To the Editor:
I am a retired Special Agent of the
FBI. For the last few days I have listened to reporters ask the question,
"Why did our intelligence and federal law enforcement fail?" The answer is
simple. Congress
and the previous administration
successfully and effectively tied the hands and feet of these
agencies.
Four years ago, the FBI warned
Congress that the United States was headed for disaster with these
terrorist groups if we did not
act. The FBI requested that the FBI be given authority to intercept
and decrypt communications coming into this
country via the Internet. The FBI wanted manufacturers of U.S.
encryption software to be required to put
in a "back door," to allow court-ordered interception of encrypted
communications.
The software manufacturers opposed
such a move and they have the money and lobby to speak to Congress. Software manufactures
are more interested in making money than the security of this
country. Congress refused to
give the FBI the tools it needed to protect this country.
The press released a story that
indicated that U.S. intelligence agencies were monitoring uplinks
and cell phones of Osama bin Laden. This
single act by the free press cut off intelligence as to bin Laden's
current activities. Bin Laden then
switched to using the Internet, utilizing U.S.-made encryption
software -- the same software that Congress
refused to give U.S. intelligence agencies for a "back door."
I wonder if the relatives of the
thousands of victims of terrorism in New York think that the money
made by software companies and subsequent donations to congressional "campaign funds" would
be a good trade for the lives of their loved ones.
President Clinton tied the hands of
the FBI and CIA by not allowing these agencies to recruit
informants in terrorist cells, if these people had a history of human rights violations.
This single act precluded the agencies from acquiring good intelligence.
Congress passed laws that bar the
FBI from directing informants into ongoing terrorist activity or
any criminal conspiracy with recorders. This law was passed by Congress in response
to congressmen who were indicted for corruption.
The sponsor of the bill was himself indicted and tried for taking bribes.
Many congressmen had close calls
when they took bribes and were caught on tape doing so. It was
Congress protecting itself from
prosecution for congressional criminal wrongdoings. As this law stands
today, if the FBI had an
informant who told them that there was a plan to hijack an airplane
and dive it into the White House, and the suspects
had hired a lawyer, the FBI could not send the informant back to the suspects with a recorder
to get the details. In many cases the informants are criminals and
have a low level of credibility in court. A recording
of the conspiracy and criminal plan is needed to convince the jury that there is sufficient
evidence to convict.
The law itself must be carefully
read to see the sinister intent of Congress. It says in part that
the United States Attorney's offices will be
bound by the ethical conduct rules of the bar in the state that they
operate. State bar rules of conduct
for lawyers preclude them from contacting or recording any persons
who are represented. This
means that the lawyer's agents must obey the same rules. Most of
these local rules apply to local lawyers
who practice civil law. The rules are well founded in those cases.
However, the United States long
recognized the problems involved in requiring United States
criminal prosecutors to follow local
state bar rules, intended for use in civil cases. Local lawyers
are not involved in terrorism cases and ongoing criminal conspiracies. The United States
has a code of Criminal and Civil Procedure that directs the
conduct of lawyers in federal courts. More rules designed for local
attorneys are not only not needed, but severely hamper federal law enforcement.
With this stroke of the pen,
Congress gave free license to not only its own members to violate
the law, but for terrorists and other criminals to operate within the United States with
relative freedom. The United States Department of Justice
opposed this legislation, but Congress passed it anyway.
President Clinton ordered the FBI
not to investigate terrorist groups unless they actually committed
a criminal act. In this case, a citizen could call the FBI and advise the FBI that there
is a group of foreigners living next door and that these foreigners
say that they plan to wage war against the United States. The FBI could
not institute an investigation but must wait for them to violate the law.
If all of these actions were not
crippling enough to American Intelligence, the FBI is limited to
$50 per month to spend on gasoline for
each vehicle they operate. When the agent spends $50, he must stop
working. The agent is prohibited by
law from buying the gasoline himself and giving it to the government.
Let's hope that this agent is not
on his way to an airport in the face of a terrorist attack when he
runs out of gas.
How did the terrorists who blew up
this New York landmark the first time get into the United States?
Did they come by submarine or use fictitious passports? No, they just flew into New York with
no papers. They were told by immigration that
they must appear in court and were released on a promise to
appear, like a traffic ticket. In any other
country they would have been jailed or returned to the country they
came from.
During World War II, there was not
one single act of terrorism successfully carried out in the United
States. There were many planned and
many attempted. The lights never went out in the FBI from 1941 to1946.
This was because the FBI sorted out thousands of leads that were called in by citizens. Most of these
leads were nothing, but some identified
enemy agents operating in the United States.
If WWII were today, the FBI would
not be allowed to check out reports of actions by enemy agents
until they actually committed the act. An organization
making the statement that the group plans to attack the United States is not sufficient for the
FBI to do even the most preliminary inquiry, under current
guidelines.
This is a wake-up call for America.
Congress and the executive branch need to move swiftly. The course
of action is clear to everyone but Congress. Our intelligence agencies previously
laid out the course of action that would have stopped
these terrorist acts. President Clinton chose to act with a
"feel good assault" because it would
have been bad for his image to have any U.S. forces come home in body
bags and a real war would have
diverted money from all of his pet giveaway programs.
A token assault, like the one that
President Clinton directed, is worse than nothing. It tells the
enemy that we do not have the will to
fight a real war. I believe we can increase security in the country
with NO erosion of our fundamental freedoms that I
raised my hand and swore to defend. The ultimate freedom would be
no law at all, and I believe that is called anarchy.
We must never abrogate our
responsibility to defend the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
However, the laws and executive orders I have mentioned above that were created for
special interest groups and for the benefit of politicians are not
part of the Constitution.
Richard J. Elroy
Weston, Fla.
Editor's Note: Mr. Elroy spent much
of his FBI career assigned to Oklahoma, working cases in the Tri-County area and was a Shawnee resident
for more than 15 years.