FBI waging another political war on American citizens

Kansas: FBI officials interrogated parents, employers and neighbors of Solidarity Anarchists

Thursday, May 05 2005 Contributed by: reckless
On July 24 FBI officials interrogated parents, employers and neighbors of Solidarity Anarchists.

"My mother called me at about eight in the morning and said the FBI was just at my house," says Vanessa Hays, Topeka senior. She questions why they didn't come to her house or call her, "My number's in the phone book," she says and laughs in frustration.

The Kansan

http://www.kansan.com/stories/2005/apr/27/features_kulture_flags/

Jonathan Leyser Published: Wednesday, April 27, 2005

On July 24 FBI officials interrogated parents, employers and neighbors of Solidarity Anarchists.

"My mother called me at about eight in the morning and said the FBI was just at my house," says Vanessa Hays, Topeka senior. She questions why they didn't come to her house or call her, "My number's in the phone book," she says and laughs in frustration.

FBI Agents knocked on dozens of doors in town. However, during the three-day investigation, they "didn't even bother coming to Solidarity," says anarchist and Lawrence resident Kalila Dalton. According to the Lawrence Journal-World and ABC news, the interrogation was based on "unconfirmed information of a potential threat to disrupt the Democratic National Convention, by college-age members based in the Midwest."

The interrogation was part of a FBI sweep across the country that resulted in numerous arrests. Three weeks later, on Aug. 17, the FBI returned to town. This time, the tip was based on a potential disruption at the Republican National Convention. They knocked on the door of John Young, a middle-aged activist who produces an anarchist web site. The Lawrence resident claims the FBI have been monitoring the site since its first Lawrence visit.

On the same day Reps., John Conyers Jr (D-Mich.,) Jerrold Nader (D-N.Y.,) and Robert C Scott (D-Va.,) filed a formal complaint to Inspector General Glenn Fine, requesting the investigation of "possible violations of the First Amendment and assembly rights," by FBI agents during a national sweep conducted between July and August, which included two Lawrence anarchists. The letter wrote, "the FBI appears to be engaging in systematic political harassment and intimidation of legitimate anti-war protesters."

he congressmen compared the sweep to the "notorious days of political enemies list and COINTELPRO associated with the Nixon administration." COINTELPRO is an acronym for the FBI counter intelligence program that investigated and disrupted rebellious political organizations in the United States between 1956 and 1971.

On August 20 former Attorney General John Ashcroft defended the FBIs actions and called them a necessary action to real threat.

The fiasco brought awareness and new members to Solidarity but it also brought fear, says Ailecia Ruscin, Auburn, Ala., graduate student. The anarchists believe that the FBI was using the opportunity to harass and gather information about them because of their anti-capitalist and anti-authoritarian views. Bob Henderson, a Kansas City FBI spokesperson, told the Lawrence Journal-World, they were "not investigating Ideas, per se."

Members of solidarity said they went to protest the GOP a few weeks after FBI investigation, because they would not to succumb to FBI fear tactics. At least nine were arrested at the protest.

"We have footage the police took of anarchist meetings, so there is no doubt that we have been monitored," Ruscin says.

Many Anarchist still believe they are being monitored. Over Solidarity's phone, a sign reads: "Remember this phone IS tapped."
- Edited by Jennifer Voldness

more at
http://www.kansan.com/stories/2005/apr/27/features_kulture/

www.infoshop.org

 

So the FBI knocked on some doors to confirm/dismiss some tips they'd picked up. Sounds like a routine investigation to me. If those people didn't want to talk to the FBI, they could tell them so. What's the big deal? Did the FBI force their way into the house without a search warrant? If not, what exactly did they do that you have a problem with?

I'm a card-carrying member of the ACLU, and yet I still can't figure out why you think this constitutes an unjust infringement on civil liberties. Don't you think the police have a duty to investigate crimes or potential crimes?

 

Not that I feel a need to reply to you, as I feel you are near-worthless, but for the sake of others who might be reading this, the reason the Patriot Act is un-Constitutional is because these new sweeping powers will allow the state to blur the line between crime and lawful activism which the government deems subversive (which it very well may be). But subversion is NOT terrorism. Even Revolution isn't terrorism. Unless you consider "terrorism" to be an act of aggression against a dominating paradigm.

"Don't you think the police have a duty to investigate crimes or potential crimes?"

Potential crimes? No I do not. I don't believe that law-enforcement has the right to act pre-emptively against a crime they feel "may or may not" take place. For one it's un-Constitutional. It threatens the 1st and 4th Amendments. If pre-emption was a fair thing, it would also be fair to have one agent assigned each household to make sure that we don't commit any crimes now or in the future, because, well...once upon a time we talked about something that had a little something to do with, well...you get the idea (at least others do, not you).

So Kandahar, yet again you are incorrect. But thanks for raising the issue so I could explain to others. As for you holding an ACLU card...that means nothing, esp. because they (as an organization) disagree with just about everything you've ever said on here. You may as well give the card to someone worthy of holding it.

 

Don't change the subject. Nowhere in your previous post or in mine is the Patriot Act mentioned. I asked what is wrong with routine investigations by the FBI.

So for example, if someone called the FBI and tells them that they're going to crash a plane into a skyscraper, the FBI has a constitutional obligation to turn a blind eye? If a worried neighbor thinks that a husband might kill his wife, the police should tell the neighbor to call back when there's a dead body? Don't be ridiculous; nowhere in the 4th amendment (and I don't know how you came to the conclusion that the 1st amendment even had anything to do with this matter) does it say that the police don't have a right to investigate crimes or potential crimes. It says that the police need a warrant issued on probable cause.

If the FBI had forced their way into these people's homes without a search warrant issued on probable cause, you might have a point. But according to your article 1) the police just talked to them, 2) they were acting on information they had been given.

I agree with almost everything the ACLU stands for (except affirmative action and a few entitlement issues). That doesn't mean I'm going to support every knee-jerk reaction to anything the FBI does, especially in a case like this where it doesn't sound like they did anything out of the ordinary. Unlike you, I'm capable of thinking for myself instead of just adopting whatever opinion some website tells me to hold.