ACLU Says Government Spying on Bank Records is Further Abuse of Power
Posted on June 23, 2006
Hat tip: Don Surber
We could see this one coming from a mile away! From the ACLU Website.
The ACLU today condemned the U.S. government for gaining access to vast troves of international financial data with no judicial or Congressional oversight nor definition of how the information is being used.
The program, revealed this morning by multiple news outlets, outlines how the government received the cooperation of the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication, more commonly referred to as Swift, to monitor financial transactions. Swift is a Brussels-based consortium that serves as a clearinghouse for transactions worldwide. It was reported this morning that tens of thousands of records gathered by Swift have been turned over to the CIA, the FBI and the Treasury Department at the request of the U.S. government.
It isn’t suprising that the ACLU would be against this, after all it is has been a successful tool in helping us catch terrorists. What government program has America implemented that the ACLU has not been against? The answer is none. From metal detectors and random searches to the Patriot Act and the NSA, the ACLU have been there to oppose it.
We have been told on numerous occassions that one of the main fronts in the war on terror is to freeze terrorist financial assets. This is most likely one of the most effective means of fighting the terrorist, cutting right to the heart of what provides them with the means to hurt us.
Check out this overexaggerated paranoia!
The following statement can be attributed to Anthony D. Romero, Executive Director of the ACLU:
“The revelation of the CIA’s financial spying program is another example of the Bush administration’s abuse of power. The invasion of our personal financial information, without notification or judicial review, is contrary to the fundamental American value of privacy and must be stopped now. It seems the administration feels entitled to flip through all of our checkbooks. How many other secret spying programs has the Bush administration enacted without Congress, the courts or the public knowing? We need a full accounting of what information has been demanded by the U.S. government, how they have used it, with whom it was shared, and how they intend to repair this grave breech of trust. This program is a glaring example of how this government thinks nothing of widespread abuse of power.
Yes, the government is now flipping through everyone’s individual checkbooks! Doesn’t the IRS already do this? Don Surber is excited about this new right the ACLU have invented in order to oppose our government’s efforts to fight terror.
So take that, IRS! I don’t have to tell you nothing. Ditto Social Security. The ACLU said so. I have this right to privacy over all my financial transactions. I no longer have to report my income to the IRS or Social Security. That will save me lots of money.
Thank you, ACLU. Your pathological hatred for George W. Bush may not destroy the nation’s security, but it sure as heck can cost it a couple of trillion dollars in taxes each year. Keep minting those rights.
There is probably no other time that a proper balance between civil liberties and national security becomes more important than in wartime. During times of war, sometimes unusual responses are implemented, often requiring suspension of certain liberties. Of course war opens the opportunity for abuse by governments, and the ACLU are right to watch for them. However, the ACLU in its absolutist perception of freedom, only worries about one side of the equation, civil liberties. It pays no attention to the national security side of things, not only ignoring it, but working against it.
One of the most revealing occurances towards the ACLU’s absolutist position on national security and its recent evolution can be seen in the action the board of directors took at its Oct 1989 meeting: It dropped section (a) from its policy, “Wartime Sedition Act.” Before, the ACLU held that it “would not participate (save for fundamental due process violations) in defense of any person believed to be “cooperating” with or acting on behalf of the enemy.” This policy was based on the recognition that “our own military enemies are now using techniques of propaganda which may involve an attempt to prevent the Bill of Rights to serve the enemy rather than the people of the United States.” In making its determination as to whether someone were cooperating with the enemy, “the Union will consider such matters as past activities and associations, sources of financial support, relations with enemy agents, the particular words and conduct involved, and all other relevant factors for informed judgement.” Source
All of this is now omitted from the Official ACLU policy!
As these policy changes indicate, balancing national security interests and civil liberties is not a goal of the ACLU. Its only goal is the absolute pursuit of unlimited civil liberties, with no regard to any consequence or negative impact upon our security. Not only does it ignore the issue of national security, but there are many examples I have shown where they actually work against it, even to the point of defending the enemy. The absolute tragedy is that it is not only the nations’s security the ACLU’s absolutist philosophy puts in danger, but the very cause of liberty itself.
Captain’s Quarters chimes in with this fire.
Actually, it gets worse than that. The ACLU enjoys a large membership of attorneys, many of whom work in specific Constitutional law regarding civil liberties. They have a vast wealth of talent from which to call for in-depth analyses. And yet, in reviewing their statement alleging criminality and abuse of power against the government, the ACLU cannot cite any statute or regulation violated by the Swift project. Not one. Why? Because, as the New York Times report explicitly states, it doesn’t violate any laws at all.
Not only that, but anyone operating within the US banking system — at least at those facilities insured by the FDIC and FSLIC — the government has access to data on individual banking customers whenever it wants to access it. Any institution insured by the federal government has to give federal regulators access to their records during any extensive examination. Not only that, but since most accounts pay interest, the IRS also gets all of the information on these accounts, including taxpayer numbers and other private information.
However, in this case, the Swift project targeted only those people already indentified as terrorists or terrorist financiers, and the focus was on international transactions. The government brought in outside auditors to ensure that the information requested remained within the boundaries of their power. Most of all, George Bush told us on a number of occasions that the United States would track these transactions around the world to find terrorists and their enablers. The project itself has never been a secret; only the methods used remained clandestine.
At least they remained clandestine until now. The New York Times and its two reporters have sold out our national security to sell a few papers, and in this case told us absolutely nothing we haven’t known for five years except the specific methods used. That information only helps one set of people: the terrorists we want to catch and stop before they can kill more people, Americans or otherwise. And the ACLU, instead of actually reading the article and determining that the Times had its head up Bill Keller’s backside, sends out its typical knee-jerk jeremiad accusing Washington of stomping its jackbooted feet on our civil liberties but somehow cannot be bothered to explain what laws they claim have been broken.
I wonder how the ACLU’s board will deal with this criticism. Of course, we won’t know, because the ACLU is about to impose a ban on public criticism of the organization by its board members. Some civil liberties are more precious than others at the ACLU, after all.
That is a slam dunk Captain!
The American Mind has a good take on this too.
Also see Rick Moran’s post on what actions we should take against the Times.
» Filed Under ACLU, News, War On Terror
Trackback URL
Comments
4 Responses to “ACLU Says Government Spying on Bank Records is Further Abuse of Power”
Affiliations
The Giants
-
Advertise
Donate
Steal Me
Our Store
Click the design to visit our store and help Stop the ACLU!
More blogs about the ACLU
Eliminate the IRS! Count me in! The ACLU could be my new best friend…
I disagree with the ACLU about 99% of the time, in this case I agree with them. The government already has too much access to our financial information through the IRS. They don’t need any more access to where my money is going or how I’m spending it. What if you’re a law-abiding Arab-American and still have relatives in Saudi Arabia? Is it fair to look at your financial transactions just because you’re sending money to your family?
jasontromm,
However, in this case, the Swift project targeted only those people already indentified as terrorists or terrorist financiers, and the focus was on international transactions. The government brought in outside auditors to ensure that the information requested remained within the boundaries of their power..
You doing international banking with transactions over $10,000?
I am more concerned with how much information a foreign banking organization has access to than I am about the government. My question is can a organization with so much control of financial information use that control to coerce others to do its biddings? It is a question I would really liked soundly answered. I also want solid evidence to back up the answer.