Reading your mail, too

January 10, 2006

Under the guise of a war on terror, the Bush administration has decided it can intercept phone calls and emails without a warrant. Apparently, snail mail is fair game too.

U.S. officials are opening personal mail that arrives from abroad when they deem it necessary to protect the country from terrorism, a Customs and Border Protection spokeswoman said Monday. […]

“Customs and Border Protection is charged with making sure that terrorists and terrorists’ weapons don’t enter the country,” said Suzanne Trevino, a spokeswoman for the customs agency, which is part of the Department of Homeland Security.

“One of our areas of responsibility is to inspect international mail coming into our country,” she said. “We respect privacy and always keep that at the forefront, but at the same time we need to make sure we do our job in keeping U.S. citizens safe.”

I’m trying to be open minded about this. If a package is coming into the country from North Korea, and it’s ticking, I think it’s fair to say that officials can and should open it. If a package is arriving by way of Iran and it appears to be leaking some kind of suspicious white powder, by all means, give it serious and immediate scrutiny.

But the problem is that Bush’s Department of Homeland Security seems to use vague standards for its mail-opening program. The Reuters report noted a letter that an 81-year-old retired history professor received from a long-time colleague in the Philippines. Before it was delivered, Customs agents opened it, screened it, resealed it, and then sent it to its destination.

“It was a big surprise,” Goodman, who taught at the University of Kansas, told Reuters. “The public should know that this is being done. Nobody whom I know had any idea that this was going on. And as far as I know, it’s never been announced. It’s never been revealed that this is being done.”

No warrant, no notice, no suspicion of wrongdoing. It’s just the federal government reading your mail — just in case.

At a minimum I thionk they should have to put a note in the mail they search stating they opened it and looked at it. The TSA puts a slip in your suitcase if it gets searched at the airport. Why not do it for the mail too? At least we would have some idea of who’s mail and what kind of mail is being searched.

  • Let me understand this. If I’m Senator Xyz from the Great “Blue” State of ABC and I get a letter from a correspondent in Iraq, then the Homeland Security “might” be reading my mail. And this is okay?

    Yeah, that’s what I thought….

  • Second thought on this…Could they justify looking at absentee ballot envelopes coming in from overseas? I could make an argument that sneding anthrax to an election official would be a good way to disrupt a US election. Is it therefore justified? If they state they will not search these envelopes are they telling the terrorists how to hurt America? It is far-fetched but I really would not put it past these guts.

  • Hello,
    Mail / packages coming into the US are crossing the border and need to go through customs. When I carry my packages in my car, in my suitcase, on the train, whatever – and I’m at the border, customs can choose to search.

    How is mail different?

    There are laws which restrict the amount of currency / products which you can bring into the country. There are restrictions on the types of products for a variety of purposes (safety, agricultural — don’t want to let cankor into Florida now, etc).

    Also, I suspect this authority and practice was alive and well in the Clinton days, and probably stepped up after 9/11.

    Best Regards

  • Last month Goodman, an 81-year-old retired University of Kansas history professor, received a letter from his friend in the Philippines that had been opened and resealed with a strip of dark green tape bearing the words “by Border Protection” and carrying the official Homeland Security seal.

    This is from the MSNBC web site. I think the fact that this was not done surrepticiouosly makes all the difference. Since you would know that the mail was opened, you can seek relief if you thought it was done so illegally. This should be contrasted with the extra-FISA spying which has been done surrepticiously.

  • So how long before they admit to “accidentally” opening and inspecting domestic mail? I’m sure W. will defend the mail snooping and say that federal government just doesn’t have the technology to tell the difference between domestic and international mail.

  • Last month Goodman, an 81-year-old retired University of Kansas history professor, received a letter from his friend in the Philippines that had been opened and resealed with a strip of dark green tape bearing the words “by Border Protection” and carrying the official Homeland Security seal.

    This is from the MSNBC web site. I think the fact that this was not done surrepticiously makes all the difference. Since you would know that the mail was opened, you can seek relief if you thought it was done so illegally. This should be contrasted with the extra-FISA spying which has been done surreptitiously.

    Sorry, I have gotten the hang of “Previewing” yet. There is a spelling error and the link is wrong in the previous post.

  • prm,
    Do you accidentally get put through customs when you fly domestically?

    Give me a break, guys. How can we gripe about not securing the ports when you want to leave the international “mail port” wide open?

  • This isn’t a shock to me. I would have assumed some basic “random” or “suspicious” allowances for inspecting foreign mail.

    Though, much like when my bag gets searched when I fly, I expect to be notified when it happens. That can be a stamp on the envelope (or green tape) or an insert alerting me that my package has been inspected, and then the letter continues it’s way to my box.

    Reading my mail is different. I’m not living in a fucking prison (last I checked), and that is bullshit. Once you are reading my mail, pigs, you might as well photocopy it and put it in my secret file along with my keystroke recordings…

  • Ok Mr Furios,
    I checked out your website. That baby bush toys link is hilarious, I haven’t had a good laugh like that in awhile.

    http://misterfurious.blogspot.com/2005/12/kids-on-christmas-holiday-shopping.html

    I agree there’s a difference between inspecting and reading. There’s also a difference between searching a suitcase and having a “fetish-like” enjoyment of fondling suitcase contents.

    I don’t think these are “Administration” issues, but very low level firable offense types of inspector issues (when you get an “overzealous” inspector).

    I guess my main problem is, harping on cases like this – where a reasonable case can be made for needing customs searching with the NSA case where there’s blatant violation of FISA laws doesn’t do our cause any good.

    Regards

  • I’m with My dog Alex. As the story stands, this is small potatoes and a distraction from bigger issues. By hammering on this we lose credibility on the extra-FISA spying. It would be wise not to let our distain for Bush to get in the way of our enlightenment principles:empiricism and rationality. Once we start down the road of irrational hatred we lose an important distinction with the freepers.

  • Not all border inspections are for nuclear weapons.

    I guess the whole Anthrax thing didn’t happen. I guess we don’t need to look for possible biological agents.

    When I come in through customs, I’m subject to search, my bags / possesions subject to inspection. Mail coming in from overseas is subject to inspection.

    My point is – it was this way before Bush, and it got stepped up after 9/11.

  • I’m the resident paranoid freak, and I think by itself this one incident doesn’t sound huge. However, it is suggestive and raises questions. How many people have received mail with these green strips? Are they putting notification on all opened mail? Was the green strip something they decided they didn’t need to do on others or have they been doing this all along with other overseas mail and have only recently decided to have a notification strip on them? Just like the NSA issue, we are left to wonder just how fine-toothed a comb they are using and how deeply are they snooping into our private lives.

    (Biden just told Alito he doesn’t like the way he looks! Ha.)

  • I don’t have a problem with inspecting ANYTHING that comes across the border. For nukes, drugs, anthrax or whatever. There are proper customs channels for all of that. Always have been, always will be. And there are procedures and safeguards. Notification of the party that their item has been inspected. That inspections take place with proper safeguards and supervision/oversight.

    As Alex said, there IS a line between inspection and abuse. Check my mail for contraband. fine. Surreptitiously opening my mail, reading it, and for all I know, documenting it, and then passing it along as if it never happened is NOT OKAY.

    The Bushies have shown a clear distaste for oversight or constraints of any kind, and have shit upon any trust giiven them. They make it different than what happened pre-9/11.

    Oh, thanks for dropping by the blog

  • Patrick Henry said “Give me liberty or give me death,” not “Spy on me, read my mail, tell me who and how I can fuck, and send my sons and daughters to die so corporations can profit or give me a number three with a diet.”

    This doesn’t quite resolve itself into such a binary argument, but the government is supposed to work for us. There must be transparency and just cause before they dive into the personal affairs of citizens or there should be consquences. Until such conditions exist, they are breaching the publics trust and trampling civil rights.

    Should this administration and those who follow it continue to behave like royalty gone wild under the guise of national security, then my constitution will be the same as Henry’s.

    • Comments are closed.