Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
American Civil Liberties Union - Pentagon Spied on Sacramento Area Activists
The first report in nine reports by the Pentagon's TALON program, released on Tuesday by the ACLU, was about the protest at the Sacramento Military Processing Station on November 11, 2004 by Veterans for Peace and other local peace organizations. Check out these documents - they are chilling!
American Civil Liberties Union - Pentagon Spied on Sacramento Area Activists
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
NOVEMBER 21, 2006
3:00 PM
CONTACT: American Civil Liberties Union
media [at] aclu.org
ACLU Calls for Investigation In Response to New Details of Pentagon Spy Files
Pentagon, FBI Documents Reveal Widespread Domestic Surveillance of Political Groups
NEW YORK - November 21 - The American Civil Liberties Union today released new Pentagon documents showing that counterterrorism resources were used to monitor American groups opposed to the war in Iraq and military recruitment. The ACLU is calling on Congress to investigate the widespread surveillance of political and religious groups by the Defense Department, the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security.
“There is increasing evidence that the Pentagon improperly targeted innocent Americans for surveillance,” said Ben Wizner, an ACLU staff attorney. “These documents send a chilling message that if you oppose the war, the military is watching you. That is simply un-American.”
The documents released today consist of nine reports from the Pentagon’s Threat and Local Observation Notice (TALON) database that describe as “threats” several planned demonstrations at military recruitment stations, including sites on college campuses.
One report focuses on a planned protest at the Sacramento Military Entrance Processing Station by “a Sacramento chapter of a US domestic group.” According to the report, “this specific group is deeply into ‘counter-recruiting,’” and views the station “as their last chance to influence a decision to enlist.”
Commanders of the Sacramento and San Jose stations were advised of the protests by the San Francisco Joint Terrorism Task Force. The report notes that “it appears this protest will most likely be peaceful, but some type of vandalism is always a possibility.”
An April 8, 2005 report lists planned protests by Veterans for Peace at nine different universities across the country. The source of the information, described as an active duty Army officer, states that “Veterans for Peace is a peaceful organization, but there is potential future protest could become violent.”
Another report, dated April 22, 2005, attempts to justify surveillance of Veterans for Peace by pointing to an altercation between a solider and an individual at a university anti-war rally in New Orleans. According to the report, the soldier mistakenly arrived at the campus demonstration and was confronted by the individual. A security officer instructed the soldier to leave the area. Although the organization had a permit for the rally, and it is unknown whether the individual was a student or a veteran, the TALON report claims that “Veterans for Peace should be viewed as a possible threat to Army and DoD personnel.” The report was shared with local army personnel, the New Orleans Police Department and the New Orleans Joint Terrorism Task Force.
“It is appalling that the Pentagon would label peace activists-including those of us who put our lives at risk defending this country-as potential threats,” said Michael T. McPhearson, Executive Director of Veterans for Peace. “The federal government should not be wasting valuable resources gathering files on peaceful protesters who disagree with the Bush administration’s policies.”
The documents come in response to a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed by the ACLU earlier this year after evidence surfaced that the Pentagon was secretly conducting surveillance of peaceful anti-war and counter-military recruitment groups, including Quakers and student groups. After public outcry, Deputy Secretary of Defense Gordon England announced in January that intelligence personnel would receive “refresher training on the policies for collection, retention, dissemination and use of information related to U.S. persons.”
So far Congress has failed to investigate how the Pentagon collected the information on innocent Americans, and which other agencies received these reports. In addition, Congress has yet to act on the hundreds of FBI documents previously obtained by the ACLU that show widespread surveillance by Joint Terrorism Task Forces of peace activists, religious groups, environmental groups and animal rights activists.
“Congress must shed light on this effort to spy on veterans and Quakers,” said Caroline Fredrickson, Director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office. “We are pleased that new leaders have signaled a desire to get serious about congressional oversight. No American should ever be targeted for exercising his or her First Amendment rights.”
Other documents released today include a February 24, 2005 report on protests planned at three New York City recruiting stations by the War Resisters League, which advocates nonviolence as the method for creating a democratic society. The report includes guidelines from the protest organizers stressing that participants must agree not to engage in physical violence or verbal use and not to damage any property. Still, in the same report, a Department of Homeland Security agent warned that individual members of the group may favor “civil disobedience and vandalism.” The report indicates that the FBI Joint Terrorism Task Forces in Atlanta and New York were briefed on the planned protests.
The TALON reports released today are online at: http://www.aclu.org/safefree/spying/27459lgl20061121.html
More information on government surveillance of innocent Americans, including FBI documents, is online at: http://www.aclu.org/spyfiles
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
NOVEMBER 21, 2006
3:00 PM
CONTACT: American Civil Liberties Union
media [at] aclu.org
ACLU Calls for Investigation In Response to New Details of Pentagon Spy Files
Pentagon, FBI Documents Reveal Widespread Domestic Surveillance of Political Groups
NEW YORK - November 21 - The American Civil Liberties Union today released new Pentagon documents showing that counterterrorism resources were used to monitor American groups opposed to the war in Iraq and military recruitment. The ACLU is calling on Congress to investigate the widespread surveillance of political and religious groups by the Defense Department, the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security.
“There is increasing evidence that the Pentagon improperly targeted innocent Americans for surveillance,” said Ben Wizner, an ACLU staff attorney. “These documents send a chilling message that if you oppose the war, the military is watching you. That is simply un-American.”
The documents released today consist of nine reports from the Pentagon’s Threat and Local Observation Notice (TALON) database that describe as “threats” several planned demonstrations at military recruitment stations, including sites on college campuses.
One report focuses on a planned protest at the Sacramento Military Entrance Processing Station by “a Sacramento chapter of a US domestic group.” According to the report, “this specific group is deeply into ‘counter-recruiting,’” and views the station “as their last chance to influence a decision to enlist.”
Commanders of the Sacramento and San Jose stations were advised of the protests by the San Francisco Joint Terrorism Task Force. The report notes that “it appears this protest will most likely be peaceful, but some type of vandalism is always a possibility.”
An April 8, 2005 report lists planned protests by Veterans for Peace at nine different universities across the country. The source of the information, described as an active duty Army officer, states that “Veterans for Peace is a peaceful organization, but there is potential future protest could become violent.”
Another report, dated April 22, 2005, attempts to justify surveillance of Veterans for Peace by pointing to an altercation between a solider and an individual at a university anti-war rally in New Orleans. According to the report, the soldier mistakenly arrived at the campus demonstration and was confronted by the individual. A security officer instructed the soldier to leave the area. Although the organization had a permit for the rally, and it is unknown whether the individual was a student or a veteran, the TALON report claims that “Veterans for Peace should be viewed as a possible threat to Army and DoD personnel.” The report was shared with local army personnel, the New Orleans Police Department and the New Orleans Joint Terrorism Task Force.
“It is appalling that the Pentagon would label peace activists-including those of us who put our lives at risk defending this country-as potential threats,” said Michael T. McPhearson, Executive Director of Veterans for Peace. “The federal government should not be wasting valuable resources gathering files on peaceful protesters who disagree with the Bush administration’s policies.”
The documents come in response to a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed by the ACLU earlier this year after evidence surfaced that the Pentagon was secretly conducting surveillance of peaceful anti-war and counter-military recruitment groups, including Quakers and student groups. After public outcry, Deputy Secretary of Defense Gordon England announced in January that intelligence personnel would receive “refresher training on the policies for collection, retention, dissemination and use of information related to U.S. persons.”
So far Congress has failed to investigate how the Pentagon collected the information on innocent Americans, and which other agencies received these reports. In addition, Congress has yet to act on the hundreds of FBI documents previously obtained by the ACLU that show widespread surveillance by Joint Terrorism Task Forces of peace activists, religious groups, environmental groups and animal rights activists.
“Congress must shed light on this effort to spy on veterans and Quakers,” said Caroline Fredrickson, Director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office. “We are pleased that new leaders have signaled a desire to get serious about congressional oversight. No American should ever be targeted for exercising his or her First Amendment rights.”
Other documents released today include a February 24, 2005 report on protests planned at three New York City recruiting stations by the War Resisters League, which advocates nonviolence as the method for creating a democratic society. The report includes guidelines from the protest organizers stressing that participants must agree not to engage in physical violence or verbal use and not to damage any property. Still, in the same report, a Department of Homeland Security agent warned that individual members of the group may favor “civil disobedience and vandalism.” The report indicates that the FBI Joint Terrorism Task Forces in Atlanta and New York were briefed on the planned protests.
The TALON reports released today are online at: http://www.aclu.org/safefree/spying/27459lgl20061121.html
More information on government surveillance of innocent Americans, including FBI documents, is online at: http://www.aclu.org/spyfiles
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
A few weeks before the election where the democrats took control of the house and senate and can now determine committee chairs, the building in Maryland where they run a lot of these spy programs was burned down in an accidental five alarm (!!) fire caused by a 'faulty air conditioner' on the roof which burned down the whole complex during afternoon daylight hours because it was too much for their sprinkler system to combat:
http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2006/10/21/fort-meade-fire-displaces-military-intelligence-unit/
http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2006/10/21/fort-meade-fire-displaces-military-intelligence-unit/
The ACLU supported the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act as it passed both the House and Senate.
http://www.aclu.org/images/general/asset_upload_file809_27356.pdf
October 30, 2006
The Honorable F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr.
Chairman, House Judiciary Committee
2449 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515-4909
The Honorable John Conyers, Jr.
Ranking Member, House Judiciary Committee
2426 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515-2214
Re: ACLU Urges Needed Minor Changes to AETA, But Does Not
Oppose Bill (S. 3880, the “Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act”)
Dear Chairman Sensenbrenner and Ranking Member Conyers:
On behalf of the ACLU, a non-partisan organization with hundreds of thousands of activists and members and 53 affiliates nation-wide, we urge you to make some necessary minor amendments to the “Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act” (AETA), S. 3880 which has passed the Senate and may be coming up for a vote in the House. The ACLU does not oppose this bill, but believes that these minor changes are necessary to make the bill less likely to chill or threaten freedom of speech.
The bill expands 18 U.S.C. §43, targeting animal rights activists, to include
economic damage and threats of death and serious bodily injury to persons associated with animal enterprises. While the ACLU does not condone violence or threats, we are concerned when a law singles out a specific group that engages in expressive activity. Many improvements have been made to the bill, but the minor amendments we suggest will clarify portions of the bill and make it less likely that it will be used to pursue legitimate expression.
Define “Real or Personal Property” as “Tangible” Property to Avoid
Lost Profits or Good Will Forming the Basis for the Offense
Legitimate expressive activity may result in economic damage.1 Boycotts, for
example, were an important tool in the civil rights movement. Care must therefore be taken in penalizing economic damage to avoid infringing upon
legitimate activity.
S. 3880 criminalizes conduct that “intentionally damages or causes the loss of
any real or personal property.” The bill does not, however, define “real or personal property.” The question arises as to whether this language would
require the actual loss of tangible property, or whether it would criminalize
legitimate activity that caused an enterprise to lose intangible property like
future profits or business good will.
To avoid these problems and avoid having loss of intangible property
forming the basis for a prosecution, we suggest the following amendment:
Insert the following new section in section 43(d) and remove current
subsection (3)(B), renumbering appropriately.
(3) the term “intentionally damages or causes the loss of any real or
personal property” –
(A)means intentionally damaging or causing the loss of any tangible property; but
(B) does not include damage or loss resulting from a boycott, protest, demonstration, investigation, whistleblowing, reporting of animal mistreatment, or any public, governmental, or business reaction to the disclosure of
information concerning animal enterprises.
Define “Animal Enterprise” to Only Include Lawful Activities
Some animal enterprises exist for the purpose of using animals unlawfully, for example, criminal dog fighting and cockfighting. These types of activities should be investigated and exposed. Under the bill, an activist who rescued a rooster before it could be put in a cockfight could be charged as a terrorist under the AETA. To avoid this outcome, the definition of “animal enterprise” should be altered to make it clear that interference with unlawful
activities does not trigger the statute.
Clarify that Section 43(b)(1)(A) Only Applies to Conspiracies or
Attempts.
The bill imposes a sentence of up to one year and a fine for offenses that caused no reasonable fear of bodily harm, no actual bodily injury or any
economic damages. Since reasonable fear of bodily harm, actual bodily injury or economic damages are all elements of crimes associated with more severe penalties under the bill, we assume the first penalty provision under
the bill is meant to address conspiracies or attempts. However, this should be
clarified. To avoid the chilling effect on those individuals considering actions
that would cause no harm, either physical or economic, nor instill any fear of
harm we suggest the following amendment to section 43(b)(1)(A):
(A) an offense under subsection (a)(2)(C) results in no economic
damage or bodily injury.
Conclusion
Hubert H. Humphrey once said “Freedom is hammered out on the anvil of discussion, dissent and debate.” When Congress singles out a group on one
side of a debate for criminal penalties, it must be careful to avoid silencing the discussion, dissent and debate that is so fundamental to our freedom.
These minor changes should help focus the law and avoid penalizing legitimate dissent.
Sincerely,
Caroline Fredrickson
Director, Washington Legislative Office
Marvin J. Johnson
Legislative Counsel
cc: Rep. Robert C. Scott
http://www.aclu.org/images/general/asset_upload_file809_27356.pdf
October 30, 2006
The Honorable F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr.
Chairman, House Judiciary Committee
2449 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515-4909
The Honorable John Conyers, Jr.
Ranking Member, House Judiciary Committee
2426 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515-2214
Re: ACLU Urges Needed Minor Changes to AETA, But Does Not
Oppose Bill (S. 3880, the “Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act”)
Dear Chairman Sensenbrenner and Ranking Member Conyers:
On behalf of the ACLU, a non-partisan organization with hundreds of thousands of activists and members and 53 affiliates nation-wide, we urge you to make some necessary minor amendments to the “Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act” (AETA), S. 3880 which has passed the Senate and may be coming up for a vote in the House. The ACLU does not oppose this bill, but believes that these minor changes are necessary to make the bill less likely to chill or threaten freedom of speech.
The bill expands 18 U.S.C. §43, targeting animal rights activists, to include
economic damage and threats of death and serious bodily injury to persons associated with animal enterprises. While the ACLU does not condone violence or threats, we are concerned when a law singles out a specific group that engages in expressive activity. Many improvements have been made to the bill, but the minor amendments we suggest will clarify portions of the bill and make it less likely that it will be used to pursue legitimate expression.
Define “Real or Personal Property” as “Tangible” Property to Avoid
Lost Profits or Good Will Forming the Basis for the Offense
Legitimate expressive activity may result in economic damage.1 Boycotts, for
example, were an important tool in the civil rights movement. Care must therefore be taken in penalizing economic damage to avoid infringing upon
legitimate activity.
S. 3880 criminalizes conduct that “intentionally damages or causes the loss of
any real or personal property.” The bill does not, however, define “real or personal property.” The question arises as to whether this language would
require the actual loss of tangible property, or whether it would criminalize
legitimate activity that caused an enterprise to lose intangible property like
future profits or business good will.
To avoid these problems and avoid having loss of intangible property
forming the basis for a prosecution, we suggest the following amendment:
Insert the following new section in section 43(d) and remove current
subsection (3)(B), renumbering appropriately.
(3) the term “intentionally damages or causes the loss of any real or
personal property” –
(A)means intentionally damaging or causing the loss of any tangible property; but
(B) does not include damage or loss resulting from a boycott, protest, demonstration, investigation, whistleblowing, reporting of animal mistreatment, or any public, governmental, or business reaction to the disclosure of
information concerning animal enterprises.
Define “Animal Enterprise” to Only Include Lawful Activities
Some animal enterprises exist for the purpose of using animals unlawfully, for example, criminal dog fighting and cockfighting. These types of activities should be investigated and exposed. Under the bill, an activist who rescued a rooster before it could be put in a cockfight could be charged as a terrorist under the AETA. To avoid this outcome, the definition of “animal enterprise” should be altered to make it clear that interference with unlawful
activities does not trigger the statute.
Clarify that Section 43(b)(1)(A) Only Applies to Conspiracies or
Attempts.
The bill imposes a sentence of up to one year and a fine for offenses that caused no reasonable fear of bodily harm, no actual bodily injury or any
economic damages. Since reasonable fear of bodily harm, actual bodily injury or economic damages are all elements of crimes associated with more severe penalties under the bill, we assume the first penalty provision under
the bill is meant to address conspiracies or attempts. However, this should be
clarified. To avoid the chilling effect on those individuals considering actions
that would cause no harm, either physical or economic, nor instill any fear of
harm we suggest the following amendment to section 43(b)(1)(A):
(A) an offense under subsection (a)(2)(C) results in no economic
damage or bodily injury.
Conclusion
Hubert H. Humphrey once said “Freedom is hammered out on the anvil of discussion, dissent and debate.” When Congress singles out a group on one
side of a debate for criminal penalties, it must be careful to avoid silencing the discussion, dissent and debate that is so fundamental to our freedom.
These minor changes should help focus the law and avoid penalizing legitimate dissent.
Sincerely,
Caroline Fredrickson
Director, Washington Legislative Office
Marvin J. Johnson
Legislative Counsel
cc: Rep. Robert C. Scott
For more information:
http://www.greenisthenewred.com
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$75.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network