Senators: FBI rules could target innocent people
August 26, 2008, 5:04 pm
Filed under:
1984,
1st amendment,
4th amendment,
arlen specter,
Big Brother,
bill of rights,
Control Grid,
Department of justice,
DOJ,
FBI,
free speech,
mukasey,
orwell,
Patrick Leahy,
privacy rights,
racial profiling,
Racism,
Senate,
stasi,
stasi tactics,
Surveillance,
US Constitution,
War On Terror | Tags:
Dick Durbin,
edward m. kennedy,
Russ Feingold,
sheldon whitehouse
Senators: FBI rules could target innocent people
AP
August 20, 2008
Proposed rules to help the FBI catch terrorists could lead to innocent Americans being spied upon by government agents or informants “all without any basis for suspicion,” a group of Democratic senators said Wednesday.
The rules, known as the attorney general guidelines, have not been approved or even publicly released yet, but four Democrats joined a growing chorus of lawmakers raising concerns after being briefed on what the guidelines say.
Among their fears: Americans could be targeted in part based on their race, ethnicity or religion — or free speech activities protected by the Constitution.
“As you know, attorney general guidelines were first implemented in the wake of the FBI abuses of the 1960s and 1970s, and serve as one of the most important bulwarks against future abuses,” the senators said in a letter to Attorney General Michael Mukasey.
The four Democrats — Sens. Dick Durbin of Illinois, Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts and Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island — indicated they remained concerned even after assurances from officials during the Justice Department briefings.
The lawmakers asked Mukasey to hold off finalizing the rules to allow a public review.
“Given the importance of these guidelines, providing a period of time for public comment would be a reasonable and responsible way to move forward and achieve the best possible end result,” the Democrats wrote.
Earlier this week, Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and the panel’s top Republican, Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, also called for delaying the guidelines.
Justice spokesman Brian Roehrkasse said the department will review the requests. Citing remarks earlier by Mukasey about the new rules, the spokesman said an investigation would not be opened based solely on a person’s race, ethnicity or religion.
“The guidelines will require all activities to have a valid purpose,” Roehrkasse said, adding that the rules will “include robust and effective oversight measures.”
The guidelines are expected to be finalized next week. They do not require congressional approval.
First reported last month by The Associated Press, the rules are intended to update policies governing investigations as the FBI shifts from a traditional crime-fighting agency to one whose top priority is protecting the United States from terrorist attacks.
Currently, the FBI must have evidence or allegations of wrongdoing before opening an investigation of U.S. citizens or legal residents from other countries. As described by some law enforcement officials, the new policy would let agents open preliminary terrorism investigations after mining public records and intelligence to build a profile of traits that, taken together, were deemed suspicious.
The officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about the rules, said factors that could trigger an inquiry would include travel to regions of the world known for terrorist activity and access to weapons or military training, along with the person’s race or ethnicity.
Following their briefings, the four Democrats said the guidelines would:
_Let the FBI use “a variety of intrusive investigative techniques” with no evidence of possible wrongdoing. The techniques could include: long-term FBI surveillance, interviewing neighbors and work-mates, recruiting informants and searching commercial databases for information on people “all without any basis for suspicion.”
“We are particularly concerned that the draft guidelines might permit an innocent American to be subjected to such intrusive surveillance based in part on race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, or on protected First Amendment activities,” the senators wrote.
_Allow the government to collect foreign intelligence information inside the United States without current legal protections for U.S. citizens or legal residents. The senators noted that the broad term “foreign intelligence” would cover any information relating to the activities of a foreign government, organization or person.
_Allow the information gathered to be broadly shared among government agencies. “We have serious questions about the scope of information sharing as it relates to U.S. persons who are under no suspicion of wrongdoing,” the senators wrote.
Why Did 94 House Dems Change Votes on FISA? Money.
June 28, 2008, 12:27 pm
Filed under:
1984,
2-party system,
2008 Election,
4th amendment,
9/11,
9/11 Truth,
amnesty,
AT&T,
Barack Obama,
barbara boxer,
Big Brother,
chris dodd,
civil liberties,
civil rights,
False Flag,
FISA,
George Bush,
Harry Reid,
House,
HR 6304,
inside job,
left right paradigm,
Media,
Nancy Pelosi,
neocons,
Neolibs,
NSA,
obama,
Oppression,
Police State,
Propaganda,
Ron Paul,
Senate,
steny hoyer,
Surveillance,
telco pac,
US Constitution,
War On Terror,
warrantless search,
warrantless wiretap,
whistleblower | Tags:
Frederick Boucher,
Gregory Meeks,
James Clyburn,
MCI,
orrin hatch,
Protect America Act,
Rahm Emanuel,
Russ Feingold,
Sprint,
Verizon
Why Did 94 House Democrats Change Their Votes on FISA?
(A: Money)
Politico
June 25, 2008
In March, the House passed an amendment that rejected retroactive immunity for telecoms that assisted the NSA in illegal wiretapping. Most of us have wondered what happened to change the minds of 94 Democrats. What happened between June 20 and March 14 to change 94 Democratic hearts and minds?
The answer might well be simple: money. Could it be that simple?
MAPLight.org has published a breakdown of contributions received from Telco PACS by the 94 Dems who experienced the change of heart. [Maplight.org is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, nonpartisan organization based in Berkeley, California. Its search engine at MAPLight.org illuminates the connection between Money And Politics (MAP) via an unprecedented database of campaign contributions and legislative outcomes.’]
Here’s the bottom line:
Verizon, AT&T, and Sprint gave PAC contributions averaging:
$8,359 to each Democrat who changed their position to support immunity for Telcos (94 Dems)
$4,987 to each Democrat who remained opposed to immunity for Telcos (116 Dems)
88 percent of the Dems who changed to supporting immunity (83 Dems
of the 94) received PAC contributions from Verizon, AT&T, or Sprint
during the last three years (Jan. 2005-Mar. 2008). ( MAPLight.org)
Of course the average amount received is a bit misleading. A few of the very prominent Dems who changed their votes took a lot more than $8000. According to this website,
Nancy Pelosi [CA], Speaker of the House, allegedly received $24,500.
Steny Hoyer [MD] allegedly received $29,000.
James Clyburn [SC] allegedly received $29,500.
Rahm Emanuel [IL] allegedly received $28,000.
Frederick Boucher [VA] allegedly received $27,500.
Gregory Meeks [NY] allegedly received $26,000.
You can see the complete list here.
I guess with campaign finance laws in the state they’re in, we can’t expect them to turn down free money. I would like to believe that there are other reasons why they supported the current incarnation of FISA. I wish I could think of some.
Read Full Article Here
HR 6304 – A Bill To Abolish the 4th Amendment
Hatch compares FISA critics to those ‘who wear tin foil hats and think 9/11 was an inside job.’
Think Progress
June 26, 2008
Speaking today on the Senate floor in favor of the Foreign Service Intelligence Act legislation, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) compared critics of the bill — which include Sens. Harry Reid (D-NV), Chris Dodd (D-CT), and Barbara Boxer (D-CA), among others — to deluded conspiracy theorists. Hatch mocked the what he called “onerous oversight provisions” included in the bill, and said those who raise the specter of unchecked executive wiretapping power “feed the delusions of those who wear tin foil hats around their house and think that 9/11 was an inside job.”
Those “onerous” oversight provisions Hatch maligns? A ban on “reverse targeting” of Americans and a new requirement of probable cause for surveillance of Americans abroad.
UpdateLate this afternoon, the Senate voted 80-15 to invoke cloture on the FISA bill. Ian Welsh at FDL writes that this “was the real vote” and applauds the 15 senators who “voted for the Bill of Rights.”
Spy Bill Destroys 4th Amendment
June 25, 2008, 1:10 pm
Filed under:
1984,
2-party system,
2008 Election,
4th amendment,
9/11,
ACLU,
Al Gore,
amnesty,
AT&T,
Barack Obama,
benjamin franklin,
Big Brother,
civil liberties,
civil rights,
Dennis Kucinich,
FISA,
George Bush,
Global Warming,
House,
John McCain,
Keith Olbermann,
left right paradigm,
Media,
Media Fear,
NAFTA,
Nancy Pelosi,
Neocon,
Neolibs,
NSA,
obama,
Oppression,
Patriot Act,
Police State,
Propaganda,
Senate,
Surveillance,
US Constitution,
War On Terror,
warrantless search,
warrantless wiretap | Tags:
chris dodd,
MCI,
Protect America Act,
Russ Feingold,
Sprint,
Verizon
Spy Bill Destroys 4th Amendment
AFP
June 20, 2008
In a late-term triumph for US President George W. Bush, the US House of Representatives on Friday approved spy-powers legislation that has drawn heavy fire on civil liberties grounds.
Lawmakers voted 293-129 for a bill that may shield telecommunications firms facing massive lawsuits over their work with Bush’s secret, six-year, warrantless wiretapping program, begun after the September 11, 2001 attacks.
The measure now goes to the Senate, where Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid has opposed granting retroactive immunity to companies that cooperated with a program thought to have skirted established surveillance laws.
During often bitter House floor debate, many Democrats broke with the measure, the fruit of months of talks among Senate and House leaders of both parties that ultimately gave in to key White House demands.
“It’s Christmas morning at the White House thanks to this vote,” said Caroline Fredrickson, a top official with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) which has fiercely opposed the legislation.
Earlier, Bush had used a hastily announced public statement at the White House to press lawmakers to approve new funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and pushed hard for House passage of the intelligence bill.
“It’s vital that our intelligence community has the ability to learn who the terrorists are talking to, what they are saying, and what they are planning,” Bush said in the two-minute statement.
The spending bill would provide 162 billion dollars for conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, fuelling both for months after Bush’s successor takes over in January, without attaching a withdrawal timetable sought by Iraq war opponents.
But the bitterest feuding was over the intelligence bill, which came amid a pitched political battle raging over Bush’s decision to secretly launch a warrantless wiretapping program believed to have skirted surveillance law.
Critics charge the secret program was illegal because it ran afoul of the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA)’s requirement of a court order to spy on US citizens inside the United States.
The White House says Bush, who brought the program under FISA oversight in January 2007, made proper use of wartime presidential powers under the US Constitution, and that the often-updated law was ill-suited to deal with modern telecommunications and the nature of the terrorist threat.
If passed, the new measure could short-circuit about 40 court challenges targeting major US telecommunications firms that cooperated with the program, which the US public learned about in a December 2005 New York Times article.
Read Full Article Here
Feingold, Dodd planning filibuster of wiretap bill
Raw Story
June 24, 2008
In a last-ditch attempt to fix a surveillance bill critics say would essentially legalize President Bush’s warrantless wiretapping program, Sens. Russ Feingold (D-WI) and Chris Dodd (D-CT) have promised to filibuster the bill as long as it offers telecommunications companies retroactive immunity.
“This is a deeply flawed bill, which does nothing more than offer retroactive immunity by another name. We strongly urge our colleagues to reject this so-called ‘compromise’ legislation and oppose any efforts to consider this bill in its current form. We will oppose efforts to end debate on this bill as long as it provides retroactive immunity for the telecommunications companies that may have participated in the President’s warrantless wiretapping program, and as long as it fails to protect the privacy of law-abiding Americans,” the senators said in a joint statement Tuesday.
Read Full Article Here
Kucinich Slams FISA Bill