A Stitch in Haste

In case you think it's just about warrantless wiretapping of American citizens:

ITEM: It's also about warrantless opening of your mail --

Grant Goodman on Monday showed the [Lawrence, Kansas] Journal-World a recent letter he had received from a friend in the Philippines; it apparently had been opened, then re-closed with green tape bearing the seal of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and a message that it had been opened "by Border Protection."
...
The U.S. government has been concerned about the Muslim insurgency in the Philippines, but Goodman said his correspondent — a devoutly Catholic Filipino history professor in her 80s — was an unlikely suspect to be connected to such causes. Goodman declined to reveal her name, saying he feared stirring up trouble for her.
...
John Mohan, the spokesman [for the Department of Homeland Security], said he didn’t know how often the agency opened mail from abroad. And he wouldn't discuss the criteria for opening letters.

But he said such searches had helped the government protect American lives.

MY TAKE: The "criteria for opening letters" is — or was — probable cause. But as we have seen elsewhere and often, "probable cause" is too high a hurdle for the government's tastes. And while there is admittedly a "border search" exemption to the Fourth Amendment, that applies to packages and containers — not letters — for the obvious reasons. But in the new "security at all costs" paradigm, what's a few opened letters, right — you don't want another 9/11, do you? (Hat tip to Homeland Stupidity; more thoughts at Hammer of Truth, De Novo, Moderate Voice.)

---

ITEM: And your journal too--

An airline passenger with the words "suicide bomber" written in his journal was arrested when his plane arrived in San Jose, California, on Wednesday, but the words appeared to refer to music and he was later released, officials said.

"A male was observed by his fellow passengers as having a journal and handwritten on the journal were the words 'suicide bomber,'" FBI spokeswoman LaRae Quy said.

"That, combined with the fact that he was clutching a backpack, and then finally he was acting a little suspiciously" prompted law enforcement to act.

Authorities boarded the plane and detained the man on the Frontier Airlines plane on charges of being under the influence of drugs or alcohol. But the words "suicide bomber" in his journal appeared related to music, the FBI spokeswoman said.

MY TAKE: First of all, aren't we supposed to be "clutching our backpacks" at the airport? "Watch your personal belongings at all times..." Isn't that what the P.A. systems constantly bellow at the airport? And I can assure you that if I were being leered at and questioned by fellow passengers and flight attendants while on an airplane for no other reason than because I doodled in my journal, then I'd "act a little suspiciously" too — and what does that even mean anyway? And what fraction of the air traveling public isn't "under the influence of drugs and alcohol" while they fly? Finally, I'd love to Google "suicide bomber" to see what song or band it refers to, but I don't want to end up on any lists (although there's probably already an "uppity blogger" list somewhere in DHS and I'm probably right near the top — oh well). More thoughts at To The People.

While the warrantless wiretap scandal continues to hog the headlines, here is a hat trick of lesser but still maddening tales of how the War on Terror is becoming the Hysteria on Terror:

---

ITEM: Houston's chief of police wants to recruit more people into law enforcement, starting with your landord --

Houston's police chief Wednesday proposed placing surveillance cameras in apartment complexes, downtown streets, shopping malls and even private homes to fight crime during a shortage of police officers.

"I know a lot of people are concerned about Big Brother, but my response to that is, if you are not doing anything wrong, why should you worry about it?" Chief Harold Hurtt told reporters Wednesday at a regular briefing.
...
Building permits should require malls and large apartment complexes to install surveillance cameras, Hurtt said.

MY TAKE: According to Grits for Breakfast, Hurtt is proposing that the surveillance cameras actually have a direct feed to police, although the media reports are unclear on this. I hope that's not the case. One can make an argument, although not a very libertarian argument, that simply requiring security cameras is not a significant intrusion on privacy or property rights, comparable to requiring buildings to have fire escapes. But Houston's unwillingness to pay a sufficiently high salary to recruit enough police officers (it was the shortage that prompted Hurtt's proposal) is no excuse to conscript landlords into the War on Terror. There's a big difference between "If you see something, say something..." and "We can't afford to see everything, so we're going to force you to do it..." (Via CrimProf.)

---

ITEM: Another group being drafted into the War on Terror: school bus drivers --

School bus drivers around the country are being trained to watch for potential terrorists, in a program financed by the Homeland Security Department. Designers of the program, called School Bus Watch, want to turn 600,000 drivers into an army of observers.
...
In Virginia, bus drivers were taught how to identify and evaluate unusual activity. What drew your attention to this person in the first place? Is someone unfamiliar taking photographs or drawing sketches of the area? Is the person asking a lot of questions about the bus route?

MY TAKE: It seems that the best way to protect children on school buses is by having school bus drivers focusing on driving rather than watching out for people taking pictures and drawing sketches terrorists. And as one critic of the program noted, if we turn school bus drivers into security guards, then who's next? Postal workers? Paper boys? I say again, "If you see something, say something..." is not the same as "It is now part of your job description to look for something..."

---

ITEM: You've probably already seen reports of the two county-level [sic] homeland security employees in Bethesda, Maryland, who decided to declare themselves the Porn Police and raid a public library, unconstitutionally seizing a web-surfing patron in the process. "If you see something, say something..." does not mean "If you see something smutty, arrest someone..." I'll just suggest circling back and re-evaluating the first two stories against the backdrop of this one. These county-level [sic] homeland security employees are, um, homeland security employees. One would hope that they are specially trained in homeland security issues, including some basic constitutional law. Now if the bona fide "Warriors on Terror" can't stick to the playbook and limit themselves to "legitimate" surveillance activities, then why should we think that landlords and school bus drivers can and will?