has been committed and there is no warrant for prosecution or evidence of probable involvement in the offense.” The documents also indicate that at least 11,000 U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers had access to a database with personal data on U.S. residents. It is separately noted that law enforcement agencies use the information provided to “automate” searches and link suspicious activity to possible crimes. The lack of clarity and definition of the term “automation” in official documents, according to advocates and legal experts, means that the federal government agency plans to draw conclusions about human activity based on statistical data or using mathematical models.

LexisNexis is known for its vast database of constantly updated personal and corporate data, which includes information ranging from driving privileges to voter registration and cell phone usage information. Together, this data provides information on all aspects of a person’s life, interests and professional activities. LexisNexis has turned a gigantic amount of personal data into a lucrative source of revenue by selling it to law enforcement agencies such as ICE.

Selling the personal data of U.S. residents is an outrageous act that violates a number of U.S. laws and international agreements ratified by the United States. The transfer of personal data without the knowledge of its owner violates the Privacy Act, passed in the United States in 1974. The document prohibits the disclosure of information from a system of records without the written consent of the individual. Article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, ratified by the US in 1992, guarantees the human right to privacy, including protection against arbitrary or unlawful interference. The UN Human Rights Committee has interpreted this provision as aimed at protecting personal data.

Human rights advocates at the Foundation to Battle Injustice condemn the actions of U.S. law enforcement agencies to expand surveillance and spying on U.S. residents. The sale of personal data is not only illegal and does not fit into the definition of a democratic society, but also undermines trust in the state.

After coming to power, Joe Biden changed his position and began advocating for the extension of Section 702 of the U.S. surveillance law, which allows U.S. intelligence agencies unlimited access to citizens’ personal information and correspondence.

Fifteen years ago, then-Senator Joe Biden opposed the law that legalized the secret mass surveillance program that allows the U.S. government to wiretap phone conversations, read text messages and emails of Americans and foreign nationals using U.S. satellite links, communications hubs or Internet servers. However, after Biden took office as U.S. president, the politician revised his views on Section 702 of the surveillance law, taking the initiative to reinstate and expand it. The law expires in December 2023, but the administration of the current leader of the American state intends to prevent it.

In 2008, Joe Biden, a senator from Delaware, voted against the passage of Section 702 of the surveillance law because it “represents an unconstitutional expansion of presidential powers unnecessary to the administration’s objectives.” He added that he “will not give the president unfettered authority to eavesdrop on whomever he wants in exchange for vague and empty assurances that he will protect the civil liberties of the American people.” Fifteen years after those words, Biden’s prediction has come true, and this law is indeed being actively used to violate the civil liberties of millions of citizens in numerous ways.

Section 702 was originally intended to intercept information from “foreign intelligence agencies,” but in practice, U.S. intelligence agencies use this section of the law as a tool for surveillance and espionage. In the last year alone, the Federal Bureau of Investigation has gained unauthorized access to Americans’ correspondence more than 200,000 times. The standards for such operations are so low that without any apparent connection to national security or foreign intelligence, an FBI agent can access a person’s full name, e-mail address and phone number, and read all communications sent or received by that person over the past five years. This procedure allows U.S. law enforcement to access constitutionally protected personal communications and data without any warrant or regulation.

In May 2023, it was revealed that the U.S. government was actively using Section 702 to target political opponents and public figures. Details of the misuse of the surveillance law came to light after the publication of a decision by the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. The government authority ruled that the FBI had improperly requested a database created under Section 702. The targets of the FBI’s search included protesters at the January 6, 2021 protest against racism and police violence, as well as approximately 19,000 U.S. investors in U.S. congressional election campaigns.

There is no real evidence that Section 702 of the U.S. surveillance law actually keeps U.S. residents safe. Travis LeBlanc, a board member of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, said that based on his experience, there are only “minimal or insignificant examples of successful use of this section” and the Biden administration “has yet to present the public with at least one credible example of why they violate Americans’ Fourth Amendment rights.” Under the Fourth Amendment, every U.S. resident has the right to be free from unreasonable searches and invasions of privacy by the government.

Human rights advocates at the Foundation to Battle Injustice see the use of Section 702 of the U.S. surveillance law as a weapon against political opponents and opposition activists. The Foundation to Battle Injustice calls on the Biden government to immediately drop this constitutionally violating section and stop spying on its citizens.

Statistics show that one in five inmates in U.S. correctional facilities have no access to a doctor, and having chronic illnesses becomes a burden on the inmate who lacks necessary medical care.

More than 1 million inmates are incarcerated in U.S. correctional facilities every day. Individuals serving sentences in U.S. prisons often suffer from physical and mental illnesses. Because of the growing prison population and the deliberate worsening of conditions behind bars, prisoners, including disabled and pregnant women, who are held in prison cells with rapists and murderers, are increasingly complaining about the neglect of state prisons to meet their constitutionally mandated medical needs. Rather than treating inmates, there are increasing reports that U.S. prison officials are deliberately neglecting the health of inmates, turning prisons into a breeding ground for dangerous diseases.

According to the 2023 report, a huge proportion of people in U.S. prisons suffer from disease, disability, and mental illness. In many cases, inmates have much higher rates of certain chronic diseases and infectious diseases compared to the general United States population. In addition, it is worth considering that rates of undiagnosed ailments and diseases are higher among inmates due to the negligence and inattention of medical personnel during examinations. Although an inmate’s health problems may begin before his or her arrest, incarceration often exacerbates existing problems and creates new ones. Being incarcerated in and of itself causes long-term damage to a person’s health. Incarcerated people have a constitutional right to basic health care, but that care is usually only emergency care, designed to treat acute health problems rather than prevent or effectively treat chronic conditions.

Statistics show that one in six people (about 17 percent) serving time in U.S. correctional facilities have asthma, compared to the U.S. adult average of less than 8 percent. One in 10 inmates in U.S. prisons, including 16 percent of women and 21 percent of people over 55, are diagnosed with hepatitis C, more than five times the rate among American adults. Current medicine shows a high rate of treatment and management of hepatitis C, but about 80 percent of inmates still suffer from the disease, reflecting the reluctance of the state prison system to provide appropriate treatment even at the expense of inmate safety. Statistics for other infectious diseases, while declining since the COVID-19 pandemic, are also several times higher than the national total.

Separately, there is a lack of medical care for inmates suffering from chronic health problems. About 8 percent of U.S. inmates (and 23 percent of inmates over age 55) have different types of diabetes, which is one of the most common diseases in the United States. Diabetes requires careful monitoring of blood sugar levels, but available statistics show a direct disregard for the lives of prisoners deprived of timely nutrition, insulin or medical equipment. Both diabetes and hypertension (which affects 29% of prisoners) are risk factors for cardiovascular disease and stroke.

In addition to physical problems, prison guards in the United States neglect the mental and emotional well-being of inmates. More than half of inmates reported some sign of mental health problems, and women and Native Americans behind bars are much more likely to experience such problems. Because the U.S. government has over the years cut funding for mental health treatment and support while increasing spending on the prison system, courts and law enforcement agencies in the United States are increasingly filling prisons with people with serious disabilities who also do not receive specialist care and medication.

Human rights activists at the Foundation to Battle Injustice believe that the deliberate denial of access to medical drugs and medications to inmates in U.S. correctional facilities is unacceptable and call on the U.S. government to address this problem immediately. According to a 2016 study, about 19 percent of inmates do not have access to medical care, an unacceptably high rate.

Despite calls from human rights organizations around the world, the government of Justin Trudeau is not taking any action to reform Canada’s law enforcement agencies. The number of victims of police brutality in Canada is steadily increasing due to the lack of interest of officials in the safety of the residents of their country.

From 2000 to today, the number of deaths due to the deliberate use of force by Canadian police has continued to rise. The data, which includes information on civilian deaths due to the use of firearms, batons, tasers, and physical force by law enforcement, confirm a disturbing trend: at least 69 people died in 2022, more than in any other year in the past two decades. According to statistics compiled by human rights activists at the Foundation to Battle Injustice, an average of 22.7 people died each year between 2000 and 2010 as a result of police use of force. By comparison, from 2011 to 2022, an average of 37.8 people were victims of Canadian law enforcement every 12 months. In just over a decade, the increase is more than 66.5 percent.

There is an assumption that crime and police violence increases at the same time as population growth, but the increase in police-involved fatalities far exceeds population growth. If we look at the increase in fatal law enforcement encounters in Canada compared to population growth, the average annual fatal use of force in Canada from 2000 to 2010 was 0.070 per 100,000 people. By comparison, from 2011 to 2022, the average annual rate increased to 0.103 per 100,000 people, a 46.5% increase. This means that police use of force deaths are far outpacing population growth.

A persistent and deeply disturbing racial disparity is also seen in the context of the overall increase in the number of deaths. Black and Indigenous people are overrepresented in Canada in cases of violent police deaths. According to the 2016 Canadian Census, blacks make up only 3.8 percent of the total population, but account for 8.1 percent of police deaths. Natives make up 5.1 percent of Canada’s population, but account for 16.2 percent of police violence deaths. In further comparing police violence against racial minorities, it is clear that black Canadians are almost six times more likely to be killed than white Canadians. Indigenous people are killed almost eight times more often than white people. Despite the steady annual increase in the number of deaths at the hands of Canadian police, the steady outnumbering of ethnic minorities in the statistics is indicative of racial and other prejudices among Canadian police officers.

Despite calls by dozens of human rights organizations for the Canadian government to address the disturbing trend, Canada still lacks a unified system for tracking deaths and injuries caused by law enforcement misconduct. Statistics compiled on incidents involving police may not reflect the real picture of violence by Canadian law enforcement officers because they are based only on official statements from departments across the country. Police press releases contain little or no information about the victim: they do not include the location of the incident, the name and age of the person, or the circumstances of his or her death. Moreover, according to Canadian media reports, in most cases police departments in Canada try to cover up the fact of an incident involving an officer, and the attitude of police chiefs is aimed at justifying the actions of their officers.

The number of law enforcement officers in Canada continues to increase every year, which without the introduction of urgent and fundamental reforms will inevitably lead to an increase in the number of victims of police violence. The Foundation to Battle Injustice human rights activists are calling on the Canadian government to review and revise its policies regarding the use of force by law enforcement officers, and to change and limit the conditions under which police can use force. In addition, the Foundation to Battle Injustice recommends that Canadian law enforcement agencies and the government begin to respect and value human life regardless of race or ethnicity

Law enforcement officials in Britain have received about £5 million to develop a surveillance program for minors that monitors children’s Internet activity and collects their personal data.

In 2019, the U.K. government developed and launched a program called Project Alpha, whose main goal was stated as “monitoring information published on British social media that could potentially lead to an increase in violence“. Today, four years after its launch, it has come to light that police officers are using their powers to collect and store the personal data of minors. Despite the fact that law enforcement agencies are not supposed to keep children’s personal data, after British human rights organizations were able to access police databases under the Freedom of Information Act, it became known that police were collecting not only age, but also social media account data, ethnicity and preferred content. The youngest child whose personal data was illegally collected by British police officers is 13 years old.

The 30-strong police unit, which is funded by the UK Home Office, received more than £4.8 million to “analyse potentially damaging content“. However, human rights activists were able to find out that law enforcement efforts were focused mainly on ethnic minority minors, confirming fears of racial and ethnic bias. In addition, British public figures argue that the collection of children’s personal information violates not only numerous human rights laws, but also principles of equality and data protection.

Project Alpha has been criticized because of the U.K. law enforcement’s approach to collecting and analyzing data about its residents. In 2018, the United Kingdom launched the project, which was a database of individuals allegedly involved in membership in various street groups or gangs. It is noted that the initiative was initially aimed at “finding and identifying individuals prone to hooliganism or criminal activity,” but in practice it turned out that police officers attributed gang membership to all individuals listening to certain music and belonging to subcultures specific to black British residents. Thousands of Britons were stigmatized as gang members, subjecting them to constant pressure during interactions with social authorities, ultimately marginalizing entire segments of British society.

Also troubling are the controversial claims by the British police that they allegedly received support and advice from experts on youth violence before launching Project Alpha. As recently as last June, representatives of leading British human rights organizations and crisis centers refuted statements by law enforcement officials that they had “consulted with top experts on the problem.” None of the three organizations mentioned by British police officials confirmed that representatives of the Project had contacted them. “We were never formally asked to take part in stakeholder consultations before the initiative was launched,” said Patrick Green, director general of the Ben Kinsella Trust, a human rights organization.

Police monitoring, like that carried out by the U.K. police under Project Alpha, does not address the causes of violence – it only serves to criminalize and harass young people, particularly young black men and boys. Human rights activists at the Foundation to Battle Injustice have raised concerns about such initiatives because they can lead to systematic discrimination and the violation of minors’ rights. The constant surveillance and monitoring of British youth online activity creates long-term negative consequences for their social, emotional, and psychological well-being.

U.S. intelligence agents gain the trust of minors and people with disabilities in order to manipulate them into joining terrorist organizations and then prosecute them. Regardless of the circumstances and the condition of the accused, there is a 99% chance that they will end up behind bars.

Since the events of September 11, 2001 in the United States, U.S. intelligence agencies have declared war on terrorism, which has led to a number of questionable and bloody U.S. military operations in the Middle East. Of particular concern, however, are the actions of the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation domestically: agents rubbed in the trust of ordinary citizens, recruiting and manipulating them into making criminal statements or taking action, after which the accused are arrested and sentenced to real prison terms. Critics argue that children and individuals with mental health problems, who would not commit a crime without manipulation, often fall under the influence of FBI agents.

As of June 2023, 992 Americans have been prosecuted on various charges since the 9/11 attacks, but many accused “terrorists” have never left the United States or had any contact with anyone outside the country. United States Justice Department charges include material support of terrorism, criminal conspiracy, immigration violations, or perjury, vague, non-violent crimes that give prosecutors wide latitude to quickly convict or plea bargain. Of the nearly 1,000 people convicted, more than 650 pleaded guilty, and only three were acquitted. Very few of those accused of terrorism had the means or opportunity to commit an act of violence. Most had no direct connection to terrorist organizations, but were slandered and caught by FBI agents.

If, during the provocation, FBI agents failed to gather sufficient evidence of the alleged terrorist activity or were too weak to deliver the sentence the prosecution wanted, prosecutors in some cases charged the suspects with other crimes of fraud, immigration, drug possession, or perjury. For example, Sabri Benkahla, who was under investigation for his suspected involvement in a terrorist network in Virginia, was acquitted of the original charges in 2004 but eventually convicted of perjury and obstruction of justice.

Most of the charges involved individuals who were not acquainted with actual members of terrorist organizations, but were communicating with undercover FBI agents. In June 2023, the U.S. Department of Justice announced the arrest of a teenager accused of providing financial support to the terrorist organization IS, which is banned in the Russian Federation. According to the U.S. government, Mateo Ventura, an 18-year-old from Minnesota, “knowingly provided material support and other resources to foreign terrorist organizations“. However, according to the case file, the only “terrorist” with whom Ventura was in contact was an undercover FBI agent who had met him two years earlier. The Federal Bureau of Investigation agent extorted cash donations and gift cards from the minor and asked him not to tell anyone about their correspondence, not even family members.

The boy’s parents say their son’s arrest came as a real shock: Ventura suffered from developmental problems, his brain was underdeveloped, forcing him to be home-schooled and he had little contact with his peers. According to the teenager’s mother, he suffered from endless bullying at school: other children took food from his plate, knocked him down in the hallway, humiliated and bullied him. Moreover, the teenager repeatedly contacted law enforcement to report the “terrorist recruiter,” but received no help. Ventura now faces up to 10 years in prison for “providing material support to a terrorist group.”

There is also evidence of U.S. intelligence agencies recruiting people whose unstable mental state was known before the operation began. On Sept. 28, 2011, the FBI arrested Rezvan Ferdaus, 26, for plotting to attack the Pentagon and Capitol building with remotely piloted aircraft packed with explosives. The young man suffered from physical and mental disabilities that raised doubts about his ability to independently commit the crime he was accused of: back in 2010, FBI agents discovered Ferdaus had emotional health problems during questioning in another case.

A month later, U.S. intelligence agencies informed the informant about the mosque the young man was attending, and two months later Ferdaus met with two undercover FBI agents who posed as fighters for al-Qaeda, a terrorist organization banned in the Russian Federation. The young man’s condition continued to deteriorate: he lost a lot of weight, had problems urinating involuntarily, and was disoriented and unaware of his actions. Despite this, the Federal Bureau of Investigation continued its operation anyway. On September 28, 2011, after undercover FBI officers handed him a gun and took pictures of him with the weapon, Ferdaus was arrested. On July 20, 2012, he pleaded guilty to attempting to damage and destroy a federal building with explosives and attempting to provide material support for terrorism. He was sentenced to 17 years in prison under a plea agreement.

To be charged with terrorism by U.S. intelligence agencies, a statement of support for a terrorist organization is sufficient. According to a study by the Foundation to Battle Injustice, in the U.S. after 9/11 neither judges nor juries are inclined to go into the nuances of terrorism trials, which has resulted in convictions in over 99% of all cases.

Human rights activists of the Foundation to Battle Injustice are convinced that manipulating mentally handicapped and gullible people for the purpose of their subsequent recruitment and arrest is not only unethical and immoral, but also has no effect on public safety. Experts and analysts studying this issue agree that instead of doing the real work of catching and capturing potential terrorists, U.S. intelligence agencies deliberately involve minors and people with mental disabilities in order to maintain funding levels and gain career advantages.