[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 19]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 26218]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



         BILL OF RIGHTS CANNOT BE THE NEXT VICTIM OF TERRORISM

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. LYNN C. WOOLSEY

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                      Wednesday, December 12, 2001

  Mr. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, the terrorist attacks on September 11 
struck fear in the heart of every American. Today, we continue to fight 
a war against terrorism on two fronts--in the mountains of Afghanistan 
and on the main streets of the United States. The first is a more 
traditional war against soldiers and war machinery; the second, a war 
against domestic terrorism.
  Within days of the attacks, Congress passed a Homeland Security Bill 
that included the so-called ``Patriot Act.'' The Patriot Act allows the 
government to increase its use of wiretaps and surveillance, and 
enhances its ability to trace e-mail and Internet usage. I voted 
against the Patriot Act because it intrudes unnecessarily on our civil 
liberties. We had adequate police and intelligence systems available to 
prevent 9/11, but they were not used effectively. The inadequate use of 
these resources is no reason to trample our freedoms.
  The Bill of Rights, civil rights and civil liberties must not be the 
``other victim'' of terrorism. As the domestic war against terrorism 
continues, my concern is that ``increased police power'' will encroach 
on our liberties.
  In the past month, Attorney General John Ashcroft issued rules to 
allow the FBI to eavesdrop on communications between attorneys and 
their clients who are suspected terrorists, ordered prosecutors to 
interview over 5,000 young, mostly Middle Eastern men in the United 
States, and supported a system of secret military tribunals that could 
be used to try alleged accomplices in the September 11 attacks.
  Members of Congress and eight former high-ranking FBI officials have 
questioned the effectiveness of Attorney General Ashcroft's plan to 
fight terrorism. The tactics that he is proposing are not new. By 
interviewing over 5,000 mostly Middle Eastern men to gather information 
about terrorists, he is merely recycling the same ``preventive'' 
intelligence-gathering techniques that were rejected in the late 1970s 
because they did not prevent terrorism and in fact, led to abuses of 
civil liberties.
  In the 1950's and 1960's, FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover used ``Red 
Squads'' to collect massive amounts of ``preventive'' intelligence to 
deter terrorist attacks. The ``Squads'' were criticized for abusing 
civil liberties and they were seldom effective. Because the majority of 
preventive intelligence investigations did not lead to criminal cases, 
most terrorist activities went unsolved and most of the terrorists were 
not apprehended. There is no reason to return to a system that didn't 
work and has a track record of failure and abuse.
  Attorney General Ashcroft wants terrorist suspects to be tried by 
secret military tribunals. Conducting the tribunals in secret with the 
possibility of imposing capital punishment by a mere two-thirds vote, 
is an infringement of our civil liberties. It also undermines our 
system of checks and balances. Our Democracy retains its integrity in 
large part because no single branch of government overwhelms another. 
The military tribunals circumvent the role of oversight control granted 
to Congress in the Constitution, and allow too much power to the 
Executive branch.
  The strength of the United States does not rest entirely on our 
overwhelming military superiority. Our country's strength lies in its 
moral authority, its reliance on the rule of law, and its belief in 
democracy. The ideals stated in our Constitution and Bill of Rights 
resonate throughout the world. It is our strength as a just, fair and 
transparent society that has made us a superpower, and these are the 
ideals that will ensure our world preeminence in the future.
  Just as we cannot win the battle against terrorism in Afghanistan 
with purely military options, we cannot improve homeland security by 
infringing on our freedoms. The Bill of Rights cannot be the next 
victim of terrorism. We will eventually win the military intervention 
against terrorism, but we cannot lose our national character in the 
meantime. Fear should not guide our decisions or cloud our judgment. 
Fear must not muffle the voice of freedom.

                          ____________________