Posted on 06/24/2002 3:34:40 PM PDT by Asmodeus
WASHINGTON –– The FBI is visiting libraries nationwide and checking the reading records of people it suspects of having ties to terrorists or plotting an attack, library officials say.
The FBI effort, authorized by the antiterrorism law enacted after the Sept. 11 attacks, is the first broad government check of library records since the 1970s when prosecutors reined in the practice for fear of abuses.
The Justice Department and FBI declined to comment Monday, except to note that such searches are now legal under the Patriot Act that President Bush signed last October.
Libraries across the nation were reluctant to discuss their dealings with the FBI. The same law that makes the searches legal also makes it a criminal offense for librarians to reveal the details or extent.
"Patron information is sacrosanct here. It's nobody's business what you read," said Kari Hanson, director of the Bridgeview Public Library in suburban Chicago.
Hanson said an FBI agent came seeking information about a person, but her library had no record of the person. Federal prosecutors allege Global Relief Foundation, an Islamic charity based in the Chicago suburb, has ties to Osama bin Laden's terror network
The University of Illinois conducted a survey of 1,020 public libraries in January and February and found that 85 libraries had been asked by federal or local law enforcement officers for information about patrons related to Sept. 11, said Ed Lakner, assistant director of research at the school's Library Research Center.
The libraries that reported FBI contacts were nearly all in large urban areas.
In Florida, Broward County library director Sam Morrison said the FBI had recently contacted his office. He declined to elaborate on the request or how many branch libraries were involved.
"We've heard from them and that's all I can tell you," Morrison said. He said the FBI specifically instructed him not to reveal any information about the request.
The library system has been contacted before. A week after the Sept. 11 attacks, the FBI subpoenaed Morrison to provide information on the possible use of computer terminals by some of the suspected hijackers in the Hollywood, Fla., area.
In October, investigators revisited the county's main library in Fort Lauderdale and also checked a regional library in Coral Springs.
At least 15 of the 19 hijackers had Florida connections.
The process by which the FBI gains access to library records is quick and mostly secret under the Patriot Act.
First, the FBI must obtain a search warrant from a court that meets in secret to hear the agency's case. The FBI must show it has reason to suspect that a person is involved with a terrorist or a terrorist plot – far less difficult than meeting the tougher legal standards of probable cause, required for traditional search warrants or reasonable doubt, required for convictions.
With the warrant, FBI investigators can visit a library and gain immediate access to the records.
Judith Krug, the American Library Association's director for intellectual freedom, said the FBI was treading on the rights it is supposed to be upholding.
"It's unfortunate because these records and this information can be had with so little reason or explanation," Krug said. "It's super secret and anyone who wants to talk about what the FBI did at their library faces prosecution. That has nothing to do with patriotism."
Krug tells worried librarians who call that they should keep only the records they need and should discard records that would reveal which patron checked out a book and for how long.
She is frustrated by the hate mail she says she receives when she speaks out against the Patriot Act.
"People are scared and they think that by giving up their rights, especially their right to privacy, they will be safe," Krug said. "But it wasn't the right to privacy that let terrorists into our nation. It had nothing to do with libraries or library records."
Some libraries said they will still resist government efforts to obtain records.
Pat McCandless, assistant director for public services for Ohio State University's libraries, said, "State law and professional ethics say we do not convey patron information and that is still our stance.
"To the best of our ability, we would try to support patron confidentiality," she said.
I too have had some misgivings about those kind of orders but, as the article points out, at least the state has to show probable cause to obtain such an order, which is a higher standard that what they currently have to meet in these investigations. So to me that kind of makes sense and has some safeguards in it to keep the government in check.
But by the same token we expect our law enforcement agencies to investigate and protect us form those who would do us harm. We can't very well expect them to investigate if we don't allow them to have the tools to do investigations, and taking a look at what someone is reading or researching would certainly be one way of investigating them.
"We don't even have to sign a card in the back of the book anymore to leave a permanent record of what we've checked out."
I have also found it somewhat disturbing that for years now, if you purchase a book at the bookstore and pay for it with a credit card, a record is automatically generated as to what you bought. So I have made it a practice for many years that if I purchase a book that in the most remote way could be construed as something other than what it is, I pay cash for it. Fortunately I don't purchase many books that could fall into that category.
Congress will not and cannot "clamp down" on anything, they are incapable of disciplining themselves. Misuse will happen, often, and Congress will have a hearing, some low level bastard that got mouthy at the last company Christmans party will take the fall and they will all vow to each other to not let the next incedent leak out.
I do agree that the CIA could have possibly prevented it but they were, as you put it, "enfeebled" by everyone on the hill not just the rats.
My point is this.....Do you trust the gubment to not trample your rights when given the power to do so? I don't and I think that if they had the nuts they could certainly nuetralize the terrorist threat in days. Deportation, ethnic/racial profiling (which IMO is Constitutional), and closed (or very very secure) borders are three quick and painless (in a preservation of rights kind of way) to severely hamper their efforts. The big step is to quit meddeling in their affairs. Which would negate their need to "punnish" us.
EBUCK
A crime that "extends beyond the scope of one state"? Like what? And isn't that the AG's job, to prosocute I mean.
EBUCK
EBUCK
The terrorists have very conveniently taken away "common sense" and replaced it with our own laws.
Videostores typically keep a record of your renting as well.
In Japan, a ghastly murder of a schoolboy who was decapitated and his head placed on a post on a fence prompted police to run checks on customers who had rented particularly gory/violent films. None were guilty, the crime was committed by a classmate.
The only guarantee against this type of intrusion is for businesses to avoid keeping these close tabs on their customers. To me, that data is costly to store and of very little use.
Knowing that someone bought "Bias" is good to note that "Bias" is still selling. To know that I bought "Bias" and the DVD of "Tommy" is of little relevance. It certianly would give no indication that my next purchase would be "Sushi at Home: A Beginner's Guide To Japanese Cooking".
The grocery stores are into this habit too now.
Meanwhile law enforcement has been trying to reduce the barriers to looking at your medical records. To me, there is absolutely no reason they should ever be permitted access to this data, let alone with a court order.
There are a number of crimes that can extend across state lines.
EBUCK
As I respect yours.
There are only +/- 2 years of our current leadership left. What then? That is my concern. I don't trust Bush. I wouldn't trust Ghandi, as presidient, not to trample my rights because I get the idea that to get elected one must have a certain amount of leverage held against them to go all the way. I don't trust government period when it comes to anything as important as my freedom. We keep giving them inches and they keep taking feet...sooner or later those feet are going to add up to miles and where will we be then?
I'm torn over the WWII round-ups. At least they were targeted at the right people without regard to PC sensibilities, but there were rights violations of high order IMO. That would never fly today against citizens, as the Japanees prisoners were at the time, but the folks we need to get rid of are not even citizens. We could, with the right leadership, just export them back to the ME and be done with it.
EBUCK
Bought lots of other seditious books also, like "Unintended Consequences".
EBUCK
If I remember correctly, the FBI started as a domestic intelligence organization without even the powers of arrest. Prosecution was left to the locals.
EBUCK
And please, avocado, keep posting. You are making the classical liberal case every time you set down at the computer.
Very easy to circumvent that system. You condition the receipt of even one federal dollar on that library maintaining detailed records of ALL circulation. Watch how fast the director cries uncle. Then I'd pass a law (an amendment to the Patroit Act) that would provide a 10 year felony for anyone like yourself who aids or assists in the failure to maintain such records. We'll get the info and you get to use the federal prison library for free. How's that?
Got a thin skin?
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.