Another Step Backwards in America

[Ameroth]

WASHINGTON — A Justice Department plan would loosen restrictions on the Federal Bureau of Investigation to allow agents to open a national security or criminal investigation against someone without any clear basis for suspicion, Democratic lawmakers briefed on the details said Wednesday.
The plan, which could be made public next month, has already generated intense interest and speculation. Little is known about its precise language, but civil liberties advocates say they fear it could give the government even broader license to open terrorism investigations.
Congressional staff members got a glimpse of some of the details in closed briefings this month, and four Democratic senators told Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey in a letter on Wednesday that they were troubled by what they heard.
The senators said the new guidelines would allow the F.B.I. to open an investigation of an American, conduct surveillance, pry into private records and take other investigative steps “without any basis for suspicion.” The plan “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 letter said. It was signed by Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts and Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island.
As the end of the Bush administration nears, the White House has been seeking to formalize in law and regulation some of the aggressive counterterrorism steps it has already taken in practice since the Sept. 11 attacks.
Congress overhauled the federal wiretapping law in July, for instance, and President Bush issued an executive order this month ratifying new roles for intelligence agencies. Other pending changes would also authorize greater sharing of intelligence information with the local police, a major push in the last seven years.
The Justice Department is already expecting criticism over the F.B.I. guidelines. In an effort to pre-empt critics, Mr. Mukasey gave a speech last week in Portland, Ore., describing the unfinished plan as an effort to “integrate more completely and harmonize the standards that apply to the F.B.I.’s activities.” Differing standards, he said, have caused confusion for field agents.
Mr. Mukasey emphasized that the F.B.I. would still need a “valid purpose” for an investigation, and that it could not be “simply based on somebody’s race, religion, or exercise of First Amendment rights.”
Rather than expanding government power, he said, “this document clarifies the rules by which the F.B.I. conducts its intelligence mission.”
In 2002, John Ashcroft, then the attorney general, allowed F.B.I. agents to visit public sites like mosques or monitor Web sites in the course of national security investigations. The next year, Mr. Bush issued guidelines allowing officials to use ethnicity or race in “narrow” circumstances to detect a terrorist threat.
The Democratic senators said the draft plan appeared to allow the F.B.I. to go even further in collecting information on Americans connected to “foreign intelligence” without any factual predicate. They also said there appeared to be few constraints on how the information would be shared with other agencies.
Michael German, a lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union and a former F.B.I. agent, said the plan appeared to open the door still further to the use of data-mining profiles in tracking terrorism.
“This seems to be based on the idea that the government can take a bunch of data and create a profile that can be used to identify future bad guys,” he said. “But that has not been demonstrated to be true anywhere else.”
The Justice Department said Wednesday that in light of requests from members of Congress for more information, Mr. Mukasey would agree not to sign the new guidelines before a Sept. 17 Congressional hearing.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/21/wa...=1&oref=slogin
----

Summary: The FBI will receive the power to commit warrant-less searches and investigations of American citizens who have not been defined as having any clear basis for suspect of wrong-doings/illegal activities.

-----

Though not surprising, this is still unnerving. Basically, the FBI is about to receive the power to fully investigate American citizens without any substantial evidence to suggest any wrong-doings. They claim this will continue to help in the prevention of terrorist activities.

How far are you, as an American, willing to let your civil liberties slide to "protect" you from any kind of terrorism afoot? Do you have a problem with warrant-less searches of your private records by the government? Do you think this is yet another blow to the failing civil liberties our Constitution guarantees?

Personally, I am 100%, totally against the concept of warrant-less, un-provoked searches/investigations of American people. The founding fathers didn't draft the Bill of Rights with the 4th amendment (Protection against unjust search and seizure) included for no reason. As far as I'm concerned, a citizen needs to have been involved in illegal activities, or conspiracy to commit illegal activities before a government-based investigation should be allowed.

Discuss.

[KingOfZeal]

Re: Another Step Backwards in America

“Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.” ~Benjamin Franklin


Never has such a statement ever been as true as the days we live in.

[Telera]

Re: Another Step Backwards in America

Old Ben knew what he was talking about, and that alone sums up my feelings on the matter.

[Yellow Mage]

Re: Another Step Backwards in America

Well, dang, beaten twice on the big Ben quote.

/em readies Ticket to New Zealand.

[Cometgreen]

Re: Another Step Backwards in America

Gotta protect us from the terrists!

[Effedup]

Re: Another Step Backwards in America

Guess I'd better start figuring out that whole "moving to Canada" thing.

[MrMageo]

Re: Another Step Backwards in America

hmmm with that and the patriot act americans are going to be without lots of freedoms. (so to speak).

I honestly feel sorry for americans now, I have never really liked many simply because the flavor in which they accepted the patriot act. But this new bill is pretty intebse and absurd. Your all welcome to join me in my freedom loving country. Well at least until 2012 when its expected that the NAU (north american union) is supposed to emerge. In which case the USA will supply their laws military and people and Canada will provide the natural resources, the money and the good beer. I don't know what mexico offers, but hey cheap labour is always needed.

Australia here I come January 2011

[WovenDarkness]

Re: Another Step Backwards in America

This angers me so much that I can't actually come up with the words to relay to others what I feel when I read something like this. Anger, frustration, and fury just don't even come close.

The other thing that absolutely blows me away is the "I have nothing to hide..." concept where people simply hand their rights over to the government and allow/support this nonsense. It's too bad that the vast majority of U.S citizens don't have a clue what their rights are.

Please don't mention that you know of anyone that actually knows what their rights are and still thinks that the U.S. government trampling them is okay. I might have a coronary or explode into a steaming pile of flesh and blood.

[Grizzlebeard]

Re: Another Step Backwards in America

Kind of sad that wars were fought and many, many marches and demonstrations were held so Americans could have freedoms countries around the world envy and yet slowly, and without so much as a whimper, they're being given up and taken away from you.

[Akashimo]

Re: Another Step Backwards in America

Can i haz arms race?

[Lmnop]

Re: Another Step Backwards in America

Kind of sad that wars were fought and many, many marches and demonstrations were held so Americans could have freedoms countries around the world envy and yet slowly, and without so much as a whimper, they're being given up and taken away from you.

Making sure you give your Wars Marches is great and all, but having a reliable Haster is also crucial to tp burning the constitution.

...

Sorry.

I kinda can't believe how apt that Ben Franklin quote is. I don't really know much about politics, but I'm perpetually sickened by how easy it is to rally people behind bad ideas with the simple mention of the word "Terrorist".

[Ameroth]

Re: Another Step Backwards in America

I kinda can't believe how apt that Ben Franklin quote is. I don't really know much about politics, but I'm perpetually sickened by how easy it is to rally people behind bad ideas with the simple mention of the word "Terrorist".

Point in case: Bush was in office for 8 years.

[Audioma]

Re: Another Step Backwards in America

*sigh*


I blame suburban America.



Soon the Constitution will just be a wrinkled sheet of notebook paper with a few Home Owner's Association guidelines scribbled on it. IMUH SCURRED FER MUH KIDZ AND MUH COMMUNITY! HERE BE MUH FREEDUMZ GUVMENT. *shot in the face by Audioma*

[Effedup]

Re: Another Step Backwards in America

Point in case: Bush was in office for 8 years.

Yeah, but I don't think he was in office legitimately, with all the bullshit in Florida in the 2000 election and Ohio in the next concerning voter fraud, etc.

At least, that's what I tell myself.

I read a poll recently (don't remember where) that quite a few of Hillary Clinton's supporters are leaning towards McCain. That's a scary thought.

[MrMageo]

Re: Another Step Backwards in America

I don't know Mccain is pretty liberal. Unfourtunatley he can not be liberal in the election year. You lose the republican votes that way. His track record in the senate and as a congressman, has been very by-partisan, and he has even received flack over his work with democrats on the campaign money bill they finally got passed. He has gone toe to toe with bush and hardliners. In fact prior to 2004 when he really inclined himself to run again he was considering switching parties.

Politics make strange bedfellows, if he gets in I wouldn't be too worried he has to hardline for the christian right and the republicans, but his track record shows differently, if any thing he is an independant. From day 1 of the final race, (when he became the nominee) I liked him or obama, HRC would have been a worse pick than Mccain, but hey I like Huckabee, he should be the president.