F.B.I. Looking For Political Troublemakers

[Epitome22]

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/16/po...ign/16fbi.html


F.B.I. Goes Knocking for Political Troublemakers


WASHINGTON, Aug. 15 - The Federal Bureau of Investigation has been questioning political demonstrators across the country, and in rare cases even subpoenaing them, in an aggressive effort to forestall what officials say could be violent and disruptive protests at the Republican National Convention in New York.

F.B.I. officials are urging agents to canvass their communities for information about planned disruptions aimed at the convention and other coming political events, and they say they have developed a list of people who they think may have information about possible violence. They say the inquiries, which began last month before the Democratic convention in Boston, are focused solely on possible crimes, not on dissent, at major political events.

But some people contacted by the F.B.I. say they are mystified by the bureau's interest and felt harassed by questions about their political plans.

"The message I took from it," said Sarah Bardwell, 21, an intern at a Denver antiwar group who was visited by six investigators a few weeks ago, "was that they were trying to intimidate us into not going to any protests and to let us know that, 'hey, we're watching you.' ''

The unusual initiative comes after the Justice Department, in a previously undisclosed legal opinion, gave its blessing to controversial tactics used last year by the F.B.I in urging local police departments to report suspicious activity at political and antiwar demonstrations to counterterrorism squads. The F.B.I. bulletins that relayed the request for help detailed tactics used by demonstrators - everything from violent resistance to Internet fund-raising and recruitment.

In an internal complaint, an F.B.I. employee charged that the bulletins improperly blurred the line between lawfully protected speech and illegal activity. But the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, in a five-page internal analysis obtained by The New York Times, disagreed.

The office, which also made headlines in June in an opinion - since disavowed - that authorized the use of torture against terrorism suspects in some circumstances, said any First Amendment impact posed by the F.B.I.'s monitoring of the political protests was negligible and constitutional.

The opinion said: "Given the limited nature of such public monitoring, any possible 'chilling' effect caused by the bulletins would be quite minimal and substantially outweighed by the public interest in maintaining safety and order during large-scale demonstrations."

Those same concerns are now central to the vigorous efforts by the F.B.I. to identify possible disruptions by anarchists, violent demonstrators and others at the Republican National Convention, which begins Aug. 30 and is expected to draw hundreds of thousands of protesters.

In the last few weeks, beginning before the Democratic convention, F.B.I. counterterrorism agents and other federal and local officers have sought to interview dozens of people in at least six states, including past protesters and their friends and family members, about possible violence at the two conventions. In addition, three young men in Missouri said they were trailed by federal agents for several days and subpoenaed to testify before a federal grand jury last month, forcing them to cancel their trip to Boston to take part in a protest there that same day.

Interrogations have generally covered the same three questions, according to some of those questioned and their lawyers: were demonstrators planning violence or other disruptions, did they know anyone who was, and did they realize it was a crime to withhold such information.

A handful of protesters at the Boston convention were arrested but there were no major disruptions. Concerns have risen for the Republican convention, however, because of antiwar demonstrations directed at President Bush and because of New York City's global prominence.

With the F.B.I. given more authority after the Sept. 11 attacks to monitor public events, the tensions over the convention protests, coupled with the Justice Department's own legal analysis of such monitoring, reflect the fine line between protecting national security in an age of terrorism and discouraging political expression.

[LRB]

Sounds like the FBI is doing a great job.

[knowitall]

LRB, I know you don't mean that.

[LRB]

Actually I do. Simply meeting with those who could potentially cause trouble and try to head that off is being very proactive. violent protest are not guarranteed by the Constitution nor the Bill of Rights. These people still can protest, however they need to do so civily and in compliance with all laws.

[MavKikiNYC]

Gosh. Anybody heard from Reeds lately?

[LRB]

Originally posted by: MavKikiNYC
Gosh. Anybody heard from Reeds lately?

Last I heard the FBI was interviewing him. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]

[knowitall]

All of those protesters in DC weren't violent when Bush drove up after stealing the election! For the FBI to prematurely label possible protesters as violent is a scary thought. "Break out your nightsticks agents, this is gonna get ugly"! BREAKING NEWS..........From an FBI spokesperson "Hey, they just won't shutup" and "They had it coming" and "We already warned them when we secretly showed up at their homes".

Weary, rest now, for the futures dawn will illuminate the danger.

[LRB]

Originally posted by: knowitall
All of those protesters in DC weren't violent when Bush drove up after stealing the election! For the FBI to prematurely label possible protesters as violent is a scary thought. "Break out your nightsticks agents, this is gonna get ugly"! BREAKING NEWS..........From an FBI spokesperson "Hey, they just won't shutup" and "They had it coming" and "We already warned them when we secretly showed up at their homes".

Weary, rest now, for the futures dawn will illuminate the danger.

1st of all, Bush did not steal the election. It was all done legally. Sure it was controversial, but calling it illegal is a huge stretch.

Next when those protestors were protesting, there were two very tall and prominent buildings still standing in New York City and the US was not at war. Different time and different circumstances. There is a huge logical step from questioning people to breaking into their homes and illegally beating them. The safety of this nation is much more important IMO than some minor inconvience to a relative few protestors.

[knowitall]

Those buildings came down on Bush's shift, remember.

[LRB]

Originally posted by: knowitall
Those buildings came down on Bush's shift, remember.

However how loud would you and other left leaning liberals have yelled if Bush had took preventive measures such as FBI interviewing of potential terrorists in the US? Pretty damn loud I bet. That sad part is if he had prevented 9/11 it would probably been totally dicounted by his opponents and Bush just accused of using police state tactics.

Yes it came about 8 months after Bush took office. However much of the Clinton administration was still in place as Bush was only in the midst of his changes. Would it have made a difference if Bush had made his changes? IMO, no it would not have. Neither would it have made a difference if Clinton or Gore of even Kerry had been president.

[Mavdog]

John Ashcroft in action.

A very dangerous course when the Feds are actively stiffling citizen's right of free speech.

[knowitall]

LRB, you are sounding more and more radical as the day wears on.

This is a true statement........I have never in my life voted for a democratic candidate for President. You call me a "left leaning liberal". Sounding kinda like a zealot. What's next. Vote for Bush, Knowitall, or i'll kill ya?

[LRB]

Originally posted by: knowitall
LRB, you are sounding more and more radical as the day wears on.

This is a true statement........I have never in my life voted for a democratic candidate for President. You call me a "left leaning liberal". Sounding kinda like a zealot. What's next. Vote for Bush, Knowitall, or i'll kill ya?

Sorry I didn't mean to call you a left leaning liberal, I ment you. And Left leaning liberals. You of course are free to vote for whom you chose. And whoever that is in nobody's business but your own unless you choose to share. But if agreeing that FBI agents questioning potential troublemakers in a city which is on heightened alert for terrorist activity and which will be housing the President of the USA, then I guess I meet that definition of a radical.

[knowitall]

When the FBI, which has already compiled a list of protesters, goes to "visit" certain individuals, it reeks of oppression. But that doesn't bother you because those people, left leaning liberals, don't share your philosophy. Because of that, they had it coming, huh?

[LRB]

Actually I hope that they did the same with ther far out right wing wackos as well. We all saw how conservative protestors at the DNC were forced to stand in cages a great distance from the fleet center for protection. I posted then that if that's what it takes for security, then I'm all for it.

If getting asked a few questions is more than these people can take, and I mean liberal, conservative, whatever, then they will just have to quit. But they don't have a valid reason to say they were forced out IMO. Anyone should be able to answer a few questions to law enforcement if they have nothing to hide. Again, I think that you're making mountains out of molehills. Heck this is even nothing compared to what clinton did using the FBI files to gain confidential informaiton on political opponents. I wouldn't even call Clinton's tactics oppression. Dishonesty and abuse of power, but not oppression.

In reality these protestors still have freedom to protest without being punished except for unlawful behavior. I don't consider questioning to be punishment.

[knowitall]

I just wouldn't want someone bending my arm.......sort of like "big brother is watching" tactics.

[LRB]

As far as it has been reported, the questioning was without physical accompaniments such as arm bending. As far as big brother watching, if you're a protester, you're trying to get as many people as possible to watch you. Sorry, but it's just not a concern to me. The FBI can stop my my house tonight and question me about my posting on this board if they want to. Hell they can even keep an eye on me. If they think I might pose some terrorist threat. It's not that big of a deal. This is just a bunch of liberals whining for attention about a not issue. The FBI probably did the same thing to the conservative groups and they probably whined as well only the media didn't give a darn about the conservative whackos so that's why this is just coming up now.

[knowitall]

Better be careful LRB, they may find out all of your adulation is just a front. You'll blow your cover.

[LRB]

Originally posted by: knowitall
Better be careful LRB, they may find out all of your adulation is just a front. You'll blow your cover.

The only thing that they'll be likely to blow is their minds with my incredibly boring life.

[knowitall]

Oh come on, you are insightful, smart and have a big carrot for a nose. And I take back what I just posted on that other subject. The part where I also want you to punch in on a clock.

[FishForLunch]

LRB, you are sounding more and more radical as the day wears on.

This is a true statement........I have never in my life voted for a democratic candidate for President. You call me a "left leaning liberal". Sounding kinda like a zealot. What's next. Vote for Bush, Knowitall, or i'll kill ya?

All of those protesters in DC weren't violent when Bush drove up after stealing the election! For the FBI to prematurely label possible protesters as violent is a scary thought. "Break out your nightsticks agents, this is gonna get ugly"! BREAKING NEWS..........From an FBI spokesperson "Hey, they just won't shutup" and "They had it coming" and "We already warned them when we secretly showed up at their homes".

Those buildings came down on Bush's shift, remember.

"Knowitall" you are very convincing, when you try to tell us all that you havent decided you to vote for in this election. Maybe you are a "right leaning liberal"

[Drbio]

There is no way in hell that knowitall was ever on the fence. The on the fence motto has long been used by leftists who wish to have someone from the right listen to feeble argument.

[mavsman55]

Originally posted by: knowitall
When the FBI, which has already compiled a list of protesters, goes to "visit" certain individuals, it reeks of oppression. But that doesn't bother you because those people, left leaning liberals, don't share your philosophy. Because of that, they had it coming, huh?

Oppression? Oppression my @$$. Opression is having thousands of people violently protest in our streets. For you to criticize the FBI for taking measure to prevent any <u>chance</u> of that happening is ridiculous.

[knowitall]

Drbio and Mavsman55. Here they come walking down the street. Watch out, they shoot first and ask............can i kiss your ass Mr. Bush?

[mavsman55]

How old are you again?

[mavsman55]

Originally posted by: knowitall
Drbio and Mavsman55. Here they come walking down the street. Watch out, they shoot first and ask............can i kiss your ass Mr. Bush?

Are you stupid or were you never taught how to read? Shoot First? Come on now. Interviewing somebody is different from shooting them. Blatant and complete exaggeration will get you nowhere. Ever.

[FishForLunch]

FBI is a regular Gestapo now. I guess their right to free speech trumps chaos and anarchy. Look what happened in Seattle during the WTO meetings.

[Drbio]

Originally posted by: knowitall
Those buildings came down on Bush's shift, remember.

Only the presence of Mavdog keeps this from being the stupidest post in d-m.com history.

[knowitall]

drbio..... spoken like a true rootin tootin redneck.

[LRB]

Originally posted by: knowitall
drbio..... spoken like a true rootin tootin redneck.

That sounds distinctly more like leftist baby killing, pot smoking, flag burning hippee than a still on the fence undecided moderate.

[knowitall]

I just think drbio is a walking bar fight.

[Drbio]

Originally posted by: knowitall
I just think drbio is a walking bar fight.

This coming from an instigating beeyatch who has done nothing but spew agenda or inflammatory remarks? Laughable.

[knowitall]

Beeyatch............How original! What's next.........My bad! hahahahahaha

[dude1394]

Originally posted by: Mavdog[]
John Ashcroft in action.

06/11/2002 - Updated 11:28 AM ET
U.S. citizen arrested in 'dirty bomb' plot
---------------------
PORTLAND, Oregon, (CNN) -- Three of the six U.S. residents charged with conspiring to assist al Qaeda and the Taliban in waging war against the United States made initial appearances in federal court Friday.
---------------------
July 22 — An Islamic militant group is denying any involvement in a scheme that the FBI says raised money for terrorism activities worldwide through cigarette trafficking in the United States.
--------------------
The United States has arrested a native of Bucaramanga, Colombia, for attempting to purchase over 1,000 machine guns, rifles, grenades, grenade launchers, and pistols on behalf of a Colombian terrorist group.
---------------------
American federal agents arrested 18 alleged supporters of Hizballah in North Carolina and Michigan on Friday. According to an indictment filed in a federal court, the men are accused of trafficking in cigarettes, money laundering and evading immigration laws. They are also suspected of supplying money and equipment to Hizballah in Lebanon.
---------------------
Washington -- Five former leaders of the Holy Land Foundation, once the biggest Islamic charity in the United States, were arrested Tuesday on charges that they funneled $12.4 million to Palestinian terrorists.
----------------------