The ACLU is Miffed

According to Eric Lichtblau of the New York Times (HT: AOL News), the ACLU is alarmed by the existence of FBI files on that organization.

The F.B.I. has in its files 1,173 pages of internal documents on the American Civil Liberties Union, the leading critic of the Bush administration's antiterrorism policies, and 2,383 pages on Greenpeace, an environmental group that has led acts of civil disobedience in protest over the administration's policies, the Justice Department disclosed in a court filing this month in a federal court in Washington.

F.B.I. and Justice Department officials declined to say what was in the A.C.L.U. and Greenpeace files, citing the pending lawsuit. But they stressed that as a matter of both policy and practice, they have not sought to monitor the political activities of any activist groups and that any intelligence-gathering activities related to political protests are intended to prevent disruptive and criminal activity at demonstrations, not to quell free speech. They said there might be an innocuous explanation for the large volume of files on the A.C.L.U. and Greenpeace, like preserving requests from or complaints about the groups in agency files.

Naturally, though, the ACLU's assumption is that the the Bush administration has enlisted the FBI in a vendetta against the ACLU.

"I'm still somewhat shocked by the size of the file on us," said Anthony D. Romero, executive director of the A.C.L.U. "Why would the F.B.I. collect almost 1,200 pages on a civil rights organization engaged in lawful activity? What justification could there be, other than political surveillance of lawful First Amendment activities?"

Indeed. What justification could there be? And what precedent is the ACLU basing its concerns on? Might it be the alleged use of the IRS by the Clinton administration as a political weapon against Clinton's perceived enemies?

Here is an excerpt from a typical 1998 commentary by Joseph Farah of WorldNetDaily (link here):

We have now identified about two dozen non-profit organizations considered "unfriendly" to the Clinton administration that have been subjected to audits during the Clinton years. They include the American Spectator, one of the three news organizations cited in the 331-page report, the National Review, the Heritage Foundation, the National Rifle Association, Concerned Women of America and Citizens Against Government Waste. Not a single high-profile "friendly" non-profit has been found to have been audited during this same time period. Coincidence? That's what the administration would have the American people believe.

It would also have us believe that the audit of Paula Jones was the result of a statistical anomaly. Likewise Billy Dale, the former Travel Office director unceremoniously fired by Hillary Clinton. In his case, too, there is a paper trail to indicate the audit began in the White House Counsel's Office. According to congressional investigators, former Associate Counsel William Kennedy told the FBI to launch an investigation into Dale and his office or he would be forced to turn to other agencies such as the IRS. A week later, Dale was served with his audit papers.

Perhaps the ACLU sees itself as an enemy of the Bush administration and therefore assumes that the FBI or the IRS would be the Bush weapon-of-choice against them.

Personally, I'm inclined to believe that the ACLU is suffering from hypocritical paranoia. I believe there's a big file on them, but I don't see the sinister ulterior motives that they see. But if the FBI file makes the ACLU worried, then that suits me just fine.