The Justice Department asked Congress to remove the key legal restriction on obtaining wiretaps under the FISA law. The law permits extensive use of listening devices in espionage and international terrorism cases so long as the target is connected to a foreign power or international terrorist group. [...] By removing the requirement of a foreign connection, the administration proposal would make it far easier to mount surveillance on people who have no known connection to actors overseas. [...] The new proposals came at the invitation of the Senate and House intelligence panels, which asked the agencies to submit technical corrections to the anti-terrorism bill or suggest laws that would help combat terrorism, according to an informed source.
THIS is a technical correction?
Attorney General John Ashcroft indicated Sunday the Justice Department could loosen some restrictions on the FBI's ability to put domestic groups, including religious organizations, under surveillance to thwart terrorist activity. [...] Asked by ABC about reports that restrictions on FBI surveillance of domestic groups would be loosened, Ashcroft said, "We're going to do what we need to do to protect the American people." He did not directly confirm the change was being pursued. He said federal law enforcement would be "interested" in any group that makes killing Americans "part of its mantra" -- even if the group were a religious organization.
Yeah. Right.
Well, the plain fact is that, depending on how it's done, it's entirely legal to advocate killing Americans to advance political goals. It's not legal to do it, but it's quite legal to say that it's a good thing to do. By advocating these changes, our Minister of Injustice is trying to criminalize protected speech.
To be sure, I never have understood why you would need to use FISA to obtain a wiretap for anything. Wiretap judicial procedings are closed, and the records generally sealed until trial. Secrecy isn't particularly served with FISA; all that is served is expediency and the ability to keep dubious requests from any sort of meaningful review. Which is, of course, the point: our Lord Minister would surely not want any such requests reviewed by anyone who would actually make him justify them with evidence.
I'm actually beginning to feel somewhat sorry for the FBI -- up to a point. Ashcroft has ripped apart investigative procedures that actually did work most of the time, and replaced them with procedures that have already been proven not to work. And now, with these requested changes, he's just setting them up for a ceaseless string of suits later on as people allege -- with perfect justification -- that the FBI has violated their rights and the Constitution. Of course, by the time Congress decides that they've gone too far and jerk on the FBI leash, it'll be too late for those people who get caught in these investigations, whether they've done anything or not.
Copyright © 2001, Iain Jackson, after-words.org
[Archives: 2001 and after]
Archives before February 5, 2001
Search entries:
12/19/2001: vive la france
12/19/2001: princess, redux
12/19/2001: yemen and rumsfeld
12/18/2001: you're NOT in the army now
12/18/2001: interesting donation
12/18/2001: shame on winn dixie, indeed
12/18/2001: saudi princess
12/17/2001: new resolve
12/17/2001: a victim of the attack ... yeah, right
12/17/2001: polluters ho!