Posted on 12/01/2001 8:12:17 PM PST by OKCSubmariner
The US Attorney General, John Ashcroft, was yesterday reported to be ready to relax restrictions on the FBI's powers to spy on religious and church-based political organisations.
His proposal, leaked to the New York Times, would loosen limits on the FBI's surveillance powers, imposed in the 1970s after the death of its founder J. Edgar Hoover.
The plan has caused outrage within the FBI itself with agents expected to act upon new surveillance powers describing themselves as 'very, very angry'.
The spying, wiretapping and surveillance campaign unleashed by Hoover against church and political groups was called 'Cointelpro', and was aimed mainly at the movement behind civil rights activist Martin Luther King, the Black Panthers, the anti-Vietnam war movement and, on the other wing, the Ku Klux Klan.
When the system was revealed, upon Hoover's death, restrictions were put on the security bureau, in the form of two sets of regulations pertaining to foreign-based and domestic groups. The rules forbade FBI agents from sending undercover agents into churches, synagogues or mosques unless they found 'probable cause or evidence' that someone in them had broken the law.
A Justice Department spokeswoman, Susan Dryden, said no final decision had been made on their reintroduction.
According to sources, the plan has caused a sharp rift within the department and the FBI. Ashcroft and the new FBI director, Robert Mueller, are pushing the plan eagerly, but there is strong opposition among officials inside both the bureau and the Justice Department.
Internal opposition to the plan will exacerbate an already fractious atmosphere in the FBI since President Bush took office.
Some agents told the New York Times that they considered any weakening of the guidelines 'a serious mistake', and that the Justice Department had 'not clearly described' the proposed changes. 'People are furious right now,' said one agent.
The changes would become part of what civil liberties groups regard as a dangerously changing legal landscape in the US: 1,200 people with connections to Islamic groups have been taken into custody, and Draconian security measures, such as wiretapping of lawyers, pushed through Congress.
Further plans are now afoot to seek out and interview some 5,000 immigrants, mostly Muslims, who have entered the US since January.
Ohhh you have learned a new word. That is truly impressive.
OKCS, thanks for posting this with your detailed examples following. That must be the reason the maggots jumped in to load the thread. They just hate it when clear and concise is put in front of folks.
We needed some encouragement that not all of the real FBI are being fitted for SS uniforms.
I'm sorry, but if you're trying to make a case against investigational excesses, you'll have to do a lot better than that. You're not apt to get much (if any) sympathy from anyone who isn't a member of one of those outfits.
Since I don't want to be harassed into oblivion by lawsuits, or have my house burned down, or get shot in the back, I won't say anything further about those Fine Patriotic Organizations.
LMAO. Was your tongue sticking out as you typed that?
"I believe privacy is a fundamental right, and that every American should have absolute control over his or her personal information. Now, with the advent of the Internet, personal privacy is increasingly at risk. I am committed to protecting personal privacy for every American."
George W. Bush - Source: Associated Press Oct 6, 2000.
"If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense, which is paramount to all positive forms of government."
Alexander Hamilton - Federalist No. 28.
What, you want martial law? Extend every Constitutional protection to every foreign national that comes over here. Make sure he can take flying lessons under privacy safeguards, go to truck driving school and get a HazMat ticket, and buy whatever chemicals he needs without anyone "prying into his business."
Then when the sumbitch blows up a tanker truck full of anthrax powder in Times Square, you can proudly say that you made it possible.
The only question will be whether you protected the Constitution, or sealed its doom.
Don't worry so much about what's happening now. These measures can be rolled back. If the stakes get raised to, "Miss even one of 'em, and two million die," then the measures will get tougher. A lot tougher. And a lot harder to get rid of.
All I'm saying is, pick your battles. Win this one, and you'll lose the war.
What a sage statement. I have yet to find you say anything that is not at once pithy and wise. Allowing things to reach what is perceived as "in extremis" is the most toxic agent against liberty of all. Rest relatively easy though, the odds that the opposition will "win this one," are highly remote.
With all due respect to the Congress, I think Ashcroft was just a little too busy to squeeze in a Congressional hearing on September 11th.
Gee Fred what's wrong? Did reality intrude into your tin foil.
Your above italicized passage could be a verbatim Hillary dictate.
I don't, but it looks like we're well on our way towards martial law.
Extend every Constitutional protection to every foreign national that comes over here. Make sure he can take flying lessons under privacy safeguards, go to truck driving school and get a HazMat ticket, and buy whatever chemicals he needs without anyone "prying into his business."
Well, our borders are still a sieve (I still haven't gotten over the 14 Syrians who were let in to take flying lessons in October) and I see no evidence that anything is being done to deport illegals of any nationality.
With few exceptions, the laws and EO's apply to all of us not just foreigners (see Patriot Act for an example).
Our military can guard borders of countries all over the world but can't guard our own. Meanwhile, there are rumblings of rescinding Posse Comitatus so the military can "guard" all of us within our borders.
We've got a whole new airport security package where little old ladies get their knitting needles taken away and law abiding Americans are searched head to toe, all in the name of safety, but we can't target foreigners for searches because we may offend someone.
Sorry, I don't get it. And I think the FBI agents here have a legitimate beef because they know this spying isn't going to be limited to "terrorist" activity in certain churches.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.