Good for Europe! At least they have some sense when it comes to privacy rights.

Europe's willingness to cooperate with a security-conscious United States government appears to have reached its limit. The union's commissioner in charge of data protection issues, Frits Bolkestein, said that while the European Union continues to stand with America in the war on terrorism, it views the latest demands for information about airline passengers flying into the United States from Europe as going too far.

The Chicago Jewish News calls upon its readers to urge the Chicago city council to pass a resolution opposing the Patriot Act.

Since its passage, the act has severely curtailed the constitutional rights of American citizens and non- citizens alike. Several members of the Chicago City Council have introduced a resolution supporting Chicago's immigrant population and condemning the excesses of the act. Jews, as people who throughout history have understood the need to protect those who are not yet citizens, should vigorously support this resolution by urging their aldermen to vote for the resolution when it comes up for a vote on Oct. 1.

The article details the most objectionable provisions of the act, and continues with:

The Sacramento Bee begins an important series today on the terror war's effect on civil liberties. Arthur at Light of Reason has a full analysis of today's article. This is definitely a series to follow this week.

While Attorney General John Ashcroft maintains that no library records have been sought in the wake of 9/11 and enactment of the Patriot Act, libraries reported differently in June, 2002, according to this USA today article.

... the University of Illinois conducted a survey of 1,020 public libraries in January and February and found that 85 libraries had been asked by federal or local law enforcement officers for information about patrons related to Sept. 11, said Ed Lakner, assistant director of research at the school's Library Research Center.

....Kari Hanson, director of the Bridgeview Public Library in suburban Chicago, said an FBI agent came seeking information about a person, but her library had no record of the person. Federal prosecutors allege Global Relief Foundation, an Islamic charity based in the Chicago suburb, has ties to Osama bin Laden's terror network

...In Florida, Broward County library director Sam Morrison said the FBI had recently contacted his office. He declined to elaborate on the request or how many branch libraries were involved. "We've heard from them and that's all I can tell you," Morrison said. He said the FBI specifically instructed him not to reveal any information about the request.

The library system has been contacted before. A week after the Sept. 11 attacks, the FBI subpoenaed Morrison to provide information on the possible use of computer terminals by some of the suspected hijackers in the Hollywood, Fla., area. In October, investigators revisited the county's main library in Fort Lauderdale and checked a regional library in Coral Springs.

The article went on to discuss how library record requests work under the Patriot Act:

Attorney General John Ashcroft disclosed Thursday that no requests for library records have been made under the authority granted the Government by the Patriot Act. Hardly a surprise, since otherwise, he would not have agreed to release the information.

As we mentioned yesterday, the data we want to see pertains to the FISA electronic surveillance and search warrants the Justice Department has obtained--so it can be determined whether such warrants were necessary or fruitful in conjunction with a terrorism investigation as opposed to a criminal investigation. If only for the latter, then our fears are correct--that the Justice Department is using its new FISA powers to circumvent the Fourth Amendment.

As to the library records, if none have been requested in the aftermath of 9/11, why does the Government need the power to get them? We agree with Congressman John Conyers who says:

"Given the potential for abuse of library and bookstore records, I can see no reason why — if this authority was not needed to investigate Sept. 11 — it should stay on the books any longer."

Buzzflash has a new editorial up today, It's Me or the Terrorists-- You Have Three Seconds to Decide":

If you had to distill the Bush administration's argument for its existence down to the essence, it would amount to simply this: "It's Me or the Terrorists! You Have Three Seconds to Decide."

Since September 11, 2001, the American people have had the threat of terrorist attacks hovering over them and a gun held to their heads by the Bush administration. The true risk of terrorist assaults on the U.S. and its interests is hard to gauge. Partly, it is due to the murky, secretive nature of terrorism itself, which makes risk assessment a difficult task. But, the other challenge for Americans is that they have an administration that shamelessly uses terrorism to scare and frighten its own population in order to achieve political goals and reward their campaign contributors. The first limitation in assessing terrorism risk is understandable; the second is shameless and unconscionable.

There were two wins Wednesday in the War on Terror: A Senate subcommittee killed the Total Information Awareness Program (TIA) and Attorney General John Ashcroft reversed himself and agreed to release data on searches of library records.

It's a nice start, but we won't be satisfied until Ashcroft agrees to release the data on the FBI and Justice Department's use of FISA search and electronic surveillance warrants. So far it has only released the number of warrants sought and obtained. We have no indication of whether the warrants were needed or useful. That's something Congress needs to know in order to determine whether to continue the broad expanse of Patriot Act powers.

A new report by the Lawyers Committee for Human Rights, titled “Assessing the New Normal,” examines changes to U.S. law and security policy since September 11, 2001 in five areas: government openness; personal privacy; immigration; security-related detention; and the effect of U.S. actions on international human rights standards.

The report concludes that while certain changes in law and policy have been sensible and constructive, many others threaten basic rights and freedoms, and taken together reflect a significant departure from rule of law principles. The report highlights how what it terms the “new normal” has meant a diminution of legal safeguards, a breakdown of the system of checks and balances (in particular, judicial oversight of executive branch decisions), and a reduction in government openness and accountability.

Each chapter contains a set of policy recommendations—including calls for increased congressional oversight, rolling back certain provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act, and close scrutiny of additional measures being proposed by the President and Attorney General John Ashcroft. [Thanks to Patriot Watch for the link]

Here it is all 8 pages of it today's memo of understanding from Attorney General John Ashcroft, the Director of the CIA, the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Homeland Security regarding the implementation of the new terror watch list. We can't wait for the ACLU's analysis. We'll post it here when it's out.

Meanwhile, the New York Times reports:

The Bush administration announced the creation of a new counterterrorism center today intended to develop a master "watch list" of more than 100,000 terrorism suspects and avoid the communication breakdowns that plagued the federal government before the Sept. 11 attacks.

....The plan announced today would create a new screening center, to be led by the F.B.I. in conjunction with the C.I.A., the Justice Department, the Department of Homeland Security and the State Department. Officials said they expected the center to be operating by December. It will track, they said, not only suspected foreign terrorists but also Americans tied to domestic events like violence at abortion clinics.

Civil rights advocates said they worried that the new process would give the government greater power to track and compile information on Americans and others who may have no clear links to terrorism. Law enforcement officials pledged to respect privacy and civil rights while improving national security.

Where have we heard that before?

Update: This Bush supporter has bailed over homeland security. (link via Instapundit)

DARPA, the Pentagon's research arm which until recently was under the direction of John Poindexter, and which was responsible for the outrageous Total Information Awareness (TIA) Program-- has had its budget slashed by more than $100 million dollars by the Senate. Noah Shachtman at Wired News has the details of what gets cut.

The Senate bill eliminates $103 million from the Information Awareness Office's $169 million requested budget, wiping out controversial programs like Human Identification at a Distance, Darpa's effort to identify potential suspects by the way they walk.

Other projects have been shelved in the Senate bill, as well. Funds from Darpa helped launch Duke University's Center for Neuroengineering, where Craig Henriquez was one of a team of researchers developing techniques to control mechanical limbs using brain power alone. In a widely cited paper in Nature, Henriquez's colleagues showed how a monkey, implanted with a series of electrodes in its brain, could move a robotic arm -- just by thinking about it.

Some DARPA programs may be worthwhile, such as one to study the effects of sleep deprivation and ways to combat it. But, it looks like the baby will be thrown out with the bath water. In our view, Poindexter tarnished the reputation of the agency, making Congress skeptical of just about everything bearing its name. Good riddance, Admiral.

Did you know that your bank can blacklist you in the name of homeland security? Financial institutions can close accounts and cancel credit cards with little explanation. Not surprisingly, complaints are beginning to stream in.

Banks have long played a role in stopping the flow of money among suspected terrorists, money launderers, and narcotraffickers. But the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, raised the bar. More watch lists have been generated, more institutions have become accountable -- and more consumers may feel the heat.

And while alleged government violations of civil rights under the USA Patriot Act have received steady attention, consumer complaints in the private sector have fallen largely off the radar.

"No one paid attention to the lists because they primarily affected foreign nationals," says Peter Fitzgerald, an expert on government watch lists at Stetson University in Florida. "Now it affects those who do business with those who do business with those who do business with someone suspected of terrorism."

The Associated Press reports that anti-terror laws are being used increasingly against "common criminals."

Bush is calling for expanded Patriot Act powers.

The San Francisco Chronicle says the Patriot Act went too far and Americans are rising up against it. The Miami Herald notes the sweeping new powers have few checks:

Two years into the war on terrorism, federal law enforcers conduct secret searches, indefinitely detain ''special interest'' suspects and mine data bases for personal information on Americans. Yet we still don't know how effective our government has been in protecting our homeland.

It's time for Congress and Americans to press the administration for straight talk and smart policy. In no case should Congress grant greater federal policing powers unless the administration demonstrates that it hasn't abused the broad power it now wields with the Patriot Act and that there would be sufficient oversight.

Doug Giebel in Counterpunch says we are ending America as we know it.