| Flasch186 |
09-29-2008 12:30 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glengoyne
(Post 1846795)
Hey you've now you've played the ulitmate substantial discussion avoider, "I'm an offended Jewish person" tactic.
Flasch I wasn't trying to argue. I just saw a statement, and had to call "Bullshit".
I'm not asking for you to even substantiate the references. But if you say that "W" used the "Feds","Army", and "DoD" to intimidate those that shouldn't be intimidated, then I'd think you'd at least be able to produce a reference to each that you could believe in. As it is, I think you just threw it out there with zero substance.
Fair enough, I'm just sticking with my original assessment, "Bullshit"
|
very quickly so as not to waste too much of my time showing stuff that you'll throw in the trash:
Feds Intimidate War Protesters :: there it is . org :: pertinent pointers
Quote:
Feds Win Right to War Protesters' Records
[ link ]
BY RYAN J. FOLEY
Associated Press Writer
February 8, 2004, 9:23 AM EST
DES MOINES, Iowa -- In what may be the first subpoena of its kind in decades, a federal judge has ordered a university to turn over records about a gathering of anti-war activists.
In addition to the subpoena of Drake University, subpoenas were served this past week on four of the activists who attended a Nov. 15 forum at the school, ordering them to appear before a grand jury Tuesday, the protesters said.
Federal prosecutors refuse to comment on the subpoenas.
In addition to records about who attended the forum, the subpoena orders the university to divulge all records relating to the local chapter of the National Lawyers Guild, a New York-based legal activist organization that sponsored the forum.
The group, once targeted for alleged ties to communism in the 1950s, announced Friday it will ask a federal court to quash the subpoena on Monday.
"The law is clear that the use of the grand jury to investigate protected political activities or to intimidate protesters exceeds its authority," guild President Michael Ayers said in a statement.
Representatives of the Lawyer's Guild and the American Civil Liberties Union said they had not heard of such a subpoena being served on any U.S. university in decades.
Those served subpoenas include the leader of the Catholic Peace Ministry, the former coordinator of the Iowa Peace Network, a member of the Catholic Worker House, and an anti-war activist who visited Iraq in 2002.
They say the subpoenas are intended to stifle dissent.
"This is exactly what people feared would happen," said Brian Terrell of the peace ministry, one of those subpoenaed. "The civil liberties of everyone in this country are in danger. How we handle that here in Iowa is very important on how things are going to happen in this country from now on."
The forum, titled "Stop the Occupation! Bring the Iowa Guard Home!" came the day before 12 protesters were arrested at an anti-war rally at Iowa National Guard headquarters in Johnston. Organizers say the forum included nonviolence training for people planning to demonstrate.
The targets of the subpoenas believe investigators are trying to link them to an incident that occurred during the rally. A Grinnell College librarian was charged with misdemeanor assault on a peace officer; she has pleaded innocent, saying she simply went limp and resisted arrest.
"The best approach is not to speculate and see what we learn on Tuesday" when the four testify, said Ben Stone, executive director of the Iowa Civil Liberties Union, which is representing one of the protesters.
Mark Smith, a lobbyist for the Washington-based American Association of University Professors, said he had not heard of any similar case of a U.S. university being subpoenaed for such records.
He said the case brings back fears of the "red squads" of the 1950s and campus clampdowns on Vietnam War protesters.
According to a copy obtained by The Associated Press, the Drake subpoena asks for records of the request for a meeting room, "all documents indicating the purpose and intended participants in the meeting, and all documents or recordings which would identify persons that actually attended the meeting."
It also asks for campus security records "reflecting any observations made of the Nov. 15, 2003, meeting, including any records of persons in charge or control of the meeting, and any records of attendees of the meeting."
Several officials of Drake, a private university with about 5,000 students, refused to comment Friday, including school spokeswoman Andrea McDonough. She referred questions to a lawyer representing the school, Steve Serck, who also would not comment.
A source with knowledge of the investigation said a judge had issued a gag order forbidding school officials from discussing the subpoena.
|
http://www.aclu.org/safefree/nationa...s20071014.html
Quote:
Hundreds of New Documents Reveal Expanded Military Role in Domestic Surveillance (10/14/2007)
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: [email protected]
NEW YORK - New documents uncovered as a result of an American Civil Liberties Union and New York Civil Liberties Union lawsuit reveal that the Department of Defense secretly issued hundreds of national security letters (NSLs) to obtain private and sensitive records of people within the United States without court approval. A comprehensive analysis of 455 NSLs issued after 9/11 shows that the Defense Department seems to have collaborated with the FBI to circumvent the law, may have overstepped its legal authority to obtain financial and credit records, provided misleading information to Congress, and silenced NSL recipients from speaking out about the records requests, according to the ACLU.
"Once again, the Bush administration's unchecked authority has led to abuse and civil liberties violations," said ACLU Executive Director Anthony D. Romero. "The documents make clear that the Department of Defense may have secretly and illegally conducted surveillance beyond the powers it was granted by Congress. It also appears as if the FBI is serving as a lackey for the DoD in misusing the Patriot Act powers. At the very least, it certainly looks like the FBI and DoD are conspiring to evade limits placed on the Department of Defense's surveillance powers."
NSLs are secretly issued by the government to obtain access to personal customer records from Internet service providers, financial institutions, and credit reporting agencies. In almost all cases, recipients of the NSLs are forbidden, or "gagged," from disclosing that they have received the letters. While the FBI has broad NSL powers and compliance with FBI-issued NSLs is mandatory, the Defense Department's NSL power is more limited in scope, and, in most cases, compliance with Defense Department demands is not mandatory.
In April, the ACLU filed Freedom of Information Act requests with both the Defense Department and the CIA seeking all documents related to their use of NSLs to gain access to personal records of people in the United States. And in June, the ACLU filed a lawsuit to force those agencies to turn over the requested documents. The Defense Department's NSL documents are the first materials received by the ACLU as part of this lawsuit.
"The expanded role of the military in domestic intelligence gathering is troubling. These documents reveal that the military is gaining access to records here in the U.S. – in secret and without any meaningful oversight," said Melissa Goodman, staff attorney with the ACLU's National Security Project. "There are real concerns about the use of this intrusive surveillance power."
As first revealed by the New York Times in January, recipients of the letters have reported confusion over the scope of the information requested and whether compliance with the NSLs is legally required. The documents released to the ACLU confirm that the letters are coercive and do not make clear that compliance with the Defense Department's "requests" for information is voluntary.
These revelations about the Defense Department's use of NSLs come on the heels of widespread reports of other significant government abuses of the NSL power. A March 2007 report from the Justice Department's Inspector General (IG) estimated that the FBI issued over 143,000 NSLs between 2003 and 2005, an astronomical increase from previous years. The IG's report also found numerous examples of improper and illegal uses of NSLs by the FBI.
The Defense Department documents uncovered today contain numerous revelations of potential abuses of the National Security Letter power:
* Documents show the Defense Department may be flouting the law and, by simply asking the FBI to issue the NSLs on their behalf, accessing documents it is not entitled to receive. There is no evidence that the FBI has ever turned down such a request. (See document page 60)
* The Defense Department told Congress that it seeks NSL assistance from the FBI only in joint investigations, but an internal program review shows that the military asks the FBI to issue NSLs in strictly Defense Department investigations. (See document pages 178-80)
* A heavily redacted copy of the results of an internal program review prompted after the New York Times reported potential abuses of the military's NSL power shows that the Defense Department has issued NSLs with little guidance or training, no coordination within the military, no real recordkeeping, and an inadequate review process. A Defense Department action memo identifies and recommends fixing these flaws. (See document pages 49, 54-73)
* Although compliance with Defense Department-issued NSLs is voluntary, the coercive language found in these letters would lead a reader to believe compliance was mandatory. For example, one NSL was stamped multiple times with the words "subpoena" and "non-disclosure obligation" to intimidate its recipients with authority the Defense Department does not have. According to Navy records, no credit agency has ever refused to comply with the military's requests, and only two financial institutions have refused to comply. (See document pages 16-18, 87, 1040)
* The Defense Department appears to "gag" all NSL recipients as a matter of course, and, despite recent changes to the law, the NSLs issued by the Defense Department do not inform recipients of their new right to challenge the request and gag order in court. (See document pages 87, 303)
* The Defense Department can use NSLs to gather information on individuals not suspected of wrongdoing. (See document pages 112-114)
"The Fourth Amendment protects against the government's effort to rummage broadly through the papers and documents of individuals without narrow and specific justifications," said Arthur Eisenberg, NYCLU Legal Director. "Yet the excessive secrecy surrounding the military's use of national security letters opens the door to abuse. Without oversight and accountability, there is nothing to stop the Defense Department from engaging in broad fishing expeditions."
The ACLU has successfully challenged the NSL power in two separate lawsuits. In one case involving an Internet Service Provider, a federal court in September struck down as unconstitutional the National Security Letter provision of the Patriot Act authorizing the FBI to demand a range of personal records without court approval, and to gag those who receive NSLs from discussing the letters.
Senator Russ Feingold and Representative Jerrold Nadler have introduced legislation to rein in this unchecked NSL authority. The ACLU urges immediate consideration of these bills in light of this new information.
Attorneys in the case are Goodman and Jameel Jaffer of the ACLU's National Security Project and Eisenberg of the NYCLU.
All of the Defense Department documents obtained by the ACLU are available at: http://www.aclu.org/safefree/nationa...s20071014.html
More information about the ACLU's challenges to the NSL power is available at: www.aclu.org/nsl
|
|
