Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Politics : The Donkey's Inn -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mephisto who wrote (1183)	11/27/2001 1:59:15 AM
From: Mephisto	Respond to of 15516

Foes turn up heat on Ashcroft Jules Witcover Baltimore Sun Originally published Nov 26, 2001 WASHINGTON - Attorney General John Ashcroft found himself in a somewhat ironic situation the other day when he presided over the naming of the Justice Department building in honor of one of his predecessors in the job with whom he has little in common - the late Robert F. Kennedy. Mr. Ashcroft likes to compare his approach toward the war on terrorism with Kennedy's own war against Mafia kingpins and labor tough guys like Jimmy Hoffa, saying he intends to get terrorist suspects off the streets the way he says Kennedy dealt with the hoods: by catching them in any minor violation of law. But that's where the comparison ends. Mr. Ashcroft's record as a state attorney general, Missouri governor and senator in the realm of civil rights, where Robert Kennedy made a much more lasting contribution to American life than as a crime-fighter, obliged him to stand on his head disavowing his past during contentious Senate confirmation hearings last winter. The large Kennedy clan, pleased at the dedication of the building and willing to swallow the temporary discomfort of Mr. Ashcroft trying to don the mantle of their lost kin even temporarily, sat and politely applauded the incumbent attorney general's remarks of praise. As one of them said later, "The building will be there long after he will." But Mr. Ashcroft played host to the event at a time he is under increasing fire for his actions as the nation's chief law-enforcement officer. His latest decision to eavesdrop on certain conversations between suspected terrorists or associates detained and not charged with any crime has many legal scholars declaring the order to be unconstitutionally in violation of client-attorney privilege. One of Kennedy's daughters, Kerry Kennedy Cuomo, seemed to allude to the matter at another event on the same day as the building dedication, saying to her own daughter, "Cara, if anyone tries to tell you this is the type of justice your grandpa would embrace, don't you believe it." Others recall, however, that Kennedy as attorney general did authorize FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover to wiretap Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. on national security grounds when Hoover suspected the civil rights leader of associations with Communists during the Red Scare days. But Kennedy redeemed himself in the eyes of civil rights advocates with his record against racial discrimination. There are other raps against Mr. Ashcroft and his attitude toward civil liberties. His recent ruling against the so-called assisted suicide law in Oregon inspired a large ad in the New York Times by the Hemlock Society, self-described as "the nation's oldest and largest organization advocating death with dignity." The ad says: "Intolerance comes in many forms. Attorney General John Ashcroft just arbitrarily decreed that terminally ill Americans cannot choose physician aide [sic] in dying. If his action stands, no hopelessly ill American in any state will be able to get physician help for a dignified death. This is an unwarranted and cruel intrusion into the private lives and personal choices of all Americans." In another Oregon case, Portland's acting chief of police, Andrew Kirkland, has decided to buck Mr. Ashcroft by announcing he will not help the FBI question 200 Middle Eastern immigrants as part of the war on terrorism. The acting chief has invoked a state law that he says prohibits such interrogation of immigrants not suspected of having committed a crime. This same matter of ethnic or racial profiling is being opposed in legislation co-sponsored by Democratic Sen. Russell Feingold of Wisconsin, a liberal who nevertheless provided the deciding vote that moved Mr. Ashcroft's nomination as attorney general to the Senate floor last winter. President Bush himself has gone out of his way to urge Americans not to engage in racial or ethnic profiling and has taken commendable action to shield Muslims from harassment by hosting a large group of Islamic leaders at the White House and visiting a major Islamic mosque. But civil libertarians are plainly concerned that he has a loose cannon running the Justice Department, which has such a critical role to play in the war on terrorism, especially on the home front. Jules Witcover writes from The Sun's Washington bureau. Copyright © 2001, The Baltimore Sun sunspot.net

To: Mephisto who wrote (1183)	11/27/2001 1:24:14 PM
From: Karen Lawrence	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 15516

Portland Oregon officials refuse Ashcroft's request for help: oregonlive.com Terrorism questions meet legal challenges 11/27/01 MAXINE BERNSTEIN Portland City Attorney Jeffrey Rogers said Monday that federal authorities have narrowed the list of questions that they want police to ask foreign visitors in a form that may comply with state law and allow Portland police participation. "Many of the questions we objected to are not in the new list," Rogers said Monday. "It's a very favorable development and is narrowing substantially the areas of concern we have." The Portland Police Bureau last week, on advice from the city attorney's office, became the first agency in the nation to refuse U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft's request for help in interviewing approximately 5,000 foreign visitors in a national anti-terrorism campaign. The decision was based on legal advice from Portland's Deputy City Attorney David Lesh, who concluded that a 1987 state law restricted police from collecting certain information that Ashcroft had sought from 5,000 foreign visitors who came to the United States in the past two years from countries harboring terrorists. But Rogers signaled that federal agents ultimately may get the assistance of Portland police should all the city's legal concerns be addressed. The city received a new list of questions Monday that, according to Rogers, originated from the U.S. Department of Justice and is entitled "Anti-Terrorism Task Force -- Suggested Topics for Interviews." The new list does not contain many of the questions that Portland had objected to as being too intrusive and broad. "It appears that a number of the unlawful questions have been removed," Rogers said. "It's come a long way." Oregon law restricts law enforcement from collecting or maintaining information on any individual or group unless the information relates to criminal activity and there are reasonable grounds to suspect that the subject of the information is or may be involved in criminal conduct. The following questions that Portland had objected to are not on the new federal list of suggested questions: Seeking telephone numbers of the individual, family member or close associate; what foreign countries a person visited, the dates of the visit and reason for the visit; and whether the person or anybody they know had ever visited Afghanistan. Portland city attorneys thought Ashcroft initially had asked officers to inquire into a "number of areas beyond the subject's knowledge of past, current or future criminal activity." "It is these areas of inquiry that raised my concern," Rogers said. The people identified for questioning are mostly Middle Eastern men between the ages of 18 and 33 and have come to the United States on student, work or tourist visas in the past two years from countries that are known to harbor terrorists. Federal officials said the voluntary interviews are aimed at collecting information to help prevent future terrorist attacks and said the people on the lists are not criminal suspects. No one could be reached Monday night from the U.S. Department of Justice. U.S. Attorney Michael Mosman has defended the federal line of questioning, calling it legal and appropriate. The state Legislative Counsel's office has supported Portland's reading of state law, and the state attorney general's office is expected to issue its own opinion today after evaluating the new federal list of suggested questions. Meanwhile, Multnomah County District Attorney Michael Schrunk has also weighed in on the legal debate. In a memo the city received Monday, Schrunk disagreed with Portland's reading of state law. Under Schrunk's interpretation, police can conduct the interviews because the subject of the investigation -- terrorist threats against the United States -- does constitute a crime even though the people being questioned are not criminal suspects. "We see no requirement that the actual interviewee must be suspected of criminal activity before he could be interviewed," Schrunk wrote, in an opinion forwarded to the city. Schrunk likened the questioning to any police criminal investigation in which officers routinely question friends or family members who may have information on a crime but are not criminal suspects. Since Portland's original decision was announced last week, the mayor's office has received 150 calls and 300 e-mails, while the Police Bureau recorded at least 100 calls. Reaction in Oregon seemed split, while 90 percent of the out-of-state contacts criticized the decision, city officials and police said. Mayor Vera Katz and Police Chief Mark Kroeker seemed surprised by the strong reactions and have tried to stress that the decision was based on law, not public opinion. "I understand the intensity of this discussion is driven by the intensity of the attack on this country," Kroeker said. "Emotions are running on very extreme levels." Among those praising the decision were seven Oregon Muslim groups who wrote a letter and Beaverton resident Vicki Bartholomew who wrote, "I have to applaud the police for standing up to profiling." But some offered scathing criticisms. "What a foolish position to take and inflict on Portland. Please correct this provincial arrogance," Portland resident Peter Mozena wrote.