‘Is handing out fliers now considered a terrorist activity?’

The notion that Americans should trust the Bush administration to use its surveillance powers responsibly, and trust federal agencies not to abuse the rules, is getting harder and harder to believe.

An FBI counterterrorism unit monitored — and apparently infiltrated — a peace group in Pittsburgh that opposed the invasion of Iraq, according to internal agency documents released on Tuesday.

The disclosure raised new questions about the extent to which federal authorities have been conducting surveillance operations against Americans since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

In this instance, the ACLU released documents obtained from the Freedom of Information Act showing that the Joint Terrorism Task Force of the FBI’s Pittsburgh office conducted a secret investigation into the activities of the Thomas Merton Center beginning as early as November 2002, and continuing as late as March 2005.

Why? Because the group distributed fliers in opposition to the war in Iraq.

The report called the group a “left-wing organization advocating, among many political causes, pacifism.”

The same memo notes that one of the leaflet distributors “appeared to be of Middle Eastern descent” but that no other participants appeared to be from the Middle East.

“All we were doing was handing out leaflets, which is a perfectly legal way to spend an afternoon,” said Tim Vining, the center’s former executive director, who said he participated in the Nov. 24, 2002, protest monitored by the FBI. “All we want to do is exercise our First Amendment rights . . . Is handing out fliers now considered a terrorist activity?”

The ACLU contended that the documents are the first to “show conclusively” that an anti-war group was targeted for “its anti-war views.” “These documents show that Americans are not safe from secret government surveillance, even when they are handing out fliers in the town square, an activity clearly protected by the Constitution,” said Marty Catherine Roper, an ACLU staff attorney.

What strikes me as particularly odd about this is how much the Thomas Merton Center seems to emphasize pacifism. The group describes itself as being committed to a “nonviolent struggle” for peace. Indeed, the FBI’s report even highlighted the group’s advocacy of pacifism.

The whole surveillance effort seems to have been entirely unneccessary, but just on an ideological level, why send a counterterrorism unit after a group that doesn’t believe in violence?

Americans should be outraged!!!!
If our forefathers did not do these same “activities” we’d be answering to Tony Blair.
No wonder why we can’t find OSB, the FBI and CIA are lokking in the US for him!

  • why send a counterterrorism unit after a group that doesn’t believe in violence?

    The admin doesn’t want these peace-niks winning the hearts and minds of the American citizenry. If they did, how would the U.S. be able to continue the Long War?

  • I have just been living with the assumption that anyone who opposes the Bush regime in an open manner will be monitored to some extent. All those MoveOn petition I signed that were delivered to the White House probably got me in an FBI file of some sort.

    The efforts towards suppression of free-speech are unprecedented, both overt and covert. It seems as though we are slipping down the slow road to McCarthyism. If the Republicans retain their hold on the halls of Congress I wouldn’t be a bit surprised to see a revival of HUAC or something similar.

  • I really wanna know what the people are saying who are justifiing this whole sham. I don’t understand why these resources are not put to better use.

  • The same memo notes that one of the leaflet distributors “appeared to be of Middle Eastern descent”
    So the FBI is worried that someone from the Middle East is advocating peace in the Middle East?

    Obviously a terrorist…..

  • …why send a counterterrorism unit after a group that doesn’t believe in violence?

    Because somewhere in the FBI is a republican who:

    1) Now has the power to order the domestic spying.
    2) Regards all opponents to Bush as enemies of the state.

    It is pretty simple really.

    If you give people the power to behave partisan and irrational…. they will.

  • I think Marcus and Gridlock both have it right.

    If you speak out against the government these days, you get an FBI file. I already assume checks I write to groups, mailing lists I belong to, online petitions I sign, and my volunteer hours have all be cataloged by the FBI.

    Part of the reason we “lost” in Vietnam was the precipitous decline of public support, aided in part by “agitation” of anti-war groups. Bush and his cronies are trying hard to stop the peaceniks from derailing their Middle Eastern plans.

  • Why send them out against this gorup?

    Practice?

    Then again this is nothing new with the Sadministration. They had Iraq completely disarmed and unable to do anything and then attacked them. We like beating up those who can’t/won’t fight back. But they run away from countries and groups that can fight back.

  • It would be nice if the pansy-assed Democrats actually picked up on this. Of course, they won’t, because they still fear the Shrub and his pounding of the war drums…

  • What annoys me the most is that the Democrats aren’t picking up on this. If they are so convinced that the NSA program is being largely supported by the American people to the point that they’d rather let Feingold twist in the wind alone, surely you’d think these kind of actions (like those against the Quaker peace group) are stories simple enough for most Americans to recognize as out of bounds. Where are the hearings on this kind of spying on political opponents?

  • What kind of wackos are running the FBI nowadays?

    This is proof that there are a lot of cops who are very ideological and also very powerful.

    A very disturbing situation.

  • A friend of mine’s wife jointed the FBI a couple of years ago and was assigned to the Pittsburgh office roughly a year ago. I ran into them last June when they returned for a visit. I asked his wife what her assignment entailed. She said that primarily she monitors terrorists. I scoffed, but she insisted that Pittsburgh was in fact a hotbed of terrorist activity. I figured with two major universities, Pitt and Carnegie Mellon, and host of smaller universities and college, Pittsburgh was more a hotbed of Muslim students than terrorists. I didn’t argue the point with her, but now I must wonder what other Pittsburgh groups have attracted the attention of the FBI.
    ************************************************************************
    The same memo notes that one of the leaflet distributors “appeared to be of Middle Eastern descent”

    Get this straight. If you look like you’re from the middle east and distribute peace literature the FBI wants to know why. If you are a company owned by a middle eastern country and you buy US port operations in six cities, no big deal.

    .

  • rege,
    Don’t you know that the best cover a terrorist could have that doesn’t draw any attention to themselve is to join an organization that is openly critical of the government?
    It’s almost foolproof.

  • Muslim students…. Heh…

    I knew some engineering students about 15 or so years ago and saw one of their grad school projects… It was supposed to be housing. Looked like something from Adolf’s “Rebar and Portland Cement” phase… I imagine they went back home and implemented it…

  • They fear that people of “middle-eastern descent” may be committing themselves to non-violence!

    Bush is worried that when he starts his next war, nobody will come.

  • I’m worried that the next place that the islamic nutjobs target will be in flyover country, where I live… You guys, and your culture of death, would probably be dancing in the streets – at least until they hit the coasts again.

  • Comments are closed.