And this is why the ACLU Sucks

[System]

http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/10/22/terror.questioning.ap/index.html



ACLU sues FBI over Muslim interviews

SAN FRANCISCO, California (AP) -- The American Civil Liberties Union has sued the FBI, trying to get more information about the agency's questioning of Muslims and Arabs as it investigates the possibility of pre-election terror attacks.

The ACLU suit, filed Thursday, is seeking internal documents under the Freedom of Information Act to find out whether the government is protecting the constitutional rights of the subjects of its unannounced interviews at homes, workplaces and mosques.

"We are trying to get much greater sunshine over these activities," said ACLU attorney John Crew.

The FBI has conducted more than 13,000 interviews this year as part of an effort to detect and disrupt a potential election-year terror attack.

The interviews are voluntary and are not meant to indicate that the person is a suspected terrorist. Still, Muslim groups have expressed concern that they are being singled out for unfair scrutiny.

The ACLU wants to know, among other things, how the agency chooses whom it will interview.

"These random interviews or interrogations raise the concern that the FBI and the Joint Terrorism Task Forces operating in Northern California are infringing upon the civil rights and civil liberties of immigrants, U.S. citizens and organizations by interrogating them without any valid basis, rationale, or individualized suspicion for doing so," the ACLU's FOIA request says.

Joe Parris, an FBI spokesman in Washington, D.C., said the agency had no comment because of "pending litigation."

LaRae Quy, an FBI spokeswoman in San Francisco, told the San Francisco Chronicle on October 6 that agents were going to mosques as part of their pre-election terror investigation.

"We're trying to learn about the Muslim community and understand how a terrorist could move or hide in that community, or find out who in that community might be funding terrorists," she told the paper. "If this were a Catholic jihad, we'd be going into Catholic churches."

No court date has been set for the ACLU's suit, which comes a month after the FBI refused the group's request to immediately respond to its Freedom of Information Act claim.

In a letter to the ACLU, the FBI said it would process the request in a "first-in-first-out" basis, a process that would take more than a year.





The FBI is doing their job trying to protect us, and they are saying they are targeting Muslims.

WHO IN THE FUCK SHOULD THEY TARGET THEN!!!!

FBI said if it was a Catholic Jihad they would be in Catholic churches, so true. The is a Muslim Jihad so they are in Mosques. Should I slow down or do the bleeding heart liberals understand me? If nothign had been done and there was a terrosist attack peopel would be in outrage, but now that we are doing something about it, they are still upset. So pick a side, either let the FBI do its job protecting us or prepare for more terrorists acts.

[Spicy McHaggis]

Sometimes the truth sucks...

Not all Muslims are terrorists, but most terrorists are Muslim.

[crosscg]

http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/10/22/terror.questioning.ap/index.html




The FBI is doing their job trying to protect us, and they are saying they are targeting Muslims.

WHO IN THE FUCK SHOULD THEY TARGET THEN!!!!

FBI said if it was a Catholic Jihad they would be in Catholic churches, so true. The is a Muslim Jihad so they are in Mosques. Should I slow down or do the bleeding heart liberals understand me? If nothign had been done and there was a terrosist attack peopel would be in outrage, but now that we are doing something about it, they are still upset. So pick a side, either let the FBI do its job protecting us or prepare for more terrorists acts.
As much as some people hate it, there has to be some amount of secrecy in organization such as the CIA, FBI and NSA. If it were up to the ACLU we would have to let the whole world know we know where Bin Laden is a month before we go after him so that he would have plenty of time to escape. Every prisoner in Guantanamo Bay would be getting steak dinners every night and living in mansions while we beg them to tell us why they are crashing planes into our buildings.

[System]

As much as some people hate it, there has to be some amount of secrecy in organization such as the CIA, FBI and NSA. If it were up to the ACLU we would have to let the whole world know we know where Bin Laden is a month before we go after him so that he would have plenty of time to escape. Every prisoner in Guantanamo Bay would be getting steak dinners every night and living in mansions while we beg them to tell us why they are crashing planes into our buildings.

ya, people don't think globally they think that the rights of a few out weigh the right to live of countless numbers of people taht could possibly die in another attack

They said the interviews were voluntary. That means they asked nicely and people responded. Nothing wrong with that. If i was a peace loving muslim I would talk to them to see if something i knew could help save some lives.

[Seankel]

I agree with what the ACLU is doing. We need groups like the ACLU protecting peoples rights just as much as we need the FBI protecting our asses. From what I read in the article, the ACLU is not trying to stop the questioning, they are only trying to get information.

[Rob]

Checks and balances.

[mwjorgens]

The FBI is doing their job trying to protect us, and they are saying they are targeting Muslims.

WHO IN THE FUCK SHOULD THEY TARGET THEN!!!!

FBI said if it was a Catholic Jihad they would be in Catholic churches, so true. The is a Muslim Jihad so they are in Mosques. Should I slow down or do the bleeding heart liberals understand me? If nothign had been done and there was a terrosist attack peopel would be in outrage, but now that we are doing something about it, they are still upset. So pick a side, either let the FBI do its job protecting us or prepare for more terrorists acts.
ignorance is bliss isnt it. you are a very sad person.

[DMBSignGuy]

The ACLU is doing the right thing here. They want to know how the FBI is going about interviewing these people and on what grounds. If anybody thinks we can trust the FBI to conduct and investigation into US citizens you are sorely mistaken. The FBI has repeatedly stepped over its bounds infringing on people rights, mainly 1st amendment rights. The FBI can do this, and with thier past history, we need to demand to know how and why they are doing it.

Recommended read: Terrorism and the Constitution: Sacrificing Civil Liberties in the Name of National Security
by David Cole, James X. Dempsey, Carole Goldberg

really good read on the activities of the FBI throughout its history up till today.

[Proof2k3]

You know if we put a barcode on everyone's neck and made it so that everytime they entered or left a room it got stored in a government computer, I bet we could really cut down the crime rate. Granted that is an extreme example. But then again where should the line between people's rights and security be drawn? That's a topic that needs open debate. I applaud groups like the ACLU who fight to make sure that in the end it's the people that dictate where that line should be drawn, and not agencies like the FBI and CIA.

[crosscg]

We should just disband the FBI, CIA, NSA, the entire military, police, government... why not. All they do is control our lives. I can't stand it, every day I have to drive down the street and OBEY STOP LIGHTS! Its rediculous, next thing you know I won't be able to kill someone without getting tried.

How rediculous does that sound? About as bad as the idea that barcodes would ever be put on our necks. I like the freedoms that this country has afforded me, but I realize that there is a cost. Its not a perfect world, and terrorist don't always talk when you say pretty please.

[EatSleepJeep]

What's wrong with the American Civil Liberties Union? Do you not enjoy your Civil Liberties? Don't all Americans have the same Civil Liberties? What do you have against the Bill of Rights? I like the Bill of Rights. I like that there is an organization out there making sure that the FBI(and other government agencies) isn't violating the rights of a citizens of this country. The group that is under increased scrutiny here isn't yours. How fortunate you are.

What if it were your group was as in the example stated above. How would you feel if a radical minority of Catholics were implicated in terrorism. Do you, as a law abiding Catholic, feel that you should be placed under additional scrutiny? That your phones be tapped? That your business be monitored? That your co-workers be questioned about your actions and habits? That your financial records be dissected? That you get a knock on your door and a request to come in for voluntary questioning just because you are a Catholic?

Is this an extreme example? No, if you've heard of a not-so-little group called the IRA.

Even those that bash the ACLU have benefitted from their battles to make sure that your rights and liberties are being maintained and honored. Why don't you read up a little before you make such an ass clown out of yourself by generalizing and regurgitating a Republican party line.

http://www.aclu.org/about/aboutmain.cfm
Everyone loves to bash the ACLU, until questioned on their mission statement. Find a Republican that speaks harshly of the ACLU and then ask them what they have against the Bill of Rights. The American Civil Liberties Union's guiding principal is this: If the rights of society's most vulnerable members are denied, everybody's rights are imperiled.

[illbackyouup_03]

You know if we put a barcode on everyone's neck and made it so that everytime they entered or left a room it got stored in a government computer, I bet we could really cut down the crime rate. Granted that is an extreme example. But then again where should the line between people's rights and security be drawn? That's a topic that needs open debate. I applaud groups like the ACLU who fight to make sure that in the end it's the people that dictate where that line should be drawn, and not agencies like the FBI and CIA.

You bring up a good point. And of course that is an example, but I think I know where the line should be drawn. .

Terrorism is bad, we all agree that the world would be better if it stopped. The fact of life is however that shit does happen. 9/11 was nowhere near the first time a mass number have been killed, and it will happen again eventually, somewhere. . maybe not terrorism. . maybe a horrible earthquake or hurricane, maybe another war will break out for some reason or another. . .

If we truly wanted to we could likely find a way to protect everyone in the population from any possible bad situation. . however. . the point where our lives are being intruded on, and are no longer enjoyable, is the point where we have taken security too far. We really just have to live our lives and accept that fact that shit does happen. . and just about everyday we have a chance of dying.

[bseitz]

What if it were your group was as in the example stated above. How would you feel if a radical minority of Catholics were implicated in terrorism. Do you, as a law abiding Catholic, feel that you should be placed under additional scrutiny? That your phones be tapped? That your business be monitored? That your co-workers be questioned about your actions and habits? That your financial records be dissected? That you get a knock on your door and a request to come in for voluntary questioning just because you are a Catholic?
If I was a member of a group that a small minority was portraying as blood thirsty savages, I'd be the first one to go to the authorities and volunteer to help them however I could. Especially when this country allowed me to escape a third-world cesspool and live like a civilized human being. No need to sneak around behind someone's back when they come in the front door and offer to help.



Everyone loves to bash the ACLU, until questioned on their mission statement. Find a Republican that speaks harshly of the ACLU and then ask them what they have against the Bill of Rights. The American Civil Liberties Union's guiding principal is this: If the rights of society's most vulnerable members are denied, everybody's rights are imperiled.
The ACLU is certainly selective in their support for the Bill of Rights. All the libs would be outraged if they treated the other 9 Amendments like they treat the Second.

[System]

The reason stereotypes are funny is that they are true a majority of the time.

Huh, never saw a catholic, jewish, baptist, hindu suicide bomber

[Nitro1515]

The reason stereotypes are funny is that they are true a majority of the time.

Huh, never saw a catholic, jewish, baptist, hindu suicide bomber
Wow you are one ignorant person if you actually believe stereotypes are true a majority of the time.
And remember during WWII when all japanese americans were interred into camps because everyone thought they were somehow involved in Pearl Harbor, this is almost as bad as that. Havent we learned anything from the past, dont people see how ridiculous that was in this day in age. Unfortunately we are making some of the some mistakes all over again just to different group of people. If your an American citizen then the government cannot be allowed to just go in an look up anything it wants on you just because of your religion.

[EatSleepJeep]

The ACLU is certainly selective in their support for the Bill of Rights. All the libs would be outraged if they treated the other 9 Amendments like they treat the Second.

The NRA likes to quote only the second half of the second amendment, the first parts reads "For the purpose of a well regulated militia,"

It's the "well regulated" part they like to forget. I can make anyones words fit my agenda if I only use half of them. By the way, I'm a lifetime member of the NRA as well as the ACLU.

[DMBSignGuy]

Wow you are one ignorant person if you actually believe stereotypes are true a majority of the time.
And remember during WWII when all japanese americans were interred into camps because everyone thought they were somehow involved in Pearl Harbor, this is almost as bad as that. Havent we learned anything from the past, dont people see how ridiculous that was in this day in age. Unfortunately we are making some of the some mistakes all over again just to different group of people. If your an American citizen then the government cannot be allowed to just go in an look up anything it wants on you just because of your religion.

well i do enjoy a good stereotyped joke now and again...but only as a joke...not as policy for the FBI. Unfortunatly we havent learned anything from the past as you said. The PATRIOT ACT allows the FBI to use the same rationale used on the Japanese during WWII on Muslim Americans today. Which is scary. We cant keep letting this happen.

[bseitz]

The NRA likes to quote only the second half of the second amendment, the first parts reads "For the purpose of a well regulated militia,"

It's the "well regulated" part they like to forget. I can make anyones words fit my agenda if I only use half of them. By the way, I'm a lifetime member of the NRA as well as the ACLU.
At the time the Constitution was written, the term "well regulated" nmeant that you had a gun, it worked, you knew how to use it, and you had some ammunition. It appears that the ACLU's interpretation is that the govenment has the right to place any restrictions they want on this right.

For an excellent analysis of the Second Amendment go to: http://www.constitution.org/mil/rkba1982.htm

Check it out. You might learn something.

[DMBSignGuy]

At the time the Constitution was written, the term "well regulated" nmeant that you had a gun, it worked, you knew how to use it, and you had some ammunition. It appears that the ACLU's interpretation is that the govenment has the right to place any restrictions they want on this right.

For an excellent analysis of the Second Amendment go to: http://www.constitution.org/mil/rkba1982.htm

Check it out. You might learn something.

dont we already have a 2nd amendment thread ;)