September 17, 2004
-
Not long ago, I wrote about how librarians seemed to be the last people in American civil life who really get what's going on in terms of our erosion of civil liberties. Wired news has picked up the meme: 'Don't Mess With Librarians'
[..]
She worries that a researcher could check out a book on Islam and suddenly end up on the no-fly list, forced to take the Greyhound with Teddy Kennedy for the rest of her life. Or an HIV-positive teen living in a conservative community could be outed after reading about the disease. If this sounds far-fetched, two years ago, in Punta Gorda, Florida, a British man was arrested in a public library after visiting websites that posted material on mineral supplements and the world's first chemical generator of electricity, the Baghdad Battery.
"In a democracy, citizens can access information they view as important," West said, "and traditionally we as librarians have kept it private. We are in favor of free speech and against censorship, and believe in the right to research material without the government looking over your shoulder."
Update: For libby's benefit, I'm going to quote another section of the article:
What got many librarians' dander up was Section 215 of the law, which stipulates that government prosecutors and FBI agents can seek permission from a secret court created under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to access personal records -- everything from medical histories to reading habits. They don't need a subpoena. In fact, they don't need to show that a crime has even been committed. And librarians, stymied by a gag order, are forbidden to tell anyone (except a lawyer).
See where it says MANY librarians? Here's the American Library Association web site's issues and advocacy page. See the section about USA PATRIOT? Read up. Librarians everywhere are concerned about this.
And, you see that section about 'government prosecutors and FBI agents can seek permission from a secret court?' They don't need a subpoena.
Like I said: Either you value freedom and liberty or you don't. If someone can show me how handing over library card records of arbitrary individuals to secret courts and prosecutors can make America safer, then we can have that discussion. But no one has shown that. It's just one of those things that seems like it might, someday, somehow, help someone catch some terrorist. And golly gee, how many terrorists *have* we caught lately? People are getting out of Guantanamo one after the other, for having been wrongfully detained. The Taliban's back in control of Afghanistan. Al Qaeda is now in Iraq, where it wasn't previously, before Bush invaded. But gag rules against librarians from secret courts with no subpoenas are supposed to make me safer?
I remember the first federal bust made after 9/11. How did the Justice Department bring the terrorists to justice? By busting some medical marijuana growers who were totally within their rights in California. That's right, Ashcroft decided that federal law was more important than state laws on the issue, and that busting some small-time pot growers was a more important allocation of resources than FINDING AL QAEDA MEMBERS. His personal grudge against the medical marijuana issue took precedence over the CURRENT NATIONAL EMERGENCY.
And this is the guy we want to trust with secret courts and subpoena-free gag rules? You can bet he'll keep his job if Bush ends up president again.
Comments (8)
I get so angry with people who minimize this threat.
So I looked up the Punta Gorda story. The man was arrested not only because he was researching minerals, but he was acting suspiciously and he was carrying unknown chemicals in his backpack. When arrested, he gave a false name, and it turned out he had been illegally in this country since his visa expired in 1991. All in all, a good day for law enforcement.
The theory of not allowing gov't to view records that are not sealed by any court of law, documenting the public use of public goods, and information that can be observed simply by standing outside a library, completely escapes me. Since when did librarians become the Fifth Estate?
You miss the point, 'thatliberalmedia.' This story is much larger than that single case. Either you believe in the American values of liberty and freedom, or you don't, and it's plenty apparent that John Ashcroft doesn't.
Great rebuttal.
I mean who can deny the quality of a response that makes a point and refuses to defend it?
I mean the intellectual honesty involved in quoting an obviously deeply biased woman spinning a victory for law enforcement into harassment.
And naturally, u fail to express why library records should be considered private in the first place.
You're a joke.
Homer The Brave Said: "Either you believe in the American values of liberty and freedom, or you don't, and it's plenty apparent that John Ashcroft doesn't."
Sounds sorta' like the "You're either with us or against us in the fight against terror." black and white mentality you decried earlier Homer. That's kinda' amusing.
Some things *are* black and white, sej.
Good to see you and The President agree on soemthing.
trust is an inappropriate word here.
Comments are closed.