Intelligence Community Abuses: The Interviews

Intelligence Community Abuses: The Interviews - Review

The film assembles creative artists who deliberate on the topic, guided by eight fundamental questions. Ricardo Soto guides the discussion, introduces the questions, and invites interviewees to contribute to the debate (Soto, 2025). Jessica Ross, Sonal Vimal, Laura Lake, and Jose Luis respond to the questions, enabling the producer to expand the discussion and exhaust the questions (Soto, 2025). The opening question seeks interviewees’ perspectives regarding the intelligent community’s absolute power over right activists. Respondents unanimously oppose absolute authority, disregarding the intelligent community’s power to harass human rights activists. Respondents unanimously agree that intelligent communities should protect rights, safeguard people’s welfare, and secure public interest.

The actors opine that deliberate technology use, including tracking and surveillance tools on citizens violate rights and privileges. Many respondents opine that surveillance tools used by intelligence communities lead to human rights violations (Soto, 2025). Surveillance systems compromise citizens’ privacy rights, criminalizing individuals and making them potential targets. Intelligent communities profile human rights activists, criminalizing their operations and impeding their work. Interviewees unanimously opine that intelligent communities offer the necessary protection and security for human activists to undertake their work in safer environments (Soto, 2025). The law protects citizens equally, and this protection should extend to human rights activists. However, intelligent communities tend to discriminate against human rights activists, compromising their work and risking their lives.

Interviewees observe that intelligence communities wield significant authority, leading to social control and power abuses. According to the actors, intelligence communities enjoy unchecked power that encourages systematic societal abuses (Soto, 2025). Excessive power abuses elevate intelligent communities above everyone else, creating semi-gods in community settings. Many respondents observe that such elevation is unlawful as everyone should live within the law. The absolute authority vested in intelligent communities exposes the weaknesses in policy, necessitating systematic transformations to streamline the service (Soto, 2025). Excessive social control limits citizens’ freedoms and privileges in community settings, including online platforms. Online screening profiles citizens through emails and social networking sites, limiting social engagements.

Investigations and harassment are increasingly synonymous with intelligent communities. Many respondents confess to witnessing or experiencing harassment under the guise of investigations (Soto, 2025). There is widespread victimization and profiling by intelligent communities in their daily operations. Arbitrary investigations, profile screening, searchers result in harassment and violations against innocent citizens. While investigations are necessary for increased security, they protect citizens from harassment and abuses (Soto, 2025). Intelligent officers should undertake their work professionally by treating citizens respectfully in their undertakings.

Since intelligent communities wield excessive power and abuse their privileges, respondents unanimously recommend policy transformations to check officers’ powers and privileges. Interviewees observe that the law should treat citizens equally and balance competing societal priorities without victimizing a section of society (Soto, 2025). Besides policy transformation targeting power abuses, the interviewees recommend budget cuts to streamline intelligent communities’ operations and behaviors. Many respondents opine that the intelligent community power abuses stem from excessive budgetary allocations, encouraging misconduct and violations (Soto, 2025). These changes would enhance service integrity and personnel accountability, prioritizing citizens’ welfare and rights.

Finally, the interview considers whether abuses should be criminalized to restore confidence in community intelligence. Respondents observe that penalizing deviant behavior within the system would significantly transform the service. Many officers take advantage of the immunity they get from their job, leading to increased violations and abuses. Systematic changes should consider criminalizing deviant behavior to inject sanity into the system to make it work and serve citizens proportionately.

References

Soto, R. S. (2025). Intelligence community abuses: The interviews. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uc9xqVSIquk