Patriot Act, FBI now in our libraries, as feared

[DrSmellThis]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20050518/cm_usatoday/librariansbrushwithfbishapesherviewoftheusapatriot act

I guess the fact that somebody reads about a terrorist makes them a suspected terrorist to the FBI.

I can just imagine all the third graders writing reports on terrorism only to have their homes surreptitiously ransacked by FBI agents with "sneak and peek" orders. FBI agent: "Exhibit A, your honor, is this action figure which appears to be a terrorist!"

Moral of the story: Stay ignorant. Let the government worry about all that knowledge stuff.

Is this democracy?

[DrSmellThis]

Since the passage of the Patriot Act in October 2001, the FBI has the power to go to a secret court to request library and bookstore records considered relevant to a national security investigation. It does not have to show that the people whose records are sought are suspected of any crime or explain why they are being investigated. In addition, librarians and booksellers are forbidden to reveal that they have received an order to surrender customer data.

Our government has always possessed the power to obtain library records, but that power has been subject to safeguards. The Patriot Act eliminated those safeguards and made it impossible for people to ask a judge to rule whether the government needs the information it is after.

....With a Patriot Act order in hand, I would have been forbidden to disclose even the fact that I had received it and would not have been able to tell this story...........

[DrSmellThis]

Note this is a four page, two part article, this being part one:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/11/AR2005061100381.html

[DrSmellThis]

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/06/15/patriotact.libraries.ap/index.html

[DrSmellThis]

Libraries Say Yes, Officials Do Quiz Them About Users
By Eric Lichtblau / New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/20/politics/20patriot.html?)

WASHINGTON, June 19 - Law enforcement officials have made at least 200 formal and informal inquiries to libraries for information on reading material and other internal matters since October 2001, according to a new study that adds grist to the growing debate in Congress over the government's counterterrorism powers.

In some cases, agents used subpoenas or other formal demands to obtain information like lists of users checking out a book on Osama bin Laden. Other requests were informal - and were sometimes turned down by librarians who chafed at the notion of turning over such material, said the American Library Association, which commissioned the study.

The association, which is pushing to scale back the government's powers to gain information from libraries, said its $300,000 study was the first to examine a question that was central to a House vote last week on the USA Patriot Act: how frequently federal, state and local agents are demanding records from libraries.

The Bush administration says that while it is important for law enforcement officials to get information from libraries if needed in terrorism investigations, officials have yet to actually use their power under the Patriot Act to demand records from libraries or bookstores.

The library issue has become the most divisive in the debate on whether Congress should expand or curtail government powers under the Patriot Act, and it was at the center of last week's vote in the House approving a measure to restrict investigators' access to libraries.

The study does not directly answer how or whether the Patriot Act has been used to search libraries. The association said it decided it was constrained from asking direct questions on the law because of secrecy provisions that could make it a crime for a librarian to respond. Federal intelligence law bans those who receive certain types of demands for records from challenging the order or even telling anyone they have received it.

As a result, the study sought to determine the frequency of law enforcement inquiries at all levels without detailing their nature. Even so, organizers said the data suggested that investigators were seeking information from libraries far more frequently than Bush administration officials had acknowledged.

"What this says to us," said Emily Sheketoff, the executive director of the library association's Washington office, "is that agents are coming to libraries and they are asking for information at a level that is significant, and the findings are completely contrary to what the Justice Department has been trying to convince the public."

Kevin Madden, a Justice Department spokesman, said that the department had not yet seen the findings and that he could not comment specifically on them. But Mr. Madden questioned the relevance of the data to the debate over the Patriot Act, noting that the types of inquiries found in the survey could relate to a wide range of law enforcement investigations unconnected to terrorism or intelligence.

"Any conclusion that federal law enforcement has an extraordinary interest in libraries is wholly manufactured as a result of misinformation," Mr. Madden said.

The study, which surveyed 1,500 public libraries and 4,000 academic libraries, used anonymous responses to address legal concerns. A large majority of those who responded to the survey said they had not been contacted by any law enforcement agencies since October 2001, when the Patriot Act was passed.

But there were 137 formal requests or demands for information in that time, 49 from federal officials and the remainder from state or local investigators. Federal officials have sometimes used local investigators on joint terrorism task forces to conduct library inquiries.

In addition, the survey found that 66 libraries had received informal law enforcement requests without an official legal order, including 24 federal requests. Association officials said the survey results, if extrapolated from the 500 public libraries that responded, would amount to a total of some 600 formal inquires since 2001.

One library reporting that it had received a records demand was the Whatcom County system in a rural area of northwest Washington.

Last June, a library user who took out a book there, "Bin Laden: The Man Who Declared War on America," noticed a handwritten note in the margin remarking that "Hostility toward America is a religious duty and we hope to be rewarded by God," and went to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Agents, in turn, went to the library seeking names and information on anyone checking out the biography since 2001.

The library's lawyers turned down the request, and agents went back with a subpoena. Joan Airoldi, who runs the library, said in an interview that she was particularly alarmed after a Google search revealed that the handwritten line was an often-cited quotation from Mr. bin Laden that was included in the report issued by the Sept. 11 commission.

The library fought the subpoena, and the F.B.I. withdrew its demand.

"A fishing expedition like this just seems so un-American to me," Ms. Airoldi said. "The question is, how many basic liberties are we willing to give up in the war on terrorism, and who are the real victims?"

The survey also found what library association officials described as a "chilling effect" caused by public concerns about the government's powers. Nearly 40 percent of the libraries responding reported that users had asked about changes in practices related to the Patriot Act, and about 5 percent said they had altered their professional activities over the issues; for instance, by reviewing the types of books they bought.

Representative Bernard Sanders, independent of Vermont, who sponsored the House measure to curtail the power to demand library records, said he was struck by the 40 percent response.

"What this demonstrates is that there is widespread concern among the American people about the government having the power to monitor what they are reading," Mr. Sanders said.

The margin of the vote on Mr. Sanders's measure, which passed 238 to 187, with support from 38 Republicans, surprised even some backers, but Bush administration officials say they are hopeful the decision will be reversed and have threatened a veto of any measure that would limit powers under the Patriot Act.

Carol Brey-Casiano, who runs the library system in El Paso and is president of the library association, said she, too, sensed a public unease.

"We're concerned about protecting people's privacy," she said. "People will say to me, 'I've read about the Patriot Act, and does that mean the government can come in and ask you what I'm reading?' And my answer to them has to be, 'Yes, they can,' and quite frankly, I can't even tell anyone if that happened, because there's a gag order."

Investigators have long had the ability to seek out library records in tracking leads in criminal inquiries. In two of the most noted cases, investigators in the 1990's used library records to search for the Unabomber, who wrote detailed and unusual academic treatises in his string of bombings over almost two decades, and for New York's "Zodiac Killer," who had cited the writing of an obscure occult poet.

Government officials say that while they have no interest in using their expanded powers under the Patriot Act to monitor Americans' reading habits, they do not believe that libraries should be safe havens for terrorists. They point to several cases in which Sept. 11 hijackers and other terror suspects used library computers to send e-mail messages.

Perhaps the fiercest counterattack from the Bush administration on the issue came in 2003 from John Ashcroft, then the attorney general, who said in a speech in Washington that groups like the American Library Association had bought into "breathless reports and baseless hysteria" about the government's interest in libraries.

"Do we at the Justice Department really care what you are reading?" Mr. Ashcroft asked. "No."

Ms. Sheketoff at the library association acknowledged that critics of the study may accuse the group of having a stake in the outcome of the Patriot Act debate. "Sure, we have a dog in this fight, but the other side has been mocking us for four years over our 'baseless hysteria,' and saying we have no reason to be concerned," she said. "Well, these findings say that we do have reason to be concerned."

[DrSmellThis]

...and a related story, regarding air traveler privacy:

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050620/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/passenger_screening_4

[DrSmellThis]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050825/pl_nm/security_libraries_dc;_ylt=Asawj9N2R3zKAuKsQh.xv51 34T0D;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl

[tim929]

I dunno...I think it's all kinda fun and entertaining.Sorta like the 1950's and 60's when if you wanted to mess with your boss or you neighbors, all you had to do was suggest to the F.B.I that they were a possible Communist and they would decend on them like a plague of locusts and destroy thier lives.

How many people ended up be ruined by the meer suggestion? Nobody knows because that information is classified.But there were in fact people who dissapeared as a result of it.And how many of us who either lived then or whos parents lived thru it all still have F.B.I. files containing infomation on official and unofficial inquiries into our backgrounds?

It's sort of nostalgic realy.Sorta like owning a restored 57' Chevy and listening to Elvis and The Beatles.

Thomas Jefferson told us "Those who would sacrifice freedom for security deserve niether." But Americans have a long history of doing exactly that.This is just the latest chapter in the story of a free country enslaving itself.Start looking at the future applications of R.F.I.D....which stands for Radio Frequency Identification and learn about the truly horrifying implications of the technology and that will sooth your fears of the Government meerly peering into your reading habbits.

[DrSmellThis]

Another Jefferson gem: "Dissent is the highest form of patriotism." Jefferson would surely be branded a Muslim, America hating, atheist, Jap Communist were he alive today. :rolleyes: Got democracy?

[belgareth]

This is a good site if you really want to understand where Jeffereson was trying to take us. http://etext.virginia.edu/jefferson/quotations/

[DrSmellThis]

How much better educated, more intelligent, more thoughtful, and more a delightful a person was he compared to our leaders today (minus the having slaves part)?

Must be the TV generation.

[Mtnjim]

Another Jefferson gem: "Dissent is the highest form of patriotism." Jefferson would surely be branded a Muslim, America hating, atheist, Jap Communist were he alive today. :rolleyes: Got democracy?

You forgot "dope smoker" since he and George grew pot. And rumor has it they indulged in more than making ropes with it.:kiss:

[belgareth]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050910/ap_on_re_us/patriot_act_records;_ylt=AksifoHfA.gmjcPNAunFCtlvz wcF;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl

[tim929]

I just heard an advertisement on the "idiot box" for IBM's new RFID compatable network system.Very interesting realy...

For those who are unfarmiliar with RFID,it was developed by a bunch of egg heads at MIT for the purpose helping to keep track of inventory in the shipping industry.As the technology grew,the individual chips became smaller and smaller.The chip is now barely the thickness of a human hair and just several hundredths of an inch wide.Each chip transmits a totaly unique signal that can be recieved by a simple,hand help unit.

The only information kept on the chip itself is a number.That number is then ascociated in a computer database with a coresponding item.Each item gets a chip installed,and then is entered,with that chip number into the database for tracking.Each time that item passes thru a reciever station,its chip is read,the database is accessed and the arrival of the product at that station is logged.

That eliminates the need for actualy hand counting inventory as it passes thru a warehousing or retail system.Im sure we have all seen the nice folks at the grocery store with the little hand held scanners that they use to check inventory on the store shelves.That is an optical system just like the laser scanners at the checkout that requires the person taking inventory to actualy handle each individual item on the shelf,one by one.A very time consuming process.

In an RFID environment,the person taking the inventory simply walks thru the warehouse.Each item transmits its own unique code to the reciever and its done.Thats all there is to it.

Reciever stations are a very simple antena arangement that is both inexpensive and easy to instal.Instalation takes place at each entrance/exit from the store,each checkstand and at various places around the store,so as to track the movement of that item as it passes thru the store.That way,they can not only identify what you have in your cart,but where you go next.By using that information,store layouts can be altered to maximize the shopping experience for the individual.

Once you arrive at the checkstand,each item passed over the bar code scanner is also RFID scanned.That way,they can taylor the store to the shopping needs of customers that routeenly spend large amounts of money with them.

How do they know that? How in the world would they know weather I am shopping there this one time only or every three days?

Easy.Once you make a purchse,the item you bought is entered into the database along with your payment method.Check or debit or credit card information is collected and the system logs it with the individual items you bought.That database is national.So every retailer in the country has access to your personal buying habbits.

The pair of shoes that you bought at macy's has a chip in it.When you walk thru the door at the supermarket,you shoes get scanned...along with every other piece of clothing you have on and it identifies YOU!At this point,your shopping is being tracked all the way thru the store and your purchases logged into the national database.When you go back to Macy's,if your a known "big spender," a store clerk will be notified that an important customer has entered the store and that you require emiediate assistance.This clerk will be coached by the system on such issues as your favorite style of clothes,color preferences,favorite perfume....and so forth.That way,they can direct your shopping experience to the items you are most likely to buy.

For those that are known as "big spenders," coupons for "special savings" on certain items will be provided at the register for your convinence.Special offers and other "special items" that fit into your spending habbits will be reccomended.Of course,if your what the retail industry refers to as a "bottom feeder," you will be charged full price and told to have a nice day.

RFID chips are also comming to a debit or credit card near you.Thus eliminating the need to "swipe" the card thru a reader that sometimes doesnt work.It also means you dont have to take it out of your wallet.In Barcelona Spain,several banks are using the technology in cooperation with movie theaters and night clubs.Enabling you to simply walk into the teater and pay for the movie without having to stop and get a ticket.

Speaking of "tickets," the Department of Homeland Security wants RFID chips instaled in drivers licenses and state ID cards by the end of 2007.That way,if a police officer wants to ask you who you are,all he has to do is...well...scan you.The system in cards is readable to a range of about forty feet.The tiny little chips in clothing at a range of just a few feet.But the result is the same...anyone with access to a hand held scanner and a computer,can know almost anything they realy want to know...all without having to be polite and strike up a conversation with you.

The chips in clothing,by the way are washing machine safe,and can only be destroyed by a massive electro-magnetic fields or a microwave oven.They have also been deemed "safe for human use" by the FDA.Which means at some future date,instead of having a debit card,credit cards,cash,drivers license and all the other crap in your wallet....you can just stand close enough to the scanner.With an implanted chip,theres no need to worry about leaving your wallet at home or loosing it at the ball park...you will ALWAYS be identified...no matter what...

Do you feel more secure yet?

[DrSmellThis]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050910/ap_on_re_us/patriot_act_records;_ylt=AksifoHfA.gmjcPNAunFCtlvz wcF;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl
Yeah, you definitely should have a lot of trouble trying to restrict free speech in this country. People don't take kindly to being gagged.

For example, can you imagine either one of us keeping our mouths shut? ;)

[wood elf]

Yeah, you definitely should have a lot of trouble trying to restrict free speech in this country. People don't take kindly to being gagged.

For example, can you imagine either one of us keeping our mouths shut? ;)

It is well that people object. Free speech is the foundation of the freedoms in this country. Many countries do not have that privilage. Defend it always.

None who know him can imagine that from Belgareth, keeping his mouth shut. Not always a good thing but not always bad either. He surely does have an opinion.

[DrSmellThis]

It is well that people object. Free speech is the foundation of the freedoms in this country. Many countries do not have that privilage. Defend it always. Yes, m'aam. :)