FBI stats: Racial hate crimes up, antigay reports level

Dear Friends:

The latest crime statistics for the U.S. were released today by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, showing a drop in 2003 of reported total hate crimes from 2001, but a slight increase from the 2002 figures.

The FBI recorded a total of 9,726 hate crimes in 2001, with 7,462 bias cases in 2002 and 7,489 reported hate crimes for 2003.

Broken down by percentage, reported hate crimes with a sexual orientation bias are up in the latest report from 2001 when the figure was 14.3 percent, but basically unchanged from 16.7 percent in 2002 to 16.6 percent for 2003.

Reported racially motivated hate crimes increased from 44.9 percent in 2001 up to 51.4 percent for 2003.

Excerpts from FBI press releases about these reported bias crimes are below, along with links to the full announcements.
^^^


http://www.fbi.gov/pressrel/pressrel02/cius2001.htm

2002

Hate crime data were provided by 11,987 law enforcement agencies. The 9,726 hate crime incidents reported in 2001 involved 11,447 separate offenses, 12,016 victims, and 9,231 known offenders.

Of all reported single-bias incidents, 44.9 percent were motivated by racial bias, 21.6 percent were motivated by an ethnicity or national origin bias, 18.8 percent were based on a religious bias, 14.3 percent were based on a sexual-orientation bias, and 0.3 percent were based on a disability bias.

-

http://www.fbi.gov/pressrel/pressrel03/ucr2002.htm

2003

A total of 12,073 law enforcement agencies contributed hate crime data to the UCR Program in 2002. Of these agencies, 1,868 agencies (15.5 percent) submitted 7,462 hate crime incident reports that involved 8,832 separate offenses, 9,222 victims, and 7,314 known offenders.

Of the total number of single-bias crime incidents reported in 2002, 48.8 percent were motivated by racial bias, 19.1 percent were driven by religious bias, 16.7 percent were motivated by sexual-orientation bias, 14.8 percent resulted from an ethnicity/national origin bias, and 0.6 percent were motivated by disability bias.

-

http://www.fbi.gov/pressrel/pressrel04/crimestat102504.htm

2004

In 2003, 11,909 agencies actively participated in the hate crime portion of the UCR Program, and 1,967 of those agencies reported 7,489 hate crime incidents involving 8,715 separate offenses, 9,100 victims, and 6,934 known offenders.

More than half (51.4 percent) of all single-bias hate crime incidents in 2003 were racially motivated. Law enforcement investigators attributed nearly 18 percent (17.9) of hate crimes to a religious bias, 16.6 percent to a sexual-orientation bias, 13.7 percent to a bias based on ethnicity/national origin, and 0.4 percent to a disability bias.

FBI omits 9/11 from bin Laden wanted poster

October 25, 2004

Robert S. Mueller lll
Director
Federal Bureau of Investigation
935 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20535-0001

Re: Osama bin Laden's FBI Wanted Poster

Dear Mr. Mueller:

The Federal Bureau of Investigation's current wanted poster for terrorist Osama bin Laden is of grave concern to me because crucial information is missing. [Source: http://www.fbi.gov/mostwant/topten/fugitives/laden.htm].

First, absolutely no mention is made of bin Laden's role masterminding the September 11, 2001, terror attacks on the United States.

The poster states he is wanted for "murder of U.S. nationals outside the United States; conspiracy to murder U.S. nationals outside the United States; attack on a federal facility resulting in death ... [and] in connection with the August 7, 1998, bombings of the United States embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya. These attacks killed over 200 people. In addition, bin Laden is a suspect in other terrorist attacks throughout the world."

Does the FBI not recognize bin Laden's central role in the 9/11 attacks?

Second, bin Laden's poster was last revised in November 2001, two months after the tragedy of 9/11. Surely the FBI has gathered new intelligence on him since then, warranting an update of his wanted poster.

Again, does your agency not acknowledge his involvement in the 9/11 attacks? If so, then the nearly three-year-old wanted posted requires revision.

Third, the FBI spells bin Laden's first name only one way, Usama. The list of his aliases fails to inform the public that he also spells it Osama.

It seems to me immediate revisions are needed on bin Laden's FBI wanted poster, clearly stating he was behind the 9/11 attacks, with any new information regarding his suspected whereabouts, and all possible spellings of his name.

The American public deserves accurate and up-to-date information on bin Laden, which may ultimately lead to his capture and prosecution.

Sincerely,
Michael Petrelis
Phone: 1-415-621-6267
Email: MPetrelis@aol.com
Web: releasebushsfbifile.blogspot.com
Postal: 2215-R Market Street, #413
San Francisco, CA 94114

Article from Raw Story

www.rawstory.com


10/19/2004

Activist to press for release of Bush FBI files Wednesday in Washington;
FOIA attorney says FBI should likely expedite release


By John Byrne | RAW STORY Editor

A California activist will fly to Washington D.C. tomorrow to demand the release of President George W. Bush’s Federal Bureau of Investigation surveillance file on the steps of the FBI headquarters in Washington Wednesday.

Michael Petrelis, who says he placed a Freedom of Information Act request for the President’s file July 6, says he has not received the file. He made a request that the request be expedited due to the presidential election, but it was denied.

The FBI confirmed to RAW STORY today that it had received Petrelis’ request July 28. In their letter denying an expedited release, the bureau said that the request had been placed in their regular processing queue.

The FBI would not confirm or deny whether they kept a file on Bush.

“Based on information you have provided, I have determined you have not demonstrated any particular urgency to inform the public about the subject matter of your requests beyond the public’s right to know about government activity generally,” wrote Records Management Division Section Chief David M. Hardy. “Accordingly, your request has been placed in our regular processing queue.”

The July 28 letter, in which Hardy said he thoroughly reviewed the request, did not state that the request was out of order. But a public affairs spokesman for the FBI told RAW STORY Tuesday afternoon that the bureau could not furnish a file on a living person without their consent. The FBI also states this on their FOIA website.

“You can’t put in a request for a living person,” the spokesman said.

FOIA attorney says FBI has responsibility to release, expedite files

Michael Fitzpatrick, an attorney for the advocacy group Public Citizen, calls the FBI’s statement an “oversimplification.” He notes that under the law’s exemption number six, documents are only withheld if disclosure would amount to an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

“It’s a balanacing test between the interest in personal privacy and the public interest in disclosure of government records,” Fitzpatrick said. “Certain kinds of records like medical records or the personnel file of a government employee, those are generally exempt. But information on individuals’ business activities or professional activies – those things are generally disclosed.

“When we’re dealing with a public official, the privacy interest is not as strong as it would be if we were dealing with a purely private individual,” he added.

Fitzpatrick also stated that Petrelis had a strong case for expedition of the documents’ release, but that part of the problem is that one needs to know what’s being requested before it can be expedited.

“Expedition is warranted when there is widespread media interest and the documents reflect on the integrity of the government,” he said. “I would think that most any records about the president that are not exempt from disclosure would meet that criteria.

“It is difficult to demonstrate why the documents meet the criteria before one knows what kind of documents are there, he continued. “It’s a little bit of a Catch-22.”

Petrelis said he wondered why the FBI didn’t state this in their July letter.

“Why wouldn’t the FBI explain this in their July letter?” he asked. “Why wouldn’t the FBI say that I need to get permission from the third party?”

I “believe that there still must be a public demand for his FBI file to be released,” he said. “If the White House responded to the pressure in February for his National Guard record, maybe they’ll respond to pressure if it’s created.”

Debbie Beatty, who works in the Historical and Executive Review Unit at the FBI and spoke for the FOIA office, stated the request was in the queue. She said that to her knowledge, no other media organization has requested Bush’s file.

“Not that I’m aware of,” Beatty said. “I supervise all incoming mail.”

Thousands of pages related to Kerry surveillance already released

Thousands of pages of FBI surveillance files relating to Sen. John Kerry’s anti-war protests when he was a member of Vietnam Veterans Against the War have been released in the last decade. Under the Freedom of Information Act, the FBI is obliged to release files on organizations, and can do so without the organization’s consent.

The FBI trailed Kerry in the early 1970s as he traveled the country, speaking out against the war and raising money.

Kerry, who obtained his personal FBI files years ago, knew of the surveillance, but the VVAW files obtained by a historian detail more extensive surveillance. Some of the files were stolen from the historian in March.

“It is almost surreal to learn the extent to which I was followed by the FBI,” Kerry said in a March statement. “The experience of having been spied on for the act of engaging in peaceful patriotic protest makes you respect civil rights and the Constitution even more.”

Petrelis has routinely championed causes that would have otherwise gotten scant media attention. He will be joined in Washington with his friend and fellow activist Wayne Turner. Both were members of the AIDS activist group ACT UP.

He organized boycotts against Miller and Marlboro because their parent company was the largest corporate donor to Senator Jesse Helms, and boycotts against Florida orange juice when growers hired Rush Limbaugh as a spokesperson, and the Coors Brewery for its donations to antigay think tanks.

In November of 2001, he and another activist were arrested for harassing the San Francisco Chronicle and the San Francisco Health Department with obscene and threatening phone calls regarding a proposed federal quarantine on people with AIDS.

All felony charges were dismissed in July 2003. Petrelis plead no contest to two charges of obscene phone calls.

Ultimately, Petrelis says he hopes Bush will agree to release his files. He noted that even candidate’s wives – Theresa Heinz Kerry – had begun releasing personal information. Heinz Kerry released her tax returns.

“The candidates have released financial and medical records to the press,” he said. “I think that’s good thing, and I think they should release their FBI files.”

“I would hope that the media scrutiny of the files would be equal to that on Kerry’s files,” he concluded.

Oct. 20 press conference at FBI headquarters

For Immediate Release
October 19, 2004
Contact: Michael Petrelis
Ph: 1-202-332-8663


ACTIVIST DEMANDS F.B.I. RELEASE BUSH’S FILE;

F.O.I.A. REQUEST PENDING SINCE JULY


Washington, DC – Gay activist Michael Petrelis will hold a press conference at the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s headquarters to demand the agency release all of its files on President George W. Bush.

WHAT: Press conference

WHERE: FBI headquarters
935 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

WHEN: October 20

TIME: 11:00 a.m.

A Freedom of Information Act request for the Bush file was made on July 6 to the FBI by Petrelis, who invoked the expedited processing clause of the act, given the urgency of the November election. The FBI has thus far not released a single page from Bush’s file.

More than 9,000 pages of the FBI’s files on Democratic challenger Sen. John Kerry and the Vietnam Veterans Against the War group have been made available to the public and media, which has extensively scrutinized Kerry’s dossier.

At the press conference, copies of the activist’s correspondence with the FBI will be distributed.

For more information about the effort to obtain Bush’s FBI file can be found on the web at: releasebushsfbifile.blogspot.com

# # #

Forbes (2000): If there is an FBI file on Bush . . .

http://www.forbes.com/2000/11/07/1107freeman.html


Technology Heralds End Of Clinton Era
James Freeman, 11.07.00, 12:01 AM ET

NEW YORK - Who was the source of the George W. Bush DUI story? We may never know, but in the future new technology could eliminate the uncertainty in similar cases. In fact, while people fear that computer databases will lay bare the most intimate details of their personal histories, information technology is exactly what will give people a level of privacy that we've never enjoyed in the past. And technology will prevent the kind of abuse of personal information that's been routinely conducted by the Clinton White House.

As for Bush's case, we know that a Maine delegate to the Democratic National Convention passed along Bush's 1976 court docket to a Fox television reporter. Who gave the information to the Democratic delegate? He won't say, so we're left to wonder about the ultimate source of the information.

It could be that someone who happened to be in the Biddeford, Me., courtroom that day in 1976 made a note and decided to share it with the world 24 years later. You might think that that's an awfully long time to hold a secret or a grudge. You also might think that it's dirty politics on the last weekend of a campaign, but it's perfectly legal. Whatever happened in that courtroom is public information. So this scenario is possible, but since the Democratic delegate, Tom Connolly, won't reveal a source, it's hard to judge the likelihood of this chain of events.

It's also possible that the news resulted from a very thorough opposition research effort by the Democrats. Under Maine law, any citizen who shows up at the court is free to check the records. But this would have been a very difficult job. The records for the Biddeford court weren't computerized until 1986 or 1987, according to a clerk who works there. Dockets for earlier years exist only on paper. So slogging through decades of court records in search of a Bush infraction would have been extremely time-consuming. Unless, of course, you knew where to look.

Which brings us to another possibility. It's unlikely that the Secret Service would have done a background investigation on George W. Bush while his father was in office, but an FBI spokesman says that the Bureau might very well do background checks on the family members of Presidents and Vice Presidents. The FBI won't say whether or not it has a background file on a particular person, so I can't tell you whether they have one on W, or whether information about him would appear in a file on his father.

But if there is a file on W, history says that the Clinton White House would have had no reservations about perusing it for politically useful data. We've known for some time that the White House illegally requested and received the summaries of FBI background investigations on more than 900 appointees from the Reagan and Bush Administrations. FBI Director Louis Freeh called these requests "egregious violations of privacy." Anthony Marceca of the White House Office of Personnel Security pleaded the Fifth when questioned about them.

Neither Bush was included among the more than 900 names, but those are just the 900 that we know about. The legal watchdog group Judicial Watch showed that White House Associate Counsel William Kennedy was able to obtain FBI background information simply by picking up the phone, and Linda Tripp testified that FBI files were piled up all over Kennedy's office. In her testimony for a Judicial Watch lawsuit, Tripp described visiting this office: "My impression of Bill Kennedy's office from that day forward never changed, and that was that he was the keeper of more files than I'd ever seen in my life, which is why...I was surprised at the number that seemed to be associated with the file issues because it seemed so very many more than 900."

Tripp, of course, is living proof that members of the Clinton-Gore team don't hesitate to use the dirt they've gathered on their perceived enemies. In direct violation of the Privacy Act, Tripp's Pentagon personnel file was leaked to the media. The White House used the same tactic on Kathleen Willey, an alleged victim of an Oval Office grope by Bill Clinton.

What does all this have to do with information technology? As Peter Huber correctly predicted in Forbes several years ago, electronic recordkeeping will provide better privacy and security than paper files. Why? Because computers keep very accurate records and can maintain very tight access to information.

The paper FBI files were sent to the White House and who knows who saw them. The White House was able to claim that the record requests were the result of a bureaucratic mixup, and that no senior people, and certainly not Mrs. Clinton, ever took a peek at them. Who can dispute that? With no records of access to the files, with hundreds of them sitting in piles around an attorney's desk, who can even guess where that information ended up?

With electronic files, secured under the latest security and authentication software, we can know exactly who accesses personnel files and when they're doing it. The latest trend in authentication is "biometrics," using the body to ensure that people are who they say they are, that they're cleared to view your information, and to record the details of their visit to your file.

Companies like Identix (nyse: IDX - news - people), Veridicom and Authentec are providing tools to scan fingerprints before people have access to encrypted files, or are able to use a wired or wireless device. Start-ups like Bionetrix are creating software that manages access to information based on retina scans as well as fingerprint verification. Much bigger corporations like Verisign (nasdaq: VRSN - news - people) offer a range of products to secure computer networks and prevent illegitimate access to data.

Technology is delivering, in a word, accountability. And whether we're talking about White House files or your medical records, that means less potential for abuse.

Letter to Sulzberger of the NY Times

Michael Petrelis
San Francisco, CA
Ph: 415-621-6267

Arthur Sulzberger Jr.
The New York Times
New York, NY 10036

RE: NYT coverage of Kerry and Bush FBI files

Dear Mr. Sulzberger:

On March 23 David Halbfinger wrote a 759-word story about the release of more pages from Democratic presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry’s FBI files, all related to his activities protesting the Vietnam war in the 1970s.

No mention was made about the possibility the FBI also has records on Kerry’s Republican opponent, President George W. Bush.

I’ve searched the New York Times’ web archives and can’t find stories about what the FBI may have in its files on Bush.

While I have no evidence suggest a file exists, I believe it is highly probable the FBI has files on Bush, either because of his business dealings in the Texas oil industry or from his tenure as governor of the state, and certainly in his capacity as president.

Enclosed are copies of letters from the FBI in response to my FOIA request and my appeal after the agency denied my request for expedited processing.

In the interests of political fairness, journalistic balance and equal press scrutiny of the two top presidential contenders, I ask, as citizen activist and Times shareholder, that the Times pursue the immediate release of these files and shake the FBI out of its complacent posture.

In the FBI’s July 28, 2004 letter to me, the agency says it has determined I “have not demonstrated any particular urgency to inform the public about the subject matter of your requests."

As you no doubt know, there’s a provision in FOIA requiring fast release of files when there is “exceptional media interest.”

If an election in less than 30 days doesn't demonstrate any particular urgency to know the truth about one of the candidates, then maybe the Times can prevail upon them to see the light.

Sincerely,


Michael Petrelis

Update

Subj: Existence of Bush FBI File Confirmed by DOJ Document
Date: 10/14/04 2:46:20 PM Pacific Daylight Time
From: mikerav@mindspring.com (Michael Ravnitzky)


EXISTENCE OF BUSH FBI FILE CONFIRMED BY DOJ DOCUMENT
by Michael Ravnitzky , mikerav@mindspring.com

While the FBI neither confirms nor denies the existence of an background
investigation file on President George W. Bush, the Justice Department has
just released an internal document describing how the FBI investigates each
President-Elect.

The Memorandum of Understanding is entitled:

Federal Bureau of Investigation Background Investigations For the
President-Elect of the United States of America

The 1992 document described the respective responsibilities of the FBI and
Justice Department during the investigation of President-Elect, and was
released in response to an FOIA request filed more than two years ago.

According to the Justice Department, this MOU has not been revoked. As a
result, an FBI File on President George W. Bush was initiated near the end
of the year 2000.

You can request a copy of the FBI File on the Investigation of
President-Elect Bush by sending a letter including the phrase: FOIA request

to:

Federal Bureau of Investigation
Record/Information Dissemination Section - RIDS
Service Request Unit, Room 6359
935 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W.
Washington, DC 20535

or preferably faxed to 202-234-3752.

While generally the FBI requires either a signed privacy waiver or proof of
death to supply a third-party's FBI File, the rules are somewhat different
when the subject of the request is of significant public or media interest,
such as when the subject was Senator John Kerry and when files dealing with
Vietnam era activities were provided to requesters.

In such cases, the FBI is obliged to review the available material in
response to a written request, and to release all segregable releasable
records.

Your request letter should contain a promise to pay fees up to $30 if
necessary.

Your request letter may include a special request for expedited processing
if you wish.

Update on Bush's FBI file

Dear Friends:

Over the weekend I received a reply from the Department of Justice regarding my appeal of the FBI denying me expedited processing for George W. Bush's FBI file. As you can see, DOJ is in no hurry to grant my Freedom of Information Act request for the president's FBI dossier.

It is my understanding, after speaking with both DOJ and the FBI last week, that once an appeal number has been assigned, it means a DOJ lawyer was appointed to handle (thwart?) my appeal.

Of course, my appeal would be moot, if reporters, pundits, media outlets and the voting public created an exceptional reason and interest in the Bush FBI file. I believe with little more than four weeks before the November election, there is ample time to force the FBI, or the White House, to release Bush's records.

In reading news accounts again from the spring about the thousands of pages of FBI files on Sen. John Kerry and his role in Vietnam Veterans Against the War, which are in the public sphere, I am reminded of how unfair and imbalanced the stories were. Not one story raised the topic of Bush's FBI file -- the focus was strictly on Kerry.

How is it Kerry supporters and the Democratic National Committee allowed the press to give Bush a free ride about his FBI dossier? I also wonder why the Associated Press has filed FOIA requests for Bush's National Guard files, and written extensively about them, but the wire service has apparently failed to request whatever the FBI may have on Bush.

In my opinion, Kerry voters and the DNC have an important responsibility to demand media outlets ask for Bush's FBI file.

Finally, my friend Clinton Fein, a San Francisco artist and political activist who operates the fantastic annoy.com web site, has created a great image depicting the unavailability of Bush's FBI file, which accompanies my column, Where is Bush's FBI file?

Cruise on over to http://www.annoy.com/home.html and check out Fein's artistry.

^^^


September 27, 2004

U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Information and Privacy
Flag Building
Washington, DC 20530

Telephone: 202-514-3642

Mr. Michael Petrelis
2215-R Market Street, #413
San Francisco, CA 94114

Re: Request No. 1001866 [My FOIA request for Pres. Bush's FBI file]

Dear Mr. Petrelis:

This is to advise you that your administrative appeal from the action of the Federal Bureau of Investigation on your request for information from the files of the Department of Justice was received by this Office on September 7, 2004.

The Office of Information and Privacy, which has the responsibility of adjudicating such appeals, has a substantial backlog of pending appeals received prior to yours. IN an attempt to afford each appellant equal and impartial treatment, we have adopted a general practice of assigning appeals in the appropriate order of receipt.

Your appeal has been assigned number 04-2795. Please mention this number in any future correspondence to this Office regarding this matter.

We will notify you of the decision on your appeal as soon as we can. The necessity of this delay is regretted and your continuing courtesy is appreciated.

Sincerely,
Priscilla Jones
Administrative Specialist

Op-ed submission to editors

Dear Friends:

Here is a column about the FBI file on George Bush that I've submitted to
various newspapers, hoping to generate news coverage regarding questions about
his file, and how it has not been released.

After my column is the July 28 letter from the Department of Justice
responding to my FOIA request for the Bush FBI file, which is post on my blog about
this issue: releasebushsfbifile.blogspot.com.

In phone conversations this week with the FBI and DOJ, both agencies
confirmed receiving my appeal. The DOJ has not sent me a written reply to my appeal
because a lawyer has not yet been assigned to review the appeal. I intend to
keep calling Washington, to prod the federal agencies to release Bush's FBI file.

And at the end of this post is the May 5 AP wire story about newly released
pages from FBI files on Kerry and the Vietnam Veterans Against the War. Read it
for background.

Finally, I ask you to share this email with friends and colleagues in the
media. The press, particularly the liberal media, need to pose this question
until the White House answers it.

Where is Bush's FBI file?

Best,
Michael Petrelis
^^^


releasebushsfbifile.blogspot.com


Where is Bush's FBI file?

By Michael Petrelis
2215-R Market Street, #413
SF, CA 94114
Ph: 415-621-627

When it comes to the issue of FBI files on President George W. Bush and
Senator John Kerry, the so-called liberal media have shown unquestionable bias in
only scrutinizing Kerry's dossier and ignoring the possibility of a file on
Bush.

An Associated Press story on May 5 detailed how the wire service got the FBI
to hand over more than 9,000 pages on Kerry's role in Vietnam Veterans Against
the War, by demanding their release under provisions of the Freedom of
Information Act.

"The FBI considered John Kerry a 'glib, cool' spokesman for Vietnam war
protesters," the AP reported.

Kerry's response was succinct and laudable.

"I think it's great [the FBI pages were released]. I'm very proud of my
efforts to end the war. I welcome anybody's perusal of them. I'm proud that I stood
up to Richard Nixon. And you know, I personally have also requested those
documents. So I'm happy to have them out there. It's terrific," Kerry said.

Using the FOIA clause for expediting processing, I requested Bush's FBI file,
assuming there is one. I'd be shocked if there isn't.

I took this action because not only the AP but also every other news report
on Kerry and the veterans' dossiers didn't broach the matter of a Bush file.

The FBI denied fast-tracking my request, placing it in the regular processing
queue. If I'm lucky, this means the agency will likely release Bush's FBI
file at the end of 2005.

There are at least three angles through which the media should look at the
issue of FBI files and the two leading contenders for the White House.

First, if press organizations and their lawyers are going to request and
examine one candidate's FBI files, and I think they should, the same request must
be made for other contender's file, if only to treat the candidates fairly and
equally.

Second, given the context of the AP's filing FOIA requests for Bush's
National Guard records and Kerry's FBI dossier, the question must be raised as to why
the AP, along with other media, have made no apparent effort to use FOIA to
obtain the Bush FBI record.

Third, Bush and his administration could themselves make his FBI file
available to the press and public, generating extensive coverage. Should that occur,
Bush, like Kerry, should "welcome anybody's perusal of" his FBI files.

I've taken an interest in this issue because I'm a gay male voter and news
consumer with a blog in which I have researched political donations from
journalists and media executives to both the Democratic and Republican presidential
candidates and their PACs.

What I've discovered is that among media personalities who have donated, the
money has flowed overwhelmingly to Kerry and the Democratic National
Committee. The contributions from journalists to Kerry lend credence to the
oft-repeated charge the media are biased toward liberals.

But if this bias were genuine, then I would expect the "liberal" media to
jump through high hoops to acquire the FBI file on Bush; however, this has not
yet occurred.

Although the election is little more than a month away, there is still time
enough for the FBI to release Bush's file before America votes, if the
following provision of FOIA is invoked, allowing for expedited processing and release
of files:

"[There is a] matter of widespread and exceptional media interest in which
there exist possible questions about the government's integrity which effect
public confidence."

It wouldn't take much effort to create the exceptional interest necessary,
forcing release of the Bush FBI file, if reporters understood the democratic and
journalistic importance of obtaining the file.

So c'mon, liberal media. Live up to your reputation and ask this question of
the White House: Where's Bush's FBI file?

- - -

U.S. Department of Justice
Federal Bureau of Investigation
Washington, DC 20535-0001

Mr. Michael Petrelis
2215-R Market Street, #413
San Francisco, CA 94114

July 28, 2004

Dear Mr. Petrelis:

This is in response to your Freedom of Information Act request concerning
President George W. Bush, FOIA number 1001866, and Vice President Dick Cheney,
FOIA number 1001868. This response is being made on behalf of the Office of the
Attorney General, Deputy Attorney General and Associate Attorney General.

You have requested expedited processing of your requests pursuant to the
Department's standard permitting expedition for requests involving "[a] matter of
widespread and exceptional media interest in which there exist possible
questions about the government's integrity which affect public confidence," 28
C.F.R. Section 16.5 (d)(1)(iv).

Based on information you have provided, I have determined you have not
demonstrated any particular urgency to inform the public about the subject matter of
your requests beyond the public's right to know about government activity
generally. Accordingly, your request has been placed in our regular processing
queue.

You may administratively appeal the denial of your request for expedited
processing by writing to the Co-Director, Office of Information and Privacy,
United States Department of Justice, Flag Building, Suite 750, Washington, DC
20503-0001, within sixty days from the date of this letter.

Both letter and the envelope should be clearly marked "Freedom of Information
Act Appeal."

Your request has been assigned the numbers above. Please use these numbers in
all correspondence with us.

Sincerely yours,
David M. Hardy
Section Chief
Record/Information Dissemination Section
Records Management Division

- - -

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-05-05-ker
ry-vietnam_x.htm

May 5, 2004

FBI file focused on Kerry's anti-war group

WASHINGTON (AP) — The FBI considered John Kerry a "glib, cool" spokesman for
Vietnam war protesters when he was attached to an anti-war veterans group, but
the bureau focused on more radical elements of the organization during an
investigation spanning four years, documents show.

In more than 9,000 pages from the early 1970s, the FBI is seen tracking the
protests, manifestos and myriad activities of Vietnam Veterans Against the War,
and concluding that the group took a more extreme turn in the years after
Kerry, now the Democratic presidential candidate, quit it.

FBI files on the organization were released Wednesday in response to a
Freedom of Information Act request by The Associated Press and other news
organizations.

Kerry is accused in the file of little more than charisma.

An FBI summary of the anti-war protests he helped organize in April 1971 says
Kerry, a decorated war hero, "overshadowed" many of the organization's other
leaders and was "a more popular and eloquent figure" than the rest.

"Kerry was glib, cool, and displayed just what the moderate elements wanted
to reflect," the summary says.

Although the FBI was watching Kerry and the other protesters earlier in 1971,
it placed the group under active investigation in August of that year
following reports from many field offices that members were "engaging in illegal and
subversive activities," an FBI memo says. Kerry left the group before the end
of 1971 and was not implicated in violent activities or conspiracies
attributed to other members in the file.

That memo, which does not mention Kerry, says that in 1972, the group "moved
toward increased militant and revolutionary-type activities in addition to
continued cooperation with communist-dominated groups and foreign elements
hostile to the U.S."

By then, Kerry had moved on to an ill-fated run for a seat in Congress.

The FBI memo — the names of the sender and recipient are blacked out —
asserts that the investigation of the group was never directed or influenced by the
Nixon White House. This, despite known efforts by Nixon's aides to discredit
Kerry.

Campaigning Wednesday in Los Angeles, Kerry welcomed the release of the
records.

"I think it's great," he said. "I'm very proud of my efforts to end the war.
I welcome anybody's perusal of them. I'm proud that I stood up to Richard
Nixon. And you know, I personally have also requested those documents. So I'm
happy to have them out there. It's terrific."

Kerry is mentioned only sporadically in the file, most of which covers the
group's activities from 1972 to 1975.

In one document, the FBI field office in Pittsburgh notes that Kerry spoke at
the University of Pittsburgh on Nov. 3, 1971. "The essence of Kerry's speech
was to condemn those who did not get involved in social change," the FBI memo
says. "He urged those present to make a conscientious commitment to end the
war."

An April 12, 1971, FBI memo from Baltimore quotes a confidential source as
saying that Kerry had been telling members of the group that "Congress is
prepared to listen" to their anti-war agenda but cautioned that it was critical that
the coming demonstrations remain nonviolent. Kerry was on the group's
national steering committee at the time.

Another FBI memo describes in detail the medals Kerry won as a Navy
lieutenant in Vietnam and noted he was a Yale graduate who was named class orator in
1966.

In contrast, others members of the group were accused of conspiracy to riot
during the 1972 Republican National Convention, of passing classified
information to a Japanese communist leader, and various acts of violence. A Connecticut
member was arrested with an explosive device en route to a speech given by
Vice President Spiro Agnew.