[Links to the DOJ's report to Congress, required under the USA Patriot Act, are at the end. Also see the DOJ's fact sheet below. --Declan] --- From DOJ: FYI - This is a letter that was sent to USA Today last week from the Deputy Attorney General regarding the Patriot Act. Today we received an email from USA Today indicating that it probably would not be published. As many of you know, we are always happy to clarify any issues or misinformation regarding the Patriot Act and therefore I am making this available to all of you. An overview of the Patriot Act is also attached. Please feel free to call us for any further information on the Patriot Act. ******************************************************************************************************************************************* LETTER TO THE EDITOR BY DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL LARRY D. THOMPSON Dear Editor: In your July 14, 2003 article, "Patriot Act Battle is Fought Locally," your reporter Debbie Howlett expressed the view that the Patriot Act "gives the government sweeping powers to monitor citizens suspected of having ties to terrorists." This may be Ms. Howlett's opinion, but it was not identified as such; it was expressed as fact, and it is simply not true. The Patriot Act was a long overdue measure to close gaping holes in the government's ability, responsibly and lawfully, to collect vital intelligence information on criminal terrorists to protect our citizens from savage attacks such as those which occurred on September 11, 2001. It updated the law to accommodate modern technology and to use the same tools in terrorism that we have used for years in drug cases and organized crime cases. The Patriot Act was supported overwhelmingly by the American people, it was enacted by a margin of 98-1 in the Senate and 357-66 in the House, and it provides ample review by federal judges of the actions the government takes to prevent terrorism and to investigate terrorist acts. Senator Joseph Biden (D-Delaware) explained his support of the Patriot Act as follows: "It allows law enforcement to keep up with the modern technology these terrorists are using." Prior to the Patriot Act, he explained, "the FBI could get a wiretap to investigate the mafia, but they could not get one to investigate terrorists. . . . To put it bluntly, that was crazy." The Patriot Act allows law enforcement to share information with intelligence agencies. Failure to do so is not only foolish, but may lead to deadly consequences for our citizens. As Senator Edwards (D-North Carolina) explained, "we simply cannot prevail in the battle against terrorism if the right hand of our government has no idea what the left hand is doing." While presumably well-intended, efforts to defeat enforcement of the carefully calibrated, congressionally authorized, and largely judicially monitored provisions of the Patriot Act could lead to disastrous consequences for the American people. The government has an obligation to use common sense and lawful measures to protect its citizens from terrorists. While your newspaper is certainly entitled to report on those who oppose these measures, it is unfortunate that your news article served to mislead the American people by labeling as fact the misleading opinion of one of your reporters. --- U.S. House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr., Chairman _______________________________________ www.house.gov/judiciary News Advisory Statement Regarding Inspector General's Report on Civil Rights/Liberties Complaints WASHINGTON, D.C. - Recent news reports have erroneously described a report by the Justice Department's Inspector General required by section 1001 of the USA-PATRIOT Act. House Judiciary Committee Communications Director Jeff Lungren issued the following statement: "Clarification is necessary about this report. As stated in the report, 'Section 1001 of the Patriot Act directs the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) in the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to undertake a series of actions related to claims of civil rights or civil liberties violations allegedly committed by DOJ employees. It also requires the OIG to provide semiannual reports to Congress on the implementation of the OIG's responsibilities under Section 1001.' "This report is required by the Patriot Act and is not a report on any alleged civil rights violations using the Patriot Act authorities. Put another way, the Patriot Act was the legislative vehicle requiring this report, and not the subject of it. Unfortunately, many stories have misreported this fact by falsely saying this report details civil liberties complaints stemming from enforcement of the Patriot Act. "If Meals of Wheels legislation required this report, I would not expect to see stories describing the report as detailing civil rights complaints in the Meals on Wheels program. Similarly, stories should not be saying this report identifies civil rights violations under the Patriot Act. "Section 1001 requires the OIG to 'review information and receive complaints alleging abuses of civil rights and civil liberties by employees and officials of the Department of Justice.' This report covers any action by any DOJ employee under any of the thousands of laws on the books. The USA Today correctly described this report near the end of today's story, 'The report does not cite any examples of alleged abuse of the powers provided by the Patriot Act.'" --- From DOJ: USA PATRIOT Act Summary and Overview Since the September 11th attacks, the PATRIOT Act has played a part - and often the leading role - in a number of successful operations to protect America from the deadly plans of terrorists dedicated to destroying America and our way of life. While the results have been important, the PATRIOT Act provided for only modest, incremental changes in the law. The Act simply took existing legal principles and retrofitted them for the challenges posed by a global terrorist network. ü Congress enacting the PATRIOT Act by overwhelming, bipartisan margins, arming law enforcement with new tools to detect and prevent terrorism: The USA PATRIOT Act was passed nearly unanimously by the Senate 98-1, and 35766 in the House, with the support of members from across the political spectrum. The Act Improves Our Counter-Terrorism Efforts in Several Significant Ways: 1. The PATRIOT Act facilitated information sharing and cooperation among government agencies so that they can better connect the dots : the Act removed the legal barriers that prevented the law enforcement, intelligence, and defense communities from sharing information and coordinating activities in the common effort to protect national security. The governments prevention efforts cannot be constrained by boxes on an organizational chart. The Act dismantled the walls of separation and enabled a culture of cooperation that is essential in our integrated antiterrorism campaign. · For example, prosecutors can now share grand jury evidence with the intelligence community -- and the Act also permits the sharing of intelligence information with federal prosecutors. Such sharing of information leads to concrete results. · Recently, a federal grand jury indicted Sami al-Arian for bankrolling Palestinian Islamic Jihad, one of the worlds most violent terrorist outfits. Palestinian Islamic Jihad is responsible for murdering more than 100 innocent people, including Alisa Flatow, a young American killed in a bus bombing near the Israeli settlement Kfar Darom. The indictment of al-Arian was possible because the Act allowed criminal prosecutors to use foreign intelligence information gathered by intelligence agents. 2. Updating the Law to Reflect New Technologies: The PATRIOT Act brought the law up to date with current technology, so we no longer have to fight a digital-age battle with antique weaponslegal authorities leftover from the era of rotary telephones. When investigating the murder of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, for example, law enforcement used one of the Acts surveillance authorities to intercept critical internet communications that helped identify and locate some of the killers. Also, after the 2001 anthrax attacks, a federal court in Washington, D.C., used the Acts nationwide search warrants authority to issue an order authorizing law enforcement to search the premises of the first anthrax victims employer in Boca Raton, Florida. Investigators saved valuable time because they were able to ask the local federal judge, who was most familiar with the case and who was overseeing the nationwide investigation, for the order. Other authorities permitted by the Act include: Adds terrorism crimes to the pre-existing list of offenses for which the government can ask a court for a wiretap order. The offenses added include chemical weapons offenses, killing United States nationals abroad, using weapons of mass destruction, and providing material support to terrorist organizations. Allows victims of computer hacking to request law enforcement assistance in monitoring the trespassers on their computers. This change made the law technology-neutral; it placed electronic trespassers on the same footing as physical trespassers. Allows law enforcement to ask a court for an order to obtain business records in national security cases. While law enforcement has always been able to obtain business records in criminal cases through grand jury subpoenas, it was difficult for them to get these records in national security investigations. These records proved useful in criminal cases like the Unabomber investigation, where grand juries looked for those who had checked out the four fairly arcane books cited in the Unabomber Manifesto. Under the PATRIOT Act, the government can now ask courts for the same records in national security investigations, as well. Investigators might seek, for example, records from chemical plants to find out who bought materials that could make a bomb, or bank records to see whos sending money to terrorists. Courts can issue these orders only after the government demonstrates its need for them, and the Act specifically protects First Amendment activities. 3. The PATRIOT Act increased the penalties for those who commit terrorist crimes: Americans are threatened as much by the terrorist who pays for a bomb as by the one who pushes the button. Thats why the PATRIOT Act imposed tough new penalties on those who commit and support terrorist operations, both at home and abroad. In particular, the Act: Prohibits the harboring of terrorists. The Act created a new offense that prohibits knowingly harboring persons who have committed or are about to commit a variety of terrorist offenses, such as: destruction of aircraft; use of nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons; use of weapons of mass destruction; bombing of government property; sabotage of nuclear facilities; or aircraft piracy. Enhanced the inadequate maximum penalties for various crimes likely to be committed by terrorists: including arson, destruction of energy facilities, material support to terrorists and terrorist organizations, and destruction of national-defense materials. Enhanced a number of conspiracy penalties, including for arson, killings in federal facilities, attacking communications systems, material support to terrorists, sabotage of nuclear facilities, and interference with flight crew members. Under previous law, many terrorism statutes did not specifically prohibit engaging in conspiracies to commit the underlying offenses. In such cases, the government could only bring prosecutions under the general federal conspiracy provision, which carries a light maximum penalty of five years. Punishes terrorist attacks on mass transit systems. Punishes bioterrorists. Eliminates and lengthens the statutes of limitations for terrorism crimes. Overall, the governments success in preventing another catastrophic attack on the American homeland since September 11, 2001, would have been much more difficult, if not impossibly so, without the USA PATRIOT Act. The Departments experience is that the authorities Congress provided in the Act have substantially enhanced our ability to prevent, investigate, and prosecute acts of terrorism. --- Report to Congress on Implementation of Section 1001 of the USA PATRIOT Act (as required by Section 1001(3) of Public Law 107-56) July 17, 2003 Office of the Inspector General ------------------------------------------------------------------------ The USA PATRIOT Act (Patriot Act), Public Law 107-56, enacted by Congress and signed by the President on October 26, 2001, provides expanded law enforcement authorities to enhance the federal government's efforts to detect and deter acts of terrorism in the United States or against United States' interests abroad. Section 1001 of the Patriot Act directs the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) in the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to undertake a series of actions related to claims of civil rights or civil liberties violations allegedly committed by DOJ employees. It also requires the OIG to provide semiannual reports to Congress on the implementation of the OIG's responsibilities under Section 1001. This report - the third since enactment of the legislation - summarizes the OIG's Patriot Act-related activities from December 16, 2002, through June 15, 2003. http://www.usdoj.gov/oig/special/03-07/index.htm http://www.usdoj.gov/oig/special/03-07/final.pdf ------------------------------------------------------------------------- POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/ Like Politech? Make a donation here: http://www.politechbot.com/donate/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Jul 23 2003 - 00:29:10 PDT