[iwar] [fc:Walls.of.'Fortress.America'.rising]

From: Fred Cohen (fc@all.net)
Date: 2001-09-24 18:04:55


Return-Path: <sentto-279987-2319-1001379896-fc=all.net@returns.onelist.com>
Delivered-To: fc@all.net
Received: from 204.181.12.215 by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.1.0) for fc@localhost (single-drop); Mon, 24 Sep 2001 18:06:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 20526 invoked by uid 510); 25 Sep 2001 01:05:17 -0000
Received: from n11.groups.yahoo.com (216.115.96.61) by 204.181.12.215 with SMTP; 25 Sep 2001 01:05:17 -0000
X-eGroups-Return: sentto-279987-2319-1001379896-fc=all.net@returns.onelist.com
Received: from [10.1.4.53] by c3.egroups.com with NNFMP; 25 Sep 2001 01:04:56 -0000
X-Sender: fc@big.all.net
X-Apparently-To: iwar@onelist.com
Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_2_2); 25 Sep 2001 01:04:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 64696 invoked from network); 25 Sep 2001 01:04:55 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 25 Sep 2001 01:04:55 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO big.all.net) (65.0.156.78) by mta3 with SMTP; 25 Sep 2001 01:04:55 -0000
Received: (from fc@localhost) by big.all.net (8.9.3/8.7.3) id SAA12358 for iwar@onelist.com; Mon, 24 Sep 2001 18:04:55 -0700
Message-Id: <200109250104.SAA12358@big.all.net>
To: iwar@onelist.com (Information Warfare Mailing List)
Organization: I'm not allowed to say
X-Mailer: don't even ask
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL1]
From: Fred Cohen <fc@all.net>
Mailing-List: list iwar@yahoogroups.com; contact iwar-owner@yahoogroups.com
Delivered-To: mailing list iwar@yahoogroups.com
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:iwar-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2001 18:04:55 -0700 (PDT)
Reply-To: iwar@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [iwar] [fc:Walls.of.'Fortress.America'.rising]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Walls of 'Fortress America' rising
Congress is moving on tough bills that would expand surveillance and tighten
security at airports and borders.
By Gail Russell Chaddock &lt;mailto:<a href="mailto:chaddockg@csps.com?Subject=Re:%20(ai)%20FW:%20Walls%20of%20'Fortress%20America'%20rising%2526In-Reply-To=%2526lt;B7D50E73.16592%25rforno@infowarrior.org">chaddockg@csps.com</a> | Staff writer of The
Christian Science Monitor

WASHINGTON - Washington is on the verge of enacting - quickly - the most
sweeping changes in law enforcement in a generation.  Aimed at thwarting
terrorists, they also will touch the lives of almost every American.  A
draft wish list from the Bush administration now circulating in Congress
asks for broad new powers to eavesdrop, control borders, and collect and
share information about citizens, students, and visitors to the United
States. 

At first glance, it looks as if most of the changes apply just to
suspected terrorists or those who support them.  But experts say the
impact could be much broader. 

"People always think such new laws won't apply to them, but it's tough
if you get caught up in the dragnet," says Christopher Sands, director
of the Canada Project at the Center for Strategic and International
Studies here.  The impact of new laws and regulations will be most
obvious to people traveling or crossing borders.  Passengers will find
more metal detectors, cameras, and checkpoints at airports.  This means
Americans can expect fewer flights and more delays, indefinitely. 

Along the US-Canada border, where 200 million people cross each year,
the wait at checkpoints will also lengthen dramatically.  Concern about
the number of Islamic extremists entering the US from north of the
border has already forced authorities to tighten security. 

Now the screening is set to get even more stringent, threatening to
create gridlock. 

What will be less obvious in its impact - but no less far reaching - are
congressional moves to allow the government to accumulate more
information about the movements, beliefs, and financial transactions of
its citizens.  This includes giving authorities more power to detain and
prosecute people.  "We need these tools to fight the terrorist threat
which exists in the United States," said Attorney General John Ashcroft
last week. 

Terrorist experts say there are tough tradeoffs involved in many of
these new provisions.  For example, the use of cameras with face
recognition software around airports and public places can help track
terrorists.  Yet it also gives government the capacity to track all
citizens. 

"We might have to give the government much more access to our personal
goings-on to protect our overall security," says Michael Swetnam,
president of the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies, a nonprofit group
here.  New life for old agenda

Many of the items on the attorney general's wish list have been a goal
of law-enforcement officials for years, but were blocked by Congress
because of concerns that they violated civil liberties. 

But the massive security break that produced the Sept.  11 attacks has
changed the climate in Washington so dramatically that much on this list
is expected to pass into law quickly. 

One of the first bills expected to move through Congress is the
administration's request for broader wiretap authority.  Current federal
law allows authorities to tap the phone of a suspect.  The attorney
general wants authority to track conversations of suspected terrorists
across any state - on any phone, pay phone, or cellphone that the
suspect may use - including e-mail and unanswered voice-messages. 

By casting a broader net, law-enforcement officials hope to be able to
track terrorists who change cell phones and venues frequently.  But
civil rights groups warn that the conversations of many Americans
unrelated to terrorists could also be picked up in the process. 

"Every year, 2 million communications are intercepted involving people
who weren't even suspected of any crimes, according to the government's
own data," says Nadine Strossen, president of the American Civil
Liberties Union.  "That number would be increased exponentially under
the new law, because it allows roving wiretaps that follow that person
to any telephone that person might use."

When the Clinton administration sought broader wiretap authority in
1994, Congress balked.  But lawmakers this time seem inclined to move it
through quickly. 

Two days after the assault on the World Trade Towers and the Pentagon,
the Senate passed by voice vote an amendment that gives government new
authority to search the contents of computers. 

Some senators were alarmed that such a controversial and far-reaching
measure passed with no hearings and little debate. 

"Maybe that will make us feel safer," says Sen.  Patrick Leahy (D) of
Vermont, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, who opposed the
amendment.  "Maybe.  And maybe what the terrorists have done made us a
little bit less safe.  Maybe they have increased Big Brother in this
country." The wish list

Other requests to be taken up by Congress in the next two weeks include:

* Granting the attorney general discretion to detain any individual
determined to "pose a threat to national security." Such a decision
could only be challenged in federal court in the District of Columbia. 

* Giving authorities at border checkpoints and consular offices
electronic access to crime, intelligence, and immigration data from many
federal agencies to help identify high-risk travelers. 

* Imposing stiffer penalties on anyone who harbors or supports
terrorists.  The law would also allow the confiscation of the property
of terrorists, and DNA samples to be collected of all people convicted
of terrorist crimes. 

* Allowing the use of information collected by foreign governments
against American citizens, even if the collection violates
constitutional protections against unreasonable searches and seizures. 

Public-interest groups worry that many of these provisions go too far
and are likely to stay in place even after the threat to national
security diminishes. 

"There's no question that a concerted attempt is being pursued to take
advantage of the attack as an opening for government to secure a wide
variety of powers that it has raised over the years," says Tom Devine,
legal director of the Washington-based Government Accountability
Project.  "Many of the items in the legislative package aren't directly
relevant to the events of September 11."

It's a balance between security and civil liberties that governments
have often had to strike in wartime.  During the Civil War, President
Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus to allow the government to
detain people indefinitely without trial.  President Roosevelt
authorized the internment of some 100,000 ethnic Japanese during World
War II, and Congress approved his action. 

However, Congress rejected President Wilson's request for censorship
during World War I. 

"In any civilized society, the most important task is achieving a proper
balance between freedom and order," writes Chief Justice of the United
States William Rehnquist in his 1998 book "All the Laws but One: Civil
Liberties in Wartime." "In wartime, reason and history both suggest that
this balance shifts to some degree in favor of order - in favor of the
government's ability to deal with conditions that threaten the national
well-being."

But he warns that the use of war as an excuse for reining in liberties
can be abused.  "It is all too easy to slide from a case of genuine
military necessity, where the power sought to be exercised is at least
debatable, to one where the threat is not critical and the power either
dubious or nonexistent," he adds. 

Laws that won't disappear

Civil rights groups worry that, once enacted, tough new laws may be
difficult to get off the books. 

Before the recent attacks, the Justice Department and a bipartisan group
in Congress had been meeting to discuss repealing the use of secret
evidence, not shared with defendants, in cases involving criminal aliens
or terrorists - procedures adopted after the 1995 Oklahoma City Bombing. 
Earlier this year, the attorney general told Congress he would not use
secret evidence until Congress reexamined the issue.  But in response to
a question on this issue last week, Mr.  Ashcroft declined to say he
still supported that course.  "We're going to do everything we can to
harmonize the constitutional rights of individuals with every legal
capacity we can muster to also protect the safety and security of
individuals," he said. 


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Pinpoint the right security solution for your company- Learn how to add 128- bit encryption and to authenticate your web site with VeriSign's FREE guide!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/JNm9_D/33_CAA/yigFAA/kgFolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

------------------
http://all.net/ 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : 2001-09-29 21:08:49 PDT