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.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Lane3 who wrote (16614)11/18/2003 8:36:43 AM
From: Lane3  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793671
 
washingtonpost.com
FBI Curbed In Tracking Gun Buyers
Brady Law Policy Foils Watch List

By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, November 18, 2003; Page A01

The FBI has launched a new background-check system that notifies counterterrorism agents when suspects on its terrorist watch list attempt to buy guns, but regulations prohibit those officials from obtaining details if the transaction occurs, according to federal officials familiar with the system.

If the purchase is blocked, however, the FBI is permitted to investigate the person who attempted to buy the weapon.

The result, according to the officials, is an awkward situation in which terrorism suspects who do not complete gun purchases may be located but those toting lawfully purchased weapons may not be sought.

More than a dozen suspects on the FBI's terrorist watch list have attempted to buy guns since the system was implemented this spring, officials said. Authorities have declined to say how many succeeded.

The rules are the result of Attorney General John D. Ashcroft's interpretation of the Brady gun-control law, according to Justice Department officials, who said they are simply abiding by the federal firearms background-check system the statute established. The law bars authorities from sharing information with investigators about legal gun buyers and does not prohibit terrorism suspects from buying firearms, officials said.

"Being a suspected member of a terrorist organization doesn't disqualify a person from owning a gun any more than being under investigation for a non-terrorism felony would," a Justice Department official said in a written statement

Gun-control advocates said the rules endanger Americans by giving suspected terrorists an opportunity to evade scrutiny while obtaining weapons. The situation also has frustrated many law enforcement officials eager to monitor the whereabouts and activities of suspected terrorist operatives and their associates.

"This policy is mind-boggling," said Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg (D-N.J.), who has frequently clashed with Ashcroft on gun issues. "We could have a nationwide lookout for a known terrorist within our borders, but if he obtained a weapon, the Justice Department's policy is to refuse to reveal his location to law enforcement officials."

Officials have declined to reveal how many terrorism suspects were able to buy weapons. It is also difficult to determine precisely how the system works because Justice and FBI officials have refused to provide details about it.

Congressional staff members who were briefed on the situation last month were told that at least 13, and as many as 21, suspects on the watch list tried to buy firearms since the system was established. Two law enforcement sources said subsequently that the correct number is 13 and that all had been suspected of links to terrorist groups, not domestic gangs.

When someone on the watch list attempts to buy a weapon, the FBI is allowed to search for additional reasons -- such as a previous conviction or mental illness -- to deny a purchase and investigate further, the Justice Department official said. But it can do no more unless such an indicator is found, the official said.

Ashcroft, who has presided over an expansion of law enforcement powers in the effort to prevent terrorism, has enforced a relatively narrow interpretation of the Brady law. The law is named for James Brady, the press secretary wounded in the 1981 assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan.

Ashcroft, a longtime National Rifle Association member, has also altered the government's legal view of the Second Amendment by asserting that an individual's right to possess a firearm is not tied to the maintenance of state militias.

Shortly after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, Ashcroft's advisers stopped the FBI from comparing a list of Sept. 11-related detainees against a list of approved gun purchasers. They said that under the Brady law, the Justice Department is prohibited from using such records for law enforcement purposes. Before it was interrupted, the search had resulted in two matches, sources said at the time.

A Congressional Research Service report released earlier this year found that U.S. gun laws could be exploited easily by terrorists, who can obtain firearms and explosives by taking advantage of delays and loopholes in the system. An al Qaeda training manual recovered by U.S. forces in Afghanistan included a chapter noting the ease with which firearms can be obtained in the United States and urged followers to "obtain an assault rifle legally, preferably an AK-47 or variations, learn how to use it properly and go and practice in the areas allowed for such training."

AK-47 rifles are prohibited under the current ban on assault weapons, but numerous copycat models are available legally.

At the heart of the Brady law is the National Instant Criminal Background Checks System (NICS), a section of the FBI with offices in West Virginia that reviews gun purchases made through federally licensed firearms dealers. The dealer transmits a form to NICS, which runs a computerized check to make sure the applicant is not a member of several categories prohibited from buying guns. These include felons, illegal immigrants, convicted domestic abusers and those found by a court to be mentally ill.

Many of the files accessed during these checks are contained in the FBI's overall criminal database, the National Crime Information Center, which also contains lists that are not used in the gun purchase process. The Violent Gang and Terrorist Organization File contains more than 10,000 names, most of them belonging to suspected terrorists or their alleged sympathizers and associates, officials said.

When NICS runs a search on an attempted gun purchaser whose name is on the gang and terror list, the FBI or another federal agency responsible for entering that name is notified and is able to contact an anti-terrorism team at NICS, sources said. If the person was denied the ability to purchase a firearm, the agency is free to seek records of the transaction, these sources said.

If the person was allowed to buy a firearm, NICS is generally prohibited under Justice rules from providing the FBI or any other agency with information about the transaction, including where it occurred and what personal information was provided on the purchase application, officials said.

The most the FBI can do in such cases is to confirm whether the purchaser is the same person listed on the terrorist watch list and attempt to determine if any incidents have been overlooked that should have prohibited the person from buying a firearm.

The FBI frequently does not know the whereabouts of terror associates listed in the gang and terror watch list, which means that learning where a firearm was bought and what address the purchaser provided could be extremely helpful to counterterrorism investigators, several law enforcement officials said.

"It's obviously frustrating for law enforcement in that kind of situation," one official said. "But we're just following the rules set by DOJ. . . . We can't get in the middle of it."

NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam said he could not comment on the details of the NICS process. But he said it was doubtful that most terrorist groups would bother to buy legal firearms for use in an attack.

"We support any effort that would prevent firearms from getting into the hands of terrorists," Arulanandam said. "But it is also misguided for anyone to think that gang members or terrorists are somehow en masse going through legal means to purchase their firearms. Most of these firearms are obtained through the black market."

Gun-control advocates disagree about the risks, pointing to the instructions found in the al Qaeda manual and to other incidents that have indicated terrorists have an interest in U.S. guns. After the Sept. 11 attacks, the FBI arrested a Michigan felon who bought weapons at a gun show for the Hezbollah militant group and, in another case, charged a Seattle man for allegedly attempting to set up an al Qaeda firearms training camp in rural Oregon.

Eric Howard, spokesman for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said Ashcroft's interpretation of the Brady law is overly narrow and inhibits the ability of the FBI and other law enforcement agencies to monitor and prevent terrorism. Investigators should be allowed to have access to basic information about gun purchases by terror suspects, he said.

© 2003 The Washington Post Company



To: Lane3 who wrote (16614)11/18/2003 11:45:16 AM
From: LindyBill  Respond to of 793671
 
A surprising jog to the right
By John Leo
US News and World Report


"We're not losing" isn't much of a battle cry, but an article in the policy magazine City Journal with that modest message is attracting a lot of attention. The article, "We're Not Losing the Culture Wars Anymore" by senior editor Brian Anderson, argues that the left's near monopoly in the entertainment and news media is "skidding to a startlingly swift halt."


Much of Anderson's evidence--the rise of Fox News, talk radio, and conservative bloggers--is familiar, but the article argues that a corner has been turned and the culture war is a far more even struggle now. This news may come as a shock to conservatives. It's certainly a shock to Tim Noah, a liberal commentator at Slate. Noah read Anderson's article, watched as the Reagan miniseries was pulled, then wrote glumly that the right has won the culture wars.

Hardly. The liberal worldview still dominates the news business, the arts, the entertainment world, publishing, the campuses, and all levels of schooling. It's the media and educational status quo. But five years ago, CBS probably could have gotten away with a cheap-shot miniseries on the Reagans. Now it can't. This is partly because of market forces, as conservative columnist Robert Bartley and liberal columnist Richard Reeves both pointed out. Reeves called the miniseries "commercially insane." Large conservative audiences no longer accept many liberal products, so those products are adapted or abandoned. The other reason for the ditching of the Reagan miniseries is that the conservative media world is now good at gang tackling. From Matt Drudge's Drudge Report (which framed the issue of the miniseries) to Fox, the bloggers, talk radio hosts, and the columnists, everybody piled on. New York Times columnist David Brooks touched on this point some time ago, writing that the new conservative media have "cohered to form a dazzlingly efficient ideology delivery system that swamps liberal efforts to get their ideas out." For liberals, this is an ominous development.

The unfamiliar part of Anderson's article is the rising conservative impact on pop culture. In comedy, it's not just Dennis Miller, the first major comedian fully identified with the right. On cable, conservative humor--or at least, antiliberal humor--pops up all the time. Colin Quinn, like Miller a veteran of Saturday Night Live, skewers liberal pieties regularly on Comedy Central's popular Tough Crowd. I once asked a thoughtful liberal friend: "Why does the message of the left seem to penetrate the whole of pop culture?" His answer--"We make the culture; you don't"--doesn't seem so obvious now.

New paradigm. The showpiece of antiliberal humor is one that appalls a good many conservatives: South Park, Comedy Central's wildly popular cartoon saga of four crude and incredibly foul-mouthed little boys. The show mocks mindless lefty celebrities and takes swipes at the gay lobby and the abortion lobby. Some examples: Getting Gay With Kids is a homosexual choir that descends on the school. And the mother of one South Parker decides she wants to abort him ("It's my body"), despite the fact that he's 8 years old. The weekly disclaimer on the show says it is so offensive "it should not be viewed by anyone." This is a new paradigm in pop culture: Conventional liberalism is the old, rigid establishment. The antiliberals are brash, funny, and cool. Who would have thought?

Some of the new conservative success is due to the rise of a large crop of commentators the left has not been able to match. Mostly young and often very funny, they include Mark Steyn, Jonah Goldberg, Michelle Malkin, and Jeff Jacoby. But most of the conservative gains have been in new media. Fox News's large audience skews young, and half its viewers are either liberal or centrist. So Fox isn't just preaching to the choir. It's exposing nonconservatives to conservative ideas.


As mentioned here several times, the "blogosphere"--the world of Internet commentators--tilts strongly to the right. Bloggers like Andrew Sullivan, Mickey Kaus, and Glenn Reynolds of instaPundit have a heavy impact. No excess of the liberal media seems to escape their attention. Among other things, they have mercilessly attacked Paul Krugman, the New York Times columnist and idol of America's angriest liberals. It has been an amazing and, I think, largely successful campaign of informed detraction.

It was obvious that the democratization of the media would bring new voices into the field, but who knew that so many of those voices would be conservative, libertarian, or just cantankerously opposed to entrenched liberal doctrine? The conservative side is far from winning the culture wars, but the debate is broader and fairer now. The near monopoly is over.
usnews.com