Aggressive approach
New guidelines allow F.B.I. to open investigation �without any basis for suspicion�

WASHINGTON � A Justice Department plan would loosen restrictions on the Federal Bureau of Investigation to allow agents to open a national security or criminal investigation against someone without any clear basis for suspicion, Democratic lawmakers briefed on the details said last month.

The plan, which could be made public this month, has already generated intense interest and speculation. Little is known about its precise language, but civil liberties advocates say they fear it could give the government even broader license to open terrorism investigations.

Four Democratic senators told Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey in a letter that they were troubled by what they heard.

The senators said the new guidelines would allow the F.B.I. to open an investigation of an American, conduct surveillance, pry into private records and take other investigative steps �without any basis for suspicion.� The plan �might permit an innocent American to be subjected to such intrusive surveillance based in part on race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, or on protected First Amendment activities,� the letter said.

As the end of the Bush administration nears, the White House has been seeking to formalize in law and regulation some of the aggressive counterterrorism steps it has already taken in practice since the 9/11 attacks.

The Justice Department is already expecting criticism over the F.B.I. guidelines. In an effort to pre-empt critics, Mukasey gave a speech last week in Portland, Ore., describing the unfinished plan as an effort to �integrate more completely and harmonize the standards that apply to the F.B.I.�s activities.� Differing standards, he said, have caused confusion for field agents.


Denver hunted protesters who 
possessed maps and bicycles

DENVER � Almost everyone could have been a potential violent protester at the Democratic National Convention, according to a bulletin issued by the Denver Police Department and leaked to the ACLU. The bulletin listed myriad items police should watch out for, including �caches of supplies that could be used by violent demonstrators.� The publication was intended for commissioned police officers.

On the list: plastic shields, football helmets, gas masks, baseball catch protectors, cases of nails, hand held radios, maps, bicycles and protest sign handles (�perfect for swinging at first responders�). Police said they were also worried about people with large numbers of city maps or �camping information.�

�Football, baseball, motorcycle and bicycle helmets are all used by violent protesters,� the bulletin warned. �Bicycles are used to blockade sidewalks, streets and can be used to slow down responding emergency vehicles.�

Camping information is a threat, too, such as �information concerning the camping, boarding or housing of potential violent protesters that have rented campaign spaces, rented farms or land for the time period around the DNC.� Maps are worrisome because they�re �frequently used by violent protesters to plan direct actions against conventioneers.�


NYPD�s �Operation 
Sentinel� to track everything

NEW YORK CITY � �Operation Sentinel� proves just how far the NYPD will go to �protect� its city from terrorists. As part of the plan, the NYPD is creating a huge buffer zone, working with cops in a 50-mile radius of the city. Officials in New Jersey, Connecticut, Pennsylvania and Long Island are given radiation detectors to stop people as far away from New York City as possible. Police also plan to track every vehicle that enters Manhattan. That part of the plan calls for photographing and scanning license plates of cars and trucks at all bridges and tunnels.

�I don�t think it�s hyperbole to call this Big Brotherish,� said Christopher Dunn of the New York Civil Liberties Union. �The New York City Police Department is creating a huge computer database of the movement of everyone in a vehicle in Manhattan.� 

Mayor Michael Bloomberg defended the idea. �It is always a balance between freedoms to come and go between civil liberties and security, and I think we pretty much have the balance pretty much right.�