posted 03-26-2003 04:53 PM            

March 26 - April 1, 2003
http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0313/lee.php

An ugly theory popped up in the nation's capital several weeks ago., The Bush administration would wait until war began, and worry gripped the homeland, to ram a staggering package of domestic security measures through a Congress silenced by fears of seeming unpatriotic. Such measures would radically expand the executive branch powers already inflated by the 2001 USA Patriot Act.

On Friday—as the U.S. began suffering combat fatalities, and the terror alert on whitehouse.gov glared orange for "high"—Justice Department spokesperson Mark Corallo confirmed to the Voice that such measures were coming soon. Exact details are confined to "internal deliberations," he said, but the proposals "will be filling in the holes" of the Patriot Act, "refining things that will enable us to do our job."

But a new, comprehensive review of Bush's growing presidential power hardly reveals any "holes." Rather—using court positions, internal policy changes, and secret decisions as bricks—the administration has built the executive branch into a fortress, nearly invulnerable to the checks of the judiciary and Congress. Most alarming, according to the watchdog authors of the 96-page report, "Imbalance of Powers," the complexity of this historic expansion continues to mask its true proportions.

"You have to connect the dots," said Elisa Massimino, Washington, D.C., director of the Lawyers Committee for Human Rights (LCHR), a 25-year nonprofit defender of civil liberties and humane policy. LCHR analyzed hundreds of pages of legislation, policy directives, and congressional records, plus a spate of major court cases such as the suit challenging the indefinite detention, without representation, of accused American "dirty bomber" Jose Padilla. The big picture shows an "executive branch amassing so much more power," said Massimino, even in the past six months alone. But since many developments have occurred "under the radar," she said, few members of Congress, let alone of the public, could easily map out such a blueprint on their own.

Briefly, the dots connect like this:

The administration's refusal to release Patriot Act-related records to Congress, the refusal to release the names of detainees and open their court hearings to the public, and the Freedom of Information Act exemptions under the Homeland Security Act add up to a secretive government, acting outside the scrutiny of the public and its representatives.

The development of the Total Information Awareness program, the mining of individuals' shopping and library records, and the melding of spy and arrest functions add up to government invasion of privacy and restriction of expression.

The indefinite detention of U.S. citizens deemed by Bush to be "enemy combatants," the secret detention and deportation of immigrants not charged with a crime, and the tracking and questioning of nationals from particular countries add up to unilateral executive power to deprive people of their physical liberty.

Even with the existing behemoth, Massimino said, a "quantum leap" in executive branch authority is possible. She referred to the recently leaked Justice Department draft bill, the Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003, commonly known as Patriot Act II. "It would make over 100 changes to existing law," she said. But as recently as March 4, Attorney General John Ashcroft was being coy about it, refusing to discuss any of the 86-page draft at a Senate hearing.

Among the more extreme powers Patriot Act II would grant the executive branch: The ability to strip citizenship from an American who supports a group the feds label as terrorist. Secret arrests—the government could avoid revealing the location of, charges against, and evidence on someone it was holding. Far looser checks on search-and-seizure activities of law enforcement. And a DNA database for people deemed to be terrorist suspects.

Yale Law School professor Jack Balkin was among the first constitutional experts to condemn Patriot Act II as "a new assault on our civil liberties." Last week he told the Voice, "What we're really worried about here is something being proposed while all eyes are on Iraq. People are whipped up into a frenzy. The executive will propose what, at a certain time, it thinks it can get away with." That, he said, could be the draft bill "in its most virulent form."

Before the war began, there were signs that Congress might fight future presidential power-hogging and bring more heft to the legislative branch. Some Democrats excoriated Ashcroft for his furtiveness on Patriot Act II. Some Republicans were talking about subpoenaing records that the Justice Department refused to release on its use of Patriot Act I powers.

Yet wartime has traditionally meant deferring to the executive. The entire post-September 11 period may have seemed like one big state of war, with the Justice Department successfully skirting Congress and pushing every constitutional challenge to higher, more administration-friendly courts. But given the actual war in Iraq, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia said last week, Americans can expect that "protections [of their individual rights] will be ratcheted right down to the constitutional minimum."

Ashcroft deflected angry Senate queries on Patriot Act II, saying "it would be the height of absurdity" to imagine the administration's hustling through a law without congressional review. Yet on October 25, 2001, 98 out of 99 voting senators hurriedly passed the 342-page Patriot Act I—without any public debate and before most of them had read it. The White House made clear their votes would be spun as a test of their patriotism. Votes on Patriot Act II could also be a test—of who has the patriotism to right democracy's severely lopsided structure of checks and balances.

posted 04-12-2003 07:41 PM            

BYE BYE CIVIL LIBERTIES...HELLO SS DEUTCHLAND

Friday, April 11, 2003 http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/117060_patriot11.html

GOP calls for wider powers to track citizens
Critics rip bid to make Patriot Act permanent

By CHARLES POPE
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT

WASHINGTON -- With the war on terrorism lagging behind the war in Iraq, Republicans in Congress and the White House are pushing legislation that would give federal authorities sweeping new powers to monitor, track, profile, and even revoke citizenship of U.S. citizens.

The effort is being directed along two controversial fronts, involving current law as well as new proposals. Both have generated fierce resistance on Capitol Hill and from civil liberties groups.

On one track, Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, with the backing of the White House, wants to make permanent the provisions of the USA Patriot Act, the sprawling 2001 law hastily passed only weeks after the Sept. 11 attack.

The law greatly expanded the government's ability to search records and monitor people and their property.

It gave the government new authority to conduct telephone and Internet surveillance with minimal judicial oversight and created a broad new definition of "domestic terrorism" that could lead to the investigation and prosecution of people engaged in acts of political protest.

It also gave federal agents the power to survey all book and computer records at libraries, and permitted non-citizens to be jailed without formal charges for up to six months.

Because of concerns that the law might go too far and harbor unintended consequences, Congress stipulated that the Patriot Act dissolve in 2005.

But Hatch, who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee, said this week that he wants to make the law permanent.

At the same time, the Bush administration is drafting new legislation, dubbed Patriot II, that would provide federal agents even more authority to issue wiretaps, conduct "data mining" and monitor people presumed or known to have terrorist connections.

Although the bill is still being drafted, those with knowledge of it say it would, among other things, allow federal authorities to make secret arrests and to "infiltrate and monitor" worship services.

Critics say the proposals are troubling.

"We know the government has used some of these laws incorrectly, and we know that this has been the least cooperative Justice Department in anyone's memory," Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said in response to Hatch's plan to strip the "sunset provision" from the Patriot Act.

"History shows that a government that doesn't want oversight often is a government that has something to hide."

The Illinois chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union wrote a letter to the state's two senators Wednesday urging them to oppose Hatch.

Other groups also are mobilizing to fight the proposal.

"After a mere 18 months since the enactment of the legislation, it is simply too soon to measure the impact of these provisions and move to make them permanent," said the letter to Sens. Dick Durbin and Peter Fitzgerald.

Hatch declined to comment, but Justice Department spokesman Mark Corallo said the law has been crucial in the fight against terrorism. "It has been an invaluable tool in our efforts to prevent terrorist activity," Corallo said.

"The Patriot Act gives us the tools we need to better protect the American public while also protecting civil liberties."

Corallo declined to comment on Hatch's proposal, but a Justice Department official who asked to remain nameless said Hatch has the support of the department. Republican aides believe Hatch's amendment could pass the Senate. It could run into trouble in the House, however, where Judiciary Chairman F. James Sensenbrenner Jr., R-Wis., has stressed the importance of congressional oversight. Sensenbrenner was instrumental in inserting the sunset provisions in the Patriot Act.

Opposition also is coming from a more surprising direction -- mainstream conservative organizations that usually count Attorney General John Ashcroft among their heroes.

"Already, government investigative powers have been dramatically expanded," said former Rep. Bob Barr, a well-known conservative who once was a close ally of former House Speaker Newt Gingrich. "Already, intelligence is working under the flawed premise that to get the bad guys you need to spy unmercifully on the good guys."

Barr appeared at a forum yesterday with three other influential conservatives, who have banded together with, improbably, the American Civil Liberties Union to try to defeat the initiatives.

"We hope that the White House will take notice from the shared concern expressed today that Americans of all political stripes want leaders who strive to make us all both safe and free," said Laura Murphy, director of the ACLU's Washington office. She joined Barr and David Keene, chairman of the American Conservative Union; Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform; and Lori Waters, executive director of the Eagle Forum.

Murphy said the draft bill would, if passed in its current form, represent a big shift away from America's long-standing commitment to the right 'to be left alone,' " she said.

Among other powers, Murphy said the bill would "give the government the unprecedented authority to revoke Americans' citizenship and open the door to government suppression of lawful protest activities."

Waters said passage of the two measures would edge the country closer to a philosophy "where there are two types of people: the caught and the uncaught. .... We see a growing effort of the government to tag and track everything we do," she said. "We don't think these are the most effective way of preventing terrorists from getting on planes and blowing them up."

A Justice Department official who didn't want his name used said the initial criticisms would be moot because many of the objectionable provisions will not be included in the final bill. Some of the ideas, the official said, were proposed only to get discussions started within the department and were never intended for inclusion. He wouldn't say which provisions fit in that category.

Civil libertarians and conservatives alike are still unnerved by an earlier proposal by the Justice Department called Operation TIPS that would encourage citizens to watch and report strange behavior. That proposal died last year in Congress.

posted 04-26-2003 09:02 AM            

Get Ready for the USSA
(The United Soviet States of America) (http://www.almartinraw.com).

********************************************************************

(March 17) You will be happy to learn that the former head of the KGB (the secret police of the former Soviet Union), General Yevgeni Primakov, has been hired as a consultant by the US Department of Homeland Security. Do you think he will share his expertise in "security" to prepare US citizens for domestic internal passports under the pretense of fighting the never-ending "War on Terrorism"?

**************************************************************************

CAPPS II is the name of the new program which is technically under the auspices of the US Department of Transporation, but that's only technical and the only reaosn they did that was to use the Transportation Department's budget to buy the computer hardware and software they need.

The way it works is you give them your credit card and they slide it thorough like you would in a store and then they hit a button and the monitor reads: CAPPS II, SS CTF. The SS CTF evidently stands for State Security Citizen Threat File. But it has nothing to do with the Department of Transportation. It goes directly to a division, which has been established between the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security, and the CIA and several other federal agencies. This is a new division, referred to as the Office of Internal Security, which is coordinating the effort to establish citizen threat files on every US citizen. It will be a huge database including credit files, medical files, political and religious affiliation, military history, attendance at anti-government rallies,etc.

The newsclip didn't point out what information is being accessed.

The only thing they'll tell you is they're going to access your credit history, but like the guy giving the interview said they will be accessing a whole lot more. They just don't tell you what it is. When the Department of Homeland Security was asked about it, they wouldn't say but replied that it would defeat the purpose if we told you what it was we were looking for.

No announcement will be made to the public about what information exactly is being accessed or exactly how much information or what type of information is going to be included in each citizen's security threat file.

What I liked about this segment is that they interviewed General Yevgeni Primakov, who is now a consultant to the Department of Homeland Security along with General Alexander Karpov.

Primakov was laughing about it because he's getting paid a big fee to do it. He doesn't care, of course. Primakov speaks beautiful English, as you would expect a former head of the KGB to do. When he was asked what is this CAPPS II program really about, because obviously even "terrorists" could have credit ratings.

Primakov said that this is one of the steps now being employed along with NICA and new identity upgrade features which are coming to your driver's license. It is being used to get the people used to new types of documentation and carrying new types of identity cards pursuant to the United States instituting a formal policy of internal passports.And he actually used the words "internal passports."

It's like he said and he was pretty knowledgeable. When the NICA (National Identity Card Act) gets passed, the Posse Comitatus Act gets overturned, a few other pieces of legislation yet to be proffered get passed, the White House will have more control over the American people than the Kremlin had over the Russian people when Stalin was alive. He said that and then he laughed.

What Primakov finds funny are what he calls these "right wing flag wavers" that were so anti-communist and now they're supporting a state policy of internal passports.

The irony is deafening.

Old right wing farts -- turn up your hearing aids for the irony is deafening.

Primakov continued by saying that he had been hired as a consultant and he was consulting on other "security" matters, an ongoing policy in various agencies of government (some of these offices haven't even been created yet) to consistently narrow the rights of the American people and to expand the power of government. He professed not to know why, the reason for all this was, other than he admitted that "it doesn't have much to do with 'fighting terrorism.'"

In other words, it's funny that we need a commie to come over here and tell people the truth. And remember its not just any commie, it's the former head of the KGB, who is being (paid) for with taxpayers' money from all the (naive) flag wavers out there.

If you think about it - how ironic this whole thing is. And it's not only Primakov, who was, by the way the last general of the KGB, before the KGB was changed to RFSS. Look who else was hired. There's General Primakov.

Then there's General Karpov, former KGB station chief of their Washington station at their embassy and the first director of the Russian Federal Security Service.

You could call this the "Sovietization of America." Primakov said he can't wait to get on the payroll (he called it the "pay corps," referring to the Heritage Foundation, the PNAC and all the other right wing foundations in the United States) He cant get over how many ex-KGB generals and colonels still want to come over to the United States and become consultants to get on the pay corps.

It has been reported that Nikita Krushchev Jr works for the Heritage Foundation. Another right wing foundation has Elena Stalin. The Old Soviet Brand names are all coming to Washington to get on the gravy train and teach the Bush administration how to further restrict the rights of the American people.

And Primakov is waiting for the USSA, The United Soviet States of America. It'll probably make him feel right at home.

AL MARTIN is America's foremost expert on corporate and government fraud. A relentless whistleblower, he has written a book called, "The Conspirators: Secrets of an Iran Contra Insider," which chronicles his adventures with the Bush Cabal (National Liberty Press, Order Line: 866-317-1390). This detailed account of government criminal operations, namely State-sanctioned fraud, drug trafficking and illicit weapons sales, is unprecedented in publishing history.

Al Martin is also well known for his great charm and profound insights into world events, and he is frequently interviewed on many talk radio shows across the nation. His weekly column "Behind the Scenes in the Beltway" is published regularly online at Al Martin Raw

posted 04-27-2003 02:34 PM            

Who Profits from spying on American citizens?

Who gets the Contracts?

Take a gander....

posted 05-09-2003 11:50 PM            

ERIC LICHTBLAU; The New York Times
http://www.tribnet.com/news/story/3088853p-3112039c.html

WASHINGTON - Senate Republicans backed down Thursday from an effort to make permanent the Patriot Act's sweeping antiterrorism powers, clearing the way for passage of a less divisive measure that would still expand the government's ability to spy on terrorist suspects in the United States.

In an agreement finalized over the last week, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, dropped his effort to extend provisions of the Patriot Act whose broad powers to investigate and track terrorist suspects were scheduled to expire in 2005.

As a result, the Senate voted 90-4 to approve a measure expanding the government's ability to use secret surveillance tools against terrorist suspects who are not thought to be members of known terrorist groups.

Under current law, federal officials are not allowed to seek secret surveillance warrants against noncitizens unless the officials can establish that they are linked to a known terrorist group.

The day's developments represented a key test of the balancing act between fighting terrorism and protecting civil liberties, and the result delivered a mixed verdict as many lawmakers expressed reservations about giving law enforcement too much power to fight terrorism.

"There's a delicate balance between liberty and security," said Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), an author of the so-called "lone wolf" counterterrorism measure. "It's a see-saw, and that's the debate that we're seeing now in Congress."

The law, co-sponsored by Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), is backed by the Justice Department. Its fate in the House is uncertain.

"We'll wait to take a look at the Senate bill and see what we're going to do," said a senior Republican aide in the House.

The Senate bill's supporters sought to fix problems that arose in the case of Zacarias Moussaoui, a member of al-Qaida jailed on immigration charges in the summer of 2001 after taking flight classes in the Minneapolis area.

Law enforcement officials have maintained that the FBI's inability to show conclusively that Moussaoui was linked to al-Qaida or a known terrorist group - as the current law for foreign intelligence surveillance requires - prevented them from securing a warrant against him.

-----

posted 05-21-2003 10:54 PM            

When The War Hits Home
U.S. Plans for Martial Law, TeleGovernance,
and the Suspension of Elections

By John Stanton and Wayne Madsen

CounterPunch.org

Since September 11, 2001, the Bush Regime, the US Congress and senior personnel in the U.S. military have been busy planning their escape routes from Washington, D.C. and surrounding communities in the event that the continental United States is attacked by another 19 global insurgents possessing little more than wit, dedication, an unrepentant animosity towards America, and an ample dose of radioactive material packed inside an explosive-laden metallic suitcase. Corporate executives have ensured that they too will find a place in the bunker along side their effete government colleagues through organizations such as National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee (NSTAC). That group is composed of "up to 30 industry chief executives representing the major communications and network service providers and information technology, finance, and aerospace companies the NSTAC provides industry-based advice and expertise to the President on issues and problems related to implementing national security and emergency preparedness " Defense contracting giants play a prominent role on the NSTAC and include Lockheed Martin, SAIC, Oracle (the company that volunteered to develop a post-911 national identification database), Boeing, Raytheon, Northrop Grumman and CSC. The chairman of the NSTAC also conveniently serves as an ex-officio member of Homeland Security czar Tom Ridge's President's Homeland Security Advisory Council.

The U.S. government and its military and corporate officials are fond of making the pitch to the American public that the U.S. Constitution mandates that their survival, above all others, is absolutely necessary to ensure that the government that emanates from that document survives a debilitating attack. It is astonishing that the American public believes such absurdities. But one has to admire the boldly craven and callous "doomsday" planning of the Bush regime and its military centurions and corporate nabobs, who take pleasure in gutting the environment, the workforce, the economy, and the world in general. These are the same people who played hide-and-seek with the American public in September 2001.

We the People?

On September 11, 2001, one of the commercial aircraft commandeered by suspected Saudi and Yemeni insurgents made its final approach to its destination, the Pentagon -- located roughly three miles across the Potomac River from the U.S. Capitol and White House in Washington, DC -- by following Columbia Pike, in Arlington, Virginia, to its target. The Pentagon is located adjacent to the glitzy Pentagon City Mall in Arlington, Virginia, not Washington, DC, as much of the media conveniently fudged the geographic difference. Although not Manhattan, Arlington is a densely packed and diverse community of close to 200,000 people. It hosts five high schools and two notable colleges: Marymount University and George Mason Law School. When the aircraft slammed into the Pentagon, residents of Arlington--including many in office buildings, stores, and schools in the "South Side" -- felt the thud of the explosion as the aircraft incinerated a block of the Pentagon and killed 123 employees and contractors on the ground and 64 on the Boeing 757.

Arlington fire fighters, police and EMT units were on the scene at the Pentagon -- as were their counterparts at the World Trade Centers in New York City-- within seconds of the aircraft's explosion. In Arlington's case, the rapidity of response was due to alert firefighters and police officers who noticed the aircraft off-path as it flew dangerously low over the heavily populated Columbia Pike corridor in Arlington that leads directly to the Pentagon. They alerted their colleagues in the Arlington Fire and Police Departments that something was terribly wrong. Someone at the controls of the aircraft knew to pick up the visual of the "Pike" as it is called by Arlingtonians, the same way other pilots pick up the Potomac River on visual to land at Reagan National Airport.

Local residents scrambled to get their youngsters out of schools where the hallways were filled with the crying and unsettled. Teachers, counselors, and coaches did all they could to calm student's nerves. Local firefighters and police were busy trying to give relief to the Pentagon structure and its mangled people. Local hospitals were alerted to receive Pentagon injured. The same scene was played out in New York City.

As mayhem broke loose in Arlington, Virginia, adjacent Washington, and New York City, the response of those who are tasked with national governance provides important clues as to who will live and die during the next disaster. Prior to 911, the only insight into continuity-of-government planning was provided by Stanley Kubrick's Doctor Strangelove, which through its characters, portrayed dimwitted "leaders"--most un-elected -- sheltering themselves ahead of their populations.

911 Hide and Seek

Dick Cheney was hustled into a bunker and ultimately ended up in a cave running the Shadow Government. U.S. Supreme Court-anointed George Bush II and staff was whisked from an elementary school class--minus the children, teachers and school staff --- to undisclosed locations scattered across the land. Military installations barricade their gates. As F-16s patrolled the skies, government officials lauded the protection they were providing despite the fact that the fighters were there to shoot down commercial passenger planes. Leaders of both parties in Congress, and, in fact, all of Congress, were escorted from Washington, DC as if Gort from the Hollywood classic "The Day the Earth Stood Still" had gone on a rampage.

The Bush Regime's senior appointees and bureaucrats sprinted off to hardened bunkers or were taken by helicopter, like their military counterparts, to place like Site R in Pennsylvania to "monitor" the situation. Many of the local corporate senior managers and local newsreaders instructed the "public" to remain calm and not panic. A commonplace refrain from this lot was to "keep busy, be productive". The lone Superpower, with its arsenals and vaunted intelligence agencies convulsed from the handiwork of 19 insurgents, became enfeebled. In effect, the nation came under the rule of a tele-government. Undoubtedly, government and military planners -- and their think tanks - have discussed attack scenarios that include the institution of a Federal government tele-governing operation. Members of the U.S. Congress, Supreme Court justices, and the President and his cabinet could easily debate, vote, set policy, render legal decisions via encrypted communications lines, from the comfort of their protective bunkers, home shelters, and command posts on land, sea, and air. In the eventuality of nationwide martial law, these individuals, based on their cowardly performance on 911, would no doubt prefer the safe confines of Hitleresque bunkers. Such was the case on September 11, when, from the safety of a studio in a bunker and a phone line from a basement, the nation's "leadership" sought to govern in an ersatz manner.

The American public fell for this act from a "government" whose inserted president and appointees are the wealthiest Americans ever to oversee a US populace. And as the wealthiest and most corrupt person ever to occupy the White House uttered his inanities, "average people" were taking care of their post-attack communities in Arlington and New York City. As they suffered, the so-called civilian and military "leaders" ducked and covered in a classic CYA move. These are America's leaders who -- through sheer arrogance and stunning stupidity -- ignored reports from tireless FBI field agents that involved suspicious flight school activities and similar reports from gutsy Drug Enforcement Administration agents about the activities of Israeli "art student" spies who happened to be living in the same Florida and Texas neighborhoods as the future hijackers. The same "leaders" would stand by and watch the state of California get raped by Enron -- the Bush family's fund raising Ponzi scheme contrivance.

Where was the Senator or Representative, or Cabinet official (save for Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld) who said, "I'm staying with the people" and showed up in the bucket line? Where was the General or Admiral who said I'm staying with my people and worked with the body bags? Where was the Corporate Executive who, instead, was busy turning "patriotism" into profiteering to gain market share and recoup profits? Where will they be during the next attack?

As the U.S. military-industrial complex sells more and more advanced weaponry to Israel, Indonesia, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Colombia, Pakistan, India, and Nepal and as more and more ethnic and religious minority groups, poor villagers, nomads, urban laborers, and sustenance farmers are massacred by national armies in the pay of ruling oligarchs and multinational corporations, will America's leaders care? No, it's good for business. After U.S. snubbing of the International Criminal Court (to protect war criminals like Henry Kissinger), Conventions on child soldiers and land mines, long-held international nuclear test-ban treaties, international protocols involving HIV/AIDS and global warming, will America's leaders care? No. When the Turkmens, Uzbeks, Afghans, Pakistanis, Azeris, Kurds, Turks, and Georgians tire of the special treatment that US Special Forces receive for guarding gas and oil pipelines -- and the young troops are killed-- will America's leaders notice? No.

Hand it to the CYA crowd, they now know that they can successfully sell the American public a rotten barrel of apples (or oil) and they will buy it gladly. Armed with that knowledge, the next attack may trigger enactment of national martial law.

Martial Law: Coming to a Neighborhood Near You?

The U.S. government has used martial law on numerous occasions, most often to quell domestic disturbances in specific locations around the country. According to the United States Constitution Online, during the War of 1812, Andrew Jackson imposed martial law in an area of New Orleans. When a judge demanded Jackson produce, through the writ of habeas corpus, a man arrested for sedition, Jackson ordered the arrest of the judge. in 1892 at Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, rebellious mine workers blew up a mill and shot at strike breaking workers. Mine owners requested that the state's governor impose martial law and, to no surprise, he did. In 1914, federal troops were ordered by Woodrow Wilson to end the Coal Field Wars in Colorado. In 1934, dockworkers in San Francisco initiated a strike and the governor declared the dockyards subject to martial law empowering the National Guard to make arrests and try detainees. The Supreme Court opined twice on matters involving martial law in Ex Parte Milligan and Duncan v. Kahanamoku. In 1866, Milligan's Supreme Court writers proclaimed that Abraham Lincoln's imposition of martial law had been unconstitutional:

"Martial lawdestroys every guarantee of the Constitution and effectually renders the military independent of an superior to the civil power--the attempt to do which by the King of Great Britain was deemed by our fathers such an offense that they assigned it to the world as one of the causes which impelled them to declare their independence. Civil liberty and this kind of martial law cannot endure together; the antagonism is irreconcilable, and, in the conflict, one or the other must perish."

In 1946, the Supreme Court ruled that the military arrest of two civilians in Hawaii during World War II and their subsequent trial by military tribunals was unconstitutional.

In 2002, with the U.S. Supreme Court nothing more than a useful machination of the Bush regime, it seems likely that if Americans become subjected to a Bush declaration of martial law, any challenge to it would fail miserably. With that thought in mind, its useful to note that the Bush crowd has had plenty of experience with martial law and states-of-emergency. In 1992, Bush the Elder issued Executive Order 12804 in response to the Los Angeles riots. Hence, the US Army 7th Infantry Division and detachments of US Marines were deployed to mop up Los Angeles. That order was only issued after the city's poor had destroyed their neighborhoods. As an aside, that event would expose the CIA's penchant for selling drugs to inner city youth to raise funds for U.S. government covert operations in Central and South America. Bush the Elder was the overseer of much of this activity when he lorded over the Iran-contra scandal while Vice President under Ronald Reagan. One of Bush's underlings at the time, Oliver North, came up with a secret plan, along with the fascist-oriented Federal Emergency Management Agency (the key-masters for the doors to the bunkers), to declare martial law in the event of a "national crisis," including "violent and widespread internal dissent or national opposition to a U.S. military invasion abroad." Florida's provincial ruler Jeb Bush signed Executive Order 01-262 on September 11, 2001 declaring a State of Emergency in Florida. That was prior to similar declarations in New York and Virginia where the action was. "Jebbie" (that's what Bill Clinton calls him) also has the power to suspend elections for 30 days in a county under a State of Emergency.

The Bush family has managed to involve the United States in two wars; two invasions in Latin America, one that resulted in the fiery deaths of thousands of poor Panamanian barrio residents and another that resulted in the Bay of Pigs fiasco; aiding and abetting through murky financial investments America's Teutonic enemy in the last world war; corrupting the U.S. presidential election process; and making the wealthiest Americans and U.S. corporations richer while at the same cutting federal health, education, and welfare budgets and offloading those tasks to the overburdened states.

As the economy sputters with real unemployment close to 8 percent and as income disparity reaches astronomical proportions, it seems that the Bush regime will begin another war. Will that war be against Iraq, as Bush's neo-conservative hawks want? Or will the Seven Days in May crowd spin the Axis of Evil roulette wheel? Will the arrow point to Cuba? North Korea? Venezuela? The Bush family's record of death and destruction prompted one elderly couple in Baltimore, Maryland (the husband being a highly decorated WW II U.S. Army veteran) to say, " The Bush family should be barred from ever holding political office. Look what they've done to this nation!"

And They Are Not Done Yet

An invasion of Iraq or any of the "Axis of Evil" or "Beyond Axis of Evil" nations is likely to result in a response that means American citizens will die here in the U.S. One incident, one aircraft hijacked, a "dirty nuke" set off in a small town, may well prompt the Bush regime, let's say during the election campaign of 2003-2004, to suspend national elections for a year while his government ensures stability. The precedent for such thinking is now enshrined in GOP politics. Another egotistical politician, Rudolph Giuliani, suggested that he should stay on as Mayor of New York a while longer past his term to make sure "New Yorkers would get through this thing". Would it be any surprise to hear Bush II say the same thing late in 2003 after insurgents would have destroyed part of a city or a chemical weapons cloud spreads over half of a small state?

Many closed-door meetings have been held on these subjects and the notices for these meetings have been closely monitored by the definitive www.cryptome.org. In the event of martial law, the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, which has already been largely gutted by the USA Patriot Act and other Bush II actions, would cease to exist. Posse Comitatus has, for over 100 years, served as an important criminal law safeguard proscribing the use of the Army (later, the Air Force and Navy) to "execute the laws," except where expressly authorized by the Constitution or by Congress. With the abrogation of Posse Comitatus and the imposition of martial law, the military would, as it did during post-Civil War Reconstruction in the South, be able to arrest and detain civilians for any flimsy reason. Civilian detainees consigned to federal prisons would be under the control of the Bureau of Prisons while those detained by the military would be subject to the regulations imposed by military commanders. The writ of habeas corpus would be suspended and the family members and legal representatives for detainees would not have a right to see them. This situation has already occurred with those detained in the wake of September 11 without a formal imposition of martial law.

Military tribunals could, as they did in Hawaii during the war, try and convict U.S. civilians. If prisons could not hold all the detainees, the government already has plans to create or reactivate large prison camps in the South and West. Some of these were already used to detain Cuban, Vietnamese, and Haitian "boat people."

In the event of martial law, Draconian censorship laws would be implemented. Even now, the Patriot Act grants authority to obtain an order from the FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) Court requiring any person or business to produce any books, records, documents, or items." That law would undoubtedly be extended to encompass the Internet as well. It should be of little wonder why the Pentagon has brought Iran-contra felon Admiral John Poindexter back from retirement to head the Office of Information Awareness. Coupled with the Office of Information Exploitation, Poindexter's office is seeking ways to identify, block, and determine the sources of seditious material posted on the Internet. Blocked web sites, confiscated computers and servers, and the arrest of non-conforming web site managers would become the rule of the day.

Not that it would need much in the way of pressure, but the broadcast media would similarly be required to air only that which has been approved by government censors. For example, U.S. Air Force scientists are soon to meet with CNN to figure out how to gather and disseminate information. During the war against Yugoslavia, CNN and National Public Radio hosted as interns U.S. Army psychological warfare operatives who worked on news stories concerning the war.

Similar closed-door meetings for "Continuity of Government" have taken place since September 11, 2001. Odd, it seems, that no "regular U.S. citizen" and few first responders have had any input into this process. Chalk that up to the fact that the entire process is classified and a matter of "national security" - the rubric that is used to justify the constant whittling away of the Constitution and its Bill of Rights. If the general public knew that "Continuity" actually means that the abilities of the Internal Revenue Service to continue to collect taxes, the Customs Service to continue to collect duties, and the Environmental Protection Agency to continue to collect fines actually outweigh the health and safety of American citizens, they would be outraged. Hence the secrecy surrounding the continuity plans.

James Madison had in right in 1794 when he wisely warned about "the old trick of turning every contingency into a resource for accumulating force in the government." The United States was founded by political sages like Madison, Jefferson, and Franklin. It will ultimately see its demise as a democracy through the likes of Bush II, his father, and the Trent Lotts and Dick Armeys that pervade the American body politic.

John Stanton is an Arlington, VA-based writer and Wayne Madsen is a Washington, DC journalist and commentator on national security and intelligence affairs. They can be reached at: WMadsen777@aol.com

First published May 14, 2002 http://www.counterpunch.org/m adsen0514.html

posted 07-17-2003 08:39 PM            

Congress threatens two hi-tech Gestapo programs

The US Senate this week proposed denying funds to two Orwellian surveillance programs sought by the Bush Administration.

By Thomas C Greene in Washington
Posted: 17/07/2003 at 09:31 GMT

The US Senate this week proposed denying funds to two Orwellian surveillance programs sought by the Bush Administration.

The Pentagon's Total Information Awareness (TIA) program has come under attack in the Senate and may see its funding shut off. The 2004 defense appropriations bill contains a provision that would deny it any financial support.

The House has got its own TIA obstacle in the works, but not so bold a one as the Senate is contemplating. The two versions will likely have to be reconciled in a conference committee, but it is a fair bet that TIA's wings will be clipped.

Research for the Big Brother scheme is being conducted by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), under the guidance of Iran-Contra scandal alumnus and convicted felon Admiral John Poindexter.

The TIA program has since had its name changed from Total Information Awareness to Terrorism Information Awareness, but for some reason this sophisticated dodge appears not to have fooled Congress.

In a related development, the Computer Assisted Passenger Prescreening System (CAPPS II), a scheme to query government and commercial databases for background on every person attempting to buy a plane ticket, has been held up pending a report by the General Accounting Office (GAO), a Congressional watchdog outfit.

The scheme would have assigned a score of "green", "yellow" or "red" to prospective passengers based on financial and other records. Greens would get the usual pat-down and x-ray routine; yellows would be singled out for additional security harassment; and reds would be grounded. There appears to be no mechanism for correcting database errors and false information if one is given an unjustly low score. Worse, those with imperfect scores could have that information passed on to law enforcement agencies and other bureaux of the national security apparatus without warning and with no way to set the record straight if the information on them should be bad.

posted 08-01-2003 12:43 AM            

EDMONTON - The province's privacy watchdog has ordered an investigation into the legality of police surveillance cameras in Old Strathcona.

If Alberta's information and privacy commissioner finds the cameras violate provincial law, he may order police to change their procedures or remove the cameras, spokesman Tim Chander said Wednesday.

Police chief Bob Wasylyshen was surprised to hear of the investigation but said he is confident the commissioner will find nothing improper with the cameras. He said the cameras' effectiveness in deterring crime should also be considered in any investigation.

"Part of the concerns ought to be privacy, but also one of the biggest reasons that we decided to try this technology is so that we would have a safer situation for people using the area and have a greater ability to catch people who would go to Whyte Avenue and cause trouble," Wasylyshen said.

The investigation will determine whether Edmonton police have authority under provincial law to use the surveillance cameras and the information they collect, Chander said. It comes after the office received a written complaint from a citizen.

"An individual wanted to know what authority the police had to collect, use and disclose the information," Chander said.

"So the commissioner thought this was a good opportunity to launch an investigation."

The report is expected by mid-August. Edmonton's Fringe Festival, when police want to use the cameras next, runs from Aug. 14 to 24.

Six closed-circuit television cameras were installed this summer in a pilot project to keep a watchful eye on people during Canada Day and Fringe Festival celebrations on and near Whyte Avenue in the Old Strathcona district.

The funky shopping and entertainment district was the scene of a drunken riot after 2001 Canada Day festivities and has had other problems with hooligans at night.

Besides police authority to use the cameras, Chander said commissioner Frank Work will investigate whether officers, rather than civilians, are operating the cameras, how secure the tapes are kept and whether they are properly destroyed when police are finished with them.

Wasylyshen said police are conducting their own investigation. They will survey people on what they thought of the cameras during the first phase of the pilot project, June 27 to July 2. "Did they feel any different? Did they feel as though their privacy was violated? Were they nervous going to Whyte Avenue knowing there were cameras there?" Wasylyshen said.

"I suspect that the public will be very supportive and say it didn't make any difference to me and it was good to know they were there."

Alberta's information and privacy commissioner is an officer of the legislature, independent of the government. The office protects the integrity of the provincial Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act and the Health Information Act.

posted 08-02-2003 02:08 PM            

LOVE YOUR BIG BROTHER SATELLITE KIDDIES.....

Super-secret spy agency now trying child's play

The Lompoc Record
7/20/03

Corey Corona and Dana Drop, agents for the nation's spy satellite agency, have a mission that once would have been impossible.

That's because the two characters promote an agency whose programs and very existence were secret just a decade ago.

Welcome to the new world order, where the National Reconnaissance Office not only admits it exists but also owns up to satellite launches, honors its pioneers publicly and even has a Web site geared toward children. NROjr.gov targets kids between the ages of 3 and 10 with songs, stories, games and art.

The Web site for NRO, which is jointly operated by the CIA and Defense Department, was born out of a family day for the Virginia-based agency, according to NRO spokesman Art Haubold. The agency announced the Web site's presence late last year.

"We thought it was something that could be fun, and there's some educational elements to it," said Haubold.

"The realities of today are different than when NRO was shrouded in a complete cloak of secrecy," said Haubold. "One of the reasons we are doing this is we want today's youth to become interested in science and technology. This is one way we do some outreach to them.

"Whether or not they end up working for NRO, its importance to get today's youth interested in the science and technology we need to continue United States pre-eminence in space," he added.

So Corey Corona -- named for NRO's first space-based spying effort four decades ago -- offers games.

Dana Drop pushes coloring projects.

Whirly Lizard carries stories.

And Earth Watch touts tunes.

Haubold couldn't give a cost estimate for the kids' page, noting that the site was designed by a contractor who handles the agency's main Web site at www.nro.gov.

Scott Hollister, operations manager for Space Endeavour Camp at Vandenberg Air Force Base, said he supports anything that educates people.

"My hat's off to them," said Hollister. "I applaud them ... Anywhere you educate people is great."

NROjr.gov creates mixed feelings among the many who lobbied for an end to the spy satellite agency's secrecy.

"I think they sort of have a split personality," said Steven Aftergood from the Federation of American Scientists in Washington D.C. "On the one hand they're not releasing what you would expect. On the other hand, they're publishing all kinds of things you'd never look for, like this kid site."

NASA has long had Web sites geared toward children. The Clinton administration pushed for kid-friendly Web sites, Aftergood said. The CIA has a site offering youth a chance to don disguises or decode messages in cyberspace.

NRO admitted to existence in 1992, and began pre-announcing its launches a few years later.

"It still comes as a surprise and a bit of a shock," said Aftergood. "I think NRO may have some uncertainty about its own identity as an intelligence organization. It looks like NRO can't decide whether they are a clandestine intelligence organization or just another government bureaucracy."

He's not intending to be critical of the site, Aftergood said, but it seems a little bit odd to have a Web site for kids.

"I don't think it does any harm," said Aftergood, who has waged a long war to get information about the government's "black program" budgets, but "I don't think it's a substitute for public accountability. That is something that is still deficient at NRO, beginning with the amount of money they spend."

He continues to fight for a statement of what NRO costs.

"The kid site is fun and games, but the public information is not a joke," he said. "It's a responsibility they have that they are not discharging. I'm getting more worked up as we talk."

posted 08-03-2003 07:06 PM            

http://www.politechbot.com/p-04097.html

posted 09-21-2003 08:34 PM            

WILL THE GROCERY STORE AND THE ATM BE NEXT????

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2002/05/28/scans-liberty.htm

THEY ARE BRAGGING ABOUT IT AGAIN

ISN'T THE STATUE OF LIBERTY SUPPOSED TO REPRESENT ITS NAMESAKE?

posted 10-15-2003 10:56 AM            

MARTA to put cameras in rail cars, buses in 2006

By HENRY UNGER

Atlanta Journal-Constitution Staff Writer
To improve security, MARTA plans to install two closed-circuit cameras on every rail car and bus starting in 2006.

"There are no cameras now on the rolling stock," MARTA Police Chief Gene Wilson said Monday. "It will give us the ability to see what has occurred. It may cause someone to think twice before doing something they shouldn't do."

The transit authority also plans to place one camera in the smaller paratransit vans, add about 300 in rail stations and install an undetermined number in parking lots, maintenance and other facilities.

"They will be used to help investigate crimes, hopefully deter crimes and help with the perception of the people who ride the system," Wilson said.

MARTA passenger Scott Bateman, who travels on bus and train each day from Memorial Drive downtown to Buckhead, had a favorable reaction.

"I guess it would make me feel a little more secure," Bateman said. "If something were to transpire on one of the buses or rail cars, it would be documented."

Wilson said the current closed-circuit television system, which dates back to the mid-1970s, does not provide clear images and is difficult to maintain.

It is not monitored by employees now. But at least part of the new system will be, Wilson said.

"The cameras in the stations and in critical areas will be monitored on a random basis," he said. "We will use crime stats to select places that need to be monitored." It has not been decided if the cameras on the trains and buses will be monitored.

For every 1,000 daily passengers that ride MARTA annually, about four are involved in serious crimes. Most involve theft in the parking lots and outside the station, Wilson said. The serious crime statistics include murder, rape, armed robbery, robbery, theft, burglary and arson. The last murder on MARTA property occurred six years ago, Wilson said.

MARTA will pay for the $42 million project, which includes nearly 3,000 cameras that will be connected to its fiber optic communications network, with money just obtained from two lease financing deals.

In such deals, MARTA transfers the tax benefits to investors that lease certain assets, such as part of its rail line. The assets are leased back to MARTA to use, but the investors get the tax benefits because MARTA is tax-exempt.

posted 11-20-2003 12:48 PM            

Published on 11/20/2003
http://www.theday.com/eng/web/newstand/re.aspx?reIDx=6E6D1E76-B9C6-4755-875D-3BBD01CEAB6E

Attorney General John Ashcroft has been traveling the country telling ordinary Americans how much better protected they are by dint of the government's powers under the Patriot Act. He talks about terrorism so as to scare the dickens out of the American people.

He doesn't talk about other intrusions into people's personal lives that may have nothing to do with investigating suspected terrorists, but a lot to do with expanding the government's power even as the Patriot Act diminishes personal liberties. Oh, no, his Justice Department would never do that, the attorney general says in shock that anyone would suggest such a thing.

Yet columnist Clarence Page of the Chicago Tribune notes that FBI agents used the Patriot Act to go after a Las Vegas strip club owner suspected of bribing politicians. What, you may ask, does this have to do with terrorist investigations? Absolutely nothing, but the Patriot Act has in many ways made it easier for federal law enforcement officers to intrude improperly on people, even to violate the rights of suspected criminals.

Section 314 of the Patriot Act allows federal investigators easier access to financial information from stockbrokers, banks and other financial institutions “suspected, based on credible evidence, of engaging in terrorist acts or money laundering.”

It's the phrase “money laundering” that is most interesting. The FBI can go after anybody they suspect has laundered money. In the past, the FBI had to go before a grand jury of citizens to get a subpoena to look at criminal records. Now they can file a secret document to certify they have a reasonable suspicion someone laundered money – for any purpose.

This is a giant reduction in the protection Americans should have against the snooping eyes and ears of federal law enforcement.

Using the Patriot Act to go after crooked politicians is a misuse of power. There are plenty of ways to investigate corruption now. There's the ability to obtain wiretaps and to present evidence to a grand jury. The FBI shouldn't be using a special act intended to stop terrorists and major drug dealers for the purpose of uprooting pols who get kickbacks.

The United States is strong and free because of the personal freedom provided its citizens under the Constitution and Bill of Rights. But the Patriot Act threatens that very freedom.

posted 11-22-2003 04:23 PM            

BUT YOU DON'T GET "SECURITY"...YOU ONLY GET TYRANNY.

http://observingsurveillance.us/

posted 11-23-2003 07:42 PM            

It IS a Non-partisan issue. But Bush is president..and he is happy to see let all this bull$#!T happen that is reducing our liberties and 4th Amendment rights.

Northstar? You mean ON-Star?

Yeah..its BIG brother on Steroids. Big brother in your car.

posted 11-23-2003 10:40 PM            

Jr. is what I call a NEO-CON. (neo-conservative)

Trotskyite machevellian ends-justify-the-means dirty politician.

posted 12-11-2003 11:40 AM            

By Elizabeth Barczak
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Thursday, December 11, 2003

Cameras cling to the ceiling at the main entrance of North Hills High School, recording the movement of everyone who passes below.

The scene is repeated several times throughout the high school -- cameras watching students, teachers and other staff as they pass through doors, walk through hallways or drive past the building.

Roughly one-fifth of Pennsylvania's 501 school districts have contacted the Pennsylvania School Boards Association about installing surveillance cameras, said Sharon Fissel, association director of policy services.

"It could be more. Not all districts contact us. There is a growing interest," Fissel said. "The No. 1 reason is security. Security and discipline are probably the top two reasons."

"THOSE WHO GIVE UP ESSENTIAL LIBERTY FOR SAFETY DESERVE NEITHER LIBERTY OR SAFETY".

BENJAMIN FRANKLIN

posted 12-13-2003 09:24 PM            

*****************************

FBI Applies New Rules to Surveillance

Sat Dec 13, 7:47 AM ET

By Dan Eggen, Washington Post Staff Writer

The FBI (news - web sites) has implemented new ground rules that fundamentally alter the way investigators handle counterterrorism cases, allowing criminal and intelligence agents to work side by side and giving both broad access to the tools of intelligence gathering for the first time in decades.

The result is that the FBI, unhindered by the restrictions of the past, will conduct many more searches and wiretaps that are subject to oversight by a secret intelligence court rather than regular criminal courts, officials said. Civil liberties groups and defense lawyers predict that more innocent people will be the targets of clandestine surveillance.

The new strategy -- launched in early summer and finalized in a classified directive issued to FBI field offices in October -- goes further than has been publicly discussed by FBI officials in the past and marks the final step in tearing down the legal wall that had separated criminal and intelligence investigations since the spying scandals of the 1970s, authorities said.

Senior FBI officials said the changes have already helped the bureau disrupt plans for at least four terrorist attacks overseas and uncover a terrorist sleeper cell in the United States, though they declined to provide details on those cases. The approach also has resulted in a notable surge in the number of counterterrorism investigations, a statistic that is classified but currently stands at more than 1,000 cases, officials said.

"With 9/11 as the catalyst for this, what we've done is fundamentally change the approach we take to every counterterrorism case," FBI terrorism chief John S. Pistole said in an interview. "This is a sea change for the FBI."

To civil libertarians and many defense lawyers, the changes pose a threat to the privacy and due-process rights of civilians because they essentially eliminate, rather than merely blur, the traditional boundaries separating criminal and intelligence investigations. As a result, these critics say, FBI agents and federal prosecutors will conduct many more searches and seizures in secret, as allowed under intelligence laws, rather than being constrained by the rules of traditional criminal warrants.

"By eliminating any distinction between criminal and intelligence classifications, it reduces the respect for the ordinary constitutional protections that people have," said Joshua L. Dratel, a New York lawyer who has filed legal briefs opposing government anti-terrorism policies. "It will result in a funneling of all cases into an intelligence mode. It's an end run around the Fourth Amendment," which protects citizens from unreasonable searches, he said.

The overhaul of the FBI's counterterrorism policies began earlier this year with a classified document called the Model Counterterrorism Investigations Strategy (MCIS), officials said. The strategy stems from a November 2002 decision by an intelligence appeals court, which ruled that the anti-terrorism USA Patriot Act permits intelligence investigators and criminal prosecutors to more easily share information about terrorism cases.

The MCIS and other rules effectively put that finding into practice by reworking the way terrorism cases are handled by the FBI, and by requiring that both criminal and intelligence investigators physically work as part of the same squads on terrorism investigations, officials said. FBI officials declined to release copies of the MCIS or a related Oct. 1 directive, citing national security restrictions, but agreed to describe the outlines of the process.

Under previous FBI protocols, terrorism probes could be opened along two separate tracks, one for the purposes of developing a criminal case and one for intelligence gathering. Each was labeled with separate classification numbers, which govern the way cases are tracked and budgeted within the FBI. Sharing between the two categories was sharply limited, overseen by legal mediators from the FBI and Justice Department (news - web sites), and subject to scrutiny by criminal courts and the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.

Under the new guidelines, all counterterrorism cases are opened under the same classification number, 315, and are handled from the outset like an intelligence or espionage investigation, officials said. The structure allows investigators to more easily use secret warrants and other methods that are overseen by the surveillance court and not available in traditional criminal probes, sources said.

All terrorism cases will also be formally run by the counterterrorism division at FBI headquarters in Washington, rather than by individual field offices, officials said.

Pistole said that focusing on intelligence gathering will improve the ability of the FBI to prevent, rather than just investigate, terrorist attacks. He and other FBI officials also said the new system will result in less emphasis on bringing criminal charges against suspects in favor of longer surveillance operations. When charges are eventually brought, however, prosecutors will be able to use information gathered through intelligence methods.

"We're still interested in the criminal violations that people may be involved in," Pistole said. "But in many cases we are going to put that in the back seat and go down the road until we have all that we need."

Robert M. Blitzer, a former FBI counterterrorism official, said that by merging the criminal and intelligence sides of counterterrorism cases, investigators will be able to work more efficiently on cases and avoid problems that were common before Sept. 11, 2001.

"In the past, it was an absolute cardinal rule that there be a wall between the two cases," Blitzer said. "Now, you will have much broader access to see what is going on. You can see the whole scope of things. . . . We were always afraid that something could slip between the cracks on both sides under the old system, and that did happen."

In one stark example, FBI lawyers refused to allow criminal agents to join an August 2001 search for Khalid Almidhar, who had entered the United States and would later help commandeer the airliner that crashed into the Pentagon (news - web sites). The lawyers said that information about Almidhar's ties to al Qaeda obtained through intelligence channels could not be used to launch a criminal investigation. An angry New York FBI agent warned in an internal e-mail that was later revealed during congressional hearings that "someday someone will die" because of the decision.

In another case, the FBI failed to seek an intelligence warrant to search the belongings of alleged al Qaeda conspirator Zacarias Moussoaui, who had been detained in Minnesota three weeks before the attacks. The legal counsel in the FBI's Minneapolis field office said headquarters officials limited the actions of regular FBI agents in the case because of concerns about breaching the wall between intelligence and criminal cases.

The FBI's new strategy is the culmination of a series of new rules and regulations issued since the Sept. 11 attacks to govern terrorism investigations. Attorney General John D. Ashcroft last month issued new national security guidelines, for example, that allow the FBI to conduct an initial "threat assessment" of potential terrorists without firm evidence of a threat or crime, which is required to open a full investigation.

Ashcroft, FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III and other officials argue that such changes are necessary to transform the FBI from a reactive law enforcement agency into one capable of detecting and thwarting terrorist attacks before they occur. According to a study released this week by Syracuse University's Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, Justice and the FBI have sharply increased the number of terrorism cases they are pursuing since the 2001 attacks, although most of the 6,400 people referred to prosecutors were never charged with a crime related to terrorism.

Several civil liberties advocates and defense lawyers said the new FBI rules appear to encourage agents to ignore constitutional concerns and to push the boundaries of what is allowed by recent court rulings. Ann Beeson, a staff attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union (news - web sites), said the system will encourage prosecutors to rely too heavily on evidence gathered by secret intelligence methods.

"They're going to use all their foreign intelligence tools, and then they're going to prosecute people using those tools," Beeson said. "They're putting this whole class of criminal cases outside the protection of the Fourth Amendment."