DETROIT (Reuters) - The American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit against the federal government on Wednesday aimed at curbing the vastly expanded spy powers won under the anti-terrorism law passed soon after the Sept. 11 attacks

The suit, filed in federal court in Detroit on behalf of six Arab-American groups, targets a key provision of the USA Patriot Act that gives the FBI more leeway to conduct domestic surveillance.

``This lawsuit is the first legal challenge to the USA Patriot Act, passed shortly and with almost no public debate after the terrorist attacks of September 11th,'' said Kary Moss, director of the Michigan chapter of the ACLU.

``The Ashcroft administration has launched a war on all of us by strategically trying to cut back the protections of the Bill of Rights,'' she said at a news conference.

Attorney General John Ashcroft, who has described the Patriot Act as a critical weapon in the war declared by President Bush after the attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center, is a defendant in the ACLU suit along with FBI Director Robert Mueller.

Under Section 215 of the Patriot Act, which the lawsuit challenges as unconstitutional, the FBI can secretly search and seize records, books, papers or other personal belongings of practically anyone, without a warrant and without showing probable cause.

The agency can also impose a lifelong ``gag'' order prohibiting anyone served with Section 215 orders -- aimed for example at getting information about a suspect's medical history, reading habits, political activities or religious affiliation -- from telling someone else about the investigation.

SECTION 215 DEFENDED

A Justice Department spokesman in Washington said it would have no immediate comment about the ACLU's lawsuit. But the department later issued a statement defending Section 215, saying it could only be used to conduct a narrow set of investigations.

``It should be noted that criticism of Section 215 frequently ignores what the provision actually includes,'' said Justice Department spokeswoman Barbara Comstock.

The ACLU's lawsuit was filed just a week after the Republican-controlled U.S. House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly to roll back another key provision of the Patriot Act. And Moss said more than 143 cities across the nation have now passed local resolutions against the Patriot Act in what she described as a groundswell of opposition to ``the government's war on the Bill of Rights.''

Mary Rose Oakar, head of the Arab-American Anti-Discrimination Committee that is one of the six plaintiffs in the ACLU case, noted that Arabs and Muslim-Americans have been the primary target of the FBI's counter-terror measures after Sept. 11.

But at the news conference at the ACLU's headquarters in Detroit, which is home to a large Arab-American community, Oakar said the ``chilling effects of the Patriot Act could happen to anyone'' and warned against the erosion of U.S. civil liberties.

``This is an un-American, unconstitutional act. It must be challenged to protect the basic rights of the people of the United States of America,'' she said.

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment XIV


Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

READ YOUR CONSTITUTION !!!!!!

"unreasonable "

Nothing more "reasonable" then keeping a close eye on those who would try and destroy us...again.


Hey failure, copy and paste yet another post that proves my point.

What a fool.

Complaints are everywhere heard from our most considerate and virtuous citizens, equally the friends of public and private faith, and of public and personal liberty, that our governments are too unstable, that the public good is disregarded in the conflicts of rival parties, and that measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority. However anxiously we may wish that these complaints had no foundation, the evidence, of known facts will not permit us to deny that they are in some degree true. It will be found, indeed, on a candid review of our situation, that some of the distresses under which we labor have been erroneously charged on the operation of our governments; but it will be found, at the same time, that other causes will not alone account for many of our heaviest misfortunes; and, particularly, for that prevailing and increasing distrust of public engagements, and alarm for private rights, which are echoed from one end of the continent to the other.

It is in vain to say that enlightened statesmen will be able to adjust these clashing interests, and render them all subservient to the public good. Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm. Nor, in many cases, can such an adjustment be made at all without taking into view indirect and remote considerations, which will rarely prevail over the immediate interest which one party may find in disregarding the rights of another or the good of the whole.

Complaints are everywhere heard from our most considerate and virtuous citizens, equally the friends of public and private faith, and of public and personal liberty, that our governments are too unstable, that the public good is disregarded in the conflicts of rival parties, and that measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority. However anxiously we may wish that these complaints had no foundation, the evidence, of known facts will not permit us to deny that they are in some degree true. It will be found, indeed, on a candid review of our situation, that some of the distresses under which we labor have been erroneously charged on the operation of our governments; but it will be found, at the same time, that other causes will not alone account for many of our heaviest misfortunes; and, particularly, for that prevailing and increasing distrust of public engagements, and alarm for private rights, which are echoed from one end of the continent to the other.

It is in vain to say that enlightened statesmen will be able to adjust these clashing interests, and render them all subservient to the public good. Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm. Nor, in many cases, can such an adjustment be made at all without taking into view indirect and remote considerations, which will rarely prevail over the immediate interest which one party may find in disregarding the rights of another or the good of the whole.

for your reply
fucking traitor.

where's dingo?

Yes, it appears that this insignificant site, which only 10 readers
use, is such a threat that it is the subject of physical disruptions
and active hostile attack including the stalking and psyops by
obviously determined enemy action. What's the matter, can't take the heat? Obviously the band of weasels hired to do the weak spin
control wasn't up to the task of fouling the board.
So the rest of the paranoids were correct all the time and this is the proof of it.
Otherwise why would so much effort be expended to shut down the comments page?

This site?? A threat?? Not in this lifetime.

Stalking and psyops by obviously determined enemy action?? We just wanna know where dingo is.

Effort expended to shut down the comments page?? LA-IMC's own server is the problem.

The question remains: Where's dingo?

We had to haul his ass off to Gitmo.

MAYBE HE'S SITTING DOWN AT THE END OF YOUR STREET WITH A HIGH POWERED RIFLE?

Nah! He's on his can in the northwest lookin for chemtrails.

how can you say 'wanted to destroy us'
compared to what your government and army has done to many countries 3000 dead people is poultry compared to 8 000 dead people in panama from the 1989 invasion and buring of the slums. what about the 1 000 000 dead people in indonesia when your government sponsored the despot surhato?
sadam and bin laden were cia inventions and now when they turn bad you winge like the little pathetic baby that you are!
i am against all terrorism be it cia fbi mi5 mi6 alqaeda israel what ever.

I wouldn't expect to much coming from the ACLU where they get much of their funding from the Rockefeller and Ford Foundations. Both these groups come from the cabal that wants a New World Order. They want the population reduced to about a half a billion. Rockefeller basically has a monopoly on the oil. The ACLU is a front group, and looses the fight many times when it comes to constitutional rights. The world plan to to have a form of fascism and communism that will emerge as one.

Hello out there! Try reading the Patriot Act it clearly states that inorder to perform a search or siezure the officers still need a judge authorised search warrent. :-)><

"I wouldn't expect to much coming from the ACLU where they get much of their funding from the Rockefeller and Ford Foundations. Both these groups come from the cabal that wants a New World Order. They want the population reduced to about a half a billion. Rockefeller basically has a monopoly on the oil. The ACLU is a front group, and looses the fight many times when it comes to constitutional rights. The world plan to to have a form of fascism and communism that will emerge as one."

Coo coo. Coo coo. Fruit loop.

Just kidding.

You're right. The ACLU is a fake-liberal Rockefeller front group, and just like other fake-liberal Rockefeller front groups (especially the Center for Science in the Public Interest), they openly conspire with the criminal elite in the modern-day crimes against humanity. The neocons have committed crimes against humanity for years.....but so have the neolibs. It really is a one party system with two phony factions.

The ACLU director, Anthony Romero, actually worked at the Council on Foreign Relations and does receive funding from the Rockefeller Foundation........the same Rockefeller Foundation that is deep-entrenched in global depopulation agendas.

ACLU = Amerikan Criminal Liberty Usurpers