[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: (erielack) Re: CNN interview.



On Thu, 4 Aug 2005, Joshua wrote:

> I was wondering if there would have been more to the story if the plane
> crash in Toronto hadn't happened, I honestly thought there would be more
> to it (the bit on railfanning).

That's sort of how I felt too. It seemed to be edited for time and I bet it
lost a lot of what we wanted to see discussed.

Anyone who has read a full account of Randy and Paul's whole debacle has to
feel that it was short shrifted in Paul's piece.

Here's the transcript of that segment from
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0508/03/pzn.01.html

Form your own opinion from the below.

Henry

>>>>>

Now on to our own security watch series "Safe at Home." I want to be secure
from terrorists. Don't we all? But when we hear that the government can come
into our homes without telling us and search through our stuff, well, that
might make you stop and think. It turns out, there are a lot of surprising
powers the federal government has as a result of 9/11, as we hear from justice
correspondent Kelli Arena. 

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) KELLI ARENA, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Paul
Burgess and Randy Olson are train enthusiasts and amateur photographers. So
it's no surprise that one of their favorite pastimes is taking pictures of
trains. 

PAUL BURGESS, AMATEUR PHOTOGRAPHER: That was Hiawatha service from Milwaukee. 

ARENA: Which is exactly what they were doing one day about seven months ago on
this very platform in suburban Chicago when they were confronted and detained
by police, their car searched and their names and information checked against
terrorist databases. 

BURGESS: There was a crowd of people standing here staring at us. We're up
against a police car. We're not handcuffed. There's two armed officers
standing in front of us telling us that we could be placed in federal
detention. 

ARENA: While it usually doesn't go this far, police officers do have the right
to question you and will if you are taking pictures of transportation systems
or bridges or other infrastructure. In fact, as CNN was shooting video for
this story, our cameraman was stopped and questioned by authorities. 

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (cop): I was just trying to find out who you were with. 

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (from the camera crew, sounded angry): I told you who we're
with. 

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (cop): Right, OK. 

ARENA: As attacks in both London and Madrid have made obvious, trains and
subways are attractive targets for terrorists, and terrorists often conduct
early surveillance by taking photos. 

Burgess and Olson understand that concern, but don't think stopping
photographers will help. 

RANDY OLSON, AMATEUR PHOTOGRAPHER: Examine the passengers' baggages. Two rail
fans taking pictures on a platform, no. Guys getting on, looking suspicious
with, you know, oversized suitcases, maybe you should stop and look at them,
you know?

ARENA: Photography isn't the only hobby that could result in a confrontation
with law enforcement. Ken Kurtis owns a dive shop in Los Angeles. He received
a subpoena from the government in 2002 asking for customer information going
back three years. 

KEN KURTIS, DIVE SHOP OWNER: It was incredibly broad. It was incredibly
unfocused, and, from that standpoint, in my opinion, going to be incredibly
unproductive. 

ARENA: Intelligence at the time suggested terrorists might be planning an
underwater attack. And agents have the right to request business records while
conducting terrorism investigations. Kurtis refused to comply with the
subpoena and filed suit. And officials voluntarily backed off. But many other
dive businesses did provide information, deciding security trumped their
customers' privacy.

Most Americans are intimately aware of post-9/11 restrictions when they travel
on airplanes, for example, taking off your shoes, going through metal
detectors, showing your I.D. But most are probably not as familiar with new
aggressive laws and practices that law enforcement and the federal government
are now using in the war on terror. 

Did you know, for example, that someone accused of plotting a terrorist attack
can be held indefinitely if the president says so? The president, as commander
in chief, can detain people allegedly fighting for the enemy. 

(on camera): Jose Padilla got off a plane here, at Chicago's O'Hare Airport.
His feet barely touched the ground before he was taken into custody, the
attorney general alleging that he was involved in a plot to set off a dirty
bomb in the United States. But Padilla was never charged. Instead, he was
declared an enemy combatant and has been in military custody for more than
three years. Padilla is a U.S. citizen. 

(voice-over): Most enemy combatants are held overseas and are not U.S.
citizens. The government argues Padilla's capture in the United States and
subsequent detention are legal because al Qaeda made the U.S. a battlefield
when it attacked New York and Washington on 9/11. Padilla's lawyers filed
suit, arguing the government should charge him and present its evidence in a
court of law. 

DONNA NEWMAN, ATTORNEY FOR JOSE PADILLA: What the government has done is not
only tried Mr. Padilla in the media before the public, they have charged him
and been the jury. How convenient, except that it is such a violation of our
Constitution that it is egregious. 

ARENA: The FBI's new mandate to prevent terror attacks has raised other
constitutional questions. 

Did you know, for example, that your home could be search without you ever
knowing if the government thinks you are a national security risk? Well,
federal agents thought Brandon Mayfield was. Armed with a court order, they
took 10 DNA samples, 335 digital photographs, searched his computer hard
drives and wiretapped his home. 

Mayfield had no idea until almost a year later. At the time, authorities
thought Mayfield's fingerprints matched those found near the scene of the
Madrid bombings last year, a good enough reason for a judge to sanction the
government's actions. Later, the FBI admitted the prints did not match. And
Mayfield is now suing. 

GERRY SPENCE, BRANDON MAYFIELD'S ATTORNEY: You don't want to have people
walking into your house and violating your Fourth Amendment rights against
unreasonable searches. That's what it's about. ARENA: Did you know that FBI
agents have the authority to not only enter your home, but can enter your
church, synagogue, mosque, or political meeting to gather information? Well,
they can. Because, John Ashcroft relaxed FBI guidelines after 9/11. But many
agents say they won't, without a good reason. 

KEVIN PERKINS, BALTIMORE FBI OFFICE DIR: I think what the public needs to know
that any type of investigative technique along those lines, there is
significant oversight by either -- by a judicial body, perhaps by Congress,
perhaps by the inspector general's office. 

ARENA: Kevin Perkins runs the FBI's Baltimore Field Office. With a major port
and its proximity to the nation's capital, he says he doesn't have the
resources or the desire to spy on law-abiding citizens. 

PERKINS: We have to have a real specific reason why we do things we do. 

ARENA: Case in point, under the Patriot Act, the government has the power,
with a court order, to demand a library hand over a list of books you've
borrowed, or Web sites you visited on computers there. Well so far, it's a
power officials say they have not used. 

Just as the public is getting used to the new powers, Congress is considering
even more changes such as giving the FBI the ability to get records from
hotels, schools and other businesses in terror investigations without even
going before a judge and broader authority to examine the outside of letters
or packages mailed to people connected to terror investigations. It's all
supposed to make us safer. 

PERKINS: I have to know that stopping a terrorist attack is my number one
goal. But at the same time, protecting people and their civil rights is very
important to me. 

ARENA: Still, some, like photographer Paul Burgess are concerned about what
the future may hold. 

BURGESS: It's the old argument of the slippery slope. And I know people tend
to laugh things off, and say, well, that can never happen. But you know, if
you look at the history of police states, most of them are incrementalists. 

ARENA: Burgess says ultimately Americans have to speak up like he did if they
think the government is going too far. 

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ZAHN: And that was Kelli Arena. 

So, do you think the government is going too far? Well, according to a new
CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll a lot of you do. When we asked if the government
should be allowed to indefinitely hold U.S. citizens suspected of terrorism,
three-quarters of you said no. But that's exactly what happened to suspected
dirty bomber Jose Padilla. When we asked if it should be easier for
authorities to read your mail or tap your phone without your knowledge, almost
three-quarters of you said no to that, too. 

And then, should the government be able to find out what books you checked out
from the library? 60 percent oppose that. But it's a power that law
enforcement already has. 



	The Erie Lackawanna Mailing List
	Sponsored by the ELH&TS
	http://www.elhts.org

------------------------------