The FBI is collecting large volumes of files on Bush's opposition

Le Jacquelope

Loves Spam
Joined
Apr 9, 2003
Posts
76,445
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/071805Z.shtml

Large Volume of FBI Files Alarms US Activist Groups
By Eric Lichtblau
The New York Times

Monday 18 July 2005

Washington - The Federal Bureau of Investigation has collected at least 3,500 pages of internal documents in the last several years on a handful of civil rights and antiwar protest groups in what the groups charge is an attempt to stifle political opposition to the Bush administration.

The F.B.I. has in its files 1,173 pages of internal documents on the American Civil Liberties Union, the leading critic of the Bush administration's antiterrorism policies, and 2,383 pages on Greenpeace, an environmental group that has led acts of civil disobedience in protest over the administration's policies, the Justice Department disclosed in a court filing this month in a federal court in Washington.

The filing came as part of a lawsuit under the Freedom of Information Act brought by the A.C.L.U. and other groups that maintain that the F.B.I. has engaged in a pattern of political surveillance against critics of the Bush administration. A smaller batch of documents already turned over by the government sheds light on the interest of F.B.I. counterterrorism officials in protests surrounding the Iraq war and last year's Republican National Convention.

F.B.I. and Justice Department officials declined to say what was in the A.C.L.U. and Greenpeace files, citing the pending lawsuit. But they stressed that as a matter of both policy and practice, they have not sought to monitor the political activities of any activist groups and that any intelligence-gathering activities related to political protests are intended to prevent disruptive and criminal activity at demonstrations, not to quell free speech. They said there might be an innocuous explanation for the large volume of files on the A.C.L.U. and Greenpeace, like preserving requests from or complaints about the groups in agency files.

But officials at the two groups said they were troubled by the disclosure.

"I'm still somewhat shocked by the size of the file on us," said Anthony D. Romero, executive director of the A.C.L.U. "Why would the F.B.I. collect almost 1,200 pages on a civil rights organization engaged in lawful activity? What justification could there be, other than political surveillance of lawful First Amendment activities?"

Protest groups charge that F.B.I. counterterrorism officials have used their expanded powers since the Sept. 11 attacks to blur the line between legitimate civil disobedience and violent or terrorist activity in what they liken to F.B.I. political surveillance of the 1960's. The debate became particularly heated during protests over the war in Iraq and the run-up to the Republican National Convention in New York City last year, with the disclosures that the F.B.I. had collected extensive information on plans for protests.

In all, the A.C.L.U. is seeking F.B.I. records since 2001 or earlier on some 150 groups that have been critical of the Bush administration's policies on the Iraq war and other matters.

The Justice Department is opposing the A.C.L.U.'s request to expedite the review of material it is seeking under the Freedom of Information Act, saying it does not involve a matter of urgent public interest, and department lawyers say the sheer volume of material, in the thousands of pages, will take them 8 to 11 months to process for Greenpeace and the A.C.L.U alone. The A.C.L.U., which went to court in a separate case to obtain some 60,000 pages of records on the government's detention and interrogation practices, said the F.B.I. records on the dozens of protest groups could total tens of thousands of pages by the time the request is completed.

The much smaller files that the F.B.I. has already turned over in recent weeks center on two other groups that were involved in political protests in the last few years, and those files point to previously undisclosed communications by bureau counterterrorism officials regarding activity at protests.

Six pages of internal F.B.I. documents on a group called United for Peace and Justice, which led wide-scale protests over the Iraq war, discuss the group's role in 2003 in preparing protests for the Republican National Convention.

A memorandum by counterterrorism personnel in the F.B.I.'s Los Angeles office circulated to other counterterrorism officials in New York, Boston, Los Angeles and Washington makes passing reference to possible anarchist connections of some protesters and the prospect for disruptions but also quotes at much greater length from more benign statements protesters had released on the Internet and elsewhere to prepare for the Republican convention.

One section of the F.B.I. memo, for instance, quotes from a statement put out by protesters to rally support for convention protests: "Imagine: A million people on the street, representing the diversity of New York, and the multiplicity of this nation - community organizers, black radicals, unions, anarchists, church groups, queers, grandmas for peace, AIDS activists, youth organizers, environmentalists, people of color contingents, global justice organizers, those united for peace and justice, veterans, and everyone who is maligned by Bush's malicious agenda - on the street - en masse."

A second file turned over by the F.B.I. on the American Indian Movement of Colorado includes seven pages of internal documents and press clippings related to protests and possible disruptions in the Denver area in connection with Columbus Day. In that case, a 2002 memorandum distributed to F.B.I. counterterrorism officials from agents in Denver said that "although the majority of demonstrators at the Columbus Day events will be peaceful, a small fraction of individuals intent on causing violence and property damage can be expected."

An agent in Denver requested that the F.B.I. open a preliminary investigation "to allow for identification and investigation of individuals planning criminal activity during Columbus Day, October 2002," the memorandum said. The file does not indicate what came of the request.

The documents are similar in tone to a controversial bulletin distributed among F.B.I. counterterrorism officials in October 2003 that analyzed the tactics, training and organization of antiwar demonstrators who were then planning protests in Washington and San Francisco.

The 2003 memo led to an internal Justice Department inquiry after an F.B.I. employee charged that it improperly blurred the line between lawfully protected speech and illegal activity. But the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel found that the bulletin raised no legal problems and that any First Amendment impact posed by the F.B.I.'s monitoring of the political protests was negligible and constitutional.

Still, the debate over the F.B.I.'s practices intensified last year during the presidential campaign. The F.B.I. questioned numerous political protesters, and issued subpoenas for some to appear before grand juries, in an effort to head off what officials said they feared could be violent and disruptive convention protests. And the Justice Department opened a criminal investigation and subpoenaed records regarding Internet messages posted by critics of the Bush administration that listed the names of delegates to the Republican convention.

Leslie Cagan, the national coordinator for United for Peace and Justice, a coalition of more than 1,000 antiwar groups, said she was particularly concerned that the F.B.I.'s counterterrorism division was discussing the coalition's operations. "We always assumed the F.B.I. was monitoring us, but to see the counterterrorism people looking at us like this is pretty jarring," she said.

At Greenpeace, which has protested both the Bush administration's environmental record and its policies in Iraq, John Passacantando, executive director of the group's United States operation, said he too was troubled by what he had learned.

"If the F.B.I. has taken the time to gather 2,400 pages of information on an organization that has a perfect record of peaceful activity for 34 years, it suggests they're just attempting to stifle the voices of their critics," Mr. Passacantando said.

Greenpeace was indicted as an organization by the Justice Department in a highly unusual prosecution in 2003 after two of its protesters went aboard a cargo ship to try to unfurl a protest banner. A federal judge in Miami threw out the case last year.
 
I'd really like to know who else has files that big; in what company does this place the ACLU and GP?
 
They were gathering files on political dissent to start with.

Bumper sticker buyers are next on the list.

With the current situation in London we can bet that certain average purchases will start to come under closer inspection and be due cause to monitor an individual's life.
 
Apparently they have done such a good job of protecting America from terrorist attacks that they now have a lot of free time.
 
They're falling all over themselves to extend or make the P/A permanent.

They will make the argument that the only sensible way to prevent attacks is to monitor everyone as much as possible.

While GWB is proclaiming his efforts to protect us, Chertoff is saying local mass transit is on their own for protection.
 
I wonder if they know about me and this site if they googled his name and went thru the list then they might. :eek:
 
Don't worry about the notes.

The pen-traps catch all of it anyway.
 
LovingTongue said:
Slick Willie did it to his enemies so that makes it ok now?

I just love conservative defense tactics. Probably as much as half the time, their first response to criticism isn't to defend themselves (or Bush), but to point he did it first fingers at anybody who moves, like if somebody else was an asshole, it's okay to be an asshole too.

Hell, I learned that wasn't a good argument while still at my mother's knee. Guess their family values aren't as strong as mine after all.
 
sigh said:
I just love conservative defense tactics. Probably as much as half the time, their first response to criticism isn't to defend themselves (or Bush), but to point he did it first fingers at anybody who moves, like if somebody else was an asshole, it's okay to be an asshole too.

Hell, I learned that wasn't a good argument while still at my mother's knee. Guess their family values aren't as strong as mine after all.
Personal responsibility was a big thing when I was a conservative. (Well, hell, I still am, it's just that these nin-con-poops have descended further down into madness than I care to follow :D )

Saying "well leebrulz did it first!" never cut it back then.

It's as if I'm on a different planet now, or something.
 
LovingTongue said:
It's as if I'm on a different planet now, or something.

*laughing*

You know, there's a whole bunch of people around here that think you are.

:D



Fuck, I have to try to get back to sleep. Insomnia sucks. Makes me giddy. G-nite, LT
 
sigh said:
*laughing*

You know, there's a whole bunch of people around here that think you are.

:D
The same buncha people also think I wear a sweatervest and that AJ is funny as fuck when he slings racial slurs.

Fuck, I have to try to get back to sleep. Insomnia sucks. Makes me giddy. G-nite, LT
Me too.
 
Bush is gonna run again, which is illegal I know. But think about it... he's spent all his time in office positioning his patsies in positions of power, the supreme court for instance. So when he declares he will run again the people and organisations who would be expected to stop him will be under control, and then he'll fix the election again and America will be a dictatorship.
 
Exactly how far back do these files go? Perhaps into the 1980's? 1970's?

Is it possible that the 2400 pages aren't all the doing of an evil FBI out of control, but the issue has only become important now to the ACLU?

Greenpeace has over its history engaged in sufficient suspicious activity to earn files in nearly every police organisation across the globe. The fact that 99% of their activity is benign (as with the ACLU) does not mean that they do not bear some watching. Any group repeatedly protesting near nuclear/chemical/oil facilities offers some interesting possibilities for mayhem and were some mayhem to actually occur the same people decrying the files now would be blaming the administration for NOT having the foresight.

Why should 2400 pages be so odd in the first place? A kid caught shoplifting generates a few dozen pages of criminal record.
 
kbate said:
Exactly how far back do these files go? Perhaps into the 1980's? 1970's?

Is it possible that the 2400 pages aren't all the doing of an evil FBI out of control, but the issue has only become important now to the ACLU?

Greenpeace has over its history engaged in sufficient suspicious activity to earn files in nearly every police organisation across the globe. The fact that 99% of their activity is benign (as with the ACLU) does not mean that they do not bear some watching. Any group repeatedly protesting near nuclear/chemical/oil facilities offers some interesting possibilities for mayhem and were some mayhem to actually occur the same people decrying the files now would be blaming the administration for NOT having the foresight.

Why should 2400 pages be so odd in the first place? A kid caught shoplifting generates a few dozen pages of criminal record.

if it's not so odd, it shouldn't be difficult to comply with the foia request. right?

the request has a limited scope: from january 1, 2000 until the present. seems like a lot of gathering to me. j. edgar hoover must be smiling in his grave.
 
human_male said:
Bush is gonna run again, which is illegal I know. But think about it... he's spent all his time in office positioning his patsies in positions of power, the supreme court for instance. So when he declares he will run again the people and organisations who would be expected to stop him will be under control, and then he'll fix the election again and America will be a dictatorship.
This is so close to being almost remotely possible that it’s scary, almost.
 
CrackerjackHrt said:
if it's not so odd, it shouldn't be difficult to comply with the foia request. right?

the request has a limited scope: from january 1, 2000 until the present. seems like a lot of gathering to me. j. edgar hoover must be smiling in his grave.


And I am sure they will comply with the request for any records in non-ongoing investigations.

I would like to see what they are investigating.. or if like the previous administrations FBI problem it is just "record keeping."

J.Edgar would be most happy to find the FBI's awesome power being abused.
 
kbate said:
And I am sure they will comply with the request for any records in non-ongoing investigations.

I would like to see what they are investigating.. or if like the previous administrations FBI problem it is just "record keeping."

J.Edgar would be most happy to find the FBI's awesome power being abused.

why would the fbi keep records on lawful organizations that advocate nothing illegal? that doesn't bother you? you think it has no chilling effect on free association?
 
am i that old ?

is anybody here old enough to remember nixon and his "enemies' list" ? lennon was on that list !!! (that's john...from the beatles, not v.i. from the russian revolution).let's not forget, also that george I, w's daddy RAN THE CIA for tricky dicky for a couple of years. as they say, the apple doesn't fall far from the tree.
hmmmmm............... i wonder if i've made "the list now ???
 
CrackerjackHrt said:
why would the fbi keep records on lawful organizations that advocate nothing illegal? that doesn't bother you? you think it has no chilling effect on free association?


Why does the DMV keep driving records? Why do credit agencies keep track of every bill you have ever paid/been late paying?

Records are kept on nearly everything, but Greenpeace with the activities they have chosen to protest is certainly worthy of some official notice, if only for cross reference against potential terrorist lists. People who protest near nuclear facilities deserve a minimum of a cross reference file.

I am more interested in why files would be necessary for the ACLU, and I am having difficulty thinking up any devastating scenario which would require such.
 
kbate said:
Why does the DMV keep driving records? Why do credit agencies keep track of every bill you have ever paid/been late paying?
This is a questionable analogy at best.
 
kbate said:
Why does the DMV keep driving records? Why do credit agencies keep track of every bill you have ever paid/been late paying?

Records are kept on nearly everything, but Greenpeace with the activities they have chosen to protest is certainly worthy of some official notice, if only for cross reference against potential terrorist lists. People who protest near nuclear facilities deserve a minimum of a cross reference file.

I am more interested in why files would be necessary for the ACLU, and I am having difficulty thinking up any devastating scenario which would require such.

the dmv keeps records on drivers. credit agencies keep records on people who use credit. and a law enforcement agency keeps records on people who have no history of breaking the law? (speaking broadly; i realize the different organizations have different histories.) i wonder if similar files are maintained on the nra. or the american center for law & justice?
 
Back
Top