Plan to Let F.B.I. Track Mail in Terrorism Inquiries

New York Times ^ | 5/21/05 | ERIC LICHTBLAU

[wagglebee]

WASHINGTON, May 20 - The F.B.I. would gain broad authority to track the mail of people in terror investigations under a Bush administration proposal, officials said Friday, but the Postal Service is already raising privacy concerns about the plan.

The proposal, to be considered next week in a closed-door meeting of the Senate Intelligence Committee, would allow the bureau to direct postal inspectors to turn over the names, addresses and all other material appearing on the outside of letters sent to or from people connected to foreign intelligence investigations.

The plan would effectively eliminate the postal inspectors' discretion in deciding when so-called mail covers are needed and give sole authority to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, if it determines that the material is "relevant to an authorized investigation to obtain foreign intelligence," according to a draft of the bill.

The proposal would not allow the bureau to open mail or review its content. Such a move would require a search warrant, officials said.

The Intelligence Committee has not publicly released the proposal, but a draft was obtained by The New York Times.

The provision is part of a broader package that also strengthens the bureau's power to demand business records in intelligence investigations without approval by a judge or grand jury.

[wagglebee]

I think if the FBI wants to monitor a person's mail or phone calls or anything else they should get a warrent from a judge, if not forget it.

[proxy_user]

My return address:

Santa Claus
69 Reindeer Way,
North Pole, NY
10001

Well, that's what's on the outside of the envelope.....really, how dumb do they think evildoers are?

[The Red Zone]

And for receivers, post office boxes or a friendly neighbor.

[wagglebee]

If they have enough evidence to suspect them of terrorism, they should have no problem convincing a judge to sign a search warrent. Moreover, if the suspected terrorist's status in the United States is questionable, the FBI should be able to take them into custody.

[MikefromOhio]

There has to be evidence so that there is a warrant and therefore, due process.


Otherwise, they can monitor all they want, but it won't mean anything because they won't get a conviction out of it....

[NJ_gent]

I agree, but I think I'd have to add that they shouldn't be getting warrants from rubber-stamp courts like the FISA court. I'd like actual due process; not always secret always one-sided arguments in front of a secret court that virtually always grants whatever the FBI wants, except in cases where it recognizes plain and obvious lies (like the first time the FISA court refused a warrant request - though that too was later overturned by the FISA appeals court).

[Gondring]

bump

[mysterio]

Once again, the government is using the term "terrorism" to grant itself the unchecked power it has wanted all along. Power expressly prohibited by the Constitution. As soon as someone can show me where the asterisks is next to the first ten amendments and the footnote that says "except to catch drug dealers or terrorists," I cannot support giving the government these powers.

[Doctor Raoul]

My return address:

Socks The Cat
Federal Witness Protection Program
Somewhere Out There, USA

[Doctor Raoul]

Since mail covers do not disclose the contents, I don't believe a warrant is necessary, IMHO. It's like visiting the person's house, you made yourself visible.

My father had a mail cover implememted on a fugitive's wife's mail when the little bastard kept send death threats to our house from Liberia.