SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : VOLTAIRE'S PORCH-MODERATED -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (43910)11/5/2001 12:24:39 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 65232
 
* 12:21 ET Juniper Ntwks (JNPR) 22.00 +2.52 (+12.9%): Buckingham Research positive on stock today. While expects obvious bumps, views JNPR as the clear winner; sees potential orders strengthening in the 2nd-half of 2002; views last week's pullback as a buying opportunity.



To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (43910)11/5/2001 2:11:43 PM
From: Jill  Respond to of 65232
 
Yeah the whole series was high drama & full of incredible comebacks and in some cases, amazing pitching, or in other cases, tragic relief pitching. It was some series.



To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (43910)11/6/2001 1:02:43 AM
From: Sully-  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 65232
 
From Scott to you Jimbo.................

An Intelligence Giant in the Making
Anti-Terrorism Law Likely to Bring Domestic Apparatus of Unprecedented Scope

By Jim McGee
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, November 4, 2001; Page A04

Molded by wartime politics and passed a week and a half ago in furious haste, the new anti-terrorism bill lays the foundation for a domestic intelligence-gathering system of unprecedented scale and technological prowess, according to both supporters and critics of the legislation.

Overshadowed by the public focus on new Internet surveillance and "roving wiretaps" were numerous obscure features in the bill that will enable the Bush administration to make fundamental changes at the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Central Intelligence Agency and several Treasury Department law enforcement agencies.

Known as the U.S.A. Patriot Act, the law empowers the government to shift the primary mission of the FBI from solving crimes to gathering domestic intelligence. In addition, the Treasury Department has been charged with building a financial intelligence-gathering system whose data can be accessed by the CIA.

Most significantly, the CIA will have the authority for the first time to influence FBI surveillance operations inside the United States and to obtain evidence gathered by federal grand juries and criminal wiretaps.

"We are going to have to get used to a new way of thinking," Assistant Attorney General Michael Chertoff, who is overseeing the investigation of the Sept. 11 attacks, said in an interview. "What we are going to have is a Federal Bureau of Investigation that combines intelligence with effective law enforcement."

The new law reflects how profoundly the attacks changed the nation's thinking about the balance between domestic security and civil liberties. The bill effectively tears down legal fire walls erected 25 years ago during the Watergate era, when the nation was stunned by disclosures about presidential abuses of domestic intelligence-gathering against political activists.

The overwhelming support in Congress shows that the nation's political leadership was persuaded that intelligence-gathering can no longer be restricted by the reforms that emerged out of a landmark 1975 Senate investigation.

After wading through voluminous evidence of intelligence abuses, a committee led by Sen. Frank Church warned that domestic intelligence-gathering was a "new form of governmental power" that was unconstrained by law, often abused by presidents and always inclined to grow.

One reform that grew out of the Church hearings was the segregation within the FBI of the bureau's criminal investigation function and its intelligence-gathering against foreign spies and international terrorists.

The new anti-terrorism legislation foreshadows an end to that separation by making key changes to the law underpinning it, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) of 1978.

"They have had to divide the world into the intelligence side and law enforcement," Chertoff said. The new law "should be a big step forward in changing the culture."

FISA allows the FBI to carry out wiretaps and searches that would otherwise be unconstitutional. Unlike regular FBI criminal wiretaps, known as Title IIIs, the goal is to gather intelligence, not evidence. To guard against abuse, the attorney general had to certify to a court that the "primary purpose" of the FISA wiretap was to listen in on a specific foreign spy or terrorist.

In negotiating the new legislation, the Bush administration asked for a lower standard for approval -- changing the words "primary purpose" to "a purpose." This would allow people merely suspected of working with terrorists or spies to be wiretapped.

The debate over this wording was one of the fiercest surrounding the new anti-terrorism law. Senate negotiators settled on the phrase "a significant purpose," which will still allow the Bush administration the leeway it wants, according toChertoff and others.

In passing the anti-terrorism law, congressional leaders were leery enough of the historical precedents to insist on a "sunset provision" that will cause the FISA amendment and other "enhanced surveillance" features to expire unless reenacted in 2005.

On the day the bill passed, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) the Senate negotiator of the bill, said on the Senate floor that he had reluctantly "acquiesced" to the Bush administration's demands for anti-terrorism powers that could be used to violate civil liberties.

"The bill enters new and uncharted territory by breaking down traditional barriers between law enforcement and foreign intelligence," said Leahy, who is chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Leahy said he expectedthe Justice Department to consult with the committee on any fundamental changes.

During the deliberations, Attorney General John D. Ashcroft characterized the anti-terrorism bill as a package of "tools" urgently needed to combat terrorism. The attorney general cut short his testimony before the Judiciary Committee, then declined to attend two additional Senate hearings for closer questioning.

Ashcroft declined to be interviewed for this story by The Washington Post.

The new law also gives the CIA unprecedented access to the most powerful investigative weapon in the federal law enforcement's arsenal: the federal grand jury. Grand juries have nearly unlimited power to gather evidence in secret, including testimony, wiretap transcripts, phone records, business records or medical records.

In the past, Rule 6(e) of the Rules of Federal Procedure required a court order whenever prosecutors shared federal grand jury evidence with other federal agencies.

The new law permits allows the FBI to give grand jury information to the CIA without a court order, as long as the information concerns foreign intelligence or international terrorism. The information can also be shared widely throughout the national security establishment.

"As long as the targets are non-Americans, they now can sweep up and distribute, without limitation, the information they gather about Americans," said Morton Halperin, a leading member of the civil liberties community and co-author of a legal text on national security law.

As a legal matter, the CIA is still prohibited from exercising domestic police powers or spying on U.S. citizens. However, its intelligence officers will work side by side with federal agents who do have arrest and domestic investigative authority.

Sen. Bob Graham (D-Fla.), chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, said the changes are long overdue and necessary to address the new terrorist threat.

"We are dealing with the issue of the empowerment of the Director of Central Intelligence," said Graham, who said he will carefully monitor how the new powers are used.

The new counterterrorism powers given to Treasury agencies breach another wall of the Church reforms, which consolidated domestic intelligence-gathering inside the FBI to ensure accountability. Treasury's expanded domestic intelligence role concerns some officials.

"I don't see how that is going to work," a senior U.S. official said. "I am worried about it -- I think we are getting an overreaction."

Technology is the key to harnessing the last and largest piece of the new domestic intelligence-gathering system, the nation's 600,000 police officers and detectives. In the new terrorism bill, Congress authorized a secure, nationwide communications system for the sharing of terrorism-related information with local police.

"Terrorists are a hybrid between domestic criminals and international agents," Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), a strong proponent of the bill, said in floor debate on Oct. 11.

"We must lower the barriers that discourage our law enforcement and intelligence agencies from working together to stop these terrorists. These hybrid criminals call for new hybrid tools."

© 2001 The Washington Post Company
washingtonpost.com



To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (43910)11/6/2001 1:54:12 AM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 65232
 
<<...As part of its psychological warfare against the Taliban, the U.S. military is dropping leaflets over Afghanistan showing a picture of Taliban leader Mullah Mohammed Omar in a set of crosshairs. The leaflet also shows a close-up photograph of the license tag from Omar's personal vehicle, also set against crosshairs. An unmanned drone has been tracking Omar and took the photographs, Pentagon sources said....>>

cnn.com



To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (43910)11/6/2001 2:35:15 AM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 65232
 
Fighting bin Ladenism

nytimes.com

By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
November 6, 2001
The New York Times

DOHA, Qatar -- If you want to know why the U.S. is hated in the Arab street, read the recent editorial in the semi-official Egyptian daily, Al Ahram, written by its editor, Ibrahim Nafie. After saying that the U.S. was deliberately making humanitarian food drops in areas of Afghanistan full of land mines, Mr. Nafie added: "Similarly, there were several reports that the [U.S.] humanitarian materials have been genetically treated, with the aim of affecting the health of the Afghan people. If this is true, the U.S. is committing a crime against humanity by giving the Afghan people hazardous humanitarian products."

This was an editorial written by Egypt's leading editor, personally appointed by President Hosni Mubarak. It basically accuses the U.S. of dropping poison food on Afghans — according to unspecified "reports." So is it any wonder that people on the Egyptian street hate us?

This is the game that produced bin Ladenism: Arab regimes fail to build a real future for their people. This triggers seething anger. Their young people who can get visas escape overseas. Those who can't turn to the mosque and Islam to protest. The regimes crush the violent Muslim protesters, but to avoid being accused of being anti-Muslim the regimes give money and free rein to their most hard-line, but nonviolent, Moslem clerics, while also redirecting their public's anger onto America through their press. Result: America ends up being hated and Islam gets handed over to the most anti-modern forces. Have a nice day.

What these Arab regimes still don't get is that Sept. 11 has exposed their game. They think America is on trial now, but in fact it is stale regimes like Egypt and Saudi Arabia, which produced the hijackers, that are on trial. Will they continue to let Islam be hijacked by anti-modernists, who will guarantee that the Arab world falls further behind? Will they continue to blame others? Or will they look in the mirror, take on intolerance, and open their societies to a different future?

Here's the good news: Some Arab-Muslim voices are popping up, rejecting the garbage peddled by the regimes. The London-based newspaper Al Hayat just published a letter from an Egyptian film critic, Samir Farid. It said: "I felt ashamed while reading most, if not all, of the commentary [on Sept. 11], primarily in the Egyptian press. . . . Most, if not all, of what I read proves that the poison of the undemocratic, military Arab regimes has also entered the bloodstream of the [intellectual] elite. These [people] no longer see . . . destruction for its own sake as disgraceful. What murky future awaits this region?"

Here in Qatar, on the Persian Gulf, Al Jazeera TV, the freest and most popular in the Arab world, recently ran a debate featuring the liberal Kuwaiti political scientist Shafeeq Ghabra versus an Islamist and a radical Arab nationalist. While the latter two tried to excuse Osama bin Laden, Mr. Ghabra hammered back: "The Lebanese civil war was not an American creation; neither was the Iran-Iraq war; neither was bin Laden. These are our creations. We need to look inside. We cannot be in this blame-others mode forever."

Dr. Abdelhameed al-Ansari, dean of Qatar University's law school, wrote in Al Raya: "How does a terrorist [bin Laden] become a hero? What is happening to the collective Arab outlook? What is happening to our famous Islamic scholars? . . . We should solve this problem from its roots. Education is the key."

While Arab leaders have refused to acknowledge any Palestinian responsibility for the stalemate with Israel, a few weeks ago the Jerusalem-based Palestinian leader Sari Nusseibeh had the guts to criticize Palestinian strategy: "We're telling the Israelis we want to kick you out: it's not that we want liberation, freedom and independence in the West Bank and Gaza, we want to kick you out of your home. And in order to make sure that the Israelis get the message, people go out to a disco or restaurant and blow themselves up. The whole thing is just crazy, ugly, totally counterproductive. The secret is to get Israelis to side with you. We lost our allies."

The Bush team should tell our Arab partners: Look, we don't need your bases or armies. We just need you to open your societies so the voices of those who want a different Arab future can really be heard. We'll take care of bin Laden — but you have to take care of bin Ladenism.

Copyright 2001 The New York Times Company



To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (43910)11/6/2001 10:56:29 AM
From: abstract  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 65232
 
is today the day greenspan is going to resign?