If you're looking for the textbook The Little, Brown Reader, click here.
is a free service provided by Lance Brown, Candidate for President in 2008. You can visit his campaign site and weblog here.
About Lance Brown
The Campaign "Elevator Pitch"
The Longer Pitch: The Future of America is Freedom
10 Easy Ways to Help the Campaign
Join the On-The-Road Support Network
Lance In The Media
Contact Lance
 |
Easy online actions for advancing the cause of freedom.
PNAC.info
An effort to investigate, analyze, and expose the Project for a New American Century, and its plan for a "unipolar" world.
CampusLP.org
Free web sites for campus libertarian clubs!
The Little Brown Reader
A rolling catalog of articles and web sites of significance that Lance is reading.
The Nevada County Libertarian Party
"Your Local Party of Principle" (Chairman)
The Nevada County Bill of Rights Defense Committee
Dedicated to Creating a Civil Liberties Safe Zone in Nevada County, California. (Co-founder)
The Free School on the Internet
A developing effort to create a superior online K-12 school, with free attendance.
StopCarnivore.org
Stop the FBI Spy Tool Carnivore Now!"
GreenLiberty.org
Where Green values meet Libertarian principles.
Pictures of The Bill of Rights
Tips for Promoting a Campus Event
198 Methods of Nonviolent Action
My (many) e-zine and list subscriptions
The History of Drug Prohibition in the U. S.
The Bill of Rights -- Full Text
Support freedom in our lifetime:
"I do not shrink from this responsibility, I welcome it."
A Little Worried About America
Boston Public: The Case Against Schools
The USA-PATRIOT Axe
The Nader 2004 "threat", and those poor, pitiful Democrats
Book Recommendation: Healing Our World
Taboos, skews, and contradictions
North Korea's Sensible Delusions
Lance on Regulation
June 09, 2004
U.S. Justice Department memo on torture sets dangerous precedent, Libertarians say=================================== U.S. Justice Department memo on torture WASHINGTON, DC -- A secret legal opinion by the Justice Department that “Iraqis can torture Americans just as easily as Americans can torture In an appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday, Of course there’s no legal or moral justification for torture, But Bush and Ashcroft seem to have overlooked a dangerous and immediate “The U.S. government has signed international treaties banning torture Unfortunately, U.S. troops have already been captured in Iraq, and may “Imagine opening your morning newspaper and seeing a photo of a captured “The American public would be justifiably outraged, and would demand Yet under the Bush administration’s “reinterpretation” of anti-torture “No civilized person wants to see such brutal, thuggish behavior go |
Capitol Hill Blue: TIA is Alive and Well
Capitol Hill Blue: Where Big Brother Snoops on Americans 24/7
Customers of the Bank of America branch at 3625 Fairfax Drive in Arlington, Virginia, often wonder about the Arlington police car that is always parked in front of the building in the next block.
They also can’t help but notice the two armed guards from the private Cantwell Security Service who patrol the street in front of the building and eye each passerby warily.
“What’s going on across the street?” one woman asked while waiting in line to deposit her paycheck last Friday.
“Not sure,” said the man ahead of her in line. “Something to do with the government. The police cars and guards have been there since shortly after 9-11.”
“Oh,” she said. “No matter.”
Actually, if the woman knew what was happening inside the nondescript office building at 3701 Fairfax Drive, she might think it really does matter because the building houses the Pentagon’s Defense Advanced Research Project Agency’s Total Information Awareness Program, the “big brother” program Congress thought it killed.
...
April 27, 2004
April 05, 2004
A Gun Rights Reply to the Bush-Cheney 2004 Fundraising Letter
Keep and Bear Arms - A Gun Rights Reply to the Bush-Cheney 2004 Fundraising Letter
March 28, 2004
Cooperate -- Or Else!
Cooperate -- Or Else!
by Timothy Lynch
Cato Institute
Few people seem to like the Fourth Amendment to the American Constitution. The Fourth Amendment is the provision that places limits on the power of the police to detain and search people. The unpopularity of the constitutional provision is perhaps understandable because it's usually mentioned in the news only when a court declares that a police raid on a drug dealer's apartment was unconstitutional. In the minds of many Americans, the Fourth Amendment only seems to benefit criminals.
The Fourth Amendment has gotten a bad rap. The Founding Fathers understood that a free society necessarily requires that the power of government to detain, interrogate, and search must be limited. It is a pity that so many Americans give the Fourth Amendment an adolescent -- "What's the big deal?" -- shrug that runs something like this: I've never been searched or arrested and never will be since I'm not doing anything illegal. Such a view misses the point. It is not so much how many times a person benefits from the Fourth Amendment that matters. Rather, the key point is that this constitutional safeguard will be there when you need it.
...
March 23, 2004
Supreme Court hears case on "right to remain silent"
MSNBC - Supreme Court hears privacy case
WASHINGTON - Do you have to tell the police your name? Depending on how the Supreme Court rules, the answer could be the difference between arrest and freedom.
The justices heard arguments Monday in a first-of-its-kind case that asks whether people can be punished for refusing to identify themselves.
The court took up the appeal of a Nevada cattle rancher who was arrested after he told a sheriff’s deputy that he had done nothing wrong and did not have to reveal his name or show identification during an encounter on a rural road four years ago.
Larry “Dudley” Hiibel, 59, was prosecuted for his silence and finds himself at the center of a significant privacy rights battle.
“I would do it all over again,” Hiibel, dressed in cowboy hat, boots and a bolo tie, said outside the court Monday. “That’s one of our fundamental rights as American citizens, to remain silent.”
...
March 22, 2004
Swearing on stage could cost stars $500
Ananova - Swearing on stage could cost stars $500
Officials in Florida want to fine rockers for swearing during public performances.
The The St Petersburg Times reports city councillors want to charge $500 (Ł272) for each swear word.
Council member Bill Foster told the paper: "Constant vulgarity is not going to be tolerated. We can't be the morality police, and we can't be the constant saviors of the First Amendment. But we can dictate what goes on in our public parks."
...
Wel,, he got one right. They clearly can't be the constant saviors of the First Amendment. We'll have to look elsewhere for them.
February 09, 2004
Judge: School must tell feds about war protest
The Miami Herald | 02/08/2004 | Judge: School must tell feds about war protest
(TruthOut permacopy)
Drake University was subpoenaed for a list of those who attended, and four activists who attended a related forum have been ordered before a grand jury.
BY RYAN J. FOLEY
Associated Press
DES MOINES, Iowa - In what may be the first subpoena of its kind in decades, a federal judge has ordered Drake University to turn over records about a gathering of antiwar activists.
...
January 31, 2004
AOL, You've Been Sued!
Hartford Advocate: You've Been Sued!
by Dan Levine - December 25, 2003
Without a judge's signature, a warrant is nothing more than a neato-toledo looking legal paper, with no power to compel anyone to do anything.
Unless you subscribe to America Online.
In a bizarre legal action, a Fairfield man is suing AOL for turning his personal information over to local police in the course of an investigation. Seems police submitted an unsigned warrant to AOL, according to the legal complaint, and the company actually complied.
The plaintiff, Clifton Freedman, is also suing the town and its police force for violating his constitutional rights.
...
January 26, 2004
Federal Judge Rules Part of Patriot Act Unconstitutional
Federal Judge Rules Part of Patriot Act Unconstitutional (washingtonpost.com)
January 23, 2004
2003 Year in Review from BORDC
This was part of the Bill of Rights Defense Committee's "Dissent is Patriotic" newsletter.
2003 Year in Review
In 2003, millions of U.S. citizens and noncitizens turned to the Bill of
Rights and exercised its protections to restore and uphold essential rights and
freedoms that help define our country. Congress and the Justice Department
noticed.
As we look forward to 2004, BORDC reviews some highlights of the past
year.
Grassroots news
-
The number of Civil Liberties Safe Zones increased
more than tenfold, from 22 communities in 2002 to 230 cities, towns, and
counties and three states by the end of 2003. The number of people protected
by Civil Liberties Safe Zones grew to over 30 million (more than 10 percent of
the United States population!).
- March 4: highest number of resolutions passed in one day, twelve,
including the first ballot initiative (Montpelier, VT).
- April 2: first ordinance passed (Arcata, CA).
-
April 25: first state resolution passed (Hawai'i).
-
The distribution of civil liberties resolutions across 37 of the 50 states
should surprise former Justice Department spokesperson Barbara Comstock, who
claimed that “about 45 percent of them, almost half, are either in cities in
Vermont, very small populations, or in sort of college towns in
California.”
-
Attention to the Patriot Act also increased among campuses,
labor
unions, religious bodies, and other types of
organizations.
-
On June 5, Attorney General Ashcroft mentioned the "Bill of Rights defense
movement" twice in his testimony before the House Judiciary Committee.
-
In August and September, the Attorney General embarked on a
month-long 30-city tour to defend the Patriot Act.
Thousands of protestors showed up at his campaign stops and held signs outside
his closed-door meetings before hand-picked audiences of uniformed law
enforcement. During the tour, 27 cities passed resolutions against the Patriot
Act, and tens of thousands of Americans looked into the Patriot Act.
-
In October, more than 200 people from 27 states met for the first time at
the first annual Grassroots America Defends the Bill of Rights
conference. Participants look forward to more regional and national conference
and ongoing communication via a listserve.
Legislation
-
On February 7, the Center for Public Integrity posted the leaked
Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003 on its website. The public outcry
over the bill dubbed "Patriot II" has prevented its subsequent introduction in
Congress. However, a section of the bill, which expands the FBI's authority to
issue national security letters by changing the definition of "financial
institutions," was inserted into the Intelligence
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004, which President Bush
signed into law in December. Other Patriot II sections may be introduced
piecemeal in 2004.
-
Last March, Rep. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) introduced the first piece of
legislation aimed at rolling back the powers granted by the USA Patriot Act,
the Freedom to Read Protection Act (HR 1157). The
bill enjoys bi-partisan support with 144 co-sponsors. Senator Russ Feingold
(D-WI) introduced the companion Library,
Bookseller, and Personal Records Privacy Act (S.1507). The SAFE Act
and the Benjamin Franklin True Patriot Act are among more than a dozen other
bills to restore liberties and rights already introduced. The CLEAR Act and
other legislation to strengthen the Patriot Act have also been introduced.
-
On July 23, by a vote of 309-118, the House approved a bipartisan amendment
offered by Congressmen C.L. "Butch" Otter (R-ID), Dennis J. Kucinich (D-OH)
and Ron Paul (R-TX) to withhold
funding for "sneak-and-peek" searches under the USA PATRIOT Act.
The nearly 3-1 vote marks the first time either chamber of Congress has acted
to roll back any provision of the law. Despite the amendment's overwhelming
House support, the conferees who worked out differences between the House and
Senate versions of the Intelligence Authorization Act dropped the amendment
from the final bill.
-
On September 25 Congress de-funded the Defense Advanced Research Projects
Agency (DARPA)'s controversial Terrorism Information Awareness (formerly the
Total Information Awareness) program. A month earlier, John Poindexter
resigned as head of the Office of Information Awareness. DARPA has transferred
some TIA research and tools to other agencies.
Reports and Court Decisions: Special Registration, Detentions, and Enemy
Combatants
-
In June, Justice Department Inspector General Glenn Fine released a report concluding that the Justice
Department had detained hundreds of Arab and Muslim men who had no ties to the
September 11 attacks or to terrorism for several months without charges or
access to attorneys. In December, Fine released another report finding that dozens of
detainees held in a federal detention center in Brooklyn were physically and
verbally abused by prison guards.
-
In November, the Supreme Court agreed to test the constitutionality of
powers that the Bush Administration has claimed since September 11, 2001: in
Rasul v. Bush and Odah v. United States, it will decide whether the non-U.S.
citizens being held in prison at Guantanamo Bay should be given access to U.S.
courts. In early January the Supreme Court also agreed to hear Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, to decide whether the
government can hold Yaser Esam Hamdi, a U.S. citizen captured in Afghanistan,
indefinitely without charges filed and without access to an attorney.
-
On December 18, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals,
based in New York, ruled that it is unlawful for the U.S. government to detain
a U.S. citizen captured on U.S. soil as an enemy combatant. The court ordered
the government to either release Jose Padilla (the only person whom the ruling
affects) or transfer him to civilian custody within 30 days.
-
On the same day, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, based in San
Francisco, ruled that the cases of some 600 detainees at Guantanamo have to be
open to judicial scrutiny, and that the Bush administration is violating
international law and the U.S. Constitution by holding detainees on a U.S.
Navy base without legal protections.
-
Nearly 85,000 men from North Korea and 24 Muslim countries reported to INS
facilities for NSEERS "special registration." The expensive program did not
turn up any terrorists, but 13,000 of the men who voluntarily reported are in
deportation proceedings. Rumors that the program has ended are untrue:
Beginning December 2, 2003, men from 25 countries who have already registered
do not need to reregister annually. Point of entry follow-up interviews are
also suspended. However, several parts of the Special Registration program
remain. Read AILA's summary of changes to the Department of
Homeland Security's Special Registration program.
-
In December 2003, the NSEERS program was supplemented by US-VISIT, a
program that takes biometric measurements of people including fingerprints and
face scans from certain countries. For more information, see the Center for
American Progress's analysis of the new program.
Silencing Dissent
-
The Secret Service shelters President Bush from
peaceful protesters. The Administration also
demanded that areas of the U.K. and Australia be "scrubbed" of protesters
during the president's visits.
-
In October, police stifled dissent at the FTAA
protests.
-
An FBI memo dated October 15 asks local law enforcement
to report antiwar protests and other activities protected by the First
Amendment which they consider "suspicious" to the FBI's counterterrorism
units.
January 14, 2004
Supreme Court Backs Police Random Roadblocks
Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan said the ruling "will allow law enforcement in Illinois and across the nation to seek voluntary assistance from citizens in their efforts to solve crime."
Right, voluntary forced assistance. It will allow them to use force to get voluntary assistance.
FOXNews.com - Top Stories - Supreme Court Backs Police Random Roadblocks
January 11, 2004
Detained in America
This is an awesome story about the very many people who have been detained in contravention with the Bill of Rights since 9/11.
Detained in America: A Guest Column by Bruce Jackson
The Desaparecidos of George W. Bush
January 03, 2004
Presidential Powers: A Court Pushes Back
MSNBC -
How do you solve a problem like Padilla?
By Michael Isikoff
Newsweek
Judges beginning to balk in war on terror
KRT Wire | 12/28/2003 | Judges beginning to balk in war on terror
January 01, 2004
Congress Expands FBI Spying Power
Wired News: Congress Expands FBI Spying Power
(Also archived at Civil Liberties Watch)
December 30, 2003
December 27, 2003
Coffee, Tea or Handcuffs?
LA Weekly: Columns: Open City: Coffee, Tea or Handcuffs?
An Australian journalist gets a taste of Department of Homeland Security hospitality
by Steven Mikulan
(TruthOut permacopy)
December 21, 2003
Checks and Balances Live On
Rebuff for Bush on civil liberties (December 20, 2003)
(TruthOut permacopy)
THE Bush administration may be forced to rethink its war on terrorism strategy after two US courts ruled yesterday that detainees should not remain indefinitely in a legal twilight zone.
In a critical decision, a San Francisco appeals court disputed the administration's claims to have "unchecked authority" in dealing with prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba outside the US criminal justice system.
The 2-1 decision came a few hours after a Manhattan appeals court ruled that accused "dirty bomb" plotter Jose Padilla - a US citizen alleged to be an enemy combatant - be released from military custody within 30 days.
...
Bill of Rights day in Noho
This is about Northampton, MA's Bill of Rights Day celebration. I've lived and worked in Northampton in the past. It's a great little Northeast city.
December 20, 2003
Bush Overruled on 'Dirty Bomb' Suspect
Yahoo! News - Bush Overruled on 'Dirty Bomb' Suspect
(TruthOut permacopy)
NEW YORK - President Bush does not have power to detain American citizen Jose Padilla, the former gang member seized on U.S. soil, as an enemy combatant, a federal appeals court ruled Thursday.
...
3 senators urge Rumsfeld to free or try terror detainees
December 08, 2003
BillofRightsDay.com
Here's a new site I put together to help folks organize their Bill of Rights Day celebration efforts:
December 01, 2003
Patriot Act Expansion Moves Through Congress
Patriot Act Expansion Moves Through Congress
by Jim Lobe
(TruthOut permacopy)
Patriot Act Author Has Concerns
Patriot Act Author Has Concerns
By Richard B. Schmitt, Times Staff Writer
Detaining citizens as 'enemy combatants' -- a policy not spelled out in the act -- is flawed, the legal scholar says.
WASHINGTON — The Justice Department's war on terrorism has drawn intense scrutiny from the left and the right. Now, a chief architect of the USA Patriot Act and a former top assistant to Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft are joining the fray, voicing concern about aspects of the administration's anti-terrorism policy.
At issue is the government's power to designate and detain "enemy combatants," in particular in the case of "dirty bomb" plot suspect Jose Padilla, the Brooklyn-born former gang member who was picked up at a Chicago airport 18 months ago by the FBI and locked in a military brig without access to a lawyer.
...
November 23, 2003
F.B.I. Scrutinizes Antiwar Rallies
F.B.I. Scrutinizes Antiwar Rallies
By Eric Lichtblau
New York Times
Sunday 23 November 2003
The Federal Bureau of Investigation has collected extensive information on the tactics, training and organization of antiwar demonstrators and has advised local law enforcement officials to report any suspicious activity at protests to its counterterrorism squads, according to interviews and a confidential bureau memorandum.
The memorandum, which the bureau sent to local law enforcement agencies last month in advance of antiwar demonstrations in Washington and San Francisco, detailed how protesters have sometimes used "training camps" to rehearse for demonstrations, the Internet to raise money and gas masks to defend against tear gas. The memorandum analyzed lawful activities like recruiting demonstrators, as well as illegal activities like using fake documentation to get into a secured site.
F.B.I. officials said in interviews that the intelligence-gathering effort was aimed at identifying anarchists and "extremist elements" plotting violence, not at monitoring the political speech of law-abiding protesters.
The initiative has won the support of some local police, who view it as a critical way to maintain order at large-scale demonstrations. Indeed, some law enforcement officials said they believed the F.B.I.'s approach had helped to ensure that nationwide antiwar demonstrations in recent months, drawing hundreds of thousands of protesters, remained largely free of violence and disruption.
But some civil rights advocates and legal scholars said the monitoring program could signal a return to the abuses of the 1960's and 1970's, when J. Edgar Hoover was the F.B.I. director and agents routinely spied on political protesters like the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. ...
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 20%
November 12, 2003
Ashcroft Slams Critics as Patriot Act Backlash Grows
Ashcroft Slams Critics as Patriot Act Backlash Grows
By Tom Regan
Christian Science Monitor
Tuesday 16 September 2003
The war of words over the USA Patriot Act heated up considerably over the past few days, thanks in part to a recently completed "Patriot Act Tour" conducted by U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft. The tour, conducted in front of small, law enforcement friendly audiences, excluded participation from the general public. (At Faneuil Hall in Boston, Ashcroft addressed a crowd of 150, while outside the hall a crowd of 1200 chanted "This is what democracy looks like.") The tour was designed to create support for the act, but in some ways may have done just the opposite.
One of the main charges critics of the Patriot Act aim against Ashcroft is that rules designed to catch terrorists will be used against ordinary citizens. They also say police and prosecutors will use the laws created by the Patriot Act in other areas of law enforcement. These critics include people from both the left and the right of the American political spectrum.
Ashcroft blasted some of these critics on Monday, taking aim in particular at librarians. The Associated Press reports that Ashcroft said people are being wrongly led to believe that libraries have been "surrounded by the FBI," with agents "dressed in raincoats, dark suits and sunglasses. They stop everyone and interrogate everyone like Joe Friday."
The attorney general continues to insist that the Act "respects rights and increases security." USA Today looks at how the Act is at the heart of Ashcroft's powers as attorney general.
...
Read It Rating: 8.1
Left/Right Rating: L1.5
Freedom Rating: 2
Learning Percentage: 20%
October 23, 2003
Georgia runs from the MATRIX
By Ashlee Vance in Chicago
Posted: 22/10/2003 at 19:45 GMT
The state of Georgia has pulled out of the U.S. Department of Justice sponsored MATRIX information collection program, leaving data only on its felons and sexual offenders behind in the Orwellian database.
Georgia Governor Sonny Perdue has cited both privacy concerns and costs as the two key reasons the state will no longer participate in the MATRIX (Multistate Anti-Terrorism Information Exchange) pilot project. ...
Read It Rating: 4.5
Left/Right Rating: L4
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 55%
October 09, 2003
Driving dangerously with the Patriot Act
Driving dangerously with the Patriot Act
By Pat M. Holt
WASHINGTON -- Attorney General John Ashcroft is running a dead heat with A. Mitchell Palmer, attorney general in the Wilson administration, for the distinction of being the worst in that job in the history of the United States.
One of the duties of the attorney general as head of the Justice Department is to protect the Constitution. Both Mr. Ashcroft and Palmer found that the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights, got in their way more than it protected anything. It has gotten in Ashcroft's way in his pursuit of terrorists after Sept. 11, especially those who dress differently and practice a different religion. Palmer's crusade was the pursuit of communists, in the aftermath of World War I. He especially went after people with what to him were funny names from Eastern Europe. He tended to equate liberals with communists.
Ashcroft's vehicle is the USA Patriot Act, which Congress, abdicating its own duties of vigilance, passed with a whoop and a holler in the days after Sept. 11. Even the name of this odious legislation is offensive. It implies that the purpose of the act is to promote patriotism and that those not cooperating with it are somehow less patriotic.
...
Pat M. Holt is former chief of staff of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L1.1
Freedom Rating: 1.1
Learning Percentage: 1%
Local Peace Group Infiltrated By Government Agent
Local Peace Group Infiltrated By Government Agent
By Mike Rhodes
October 4, 2003
Peace Fresno was infiltrated by an agent working for the Fresno Sheriff's Department. Aaron Kilner, known by Peace Fresno activists as Aaron Stokes, attended several Peace Fresno meetings. Peace Fresno activist Nicholas DeGraff remembers him taking voluminous notes and several members say they saw him at peace vilgils held at Shaw and Blackstone. He was also on the bus local anti-globalization activists took to attend the WTO ministerial-level conference on Agricultural Science and Technology demonstration in Sacramento in June 2003.
Aaron Kilner died in a motorcycle accident on August 30, 2003. In his obituary in The Fresno Bee he was identified as a member of the Fresno County Sheriff's department. The obituary went on to say that he was "assigned to the anti-terrorist team." Local activists believe that this "anti-terrorist team" is, in fact, the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) that has recently been formed in this area.. When members of Peace Fresno saw the picture and read of Kilner's association with law enforcement they began piecing the story together.
The infiltration by law enforcement of progressive community groups in Fresno and throughout the country has long been used to disrupt legitimate political work. This disruption occurs by sowing seeds of mistrust among members, agents often promote discord within the group, and sometimes encourage illegal or violent actions. Agent provocateurs have been know to instigate violence at demonstrations, giving the police an excuse to attack protestors.
...
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 45%
October 08, 2003
Terror suspect tortured: dad claims
Terror suspect tortured: dad claims
By Rebecca Urban
October 8, 2003
Australian terrorist suspects David Hicks and Mamdouh Habib had likely been tortured while detained at Guantanamo Bay, a lawyer and Hicks' father said today.
Australian lawyer Richard Bourke, who has been working with prisoners at Camp X-ray for the past two years, told ABC radio leaks from the American military and reports from former inmates revealed the detainees had been forced to kneel in the sun until they collapsed and were tied up and had rubber bullets fired at them.
...
Read It Rating: 6
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -3
Learning Percentage: 30%
Sullum: Ashcroft's Patriot Act tour
The Washington Times: Commentary
By Jacob Sullum
August 26, 2003
Attorney General John Ashcroft is on a publicity tour, promoting the Patriot Act and preparing the public for a sequel. But just as you can't always believe an actor who tells you his latest film is sure to be a hit, you have to take what Mr. Ashcroft says with a grain of salt.
Mr. Ashcroft is reacting to bad reviews from critics who say the Patriot Act -- given a green light just a month and a half after the September 11 terrorist attacks by members of Congress who had not even read the script -- was rushed into production. The result, they say, was a deeply flawed work in which civil liberties make only a brief appearance.
...
Read It Rating: 7
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: .3
Learning Percentage: 10%
Media elite debate Patriot Act
Arbiter Online - Media elite debate Patriot Act
Privacy policies concern librarians
by Amy Olsen
October 06, 2003
Pulitzer Prize winner and Washington Post reporter David Broder spoke Oct. 2 at Boise State, encapsulating the day-long “Freedom and Secrecy: Trading Liberty for Security?” conference held by the Andrus Center for Public Policy.
Broder's speech was one of several activities and joint panel discussions focusing on the philosophical and political question of balancing civil liberties and homeland security.
Broder was the last speaker among three distinguished panelists at the conference on Thursday. Former Vice President Walter Mondale and former Washington State Senator Slade Gorton joined Broder for the event.
The lecturer gave several examples of past uses of the act, ranging from long-term immigrant confinement to inquiries into library records across the nation by agents of the law.
Broder reported that among 1,500 major libraries in the United States, 178 reported "visitations from FBI members" since the USA PATRIOT Act's passage in Oct. 2001.
...
Read It Rating: 4.5
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 35%
October 05, 2003
Fed Court tells NY to back off Russell Simmons and Hip Hop Summit
FEDERAL COURT ISSUES ORDER SUSPENDING NY LOBBYING COMMISSION INVESTIGATION OF RUSSELL SIMMONS AND THE HIP-HOP SUMMIT ACTION NETWORK
NEW YORK, N.Y. -- OCTOBER 2, 2003 - Russell Simmons and Dr. Benjamin Chavis, who together with the Hip-Hop Summit Action Network, filed a lawsuit in July of this year charging the New York Temporary State Commission on Lobbying with violating their First Amendment rights, reconvened in federal court this morning to ask Judge Loretta A. Preska to enforce the suspension of the Lobbying Commission's investigation into Russell Simmons and Dr. Chavis.
Today, Judge Loretta A. Preska issued an order suspending the Lobbying Commission's investigation into Plaintiffs' First Amendment activities, which were aimed at raising public awareness about the unfairness of the Rockefeller Drug Laws. The Judge found that the Lobbying Commission had unfairly tried to back out of a court-approved agreement to suspend the investigation. The suspension that Judge Preska ordered today will last until the Court can issue a full decision in this case.
...
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 4
Learning Percentage: 85%
Ashcroft Is Unprintable, and Glad of It
Ashcroft Is Unprintable, and Glad of It
On tour, he bars the press and cozies up to local TV reporters.
September 25, 2003
COMMENTARY
By Todd Gitlin and Jay Rosen
Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft, who is continuing his tour of the country to promote the Patriot Act, has at several stops, including Buffalo and Philadelphia, refused to speak to print reporters. While television correspondents can often breeze right in, their newspaper colleagues are kept at bay by Secret Service agents doing the bidding of the nation's chief law enforcement official, who prefers audiences of handpicked enthusiasts and interviews with local television reporters.
According to Justice Department spokeswoman Barbara Comstock, Ashcroft wants to explain "key facts directly to the American people" and not have to subject himself to "as much of a filter from people who are already invested in having a different view of it."
Of course he does. What public official wouldn't prefer a stenographer to an interlocutor? Ashcroft, like the president he serves, wishes to conduct the public's business in an echo chamber. With aplomb and no hint of bad conscience, they practice the politics of no-politics, the politics of l'etat, c'est moi.
...
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 50%
October 03, 2003
Chicago City Council votes against parts of USA-PATRIOT Act
Below is an official news story about it. Here is a slightly less journalistic story that provides more background info on the movement behind the resolution. (That story, by Elaine Cassel, seems to have originated at her blog here.
Council decries Patriot Act in watered-down resolution
October 2, 2003
BY FRAN SPIELMAN City Hall Reporter
Warning of civil liberties abuses similar to those that preceded the Holocaust, the City Council on Wednesday approved a watered-down resolution urging repeal of portions of the USA Patriot Act.
The 37-7 vote followed an emotional debate that invoked the chilling words of Nazi leader Hermann Goering and ignored Mayor Daley's warning that the federal government needs extraordinary tools to fight terrorism.
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: 1.5
Learning Percentage: 75%
Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
You can read a news story about the vote mentioned below -- Austin did indeed pass a resolution against the USA-PATRIOT Act -- here. There's also a pretty interesting local news video clip about the meeting here. The story aims to be a transcript of the video, though that's not fully the case. The U.S. Attorney who is interviewed sounded like he might have only read the beginning of the act, and then skipped the rest.
t r u t h o u t - William Rivers Pitt | Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
[TruthOut] Editor's Note | The following remarks were delivered by William Rivers Pitt at a Town Hall meeting in Austin, Texas on Tuesday, September 16. The meeting was called on the eve of an historic vote; the capitol city of Texas is very near to joining hundreds of other American communities in passing a resolution that repudiates the Patriot Act.
Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
By William Rivers Pitt
t r u t h o u t | Perspective
Monday 22 September 2003
I have listened to the defenses of the Patriot Act offered tonight. The essence of the defenses, the essence of the rebuttals to our reservations and complaints, is "Trust us. We're the government. We're the constitutional scholars. Trust us."
I've heard that before.
There are tons of mass destruction weapons in Iraq. Trust us. There are al Qaeda terrorists all over Iraq. Trust us. September 11 happened because of enemies who hate our freedoms. Trust us.
With all due respect, I say hell no. The one thing this government's behavior has not created is trust.
Ladies and gentlemen, I have come here today to appeal to your patriotism. We are all patriots here, every one of us. Let no one deny that or doubt that.
What are our duties as patriots? Is one a patriot if they fly the flag, to stand for the national anthem? Yes…and no. One may do these things and be filled with love of country, but if that is all you do, then you have not done enough. In this time, and in this place, and with all that is happening in this country and around the world, the duties of a patriot go far, far, far beyond flying the flag.
The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
That is how our freedom began 227 years ago. We said 'No.' Now, we must talk, and listen, and ask questions, and understand. If we do not like where we find ourselves, we must once again say 'No' with roaring voice, and without fear.
So let us, as patriots, speak tonight about the Patriot Act....
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 1.2
Learning Percentage: 15%
October 01, 2003
Mr. Bush and the Flag
Here's the whole short editorial. The original is linked to in the title.
Mr. Bush and the Flag
Washington Post | Editorial
Sunday 31 August 2003
THE WHITE HOUSE supports the wrongheaded constitutional amendment that would give Congress the power "to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States." Yet in light of an incident last month, Mr. Bush should consider whether he might be the first person jailed should this perennial foolishness -- passed most recently by the House of Representatives earlier this year -- ever become part of the Constitution. Mr. Bush, at a political event in Livonia, Mich., autographed supporters' flags, an apparent violation of an obscure provision of American law that details the respect with which flags should be treated. "The flag," reads the code, "should never have placed upon it . . . any mark, insignia, letter, word, figure, design, picture, or drawing of any nature." The last time Congress sought to ban flag-burning, in a statute the Supreme Court struck down in 1989, it made a criminal out of anyone who "defaces" a flag -- language Mr. Bush likewise appears to have violated. Never mind the fact that he clearly meant no disrespect; if Congress had the power to criminalize flag desecration, he would at least arguably be indictable.
We say arguably because there's no telling what "desecration" actually means. The proposed amendment is meant to deal with flag-burning, but what about that American soldier who, in a moment of unadulterated patriotism, wrapped a flag around a statue of Saddam Hussein? What about a person who proudly wears a ripped T-shirt displaying the flag? Of course, such cases would never be brought in court. The amendment, in practice, would be used to punish only unpopular political expression, expression that, though sometimes odious, is today unambiguously protected by American constitutional law -- as it should be. But the notion that the president, or anyone, could be charged with signing a flag should not be even arguable. It should be laughable -- as it would be if politicians such as Mr. Bush had the guts to stand against constitutional pollution rather than pandering to it.
Read It Rating: 8.5
Left/Right Rating: L4
Freedom Rating: 3
Learning Percentage: 25%
Fear as human shield faces jail
BBC NEWS | Americas | Fear as human shield faces jail
Sitting in her modest two-bedroom home on the west Florida coast, Faith Fippinger begins to cry as she talks about the prospect of going to jail.
This spring, the 62-year-old retired schoolteacher decided to travel to Iraq as a human shield.
To many she is a humanitarian, but in the eyes of the US Government she is a criminal.
...
when she returned home there was a letter waiting for her from the US Treasury Department.
"It was a requirement to send information as to why I was in Iraq," she says.
"It also said the penalties for being there could be as high as a million dollars and up to 12 years in jail."
'Freedom of speech'
By going to Iraq Faith Fippinger had broken the US economic embargo on Iraq, which had been in place for many years.
The letter explained that by travelling to the country and spending money there, Miss Fippinger was now liable for prosecution.
Read It Rating: 8.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: -4
Learning Percentage: 25%
September 22, 2003
Ashcroft Rips Anti-Patriot Act 'Hysteria'
The last statement quoted below is a common technique used by Justice Department folks to diffuse "hysteria" (a.k.a., legitimate concern about civil liberties): you could call it the "We don't want to search you" method. The FBI guy who spoke at the public forum I organized in March used the same line, multiple times in different forms. "You regular, law abiding folks have nothing to worry about."
Right -- because law enforcement has never investigated, searched, or surveilled an innocent person.
They don't care what you're reading -- just what the bad guys are reading. So, no worries. Carry on.
(In the preceding paragraph, Ashcroft uses another common rhetorical trick -- painting a silly, cartoonish scenario, and attributing it to the law's critics. I call him on this in the local news hour segment that I posted on my main blog recently.)
Ashcroft Rips Anti-Patriot Act 'Hysteria'
The Associated Press
WASHINGTON Sept. 15 — Attorney General John Ashcroft denounced as "hysteria" the contention by some librarians and civil liberties groups that the FBI can use a new anti-terror law to snoop into Americans' reading habits.
In a speech Monday to an American Restaurant Association conference, Ashcroft said people are being wrongly led to believe that libraries have been "surrounded by the FBI," with agents "dressed in raincoats, dark suits and sunglasses. They stop everyone and interrogate everyone like Joe Friday.
"Now, you may have thought with all this hysteria and hyperbole, something had to be wrong," Ashcroft said. "Do we at the Justice Department really care what you are reading? No."
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 5%
September 14, 2003
Patriot II -- More Power, Please, Says Bush
So, they just want the power to violate the privacy of tens of thousands of people on the spot, on their own discretion.
Here's the question then: Why bother having warrants or judicial approval in any cases? What's the logic wall which prevents the example they give below from proceeding to the government simply always having instant access to all the hotel bases to check for any "known offender" in all fields of law enforcement?
Bush Seeks to Expand Access to Private Data
WASHINGTON, Sept. 13 -- For months, President Bush's advisers have assured a skittish public that law-abiding Americans have no reason to fear the long reach of the antiterrorism law known as the Patriot Act because its most intrusive measures would require a judge's sign-off.
But in a plan announced this week to expand counterterrorism powers, President Bush adopted a very different tack. In a three-point presidential plan that critics are already dubbing Patriot Act II, Mr. Bush is seeking broad new authority to allow federal agents -- without the approval of a judge or even a federal prosecutor -- to demand private records and compel testimony.
Mr. Bush also wants to expand the use of the death penalty in crimes like terrorist financing, and he wants to make it tougher for defendants in such cases to be freed on bail before trial. These proposals are also sure to prompt sharp debate, even among Republicans.
...
But Mr. Corallo gave a hypothetical example in which the F.B.I. received a tip in the middle of the night that an unidentified terrorist had traveled to Boston. Under Mr. Bush's plan, the F.B.I., rather than waiting for a judicial order, could subpoena all the Bost
A Gun Rights Reply to the Bush-Cheney 2004 Fundraising Letter
Keep and Bear Arms - A Gun Rights Reply to the Bush-Cheney 2004 Fundraising Letter
March 28, 2004
Cooperate -- Or Else!
Cooperate -- Or Else!
by Timothy Lynch
Cato Institute
Few people seem to like the Fourth Amendment to the American Constitution. The Fourth Amendment is the provision that places limits on the power of the police to detain and search people. The unpopularity of the constitutional provision is perhaps understandable because it's usually mentioned in the news only when a court declares that a police raid on a drug dealer's apartment was unconstitutional. In the minds of many Americans, the Fourth Amendment only seems to benefit criminals.
The Fourth Amendment has gotten a bad rap. The Founding Fathers understood that a free society necessarily requires that the power of government to detain, interrogate, and search must be limited. It is a pity that so many Americans give the Fourth Amendment an adolescent -- "What's the big deal?" -- shrug that runs something like this: I've never been searched or arrested and never will be since I'm not doing anything illegal. Such a view misses the point. It is not so much how many times a person benefits from the Fourth Amendment that matters. Rather, the key point is that this constitutional safeguard will be there when you need it.
...
March 23, 2004
Supreme Court hears case on "right to remain silent"
MSNBC - Supreme Court hears privacy case
WASHINGTON - Do you have to tell the police your name? Depending on how the Supreme Court rules, the answer could be the difference between arrest and freedom.
The justices heard arguments Monday in a first-of-its-kind case that asks whether people can be punished for refusing to identify themselves.
The court took up the appeal of a Nevada cattle rancher who was arrested after he told a sheriff’s deputy that he had done nothing wrong and did not have to reveal his name or show identification during an encounter on a rural road four years ago.
Larry “Dudley” Hiibel, 59, was prosecuted for his silence and finds himself at the center of a significant privacy rights battle.
“I would do it all over again,” Hiibel, dressed in cowboy hat, boots and a bolo tie, said outside the court Monday. “That’s one of our fundamental rights as American citizens, to remain silent.”
...
March 22, 2004
Swearing on stage could cost stars $500
Ananova - Swearing on stage could cost stars $500
Officials in Florida want to fine rockers for swearing during public performances.
The The St Petersburg Times reports city councillors want to charge $500 (Ł272) for each swear word.
Council member Bill Foster told the paper: "Constant vulgarity is not going to be tolerated. We can't be the morality police, and we can't be the constant saviors of the First Amendment. But we can dictate what goes on in our public parks."
...
Wel,, he got one right. They clearly can't be the constant saviors of the First Amendment. We'll have to look elsewhere for them.
February 09, 2004
Judge: School must tell feds about war protest
The Miami Herald | 02/08/2004 | Judge: School must tell feds about war protest
(TruthOut permacopy)
Drake University was subpoenaed for a list of those who attended, and four activists who attended a related forum have been ordered before a grand jury.
BY RYAN J. FOLEY
Associated Press
DES MOINES, Iowa - In what may be the first subpoena of its kind in decades, a federal judge has ordered Drake University to turn over records about a gathering of antiwar activists.
...
January 31, 2004
AOL, You've Been Sued!
Hartford Advocate: You've Been Sued!
by Dan Levine - December 25, 2003
Without a judge's signature, a warrant is nothing more than a neato-toledo looking legal paper, with no power to compel anyone to do anything.
Unless you subscribe to America Online.
In a bizarre legal action, a Fairfield man is suing AOL for turning his personal information over to local police in the course of an investigation. Seems police submitted an unsigned warrant to AOL, according to the legal complaint, and the company actually complied.
The plaintiff, Clifton Freedman, is also suing the town and its police force for violating his constitutional rights.
...
January 26, 2004
Federal Judge Rules Part of Patriot Act Unconstitutional
Federal Judge Rules Part of Patriot Act Unconstitutional (washingtonpost.com)
January 23, 2004
2003 Year in Review from BORDC
This was part of the Bill of Rights Defense Committee's "Dissent is Patriotic" newsletter.
2003 Year in Review
In 2003, millions of U.S. citizens and noncitizens turned to the Bill of
Rights and exercised its protections to restore and uphold essential rights and
freedoms that help define our country. Congress and the Justice Department
noticed.
As we look forward to 2004, BORDC reviews some highlights of the past
year.
Grassroots news
-
The number of Civil Liberties Safe Zones increased
more than tenfold, from 22 communities in 2002 to 230 cities, towns, and
counties and three states by the end of 2003. The number of people protected
by Civil Liberties Safe Zones grew to over 30 million (more than 10 percent of
the United States population!).
- March 4: highest number of resolutions passed in one day, twelve,
including the first ballot initiative (Montpelier, VT).
- April 2: first ordinance passed (Arcata, CA).
-
April 25: first state resolution passed (Hawai'i).
-
The distribution of civil liberties resolutions across 37 of the 50 states
should surprise former Justice Department spokesperson Barbara Comstock, who
claimed that “about 45 percent of them, almost half, are either in cities in
Vermont, very small populations, or in sort of college towns in
California.”
-
Attention to the Patriot Act also increased among campuses,
labor
unions, religious bodies, and other types of
organizations.
-
On June 5, Attorney General Ashcroft mentioned the "Bill of Rights defense
movement" twice in his testimony before the House Judiciary Committee.
-
In August and September, the Attorney General embarked on a
month-long 30-city tour to defend the Patriot Act.
Thousands of protestors showed up at his campaign stops and held signs outside
his closed-door meetings before hand-picked audiences of uniformed law
enforcement. During the tour, 27 cities passed resolutions against the Patriot
Act, and tens of thousands of Americans looked into the Patriot Act.
-
In October, more than 200 people from 27 states met for the first time at
the first annual Grassroots America Defends the Bill of Rights
conference. Participants look forward to more regional and national conference
and ongoing communication via a listserve.
Legislation
-
On February 7, the Center for Public Integrity posted the leaked
Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003 on its website. The public outcry
over the bill dubbed "Patriot II" has prevented its subsequent introduction in
Congress. However, a section of the bill, which expands the FBI's authority to
issue national security letters by changing the definition of "financial
institutions," was inserted into the Intelligence
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004, which President Bush
signed into law in December. Other Patriot II sections may be introduced
piecemeal in 2004.
-
Last March, Rep. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) introduced the first piece of
legislation aimed at rolling back the powers granted by the USA Patriot Act,
the Freedom to Read Protection Act (HR 1157). The
bill enjoys bi-partisan support with 144 co-sponsors. Senator Russ Feingold
(D-WI) introduced the companion Library,
Bookseller, and Personal Records Privacy Act (S.1507). The SAFE Act
and the Benjamin Franklin True Patriot Act are among more than a dozen other
bills to restore liberties and rights already introduced. The CLEAR Act and
other legislation to strengthen the Patriot Act have also been introduced.
-
On July 23, by a vote of 309-118, the House approved a bipartisan amendment
offered by Congressmen C.L. "Butch" Otter (R-ID), Dennis J. Kucinich (D-OH)
and Ron Paul (R-TX) to withhold
funding for "sneak-and-peek" searches under the USA PATRIOT Act.
The nearly 3-1 vote marks the first time either chamber of Congress has acted
to roll back any provision of the law. Despite the amendment's overwhelming
House support, the conferees who worked out differences between the House and
Senate versions of the Intelligence Authorization Act dropped the amendment
from the final bill.
-
On September 25 Congress de-funded the Defense Advanced Research Projects
Agency (DARPA)'s controversial Terrorism Information Awareness (formerly the
Total Information Awareness) program. A month earlier, John Poindexter
resigned as head of the Office of Information Awareness. DARPA has transferred
some TIA research and tools to other agencies.
Reports and Court Decisions: Special Registration, Detentions, and Enemy
Combatants
-
In June, Justice Department Inspector General Glenn Fine released a report concluding that the Justice
Department had detained hundreds of Arab and Muslim men who had no ties to the
September 11 attacks or to terrorism for several months without charges or
access to attorneys. In December, Fine released another report finding that dozens of
detainees held in a federal detention center in Brooklyn were physically and
verbally abused by prison guards.
-
In November, the Supreme Court agreed to test the constitutionality of
powers that the Bush Administration has claimed since September 11, 2001: in
Rasul v. Bush and Odah v. United States, it will decide whether the non-U.S.
citizens being held in prison at Guantanamo Bay should be given access to U.S.
courts. In early January the Supreme Court also agreed to hear Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, to decide whether the
government can hold Yaser Esam Hamdi, a U.S. citizen captured in Afghanistan,
indefinitely without charges filed and without access to an attorney.
-
On December 18, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals,
based in New York, ruled that it is unlawful for the U.S. government to detain
a U.S. citizen captured on U.S. soil as an enemy combatant. The court ordered
the government to either release Jose Padilla (the only person whom the ruling
affects) or transfer him to civilian custody within 30 days.
-
On the same day, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, based in San
Francisco, ruled that the cases of some 600 detainees at Guantanamo have to be
open to judicial scrutiny, and that the Bush administration is violating
international law and the U.S. Constitution by holding detainees on a U.S.
Navy base without legal protections.
-
Nearly 85,000 men from North Korea and 24 Muslim countries reported to INS
facilities for NSEERS "special registration." The expensive program did not
turn up any terrorists, but 13,000 of the men who voluntarily reported are in
deportation proceedings. Rumors that the program has ended are untrue:
Beginning December 2, 2003, men from 25 countries who have already registered
do not need to reregister annually. Point of entry follow-up interviews are
also suspended. However, several parts of the Special Registration program
remain. Read AILA's summary of changes to the Department of
Homeland Security's Special Registration program.
-
In December 2003, the NSEERS program was supplemented by US-VISIT, a
program that takes biometric measurements of people including fingerprints and
face scans from certain countries. For more information, see the Center for
American Progress's analysis of the new program.
Silencing Dissent
-
The Secret Service shelters President Bush from
peaceful protesters. The Administration also
demanded that areas of the U.K. and Australia be "scrubbed" of protesters
during the president's visits.
-
In October, police stifled dissent at the FTAA
protests.
-
An FBI memo dated October 15 asks local law enforcement
to report antiwar protests and other activities protected by the First
Amendment which they consider "suspicious" to the FBI's counterterrorism
units.
January 14, 2004
Supreme Court Backs Police Random Roadblocks
Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan said the ruling "will allow law enforcement in Illinois and across the nation to seek voluntary assistance from citizens in their efforts to solve crime."
Right, voluntary forced assistance. It will allow them to use force to get voluntary assistance.
FOXNews.com - Top Stories - Supreme Court Backs Police Random Roadblocks
January 11, 2004
Detained in America
This is an awesome story about the very many people who have been detained in contravention with the Bill of Rights since 9/11.
Detained in America: A Guest Column by Bruce Jackson
The Desaparecidos of George W. Bush
January 03, 2004
Presidential Powers: A Court Pushes Back
MSNBC -
How do you solve a problem like Padilla?
By Michael Isikoff
Newsweek
Judges beginning to balk in war on terror
KRT Wire | 12/28/2003 | Judges beginning to balk in war on terror
January 01, 2004
Congress Expands FBI Spying Power
Wired News: Congress Expands FBI Spying Power
(Also archived at Civil Liberties Watch)
December 30, 2003
December 27, 2003
Coffee, Tea or Handcuffs?
LA Weekly: Columns: Open City: Coffee, Tea or Handcuffs?
An Australian journalist gets a taste of Department of Homeland Security hospitality
by Steven Mikulan
(TruthOut permacopy)
December 21, 2003
Checks and Balances Live On
Rebuff for Bush on civil liberties (December 20, 2003)
(TruthOut permacopy)
THE Bush administration may be forced to rethink its war on terrorism strategy after two US courts ruled yesterday that detainees should not remain indefinitely in a legal twilight zone.
In a critical decision, a San Francisco appeals court disputed the administration's claims to have "unchecked authority" in dealing with prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba outside the US criminal justice system.
The 2-1 decision came a few hours after a Manhattan appeals court ruled that accused "dirty bomb" plotter Jose Padilla - a US citizen alleged to be an enemy combatant - be released from military custody within 30 days.
...
Bill of Rights day in Noho
This is about Northampton, MA's Bill of Rights Day celebration. I've lived and worked in Northampton in the past. It's a great little Northeast city.
December 20, 2003
Bush Overruled on 'Dirty Bomb' Suspect
Yahoo! News - Bush Overruled on 'Dirty Bomb' Suspect
(TruthOut permacopy)
NEW YORK - President Bush does not have power to detain American citizen Jose Padilla, the former gang member seized on U.S. soil, as an enemy combatant, a federal appeals court ruled Thursday.
...
3 senators urge Rumsfeld to free or try terror detainees
December 08, 2003
BillofRightsDay.com
Here's a new site I put together to help folks organize their Bill of Rights Day celebration efforts:
December 01, 2003
Patriot Act Expansion Moves Through Congress
Patriot Act Expansion Moves Through Congress
by Jim Lobe
(TruthOut permacopy)
Patriot Act Author Has Concerns
Patriot Act Author Has Concerns
By Richard B. Schmitt, Times Staff Writer
Detaining citizens as 'enemy combatants' -- a policy not spelled out in the act -- is flawed, the legal scholar says.
WASHINGTON — The Justice Department's war on terrorism has drawn intense scrutiny from the left and the right. Now, a chief architect of the USA Patriot Act and a former top assistant to Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft are joining the fray, voicing concern about aspects of the administration's anti-terrorism policy.
At issue is the government's power to designate and detain "enemy combatants," in particular in the case of "dirty bomb" plot suspect Jose Padilla, the Brooklyn-born former gang member who was picked up at a Chicago airport 18 months ago by the FBI and locked in a military brig without access to a lawyer.
...
November 23, 2003
F.B.I. Scrutinizes Antiwar Rallies
F.B.I. Scrutinizes Antiwar Rallies
By Eric Lichtblau
New York Times
Sunday 23 November 2003
The Federal Bureau of Investigation has collected extensive information on the tactics, training and organization of antiwar demonstrators and has advised local law enforcement officials to report any suspicious activity at protests to its counterterrorism squads, according to interviews and a confidential bureau memorandum.
The memorandum, which the bureau sent to local law enforcement agencies last month in advance of antiwar demonstrations in Washington and San Francisco, detailed how protesters have sometimes used "training camps" to rehearse for demonstrations, the Internet to raise money and gas masks to defend against tear gas. The memorandum analyzed lawful activities like recruiting demonstrators, as well as illegal activities like using fake documentation to get into a secured site.
F.B.I. officials said in interviews that the intelligence-gathering effort was aimed at identifying anarchists and "extremist elements" plotting violence, not at monitoring the political speech of law-abiding protesters.
The initiative has won the support of some local police, who view it as a critical way to maintain order at large-scale demonstrations. Indeed, some law enforcement officials said they believed the F.B.I.'s approach had helped to ensure that nationwide antiwar demonstrations in recent months, drawing hundreds of thousands of protesters, remained largely free of violence and disruption.
But some civil rights advocates and legal scholars said the monitoring program could signal a return to the abuses of the 1960's and 1970's, when J. Edgar Hoover was the F.B.I. director and agents routinely spied on political protesters like the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. ...
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 20%
November 12, 2003
Ashcroft Slams Critics as Patriot Act Backlash Grows
Ashcroft Slams Critics as Patriot Act Backlash Grows
By Tom Regan
Christian Science Monitor
Tuesday 16 September 2003
The war of words over the USA Patriot Act heated up considerably over the past few days, thanks in part to a recently completed "Patriot Act Tour" conducted by U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft. The tour, conducted in front of small, law enforcement friendly audiences, excluded participation from the general public. (At Faneuil Hall in Boston, Ashcroft addressed a crowd of 150, while outside the hall a crowd of 1200 chanted "This is what democracy looks like.") The tour was designed to create support for the act, but in some ways may have done just the opposite.
One of the main charges critics of the Patriot Act aim against Ashcroft is that rules designed to catch terrorists will be used against ordinary citizens. They also say police and prosecutors will use the laws created by the Patriot Act in other areas of law enforcement. These critics include people from both the left and the right of the American political spectrum.
Ashcroft blasted some of these critics on Monday, taking aim in particular at librarians. The Associated Press reports that Ashcroft said people are being wrongly led to believe that libraries have been "surrounded by the FBI," with agents "dressed in raincoats, dark suits and sunglasses. They stop everyone and interrogate everyone like Joe Friday."
The attorney general continues to insist that the Act "respects rights and increases security." USA Today looks at how the Act is at the heart of Ashcroft's powers as attorney general.
...
Read It Rating: 8.1
Left/Right Rating: L1.5
Freedom Rating: 2
Learning Percentage: 20%
October 23, 2003
Georgia runs from the MATRIX
By Ashlee Vance in Chicago
Posted: 22/10/2003 at 19:45 GMT
The state of Georgia has pulled out of the U.S. Department of Justice sponsored MATRIX information collection program, leaving data only on its felons and sexual offenders behind in the Orwellian database.
Georgia Governor Sonny Perdue has cited both privacy concerns and costs as the two key reasons the state will no longer participate in the MATRIX (Multistate Anti-Terrorism Information Exchange) pilot project. ...
Read It Rating: 4.5
Left/Right Rating: L4
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 55%
October 09, 2003
Driving dangerously with the Patriot Act
Driving dangerously with the Patriot Act
By Pat M. Holt
WASHINGTON -- Attorney General John Ashcroft is running a dead heat with A. Mitchell Palmer, attorney general in the Wilson administration, for the distinction of being the worst in that job in the history of the United States.
One of the duties of the attorney general as head of the Justice Department is to protect the Constitution. Both Mr. Ashcroft and Palmer found that the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights, got in their way more than it protected anything. It has gotten in Ashcroft's way in his pursuit of terrorists after Sept. 11, especially those who dress differently and practice a different religion. Palmer's crusade was the pursuit of communists, in the aftermath of World War I. He especially went after people with what to him were funny names from Eastern Europe. He tended to equate liberals with communists.
Ashcroft's vehicle is the USA Patriot Act, which Congress, abdicating its own duties of vigilance, passed with a whoop and a holler in the days after Sept. 11. Even the name of this odious legislation is offensive. It implies that the purpose of the act is to promote patriotism and that those not cooperating with it are somehow less patriotic.
...
Pat M. Holt is former chief of staff of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L1.1
Freedom Rating: 1.1
Learning Percentage: 1%
Local Peace Group Infiltrated By Government Agent
Local Peace Group Infiltrated By Government Agent
By Mike Rhodes
October 4, 2003
Peace Fresno was infiltrated by an agent working for the Fresno Sheriff's Department. Aaron Kilner, known by Peace Fresno activists as Aaron Stokes, attended several Peace Fresno meetings. Peace Fresno activist Nicholas DeGraff remembers him taking voluminous notes and several members say they saw him at peace vilgils held at Shaw and Blackstone. He was also on the bus local anti-globalization activists took to attend the WTO ministerial-level conference on Agricultural Science and Technology demonstration in Sacramento in June 2003.
Aaron Kilner died in a motorcycle accident on August 30, 2003. In his obituary in The Fresno Bee he was identified as a member of the Fresno County Sheriff's department. The obituary went on to say that he was "assigned to the anti-terrorist team." Local activists believe that this "anti-terrorist team" is, in fact, the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) that has recently been formed in this area.. When members of Peace Fresno saw the picture and read of Kilner's association with law enforcement they began piecing the story together.
The infiltration by law enforcement of progressive community groups in Fresno and throughout the country has long been used to disrupt legitimate political work. This disruption occurs by sowing seeds of mistrust among members, agents often promote discord within the group, and sometimes encourage illegal or violent actions. Agent provocateurs have been know to instigate violence at demonstrations, giving the police an excuse to attack protestors.
...
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 45%
October 08, 2003
Terror suspect tortured: dad claims
Terror suspect tortured: dad claims
By Rebecca Urban
October 8, 2003
Australian terrorist suspects David Hicks and Mamdouh Habib had likely been tortured while detained at Guantanamo Bay, a lawyer and Hicks' father said today.
Australian lawyer Richard Bourke, who has been working with prisoners at Camp X-ray for the past two years, told ABC radio leaks from the American military and reports from former inmates revealed the detainees had been forced to kneel in the sun until they collapsed and were tied up and had rubber bullets fired at them.
...
Read It Rating: 6
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -3
Learning Percentage: 30%
Sullum: Ashcroft's Patriot Act tour
The Washington Times: Commentary
By Jacob Sullum
August 26, 2003
Attorney General John Ashcroft is on a publicity tour, promoting the Patriot Act and preparing the public for a sequel. But just as you can't always believe an actor who tells you his latest film is sure to be a hit, you have to take what Mr. Ashcroft says with a grain of salt.
Mr. Ashcroft is reacting to bad reviews from critics who say the Patriot Act -- given a green light just a month and a half after the September 11 terrorist attacks by members of Congress who had not even read the script -- was rushed into production. The result, they say, was a deeply flawed work in which civil liberties make only a brief appearance.
...
Read It Rating: 7
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: .3
Learning Percentage: 10%
Media elite debate Patriot Act
Arbiter Online - Media elite debate Patriot Act
Privacy policies concern librarians
by Amy Olsen
October 06, 2003
Pulitzer Prize winner and Washington Post reporter David Broder spoke Oct. 2 at Boise State, encapsulating the day-long “Freedom and Secrecy: Trading Liberty for Security?” conference held by the Andrus Center for Public Policy.
Broder's speech was one of several activities and joint panel discussions focusing on the philosophical and political question of balancing civil liberties and homeland security.
Broder was the last speaker among three distinguished panelists at the conference on Thursday. Former Vice President Walter Mondale and former Washington State Senator Slade Gorton joined Broder for the event.
The lecturer gave several examples of past uses of the act, ranging from long-term immigrant confinement to inquiries into library records across the nation by agents of the law.
Broder reported that among 1,500 major libraries in the United States, 178 reported "visitations from FBI members" since the USA PATRIOT Act's passage in Oct. 2001.
...
Read It Rating: 4.5
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 35%
October 05, 2003
Fed Court tells NY to back off Russell Simmons and Hip Hop Summit
FEDERAL COURT ISSUES ORDER SUSPENDING NY LOBBYING COMMISSION INVESTIGATION OF RUSSELL SIMMONS AND THE HIP-HOP SUMMIT ACTION NETWORK
NEW YORK, N.Y. -- OCTOBER 2, 2003 - Russell Simmons and Dr. Benjamin Chavis, who together with the Hip-Hop Summit Action Network, filed a lawsuit in July of this year charging the New York Temporary State Commission on Lobbying with violating their First Amendment rights, reconvened in federal court this morning to ask Judge Loretta A. Preska to enforce the suspension of the Lobbying Commission's investigation into Russell Simmons and Dr. Chavis.
Today, Judge Loretta A. Preska issued an order suspending the Lobbying Commission's investigation into Plaintiffs' First Amendment activities, which were aimed at raising public awareness about the unfairness of the Rockefeller Drug Laws. The Judge found that the Lobbying Commission had unfairly tried to back out of a court-approved agreement to suspend the investigation. The suspension that Judge Preska ordered today will last until the Court can issue a full decision in this case.
...
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 4
Learning Percentage: 85%
Ashcroft Is Unprintable, and Glad of It
Ashcroft Is Unprintable, and Glad of It
On tour, he bars the press and cozies up to local TV reporters.
September 25, 2003
COMMENTARY
By Todd Gitlin and Jay Rosen
Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft, who is continuing his tour of the country to promote the Patriot Act, has at several stops, including Buffalo and Philadelphia, refused to speak to print reporters. While television correspondents can often breeze right in, their newspaper colleagues are kept at bay by Secret Service agents doing the bidding of the nation's chief law enforcement official, who prefers audiences of handpicked enthusiasts and interviews with local television reporters.
According to Justice Department spokeswoman Barbara Comstock, Ashcroft wants to explain "key facts directly to the American people" and not have to subject himself to "as much of a filter from people who are already invested in having a different view of it."
Of course he does. What public official wouldn't prefer a stenographer to an interlocutor? Ashcroft, like the president he serves, wishes to conduct the public's business in an echo chamber. With aplomb and no hint of bad conscience, they practice the politics of no-politics, the politics of l'etat, c'est moi.
...
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 50%
October 03, 2003
Chicago City Council votes against parts of USA-PATRIOT Act
Below is an official news story about it. Here is a slightly less journalistic story that provides more background info on the movement behind the resolution. (That story, by Elaine Cassel, seems to have originated at her blog here.
Council decries Patriot Act in watered-down resolution
October 2, 2003
BY FRAN SPIELMAN City Hall Reporter
Warning of civil liberties abuses similar to those that preceded the Holocaust, the City Council on Wednesday approved a watered-down resolution urging repeal of portions of the USA Patriot Act.
The 37-7 vote followed an emotional debate that invoked the chilling words of Nazi leader Hermann Goering and ignored Mayor Daley's warning that the federal government needs extraordinary tools to fight terrorism.
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: 1.5
Learning Percentage: 75%
Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
You can read a news story about the vote mentioned below -- Austin did indeed pass a resolution against the USA-PATRIOT Act -- here. There's also a pretty interesting local news video clip about the meeting here. The story aims to be a transcript of the video, though that's not fully the case. The U.S. Attorney who is interviewed sounded like he might have only read the beginning of the act, and then skipped the rest.
t r u t h o u t - William Rivers Pitt | Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
[TruthOut] Editor's Note | The following remarks were delivered by William Rivers Pitt at a Town Hall meeting in Austin, Texas on Tuesday, September 16. The meeting was called on the eve of an historic vote; the capitol city of Texas is very near to joining hundreds of other American communities in passing a resolution that repudiates the Patriot Act.
Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
By William Rivers Pitt
t r u t h o u t | Perspective
Monday 22 September 2003
I have listened to the defenses of the Patriot Act offered tonight. The essence of the defenses, the essence of the rebuttals to our reservations and complaints, is "Trust us. We're the government. We're the constitutional scholars. Trust us."
I've heard that before.
There are tons of mass destruction weapons in Iraq. Trust us. There are al Qaeda terrorists all over Iraq. Trust us. September 11 happened because of enemies who hate our freedoms. Trust us.
With all due respect, I say hell no. The one thing this government's behavior has not created is trust.
Ladies and gentlemen, I have come here today to appeal to your patriotism. We are all patriots here, every one of us. Let no one deny that or doubt that.
What are our duties as patriots? Is one a patriot if they fly the flag, to stand for the national anthem? Yes…and no. One may do these things and be filled with love of country, but if that is all you do, then you have not done enough. In this time, and in this place, and with all that is happening in this country and around the world, the duties of a patriot go far, far, far beyond flying the flag.
The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
That is how our freedom began 227 years ago. We said 'No.' Now, we must talk, and listen, and ask questions, and understand. If we do not like where we find ourselves, we must once again say 'No' with roaring voice, and without fear.
So let us, as patriots, speak tonight about the Patriot Act....
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 1.2
Learning Percentage: 15%
October 01, 2003
Mr. Bush and the Flag
Here's the whole short editorial. The original is linked to in the title.
Mr. Bush and the Flag
Washington Post | Editorial
Sunday 31 August 2003
THE WHITE HOUSE supports the wrongheaded constitutional amendment that would give Congress the power "to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States." Yet in light of an incident last month, Mr. Bush should consider whether he might be the first person jailed should this perennial foolishness -- passed most recently by the House of Representatives earlier this year -- ever become part of the Constitution. Mr. Bush, at a political event in Livonia, Mich., autographed supporters' flags, an apparent violation of an obscure provision of American law that details the respect with which flags should be treated. "The flag," reads the code, "should never have placed upon it . . . any mark, insignia, letter, word, figure, design, picture, or drawing of any nature." The last time Congress sought to ban flag-burning, in a statute the Supreme Court struck down in 1989, it made a criminal out of anyone who "defaces" a flag -- language Mr. Bush likewise appears to have violated. Never mind the fact that he clearly meant no disrespect; if Congress had the power to criminalize flag desecration, he would at least arguably be indictable.
We say arguably because there's no telling what "desecration" actually means. The proposed amendment is meant to deal with flag-burning, but what about that American soldier who, in a moment of unadulterated patriotism, wrapped a flag around a statue of Saddam Hussein? What about a person who proudly wears a ripped T-shirt displaying the flag? Of course, such cases would never be brought in court. The amendment, in practice, would be used to punish only unpopular political expression, expression that, though sometimes odious, is today unambiguously protected by American constitutional law -- as it should be. But the notion that the president, or anyone, could be charged with signing a flag should not be even arguable. It should be laughable -- as it would be if politicians such as Mr. Bush had the guts to stand against constitutional pollution rather than pandering to it.
Read It Rating: 8.5
Left/Right Rating: L4
Freedom Rating: 3
Learning Percentage: 25%
Fear as human shield faces jail
BBC NEWS | Americas | Fear as human shield faces jail
Sitting in her modest two-bedroom home on the west Florida coast, Faith Fippinger begins to cry as she talks about the prospect of going to jail.
This spring, the 62-year-old retired schoolteacher decided to travel to Iraq as a human shield.
To many she is a humanitarian, but in the eyes of the US Government she is a criminal.
...
when she returned home there was a letter waiting for her from the US Treasury Department.
"It was a requirement to send information as to why I was in Iraq," she says.
"It also said the penalties for being there could be as high as a million dollars and up to 12 years in jail."
'Freedom of speech'
By going to Iraq Faith Fippinger had broken the US economic embargo on Iraq, which had been in place for many years.
The letter explained that by travelling to the country and spending money there, Miss Fippinger was now liable for prosecution.
Read It Rating: 8.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: -4
Learning Percentage: 25%
September 22, 2003
Ashcroft Rips Anti-Patriot Act 'Hysteria'
The last statement quoted below is a common technique used by Justice Department folks to diffuse "hysteria" (a.k.a., legitimate concern about civil liberties): you could call it the "We don't want to search you" method. The FBI guy who spoke at the public forum I organized in March used the same line, multiple times in different forms. "You regular, law abiding folks have nothing to worry about."
Right -- because law enforcement has never investigated, searched, or surveilled an innocent person.
They don't care what you're reading -- just what the bad guys are reading. So, no worries. Carry on.
(In the preceding paragraph, Ashcroft uses another common rhetorical trick -- painting a silly, cartoonish scenario, and attributing it to the law's critics. I call him on this in the local news hour segment that I posted on my main blog recently.)
Ashcroft Rips Anti-Patriot Act 'Hysteria'
The Associated Press
WASHINGTON Sept. 15 — Attorney General John Ashcroft denounced as "hysteria" the contention by some librarians and civil liberties groups that the FBI can use a new anti-terror law to snoop into Americans' reading habits.
In a speech Monday to an American Restaurant Association conference, Ashcroft said people are being wrongly led to believe that libraries have been "surrounded by the FBI," with agents "dressed in raincoats, dark suits and sunglasses. They stop everyone and interrogate everyone like Joe Friday.
"Now, you may have thought with all this hysteria and hyperbole, something had to be wrong," Ashcroft said. "Do we at the Justice Department really care what you are reading? No."
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 5%
September 14, 2003
Patriot II -- More Power, Please, Says Bush
So, they just want the power to violate the privacy of tens of thousands of people on the spot, on their own discretion.
Here's the question then: Why bother having warrants or judicial approval in any cases? What's the logic wall which prevents the example they give below from proceeding to the government simply always having instant access to all the hotel bases to check for any "known offender" in all fields of law enforcement?
Bush Seeks to Expand Access to Private Data
WASHINGTON, Sept. 13 -- For months, President Bush's advisers have assured a skittish public that law-abiding Americans have no reason to fear the long reach of the antiterrorism law known as the Patriot Act because its most intrusive measures would require a judge's sign-off.
But in a plan announced this week to expand counterterrorism powers, President Bush adopted a very different tack. In a three-point presidential plan that critics are already dubbing Patriot Act II, Mr. Bush is seeking broad new authority to allow federal agents -- without the approval of a judge or even a federal prosecutor -- to demand private records and compel testimony.
Mr. Bush also wants to expand the use of the death penalty in crimes like terrorist financing, and he wants to make it tougher for defendants in such cases to be freed on bail before trial. These proposals are also sure to prompt sharp debate, even among Republicans.
...
But Mr. Corallo gave a hypothetical example in which the F.B.I. received a tip in the middle of the night that an unidentified terrorist had traveled to Boston. Under Mr. Bush's plan, the F.B.I., rather than waiting for a judicial order, could subpoena all the Bost
Cooperate -- Or Else!
Cooperate -- Or Else!
by Timothy Lynch
Cato Institute
Few people seem to like the Fourth Amendment to the American Constitution. The Fourth Amendment is the provision that places limits on the power of the police to detain and search people. The unpopularity of the constitutional provision is perhaps understandable because it's usually mentioned in the news only when a court declares that a police raid on a drug dealer's apartment was unconstitutional. In the minds of many Americans, the Fourth Amendment only seems to benefit criminals.
The Fourth Amendment has gotten a bad rap. The Founding Fathers understood that a free society necessarily requires that the power of government to detain, interrogate, and search must be limited. It is a pity that so many Americans give the Fourth Amendment an adolescent -- "What's the big deal?" -- shrug that runs something like this: I've never been searched or arrested and never will be since I'm not doing anything illegal. Such a view misses the point. It is not so much how many times a person benefits from the Fourth Amendment that matters. Rather, the key point is that this constitutional safeguard will be there when you need it.
...
Supreme Court hears case on "right to remain silent"
MSNBC - Supreme Court hears privacy case
WASHINGTON - Do you have to tell the police your name? Depending on how the Supreme Court rules, the answer could be the difference between arrest and freedom.
The justices heard arguments Monday in a first-of-its-kind case that asks whether people can be punished for refusing to identify themselves.
The court took up the appeal of a Nevada cattle rancher who was arrested after he told a sheriff’s deputy that he had done nothing wrong and did not have to reveal his name or show identification during an encounter on a rural road four years ago.
Larry “Dudley” Hiibel, 59, was prosecuted for his silence and finds himself at the center of a significant privacy rights battle.
“I would do it all over again,” Hiibel, dressed in cowboy hat, boots and a bolo tie, said outside the court Monday. “That’s one of our fundamental rights as American citizens, to remain silent.”
...
March 22, 2004
Swearing on stage could cost stars $500
Ananova - Swearing on stage could cost stars $500
Officials in Florida want to fine rockers for swearing during public performances.
The The St Petersburg Times reports city councillors want to charge $500 (Ł272) for each swear word.
Council member Bill Foster told the paper: "Constant vulgarity is not going to be tolerated. We can't be the morality police, and we can't be the constant saviors of the First Amendment. But we can dictate what goes on in our public parks."
...
Wel,, he got one right. They clearly can't be the constant saviors of the First Amendment. We'll have to look elsewhere for them.
February 09, 2004
Judge: School must tell feds about war protest
The Miami Herald | 02/08/2004 | Judge: School must tell feds about war protest
(TruthOut permacopy)
Drake University was subpoenaed for a list of those who attended, and four activists who attended a related forum have been ordered before a grand jury.
BY RYAN J. FOLEY
Associated Press
DES MOINES, Iowa - In what may be the first subpoena of its kind in decades, a federal judge has ordered Drake University to turn over records about a gathering of antiwar activists.
...
January 31, 2004
AOL, You've Been Sued!
Hartford Advocate: You've Been Sued!
by Dan Levine - December 25, 2003
Without a judge's signature, a warrant is nothing more than a neato-toledo looking legal paper, with no power to compel anyone to do anything.
Unless you subscribe to America Online.
In a bizarre legal action, a Fairfield man is suing AOL for turning his personal information over to local police in the course of an investigation. Seems police submitted an unsigned warrant to AOL, according to the legal complaint, and the company actually complied.
The plaintiff, Clifton Freedman, is also suing the town and its police force for violating his constitutional rights.
...
January 26, 2004
Federal Judge Rules Part of Patriot Act Unconstitutional
Federal Judge Rules Part of Patriot Act Unconstitutional (washingtonpost.com)
January 23, 2004
2003 Year in Review from BORDC
This was part of the Bill of Rights Defense Committee's "Dissent is Patriotic" newsletter.
2003 Year in Review
In 2003, millions of U.S. citizens and noncitizens turned to the Bill of
Rights and exercised its protections to restore and uphold essential rights and
freedoms that help define our country. Congress and the Justice Department
noticed.
As we look forward to 2004, BORDC reviews some highlights of the past
year.
Grassroots news
-
The number of Civil Liberties Safe Zones increased
more than tenfold, from 22 communities in 2002 to 230 cities, towns, and
counties and three states by the end of 2003. The number of people protected
by Civil Liberties Safe Zones grew to over 30 million (more than 10 percent of
the United States population!).
- March 4: highest number of resolutions passed in one day, twelve,
including the first ballot initiative (Montpelier, VT).
- April 2: first ordinance passed (Arcata, CA).
-
April 25: first state resolution passed (Hawai'i).
-
The distribution of civil liberties resolutions across 37 of the 50 states
should surprise former Justice Department spokesperson Barbara Comstock, who
claimed that “about 45 percent of them, almost half, are either in cities in
Vermont, very small populations, or in sort of college towns in
California.”
-
Attention to the Patriot Act also increased among campuses,
labor
unions, religious bodies, and other types of
organizations.
-
On June 5, Attorney General Ashcroft mentioned the "Bill of Rights defense
movement" twice in his testimony before the House Judiciary Committee.
-
In August and September, the Attorney General embarked on a
month-long 30-city tour to defend the Patriot Act.
Thousands of protestors showed up at his campaign stops and held signs outside
his closed-door meetings before hand-picked audiences of uniformed law
enforcement. During the tour, 27 cities passed resolutions against the Patriot
Act, and tens of thousands of Americans looked into the Patriot Act.
-
In October, more than 200 people from 27 states met for the first time at
the first annual Grassroots America Defends the Bill of Rights
conference. Participants look forward to more regional and national conference
and ongoing communication via a listserve.
Legislation
-
On February 7, the Center for Public Integrity posted the leaked
Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003 on its website. The public outcry
over the bill dubbed "Patriot II" has prevented its subsequent introduction in
Congress. However, a section of the bill, which expands the FBI's authority to
issue national security letters by changing the definition of "financial
institutions," was inserted into the Intelligence
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004, which President Bush
signed into law in December. Other Patriot II sections may be introduced
piecemeal in 2004.
-
Last March, Rep. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) introduced the first piece of
legislation aimed at rolling back the powers granted by the USA Patriot Act,
the Freedom to Read Protection Act (HR 1157). The
bill enjoys bi-partisan support with 144 co-sponsors. Senator Russ Feingold
(D-WI) introduced the companion Library,
Bookseller, and Personal Records Privacy Act (S.1507). The SAFE Act
and the Benjamin Franklin True Patriot Act are among more than a dozen other
bills to restore liberties and rights already introduced. The CLEAR Act and
other legislation to strengthen the Patriot Act have also been introduced.
-
On July 23, by a vote of 309-118, the House approved a bipartisan amendment
offered by Congressmen C.L. "Butch" Otter (R-ID), Dennis J. Kucinich (D-OH)
and Ron Paul (R-TX) to withhold
funding for "sneak-and-peek" searches under the USA PATRIOT Act.
The nearly 3-1 vote marks the first time either chamber of Congress has acted
to roll back any provision of the law. Despite the amendment's overwhelming
House support, the conferees who worked out differences between the House and
Senate versions of the Intelligence Authorization Act dropped the amendment
from the final bill.
-
On September 25 Congress de-funded the Defense Advanced Research Projects
Agency (DARPA)'s controversial Terrorism Information Awareness (formerly the
Total Information Awareness) program. A month earlier, John Poindexter
resigned as head of the Office of Information Awareness. DARPA has transferred
some TIA research and tools to other agencies.
Reports and Court Decisions: Special Registration, Detentions, and Enemy
Combatants
-
In June, Justice Department Inspector General Glenn Fine released a report concluding that the Justice
Department had detained hundreds of Arab and Muslim men who had no ties to the
September 11 attacks or to terrorism for several months without charges or
access to attorneys. In December, Fine released another report finding that dozens of
detainees held in a federal detention center in Brooklyn were physically and
verbally abused by prison guards.
-
In November, the Supreme Court agreed to test the constitutionality of
powers that the Bush Administration has claimed since September 11, 2001: in
Rasul v. Bush and Odah v. United States, it will decide whether the non-U.S.
citizens being held in prison at Guantanamo Bay should be given access to U.S.
courts. In early January the Supreme Court also agreed to hear Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, to decide whether the
government can hold Yaser Esam Hamdi, a U.S. citizen captured in Afghanistan,
indefinitely without charges filed and without access to an attorney.
-
On December 18, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals,
based in New York, ruled that it is unlawful for the U.S. government to detain
a U.S. citizen captured on U.S. soil as an enemy combatant. The court ordered
the government to either release Jose Padilla (the only person whom the ruling
affects) or transfer him to civilian custody within 30 days.
-
On the same day, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, based in San
Francisco, ruled that the cases of some 600 detainees at Guantanamo have to be
open to judicial scrutiny, and that the Bush administration is violating
international law and the U.S. Constitution by holding detainees on a U.S.
Navy base without legal protections.
-
Nearly 85,000 men from North Korea and 24 Muslim countries reported to INS
facilities for NSEERS "special registration." The expensive program did not
turn up any terrorists, but 13,000 of the men who voluntarily reported are in
deportation proceedings. Rumors that the program has ended are untrue:
Beginning December 2, 2003, men from 25 countries who have already registered
do not need to reregister annually. Point of entry follow-up interviews are
also suspended. However, several parts of the Special Registration program
remain. Read AILA's summary of changes to the Department of
Homeland Security's Special Registration program.
-
In December 2003, the NSEERS program was supplemented by US-VISIT, a
program that takes biometric measurements of people including fingerprints and
face scans from certain countries. For more information, see the Center for
American Progress's analysis of the new program.
Silencing Dissent
-
The Secret Service shelters President Bush from
peaceful protesters. The Administration also
demanded that areas of the U.K. and Australia be "scrubbed" of protesters
during the president's visits.
-
In October, police stifled dissent at the FTAA
protests.
-
An FBI memo dated October 15 asks local law enforcement
to report antiwar protests and other activities protected by the First
Amendment which they consider "suspicious" to the FBI's counterterrorism
units.
January 14, 2004
Supreme Court Backs Police Random Roadblocks
Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan said the ruling "will allow law enforcement in Illinois and across the nation to seek voluntary assistance from citizens in their efforts to solve crime."
Right, voluntary forced assistance. It will allow them to use force to get voluntary assistance.
FOXNews.com - Top Stories - Supreme Court Backs Police Random Roadblocks
January 11, 2004
Detained in America
This is an awesome story about the very many people who have been detained in contravention with the Bill of Rights since 9/11.
Detained in America: A Guest Column by Bruce Jackson
The Desaparecidos of George W. Bush
January 03, 2004
Presidential Powers: A Court Pushes Back
MSNBC -
How do you solve a problem like Padilla?
By Michael Isikoff
Newsweek
Judges beginning to balk in war on terror
KRT Wire | 12/28/2003 | Judges beginning to balk in war on terror
January 01, 2004
Congress Expands FBI Spying Power
Wired News: Congress Expands FBI Spying Power
(Also archived at Civil Liberties Watch)
December 30, 2003
December 27, 2003
Coffee, Tea or Handcuffs?
LA Weekly: Columns: Open City: Coffee, Tea or Handcuffs?
An Australian journalist gets a taste of Department of Homeland Security hospitality
by Steven Mikulan
(TruthOut permacopy)
December 21, 2003
Checks and Balances Live On
Rebuff for Bush on civil liberties (December 20, 2003)
(TruthOut permacopy)
THE Bush administration may be forced to rethink its war on terrorism strategy after two US courts ruled yesterday that detainees should not remain indefinitely in a legal twilight zone.
In a critical decision, a San Francisco appeals court disputed the administration's claims to have "unchecked authority" in dealing with prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba outside the US criminal justice system.
The 2-1 decision came a few hours after a Manhattan appeals court ruled that accused "dirty bomb" plotter Jose Padilla - a US citizen alleged to be an enemy combatant - be released from military custody within 30 days.
...
Bill of Rights day in Noho
This is about Northampton, MA's Bill of Rights Day celebration. I've lived and worked in Northampton in the past. It's a great little Northeast city.
December 20, 2003
Bush Overruled on 'Dirty Bomb' Suspect
Yahoo! News - Bush Overruled on 'Dirty Bomb' Suspect
(TruthOut permacopy)
NEW YORK - President Bush does not have power to detain American citizen Jose Padilla, the former gang member seized on U.S. soil, as an enemy combatant, a federal appeals court ruled Thursday.
...
3 senators urge Rumsfeld to free or try terror detainees
December 08, 2003
BillofRightsDay.com
Here's a new site I put together to help folks organize their Bill of Rights Day celebration efforts:
December 01, 2003
Patriot Act Expansion Moves Through Congress
Patriot Act Expansion Moves Through Congress
by Jim Lobe
(TruthOut permacopy)
Patriot Act Author Has Concerns
Patriot Act Author Has Concerns
By Richard B. Schmitt, Times Staff Writer
Detaining citizens as 'enemy combatants' -- a policy not spelled out in the act -- is flawed, the legal scholar says.
WASHINGTON — The Justice Department's war on terrorism has drawn intense scrutiny from the left and the right. Now, a chief architect of the USA Patriot Act and a former top assistant to Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft are joining the fray, voicing concern about aspects of the administration's anti-terrorism policy.
At issue is the government's power to designate and detain "enemy combatants," in particular in the case of "dirty bomb" plot suspect Jose Padilla, the Brooklyn-born former gang member who was picked up at a Chicago airport 18 months ago by the FBI and locked in a military brig without access to a lawyer.
...
November 23, 2003
F.B.I. Scrutinizes Antiwar Rallies
F.B.I. Scrutinizes Antiwar Rallies
By Eric Lichtblau
New York Times
Sunday 23 November 2003
The Federal Bureau of Investigation has collected extensive information on the tactics, training and organization of antiwar demonstrators and has advised local law enforcement officials to report any suspicious activity at protests to its counterterrorism squads, according to interviews and a confidential bureau memorandum.
The memorandum, which the bureau sent to local law enforcement agencies last month in advance of antiwar demonstrations in Washington and San Francisco, detailed how protesters have sometimes used "training camps" to rehearse for demonstrations, the Internet to raise money and gas masks to defend against tear gas. The memorandum analyzed lawful activities like recruiting demonstrators, as well as illegal activities like using fake documentation to get into a secured site.
F.B.I. officials said in interviews that the intelligence-gathering effort was aimed at identifying anarchists and "extremist elements" plotting violence, not at monitoring the political speech of law-abiding protesters.
The initiative has won the support of some local police, who view it as a critical way to maintain order at large-scale demonstrations. Indeed, some law enforcement officials said they believed the F.B.I.'s approach had helped to ensure that nationwide antiwar demonstrations in recent months, drawing hundreds of thousands of protesters, remained largely free of violence and disruption.
But some civil rights advocates and legal scholars said the monitoring program could signal a return to the abuses of the 1960's and 1970's, when J. Edgar Hoover was the F.B.I. director and agents routinely spied on political protesters like the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. ...
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 20%
November 12, 2003
Ashcroft Slams Critics as Patriot Act Backlash Grows
Ashcroft Slams Critics as Patriot Act Backlash Grows
By Tom Regan
Christian Science Monitor
Tuesday 16 September 2003
The war of words over the USA Patriot Act heated up considerably over the past few days, thanks in part to a recently completed "Patriot Act Tour" conducted by U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft. The tour, conducted in front of small, law enforcement friendly audiences, excluded participation from the general public. (At Faneuil Hall in Boston, Ashcroft addressed a crowd of 150, while outside the hall a crowd of 1200 chanted "This is what democracy looks like.") The tour was designed to create support for the act, but in some ways may have done just the opposite.
One of the main charges critics of the Patriot Act aim against Ashcroft is that rules designed to catch terrorists will be used against ordinary citizens. They also say police and prosecutors will use the laws created by the Patriot Act in other areas of law enforcement. These critics include people from both the left and the right of the American political spectrum.
Ashcroft blasted some of these critics on Monday, taking aim in particular at librarians. The Associated Press reports that Ashcroft said people are being wrongly led to believe that libraries have been "surrounded by the FBI," with agents "dressed in raincoats, dark suits and sunglasses. They stop everyone and interrogate everyone like Joe Friday."
The attorney general continues to insist that the Act "respects rights and increases security." USA Today looks at how the Act is at the heart of Ashcroft's powers as attorney general.
...
Read It Rating: 8.1
Left/Right Rating: L1.5
Freedom Rating: 2
Learning Percentage: 20%
October 23, 2003
Georgia runs from the MATRIX
By Ashlee Vance in Chicago
Posted: 22/10/2003 at 19:45 GMT
The state of Georgia has pulled out of the U.S. Department of Justice sponsored MATRIX information collection program, leaving data only on its felons and sexual offenders behind in the Orwellian database.
Georgia Governor Sonny Perdue has cited both privacy concerns and costs as the two key reasons the state will no longer participate in the MATRIX (Multistate Anti-Terrorism Information Exchange) pilot project. ...
Read It Rating: 4.5
Left/Right Rating: L4
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 55%
October 09, 2003
Driving dangerously with the Patriot Act
Driving dangerously with the Patriot Act
By Pat M. Holt
WASHINGTON -- Attorney General John Ashcroft is running a dead heat with A. Mitchell Palmer, attorney general in the Wilson administration, for the distinction of being the worst in that job in the history of the United States.
One of the duties of the attorney general as head of the Justice Department is to protect the Constitution. Both Mr. Ashcroft and Palmer found that the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights, got in their way more than it protected anything. It has gotten in Ashcroft's way in his pursuit of terrorists after Sept. 11, especially those who dress differently and practice a different religion. Palmer's crusade was the pursuit of communists, in the aftermath of World War I. He especially went after people with what to him were funny names from Eastern Europe. He tended to equate liberals with communists.
Ashcroft's vehicle is the USA Patriot Act, which Congress, abdicating its own duties of vigilance, passed with a whoop and a holler in the days after Sept. 11. Even the name of this odious legislation is offensive. It implies that the purpose of the act is to promote patriotism and that those not cooperating with it are somehow less patriotic.
...
Pat M. Holt is former chief of staff of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L1.1
Freedom Rating: 1.1
Learning Percentage: 1%
Local Peace Group Infiltrated By Government Agent
Local Peace Group Infiltrated By Government Agent
By Mike Rhodes
October 4, 2003
Peace Fresno was infiltrated by an agent working for the Fresno Sheriff's Department. Aaron Kilner, known by Peace Fresno activists as Aaron Stokes, attended several Peace Fresno meetings. Peace Fresno activist Nicholas DeGraff remembers him taking voluminous notes and several members say they saw him at peace vilgils held at Shaw and Blackstone. He was also on the bus local anti-globalization activists took to attend the WTO ministerial-level conference on Agricultural Science and Technology demonstration in Sacramento in June 2003.
Aaron Kilner died in a motorcycle accident on August 30, 2003. In his obituary in The Fresno Bee he was identified as a member of the Fresno County Sheriff's department. The obituary went on to say that he was "assigned to the anti-terrorist team." Local activists believe that this "anti-terrorist team" is, in fact, the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) that has recently been formed in this area.. When members of Peace Fresno saw the picture and read of Kilner's association with law enforcement they began piecing the story together.
The infiltration by law enforcement of progressive community groups in Fresno and throughout the country has long been used to disrupt legitimate political work. This disruption occurs by sowing seeds of mistrust among members, agents often promote discord within the group, and sometimes encourage illegal or violent actions. Agent provocateurs have been know to instigate violence at demonstrations, giving the police an excuse to attack protestors.
...
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 45%
October 08, 2003
Terror suspect tortured: dad claims
Terror suspect tortured: dad claims
By Rebecca Urban
October 8, 2003
Australian terrorist suspects David Hicks and Mamdouh Habib had likely been tortured while detained at Guantanamo Bay, a lawyer and Hicks' father said today.
Australian lawyer Richard Bourke, who has been working with prisoners at Camp X-ray for the past two years, told ABC radio leaks from the American military and reports from former inmates revealed the detainees had been forced to kneel in the sun until they collapsed and were tied up and had rubber bullets fired at them.
...
Read It Rating: 6
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -3
Learning Percentage: 30%
Sullum: Ashcroft's Patriot Act tour
The Washington Times: Commentary
By Jacob Sullum
August 26, 2003
Attorney General John Ashcroft is on a publicity tour, promoting the Patriot Act and preparing the public for a sequel. But just as you can't always believe an actor who tells you his latest film is sure to be a hit, you have to take what Mr. Ashcroft says with a grain of salt.
Mr. Ashcroft is reacting to bad reviews from critics who say the Patriot Act -- given a green light just a month and a half after the September 11 terrorist attacks by members of Congress who had not even read the script -- was rushed into production. The result, they say, was a deeply flawed work in which civil liberties make only a brief appearance.
...
Read It Rating: 7
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: .3
Learning Percentage: 10%
Media elite debate Patriot Act
Arbiter Online - Media elite debate Patriot Act
Privacy policies concern librarians
by Amy Olsen
October 06, 2003
Pulitzer Prize winner and Washington Post reporter David Broder spoke Oct. 2 at Boise State, encapsulating the day-long “Freedom and Secrecy: Trading Liberty for Security?” conference held by the Andrus Center for Public Policy.
Broder's speech was one of several activities and joint panel discussions focusing on the philosophical and political question of balancing civil liberties and homeland security.
Broder was the last speaker among three distinguished panelists at the conference on Thursday. Former Vice President Walter Mondale and former Washington State Senator Slade Gorton joined Broder for the event.
The lecturer gave several examples of past uses of the act, ranging from long-term immigrant confinement to inquiries into library records across the nation by agents of the law.
Broder reported that among 1,500 major libraries in the United States, 178 reported "visitations from FBI members" since the USA PATRIOT Act's passage in Oct. 2001.
...
Read It Rating: 4.5
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 35%
October 05, 2003
Fed Court tells NY to back off Russell Simmons and Hip Hop Summit
FEDERAL COURT ISSUES ORDER SUSPENDING NY LOBBYING COMMISSION INVESTIGATION OF RUSSELL SIMMONS AND THE HIP-HOP SUMMIT ACTION NETWORK
NEW YORK, N.Y. -- OCTOBER 2, 2003 - Russell Simmons and Dr. Benjamin Chavis, who together with the Hip-Hop Summit Action Network, filed a lawsuit in July of this year charging the New York Temporary State Commission on Lobbying with violating their First Amendment rights, reconvened in federal court this morning to ask Judge Loretta A. Preska to enforce the suspension of the Lobbying Commission's investigation into Russell Simmons and Dr. Chavis.
Today, Judge Loretta A. Preska issued an order suspending the Lobbying Commission's investigation into Plaintiffs' First Amendment activities, which were aimed at raising public awareness about the unfairness of the Rockefeller Drug Laws. The Judge found that the Lobbying Commission had unfairly tried to back out of a court-approved agreement to suspend the investigation. The suspension that Judge Preska ordered today will last until the Court can issue a full decision in this case.
...
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 4
Learning Percentage: 85%
Ashcroft Is Unprintable, and Glad of It
Ashcroft Is Unprintable, and Glad of It
On tour, he bars the press and cozies up to local TV reporters.
September 25, 2003
COMMENTARY
By Todd Gitlin and Jay Rosen
Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft, who is continuing his tour of the country to promote the Patriot Act, has at several stops, including Buffalo and Philadelphia, refused to speak to print reporters. While television correspondents can often breeze right in, their newspaper colleagues are kept at bay by Secret Service agents doing the bidding of the nation's chief law enforcement official, who prefers audiences of handpicked enthusiasts and interviews with local television reporters.
According to Justice Department spokeswoman Barbara Comstock, Ashcroft wants to explain "key facts directly to the American people" and not have to subject himself to "as much of a filter from people who are already invested in having a different view of it."
Of course he does. What public official wouldn't prefer a stenographer to an interlocutor? Ashcroft, like the president he serves, wishes to conduct the public's business in an echo chamber. With aplomb and no hint of bad conscience, they practice the politics of no-politics, the politics of l'etat, c'est moi.
...
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 50%
October 03, 2003
Chicago City Council votes against parts of USA-PATRIOT Act
Below is an official news story about it. Here is a slightly less journalistic story that provides more background info on the movement behind the resolution. (That story, by Elaine Cassel, seems to have originated at her blog here.
Council decries Patriot Act in watered-down resolution
October 2, 2003
BY FRAN SPIELMAN City Hall Reporter
Warning of civil liberties abuses similar to those that preceded the Holocaust, the City Council on Wednesday approved a watered-down resolution urging repeal of portions of the USA Patriot Act.
The 37-7 vote followed an emotional debate that invoked the chilling words of Nazi leader Hermann Goering and ignored Mayor Daley's warning that the federal government needs extraordinary tools to fight terrorism.
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: 1.5
Learning Percentage: 75%
Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
You can read a news story about the vote mentioned below -- Austin did indeed pass a resolution against the USA-PATRIOT Act -- here. There's also a pretty interesting local news video clip about the meeting here. The story aims to be a transcript of the video, though that's not fully the case. The U.S. Attorney who is interviewed sounded like he might have only read the beginning of the act, and then skipped the rest.
t r u t h o u t - William Rivers Pitt | Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
[TruthOut] Editor's Note | The following remarks were delivered by William Rivers Pitt at a Town Hall meeting in Austin, Texas on Tuesday, September 16. The meeting was called on the eve of an historic vote; the capitol city of Texas is very near to joining hundreds of other American communities in passing a resolution that repudiates the Patriot Act.
Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
By William Rivers Pitt
t r u t h o u t | Perspective
Monday 22 September 2003
I have listened to the defenses of the Patriot Act offered tonight. The essence of the defenses, the essence of the rebuttals to our reservations and complaints, is "Trust us. We're the government. We're the constitutional scholars. Trust us."
I've heard that before.
There are tons of mass destruction weapons in Iraq. Trust us. There are al Qaeda terrorists all over Iraq. Trust us. September 11 happened because of enemies who hate our freedoms. Trust us.
With all due respect, I say hell no. The one thing this government's behavior has not created is trust.
Ladies and gentlemen, I have come here today to appeal to your patriotism. We are all patriots here, every one of us. Let no one deny that or doubt that.
What are our duties as patriots? Is one a patriot if they fly the flag, to stand for the national anthem? Yes…and no. One may do these things and be filled with love of country, but if that is all you do, then you have not done enough. In this time, and in this place, and with all that is happening in this country and around the world, the duties of a patriot go far, far, far beyond flying the flag.
The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
That is how our freedom began 227 years ago. We said 'No.' Now, we must talk, and listen, and ask questions, and understand. If we do not like where we find ourselves, we must once again say 'No' with roaring voice, and without fear.
So let us, as patriots, speak tonight about the Patriot Act....
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 1.2
Learning Percentage: 15%
October 01, 2003
Mr. Bush and the Flag
Here's the whole short editorial. The original is linked to in the title.
Mr. Bush and the Flag
Washington Post | Editorial
Sunday 31 August 2003
THE WHITE HOUSE supports the wrongheaded constitutional amendment that would give Congress the power "to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States." Yet in light of an incident last month, Mr. Bush should consider whether he might be the first person jailed should this perennial foolishness -- passed most recently by the House of Representatives earlier this year -- ever become part of the Constitution. Mr. Bush, at a political event in Livonia, Mich., autographed supporters' flags, an apparent violation of an obscure provision of American law that details the respect with which flags should be treated. "The flag," reads the code, "should never have placed upon it . . . any mark, insignia, letter, word, figure, design, picture, or drawing of any nature." The last time Congress sought to ban flag-burning, in a statute the Supreme Court struck down in 1989, it made a criminal out of anyone who "defaces" a flag -- language Mr. Bush likewise appears to have violated. Never mind the fact that he clearly meant no disrespect; if Congress had the power to criminalize flag desecration, he would at least arguably be indictable.
We say arguably because there's no telling what "desecration" actually means. The proposed amendment is meant to deal with flag-burning, but what about that American soldier who, in a moment of unadulterated patriotism, wrapped a flag around a statue of Saddam Hussein? What about a person who proudly wears a ripped T-shirt displaying the flag? Of course, such cases would never be brought in court. The amendment, in practice, would be used to punish only unpopular political expression, expression that, though sometimes odious, is today unambiguously protected by American constitutional law -- as it should be. But the notion that the president, or anyone, could be charged with signing a flag should not be even arguable. It should be laughable -- as it would be if politicians such as Mr. Bush had the guts to stand against constitutional pollution rather than pandering to it.
Read It Rating: 8.5
Left/Right Rating: L4
Freedom Rating: 3
Learning Percentage: 25%
Fear as human shield faces jail
BBC NEWS | Americas | Fear as human shield faces jail
Sitting in her modest two-bedroom home on the west Florida coast, Faith Fippinger begins to cry as she talks about the prospect of going to jail.
This spring, the 62-year-old retired schoolteacher decided to travel to Iraq as a human shield.
To many she is a humanitarian, but in the eyes of the US Government she is a criminal.
...
when she returned home there was a letter waiting for her from the US Treasury Department.
"It was a requirement to send information as to why I was in Iraq," she says.
"It also said the penalties for being there could be as high as a million dollars and up to 12 years in jail."
'Freedom of speech'
By going to Iraq Faith Fippinger had broken the US economic embargo on Iraq, which had been in place for many years.
The letter explained that by travelling to the country and spending money there, Miss Fippinger was now liable for prosecution.
Read It Rating: 8.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: -4
Learning Percentage: 25%
September 22, 2003
Ashcroft Rips Anti-Patriot Act 'Hysteria'
The last statement quoted below is a common technique used by Justice Department folks to diffuse "hysteria" (a.k.a., legitimate concern about civil liberties): you could call it the "We don't want to search you" method. The FBI guy who spoke at the public forum I organized in March used the same line, multiple times in different forms. "You regular, law abiding folks have nothing to worry about."
Right -- because law enforcement has never investigated, searched, or surveilled an innocent person.
They don't care what you're reading -- just what the bad guys are reading. So, no worries. Carry on.
(In the preceding paragraph, Ashcroft uses another common rhetorical trick -- painting a silly, cartoonish scenario, and attributing it to the law's critics. I call him on this in the local news hour segment that I posted on my main blog recently.)
Ashcroft Rips Anti-Patriot Act 'Hysteria'
The Associated Press
WASHINGTON Sept. 15 — Attorney General John Ashcroft denounced as "hysteria" the contention by some librarians and civil liberties groups that the FBI can use a new anti-terror law to snoop into Americans' reading habits.
In a speech Monday to an American Restaurant Association conference, Ashcroft said people are being wrongly led to believe that libraries have been "surrounded by the FBI," with agents "dressed in raincoats, dark suits and sunglasses. They stop everyone and interrogate everyone like Joe Friday.
"Now, you may have thought with all this hysteria and hyperbole, something had to be wrong," Ashcroft said. "Do we at the Justice Department really care what you are reading? No."
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 5%
September 14, 2003
Patriot II -- More Power, Please, Says Bush
So, they just want the power to violate the privacy of tens of thousands of people on the spot, on their own discretion.
Here's the question then: Why bother having warrants or judicial approval in any cases? What's the logic wall which prevents the example they give below from proceeding to the government simply always having instant access to all the hotel bases to check for any "known offender" in all fields of law enforcement?
Bush Seeks to Expand Access to Private Data
WASHINGTON, Sept. 13 -- For months, President Bush's advisers have assured a skittish public that law-abiding Americans have no reason to fear the long reach of the antiterrorism law known as the Patriot Act because its most intrusive measures would require a judge's sign-off.
But in a plan announced this week to expand counterterrorism powers, President Bush adopted a very different tack. In a three-point presidential plan that critics are already dubbing Patriot Act II, Mr. Bush is seeking broad new authority to allow federal agents -- without the approval of a judge or even a federal prosecutor -- to demand private records and compel testimony.
Mr. Bush also wants to expand the use of the death penalty in crimes like terrorist financing, and he wants to make it tougher for defendants in such cases to be freed on bail before trial. These proposals are also sure to prompt sharp debate, even among Republicans.
...
But Mr. Corallo gave a hypothetical example in which the F.B.I. received a tip in the middle of the night that an unidentified terrorist had traveled to Boston. Under Mr. Bush's plan, the F.B.I., rather than waiting for a judicial order, could subpoena all the Bost
Swearing on stage could cost stars $500
Ananova - Swearing on stage could cost stars $500
Officials in Florida want to fine rockers for swearing during public performances.
The The St Petersburg Times reports city councillors want to charge $500 (Ł272) for each swear word.
Council member Bill Foster told the paper: "Constant vulgarity is not going to be tolerated. We can't be the morality police, and we can't be the constant saviors of the First Amendment. But we can dictate what goes on in our public parks."
...
Wel,, he got one right. They clearly can't be the constant saviors of the First Amendment. We'll have to look elsewhere for them.
Judge: School must tell feds about war protest
The Miami Herald | 02/08/2004 | Judge: School must tell feds about war protest
(TruthOut permacopy)
Drake University was subpoenaed for a list of those who attended, and four activists who attended a related forum have been ordered before a grand jury.
BY RYAN J. FOLEY
Associated Press
DES MOINES, Iowa - In what may be the first subpoena of its kind in decades, a federal judge has ordered Drake University to turn over records about a gathering of antiwar activists.
...
January 31, 2004
AOL, You've Been Sued!
Hartford Advocate: You've Been Sued!
by Dan Levine - December 25, 2003
Without a judge's signature, a warrant is nothing more than a neato-toledo looking legal paper, with no power to compel anyone to do anything.
Unless you subscribe to America Online.
In a bizarre legal action, a Fairfield man is suing AOL for turning his personal information over to local police in the course of an investigation. Seems police submitted an unsigned warrant to AOL, according to the legal complaint, and the company actually complied.
The plaintiff, Clifton Freedman, is also suing the town and its police force for violating his constitutional rights.
...
January 26, 2004
Federal Judge Rules Part of Patriot Act Unconstitutional
Federal Judge Rules Part of Patriot Act Unconstitutional (washingtonpost.com)
January 23, 2004
2003 Year in Review from BORDC
This was part of the Bill of Rights Defense Committee's "Dissent is Patriotic" newsletter.
2003 Year in Review
In 2003, millions of U.S. citizens and noncitizens turned to the Bill of
Rights and exercised its protections to restore and uphold essential rights and
freedoms that help define our country. Congress and the Justice Department
noticed.
As we look forward to 2004, BORDC reviews some highlights of the past
year.
Grassroots news
-
The number of Civil Liberties Safe Zones increased
more than tenfold, from 22 communities in 2002 to 230 cities, towns, and
counties and three states by the end of 2003. The number of people protected
by Civil Liberties Safe Zones grew to over 30 million (more than 10 percent of
the United States population!).
- March 4: highest number of resolutions passed in one day, twelve,
including the first ballot initiative (Montpelier, VT).
- April 2: first ordinance passed (Arcata, CA).
-
April 25: first state resolution passed (Hawai'i).
-
The distribution of civil liberties resolutions across 37 of the 50 states
should surprise former Justice Department spokesperson Barbara Comstock, who
claimed that “about 45 percent of them, almost half, are either in cities in
Vermont, very small populations, or in sort of college towns in
California.”
-
Attention to the Patriot Act also increased among campuses,
labor
unions, religious bodies, and other types of
organizations.
-
On June 5, Attorney General Ashcroft mentioned the "Bill of Rights defense
movement" twice in his testimony before the House Judiciary Committee.
-
In August and September, the Attorney General embarked on a
month-long 30-city tour to defend the Patriot Act.
Thousands of protestors showed up at his campaign stops and held signs outside
his closed-door meetings before hand-picked audiences of uniformed law
enforcement. During the tour, 27 cities passed resolutions against the Patriot
Act, and tens of thousands of Americans looked into the Patriot Act.
-
In October, more than 200 people from 27 states met for the first time at
the first annual Grassroots America Defends the Bill of Rights
conference. Participants look forward to more regional and national conference
and ongoing communication via a listserve.
Legislation
-
On February 7, the Center for Public Integrity posted the leaked
Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003 on its website. The public outcry
over the bill dubbed "Patriot II" has prevented its subsequent introduction in
Congress. However, a section of the bill, which expands the FBI's authority to
issue national security letters by changing the definition of "financial
institutions," was inserted into the Intelligence
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004, which President Bush
signed into law in December. Other Patriot II sections may be introduced
piecemeal in 2004.
-
Last March, Rep. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) introduced the first piece of
legislation aimed at rolling back the powers granted by the USA Patriot Act,
the Freedom to Read Protection Act (HR 1157). The
bill enjoys bi-partisan support with 144 co-sponsors. Senator Russ Feingold
(D-WI) introduced the companion Library,
Bookseller, and Personal Records Privacy Act (S.1507). The SAFE Act
and the Benjamin Franklin True Patriot Act are among more than a dozen other
bills to restore liberties and rights already introduced. The CLEAR Act and
other legislation to strengthen the Patriot Act have also been introduced.
-
On July 23, by a vote of 309-118, the House approved a bipartisan amendment
offered by Congressmen C.L. "Butch" Otter (R-ID), Dennis J. Kucinich (D-OH)
and Ron Paul (R-TX) to withhold
funding for "sneak-and-peek" searches under the USA PATRIOT Act.
The nearly 3-1 vote marks the first time either chamber of Congress has acted
to roll back any provision of the law. Despite the amendment's overwhelming
House support, the conferees who worked out differences between the House and
Senate versions of the Intelligence Authorization Act dropped the amendment
from the final bill.
-
On September 25 Congress de-funded the Defense Advanced Research Projects
Agency (DARPA)'s controversial Terrorism Information Awareness (formerly the
Total Information Awareness) program. A month earlier, John Poindexter
resigned as head of the Office of Information Awareness. DARPA has transferred
some TIA research and tools to other agencies.
Reports and Court Decisions: Special Registration, Detentions, and Enemy
Combatants
-
In June, Justice Department Inspector General Glenn Fine released a report concluding that the Justice
Department had detained hundreds of Arab and Muslim men who had no ties to the
September 11 attacks or to terrorism for several months without charges or
access to attorneys. In December, Fine released another report finding that dozens of
detainees held in a federal detention center in Brooklyn were physically and
verbally abused by prison guards.
-
In November, the Supreme Court agreed to test the constitutionality of
powers that the Bush Administration has claimed since September 11, 2001: in
Rasul v. Bush and Odah v. United States, it will decide whether the non-U.S.
citizens being held in prison at Guantanamo Bay should be given access to U.S.
courts. In early January the Supreme Court also agreed to hear Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, to decide whether the
government can hold Yaser Esam Hamdi, a U.S. citizen captured in Afghanistan,
indefinitely without charges filed and without access to an attorney.
-
On December 18, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals,
based in New York, ruled that it is unlawful for the U.S. government to detain
a U.S. citizen captured on U.S. soil as an enemy combatant. The court ordered
the government to either release Jose Padilla (the only person whom the ruling
affects) or transfer him to civilian custody within 30 days.
-
On the same day, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, based in San
Francisco, ruled that the cases of some 600 detainees at Guantanamo have to be
open to judicial scrutiny, and that the Bush administration is violating
international law and the U.S. Constitution by holding detainees on a U.S.
Navy base without legal protections.
-
Nearly 85,000 men from North Korea and 24 Muslim countries reported to INS
facilities for NSEERS "special registration." The expensive program did not
turn up any terrorists, but 13,000 of the men who voluntarily reported are in
deportation proceedings. Rumors that the program has ended are untrue:
Beginning December 2, 2003, men from 25 countries who have already registered
do not need to reregister annually. Point of entry follow-up interviews are
also suspended. However, several parts of the Special Registration program
remain. Read AILA's summary of changes to the Department of
Homeland Security's Special Registration program.
-
In December 2003, the NSEERS program was supplemented by US-VISIT, a
program that takes biometric measurements of people including fingerprints and
face scans from certain countries. For more information, see the Center for
American Progress's analysis of the new program.
Silencing Dissent
-
The Secret Service shelters President Bush from
peaceful protesters. The Administration also
demanded that areas of the U.K. and Australia be "scrubbed" of protesters
during the president's visits.
-
In October, police stifled dissent at the FTAA
protests.
-
An FBI memo dated October 15 asks local law enforcement
to report antiwar protests and other activities protected by the First
Amendment which they consider "suspicious" to the FBI's counterterrorism
units.
January 14, 2004
Supreme Court Backs Police Random Roadblocks
Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan said the ruling "will allow law enforcement in Illinois and across the nation to seek voluntary assistance from citizens in their efforts to solve crime."
Right, voluntary forced assistance. It will allow them to use force to get voluntary assistance.
FOXNews.com - Top Stories - Supreme Court Backs Police Random Roadblocks
January 11, 2004
Detained in America
This is an awesome story about the very many people who have been detained in contravention with the Bill of Rights since 9/11.
Detained in America: A Guest Column by Bruce Jackson
The Desaparecidos of George W. Bush
January 03, 2004
Presidential Powers: A Court Pushes Back
MSNBC -
How do you solve a problem like Padilla?
By Michael Isikoff
Newsweek
Judges beginning to balk in war on terror
KRT Wire | 12/28/2003 | Judges beginning to balk in war on terror
January 01, 2004
Congress Expands FBI Spying Power
Wired News: Congress Expands FBI Spying Power
(Also archived at Civil Liberties Watch)
December 30, 2003
December 27, 2003
Coffee, Tea or Handcuffs?
LA Weekly: Columns: Open City: Coffee, Tea or Handcuffs?
An Australian journalist gets a taste of Department of Homeland Security hospitality
by Steven Mikulan
(TruthOut permacopy)
December 21, 2003
Checks and Balances Live On
Rebuff for Bush on civil liberties (December 20, 2003)
(TruthOut permacopy)
THE Bush administration may be forced to rethink its war on terrorism strategy after two US courts ruled yesterday that detainees should not remain indefinitely in a legal twilight zone.
In a critical decision, a San Francisco appeals court disputed the administration's claims to have "unchecked authority" in dealing with prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba outside the US criminal justice system.
The 2-1 decision came a few hours after a Manhattan appeals court ruled that accused "dirty bomb" plotter Jose Padilla - a US citizen alleged to be an enemy combatant - be released from military custody within 30 days.
...
Bill of Rights day in Noho
This is about Northampton, MA's Bill of Rights Day celebration. I've lived and worked in Northampton in the past. It's a great little Northeast city.
December 20, 2003
Bush Overruled on 'Dirty Bomb' Suspect
Yahoo! News - Bush Overruled on 'Dirty Bomb' Suspect
(TruthOut permacopy)
NEW YORK - President Bush does not have power to detain American citizen Jose Padilla, the former gang member seized on U.S. soil, as an enemy combatant, a federal appeals court ruled Thursday.
...
3 senators urge Rumsfeld to free or try terror detainees
December 08, 2003
BillofRightsDay.com
Here's a new site I put together to help folks organize their Bill of Rights Day celebration efforts:
December 01, 2003
Patriot Act Expansion Moves Through Congress
Patriot Act Expansion Moves Through Congress
by Jim Lobe
(TruthOut permacopy)
Patriot Act Author Has Concerns
Patriot Act Author Has Concerns
By Richard B. Schmitt, Times Staff Writer
Detaining citizens as 'enemy combatants' -- a policy not spelled out in the act -- is flawed, the legal scholar says.
WASHINGTON — The Justice Department's war on terrorism has drawn intense scrutiny from the left and the right. Now, a chief architect of the USA Patriot Act and a former top assistant to Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft are joining the fray, voicing concern about aspects of the administration's anti-terrorism policy.
At issue is the government's power to designate and detain "enemy combatants," in particular in the case of "dirty bomb" plot suspect Jose Padilla, the Brooklyn-born former gang member who was picked up at a Chicago airport 18 months ago by the FBI and locked in a military brig without access to a lawyer.
...
November 23, 2003
F.B.I. Scrutinizes Antiwar Rallies
F.B.I. Scrutinizes Antiwar Rallies
By Eric Lichtblau
New York Times
Sunday 23 November 2003
The Federal Bureau of Investigation has collected extensive information on the tactics, training and organization of antiwar demonstrators and has advised local law enforcement officials to report any suspicious activity at protests to its counterterrorism squads, according to interviews and a confidential bureau memorandum.
The memorandum, which the bureau sent to local law enforcement agencies last month in advance of antiwar demonstrations in Washington and San Francisco, detailed how protesters have sometimes used "training camps" to rehearse for demonstrations, the Internet to raise money and gas masks to defend against tear gas. The memorandum analyzed lawful activities like recruiting demonstrators, as well as illegal activities like using fake documentation to get into a secured site.
F.B.I. officials said in interviews that the intelligence-gathering effort was aimed at identifying anarchists and "extremist elements" plotting violence, not at monitoring the political speech of law-abiding protesters.
The initiative has won the support of some local police, who view it as a critical way to maintain order at large-scale demonstrations. Indeed, some law enforcement officials said they believed the F.B.I.'s approach had helped to ensure that nationwide antiwar demonstrations in recent months, drawing hundreds of thousands of protesters, remained largely free of violence and disruption.
But some civil rights advocates and legal scholars said the monitoring program could signal a return to the abuses of the 1960's and 1970's, when J. Edgar Hoover was the F.B.I. director and agents routinely spied on political protesters like the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. ...
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 20%
November 12, 2003
Ashcroft Slams Critics as Patriot Act Backlash Grows
Ashcroft Slams Critics as Patriot Act Backlash Grows
By Tom Regan
Christian Science Monitor
Tuesday 16 September 2003
The war of words over the USA Patriot Act heated up considerably over the past few days, thanks in part to a recently completed "Patriot Act Tour" conducted by U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft. The tour, conducted in front of small, law enforcement friendly audiences, excluded participation from the general public. (At Faneuil Hall in Boston, Ashcroft addressed a crowd of 150, while outside the hall a crowd of 1200 chanted "This is what democracy looks like.") The tour was designed to create support for the act, but in some ways may have done just the opposite.
One of the main charges critics of the Patriot Act aim against Ashcroft is that rules designed to catch terrorists will be used against ordinary citizens. They also say police and prosecutors will use the laws created by the Patriot Act in other areas of law enforcement. These critics include people from both the left and the right of the American political spectrum.
Ashcroft blasted some of these critics on Monday, taking aim in particular at librarians. The Associated Press reports that Ashcroft said people are being wrongly led to believe that libraries have been "surrounded by the FBI," with agents "dressed in raincoats, dark suits and sunglasses. They stop everyone and interrogate everyone like Joe Friday."
The attorney general continues to insist that the Act "respects rights and increases security." USA Today looks at how the Act is at the heart of Ashcroft's powers as attorney general.
...
Read It Rating: 8.1
Left/Right Rating: L1.5
Freedom Rating: 2
Learning Percentage: 20%
October 23, 2003
Georgia runs from the MATRIX
By Ashlee Vance in Chicago
Posted: 22/10/2003 at 19:45 GMT
The state of Georgia has pulled out of the U.S. Department of Justice sponsored MATRIX information collection program, leaving data only on its felons and sexual offenders behind in the Orwellian database.
Georgia Governor Sonny Perdue has cited both privacy concerns and costs as the two key reasons the state will no longer participate in the MATRIX (Multistate Anti-Terrorism Information Exchange) pilot project. ...
Read It Rating: 4.5
Left/Right Rating: L4
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 55%
October 09, 2003
Driving dangerously with the Patriot Act
Driving dangerously with the Patriot Act
By Pat M. Holt
WASHINGTON -- Attorney General John Ashcroft is running a dead heat with A. Mitchell Palmer, attorney general in the Wilson administration, for the distinction of being the worst in that job in the history of the United States.
One of the duties of the attorney general as head of the Justice Department is to protect the Constitution. Both Mr. Ashcroft and Palmer found that the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights, got in their way more than it protected anything. It has gotten in Ashcroft's way in his pursuit of terrorists after Sept. 11, especially those who dress differently and practice a different religion. Palmer's crusade was the pursuit of communists, in the aftermath of World War I. He especially went after people with what to him were funny names from Eastern Europe. He tended to equate liberals with communists.
Ashcroft's vehicle is the USA Patriot Act, which Congress, abdicating its own duties of vigilance, passed with a whoop and a holler in the days after Sept. 11. Even the name of this odious legislation is offensive. It implies that the purpose of the act is to promote patriotism and that those not cooperating with it are somehow less patriotic.
...
Pat M. Holt is former chief of staff of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L1.1
Freedom Rating: 1.1
Learning Percentage: 1%
Local Peace Group Infiltrated By Government Agent
Local Peace Group Infiltrated By Government Agent
By Mike Rhodes
October 4, 2003
Peace Fresno was infiltrated by an agent working for the Fresno Sheriff's Department. Aaron Kilner, known by Peace Fresno activists as Aaron Stokes, attended several Peace Fresno meetings. Peace Fresno activist Nicholas DeGraff remembers him taking voluminous notes and several members say they saw him at peace vilgils held at Shaw and Blackstone. He was also on the bus local anti-globalization activists took to attend the WTO ministerial-level conference on Agricultural Science and Technology demonstration in Sacramento in June 2003.
Aaron Kilner died in a motorcycle accident on August 30, 2003. In his obituary in The Fresno Bee he was identified as a member of the Fresno County Sheriff's department. The obituary went on to say that he was "assigned to the anti-terrorist team." Local activists believe that this "anti-terrorist team" is, in fact, the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) that has recently been formed in this area.. When members of Peace Fresno saw the picture and read of Kilner's association with law enforcement they began piecing the story together.
The infiltration by law enforcement of progressive community groups in Fresno and throughout the country has long been used to disrupt legitimate political work. This disruption occurs by sowing seeds of mistrust among members, agents often promote discord within the group, and sometimes encourage illegal or violent actions. Agent provocateurs have been know to instigate violence at demonstrations, giving the police an excuse to attack protestors.
...
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 45%
October 08, 2003
Terror suspect tortured: dad claims
Terror suspect tortured: dad claims
By Rebecca Urban
October 8, 2003
Australian terrorist suspects David Hicks and Mamdouh Habib had likely been tortured while detained at Guantanamo Bay, a lawyer and Hicks' father said today.
Australian lawyer Richard Bourke, who has been working with prisoners at Camp X-ray for the past two years, told ABC radio leaks from the American military and reports from former inmates revealed the detainees had been forced to kneel in the sun until they collapsed and were tied up and had rubber bullets fired at them.
...
Read It Rating: 6
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -3
Learning Percentage: 30%
Sullum: Ashcroft's Patriot Act tour
The Washington Times: Commentary
By Jacob Sullum
August 26, 2003
Attorney General John Ashcroft is on a publicity tour, promoting the Patriot Act and preparing the public for a sequel. But just as you can't always believe an actor who tells you his latest film is sure to be a hit, you have to take what Mr. Ashcroft says with a grain of salt.
Mr. Ashcroft is reacting to bad reviews from critics who say the Patriot Act -- given a green light just a month and a half after the September 11 terrorist attacks by members of Congress who had not even read the script -- was rushed into production. The result, they say, was a deeply flawed work in which civil liberties make only a brief appearance.
...
Read It Rating: 7
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: .3
Learning Percentage: 10%
Media elite debate Patriot Act
Arbiter Online - Media elite debate Patriot Act
Privacy policies concern librarians
by Amy Olsen
October 06, 2003
Pulitzer Prize winner and Washington Post reporter David Broder spoke Oct. 2 at Boise State, encapsulating the day-long “Freedom and Secrecy: Trading Liberty for Security?” conference held by the Andrus Center for Public Policy.
Broder's speech was one of several activities and joint panel discussions focusing on the philosophical and political question of balancing civil liberties and homeland security.
Broder was the last speaker among three distinguished panelists at the conference on Thursday. Former Vice President Walter Mondale and former Washington State Senator Slade Gorton joined Broder for the event.
The lecturer gave several examples of past uses of the act, ranging from long-term immigrant confinement to inquiries into library records across the nation by agents of the law.
Broder reported that among 1,500 major libraries in the United States, 178 reported "visitations from FBI members" since the USA PATRIOT Act's passage in Oct. 2001.
...
Read It Rating: 4.5
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 35%
October 05, 2003
Fed Court tells NY to back off Russell Simmons and Hip Hop Summit
FEDERAL COURT ISSUES ORDER SUSPENDING NY LOBBYING COMMISSION INVESTIGATION OF RUSSELL SIMMONS AND THE HIP-HOP SUMMIT ACTION NETWORK
NEW YORK, N.Y. -- OCTOBER 2, 2003 - Russell Simmons and Dr. Benjamin Chavis, who together with the Hip-Hop Summit Action Network, filed a lawsuit in July of this year charging the New York Temporary State Commission on Lobbying with violating their First Amendment rights, reconvened in federal court this morning to ask Judge Loretta A. Preska to enforce the suspension of the Lobbying Commission's investigation into Russell Simmons and Dr. Chavis.
Today, Judge Loretta A. Preska issued an order suspending the Lobbying Commission's investigation into Plaintiffs' First Amendment activities, which were aimed at raising public awareness about the unfairness of the Rockefeller Drug Laws. The Judge found that the Lobbying Commission had unfairly tried to back out of a court-approved agreement to suspend the investigation. The suspension that Judge Preska ordered today will last until the Court can issue a full decision in this case.
...
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 4
Learning Percentage: 85%
Ashcroft Is Unprintable, and Glad of It
Ashcroft Is Unprintable, and Glad of It
On tour, he bars the press and cozies up to local TV reporters.
September 25, 2003
COMMENTARY
By Todd Gitlin and Jay Rosen
Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft, who is continuing his tour of the country to promote the Patriot Act, has at several stops, including Buffalo and Philadelphia, refused to speak to print reporters. While television correspondents can often breeze right in, their newspaper colleagues are kept at bay by Secret Service agents doing the bidding of the nation's chief law enforcement official, who prefers audiences of handpicked enthusiasts and interviews with local television reporters.
According to Justice Department spokeswoman Barbara Comstock, Ashcroft wants to explain "key facts directly to the American people" and not have to subject himself to "as much of a filter from people who are already invested in having a different view of it."
Of course he does. What public official wouldn't prefer a stenographer to an interlocutor? Ashcroft, like the president he serves, wishes to conduct the public's business in an echo chamber. With aplomb and no hint of bad conscience, they practice the politics of no-politics, the politics of l'etat, c'est moi.
...
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 50%
October 03, 2003
Chicago City Council votes against parts of USA-PATRIOT Act
Below is an official news story about it. Here is a slightly less journalistic story that provides more background info on the movement behind the resolution. (That story, by Elaine Cassel, seems to have originated at her blog here.
Council decries Patriot Act in watered-down resolution
October 2, 2003
BY FRAN SPIELMAN City Hall Reporter
Warning of civil liberties abuses similar to those that preceded the Holocaust, the City Council on Wednesday approved a watered-down resolution urging repeal of portions of the USA Patriot Act.
The 37-7 vote followed an emotional debate that invoked the chilling words of Nazi leader Hermann Goering and ignored Mayor Daley's warning that the federal government needs extraordinary tools to fight terrorism.
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: 1.5
Learning Percentage: 75%
Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
You can read a news story about the vote mentioned below -- Austin did indeed pass a resolution against the USA-PATRIOT Act -- here. There's also a pretty interesting local news video clip about the meeting here. The story aims to be a transcript of the video, though that's not fully the case. The U.S. Attorney who is interviewed sounded like he might have only read the beginning of the act, and then skipped the rest.
t r u t h o u t - William Rivers Pitt | Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
[TruthOut] Editor's Note | The following remarks were delivered by William Rivers Pitt at a Town Hall meeting in Austin, Texas on Tuesday, September 16. The meeting was called on the eve of an historic vote; the capitol city of Texas is very near to joining hundreds of other American communities in passing a resolution that repudiates the Patriot Act.
Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
By William Rivers Pitt
t r u t h o u t | Perspective
Monday 22 September 2003
I have listened to the defenses of the Patriot Act offered tonight. The essence of the defenses, the essence of the rebuttals to our reservations and complaints, is "Trust us. We're the government. We're the constitutional scholars. Trust us."
I've heard that before.
There are tons of mass destruction weapons in Iraq. Trust us. There are al Qaeda terrorists all over Iraq. Trust us. September 11 happened because of enemies who hate our freedoms. Trust us.
With all due respect, I say hell no. The one thing this government's behavior has not created is trust.
Ladies and gentlemen, I have come here today to appeal to your patriotism. We are all patriots here, every one of us. Let no one deny that or doubt that.
What are our duties as patriots? Is one a patriot if they fly the flag, to stand for the national anthem? Yes…and no. One may do these things and be filled with love of country, but if that is all you do, then you have not done enough. In this time, and in this place, and with all that is happening in this country and around the world, the duties of a patriot go far, far, far beyond flying the flag.
The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
That is how our freedom began 227 years ago. We said 'No.' Now, we must talk, and listen, and ask questions, and understand. If we do not like where we find ourselves, we must once again say 'No' with roaring voice, and without fear.
So let us, as patriots, speak tonight about the Patriot Act....
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 1.2
Learning Percentage: 15%
October 01, 2003
Mr. Bush and the Flag
Here's the whole short editorial. The original is linked to in the title.
Mr. Bush and the Flag
Washington Post | Editorial
Sunday 31 August 2003
THE WHITE HOUSE supports the wrongheaded constitutional amendment that would give Congress the power "to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States." Yet in light of an incident last month, Mr. Bush should consider whether he might be the first person jailed should this perennial foolishness -- passed most recently by the House of Representatives earlier this year -- ever become part of the Constitution. Mr. Bush, at a political event in Livonia, Mich., autographed supporters' flags, an apparent violation of an obscure provision of American law that details the respect with which flags should be treated. "The flag," reads the code, "should never have placed upon it . . . any mark, insignia, letter, word, figure, design, picture, or drawing of any nature." The last time Congress sought to ban flag-burning, in a statute the Supreme Court struck down in 1989, it made a criminal out of anyone who "defaces" a flag -- language Mr. Bush likewise appears to have violated. Never mind the fact that he clearly meant no disrespect; if Congress had the power to criminalize flag desecration, he would at least arguably be indictable.
We say arguably because there's no telling what "desecration" actually means. The proposed amendment is meant to deal with flag-burning, but what about that American soldier who, in a moment of unadulterated patriotism, wrapped a flag around a statue of Saddam Hussein? What about a person who proudly wears a ripped T-shirt displaying the flag? Of course, such cases would never be brought in court. The amendment, in practice, would be used to punish only unpopular political expression, expression that, though sometimes odious, is today unambiguously protected by American constitutional law -- as it should be. But the notion that the president, or anyone, could be charged with signing a flag should not be even arguable. It should be laughable -- as it would be if politicians such as Mr. Bush had the guts to stand against constitutional pollution rather than pandering to it.
Read It Rating: 8.5
Left/Right Rating: L4
Freedom Rating: 3
Learning Percentage: 25%
Fear as human shield faces jail
BBC NEWS | Americas | Fear as human shield faces jail
Sitting in her modest two-bedroom home on the west Florida coast, Faith Fippinger begins to cry as she talks about the prospect of going to jail.
This spring, the 62-year-old retired schoolteacher decided to travel to Iraq as a human shield.
To many she is a humanitarian, but in the eyes of the US Government she is a criminal.
...
when she returned home there was a letter waiting for her from the US Treasury Department.
"It was a requirement to send information as to why I was in Iraq," she says.
"It also said the penalties for being there could be as high as a million dollars and up to 12 years in jail."
'Freedom of speech'
By going to Iraq Faith Fippinger had broken the US economic embargo on Iraq, which had been in place for many years.
The letter explained that by travelling to the country and spending money there, Miss Fippinger was now liable for prosecution.
Read It Rating: 8.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: -4
Learning Percentage: 25%
September 22, 2003
Ashcroft Rips Anti-Patriot Act 'Hysteria'
The last statement quoted below is a common technique used by Justice Department folks to diffuse "hysteria" (a.k.a., legitimate concern about civil liberties): you could call it the "We don't want to search you" method. The FBI guy who spoke at the public forum I organized in March used the same line, multiple times in different forms. "You regular, law abiding folks have nothing to worry about."
Right -- because law enforcement has never investigated, searched, or surveilled an innocent person.
They don't care what you're reading -- just what the bad guys are reading. So, no worries. Carry on.
(In the preceding paragraph, Ashcroft uses another common rhetorical trick -- painting a silly, cartoonish scenario, and attributing it to the law's critics. I call him on this in the local news hour segment that I posted on my main blog recently.)
Ashcroft Rips Anti-Patriot Act 'Hysteria'
The Associated Press
WASHINGTON Sept. 15 — Attorney General John Ashcroft denounced as "hysteria" the contention by some librarians and civil liberties groups that the FBI can use a new anti-terror law to snoop into Americans' reading habits.
In a speech Monday to an American Restaurant Association conference, Ashcroft said people are being wrongly led to believe that libraries have been "surrounded by the FBI," with agents "dressed in raincoats, dark suits and sunglasses. They stop everyone and interrogate everyone like Joe Friday.
"Now, you may have thought with all this hysteria and hyperbole, something had to be wrong," Ashcroft said. "Do we at the Justice Department really care what you are reading? No."
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 5%
September 14, 2003
Patriot II -- More Power, Please, Says Bush
So, they just want the power to violate the privacy of tens of thousands of people on the spot, on their own discretion.
Here's the question then: Why bother having warrants or judicial approval in any cases? What's the logic wall which prevents the example they give below from proceeding to the government simply always having instant access to all the hotel bases to check for any "known offender" in all fields of law enforcement?
Bush Seeks to Expand Access to Private Data
WASHINGTON, Sept. 13 -- For months, President Bush's advisers have assured a skittish public that law-abiding Americans have no reason to fear the long reach of the antiterrorism law known as the Patriot Act because its most intrusive measures would require a judge's sign-off.
But in a plan announced this week to expand counterterrorism powers, President Bush adopted a very different tack. In a three-point presidential plan that critics are already dubbing Patriot Act II, Mr. Bush is seeking broad new authority to allow federal agents -- without the approval of a judge or even a federal prosecutor -- to demand private records and compel testimony.
Mr. Bush also wants to expand the use of the death penalty in crimes like terrorist financing, and he wants to make it tougher for defendants in such cases to be freed on bail before trial. These proposals are also sure to prompt sharp debate, even among Republicans.
...
But Mr. Corallo gave a hypothetical example in which the F.B.I. received a tip in the middle of the night that an unidentified terrorist had traveled to Boston. Under Mr. Bush's plan, the F.B.I., rather than waiting for a judicial order, could subpoena all the Bost
AOL, You've Been Sued!
Hartford Advocate: You've Been Sued!
by Dan Levine - December 25, 2003
Without a judge's signature, a warrant is nothing more than a neato-toledo looking legal paper, with no power to compel anyone to do anything.
Unless you subscribe to America Online.
In a bizarre legal action, a Fairfield man is suing AOL for turning his personal information over to local police in the course of an investigation. Seems police submitted an unsigned warrant to AOL, according to the legal complaint, and the company actually complied.
The plaintiff, Clifton Freedman, is also suing the town and its police force for violating his constitutional rights.
...
Federal Judge Rules Part of Patriot Act Unconstitutional
Federal Judge Rules Part of Patriot Act Unconstitutional (washingtonpost.com)
January 23, 2004
2003 Year in Review from BORDC
This was part of the Bill of Rights Defense Committee's "Dissent is Patriotic" newsletter.
2003 Year in Review
In 2003, millions of U.S. citizens and noncitizens turned to the Bill of
Rights and exercised its protections to restore and uphold essential rights and
freedoms that help define our country. Congress and the Justice Department
noticed.
As we look forward to 2004, BORDC reviews some highlights of the past
year.
Grassroots news
-
The number of Civil Liberties Safe Zones increased
more than tenfold, from 22 communities in 2002 to 230 cities, towns, and
counties and three states by the end of 2003. The number of people protected
by Civil Liberties Safe Zones grew to over 30 million (more than 10 percent of
the United States population!).
- March 4: highest number of resolutions passed in one day, twelve,
including the first ballot initiative (Montpelier, VT).
- April 2: first ordinance passed (Arcata, CA).
-
April 25: first state resolution passed (Hawai'i).
-
The distribution of civil liberties resolutions across 37 of the 50 states
should surprise former Justice Department spokesperson Barbara Comstock, who
claimed that “about 45 percent of them, almost half, are either in cities in
Vermont, very small populations, or in sort of college towns in
California.”
-
Attention to the Patriot Act also increased among campuses,
labor
unions, religious bodies, and other types of
organizations.
-
On June 5, Attorney General Ashcroft mentioned the "Bill of Rights defense
movement" twice in his testimony before the House Judiciary Committee.
-
In August and September, the Attorney General embarked on a
month-long 30-city tour to defend the Patriot Act.
Thousands of protestors showed up at his campaign stops and held signs outside
his closed-door meetings before hand-picked audiences of uniformed law
enforcement. During the tour, 27 cities passed resolutions against the Patriot
Act, and tens of thousands of Americans looked into the Patriot Act.
-
In October, more than 200 people from 27 states met for the first time at
the first annual Grassroots America Defends the Bill of Rights
conference. Participants look forward to more regional and national conference
and ongoing communication via a listserve.
Legislation
-
On February 7, the Center for Public Integrity posted the leaked
Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003 on its website. The public outcry
over the bill dubbed "Patriot II" has prevented its subsequent introduction in
Congress. However, a section of the bill, which expands the FBI's authority to
issue national security letters by changing the definition of "financial
institutions," was inserted into the Intelligence
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004, which President Bush
signed into law in December. Other Patriot II sections may be introduced
piecemeal in 2004.
-
Last March, Rep. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) introduced the first piece of
legislation aimed at rolling back the powers granted by the USA Patriot Act,
the Freedom to Read Protection Act (HR 1157). The
bill enjoys bi-partisan support with 144 co-sponsors. Senator Russ Feingold
(D-WI) introduced the companion Library,
Bookseller, and Personal Records Privacy Act (S.1507). The SAFE Act
and the Benjamin Franklin True Patriot Act are among more than a dozen other
bills to restore liberties and rights already introduced. The CLEAR Act and
other legislation to strengthen the Patriot Act have also been introduced.
-
On July 23, by a vote of 309-118, the House approved a bipartisan amendment
offered by Congressmen C.L. "Butch" Otter (R-ID), Dennis J. Kucinich (D-OH)
and Ron Paul (R-TX) to withhold
funding for "sneak-and-peek" searches under the USA PATRIOT Act.
The nearly 3-1 vote marks the first time either chamber of Congress has acted
to roll back any provision of the law. Despite the amendment's overwhelming
House support, the conferees who worked out differences between the House and
Senate versions of the Intelligence Authorization Act dropped the amendment
from the final bill.
-
On September 25 Congress de-funded the Defense Advanced Research Projects
Agency (DARPA)'s controversial Terrorism Information Awareness (formerly the
Total Information Awareness) program. A month earlier, John Poindexter
resigned as head of the Office of Information Awareness. DARPA has transferred
some TIA research and tools to other agencies.
Reports and Court Decisions: Special Registration, Detentions, and Enemy
Combatants
-
In June, Justice Department Inspector General Glenn Fine released a report concluding that the Justice
Department had detained hundreds of Arab and Muslim men who had no ties to the
September 11 attacks or to terrorism for several months without charges or
access to attorneys. In December, Fine released another report finding that dozens of
detainees held in a federal detention center in Brooklyn were physically and
verbally abused by prison guards.
-
In November, the Supreme Court agreed to test the constitutionality of
powers that the Bush Administration has claimed since September 11, 2001: in
Rasul v. Bush and Odah v. United States, it will decide whether the non-U.S.
citizens being held in prison at Guantanamo Bay should be given access to U.S.
courts. In early January the Supreme Court also agreed to hear Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, to decide whether the
government can hold Yaser Esam Hamdi, a U.S. citizen captured in Afghanistan,
indefinitely without charges filed and without access to an attorney.
-
On December 18, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals,
based in New York, ruled that it is unlawful for the U.S. government to detain
a U.S. citizen captured on U.S. soil as an enemy combatant. The court ordered
the government to either release Jose Padilla (the only person whom the ruling
affects) or transfer him to civilian custody within 30 days.
-
On the same day, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, based in San
Francisco, ruled that the cases of some 600 detainees at Guantanamo have to be
open to judicial scrutiny, and that the Bush administration is violating
international law and the U.S. Constitution by holding detainees on a U.S.
Navy base without legal protections.
-
Nearly 85,000 men from North Korea and 24 Muslim countries reported to INS
facilities for NSEERS "special registration." The expensive program did not
turn up any terrorists, but 13,000 of the men who voluntarily reported are in
deportation proceedings. Rumors that the program has ended are untrue:
Beginning December 2, 2003, men from 25 countries who have already registered
do not need to reregister annually. Point of entry follow-up interviews are
also suspended. However, several parts of the Special Registration program
remain. Read AILA's summary of changes to the Department of
Homeland Security's Special Registration program.
-
In December 2003, the NSEERS program was supplemented by US-VISIT, a
program that takes biometric measurements of people including fingerprints and
face scans from certain countries. For more information, see the Center for
American Progress's analysis of the new program.
Silencing Dissent
-
The Secret Service shelters President Bush from
peaceful protesters. The Administration also
demanded that areas of the U.K. and Australia be "scrubbed" of protesters
during the president's visits.
-
In October, police stifled dissent at the FTAA
protests.
-
An FBI memo dated October 15 asks local law enforcement
to report antiwar protests and other activities protected by the First
Amendment which they consider "suspicious" to the FBI's counterterrorism
units.
January 14, 2004
Supreme Court Backs Police Random Roadblocks
Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan said the ruling "will allow law enforcement in Illinois and across the nation to seek voluntary assistance from citizens in their efforts to solve crime."
Right, voluntary forced assistance. It will allow them to use force to get voluntary assistance.
FOXNews.com - Top Stories - Supreme Court Backs Police Random Roadblocks
January 11, 2004
Detained in America
This is an awesome story about the very many people who have been detained in contravention with the Bill of Rights since 9/11.
Detained in America: A Guest Column by Bruce Jackson
The Desaparecidos of George W. Bush
January 03, 2004
Presidential Powers: A Court Pushes Back
MSNBC -
How do you solve a problem like Padilla?
By Michael Isikoff
Newsweek
Judges beginning to balk in war on terror
KRT Wire | 12/28/2003 | Judges beginning to balk in war on terror
January 01, 2004
Congress Expands FBI Spying Power
Wired News: Congress Expands FBI Spying Power
(Also archived at Civil Liberties Watch)
December 30, 2003
December 27, 2003
Coffee, Tea or Handcuffs?
LA Weekly: Columns: Open City: Coffee, Tea or Handcuffs?
An Australian journalist gets a taste of Department of Homeland Security hospitality
by Steven Mikulan
(TruthOut permacopy)
December 21, 2003
Checks and Balances Live On
Rebuff for Bush on civil liberties (December 20, 2003)
(TruthOut permacopy)
THE Bush administration may be forced to rethink its war on terrorism strategy after two US courts ruled yesterday that detainees should not remain indefinitely in a legal twilight zone.
In a critical decision, a San Francisco appeals court disputed the administration's claims to have "unchecked authority" in dealing with prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba outside the US criminal justice system.
The 2-1 decision came a few hours after a Manhattan appeals court ruled that accused "dirty bomb" plotter Jose Padilla - a US citizen alleged to be an enemy combatant - be released from military custody within 30 days.
...
Bill of Rights day in Noho
This is about Northampton, MA's Bill of Rights Day celebration. I've lived and worked in Northampton in the past. It's a great little Northeast city.
December 20, 2003
Bush Overruled on 'Dirty Bomb' Suspect
Yahoo! News - Bush Overruled on 'Dirty Bomb' Suspect
(TruthOut permacopy)
NEW YORK - President Bush does not have power to detain American citizen Jose Padilla, the former gang member seized on U.S. soil, as an enemy combatant, a federal appeals court ruled Thursday.
...
3 senators urge Rumsfeld to free or try terror detainees
December 08, 2003
BillofRightsDay.com
Here's a new site I put together to help folks organize their Bill of Rights Day celebration efforts:
December 01, 2003
Patriot Act Expansion Moves Through Congress
Patriot Act Expansion Moves Through Congress
by Jim Lobe
(TruthOut permacopy)
Patriot Act Author Has Concerns
Patriot Act Author Has Concerns
By Richard B. Schmitt, Times Staff Writer
Detaining citizens as 'enemy combatants' -- a policy not spelled out in the act -- is flawed, the legal scholar says.
WASHINGTON — The Justice Department's war on terrorism has drawn intense scrutiny from the left and the right. Now, a chief architect of the USA Patriot Act and a former top assistant to Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft are joining the fray, voicing concern about aspects of the administration's anti-terrorism policy.
At issue is the government's power to designate and detain "enemy combatants," in particular in the case of "dirty bomb" plot suspect Jose Padilla, the Brooklyn-born former gang member who was picked up at a Chicago airport 18 months ago by the FBI and locked in a military brig without access to a lawyer.
...
November 23, 2003
F.B.I. Scrutinizes Antiwar Rallies
F.B.I. Scrutinizes Antiwar Rallies
By Eric Lichtblau
New York Times
Sunday 23 November 2003
The Federal Bureau of Investigation has collected extensive information on the tactics, training and organization of antiwar demonstrators and has advised local law enforcement officials to report any suspicious activity at protests to its counterterrorism squads, according to interviews and a confidential bureau memorandum.
The memorandum, which the bureau sent to local law enforcement agencies last month in advance of antiwar demonstrations in Washington and San Francisco, detailed how protesters have sometimes used "training camps" to rehearse for demonstrations, the Internet to raise money and gas masks to defend against tear gas. The memorandum analyzed lawful activities like recruiting demonstrators, as well as illegal activities like using fake documentation to get into a secured site.
F.B.I. officials said in interviews that the intelligence-gathering effort was aimed at identifying anarchists and "extremist elements" plotting violence, not at monitoring the political speech of law-abiding protesters.
The initiative has won the support of some local police, who view it as a critical way to maintain order at large-scale demonstrations. Indeed, some law enforcement officials said they believed the F.B.I.'s approach had helped to ensure that nationwide antiwar demonstrations in recent months, drawing hundreds of thousands of protesters, remained largely free of violence and disruption.
But some civil rights advocates and legal scholars said the monitoring program could signal a return to the abuses of the 1960's and 1970's, when J. Edgar Hoover was the F.B.I. director and agents routinely spied on political protesters like the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. ...
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 20%
November 12, 2003
Ashcroft Slams Critics as Patriot Act Backlash Grows
Ashcroft Slams Critics as Patriot Act Backlash Grows
By Tom Regan
Christian Science Monitor
Tuesday 16 September 2003
The war of words over the USA Patriot Act heated up considerably over the past few days, thanks in part to a recently completed "Patriot Act Tour" conducted by U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft. The tour, conducted in front of small, law enforcement friendly audiences, excluded participation from the general public. (At Faneuil Hall in Boston, Ashcroft addressed a crowd of 150, while outside the hall a crowd of 1200 chanted "This is what democracy looks like.") The tour was designed to create support for the act, but in some ways may have done just the opposite.
One of the main charges critics of the Patriot Act aim against Ashcroft is that rules designed to catch terrorists will be used against ordinary citizens. They also say police and prosecutors will use the laws created by the Patriot Act in other areas of law enforcement. These critics include people from both the left and the right of the American political spectrum.
Ashcroft blasted some of these critics on Monday, taking aim in particular at librarians. The Associated Press reports that Ashcroft said people are being wrongly led to believe that libraries have been "surrounded by the FBI," with agents "dressed in raincoats, dark suits and sunglasses. They stop everyone and interrogate everyone like Joe Friday."
The attorney general continues to insist that the Act "respects rights and increases security." USA Today looks at how the Act is at the heart of Ashcroft's powers as attorney general.
...
Read It Rating: 8.1
Left/Right Rating: L1.5
Freedom Rating: 2
Learning Percentage: 20%
October 23, 2003
Georgia runs from the MATRIX
By Ashlee Vance in Chicago
Posted: 22/10/2003 at 19:45 GMT
The state of Georgia has pulled out of the U.S. Department of Justice sponsored MATRIX information collection program, leaving data only on its felons and sexual offenders behind in the Orwellian database.
Georgia Governor Sonny Perdue has cited both privacy concerns and costs as the two key reasons the state will no longer participate in the MATRIX (Multistate Anti-Terrorism Information Exchange) pilot project. ...
Read It Rating: 4.5
Left/Right Rating: L4
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 55%
October 09, 2003
Driving dangerously with the Patriot Act
Driving dangerously with the Patriot Act
By Pat M. Holt
WASHINGTON -- Attorney General John Ashcroft is running a dead heat with A. Mitchell Palmer, attorney general in the Wilson administration, for the distinction of being the worst in that job in the history of the United States.
One of the duties of the attorney general as head of the Justice Department is to protect the Constitution. Both Mr. Ashcroft and Palmer found that the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights, got in their way more than it protected anything. It has gotten in Ashcroft's way in his pursuit of terrorists after Sept. 11, especially those who dress differently and practice a different religion. Palmer's crusade was the pursuit of communists, in the aftermath of World War I. He especially went after people with what to him were funny names from Eastern Europe. He tended to equate liberals with communists.
Ashcroft's vehicle is the USA Patriot Act, which Congress, abdicating its own duties of vigilance, passed with a whoop and a holler in the days after Sept. 11. Even the name of this odious legislation is offensive. It implies that the purpose of the act is to promote patriotism and that those not cooperating with it are somehow less patriotic.
...
Pat M. Holt is former chief of staff of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L1.1
Freedom Rating: 1.1
Learning Percentage: 1%
Local Peace Group Infiltrated By Government Agent
Local Peace Group Infiltrated By Government Agent
By Mike Rhodes
October 4, 2003
Peace Fresno was infiltrated by an agent working for the Fresno Sheriff's Department. Aaron Kilner, known by Peace Fresno activists as Aaron Stokes, attended several Peace Fresno meetings. Peace Fresno activist Nicholas DeGraff remembers him taking voluminous notes and several members say they saw him at peace vilgils held at Shaw and Blackstone. He was also on the bus local anti-globalization activists took to attend the WTO ministerial-level conference on Agricultural Science and Technology demonstration in Sacramento in June 2003.
Aaron Kilner died in a motorcycle accident on August 30, 2003. In his obituary in The Fresno Bee he was identified as a member of the Fresno County Sheriff's department. The obituary went on to say that he was "assigned to the anti-terrorist team." Local activists believe that this "anti-terrorist team" is, in fact, the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) that has recently been formed in this area.. When members of Peace Fresno saw the picture and read of Kilner's association with law enforcement they began piecing the story together.
The infiltration by law enforcement of progressive community groups in Fresno and throughout the country has long been used to disrupt legitimate political work. This disruption occurs by sowing seeds of mistrust among members, agents often promote discord within the group, and sometimes encourage illegal or violent actions. Agent provocateurs have been know to instigate violence at demonstrations, giving the police an excuse to attack protestors.
...
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 45%
October 08, 2003
Terror suspect tortured: dad claims
Terror suspect tortured: dad claims
By Rebecca Urban
October 8, 2003
Australian terrorist suspects David Hicks and Mamdouh Habib had likely been tortured while detained at Guantanamo Bay, a lawyer and Hicks' father said today.
Australian lawyer Richard Bourke, who has been working with prisoners at Camp X-ray for the past two years, told ABC radio leaks from the American military and reports from former inmates revealed the detainees had been forced to kneel in the sun until they collapsed and were tied up and had rubber bullets fired at them.
...
Read It Rating: 6
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -3
Learning Percentage: 30%
Sullum: Ashcroft's Patriot Act tour
The Washington Times: Commentary
By Jacob Sullum
August 26, 2003
Attorney General John Ashcroft is on a publicity tour, promoting the Patriot Act and preparing the public for a sequel. But just as you can't always believe an actor who tells you his latest film is sure to be a hit, you have to take what Mr. Ashcroft says with a grain of salt.
Mr. Ashcroft is reacting to bad reviews from critics who say the Patriot Act -- given a green light just a month and a half after the September 11 terrorist attacks by members of Congress who had not even read the script -- was rushed into production. The result, they say, was a deeply flawed work in which civil liberties make only a brief appearance.
...
Read It Rating: 7
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: .3
Learning Percentage: 10%
Media elite debate Patriot Act
Arbiter Online - Media elite debate Patriot Act
Privacy policies concern librarians
by Amy Olsen
October 06, 2003
Pulitzer Prize winner and Washington Post reporter David Broder spoke Oct. 2 at Boise State, encapsulating the day-long “Freedom and Secrecy: Trading Liberty for Security?” conference held by the Andrus Center for Public Policy.
Broder's speech was one of several activities and joint panel discussions focusing on the philosophical and political question of balancing civil liberties and homeland security.
Broder was the last speaker among three distinguished panelists at the conference on Thursday. Former Vice President Walter Mondale and former Washington State Senator Slade Gorton joined Broder for the event.
The lecturer gave several examples of past uses of the act, ranging from long-term immigrant confinement to inquiries into library records across the nation by agents of the law.
Broder reported that among 1,500 major libraries in the United States, 178 reported "visitations from FBI members" since the USA PATRIOT Act's passage in Oct. 2001.
...
Read It Rating: 4.5
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 35%
October 05, 2003
Fed Court tells NY to back off Russell Simmons and Hip Hop Summit
FEDERAL COURT ISSUES ORDER SUSPENDING NY LOBBYING COMMISSION INVESTIGATION OF RUSSELL SIMMONS AND THE HIP-HOP SUMMIT ACTION NETWORK
NEW YORK, N.Y. -- OCTOBER 2, 2003 - Russell Simmons and Dr. Benjamin Chavis, who together with the Hip-Hop Summit Action Network, filed a lawsuit in July of this year charging the New York Temporary State Commission on Lobbying with violating their First Amendment rights, reconvened in federal court this morning to ask Judge Loretta A. Preska to enforce the suspension of the Lobbying Commission's investigation into Russell Simmons and Dr. Chavis.
Today, Judge Loretta A. Preska issued an order suspending the Lobbying Commission's investigation into Plaintiffs' First Amendment activities, which were aimed at raising public awareness about the unfairness of the Rockefeller Drug Laws. The Judge found that the Lobbying Commission had unfairly tried to back out of a court-approved agreement to suspend the investigation. The suspension that Judge Preska ordered today will last until the Court can issue a full decision in this case.
...
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 4
Learning Percentage: 85%
Ashcroft Is Unprintable, and Glad of It
Ashcroft Is Unprintable, and Glad of It
On tour, he bars the press and cozies up to local TV reporters.
September 25, 2003
COMMENTARY
By Todd Gitlin and Jay Rosen
Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft, who is continuing his tour of the country to promote the Patriot Act, has at several stops, including Buffalo and Philadelphia, refused to speak to print reporters. While television correspondents can often breeze right in, their newspaper colleagues are kept at bay by Secret Service agents doing the bidding of the nation's chief law enforcement official, who prefers audiences of handpicked enthusiasts and interviews with local television reporters.
According to Justice Department spokeswoman Barbara Comstock, Ashcroft wants to explain "key facts directly to the American people" and not have to subject himself to "as much of a filter from people who are already invested in having a different view of it."
Of course he does. What public official wouldn't prefer a stenographer to an interlocutor? Ashcroft, like the president he serves, wishes to conduct the public's business in an echo chamber. With aplomb and no hint of bad conscience, they practice the politics of no-politics, the politics of l'etat, c'est moi.
...
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 50%
October 03, 2003
Chicago City Council votes against parts of USA-PATRIOT Act
Below is an official news story about it. Here is a slightly less journalistic story that provides more background info on the movement behind the resolution. (That story, by Elaine Cassel, seems to have originated at her blog here.
Council decries Patriot Act in watered-down resolution
October 2, 2003
BY FRAN SPIELMAN City Hall Reporter
Warning of civil liberties abuses similar to those that preceded the Holocaust, the City Council on Wednesday approved a watered-down resolution urging repeal of portions of the USA Patriot Act.
The 37-7 vote followed an emotional debate that invoked the chilling words of Nazi leader Hermann Goering and ignored Mayor Daley's warning that the federal government needs extraordinary tools to fight terrorism.
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: 1.5
Learning Percentage: 75%
Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
You can read a news story about the vote mentioned below -- Austin did indeed pass a resolution against the USA-PATRIOT Act -- here. There's also a pretty interesting local news video clip about the meeting here. The story aims to be a transcript of the video, though that's not fully the case. The U.S. Attorney who is interviewed sounded like he might have only read the beginning of the act, and then skipped the rest.
t r u t h o u t - William Rivers Pitt | Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
[TruthOut] Editor's Note | The following remarks were delivered by William Rivers Pitt at a Town Hall meeting in Austin, Texas on Tuesday, September 16. The meeting was called on the eve of an historic vote; the capitol city of Texas is very near to joining hundreds of other American communities in passing a resolution that repudiates the Patriot Act.
Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
By William Rivers Pitt
t r u t h o u t | Perspective
Monday 22 September 2003
I have listened to the defenses of the Patriot Act offered tonight. The essence of the defenses, the essence of the rebuttals to our reservations and complaints, is "Trust us. We're the government. We're the constitutional scholars. Trust us."
I've heard that before.
There are tons of mass destruction weapons in Iraq. Trust us. There are al Qaeda terrorists all over Iraq. Trust us. September 11 happened because of enemies who hate our freedoms. Trust us.
With all due respect, I say hell no. The one thing this government's behavior has not created is trust.
Ladies and gentlemen, I have come here today to appeal to your patriotism. We are all patriots here, every one of us. Let no one deny that or doubt that.
What are our duties as patriots? Is one a patriot if they fly the flag, to stand for the national anthem? Yes…and no. One may do these things and be filled with love of country, but if that is all you do, then you have not done enough. In this time, and in this place, and with all that is happening in this country and around the world, the duties of a patriot go far, far, far beyond flying the flag.
The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
That is how our freedom began 227 years ago. We said 'No.' Now, we must talk, and listen, and ask questions, and understand. If we do not like where we find ourselves, we must once again say 'No' with roaring voice, and without fear.
So let us, as patriots, speak tonight about the Patriot Act....
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 1.2
Learning Percentage: 15%
October 01, 2003
Mr. Bush and the Flag
Here's the whole short editorial. The original is linked to in the title.
Mr. Bush and the Flag
Washington Post | Editorial
Sunday 31 August 2003
THE WHITE HOUSE supports the wrongheaded constitutional amendment that would give Congress the power "to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States." Yet in light of an incident last month, Mr. Bush should consider whether he might be the first person jailed should this perennial foolishness -- passed most recently by the House of Representatives earlier this year -- ever become part of the Constitution. Mr. Bush, at a political event in Livonia, Mich., autographed supporters' flags, an apparent violation of an obscure provision of American law that details the respect with which flags should be treated. "The flag," reads the code, "should never have placed upon it . . . any mark, insignia, letter, word, figure, design, picture, or drawing of any nature." The last time Congress sought to ban flag-burning, in a statute the Supreme Court struck down in 1989, it made a criminal out of anyone who "defaces" a flag -- language Mr. Bush likewise appears to have violated. Never mind the fact that he clearly meant no disrespect; if Congress had the power to criminalize flag desecration, he would at least arguably be indictable.
We say arguably because there's no telling what "desecration" actually means. The proposed amendment is meant to deal with flag-burning, but what about that American soldier who, in a moment of unadulterated patriotism, wrapped a flag around a statue of Saddam Hussein? What about a person who proudly wears a ripped T-shirt displaying the flag? Of course, such cases would never be brought in court. The amendment, in practice, would be used to punish only unpopular political expression, expression that, though sometimes odious, is today unambiguously protected by American constitutional law -- as it should be. But the notion that the president, or anyone, could be charged with signing a flag should not be even arguable. It should be laughable -- as it would be if politicians such as Mr. Bush had the guts to stand against constitutional pollution rather than pandering to it.
Read It Rating: 8.5
Left/Right Rating: L4
Freedom Rating: 3
Learning Percentage: 25%
Fear as human shield faces jail
BBC NEWS | Americas | Fear as human shield faces jail
Sitting in her modest two-bedroom home on the west Florida coast, Faith Fippinger begins to cry as she talks about the prospect of going to jail.
This spring, the 62-year-old retired schoolteacher decided to travel to Iraq as a human shield.
To many she is a humanitarian, but in the eyes of the US Government she is a criminal.
...
when she returned home there was a letter waiting for her from the US Treasury Department.
"It was a requirement to send information as to why I was in Iraq," she says.
"It also said the penalties for being there could be as high as a million dollars and up to 12 years in jail."
'Freedom of speech'
By going to Iraq Faith Fippinger had broken the US economic embargo on Iraq, which had been in place for many years.
The letter explained that by travelling to the country and spending money there, Miss Fippinger was now liable for prosecution.
Read It Rating: 8.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: -4
Learning Percentage: 25%
September 22, 2003
Ashcroft Rips Anti-Patriot Act 'Hysteria'
The last statement quoted below is a common technique used by Justice Department folks to diffuse "hysteria" (a.k.a., legitimate concern about civil liberties): you could call it the "We don't want to search you" method. The FBI guy who spoke at the public forum I organized in March used the same line, multiple times in different forms. "You regular, law abiding folks have nothing to worry about."
Right -- because law enforcement has never investigated, searched, or surveilled an innocent person.
They don't care what you're reading -- just what the bad guys are reading. So, no worries. Carry on.
(In the preceding paragraph, Ashcroft uses another common rhetorical trick -- painting a silly, cartoonish scenario, and attributing it to the law's critics. I call him on this in the local news hour segment that I posted on my main blog recently.)
Ashcroft Rips Anti-Patriot Act 'Hysteria'
The Associated Press
WASHINGTON Sept. 15 — Attorney General John Ashcroft denounced as "hysteria" the contention by some librarians and civil liberties groups that the FBI can use a new anti-terror law to snoop into Americans' reading habits.
In a speech Monday to an American Restaurant Association conference, Ashcroft said people are being wrongly led to believe that libraries have been "surrounded by the FBI," with agents "dressed in raincoats, dark suits and sunglasses. They stop everyone and interrogate everyone like Joe Friday.
"Now, you may have thought with all this hysteria and hyperbole, something had to be wrong," Ashcroft said. "Do we at the Justice Department really care what you are reading? No."
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 5%
September 14, 2003
Patriot II -- More Power, Please, Says Bush
So, they just want the power to violate the privacy of tens of thousands of people on the spot, on their own discretion.
Here's the question then: Why bother having warrants or judicial approval in any cases? What's the logic wall which prevents the example they give below from proceeding to the government simply always having instant access to all the hotel bases to check for any "known offender" in all fields of law enforcement?
Bush Seeks to Expand Access to Private Data
WASHINGTON, Sept. 13 -- For months, President Bush's advisers have assured a skittish public that law-abiding Americans have no reason to fear the long reach of the antiterrorism law known as the Patriot Act because its most intrusive measures would require a judge's sign-off.
But in a plan announced this week to expand counterterrorism powers, President Bush adopted a very different tack. In a three-point presidential plan that critics are already dubbing Patriot Act II, Mr. Bush is seeking broad new authority to allow federal agents -- without the approval of a judge or even a federal prosecutor -- to demand private records and compel testimony.
Mr. Bush also wants to expand the use of the death penalty in crimes like terrorist financing, and he wants to make it tougher for defendants in such cases to be freed on bail before trial. These proposals are also sure to prompt sharp debate, even among Republicans.
...
But Mr. Corallo gave a hypothetical example in which the F.B.I. received a tip in the middle of the night that an unidentified terrorist had traveled to Boston. Under Mr. Bush's plan, the F.B.I., rather than waiting for a judicial order, could subpoena all the Bost
2003 Year in Review from BORDC
This was part of the Bill of Rights Defense Committee's "Dissent is Patriotic" newsletter.2003 Year in Review
In 2003, millions of U.S. citizens and noncitizens turned to the Bill of Rights and exercised its protections to restore and uphold essential rights and freedoms that help define our country. Congress and the Justice Department noticed.
As we look forward to 2004, BORDC reviews some highlights of the past year.
Grassroots news
-
The number of Civil Liberties Safe Zones increased more than tenfold, from 22 communities in 2002 to 230 cities, towns, and counties and three states by the end of 2003. The number of people protected by Civil Liberties Safe Zones grew to over 30 million (more than 10 percent of the United States population!).
- March 4: highest number of resolutions passed in one day, twelve, including the first ballot initiative (Montpelier, VT).
- April 2: first ordinance passed (Arcata, CA).
-
April 25: first state resolution passed (Hawai'i).
-
The distribution of civil liberties resolutions across 37 of the 50 states should surprise former Justice Department spokesperson Barbara Comstock, who claimed that “about 45 percent of them, almost half, are either in cities in Vermont, very small populations, or in sort of college towns in California.”
-
Attention to the Patriot Act also increased among campuses, labor unions, religious bodies, and other types of organizations.
-
On June 5, Attorney General Ashcroft mentioned the "Bill of Rights defense movement" twice in his testimony before the House Judiciary Committee.
-
In August and September, the Attorney General embarked on a month-long 30-city tour to defend the Patriot Act. Thousands of protestors showed up at his campaign stops and held signs outside his closed-door meetings before hand-picked audiences of uniformed law enforcement. During the tour, 27 cities passed resolutions against the Patriot Act, and tens of thousands of Americans looked into the Patriot Act.
-
In October, more than 200 people from 27 states met for the first time at the first annual Grassroots America Defends the Bill of Rights conference. Participants look forward to more regional and national conference and ongoing communication via a listserve.
Legislation
-
On February 7, the Center for Public Integrity posted the leaked Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003 on its website. The public outcry over the bill dubbed "Patriot II" has prevented its subsequent introduction in Congress. However, a section of the bill, which expands the FBI's authority to issue national security letters by changing the definition of "financial institutions," was inserted into the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004, which President Bush signed into law in December. Other Patriot II sections may be introduced piecemeal in 2004.
-
Last March, Rep. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) introduced the first piece of legislation aimed at rolling back the powers granted by the USA Patriot Act, the Freedom to Read Protection Act (HR 1157). The bill enjoys bi-partisan support with 144 co-sponsors. Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) introduced the companion Library, Bookseller, and Personal Records Privacy Act (S.1507). The SAFE Act and the Benjamin Franklin True Patriot Act are among more than a dozen other bills to restore liberties and rights already introduced. The CLEAR Act and other legislation to strengthen the Patriot Act have also been introduced.
-
On July 23, by a vote of 309-118, the House approved a bipartisan amendment offered by Congressmen C.L. "Butch" Otter (R-ID), Dennis J. Kucinich (D-OH) and Ron Paul (R-TX) to withhold funding for "sneak-and-peek" searches under the USA PATRIOT Act. The nearly 3-1 vote marks the first time either chamber of Congress has acted to roll back any provision of the law. Despite the amendment's overwhelming House support, the conferees who worked out differences between the House and Senate versions of the Intelligence Authorization Act dropped the amendment from the final bill.
-
On September 25 Congress de-funded the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA)'s controversial Terrorism Information Awareness (formerly the Total Information Awareness) program. A month earlier, John Poindexter resigned as head of the Office of Information Awareness. DARPA has transferred some TIA research and tools to other agencies.
Reports and Court Decisions: Special Registration, Detentions, and Enemy Combatants
-
In June, Justice Department Inspector General Glenn Fine released a report concluding that the Justice Department had detained hundreds of Arab and Muslim men who had no ties to the September 11 attacks or to terrorism for several months without charges or access to attorneys. In December, Fine released another report finding that dozens of detainees held in a federal detention center in Brooklyn were physically and verbally abused by prison guards.
-
In November, the Supreme Court agreed to test the constitutionality of powers that the Bush Administration has claimed since September 11, 2001: in Rasul v. Bush and Odah v. United States, it will decide whether the non-U.S. citizens being held in prison at Guantanamo Bay should be given access to U.S. courts. In early January the Supreme Court also agreed to hear Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, to decide whether the government can hold Yaser Esam Hamdi, a U.S. citizen captured in Afghanistan, indefinitely without charges filed and without access to an attorney.
-
On December 18, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, based in New York, ruled that it is unlawful for the U.S. government to detain a U.S. citizen captured on U.S. soil as an enemy combatant. The court ordered the government to either release Jose Padilla (the only person whom the ruling affects) or transfer him to civilian custody within 30 days.
-
On the same day, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, based in San Francisco, ruled that the cases of some 600 detainees at Guantanamo have to be open to judicial scrutiny, and that the Bush administration is violating international law and the U.S. Constitution by holding detainees on a U.S. Navy base without legal protections.
-
Nearly 85,000 men from North Korea and 24 Muslim countries reported to INS facilities for NSEERS "special registration." The expensive program did not turn up any terrorists, but 13,000 of the men who voluntarily reported are in deportation proceedings. Rumors that the program has ended are untrue: Beginning December 2, 2003, men from 25 countries who have already registered do not need to reregister annually. Point of entry follow-up interviews are also suspended. However, several parts of the Special Registration program remain. Read AILA's summary of changes to the Department of Homeland Security's Special Registration program.
-
In December 2003, the NSEERS program was supplemented by US-VISIT, a program that takes biometric measurements of people including fingerprints and face scans from certain countries. For more information, see the Center for American Progress's analysis of the new program.
Silencing Dissent
-
The Secret Service shelters President Bush from peaceful protesters. The Administration also demanded that areas of the U.K. and Australia be "scrubbed" of protesters during the president's visits.
-
In October, police stifled dissent at the FTAA protests.
-
An FBI memo dated October 15 asks local law enforcement to report antiwar protests and other activities protected by the First Amendment which they consider "suspicious" to the FBI's counterterrorism units.
Supreme Court Backs Police Random Roadblocks
Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan said the ruling "will allow law enforcement in Illinois and across the nation to seek voluntary assistance from citizens in their efforts to solve crime."
Right, voluntary forced assistance. It will allow them to use force to get voluntary assistance.
FOXNews.com - Top Stories - Supreme Court Backs Police Random Roadblocks
January 11, 2004
Detained in America
This is an awesome story about the very many people who have been detained in contravention with the Bill of Rights since 9/11.
Detained in America: A Guest Column by Bruce Jackson
The Desaparecidos of George W. Bush
January 03, 2004
Presidential Powers: A Court Pushes Back
MSNBC -
How do you solve a problem like Padilla?
By Michael Isikoff
Newsweek
Judges beginning to balk in war on terror
KRT Wire | 12/28/2003 | Judges beginning to balk in war on terror
January 01, 2004
Congress Expands FBI Spying Power
Wired News: Congress Expands FBI Spying Power
(Also archived at Civil Liberties Watch)
December 30, 2003
December 27, 2003
Coffee, Tea or Handcuffs?
LA Weekly: Columns: Open City: Coffee, Tea or Handcuffs?
An Australian journalist gets a taste of Department of Homeland Security hospitality
by Steven Mikulan
(TruthOut permacopy)
December 21, 2003
Checks and Balances Live On
Rebuff for Bush on civil liberties (December 20, 2003)
(TruthOut permacopy)
THE Bush administration may be forced to rethink its war on terrorism strategy after two US courts ruled yesterday that detainees should not remain indefinitely in a legal twilight zone.
In a critical decision, a San Francisco appeals court disputed the administration's claims to have "unchecked authority" in dealing with prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba outside the US criminal justice system.
The 2-1 decision came a few hours after a Manhattan appeals court ruled that accused "dirty bomb" plotter Jose Padilla - a US citizen alleged to be an enemy combatant - be released from military custody within 30 days.
...
Bill of Rights day in Noho
This is about Northampton, MA's Bill of Rights Day celebration. I've lived and worked in Northampton in the past. It's a great little Northeast city.
December 20, 2003
Bush Overruled on 'Dirty Bomb' Suspect
Yahoo! News - Bush Overruled on 'Dirty Bomb' Suspect
(TruthOut permacopy)
NEW YORK - President Bush does not have power to detain American citizen Jose Padilla, the former gang member seized on U.S. soil, as an enemy combatant, a federal appeals court ruled Thursday.
...
3 senators urge Rumsfeld to free or try terror detainees
December 08, 2003
BillofRightsDay.com
Here's a new site I put together to help folks organize their Bill of Rights Day celebration efforts:
December 01, 2003
Patriot Act Expansion Moves Through Congress
Patriot Act Expansion Moves Through Congress
by Jim Lobe
(TruthOut permacopy)
Patriot Act Author Has Concerns
Patriot Act Author Has Concerns
By Richard B. Schmitt, Times Staff Writer
Detaining citizens as 'enemy combatants' -- a policy not spelled out in the act -- is flawed, the legal scholar says.
WASHINGTON — The Justice Department's war on terrorism has drawn intense scrutiny from the left and the right. Now, a chief architect of the USA Patriot Act and a former top assistant to Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft are joining the fray, voicing concern about aspects of the administration's anti-terrorism policy.
At issue is the government's power to designate and detain "enemy combatants," in particular in the case of "dirty bomb" plot suspect Jose Padilla, the Brooklyn-born former gang member who was picked up at a Chicago airport 18 months ago by the FBI and locked in a military brig without access to a lawyer.
...
November 23, 2003
F.B.I. Scrutinizes Antiwar Rallies
F.B.I. Scrutinizes Antiwar Rallies
By Eric Lichtblau
New York Times
Sunday 23 November 2003
The Federal Bureau of Investigation has collected extensive information on the tactics, training and organization of antiwar demonstrators and has advised local law enforcement officials to report any suspicious activity at protests to its counterterrorism squads, according to interviews and a confidential bureau memorandum.
The memorandum, which the bureau sent to local law enforcement agencies last month in advance of antiwar demonstrations in Washington and San Francisco, detailed how protesters have sometimes used "training camps" to rehearse for demonstrations, the Internet to raise money and gas masks to defend against tear gas. The memorandum analyzed lawful activities like recruiting demonstrators, as well as illegal activities like using fake documentation to get into a secured site.
F.B.I. officials said in interviews that the intelligence-gathering effort was aimed at identifying anarchists and "extremist elements" plotting violence, not at monitoring the political speech of law-abiding protesters.
The initiative has won the support of some local police, who view it as a critical way to maintain order at large-scale demonstrations. Indeed, some law enforcement officials said they believed the F.B.I.'s approach had helped to ensure that nationwide antiwar demonstrations in recent months, drawing hundreds of thousands of protesters, remained largely free of violence and disruption.
But some civil rights advocates and legal scholars said the monitoring program could signal a return to the abuses of the 1960's and 1970's, when J. Edgar Hoover was the F.B.I. director and agents routinely spied on political protesters like the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. ...
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 20%
November 12, 2003
Ashcroft Slams Critics as Patriot Act Backlash Grows
Ashcroft Slams Critics as Patriot Act Backlash Grows
By Tom Regan
Christian Science Monitor
Tuesday 16 September 2003
The war of words over the USA Patriot Act heated up considerably over the past few days, thanks in part to a recently completed "Patriot Act Tour" conducted by U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft. The tour, conducted in front of small, law enforcement friendly audiences, excluded participation from the general public. (At Faneuil Hall in Boston, Ashcroft addressed a crowd of 150, while outside the hall a crowd of 1200 chanted "This is what democracy looks like.") The tour was designed to create support for the act, but in some ways may have done just the opposite.
One of the main charges critics of the Patriot Act aim against Ashcroft is that rules designed to catch terrorists will be used against ordinary citizens. They also say police and prosecutors will use the laws created by the Patriot Act in other areas of law enforcement. These critics include people from both the left and the right of the American political spectrum.
Ashcroft blasted some of these critics on Monday, taking aim in particular at librarians. The Associated Press reports that Ashcroft said people are being wrongly led to believe that libraries have been "surrounded by the FBI," with agents "dressed in raincoats, dark suits and sunglasses. They stop everyone and interrogate everyone like Joe Friday."
The attorney general continues to insist that the Act "respects rights and increases security." USA Today looks at how the Act is at the heart of Ashcroft's powers as attorney general.
...
Read It Rating: 8.1
Left/Right Rating: L1.5
Freedom Rating: 2
Learning Percentage: 20%
October 23, 2003
Georgia runs from the MATRIX
By Ashlee Vance in Chicago
Posted: 22/10/2003 at 19:45 GMT
The state of Georgia has pulled out of the U.S. Department of Justice sponsored MATRIX information collection program, leaving data only on its felons and sexual offenders behind in the Orwellian database.
Georgia Governor Sonny Perdue has cited both privacy concerns and costs as the two key reasons the state will no longer participate in the MATRIX (Multistate Anti-Terrorism Information Exchange) pilot project. ...
Read It Rating: 4.5
Left/Right Rating: L4
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 55%
October 09, 2003
Driving dangerously with the Patriot Act
Driving dangerously with the Patriot Act
By Pat M. Holt
WASHINGTON -- Attorney General John Ashcroft is running a dead heat with A. Mitchell Palmer, attorney general in the Wilson administration, for the distinction of being the worst in that job in the history of the United States.
One of the duties of the attorney general as head of the Justice Department is to protect the Constitution. Both Mr. Ashcroft and Palmer found that the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights, got in their way more than it protected anything. It has gotten in Ashcroft's way in his pursuit of terrorists after Sept. 11, especially those who dress differently and practice a different religion. Palmer's crusade was the pursuit of communists, in the aftermath of World War I. He especially went after people with what to him were funny names from Eastern Europe. He tended to equate liberals with communists.
Ashcroft's vehicle is the USA Patriot Act, which Congress, abdicating its own duties of vigilance, passed with a whoop and a holler in the days after Sept. 11. Even the name of this odious legislation is offensive. It implies that the purpose of the act is to promote patriotism and that those not cooperating with it are somehow less patriotic.
...
Pat M. Holt is former chief of staff of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L1.1
Freedom Rating: 1.1
Learning Percentage: 1%
Local Peace Group Infiltrated By Government Agent
Local Peace Group Infiltrated By Government Agent
By Mike Rhodes
October 4, 2003
Peace Fresno was infiltrated by an agent working for the Fresno Sheriff's Department. Aaron Kilner, known by Peace Fresno activists as Aaron Stokes, attended several Peace Fresno meetings. Peace Fresno activist Nicholas DeGraff remembers him taking voluminous notes and several members say they saw him at peace vilgils held at Shaw and Blackstone. He was also on the bus local anti-globalization activists took to attend the WTO ministerial-level conference on Agricultural Science and Technology demonstration in Sacramento in June 2003.
Aaron Kilner died in a motorcycle accident on August 30, 2003. In his obituary in The Fresno Bee he was identified as a member of the Fresno County Sheriff's department. The obituary went on to say that he was "assigned to the anti-terrorist team." Local activists believe that this "anti-terrorist team" is, in fact, the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) that has recently been formed in this area.. When members of Peace Fresno saw the picture and read of Kilner's association with law enforcement they began piecing the story together.
The infiltration by law enforcement of progressive community groups in Fresno and throughout the country has long been used to disrupt legitimate political work. This disruption occurs by sowing seeds of mistrust among members, agents often promote discord within the group, and sometimes encourage illegal or violent actions. Agent provocateurs have been know to instigate violence at demonstrations, giving the police an excuse to attack protestors.
...
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 45%
October 08, 2003
Terror suspect tortured: dad claims
Terror suspect tortured: dad claims
By Rebecca Urban
October 8, 2003
Australian terrorist suspects David Hicks and Mamdouh Habib had likely been tortured while detained at Guantanamo Bay, a lawyer and Hicks' father said today.
Australian lawyer Richard Bourke, who has been working with prisoners at Camp X-ray for the past two years, told ABC radio leaks from the American military and reports from former inmates revealed the detainees had been forced to kneel in the sun until they collapsed and were tied up and had rubber bullets fired at them.
...
Read It Rating: 6
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -3
Learning Percentage: 30%
Sullum: Ashcroft's Patriot Act tour
The Washington Times: Commentary
By Jacob Sullum
August 26, 2003
Attorney General John Ashcroft is on a publicity tour, promoting the Patriot Act and preparing the public for a sequel. But just as you can't always believe an actor who tells you his latest film is sure to be a hit, you have to take what Mr. Ashcroft says with a grain of salt.
Mr. Ashcroft is reacting to bad reviews from critics who say the Patriot Act -- given a green light just a month and a half after the September 11 terrorist attacks by members of Congress who had not even read the script -- was rushed into production. The result, they say, was a deeply flawed work in which civil liberties make only a brief appearance.
...
Read It Rating: 7
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: .3
Learning Percentage: 10%
Media elite debate Patriot Act
Arbiter Online - Media elite debate Patriot Act
Privacy policies concern librarians
by Amy Olsen
October 06, 2003
Pulitzer Prize winner and Washington Post reporter David Broder spoke Oct. 2 at Boise State, encapsulating the day-long “Freedom and Secrecy: Trading Liberty for Security?” conference held by the Andrus Center for Public Policy.
Broder's speech was one of several activities and joint panel discussions focusing on the philosophical and political question of balancing civil liberties and homeland security.
Broder was the last speaker among three distinguished panelists at the conference on Thursday. Former Vice President Walter Mondale and former Washington State Senator Slade Gorton joined Broder for the event.
The lecturer gave several examples of past uses of the act, ranging from long-term immigrant confinement to inquiries into library records across the nation by agents of the law.
Broder reported that among 1,500 major libraries in the United States, 178 reported "visitations from FBI members" since the USA PATRIOT Act's passage in Oct. 2001.
...
Read It Rating: 4.5
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 35%
October 05, 2003
Fed Court tells NY to back off Russell Simmons and Hip Hop Summit
FEDERAL COURT ISSUES ORDER SUSPENDING NY LOBBYING COMMISSION INVESTIGATION OF RUSSELL SIMMONS AND THE HIP-HOP SUMMIT ACTION NETWORK
NEW YORK, N.Y. -- OCTOBER 2, 2003 - Russell Simmons and Dr. Benjamin Chavis, who together with the Hip-Hop Summit Action Network, filed a lawsuit in July of this year charging the New York Temporary State Commission on Lobbying with violating their First Amendment rights, reconvened in federal court this morning to ask Judge Loretta A. Preska to enforce the suspension of the Lobbying Commission's investigation into Russell Simmons and Dr. Chavis.
Today, Judge Loretta A. Preska issued an order suspending the Lobbying Commission's investigation into Plaintiffs' First Amendment activities, which were aimed at raising public awareness about the unfairness of the Rockefeller Drug Laws. The Judge found that the Lobbying Commission had unfairly tried to back out of a court-approved agreement to suspend the investigation. The suspension that Judge Preska ordered today will last until the Court can issue a full decision in this case.
...
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 4
Learning Percentage: 85%
Ashcroft Is Unprintable, and Glad of It
Ashcroft Is Unprintable, and Glad of It
On tour, he bars the press and cozies up to local TV reporters.
September 25, 2003
COMMENTARY
By Todd Gitlin and Jay Rosen
Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft, who is continuing his tour of the country to promote the Patriot Act, has at several stops, including Buffalo and Philadelphia, refused to speak to print reporters. While television correspondents can often breeze right in, their newspaper colleagues are kept at bay by Secret Service agents doing the bidding of the nation's chief law enforcement official, who prefers audiences of handpicked enthusiasts and interviews with local television reporters.
According to Justice Department spokeswoman Barbara Comstock, Ashcroft wants to explain "key facts directly to the American people" and not have to subject himself to "as much of a filter from people who are already invested in having a different view of it."
Of course he does. What public official wouldn't prefer a stenographer to an interlocutor? Ashcroft, like the president he serves, wishes to conduct the public's business in an echo chamber. With aplomb and no hint of bad conscience, they practice the politics of no-politics, the politics of l'etat, c'est moi.
...
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 50%
October 03, 2003
Chicago City Council votes against parts of USA-PATRIOT Act
Below is an official news story about it. Here is a slightly less journalistic story that provides more background info on the movement behind the resolution. (That story, by Elaine Cassel, seems to have originated at her blog here.
Council decries Patriot Act in watered-down resolution
October 2, 2003
BY FRAN SPIELMAN City Hall Reporter
Warning of civil liberties abuses similar to those that preceded the Holocaust, the City Council on Wednesday approved a watered-down resolution urging repeal of portions of the USA Patriot Act.
The 37-7 vote followed an emotional debate that invoked the chilling words of Nazi leader Hermann Goering and ignored Mayor Daley's warning that the federal government needs extraordinary tools to fight terrorism.
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: 1.5
Learning Percentage: 75%
Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
You can read a news story about the vote mentioned below -- Austin did indeed pass a resolution against the USA-PATRIOT Act -- here. There's also a pretty interesting local news video clip about the meeting here. The story aims to be a transcript of the video, though that's not fully the case. The U.S. Attorney who is interviewed sounded like he might have only read the beginning of the act, and then skipped the rest.
t r u t h o u t - William Rivers Pitt | Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
[TruthOut] Editor's Note | The following remarks were delivered by William Rivers Pitt at a Town Hall meeting in Austin, Texas on Tuesday, September 16. The meeting was called on the eve of an historic vote; the capitol city of Texas is very near to joining hundreds of other American communities in passing a resolution that repudiates the Patriot Act.
Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
By William Rivers Pitt
t r u t h o u t | Perspective
Monday 22 September 2003
I have listened to the defenses of the Patriot Act offered tonight. The essence of the defenses, the essence of the rebuttals to our reservations and complaints, is "Trust us. We're the government. We're the constitutional scholars. Trust us."
I've heard that before.
There are tons of mass destruction weapons in Iraq. Trust us. There are al Qaeda terrorists all over Iraq. Trust us. September 11 happened because of enemies who hate our freedoms. Trust us.
With all due respect, I say hell no. The one thing this government's behavior has not created is trust.
Ladies and gentlemen, I have come here today to appeal to your patriotism. We are all patriots here, every one of us. Let no one deny that or doubt that.
What are our duties as patriots? Is one a patriot if they fly the flag, to stand for the national anthem? Yes…and no. One may do these things and be filled with love of country, but if that is all you do, then you have not done enough. In this time, and in this place, and with all that is happening in this country and around the world, the duties of a patriot go far, far, far beyond flying the flag.
The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
That is how our freedom began 227 years ago. We said 'No.' Now, we must talk, and listen, and ask questions, and understand. If we do not like where we find ourselves, we must once again say 'No' with roaring voice, and without fear.
So let us, as patriots, speak tonight about the Patriot Act....
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 1.2
Learning Percentage: 15%
October 01, 2003
Mr. Bush and the Flag
Here's the whole short editorial. The original is linked to in the title.
Mr. Bush and the Flag
Washington Post | Editorial
Sunday 31 August 2003
THE WHITE HOUSE supports the wrongheaded constitutional amendment that would give Congress the power "to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States." Yet in light of an incident last month, Mr. Bush should consider whether he might be the first person jailed should this perennial foolishness -- passed most recently by the House of Representatives earlier this year -- ever become part of the Constitution. Mr. Bush, at a political event in Livonia, Mich., autographed supporters' flags, an apparent violation of an obscure provision of American law that details the respect with which flags should be treated. "The flag," reads the code, "should never have placed upon it . . . any mark, insignia, letter, word, figure, design, picture, or drawing of any nature." The last time Congress sought to ban flag-burning, in a statute the Supreme Court struck down in 1989, it made a criminal out of anyone who "defaces" a flag -- language Mr. Bush likewise appears to have violated. Never mind the fact that he clearly meant no disrespect; if Congress had the power to criminalize flag desecration, he would at least arguably be indictable.
We say arguably because there's no telling what "desecration" actually means. The proposed amendment is meant to deal with flag-burning, but what about that American soldier who, in a moment of unadulterated patriotism, wrapped a flag around a statue of Saddam Hussein? What about a person who proudly wears a ripped T-shirt displaying the flag? Of course, such cases would never be brought in court. The amendment, in practice, would be used to punish only unpopular political expression, expression that, though sometimes odious, is today unambiguously protected by American constitutional law -- as it should be. But the notion that the president, or anyone, could be charged with signing a flag should not be even arguable. It should be laughable -- as it would be if politicians such as Mr. Bush had the guts to stand against constitutional pollution rather than pandering to it.
Read It Rating: 8.5
Left/Right Rating: L4
Freedom Rating: 3
Learning Percentage: 25%
Fear as human shield faces jail
BBC NEWS | Americas | Fear as human shield faces jail
Sitting in her modest two-bedroom home on the west Florida coast, Faith Fippinger begins to cry as she talks about the prospect of going to jail.
This spring, the 62-year-old retired schoolteacher decided to travel to Iraq as a human shield.
To many she is a humanitarian, but in the eyes of the US Government she is a criminal.
...
when she returned home there was a letter waiting for her from the US Treasury Department.
"It was a requirement to send information as to why I was in Iraq," she says.
"It also said the penalties for being there could be as high as a million dollars and up to 12 years in jail."
'Freedom of speech'
By going to Iraq Faith Fippinger had broken the US economic embargo on Iraq, which had been in place for many years.
The letter explained that by travelling to the country and spending money there, Miss Fippinger was now liable for prosecution.
Read It Rating: 8.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: -4
Learning Percentage: 25%
September 22, 2003
Ashcroft Rips Anti-Patriot Act 'Hysteria'
The last statement quoted below is a common technique used by Justice Department folks to diffuse "hysteria" (a.k.a., legitimate concern about civil liberties): you could call it the "We don't want to search you" method. The FBI guy who spoke at the public forum I organized in March used the same line, multiple times in different forms. "You regular, law abiding folks have nothing to worry about."
Right -- because law enforcement has never investigated, searched, or surveilled an innocent person.
They don't care what you're reading -- just what the bad guys are reading. So, no worries. Carry on.
(In the preceding paragraph, Ashcroft uses another common rhetorical trick -- painting a silly, cartoonish scenario, and attributing it to the law's critics. I call him on this in the local news hour segment that I posted on my main blog recently.)
Ashcroft Rips Anti-Patriot Act 'Hysteria'
The Associated Press
WASHINGTON Sept. 15 — Attorney General John Ashcroft denounced as "hysteria" the contention by some librarians and civil liberties groups that the FBI can use a new anti-terror law to snoop into Americans' reading habits.
In a speech Monday to an American Restaurant Association conference, Ashcroft said people are being wrongly led to believe that libraries have been "surrounded by the FBI," with agents "dressed in raincoats, dark suits and sunglasses. They stop everyone and interrogate everyone like Joe Friday.
"Now, you may have thought with all this hysteria and hyperbole, something had to be wrong," Ashcroft said. "Do we at the Justice Department really care what you are reading? No."
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 5%
September 14, 2003
Patriot II -- More Power, Please, Says Bush
So, they just want the power to violate the privacy of tens of thousands of people on the spot, on their own discretion.
Here's the question then: Why bother having warrants or judicial approval in any cases? What's the logic wall which prevents the example they give below from proceeding to the government simply always having instant access to all the hotel bases to check for any "known offender" in all fields of law enforcement?
Bush Seeks to Expand Access to Private Data
WASHINGTON, Sept. 13 -- For months, President Bush's advisers have assured a skittish public that law-abiding Americans have no reason to fear the long reach of the antiterrorism law known as the Patriot Act because its most intrusive measures would require a judge's sign-off.
But in a plan announced this week to expand counterterrorism powers, President Bush adopted a very different tack. In a three-point presidential plan that critics are already dubbing Patriot Act II, Mr. Bush is seeking broad new authority to allow federal agents -- without the approval of a judge or even a federal prosecutor -- to demand private records and compel testimony.
Mr. Bush also wants to expand the use of the death penalty in crimes like terrorist financing, and he wants to make it tougher for defendants in such cases to be freed on bail before trial. These proposals are also sure to prompt sharp debate, even among Republicans.
...
But Mr. Corallo gave a hypothetical example in which the F.B.I. received a tip in the middle of the night that an unidentified terrorist had traveled to Boston. Under Mr. Bush's plan, the F.B.I., rather than waiting for a judicial order, could subpoena all the Bost
Detained in America
This is an awesome story about the very many people who have been detained in contravention with the Bill of Rights since 9/11.
Detained in America: A Guest Column by Bruce Jackson
The Desaparecidos of George W. Bush
Presidential Powers: A Court Pushes Back
MSNBC -
How do you solve a problem like Padilla?
By Michael Isikoff
Newsweek
Judges beginning to balk in war on terror
KRT Wire | 12/28/2003 | Judges beginning to balk in war on terror
January 01, 2004
Congress Expands FBI Spying Power
Wired News: Congress Expands FBI Spying Power
(Also archived at Civil Liberties Watch)
December 30, 2003
December 27, 2003
Coffee, Tea or Handcuffs?
LA Weekly: Columns: Open City: Coffee, Tea or Handcuffs?
An Australian journalist gets a taste of Department of Homeland Security hospitality
by Steven Mikulan
(TruthOut permacopy)
December 21, 2003
Checks and Balances Live On
Rebuff for Bush on civil liberties (December 20, 2003)
(TruthOut permacopy)
THE Bush administration may be forced to rethink its war on terrorism strategy after two US courts ruled yesterday that detainees should not remain indefinitely in a legal twilight zone.
In a critical decision, a San Francisco appeals court disputed the administration's claims to have "unchecked authority" in dealing with prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba outside the US criminal justice system.
The 2-1 decision came a few hours after a Manhattan appeals court ruled that accused "dirty bomb" plotter Jose Padilla - a US citizen alleged to be an enemy combatant - be released from military custody within 30 days.
...
Bill of Rights day in Noho
This is about Northampton, MA's Bill of Rights Day celebration. I've lived and worked in Northampton in the past. It's a great little Northeast city.
December 20, 2003
Bush Overruled on 'Dirty Bomb' Suspect
Yahoo! News - Bush Overruled on 'Dirty Bomb' Suspect
(TruthOut permacopy)
NEW YORK - President Bush does not have power to detain American citizen Jose Padilla, the former gang member seized on U.S. soil, as an enemy combatant, a federal appeals court ruled Thursday.
...
3 senators urge Rumsfeld to free or try terror detainees
December 08, 2003
BillofRightsDay.com
Here's a new site I put together to help folks organize their Bill of Rights Day celebration efforts:
December 01, 2003
Patriot Act Expansion Moves Through Congress
Patriot Act Expansion Moves Through Congress
by Jim Lobe
(TruthOut permacopy)
Patriot Act Author Has Concerns
Patriot Act Author Has Concerns
By Richard B. Schmitt, Times Staff Writer
Detaining citizens as 'enemy combatants' -- a policy not spelled out in the act -- is flawed, the legal scholar says.
WASHINGTON — The Justice Department's war on terrorism has drawn intense scrutiny from the left and the right. Now, a chief architect of the USA Patriot Act and a former top assistant to Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft are joining the fray, voicing concern about aspects of the administration's anti-terrorism policy.
At issue is the government's power to designate and detain "enemy combatants," in particular in the case of "dirty bomb" plot suspect Jose Padilla, the Brooklyn-born former gang member who was picked up at a Chicago airport 18 months ago by the FBI and locked in a military brig without access to a lawyer.
...
November 23, 2003
F.B.I. Scrutinizes Antiwar Rallies
F.B.I. Scrutinizes Antiwar Rallies
By Eric Lichtblau
New York Times
Sunday 23 November 2003
The Federal Bureau of Investigation has collected extensive information on the tactics, training and organization of antiwar demonstrators and has advised local law enforcement officials to report any suspicious activity at protests to its counterterrorism squads, according to interviews and a confidential bureau memorandum.
The memorandum, which the bureau sent to local law enforcement agencies last month in advance of antiwar demonstrations in Washington and San Francisco, detailed how protesters have sometimes used "training camps" to rehearse for demonstrations, the Internet to raise money and gas masks to defend against tear gas. The memorandum analyzed lawful activities like recruiting demonstrators, as well as illegal activities like using fake documentation to get into a secured site.
F.B.I. officials said in interviews that the intelligence-gathering effort was aimed at identifying anarchists and "extremist elements" plotting violence, not at monitoring the political speech of law-abiding protesters.
The initiative has won the support of some local police, who view it as a critical way to maintain order at large-scale demonstrations. Indeed, some law enforcement officials said they believed the F.B.I.'s approach had helped to ensure that nationwide antiwar demonstrations in recent months, drawing hundreds of thousands of protesters, remained largely free of violence and disruption.
But some civil rights advocates and legal scholars said the monitoring program could signal a return to the abuses of the 1960's and 1970's, when J. Edgar Hoover was the F.B.I. director and agents routinely spied on political protesters like the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. ...
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 20%
November 12, 2003
Ashcroft Slams Critics as Patriot Act Backlash Grows
Ashcroft Slams Critics as Patriot Act Backlash Grows
By Tom Regan
Christian Science Monitor
Tuesday 16 September 2003
The war of words over the USA Patriot Act heated up considerably over the past few days, thanks in part to a recently completed "Patriot Act Tour" conducted by U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft. The tour, conducted in front of small, law enforcement friendly audiences, excluded participation from the general public. (At Faneuil Hall in Boston, Ashcroft addressed a crowd of 150, while outside the hall a crowd of 1200 chanted "This is what democracy looks like.") The tour was designed to create support for the act, but in some ways may have done just the opposite.
One of the main charges critics of the Patriot Act aim against Ashcroft is that rules designed to catch terrorists will be used against ordinary citizens. They also say police and prosecutors will use the laws created by the Patriot Act in other areas of law enforcement. These critics include people from both the left and the right of the American political spectrum.
Ashcroft blasted some of these critics on Monday, taking aim in particular at librarians. The Associated Press reports that Ashcroft said people are being wrongly led to believe that libraries have been "surrounded by the FBI," with agents "dressed in raincoats, dark suits and sunglasses. They stop everyone and interrogate everyone like Joe Friday."
The attorney general continues to insist that the Act "respects rights and increases security." USA Today looks at how the Act is at the heart of Ashcroft's powers as attorney general.
...
Read It Rating: 8.1
Left/Right Rating: L1.5
Freedom Rating: 2
Learning Percentage: 20%
October 23, 2003
Georgia runs from the MATRIX
By Ashlee Vance in Chicago
Posted: 22/10/2003 at 19:45 GMT
The state of Georgia has pulled out of the U.S. Department of Justice sponsored MATRIX information collection program, leaving data only on its felons and sexual offenders behind in the Orwellian database.
Georgia Governor Sonny Perdue has cited both privacy concerns and costs as the two key reasons the state will no longer participate in the MATRIX (Multistate Anti-Terrorism Information Exchange) pilot project. ...
Read It Rating: 4.5
Left/Right Rating: L4
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 55%
October 09, 2003
Driving dangerously with the Patriot Act
Driving dangerously with the Patriot Act
By Pat M. Holt
WASHINGTON -- Attorney General John Ashcroft is running a dead heat with A. Mitchell Palmer, attorney general in the Wilson administration, for the distinction of being the worst in that job in the history of the United States.
One of the duties of the attorney general as head of the Justice Department is to protect the Constitution. Both Mr. Ashcroft and Palmer found that the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights, got in their way more than it protected anything. It has gotten in Ashcroft's way in his pursuit of terrorists after Sept. 11, especially those who dress differently and practice a different religion. Palmer's crusade was the pursuit of communists, in the aftermath of World War I. He especially went after people with what to him were funny names from Eastern Europe. He tended to equate liberals with communists.
Ashcroft's vehicle is the USA Patriot Act, which Congress, abdicating its own duties of vigilance, passed with a whoop and a holler in the days after Sept. 11. Even the name of this odious legislation is offensive. It implies that the purpose of the act is to promote patriotism and that those not cooperating with it are somehow less patriotic.
...
Pat M. Holt is former chief of staff of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L1.1
Freedom Rating: 1.1
Learning Percentage: 1%
Local Peace Group Infiltrated By Government Agent
Local Peace Group Infiltrated By Government Agent
By Mike Rhodes
October 4, 2003
Peace Fresno was infiltrated by an agent working for the Fresno Sheriff's Department. Aaron Kilner, known by Peace Fresno activists as Aaron Stokes, attended several Peace Fresno meetings. Peace Fresno activist Nicholas DeGraff remembers him taking voluminous notes and several members say they saw him at peace vilgils held at Shaw and Blackstone. He was also on the bus local anti-globalization activists took to attend the WTO ministerial-level conference on Agricultural Science and Technology demonstration in Sacramento in June 2003.
Aaron Kilner died in a motorcycle accident on August 30, 2003. In his obituary in The Fresno Bee he was identified as a member of the Fresno County Sheriff's department. The obituary went on to say that he was "assigned to the anti-terrorist team." Local activists believe that this "anti-terrorist team" is, in fact, the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) that has recently been formed in this area.. When members of Peace Fresno saw the picture and read of Kilner's association with law enforcement they began piecing the story together.
The infiltration by law enforcement of progressive community groups in Fresno and throughout the country has long been used to disrupt legitimate political work. This disruption occurs by sowing seeds of mistrust among members, agents often promote discord within the group, and sometimes encourage illegal or violent actions. Agent provocateurs have been know to instigate violence at demonstrations, giving the police an excuse to attack protestors.
...
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 45%
October 08, 2003
Terror suspect tortured: dad claims
Terror suspect tortured: dad claims
By Rebecca Urban
October 8, 2003
Australian terrorist suspects David Hicks and Mamdouh Habib had likely been tortured while detained at Guantanamo Bay, a lawyer and Hicks' father said today.
Australian lawyer Richard Bourke, who has been working with prisoners at Camp X-ray for the past two years, told ABC radio leaks from the American military and reports from former inmates revealed the detainees had been forced to kneel in the sun until they collapsed and were tied up and had rubber bullets fired at them.
...
Read It Rating: 6
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -3
Learning Percentage: 30%
Sullum: Ashcroft's Patriot Act tour
The Washington Times: Commentary
By Jacob Sullum
August 26, 2003
Attorney General John Ashcroft is on a publicity tour, promoting the Patriot Act and preparing the public for a sequel. But just as you can't always believe an actor who tells you his latest film is sure to be a hit, you have to take what Mr. Ashcroft says with a grain of salt.
Mr. Ashcroft is reacting to bad reviews from critics who say the Patriot Act -- given a green light just a month and a half after the September 11 terrorist attacks by members of Congress who had not even read the script -- was rushed into production. The result, they say, was a deeply flawed work in which civil liberties make only a brief appearance.
...
Read It Rating: 7
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: .3
Learning Percentage: 10%
Media elite debate Patriot Act
Arbiter Online - Media elite debate Patriot Act
Privacy policies concern librarians
by Amy Olsen
October 06, 2003
Pulitzer Prize winner and Washington Post reporter David Broder spoke Oct. 2 at Boise State, encapsulating the day-long “Freedom and Secrecy: Trading Liberty for Security?” conference held by the Andrus Center for Public Policy.
Broder's speech was one of several activities and joint panel discussions focusing on the philosophical and political question of balancing civil liberties and homeland security.
Broder was the last speaker among three distinguished panelists at the conference on Thursday. Former Vice President Walter Mondale and former Washington State Senator Slade Gorton joined Broder for the event.
The lecturer gave several examples of past uses of the act, ranging from long-term immigrant confinement to inquiries into library records across the nation by agents of the law.
Broder reported that among 1,500 major libraries in the United States, 178 reported "visitations from FBI members" since the USA PATRIOT Act's passage in Oct. 2001.
...
Read It Rating: 4.5
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 35%
October 05, 2003
Fed Court tells NY to back off Russell Simmons and Hip Hop Summit
FEDERAL COURT ISSUES ORDER SUSPENDING NY LOBBYING COMMISSION INVESTIGATION OF RUSSELL SIMMONS AND THE HIP-HOP SUMMIT ACTION NETWORK
NEW YORK, N.Y. -- OCTOBER 2, 2003 - Russell Simmons and Dr. Benjamin Chavis, who together with the Hip-Hop Summit Action Network, filed a lawsuit in July of this year charging the New York Temporary State Commission on Lobbying with violating their First Amendment rights, reconvened in federal court this morning to ask Judge Loretta A. Preska to enforce the suspension of the Lobbying Commission's investigation into Russell Simmons and Dr. Chavis.
Today, Judge Loretta A. Preska issued an order suspending the Lobbying Commission's investigation into Plaintiffs' First Amendment activities, which were aimed at raising public awareness about the unfairness of the Rockefeller Drug Laws. The Judge found that the Lobbying Commission had unfairly tried to back out of a court-approved agreement to suspend the investigation. The suspension that Judge Preska ordered today will last until the Court can issue a full decision in this case.
...
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 4
Learning Percentage: 85%
Ashcroft Is Unprintable, and Glad of It
Ashcroft Is Unprintable, and Glad of It
On tour, he bars the press and cozies up to local TV reporters.
September 25, 2003
COMMENTARY
By Todd Gitlin and Jay Rosen
Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft, who is continuing his tour of the country to promote the Patriot Act, has at several stops, including Buffalo and Philadelphia, refused to speak to print reporters. While television correspondents can often breeze right in, their newspaper colleagues are kept at bay by Secret Service agents doing the bidding of the nation's chief law enforcement official, who prefers audiences of handpicked enthusiasts and interviews with local television reporters.
According to Justice Department spokeswoman Barbara Comstock, Ashcroft wants to explain "key facts directly to the American people" and not have to subject himself to "as much of a filter from people who are already invested in having a different view of it."
Of course he does. What public official wouldn't prefer a stenographer to an interlocutor? Ashcroft, like the president he serves, wishes to conduct the public's business in an echo chamber. With aplomb and no hint of bad conscience, they practice the politics of no-politics, the politics of l'etat, c'est moi.
...
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 50%
October 03, 2003
Chicago City Council votes against parts of USA-PATRIOT Act
Below is an official news story about it. Here is a slightly less journalistic story that provides more background info on the movement behind the resolution. (That story, by Elaine Cassel, seems to have originated at her blog here.
Council decries Patriot Act in watered-down resolution
October 2, 2003
BY FRAN SPIELMAN City Hall Reporter
Warning of civil liberties abuses similar to those that preceded the Holocaust, the City Council on Wednesday approved a watered-down resolution urging repeal of portions of the USA Patriot Act.
The 37-7 vote followed an emotional debate that invoked the chilling words of Nazi leader Hermann Goering and ignored Mayor Daley's warning that the federal government needs extraordinary tools to fight terrorism.
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: 1.5
Learning Percentage: 75%
Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
You can read a news story about the vote mentioned below -- Austin did indeed pass a resolution against the USA-PATRIOT Act -- here. There's also a pretty interesting local news video clip about the meeting here. The story aims to be a transcript of the video, though that's not fully the case. The U.S. Attorney who is interviewed sounded like he might have only read the beginning of the act, and then skipped the rest.
t r u t h o u t - William Rivers Pitt | Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
[TruthOut] Editor's Note | The following remarks were delivered by William Rivers Pitt at a Town Hall meeting in Austin, Texas on Tuesday, September 16. The meeting was called on the eve of an historic vote; the capitol city of Texas is very near to joining hundreds of other American communities in passing a resolution that repudiates the Patriot Act.
Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
By William Rivers Pitt
t r u t h o u t | Perspective
Monday 22 September 2003
I have listened to the defenses of the Patriot Act offered tonight. The essence of the defenses, the essence of the rebuttals to our reservations and complaints, is "Trust us. We're the government. We're the constitutional scholars. Trust us."
I've heard that before.
There are tons of mass destruction weapons in Iraq. Trust us. There are al Qaeda terrorists all over Iraq. Trust us. September 11 happened because of enemies who hate our freedoms. Trust us.
With all due respect, I say hell no. The one thing this government's behavior has not created is trust.
Ladies and gentlemen, I have come here today to appeal to your patriotism. We are all patriots here, every one of us. Let no one deny that or doubt that.
What are our duties as patriots? Is one a patriot if they fly the flag, to stand for the national anthem? Yes…and no. One may do these things and be filled with love of country, but if that is all you do, then you have not done enough. In this time, and in this place, and with all that is happening in this country and around the world, the duties of a patriot go far, far, far beyond flying the flag.
The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
That is how our freedom began 227 years ago. We said 'No.' Now, we must talk, and listen, and ask questions, and understand. If we do not like where we find ourselves, we must once again say 'No' with roaring voice, and without fear.
So let us, as patriots, speak tonight about the Patriot Act....
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 1.2
Learning Percentage: 15%
October 01, 2003
Mr. Bush and the Flag
Here's the whole short editorial. The original is linked to in the title.
Mr. Bush and the Flag
Washington Post | Editorial
Sunday 31 August 2003
THE WHITE HOUSE supports the wrongheaded constitutional amendment that would give Congress the power "to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States." Yet in light of an incident last month, Mr. Bush should consider whether he might be the first person jailed should this perennial foolishness -- passed most recently by the House of Representatives earlier this year -- ever become part of the Constitution. Mr. Bush, at a political event in Livonia, Mich., autographed supporters' flags, an apparent violation of an obscure provision of American law that details the respect with which flags should be treated. "The flag," reads the code, "should never have placed upon it . . . any mark, insignia, letter, word, figure, design, picture, or drawing of any nature." The last time Congress sought to ban flag-burning, in a statute the Supreme Court struck down in 1989, it made a criminal out of anyone who "defaces" a flag -- language Mr. Bush likewise appears to have violated. Never mind the fact that he clearly meant no disrespect; if Congress had the power to criminalize flag desecration, he would at least arguably be indictable.
We say arguably because there's no telling what "desecration" actually means. The proposed amendment is meant to deal with flag-burning, but what about that American soldier who, in a moment of unadulterated patriotism, wrapped a flag around a statue of Saddam Hussein? What about a person who proudly wears a ripped T-shirt displaying the flag? Of course, such cases would never be brought in court. The amendment, in practice, would be used to punish only unpopular political expression, expression that, though sometimes odious, is today unambiguously protected by American constitutional law -- as it should be. But the notion that the president, or anyone, could be charged with signing a flag should not be even arguable. It should be laughable -- as it would be if politicians such as Mr. Bush had the guts to stand against constitutional pollution rather than pandering to it.
Read It Rating: 8.5
Left/Right Rating: L4
Freedom Rating: 3
Learning Percentage: 25%
Fear as human shield faces jail
BBC NEWS | Americas | Fear as human shield faces jail
Sitting in her modest two-bedroom home on the west Florida coast, Faith Fippinger begins to cry as she talks about the prospect of going to jail.
This spring, the 62-year-old retired schoolteacher decided to travel to Iraq as a human shield.
To many she is a humanitarian, but in the eyes of the US Government she is a criminal.
...
when she returned home there was a letter waiting for her from the US Treasury Department.
"It was a requirement to send information as to why I was in Iraq," she says.
"It also said the penalties for being there could be as high as a million dollars and up to 12 years in jail."
'Freedom of speech'
By going to Iraq Faith Fippinger had broken the US economic embargo on Iraq, which had been in place for many years.
The letter explained that by travelling to the country and spending money there, Miss Fippinger was now liable for prosecution.
Read It Rating: 8.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: -4
Learning Percentage: 25%
September 22, 2003
Ashcroft Rips Anti-Patriot Act 'Hysteria'
The last statement quoted below is a common technique used by Justice Department folks to diffuse "hysteria" (a.k.a., legitimate concern about civil liberties): you could call it the "We don't want to search you" method. The FBI guy who spoke at the public forum I organized in March used the same line, multiple times in different forms. "You regular, law abiding folks have nothing to worry about."
Right -- because law enforcement has never investigated, searched, or surveilled an innocent person.
They don't care what you're reading -- just what the bad guys are reading. So, no worries. Carry on.
(In the preceding paragraph, Ashcroft uses another common rhetorical trick -- painting a silly, cartoonish scenario, and attributing it to the law's critics. I call him on this in the local news hour segment that I posted on my main blog recently.)
Ashcroft Rips Anti-Patriot Act 'Hysteria'
The Associated Press
WASHINGTON Sept. 15 — Attorney General John Ashcroft denounced as "hysteria" the contention by some librarians and civil liberties groups that the FBI can use a new anti-terror law to snoop into Americans' reading habits.
In a speech Monday to an American Restaurant Association conference, Ashcroft said people are being wrongly led to believe that libraries have been "surrounded by the FBI," with agents "dressed in raincoats, dark suits and sunglasses. They stop everyone and interrogate everyone like Joe Friday.
"Now, you may have thought with all this hysteria and hyperbole, something had to be wrong," Ashcroft said. "Do we at the Justice Department really care what you are reading? No."
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 5%
September 14, 2003
Patriot II -- More Power, Please, Says Bush
So, they just want the power to violate the privacy of tens of thousands of people on the spot, on their own discretion.
Here's the question then: Why bother having warrants or judicial approval in any cases? What's the logic wall which prevents the example they give below from proceeding to the government simply always having instant access to all the hotel bases to check for any "known offender" in all fields of law enforcement?
Bush Seeks to Expand Access to Private Data
WASHINGTON, Sept. 13 -- For months, President Bush's advisers have assured a skittish public that law-abiding Americans have no reason to fear the long reach of the antiterrorism law known as the Patriot Act because its most intrusive measures would require a judge's sign-off.
But in a plan announced this week to expand counterterrorism powers, President Bush adopted a very different tack. In a three-point presidential plan that critics are already dubbing Patriot Act II, Mr. Bush is seeking broad new authority to allow federal agents -- without the approval of a judge or even a federal prosecutor -- to demand private records and compel testimony.
Mr. Bush also wants to expand the use of the death penalty in crimes like terrorist financing, and he wants to make it tougher for defendants in such cases to be freed on bail before trial. These proposals are also sure to prompt sharp debate, even among Republicans.
...
But Mr. Corallo gave a hypothetical example in which the F.B.I. received a tip in the middle of the night that an unidentified terrorist had traveled to Boston. Under Mr. Bush's plan, the F.B.I., rather than waiting for a judicial order, could subpoena all the Bost
Congress Expands FBI Spying Power
Wired News: Congress Expands FBI Spying Power
(Also archived at Civil Liberties Watch)
December 27, 2003
Coffee, Tea or Handcuffs?
LA Weekly: Columns: Open City: Coffee, Tea or Handcuffs?
An Australian journalist gets a taste of Department of Homeland Security hospitality
by Steven Mikulan
(TruthOut permacopy)
December 21, 2003
Checks and Balances Live On
Rebuff for Bush on civil liberties (December 20, 2003)
(TruthOut permacopy)
THE Bush administration may be forced to rethink its war on terrorism strategy after two US courts ruled yesterday that detainees should not remain indefinitely in a legal twilight zone.
In a critical decision, a San Francisco appeals court disputed the administration's claims to have "unchecked authority" in dealing with prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba outside the US criminal justice system.
The 2-1 decision came a few hours after a Manhattan appeals court ruled that accused "dirty bomb" plotter Jose Padilla - a US citizen alleged to be an enemy combatant - be released from military custody within 30 days.
...
Bill of Rights day in Noho
This is about Northampton, MA's Bill of Rights Day celebration. I've lived and worked in Northampton in the past. It's a great little Northeast city.
December 20, 2003
Bush Overruled on 'Dirty Bomb' Suspect
Yahoo! News - Bush Overruled on 'Dirty Bomb' Suspect
(TruthOut permacopy)
NEW YORK - President Bush does not have power to detain American citizen Jose Padilla, the former gang member seized on U.S. soil, as an enemy combatant, a federal appeals court ruled Thursday.
...
3 senators urge Rumsfeld to free or try terror detainees
December 08, 2003
BillofRightsDay.com
Here's a new site I put together to help folks organize their Bill of Rights Day celebration efforts:
December 01, 2003
Patriot Act Expansion Moves Through Congress
Patriot Act Expansion Moves Through Congress
by Jim Lobe
(TruthOut permacopy)
Patriot Act Author Has Concerns
Patriot Act Author Has Concerns
By Richard B. Schmitt, Times Staff Writer
Detaining citizens as 'enemy combatants' -- a policy not spelled out in the act -- is flawed, the legal scholar says.
WASHINGTON — The Justice Department's war on terrorism has drawn intense scrutiny from the left and the right. Now, a chief architect of the USA Patriot Act and a former top assistant to Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft are joining the fray, voicing concern about aspects of the administration's anti-terrorism policy.
At issue is the government's power to designate and detain "enemy combatants," in particular in the case of "dirty bomb" plot suspect Jose Padilla, the Brooklyn-born former gang member who was picked up at a Chicago airport 18 months ago by the FBI and locked in a military brig without access to a lawyer.
...
November 23, 2003
F.B.I. Scrutinizes Antiwar Rallies
F.B.I. Scrutinizes Antiwar Rallies
By Eric Lichtblau
New York Times
Sunday 23 November 2003
The Federal Bureau of Investigation has collected extensive information on the tactics, training and organization of antiwar demonstrators and has advised local law enforcement officials to report any suspicious activity at protests to its counterterrorism squads, according to interviews and a confidential bureau memorandum.
The memorandum, which the bureau sent to local law enforcement agencies last month in advance of antiwar demonstrations in Washington and San Francisco, detailed how protesters have sometimes used "training camps" to rehearse for demonstrations, the Internet to raise money and gas masks to defend against tear gas. The memorandum analyzed lawful activities like recruiting demonstrators, as well as illegal activities like using fake documentation to get into a secured site.
F.B.I. officials said in interviews that the intelligence-gathering effort was aimed at identifying anarchists and "extremist elements" plotting violence, not at monitoring the political speech of law-abiding protesters.
The initiative has won the support of some local police, who view it as a critical way to maintain order at large-scale demonstrations. Indeed, some law enforcement officials said they believed the F.B.I.'s approach had helped to ensure that nationwide antiwar demonstrations in recent months, drawing hundreds of thousands of protesters, remained largely free of violence and disruption.
But some civil rights advocates and legal scholars said the monitoring program could signal a return to the abuses of the 1960's and 1970's, when J. Edgar Hoover was the F.B.I. director and agents routinely spied on political protesters like the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. ...
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 20%
November 12, 2003
Ashcroft Slams Critics as Patriot Act Backlash Grows
Ashcroft Slams Critics as Patriot Act Backlash Grows
By Tom Regan
Christian Science Monitor
Tuesday 16 September 2003
The war of words over the USA Patriot Act heated up considerably over the past few days, thanks in part to a recently completed "Patriot Act Tour" conducted by U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft. The tour, conducted in front of small, law enforcement friendly audiences, excluded participation from the general public. (At Faneuil Hall in Boston, Ashcroft addressed a crowd of 150, while outside the hall a crowd of 1200 chanted "This is what democracy looks like.") The tour was designed to create support for the act, but in some ways may have done just the opposite.
One of the main charges critics of the Patriot Act aim against Ashcroft is that rules designed to catch terrorists will be used against ordinary citizens. They also say police and prosecutors will use the laws created by the Patriot Act in other areas of law enforcement. These critics include people from both the left and the right of the American political spectrum.
Ashcroft blasted some of these critics on Monday, taking aim in particular at librarians. The Associated Press reports that Ashcroft said people are being wrongly led to believe that libraries have been "surrounded by the FBI," with agents "dressed in raincoats, dark suits and sunglasses. They stop everyone and interrogate everyone like Joe Friday."
The attorney general continues to insist that the Act "respects rights and increases security." USA Today looks at how the Act is at the heart of Ashcroft's powers as attorney general.
...
Read It Rating: 8.1
Left/Right Rating: L1.5
Freedom Rating: 2
Learning Percentage: 20%
October 23, 2003
Georgia runs from the MATRIX
By Ashlee Vance in Chicago
Posted: 22/10/2003 at 19:45 GMT
The state of Georgia has pulled out of the U.S. Department of Justice sponsored MATRIX information collection program, leaving data only on its felons and sexual offenders behind in the Orwellian database.
Georgia Governor Sonny Perdue has cited both privacy concerns and costs as the two key reasons the state will no longer participate in the MATRIX (Multistate Anti-Terrorism Information Exchange) pilot project. ...
Read It Rating: 4.5
Left/Right Rating: L4
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 55%
October 09, 2003
Driving dangerously with the Patriot Act
Driving dangerously with the Patriot Act
By Pat M. Holt
WASHINGTON -- Attorney General John Ashcroft is running a dead heat with A. Mitchell Palmer, attorney general in the Wilson administration, for the distinction of being the worst in that job in the history of the United States.
One of the duties of the attorney general as head of the Justice Department is to protect the Constitution. Both Mr. Ashcroft and Palmer found that the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights, got in their way more than it protected anything. It has gotten in Ashcroft's way in his pursuit of terrorists after Sept. 11, especially those who dress differently and practice a different religion. Palmer's crusade was the pursuit of communists, in the aftermath of World War I. He especially went after people with what to him were funny names from Eastern Europe. He tended to equate liberals with communists.
Ashcroft's vehicle is the USA Patriot Act, which Congress, abdicating its own duties of vigilance, passed with a whoop and a holler in the days after Sept. 11. Even the name of this odious legislation is offensive. It implies that the purpose of the act is to promote patriotism and that those not cooperating with it are somehow less patriotic.
...
Pat M. Holt is former chief of staff of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L1.1
Freedom Rating: 1.1
Learning Percentage: 1%
Local Peace Group Infiltrated By Government Agent
Local Peace Group Infiltrated By Government Agent
By Mike Rhodes
October 4, 2003
Peace Fresno was infiltrated by an agent working for the Fresno Sheriff's Department. Aaron Kilner, known by Peace Fresno activists as Aaron Stokes, attended several Peace Fresno meetings. Peace Fresno activist Nicholas DeGraff remembers him taking voluminous notes and several members say they saw him at peace vilgils held at Shaw and Blackstone. He was also on the bus local anti-globalization activists took to attend the WTO ministerial-level conference on Agricultural Science and Technology demonstration in Sacramento in June 2003.
Aaron Kilner died in a motorcycle accident on August 30, 2003. In his obituary in The Fresno Bee he was identified as a member of the Fresno County Sheriff's department. The obituary went on to say that he was "assigned to the anti-terrorist team." Local activists believe that this "anti-terrorist team" is, in fact, the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) that has recently been formed in this area.. When members of Peace Fresno saw the picture and read of Kilner's association with law enforcement they began piecing the story together.
The infiltration by law enforcement of progressive community groups in Fresno and throughout the country has long been used to disrupt legitimate political work. This disruption occurs by sowing seeds of mistrust among members, agents often promote discord within the group, and sometimes encourage illegal or violent actions. Agent provocateurs have been know to instigate violence at demonstrations, giving the police an excuse to attack protestors.
...
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 45%
October 08, 2003
Terror suspect tortured: dad claims
Terror suspect tortured: dad claims
By Rebecca Urban
October 8, 2003
Australian terrorist suspects David Hicks and Mamdouh Habib had likely been tortured while detained at Guantanamo Bay, a lawyer and Hicks' father said today.
Australian lawyer Richard Bourke, who has been working with prisoners at Camp X-ray for the past two years, told ABC radio leaks from the American military and reports from former inmates revealed the detainees had been forced to kneel in the sun until they collapsed and were tied up and had rubber bullets fired at them.
...
Read It Rating: 6
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -3
Learning Percentage: 30%
Sullum: Ashcroft's Patriot Act tour
The Washington Times: Commentary
By Jacob Sullum
August 26, 2003
Attorney General John Ashcroft is on a publicity tour, promoting the Patriot Act and preparing the public for a sequel. But just as you can't always believe an actor who tells you his latest film is sure to be a hit, you have to take what Mr. Ashcroft says with a grain of salt.
Mr. Ashcroft is reacting to bad reviews from critics who say the Patriot Act -- given a green light just a month and a half after the September 11 terrorist attacks by members of Congress who had not even read the script -- was rushed into production. The result, they say, was a deeply flawed work in which civil liberties make only a brief appearance.
...
Read It Rating: 7
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: .3
Learning Percentage: 10%
Media elite debate Patriot Act
Arbiter Online - Media elite debate Patriot Act
Privacy policies concern librarians
by Amy Olsen
October 06, 2003
Pulitzer Prize winner and Washington Post reporter David Broder spoke Oct. 2 at Boise State, encapsulating the day-long “Freedom and Secrecy: Trading Liberty for Security?” conference held by the Andrus Center for Public Policy.
Broder's speech was one of several activities and joint panel discussions focusing on the philosophical and political question of balancing civil liberties and homeland security.
Broder was the last speaker among three distinguished panelists at the conference on Thursday. Former Vice President Walter Mondale and former Washington State Senator Slade Gorton joined Broder for the event.
The lecturer gave several examples of past uses of the act, ranging from long-term immigrant confinement to inquiries into library records across the nation by agents of the law.
Broder reported that among 1,500 major libraries in the United States, 178 reported "visitations from FBI members" since the USA PATRIOT Act's passage in Oct. 2001.
...
Read It Rating: 4.5
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 35%
October 05, 2003
Fed Court tells NY to back off Russell Simmons and Hip Hop Summit
FEDERAL COURT ISSUES ORDER SUSPENDING NY LOBBYING COMMISSION INVESTIGATION OF RUSSELL SIMMONS AND THE HIP-HOP SUMMIT ACTION NETWORK
NEW YORK, N.Y. -- OCTOBER 2, 2003 - Russell Simmons and Dr. Benjamin Chavis, who together with the Hip-Hop Summit Action Network, filed a lawsuit in July of this year charging the New York Temporary State Commission on Lobbying with violating their First Amendment rights, reconvened in federal court this morning to ask Judge Loretta A. Preska to enforce the suspension of the Lobbying Commission's investigation into Russell Simmons and Dr. Chavis.
Today, Judge Loretta A. Preska issued an order suspending the Lobbying Commission's investigation into Plaintiffs' First Amendment activities, which were aimed at raising public awareness about the unfairness of the Rockefeller Drug Laws. The Judge found that the Lobbying Commission had unfairly tried to back out of a court-approved agreement to suspend the investigation. The suspension that Judge Preska ordered today will last until the Court can issue a full decision in this case.
...
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 4
Learning Percentage: 85%
Ashcroft Is Unprintable, and Glad of It
Ashcroft Is Unprintable, and Glad of It
On tour, he bars the press and cozies up to local TV reporters.
September 25, 2003
COMMENTARY
By Todd Gitlin and Jay Rosen
Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft, who is continuing his tour of the country to promote the Patriot Act, has at several stops, including Buffalo and Philadelphia, refused to speak to print reporters. While television correspondents can often breeze right in, their newspaper colleagues are kept at bay by Secret Service agents doing the bidding of the nation's chief law enforcement official, who prefers audiences of handpicked enthusiasts and interviews with local television reporters.
According to Justice Department spokeswoman Barbara Comstock, Ashcroft wants to explain "key facts directly to the American people" and not have to subject himself to "as much of a filter from people who are already invested in having a different view of it."
Of course he does. What public official wouldn't prefer a stenographer to an interlocutor? Ashcroft, like the president he serves, wishes to conduct the public's business in an echo chamber. With aplomb and no hint of bad conscience, they practice the politics of no-politics, the politics of l'etat, c'est moi.
...
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 50%
October 03, 2003
Chicago City Council votes against parts of USA-PATRIOT Act
Below is an official news story about it. Here is a slightly less journalistic story that provides more background info on the movement behind the resolution. (That story, by Elaine Cassel, seems to have originated at her blog here.
Council decries Patriot Act in watered-down resolution
October 2, 2003
BY FRAN SPIELMAN City Hall Reporter
Warning of civil liberties abuses similar to those that preceded the Holocaust, the City Council on Wednesday approved a watered-down resolution urging repeal of portions of the USA Patriot Act.
The 37-7 vote followed an emotional debate that invoked the chilling words of Nazi leader Hermann Goering and ignored Mayor Daley's warning that the federal government needs extraordinary tools to fight terrorism.
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: 1.5
Learning Percentage: 75%
Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
You can read a news story about the vote mentioned below -- Austin did indeed pass a resolution against the USA-PATRIOT Act -- here. There's also a pretty interesting local news video clip about the meeting here. The story aims to be a transcript of the video, though that's not fully the case. The U.S. Attorney who is interviewed sounded like he might have only read the beginning of the act, and then skipped the rest.
t r u t h o u t - William Rivers Pitt | Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
[TruthOut] Editor's Note | The following remarks were delivered by William Rivers Pitt at a Town Hall meeting in Austin, Texas on Tuesday, September 16. The meeting was called on the eve of an historic vote; the capitol city of Texas is very near to joining hundreds of other American communities in passing a resolution that repudiates the Patriot Act.
Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
By William Rivers Pitt
t r u t h o u t | Perspective
Monday 22 September 2003
I have listened to the defenses of the Patriot Act offered tonight. The essence of the defenses, the essence of the rebuttals to our reservations and complaints, is "Trust us. We're the government. We're the constitutional scholars. Trust us."
I've heard that before.
There are tons of mass destruction weapons in Iraq. Trust us. There are al Qaeda terrorists all over Iraq. Trust us. September 11 happened because of enemies who hate our freedoms. Trust us.
With all due respect, I say hell no. The one thing this government's behavior has not created is trust.
Ladies and gentlemen, I have come here today to appeal to your patriotism. We are all patriots here, every one of us. Let no one deny that or doubt that.
What are our duties as patriots? Is one a patriot if they fly the flag, to stand for the national anthem? Yes…and no. One may do these things and be filled with love of country, but if that is all you do, then you have not done enough. In this time, and in this place, and with all that is happening in this country and around the world, the duties of a patriot go far, far, far beyond flying the flag.
The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
That is how our freedom began 227 years ago. We said 'No.' Now, we must talk, and listen, and ask questions, and understand. If we do not like where we find ourselves, we must once again say 'No' with roaring voice, and without fear.
So let us, as patriots, speak tonight about the Patriot Act....
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 1.2
Learning Percentage: 15%
October 01, 2003
Mr. Bush and the Flag
Here's the whole short editorial. The original is linked to in the title.
Mr. Bush and the Flag
Washington Post | Editorial
Sunday 31 August 2003
THE WHITE HOUSE supports the wrongheaded constitutional amendment that would give Congress the power "to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States." Yet in light of an incident last month, Mr. Bush should consider whether he might be the first person jailed should this perennial foolishness -- passed most recently by the House of Representatives earlier this year -- ever become part of the Constitution. Mr. Bush, at a political event in Livonia, Mich., autographed supporters' flags, an apparent violation of an obscure provision of American law that details the respect with which flags should be treated. "The flag," reads the code, "should never have placed upon it . . . any mark, insignia, letter, word, figure, design, picture, or drawing of any nature." The last time Congress sought to ban flag-burning, in a statute the Supreme Court struck down in 1989, it made a criminal out of anyone who "defaces" a flag -- language Mr. Bush likewise appears to have violated. Never mind the fact that he clearly meant no disrespect; if Congress had the power to criminalize flag desecration, he would at least arguably be indictable.
We say arguably because there's no telling what "desecration" actually means. The proposed amendment is meant to deal with flag-burning, but what about that American soldier who, in a moment of unadulterated patriotism, wrapped a flag around a statue of Saddam Hussein? What about a person who proudly wears a ripped T-shirt displaying the flag? Of course, such cases would never be brought in court. The amendment, in practice, would be used to punish only unpopular political expression, expression that, though sometimes odious, is today unambiguously protected by American constitutional law -- as it should be. But the notion that the president, or anyone, could be charged with signing a flag should not be even arguable. It should be laughable -- as it would be if politicians such as Mr. Bush had the guts to stand against constitutional pollution rather than pandering to it.
Read It Rating: 8.5
Left/Right Rating: L4
Freedom Rating: 3
Learning Percentage: 25%
Fear as human shield faces jail
BBC NEWS | Americas | Fear as human shield faces jail
Sitting in her modest two-bedroom home on the west Florida coast, Faith Fippinger begins to cry as she talks about the prospect of going to jail.
This spring, the 62-year-old retired schoolteacher decided to travel to Iraq as a human shield.
To many she is a humanitarian, but in the eyes of the US Government she is a criminal.
...
when she returned home there was a letter waiting for her from the US Treasury Department.
"It was a requirement to send information as to why I was in Iraq," she says.
"It also said the penalties for being there could be as high as a million dollars and up to 12 years in jail."
'Freedom of speech'
By going to Iraq Faith Fippinger had broken the US economic embargo on Iraq, which had been in place for many years.
The letter explained that by travelling to the country and spending money there, Miss Fippinger was now liable for prosecution.
Read It Rating: 8.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: -4
Learning Percentage: 25%
September 22, 2003
Ashcroft Rips Anti-Patriot Act 'Hysteria'
The last statement quoted below is a common technique used by Justice Department folks to diffuse "hysteria" (a.k.a., legitimate concern about civil liberties): you could call it the "We don't want to search you" method. The FBI guy who spoke at the public forum I organized in March used the same line, multiple times in different forms. "You regular, law abiding folks have nothing to worry about."
Right -- because law enforcement has never investigated, searched, or surveilled an innocent person.
They don't care what you're reading -- just what the bad guys are reading. So, no worries. Carry on.
(In the preceding paragraph, Ashcroft uses another common rhetorical trick -- painting a silly, cartoonish scenario, and attributing it to the law's critics. I call him on this in the local news hour segment that I posted on my main blog recently.)
Ashcroft Rips Anti-Patriot Act 'Hysteria'
The Associated Press
WASHINGTON Sept. 15 — Attorney General John Ashcroft denounced as "hysteria" the contention by some librarians and civil liberties groups that the FBI can use a new anti-terror law to snoop into Americans' reading habits.
In a speech Monday to an American Restaurant Association conference, Ashcroft said people are being wrongly led to believe that libraries have been "surrounded by the FBI," with agents "dressed in raincoats, dark suits and sunglasses. They stop everyone and interrogate everyone like Joe Friday.
"Now, you may have thought with all this hysteria and hyperbole, something had to be wrong," Ashcroft said. "Do we at the Justice Department really care what you are reading? No."
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 5%
September 14, 2003
Patriot II -- More Power, Please, Says Bush
So, they just want the power to violate the privacy of tens of thousands of people on the spot, on their own discretion.
Here's the question then: Why bother having warrants or judicial approval in any cases? What's the logic wall which prevents the example they give below from proceeding to the government simply always having instant access to all the hotel bases to check for any "known offender" in all fields of law enforcement?
Bush Seeks to Expand Access to Private Data
WASHINGTON, Sept. 13 -- For months, President Bush's advisers have assured a skittish public that law-abiding Americans have no reason to fear the long reach of the antiterrorism law known as the Patriot Act because its most intrusive measures would require a judge's sign-off.
But in a plan announced this week to expand counterterrorism powers, President Bush adopted a very different tack. In a three-point presidential plan that critics are already dubbing Patriot Act II, Mr. Bush is seeking broad new authority to allow federal agents -- without the approval of a judge or even a federal prosecutor -- to demand private records and compel testimony.
Mr. Bush also wants to expand the use of the death penalty in crimes like terrorist financing, and he wants to make it tougher for defendants in such cases to be freed on bail before trial. These proposals are also sure to prompt sharp debate, even among Republicans.
...
But Mr. Corallo gave a hypothetical example in which the F.B.I. received a tip in the middle of the night that an unidentified terrorist had traveled to Boston. Under Mr. Bush's plan, the F.B.I., rather than waiting for a judicial order, could subpoena all the Bost
Coffee, Tea or Handcuffs?
LA Weekly: Columns: Open City: Coffee, Tea or Handcuffs?
An Australian journalist gets a taste of Department of Homeland Security hospitality
by Steven Mikulan
(TruthOut permacopy)
Checks and Balances Live On
Rebuff for Bush on civil liberties (December 20, 2003)
(TruthOut permacopy)
THE Bush administration may be forced to rethink its war on terrorism strategy after two US courts ruled yesterday that detainees should not remain indefinitely in a legal twilight zone.
In a critical decision, a San Francisco appeals court disputed the administration's claims to have "unchecked authority" in dealing with prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba outside the US criminal justice system.
The 2-1 decision came a few hours after a Manhattan appeals court ruled that accused "dirty bomb" plotter Jose Padilla - a US citizen alleged to be an enemy combatant - be released from military custody within 30 days.
...
Bill of Rights day in Noho
This is about Northampton, MA's Bill of Rights Day celebration. I've lived and worked in Northampton in the past. It's a great little Northeast city.
December 20, 2003
Bush Overruled on 'Dirty Bomb' Suspect
Yahoo! News - Bush Overruled on 'Dirty Bomb' Suspect
(TruthOut permacopy)
NEW YORK - President Bush does not have power to detain American citizen Jose Padilla, the former gang member seized on U.S. soil, as an enemy combatant, a federal appeals court ruled Thursday.
...
3 senators urge Rumsfeld to free or try terror detainees
December 08, 2003
BillofRightsDay.com
Here's a new site I put together to help folks organize their Bill of Rights Day celebration efforts:
December 01, 2003
Patriot Act Expansion Moves Through Congress
Patriot Act Expansion Moves Through Congress
by Jim Lobe
(TruthOut permacopy)
Patriot Act Author Has Concerns
Patriot Act Author Has Concerns
By Richard B. Schmitt, Times Staff Writer
Detaining citizens as 'enemy combatants' -- a policy not spelled out in the act -- is flawed, the legal scholar says.
WASHINGTON — The Justice Department's war on terrorism has drawn intense scrutiny from the left and the right. Now, a chief architect of the USA Patriot Act and a former top assistant to Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft are joining the fray, voicing concern about aspects of the administration's anti-terrorism policy.
At issue is the government's power to designate and detain "enemy combatants," in particular in the case of "dirty bomb" plot suspect Jose Padilla, the Brooklyn-born former gang member who was picked up at a Chicago airport 18 months ago by the FBI and locked in a military brig without access to a lawyer.
...
November 23, 2003
F.B.I. Scrutinizes Antiwar Rallies
F.B.I. Scrutinizes Antiwar Rallies
By Eric Lichtblau
New York Times
Sunday 23 November 2003
The Federal Bureau of Investigation has collected extensive information on the tactics, training and organization of antiwar demonstrators and has advised local law enforcement officials to report any suspicious activity at protests to its counterterrorism squads, according to interviews and a confidential bureau memorandum.
The memorandum, which the bureau sent to local law enforcement agencies last month in advance of antiwar demonstrations in Washington and San Francisco, detailed how protesters have sometimes used "training camps" to rehearse for demonstrations, the Internet to raise money and gas masks to defend against tear gas. The memorandum analyzed lawful activities like recruiting demonstrators, as well as illegal activities like using fake documentation to get into a secured site.
F.B.I. officials said in interviews that the intelligence-gathering effort was aimed at identifying anarchists and "extremist elements" plotting violence, not at monitoring the political speech of law-abiding protesters.
The initiative has won the support of some local police, who view it as a critical way to maintain order at large-scale demonstrations. Indeed, some law enforcement officials said they believed the F.B.I.'s approach had helped to ensure that nationwide antiwar demonstrations in recent months, drawing hundreds of thousands of protesters, remained largely free of violence and disruption.
But some civil rights advocates and legal scholars said the monitoring program could signal a return to the abuses of the 1960's and 1970's, when J. Edgar Hoover was the F.B.I. director and agents routinely spied on political protesters like the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. ...
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 20%
November 12, 2003
Ashcroft Slams Critics as Patriot Act Backlash Grows
Ashcroft Slams Critics as Patriot Act Backlash Grows
By Tom Regan
Christian Science Monitor
Tuesday 16 September 2003
The war of words over the USA Patriot Act heated up considerably over the past few days, thanks in part to a recently completed "Patriot Act Tour" conducted by U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft. The tour, conducted in front of small, law enforcement friendly audiences, excluded participation from the general public. (At Faneuil Hall in Boston, Ashcroft addressed a crowd of 150, while outside the hall a crowd of 1200 chanted "This is what democracy looks like.") The tour was designed to create support for the act, but in some ways may have done just the opposite.
One of the main charges critics of the Patriot Act aim against Ashcroft is that rules designed to catch terrorists will be used against ordinary citizens. They also say police and prosecutors will use the laws created by the Patriot Act in other areas of law enforcement. These critics include people from both the left and the right of the American political spectrum.
Ashcroft blasted some of these critics on Monday, taking aim in particular at librarians. The Associated Press reports that Ashcroft said people are being wrongly led to believe that libraries have been "surrounded by the FBI," with agents "dressed in raincoats, dark suits and sunglasses. They stop everyone and interrogate everyone like Joe Friday."
The attorney general continues to insist that the Act "respects rights and increases security." USA Today looks at how the Act is at the heart of Ashcroft's powers as attorney general.
...
Read It Rating: 8.1
Left/Right Rating: L1.5
Freedom Rating: 2
Learning Percentage: 20%
October 23, 2003
Georgia runs from the MATRIX
By Ashlee Vance in Chicago
Posted: 22/10/2003 at 19:45 GMT
The state of Georgia has pulled out of the U.S. Department of Justice sponsored MATRIX information collection program, leaving data only on its felons and sexual offenders behind in the Orwellian database.
Georgia Governor Sonny Perdue has cited both privacy concerns and costs as the two key reasons the state will no longer participate in the MATRIX (Multistate Anti-Terrorism Information Exchange) pilot project. ...
Read It Rating: 4.5
Left/Right Rating: L4
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 55%
October 09, 2003
Driving dangerously with the Patriot Act
Driving dangerously with the Patriot Act
By Pat M. Holt
WASHINGTON -- Attorney General John Ashcroft is running a dead heat with A. Mitchell Palmer, attorney general in the Wilson administration, for the distinction of being the worst in that job in the history of the United States.
One of the duties of the attorney general as head of the Justice Department is to protect the Constitution. Both Mr. Ashcroft and Palmer found that the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights, got in their way more than it protected anything. It has gotten in Ashcroft's way in his pursuit of terrorists after Sept. 11, especially those who dress differently and practice a different religion. Palmer's crusade was the pursuit of communists, in the aftermath of World War I. He especially went after people with what to him were funny names from Eastern Europe. He tended to equate liberals with communists.
Ashcroft's vehicle is the USA Patriot Act, which Congress, abdicating its own duties of vigilance, passed with a whoop and a holler in the days after Sept. 11. Even the name of this odious legislation is offensive. It implies that the purpose of the act is to promote patriotism and that those not cooperating with it are somehow less patriotic.
...
Pat M. Holt is former chief of staff of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L1.1
Freedom Rating: 1.1
Learning Percentage: 1%
Local Peace Group Infiltrated By Government Agent
Local Peace Group Infiltrated By Government Agent
By Mike Rhodes
October 4, 2003
Peace Fresno was infiltrated by an agent working for the Fresno Sheriff's Department. Aaron Kilner, known by Peace Fresno activists as Aaron Stokes, attended several Peace Fresno meetings. Peace Fresno activist Nicholas DeGraff remembers him taking voluminous notes and several members say they saw him at peace vilgils held at Shaw and Blackstone. He was also on the bus local anti-globalization activists took to attend the WTO ministerial-level conference on Agricultural Science and Technology demonstration in Sacramento in June 2003.
Aaron Kilner died in a motorcycle accident on August 30, 2003. In his obituary in The Fresno Bee he was identified as a member of the Fresno County Sheriff's department. The obituary went on to say that he was "assigned to the anti-terrorist team." Local activists believe that this "anti-terrorist team" is, in fact, the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) that has recently been formed in this area.. When members of Peace Fresno saw the picture and read of Kilner's association with law enforcement they began piecing the story together.
The infiltration by law enforcement of progressive community groups in Fresno and throughout the country has long been used to disrupt legitimate political work. This disruption occurs by sowing seeds of mistrust among members, agents often promote discord within the group, and sometimes encourage illegal or violent actions. Agent provocateurs have been know to instigate violence at demonstrations, giving the police an excuse to attack protestors.
...
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 45%
October 08, 2003
Terror suspect tortured: dad claims
Terror suspect tortured: dad claims
By Rebecca Urban
October 8, 2003
Australian terrorist suspects David Hicks and Mamdouh Habib had likely been tortured while detained at Guantanamo Bay, a lawyer and Hicks' father said today.
Australian lawyer Richard Bourke, who has been working with prisoners at Camp X-ray for the past two years, told ABC radio leaks from the American military and reports from former inmates revealed the detainees had been forced to kneel in the sun until they collapsed and were tied up and had rubber bullets fired at them.
...
Read It Rating: 6
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -3
Learning Percentage: 30%
Sullum: Ashcroft's Patriot Act tour
The Washington Times: Commentary
By Jacob Sullum
August 26, 2003
Attorney General John Ashcroft is on a publicity tour, promoting the Patriot Act and preparing the public for a sequel. But just as you can't always believe an actor who tells you his latest film is sure to be a hit, you have to take what Mr. Ashcroft says with a grain of salt.
Mr. Ashcroft is reacting to bad reviews from critics who say the Patriot Act -- given a green light just a month and a half after the September 11 terrorist attacks by members of Congress who had not even read the script -- was rushed into production. The result, they say, was a deeply flawed work in which civil liberties make only a brief appearance.
...
Read It Rating: 7
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: .3
Learning Percentage: 10%
Media elite debate Patriot Act
Arbiter Online - Media elite debate Patriot Act
Privacy policies concern librarians
by Amy Olsen
October 06, 2003
Pulitzer Prize winner and Washington Post reporter David Broder spoke Oct. 2 at Boise State, encapsulating the day-long “Freedom and Secrecy: Trading Liberty for Security?” conference held by the Andrus Center for Public Policy.
Broder's speech was one of several activities and joint panel discussions focusing on the philosophical and political question of balancing civil liberties and homeland security.
Broder was the last speaker among three distinguished panelists at the conference on Thursday. Former Vice President Walter Mondale and former Washington State Senator Slade Gorton joined Broder for the event.
The lecturer gave several examples of past uses of the act, ranging from long-term immigrant confinement to inquiries into library records across the nation by agents of the law.
Broder reported that among 1,500 major libraries in the United States, 178 reported "visitations from FBI members" since the USA PATRIOT Act's passage in Oct. 2001.
...
Read It Rating: 4.5
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 35%
October 05, 2003
Fed Court tells NY to back off Russell Simmons and Hip Hop Summit
FEDERAL COURT ISSUES ORDER SUSPENDING NY LOBBYING COMMISSION INVESTIGATION OF RUSSELL SIMMONS AND THE HIP-HOP SUMMIT ACTION NETWORK
NEW YORK, N.Y. -- OCTOBER 2, 2003 - Russell Simmons and Dr. Benjamin Chavis, who together with the Hip-Hop Summit Action Network, filed a lawsuit in July of this year charging the New York Temporary State Commission on Lobbying with violating their First Amendment rights, reconvened in federal court this morning to ask Judge Loretta A. Preska to enforce the suspension of the Lobbying Commission's investigation into Russell Simmons and Dr. Chavis.
Today, Judge Loretta A. Preska issued an order suspending the Lobbying Commission's investigation into Plaintiffs' First Amendment activities, which were aimed at raising public awareness about the unfairness of the Rockefeller Drug Laws. The Judge found that the Lobbying Commission had unfairly tried to back out of a court-approved agreement to suspend the investigation. The suspension that Judge Preska ordered today will last until the Court can issue a full decision in this case.
...
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 4
Learning Percentage: 85%
Ashcroft Is Unprintable, and Glad of It
Ashcroft Is Unprintable, and Glad of It
On tour, he bars the press and cozies up to local TV reporters.
September 25, 2003
COMMENTARY
By Todd Gitlin and Jay Rosen
Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft, who is continuing his tour of the country to promote the Patriot Act, has at several stops, including Buffalo and Philadelphia, refused to speak to print reporters. While television correspondents can often breeze right in, their newspaper colleagues are kept at bay by Secret Service agents doing the bidding of the nation's chief law enforcement official, who prefers audiences of handpicked enthusiasts and interviews with local television reporters.
According to Justice Department spokeswoman Barbara Comstock, Ashcroft wants to explain "key facts directly to the American people" and not have to subject himself to "as much of a filter from people who are already invested in having a different view of it."
Of course he does. What public official wouldn't prefer a stenographer to an interlocutor? Ashcroft, like the president he serves, wishes to conduct the public's business in an echo chamber. With aplomb and no hint of bad conscience, they practice the politics of no-politics, the politics of l'etat, c'est moi.
...
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 50%
October 03, 2003
Chicago City Council votes against parts of USA-PATRIOT Act
Below is an official news story about it. Here is a slightly less journalistic story that provides more background info on the movement behind the resolution. (That story, by Elaine Cassel, seems to have originated at her blog here.
Council decries Patriot Act in watered-down resolution
October 2, 2003
BY FRAN SPIELMAN City Hall Reporter
Warning of civil liberties abuses similar to those that preceded the Holocaust, the City Council on Wednesday approved a watered-down resolution urging repeal of portions of the USA Patriot Act.
The 37-7 vote followed an emotional debate that invoked the chilling words of Nazi leader Hermann Goering and ignored Mayor Daley's warning that the federal government needs extraordinary tools to fight terrorism.
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: 1.5
Learning Percentage: 75%
Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
You can read a news story about the vote mentioned below -- Austin did indeed pass a resolution against the USA-PATRIOT Act -- here. There's also a pretty interesting local news video clip about the meeting here. The story aims to be a transcript of the video, though that's not fully the case. The U.S. Attorney who is interviewed sounded like he might have only read the beginning of the act, and then skipped the rest.
t r u t h o u t - William Rivers Pitt | Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
[TruthOut] Editor's Note | The following remarks were delivered by William Rivers Pitt at a Town Hall meeting in Austin, Texas on Tuesday, September 16. The meeting was called on the eve of an historic vote; the capitol city of Texas is very near to joining hundreds of other American communities in passing a resolution that repudiates the Patriot Act.
Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
By William Rivers Pitt
t r u t h o u t | Perspective
Monday 22 September 2003
I have listened to the defenses of the Patriot Act offered tonight. The essence of the defenses, the essence of the rebuttals to our reservations and complaints, is "Trust us. We're the government. We're the constitutional scholars. Trust us."
I've heard that before.
There are tons of mass destruction weapons in Iraq. Trust us. There are al Qaeda terrorists all over Iraq. Trust us. September 11 happened because of enemies who hate our freedoms. Trust us.
With all due respect, I say hell no. The one thing this government's behavior has not created is trust.
Ladies and gentlemen, I have come here today to appeal to your patriotism. We are all patriots here, every one of us. Let no one deny that or doubt that.
What are our duties as patriots? Is one a patriot if they fly the flag, to stand for the national anthem? Yes…and no. One may do these things and be filled with love of country, but if that is all you do, then you have not done enough. In this time, and in this place, and with all that is happening in this country and around the world, the duties of a patriot go far, far, far beyond flying the flag.
The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
That is how our freedom began 227 years ago. We said 'No.' Now, we must talk, and listen, and ask questions, and understand. If we do not like where we find ourselves, we must once again say 'No' with roaring voice, and without fear.
So let us, as patriots, speak tonight about the Patriot Act....
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 1.2
Learning Percentage: 15%
October 01, 2003
Mr. Bush and the Flag
Here's the whole short editorial. The original is linked to in the title.
Mr. Bush and the Flag
Washington Post | Editorial
Sunday 31 August 2003
THE WHITE HOUSE supports the wrongheaded constitutional amendment that would give Congress the power "to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States." Yet in light of an incident last month, Mr. Bush should consider whether he might be the first person jailed should this perennial foolishness -- passed most recently by the House of Representatives earlier this year -- ever become part of the Constitution. Mr. Bush, at a political event in Livonia, Mich., autographed supporters' flags, an apparent violation of an obscure provision of American law that details the respect with which flags should be treated. "The flag," reads the code, "should never have placed upon it . . . any mark, insignia, letter, word, figure, design, picture, or drawing of any nature." The last time Congress sought to ban flag-burning, in a statute the Supreme Court struck down in 1989, it made a criminal out of anyone who "defaces" a flag -- language Mr. Bush likewise appears to have violated. Never mind the fact that he clearly meant no disrespect; if Congress had the power to criminalize flag desecration, he would at least arguably be indictable.
We say arguably because there's no telling what "desecration" actually means. The proposed amendment is meant to deal with flag-burning, but what about that American soldier who, in a moment of unadulterated patriotism, wrapped a flag around a statue of Saddam Hussein? What about a person who proudly wears a ripped T-shirt displaying the flag? Of course, such cases would never be brought in court. The amendment, in practice, would be used to punish only unpopular political expression, expression that, though sometimes odious, is today unambiguously protected by American constitutional law -- as it should be. But the notion that the president, or anyone, could be charged with signing a flag should not be even arguable. It should be laughable -- as it would be if politicians such as Mr. Bush had the guts to stand against constitutional pollution rather than pandering to it.
Read It Rating: 8.5
Left/Right Rating: L4
Freedom Rating: 3
Learning Percentage: 25%
Fear as human shield faces jail
BBC NEWS | Americas | Fear as human shield faces jail
Sitting in her modest two-bedroom home on the west Florida coast, Faith Fippinger begins to cry as she talks about the prospect of going to jail.
This spring, the 62-year-old retired schoolteacher decided to travel to Iraq as a human shield.
To many she is a humanitarian, but in the eyes of the US Government she is a criminal.
...
when she returned home there was a letter waiting for her from the US Treasury Department.
"It was a requirement to send information as to why I was in Iraq," she says.
"It also said the penalties for being there could be as high as a million dollars and up to 12 years in jail."
'Freedom of speech'
By going to Iraq Faith Fippinger had broken the US economic embargo on Iraq, which had been in place for many years.
The letter explained that by travelling to the country and spending money there, Miss Fippinger was now liable for prosecution.
Read It Rating: 8.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: -4
Learning Percentage: 25%
September 22, 2003
Ashcroft Rips Anti-Patriot Act 'Hysteria'
The last statement quoted below is a common technique used by Justice Department folks to diffuse "hysteria" (a.k.a., legitimate concern about civil liberties): you could call it the "We don't want to search you" method. The FBI guy who spoke at the public forum I organized in March used the same line, multiple times in different forms. "You regular, law abiding folks have nothing to worry about."
Right -- because law enforcement has never investigated, searched, or surveilled an innocent person.
They don't care what you're reading -- just what the bad guys are reading. So, no worries. Carry on.
(In the preceding paragraph, Ashcroft uses another common rhetorical trick -- painting a silly, cartoonish scenario, and attributing it to the law's critics. I call him on this in the local news hour segment that I posted on my main blog recently.)
Ashcroft Rips Anti-Patriot Act 'Hysteria'
The Associated Press
WASHINGTON Sept. 15 — Attorney General John Ashcroft denounced as "hysteria" the contention by some librarians and civil liberties groups that the FBI can use a new anti-terror law to snoop into Americans' reading habits.
In a speech Monday to an American Restaurant Association conference, Ashcroft said people are being wrongly led to believe that libraries have been "surrounded by the FBI," with agents "dressed in raincoats, dark suits and sunglasses. They stop everyone and interrogate everyone like Joe Friday.
"Now, you may have thought with all this hysteria and hyperbole, something had to be wrong," Ashcroft said. "Do we at the Justice Department really care what you are reading? No."
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 5%
September 14, 2003
Patriot II -- More Power, Please, Says Bush
So, they just want the power to violate the privacy of tens of thousands of people on the spot, on their own discretion.
Here's the question then: Why bother having warrants or judicial approval in any cases? What's the logic wall which prevents the example they give below from proceeding to the government simply always having instant access to all the hotel bases to check for any "known offender" in all fields of law enforcement?
Bush Seeks to Expand Access to Private Data
WASHINGTON, Sept. 13 -- For months, President Bush's advisers have assured a skittish public that law-abiding Americans have no reason to fear the long reach of the antiterrorism law known as the Patriot Act because its most intrusive measures would require a judge's sign-off.
But in a plan announced this week to expand counterterrorism powers, President Bush adopted a very different tack. In a three-point presidential plan that critics are already dubbing Patriot Act II, Mr. Bush is seeking broad new authority to allow federal agents -- without the approval of a judge or even a federal prosecutor -- to demand private records and compel testimony.
Mr. Bush also wants to expand the use of the death penalty in crimes like terrorist financing, and he wants to make it tougher for defendants in such cases to be freed on bail before trial. These proposals are also sure to prompt sharp debate, even among Republicans.
...
But Mr. Corallo gave a hypothetical example in which the F.B.I. received a tip in the middle of the night that an unidentified terrorist had traveled to Boston. Under Mr. Bush's plan, the F.B.I., rather than waiting for a judicial order, could subpoena all the Bost
Bush Overruled on 'Dirty Bomb' Suspect
Yahoo! News - Bush Overruled on 'Dirty Bomb' Suspect
(TruthOut permacopy)
NEW YORK - President Bush does not have power to detain American citizen Jose Padilla, the former gang member seized on U.S. soil, as an enemy combatant, a federal appeals court ruled Thursday.
...
3 senators urge Rumsfeld to free or try terror detainees
BillofRightsDay.com
Here's a new site I put together to help folks organize their Bill of Rights Day celebration efforts:
December 01, 2003
Patriot Act Expansion Moves Through Congress
Patriot Act Expansion Moves Through Congress
by Jim Lobe
(TruthOut permacopy)
Patriot Act Author Has Concerns
Patriot Act Author Has Concerns
By Richard B. Schmitt, Times Staff Writer
Detaining citizens as 'enemy combatants' -- a policy not spelled out in the act -- is flawed, the legal scholar says.
WASHINGTON — The Justice Department's war on terrorism has drawn intense scrutiny from the left and the right. Now, a chief architect of the USA Patriot Act and a former top assistant to Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft are joining the fray, voicing concern about aspects of the administration's anti-terrorism policy.
At issue is the government's power to designate and detain "enemy combatants," in particular in the case of "dirty bomb" plot suspect Jose Padilla, the Brooklyn-born former gang member who was picked up at a Chicago airport 18 months ago by the FBI and locked in a military brig without access to a lawyer.
...
November 23, 2003
F.B.I. Scrutinizes Antiwar Rallies
F.B.I. Scrutinizes Antiwar Rallies
By Eric Lichtblau
New York Times
Sunday 23 November 2003
The Federal Bureau of Investigation has collected extensive information on the tactics, training and organization of antiwar demonstrators and has advised local law enforcement officials to report any suspicious activity at protests to its counterterrorism squads, according to interviews and a confidential bureau memorandum.
The memorandum, which the bureau sent to local law enforcement agencies last month in advance of antiwar demonstrations in Washington and San Francisco, detailed how protesters have sometimes used "training camps" to rehearse for demonstrations, the Internet to raise money and gas masks to defend against tear gas. The memorandum analyzed lawful activities like recruiting demonstrators, as well as illegal activities like using fake documentation to get into a secured site.
F.B.I. officials said in interviews that the intelligence-gathering effort was aimed at identifying anarchists and "extremist elements" plotting violence, not at monitoring the political speech of law-abiding protesters.
The initiative has won the support of some local police, who view it as a critical way to maintain order at large-scale demonstrations. Indeed, some law enforcement officials said they believed the F.B.I.'s approach had helped to ensure that nationwide antiwar demonstrations in recent months, drawing hundreds of thousands of protesters, remained largely free of violence and disruption.
But some civil rights advocates and legal scholars said the monitoring program could signal a return to the abuses of the 1960's and 1970's, when J. Edgar Hoover was the F.B.I. director and agents routinely spied on political protesters like the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. ...
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 20%
November 12, 2003
Ashcroft Slams Critics as Patriot Act Backlash Grows
Ashcroft Slams Critics as Patriot Act Backlash Grows
By Tom Regan
Christian Science Monitor
Tuesday 16 September 2003
The war of words over the USA Patriot Act heated up considerably over the past few days, thanks in part to a recently completed "Patriot Act Tour" conducted by U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft. The tour, conducted in front of small, law enforcement friendly audiences, excluded participation from the general public. (At Faneuil Hall in Boston, Ashcroft addressed a crowd of 150, while outside the hall a crowd of 1200 chanted "This is what democracy looks like.") The tour was designed to create support for the act, but in some ways may have done just the opposite.
One of the main charges critics of the Patriot Act aim against Ashcroft is that rules designed to catch terrorists will be used against ordinary citizens. They also say police and prosecutors will use the laws created by the Patriot Act in other areas of law enforcement. These critics include people from both the left and the right of the American political spectrum.
Ashcroft blasted some of these critics on Monday, taking aim in particular at librarians. The Associated Press reports that Ashcroft said people are being wrongly led to believe that libraries have been "surrounded by the FBI," with agents "dressed in raincoats, dark suits and sunglasses. They stop everyone and interrogate everyone like Joe Friday."
The attorney general continues to insist that the Act "respects rights and increases security." USA Today looks at how the Act is at the heart of Ashcroft's powers as attorney general.
...
Read It Rating: 8.1
Left/Right Rating: L1.5
Freedom Rating: 2
Learning Percentage: 20%
October 23, 2003
Georgia runs from the MATRIX
By Ashlee Vance in Chicago
Posted: 22/10/2003 at 19:45 GMT
The state of Georgia has pulled out of the U.S. Department of Justice sponsored MATRIX information collection program, leaving data only on its felons and sexual offenders behind in the Orwellian database.
Georgia Governor Sonny Perdue has cited both privacy concerns and costs as the two key reasons the state will no longer participate in the MATRIX (Multistate Anti-Terrorism Information Exchange) pilot project. ...
Read It Rating: 4.5
Left/Right Rating: L4
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 55%
October 09, 2003
Driving dangerously with the Patriot Act
Driving dangerously with the Patriot Act
By Pat M. Holt
WASHINGTON -- Attorney General John Ashcroft is running a dead heat with A. Mitchell Palmer, attorney general in the Wilson administration, for the distinction of being the worst in that job in the history of the United States.
One of the duties of the attorney general as head of the Justice Department is to protect the Constitution. Both Mr. Ashcroft and Palmer found that the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights, got in their way more than it protected anything. It has gotten in Ashcroft's way in his pursuit of terrorists after Sept. 11, especially those who dress differently and practice a different religion. Palmer's crusade was the pursuit of communists, in the aftermath of World War I. He especially went after people with what to him were funny names from Eastern Europe. He tended to equate liberals with communists.
Ashcroft's vehicle is the USA Patriot Act, which Congress, abdicating its own duties of vigilance, passed with a whoop and a holler in the days after Sept. 11. Even the name of this odious legislation is offensive. It implies that the purpose of the act is to promote patriotism and that those not cooperating with it are somehow less patriotic.
...
Pat M. Holt is former chief of staff of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L1.1
Freedom Rating: 1.1
Learning Percentage: 1%
Local Peace Group Infiltrated By Government Agent
Local Peace Group Infiltrated By Government Agent
By Mike Rhodes
October 4, 2003
Peace Fresno was infiltrated by an agent working for the Fresno Sheriff's Department. Aaron Kilner, known by Peace Fresno activists as Aaron Stokes, attended several Peace Fresno meetings. Peace Fresno activist Nicholas DeGraff remembers him taking voluminous notes and several members say they saw him at peace vilgils held at Shaw and Blackstone. He was also on the bus local anti-globalization activists took to attend the WTO ministerial-level conference on Agricultural Science and Technology demonstration in Sacramento in June 2003.
Aaron Kilner died in a motorcycle accident on August 30, 2003. In his obituary in The Fresno Bee he was identified as a member of the Fresno County Sheriff's department. The obituary went on to say that he was "assigned to the anti-terrorist team." Local activists believe that this "anti-terrorist team" is, in fact, the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) that has recently been formed in this area.. When members of Peace Fresno saw the picture and read of Kilner's association with law enforcement they began piecing the story together.
The infiltration by law enforcement of progressive community groups in Fresno and throughout the country has long been used to disrupt legitimate political work. This disruption occurs by sowing seeds of mistrust among members, agents often promote discord within the group, and sometimes encourage illegal or violent actions. Agent provocateurs have been know to instigate violence at demonstrations, giving the police an excuse to attack protestors.
...
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 45%
October 08, 2003
Terror suspect tortured: dad claims
Terror suspect tortured: dad claims
By Rebecca Urban
October 8, 2003
Australian terrorist suspects David Hicks and Mamdouh Habib had likely been tortured while detained at Guantanamo Bay, a lawyer and Hicks' father said today.
Australian lawyer Richard Bourke, who has been working with prisoners at Camp X-ray for the past two years, told ABC radio leaks from the American military and reports from former inmates revealed the detainees had been forced to kneel in the sun until they collapsed and were tied up and had rubber bullets fired at them.
...
Read It Rating: 6
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -3
Learning Percentage: 30%
Sullum: Ashcroft's Patriot Act tour
The Washington Times: Commentary
By Jacob Sullum
August 26, 2003
Attorney General John Ashcroft is on a publicity tour, promoting the Patriot Act and preparing the public for a sequel. But just as you can't always believe an actor who tells you his latest film is sure to be a hit, you have to take what Mr. Ashcroft says with a grain of salt.
Mr. Ashcroft is reacting to bad reviews from critics who say the Patriot Act -- given a green light just a month and a half after the September 11 terrorist attacks by members of Congress who had not even read the script -- was rushed into production. The result, they say, was a deeply flawed work in which civil liberties make only a brief appearance.
...
Read It Rating: 7
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: .3
Learning Percentage: 10%
Media elite debate Patriot Act
Arbiter Online - Media elite debate Patriot Act
Privacy policies concern librarians
by Amy Olsen
October 06, 2003
Pulitzer Prize winner and Washington Post reporter David Broder spoke Oct. 2 at Boise State, encapsulating the day-long “Freedom and Secrecy: Trading Liberty for Security?” conference held by the Andrus Center for Public Policy.
Broder's speech was one of several activities and joint panel discussions focusing on the philosophical and political question of balancing civil liberties and homeland security.
Broder was the last speaker among three distinguished panelists at the conference on Thursday. Former Vice President Walter Mondale and former Washington State Senator Slade Gorton joined Broder for the event.
The lecturer gave several examples of past uses of the act, ranging from long-term immigrant confinement to inquiries into library records across the nation by agents of the law.
Broder reported that among 1,500 major libraries in the United States, 178 reported "visitations from FBI members" since the USA PATRIOT Act's passage in Oct. 2001.
...
Read It Rating: 4.5
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 35%
October 05, 2003
Fed Court tells NY to back off Russell Simmons and Hip Hop Summit
FEDERAL COURT ISSUES ORDER SUSPENDING NY LOBBYING COMMISSION INVESTIGATION OF RUSSELL SIMMONS AND THE HIP-HOP SUMMIT ACTION NETWORK
NEW YORK, N.Y. -- OCTOBER 2, 2003 - Russell Simmons and Dr. Benjamin Chavis, who together with the Hip-Hop Summit Action Network, filed a lawsuit in July of this year charging the New York Temporary State Commission on Lobbying with violating their First Amendment rights, reconvened in federal court this morning to ask Judge Loretta A. Preska to enforce the suspension of the Lobbying Commission's investigation into Russell Simmons and Dr. Chavis.
Today, Judge Loretta A. Preska issued an order suspending the Lobbying Commission's investigation into Plaintiffs' First Amendment activities, which were aimed at raising public awareness about the unfairness of the Rockefeller Drug Laws. The Judge found that the Lobbying Commission had unfairly tried to back out of a court-approved agreement to suspend the investigation. The suspension that Judge Preska ordered today will last until the Court can issue a full decision in this case.
...
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 4
Learning Percentage: 85%
Ashcroft Is Unprintable, and Glad of It
Ashcroft Is Unprintable, and Glad of It
On tour, he bars the press and cozies up to local TV reporters.
September 25, 2003
COMMENTARY
By Todd Gitlin and Jay Rosen
Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft, who is continuing his tour of the country to promote the Patriot Act, has at several stops, including Buffalo and Philadelphia, refused to speak to print reporters. While television correspondents can often breeze right in, their newspaper colleagues are kept at bay by Secret Service agents doing the bidding of the nation's chief law enforcement official, who prefers audiences of handpicked enthusiasts and interviews with local television reporters.
According to Justice Department spokeswoman Barbara Comstock, Ashcroft wants to explain "key facts directly to the American people" and not have to subject himself to "as much of a filter from people who are already invested in having a different view of it."
Of course he does. What public official wouldn't prefer a stenographer to an interlocutor? Ashcroft, like the president he serves, wishes to conduct the public's business in an echo chamber. With aplomb and no hint of bad conscience, they practice the politics of no-politics, the politics of l'etat, c'est moi.
...
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 50%
October 03, 2003
Chicago City Council votes against parts of USA-PATRIOT Act
Below is an official news story about it. Here is a slightly less journalistic story that provides more background info on the movement behind the resolution. (That story, by Elaine Cassel, seems to have originated at her blog here.
Council decries Patriot Act in watered-down resolution
October 2, 2003
BY FRAN SPIELMAN City Hall Reporter
Warning of civil liberties abuses similar to those that preceded the Holocaust, the City Council on Wednesday approved a watered-down resolution urging repeal of portions of the USA Patriot Act.
The 37-7 vote followed an emotional debate that invoked the chilling words of Nazi leader Hermann Goering and ignored Mayor Daley's warning that the federal government needs extraordinary tools to fight terrorism.
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: 1.5
Learning Percentage: 75%
Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
You can read a news story about the vote mentioned below -- Austin did indeed pass a resolution against the USA-PATRIOT Act -- here. There's also a pretty interesting local news video clip about the meeting here. The story aims to be a transcript of the video, though that's not fully the case. The U.S. Attorney who is interviewed sounded like he might have only read the beginning of the act, and then skipped the rest.
t r u t h o u t - William Rivers Pitt | Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
[TruthOut] Editor's Note | The following remarks were delivered by William Rivers Pitt at a Town Hall meeting in Austin, Texas on Tuesday, September 16. The meeting was called on the eve of an historic vote; the capitol city of Texas is very near to joining hundreds of other American communities in passing a resolution that repudiates the Patriot Act.
Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
By William Rivers Pitt
t r u t h o u t | Perspective
Monday 22 September 2003
I have listened to the defenses of the Patriot Act offered tonight. The essence of the defenses, the essence of the rebuttals to our reservations and complaints, is "Trust us. We're the government. We're the constitutional scholars. Trust us."
I've heard that before.
There are tons of mass destruction weapons in Iraq. Trust us. There are al Qaeda terrorists all over Iraq. Trust us. September 11 happened because of enemies who hate our freedoms. Trust us.
With all due respect, I say hell no. The one thing this government's behavior has not created is trust.
Ladies and gentlemen, I have come here today to appeal to your patriotism. We are all patriots here, every one of us. Let no one deny that or doubt that.
What are our duties as patriots? Is one a patriot if they fly the flag, to stand for the national anthem? Yes…and no. One may do these things and be filled with love of country, but if that is all you do, then you have not done enough. In this time, and in this place, and with all that is happening in this country and around the world, the duties of a patriot go far, far, far beyond flying the flag.
The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
That is how our freedom began 227 years ago. We said 'No.' Now, we must talk, and listen, and ask questions, and understand. If we do not like where we find ourselves, we must once again say 'No' with roaring voice, and without fear.
So let us, as patriots, speak tonight about the Patriot Act....
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 1.2
Learning Percentage: 15%
October 01, 2003
Mr. Bush and the Flag
Here's the whole short editorial. The original is linked to in the title.
Mr. Bush and the Flag
Washington Post | Editorial
Sunday 31 August 2003
THE WHITE HOUSE supports the wrongheaded constitutional amendment that would give Congress the power "to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States." Yet in light of an incident last month, Mr. Bush should consider whether he might be the first person jailed should this perennial foolishness -- passed most recently by the House of Representatives earlier this year -- ever become part of the Constitution. Mr. Bush, at a political event in Livonia, Mich., autographed supporters' flags, an apparent violation of an obscure provision of American law that details the respect with which flags should be treated. "The flag," reads the code, "should never have placed upon it . . . any mark, insignia, letter, word, figure, design, picture, or drawing of any nature." The last time Congress sought to ban flag-burning, in a statute the Supreme Court struck down in 1989, it made a criminal out of anyone who "defaces" a flag -- language Mr. Bush likewise appears to have violated. Never mind the fact that he clearly meant no disrespect; if Congress had the power to criminalize flag desecration, he would at least arguably be indictable.
We say arguably because there's no telling what "desecration" actually means. The proposed amendment is meant to deal with flag-burning, but what about that American soldier who, in a moment of unadulterated patriotism, wrapped a flag around a statue of Saddam Hussein? What about a person who proudly wears a ripped T-shirt displaying the flag? Of course, such cases would never be brought in court. The amendment, in practice, would be used to punish only unpopular political expression, expression that, though sometimes odious, is today unambiguously protected by American constitutional law -- as it should be. But the notion that the president, or anyone, could be charged with signing a flag should not be even arguable. It should be laughable -- as it would be if politicians such as Mr. Bush had the guts to stand against constitutional pollution rather than pandering to it.
Read It Rating: 8.5
Left/Right Rating: L4
Freedom Rating: 3
Learning Percentage: 25%
Fear as human shield faces jail
BBC NEWS | Americas | Fear as human shield faces jail
Sitting in her modest two-bedroom home on the west Florida coast, Faith Fippinger begins to cry as she talks about the prospect of going to jail.
This spring, the 62-year-old retired schoolteacher decided to travel to Iraq as a human shield.
To many she is a humanitarian, but in the eyes of the US Government she is a criminal.
...
when she returned home there was a letter waiting for her from the US Treasury Department.
"It was a requirement to send information as to why I was in Iraq," she says.
"It also said the penalties for being there could be as high as a million dollars and up to 12 years in jail."
'Freedom of speech'
By going to Iraq Faith Fippinger had broken the US economic embargo on Iraq, which had been in place for many years.
The letter explained that by travelling to the country and spending money there, Miss Fippinger was now liable for prosecution.
Read It Rating: 8.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: -4
Learning Percentage: 25%
September 22, 2003
Ashcroft Rips Anti-Patriot Act 'Hysteria'
The last statement quoted below is a common technique used by Justice Department folks to diffuse "hysteria" (a.k.a., legitimate concern about civil liberties): you could call it the "We don't want to search you" method. The FBI guy who spoke at the public forum I organized in March used the same line, multiple times in different forms. "You regular, law abiding folks have nothing to worry about."
Right -- because law enforcement has never investigated, searched, or surveilled an innocent person.
They don't care what you're reading -- just what the bad guys are reading. So, no worries. Carry on.
(In the preceding paragraph, Ashcroft uses another common rhetorical trick -- painting a silly, cartoonish scenario, and attributing it to the law's critics. I call him on this in the local news hour segment that I posted on my main blog recently.)
Ashcroft Rips Anti-Patriot Act 'Hysteria'
The Associated Press
WASHINGTON Sept. 15 — Attorney General John Ashcroft denounced as "hysteria" the contention by some librarians and civil liberties groups that the FBI can use a new anti-terror law to snoop into Americans' reading habits.
In a speech Monday to an American Restaurant Association conference, Ashcroft said people are being wrongly led to believe that libraries have been "surrounded by the FBI," with agents "dressed in raincoats, dark suits and sunglasses. They stop everyone and interrogate everyone like Joe Friday.
"Now, you may have thought with all this hysteria and hyperbole, something had to be wrong," Ashcroft said. "Do we at the Justice Department really care what you are reading? No."
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 5%
September 14, 2003
Patriot II -- More Power, Please, Says Bush
So, they just want the power to violate the privacy of tens of thousands of people on the spot, on their own discretion.
Here's the question then: Why bother having warrants or judicial approval in any cases? What's the logic wall which prevents the example they give below from proceeding to the government simply always having instant access to all the hotel bases to check for any "known offender" in all fields of law enforcement?
Bush Seeks to Expand Access to Private Data
WASHINGTON, Sept. 13 -- For months, President Bush's advisers have assured a skittish public that law-abiding Americans have no reason to fear the long reach of the antiterrorism law known as the Patriot Act because its most intrusive measures would require a judge's sign-off.
But in a plan announced this week to expand counterterrorism powers, President Bush adopted a very different tack. In a three-point presidential plan that critics are already dubbing Patriot Act II, Mr. Bush is seeking broad new authority to allow federal agents -- without the approval of a judge or even a federal prosecutor -- to demand private records and compel testimony.
Mr. Bush also wants to expand the use of the death penalty in crimes like terrorist financing, and he wants to make it tougher for defendants in such cases to be freed on bail before trial. These proposals are also sure to prompt sharp debate, even among Republicans.
...
But Mr. Corallo gave a hypothetical example in which the F.B.I. received a tip in the middle of the night that an unidentified terrorist had traveled to Boston. Under Mr. Bush's plan, the F.B.I., rather than waiting for a judicial order, could subpoena all the Bost
Patriot Act Expansion Moves Through Congress
Patriot Act Expansion Moves Through Congress
by Jim Lobe
(TruthOut permacopy)
Patriot Act Author Has Concerns
Patriot Act Author Has Concerns
By Richard B. Schmitt, Times Staff Writer
Detaining citizens as 'enemy combatants' -- a policy not spelled out in the act -- is flawed, the legal scholar says.
WASHINGTON — The Justice Department's war on terrorism has drawn intense scrutiny from the left and the right. Now, a chief architect of the USA Patriot Act and a former top assistant to Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft are joining the fray, voicing concern about aspects of the administration's anti-terrorism policy.
At issue is the government's power to designate and detain "enemy combatants," in particular in the case of "dirty bomb" plot suspect Jose Padilla, the Brooklyn-born former gang member who was picked up at a Chicago airport 18 months ago by the FBI and locked in a military brig without access to a lawyer.
...
F.B.I. Scrutinizes Antiwar Rallies
F.B.I. Scrutinizes Antiwar Rallies
By Eric Lichtblau
New York Times
Sunday 23 November 2003
The Federal Bureau of Investigation has collected extensive information on the tactics, training and organization of antiwar demonstrators and has advised local law enforcement officials to report any suspicious activity at protests to its counterterrorism squads, according to interviews and a confidential bureau memorandum.
The memorandum, which the bureau sent to local law enforcement agencies last month in advance of antiwar demonstrations in Washington and San Francisco, detailed how protesters have sometimes used "training camps" to rehearse for demonstrations, the Internet to raise money and gas masks to defend against tear gas. The memorandum analyzed lawful activities like recruiting demonstrators, as well as illegal activities like using fake documentation to get into a secured site.
F.B.I. officials said in interviews that the intelligence-gathering effort was aimed at identifying anarchists and "extremist elements" plotting violence, not at monitoring the political speech of law-abiding protesters.
The initiative has won the support of some local police, who view it as a critical way to maintain order at large-scale demonstrations. Indeed, some law enforcement officials said they believed the F.B.I.'s approach had helped to ensure that nationwide antiwar demonstrations in recent months, drawing hundreds of thousands of protesters, remained largely free of violence and disruption.
But some civil rights advocates and legal scholars said the monitoring program could signal a return to the abuses of the 1960's and 1970's, when J. Edgar Hoover was the F.B.I. director and agents routinely spied on political protesters like the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. ...
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 20%
November 12, 2003
Ashcroft Slams Critics as Patriot Act Backlash Grows
Ashcroft Slams Critics as Patriot Act Backlash Grows
By Tom Regan
Christian Science Monitor
Tuesday 16 September 2003
The war of words over the USA Patriot Act heated up considerably over the past few days, thanks in part to a recently completed "Patriot Act Tour" conducted by U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft. The tour, conducted in front of small, law enforcement friendly audiences, excluded participation from the general public. (At Faneuil Hall in Boston, Ashcroft addressed a crowd of 150, while outside the hall a crowd of 1200 chanted "This is what democracy looks like.") The tour was designed to create support for the act, but in some ways may have done just the opposite.
One of the main charges critics of the Patriot Act aim against Ashcroft is that rules designed to catch terrorists will be used against ordinary citizens. They also say police and prosecutors will use the laws created by the Patriot Act in other areas of law enforcement. These critics include people from both the left and the right of the American political spectrum.
Ashcroft blasted some of these critics on Monday, taking aim in particular at librarians. The Associated Press reports that Ashcroft said people are being wrongly led to believe that libraries have been "surrounded by the FBI," with agents "dressed in raincoats, dark suits and sunglasses. They stop everyone and interrogate everyone like Joe Friday."
The attorney general continues to insist that the Act "respects rights and increases security." USA Today looks at how the Act is at the heart of Ashcroft's powers as attorney general.
...
Read It Rating: 8.1
Left/Right Rating: L1.5
Freedom Rating: 2
Learning Percentage: 20%
October 23, 2003
Georgia runs from the MATRIX
By Ashlee Vance in Chicago
Posted: 22/10/2003 at 19:45 GMT
The state of Georgia has pulled out of the U.S. Department of Justice sponsored MATRIX information collection program, leaving data only on its felons and sexual offenders behind in the Orwellian database.
Georgia Governor Sonny Perdue has cited both privacy concerns and costs as the two key reasons the state will no longer participate in the MATRIX (Multistate Anti-Terrorism Information Exchange) pilot project. ...
Read It Rating: 4.5
Left/Right Rating: L4
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 55%
October 09, 2003
Driving dangerously with the Patriot Act
Driving dangerously with the Patriot Act
By Pat M. Holt
WASHINGTON -- Attorney General John Ashcroft is running a dead heat with A. Mitchell Palmer, attorney general in the Wilson administration, for the distinction of being the worst in that job in the history of the United States.
One of the duties of the attorney general as head of the Justice Department is to protect the Constitution. Both Mr. Ashcroft and Palmer found that the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights, got in their way more than it protected anything. It has gotten in Ashcroft's way in his pursuit of terrorists after Sept. 11, especially those who dress differently and practice a different religion. Palmer's crusade was the pursuit of communists, in the aftermath of World War I. He especially went after people with what to him were funny names from Eastern Europe. He tended to equate liberals with communists.
Ashcroft's vehicle is the USA Patriot Act, which Congress, abdicating its own duties of vigilance, passed with a whoop and a holler in the days after Sept. 11. Even the name of this odious legislation is offensive. It implies that the purpose of the act is to promote patriotism and that those not cooperating with it are somehow less patriotic.
...
Pat M. Holt is former chief of staff of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L1.1
Freedom Rating: 1.1
Learning Percentage: 1%
Local Peace Group Infiltrated By Government Agent
Local Peace Group Infiltrated By Government Agent
By Mike Rhodes
October 4, 2003
Peace Fresno was infiltrated by an agent working for the Fresno Sheriff's Department. Aaron Kilner, known by Peace Fresno activists as Aaron Stokes, attended several Peace Fresno meetings. Peace Fresno activist Nicholas DeGraff remembers him taking voluminous notes and several members say they saw him at peace vilgils held at Shaw and Blackstone. He was also on the bus local anti-globalization activists took to attend the WTO ministerial-level conference on Agricultural Science and Technology demonstration in Sacramento in June 2003.
Aaron Kilner died in a motorcycle accident on August 30, 2003. In his obituary in The Fresno Bee he was identified as a member of the Fresno County Sheriff's department. The obituary went on to say that he was "assigned to the anti-terrorist team." Local activists believe that this "anti-terrorist team" is, in fact, the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) that has recently been formed in this area.. When members of Peace Fresno saw the picture and read of Kilner's association with law enforcement they began piecing the story together.
The infiltration by law enforcement of progressive community groups in Fresno and throughout the country has long been used to disrupt legitimate political work. This disruption occurs by sowing seeds of mistrust among members, agents often promote discord within the group, and sometimes encourage illegal or violent actions. Agent provocateurs have been know to instigate violence at demonstrations, giving the police an excuse to attack protestors.
...
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 45%
October 08, 2003
Terror suspect tortured: dad claims
Terror suspect tortured: dad claims
By Rebecca Urban
October 8, 2003
Australian terrorist suspects David Hicks and Mamdouh Habib had likely been tortured while detained at Guantanamo Bay, a lawyer and Hicks' father said today.
Australian lawyer Richard Bourke, who has been working with prisoners at Camp X-ray for the past two years, told ABC radio leaks from the American military and reports from former inmates revealed the detainees had been forced to kneel in the sun until they collapsed and were tied up and had rubber bullets fired at them.
...
Read It Rating: 6
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -3
Learning Percentage: 30%
Sullum: Ashcroft's Patriot Act tour
The Washington Times: Commentary
By Jacob Sullum
August 26, 2003
Attorney General John Ashcroft is on a publicity tour, promoting the Patriot Act and preparing the public for a sequel. But just as you can't always believe an actor who tells you his latest film is sure to be a hit, you have to take what Mr. Ashcroft says with a grain of salt.
Mr. Ashcroft is reacting to bad reviews from critics who say the Patriot Act -- given a green light just a month and a half after the September 11 terrorist attacks by members of Congress who had not even read the script -- was rushed into production. The result, they say, was a deeply flawed work in which civil liberties make only a brief appearance.
...
Read It Rating: 7
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: .3
Learning Percentage: 10%
Media elite debate Patriot Act
Arbiter Online - Media elite debate Patriot Act
Privacy policies concern librarians
by Amy Olsen
October 06, 2003
Pulitzer Prize winner and Washington Post reporter David Broder spoke Oct. 2 at Boise State, encapsulating the day-long “Freedom and Secrecy: Trading Liberty for Security?” conference held by the Andrus Center for Public Policy.
Broder's speech was one of several activities and joint panel discussions focusing on the philosophical and political question of balancing civil liberties and homeland security.
Broder was the last speaker among three distinguished panelists at the conference on Thursday. Former Vice President Walter Mondale and former Washington State Senator Slade Gorton joined Broder for the event.
The lecturer gave several examples of past uses of the act, ranging from long-term immigrant confinement to inquiries into library records across the nation by agents of the law.
Broder reported that among 1,500 major libraries in the United States, 178 reported "visitations from FBI members" since the USA PATRIOT Act's passage in Oct. 2001.
...
Read It Rating: 4.5
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 35%
October 05, 2003
Fed Court tells NY to back off Russell Simmons and Hip Hop Summit
FEDERAL COURT ISSUES ORDER SUSPENDING NY LOBBYING COMMISSION INVESTIGATION OF RUSSELL SIMMONS AND THE HIP-HOP SUMMIT ACTION NETWORK
NEW YORK, N.Y. -- OCTOBER 2, 2003 - Russell Simmons and Dr. Benjamin Chavis, who together with the Hip-Hop Summit Action Network, filed a lawsuit in July of this year charging the New York Temporary State Commission on Lobbying with violating their First Amendment rights, reconvened in federal court this morning to ask Judge Loretta A. Preska to enforce the suspension of the Lobbying Commission's investigation into Russell Simmons and Dr. Chavis.
Today, Judge Loretta A. Preska issued an order suspending the Lobbying Commission's investigation into Plaintiffs' First Amendment activities, which were aimed at raising public awareness about the unfairness of the Rockefeller Drug Laws. The Judge found that the Lobbying Commission had unfairly tried to back out of a court-approved agreement to suspend the investigation. The suspension that Judge Preska ordered today will last until the Court can issue a full decision in this case.
...
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 4
Learning Percentage: 85%
Ashcroft Is Unprintable, and Glad of It
Ashcroft Is Unprintable, and Glad of It
On tour, he bars the press and cozies up to local TV reporters.
September 25, 2003
COMMENTARY
By Todd Gitlin and Jay Rosen
Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft, who is continuing his tour of the country to promote the Patriot Act, has at several stops, including Buffalo and Philadelphia, refused to speak to print reporters. While television correspondents can often breeze right in, their newspaper colleagues are kept at bay by Secret Service agents doing the bidding of the nation's chief law enforcement official, who prefers audiences of handpicked enthusiasts and interviews with local television reporters.
According to Justice Department spokeswoman Barbara Comstock, Ashcroft wants to explain "key facts directly to the American people" and not have to subject himself to "as much of a filter from people who are already invested in having a different view of it."
Of course he does. What public official wouldn't prefer a stenographer to an interlocutor? Ashcroft, like the president he serves, wishes to conduct the public's business in an echo chamber. With aplomb and no hint of bad conscience, they practice the politics of no-politics, the politics of l'etat, c'est moi.
...
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 50%
October 03, 2003
Chicago City Council votes against parts of USA-PATRIOT Act
Below is an official news story about it. Here is a slightly less journalistic story that provides more background info on the movement behind the resolution. (That story, by Elaine Cassel, seems to have originated at her blog here.
Council decries Patriot Act in watered-down resolution
October 2, 2003
BY FRAN SPIELMAN City Hall Reporter
Warning of civil liberties abuses similar to those that preceded the Holocaust, the City Council on Wednesday approved a watered-down resolution urging repeal of portions of the USA Patriot Act.
The 37-7 vote followed an emotional debate that invoked the chilling words of Nazi leader Hermann Goering and ignored Mayor Daley's warning that the federal government needs extraordinary tools to fight terrorism.
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: 1.5
Learning Percentage: 75%
Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
You can read a news story about the vote mentioned below -- Austin did indeed pass a resolution against the USA-PATRIOT Act -- here. There's also a pretty interesting local news video clip about the meeting here. The story aims to be a transcript of the video, though that's not fully the case. The U.S. Attorney who is interviewed sounded like he might have only read the beginning of the act, and then skipped the rest.
t r u t h o u t - William Rivers Pitt | Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
[TruthOut] Editor's Note | The following remarks were delivered by William Rivers Pitt at a Town Hall meeting in Austin, Texas on Tuesday, September 16. The meeting was called on the eve of an historic vote; the capitol city of Texas is very near to joining hundreds of other American communities in passing a resolution that repudiates the Patriot Act.
Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
By William Rivers Pitt
t r u t h o u t | Perspective
Monday 22 September 2003
I have listened to the defenses of the Patriot Act offered tonight. The essence of the defenses, the essence of the rebuttals to our reservations and complaints, is "Trust us. We're the government. We're the constitutional scholars. Trust us."
I've heard that before.
There are tons of mass destruction weapons in Iraq. Trust us. There are al Qaeda terrorists all over Iraq. Trust us. September 11 happened because of enemies who hate our freedoms. Trust us.
With all due respect, I say hell no. The one thing this government's behavior has not created is trust.
Ladies and gentlemen, I have come here today to appeal to your patriotism. We are all patriots here, every one of us. Let no one deny that or doubt that.
What are our duties as patriots? Is one a patriot if they fly the flag, to stand for the national anthem? Yes…and no. One may do these things and be filled with love of country, but if that is all you do, then you have not done enough. In this time, and in this place, and with all that is happening in this country and around the world, the duties of a patriot go far, far, far beyond flying the flag.
The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
That is how our freedom began 227 years ago. We said 'No.' Now, we must talk, and listen, and ask questions, and understand. If we do not like where we find ourselves, we must once again say 'No' with roaring voice, and without fear.
So let us, as patriots, speak tonight about the Patriot Act....
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 1.2
Learning Percentage: 15%
October 01, 2003
Mr. Bush and the Flag
Here's the whole short editorial. The original is linked to in the title.
Mr. Bush and the Flag
Washington Post | Editorial
Sunday 31 August 2003
THE WHITE HOUSE supports the wrongheaded constitutional amendment that would give Congress the power "to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States." Yet in light of an incident last month, Mr. Bush should consider whether he might be the first person jailed should this perennial foolishness -- passed most recently by the House of Representatives earlier this year -- ever become part of the Constitution. Mr. Bush, at a political event in Livonia, Mich., autographed supporters' flags, an apparent violation of an obscure provision of American law that details the respect with which flags should be treated. "The flag," reads the code, "should never have placed upon it . . . any mark, insignia, letter, word, figure, design, picture, or drawing of any nature." The last time Congress sought to ban flag-burning, in a statute the Supreme Court struck down in 1989, it made a criminal out of anyone who "defaces" a flag -- language Mr. Bush likewise appears to have violated. Never mind the fact that he clearly meant no disrespect; if Congress had the power to criminalize flag desecration, he would at least arguably be indictable.
We say arguably because there's no telling what "desecration" actually means. The proposed amendment is meant to deal with flag-burning, but what about that American soldier who, in a moment of unadulterated patriotism, wrapped a flag around a statue of Saddam Hussein? What about a person who proudly wears a ripped T-shirt displaying the flag? Of course, such cases would never be brought in court. The amendment, in practice, would be used to punish only unpopular political expression, expression that, though sometimes odious, is today unambiguously protected by American constitutional law -- as it should be. But the notion that the president, or anyone, could be charged with signing a flag should not be even arguable. It should be laughable -- as it would be if politicians such as Mr. Bush had the guts to stand against constitutional pollution rather than pandering to it.
Read It Rating: 8.5
Left/Right Rating: L4
Freedom Rating: 3
Learning Percentage: 25%
Fear as human shield faces jail
BBC NEWS | Americas | Fear as human shield faces jail
Sitting in her modest two-bedroom home on the west Florida coast, Faith Fippinger begins to cry as she talks about the prospect of going to jail.
This spring, the 62-year-old retired schoolteacher decided to travel to Iraq as a human shield.
To many she is a humanitarian, but in the eyes of the US Government she is a criminal.
...
when she returned home there was a letter waiting for her from the US Treasury Department.
"It was a requirement to send information as to why I was in Iraq," she says.
"It also said the penalties for being there could be as high as a million dollars and up to 12 years in jail."
'Freedom of speech'
By going to Iraq Faith Fippinger had broken the US economic embargo on Iraq, which had been in place for many years.
The letter explained that by travelling to the country and spending money there, Miss Fippinger was now liable for prosecution.
Read It Rating: 8.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: -4
Learning Percentage: 25%
September 22, 2003
Ashcroft Rips Anti-Patriot Act 'Hysteria'
The last statement quoted below is a common technique used by Justice Department folks to diffuse "hysteria" (a.k.a., legitimate concern about civil liberties): you could call it the "We don't want to search you" method. The FBI guy who spoke at the public forum I organized in March used the same line, multiple times in different forms. "You regular, law abiding folks have nothing to worry about."
Right -- because law enforcement has never investigated, searched, or surveilled an innocent person.
They don't care what you're reading -- just what the bad guys are reading. So, no worries. Carry on.
(In the preceding paragraph, Ashcroft uses another common rhetorical trick -- painting a silly, cartoonish scenario, and attributing it to the law's critics. I call him on this in the local news hour segment that I posted on my main blog recently.)
Ashcroft Rips Anti-Patriot Act 'Hysteria'
The Associated Press
WASHINGTON Sept. 15 — Attorney General John Ashcroft denounced as "hysteria" the contention by some librarians and civil liberties groups that the FBI can use a new anti-terror law to snoop into Americans' reading habits.
In a speech Monday to an American Restaurant Association conference, Ashcroft said people are being wrongly led to believe that libraries have been "surrounded by the FBI," with agents "dressed in raincoats, dark suits and sunglasses. They stop everyone and interrogate everyone like Joe Friday.
"Now, you may have thought with all this hysteria and hyperbole, something had to be wrong," Ashcroft said. "Do we at the Justice Department really care what you are reading? No."
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 5%
September 14, 2003
Patriot II -- More Power, Please, Says Bush
So, they just want the power to violate the privacy of tens of thousands of people on the spot, on their own discretion.
Here's the question then: Why bother having warrants or judicial approval in any cases? What's the logic wall which prevents the example they give below from proceeding to the government simply always having instant access to all the hotel bases to check for any "known offender" in all fields of law enforcement?
Bush Seeks to Expand Access to Private Data
WASHINGTON, Sept. 13 -- For months, President Bush's advisers have assured a skittish public that law-abiding Americans have no reason to fear the long reach of the antiterrorism law known as the Patriot Act because its most intrusive measures would require a judge's sign-off.
But in a plan announced this week to expand counterterrorism powers, President Bush adopted a very different tack. In a three-point presidential plan that critics are already dubbing Patriot Act II, Mr. Bush is seeking broad new authority to allow federal agents -- without the approval of a judge or even a federal prosecutor -- to demand private records and compel testimony.
Mr. Bush also wants to expand the use of the death penalty in crimes like terrorist financing, and he wants to make it tougher for defendants in such cases to be freed on bail before trial. These proposals are also sure to prompt sharp debate, even among Republicans.
...
But Mr. Corallo gave a hypothetical example in which the F.B.I. received a tip in the middle of the night that an unidentified terrorist had traveled to Boston. Under Mr. Bush's plan, the F.B.I., rather than waiting for a judicial order, could subpoena all the Bost
Ashcroft Slams Critics as Patriot Act Backlash Grows
Ashcroft Slams Critics as Patriot Act Backlash Grows
By Tom Regan
Christian Science Monitor
Tuesday 16 September 2003
The war of words over the USA Patriot Act heated up considerably over the past few days, thanks in part to a recently completed "Patriot Act Tour" conducted by U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft. The tour, conducted in front of small, law enforcement friendly audiences, excluded participation from the general public. (At Faneuil Hall in Boston, Ashcroft addressed a crowd of 150, while outside the hall a crowd of 1200 chanted "This is what democracy looks like.") The tour was designed to create support for the act, but in some ways may have done just the opposite.
One of the main charges critics of the Patriot Act aim against Ashcroft is that rules designed to catch terrorists will be used against ordinary citizens. They also say police and prosecutors will use the laws created by the Patriot Act in other areas of law enforcement. These critics include people from both the left and the right of the American political spectrum.
Ashcroft blasted some of these critics on Monday, taking aim in particular at librarians. The Associated Press reports that Ashcroft said people are being wrongly led to believe that libraries have been "surrounded by the FBI," with agents "dressed in raincoats, dark suits and sunglasses. They stop everyone and interrogate everyone like Joe Friday."
The attorney general continues to insist that the Act "respects rights and increases security." USA Today looks at how the Act is at the heart of Ashcroft's powers as attorney general.
...
Read It Rating: 8.1
Left/Right Rating: L1.5
Freedom Rating: 2
Learning Percentage: 20%
Georgia runs from the MATRIX
By Ashlee Vance in Chicago
Posted: 22/10/2003 at 19:45 GMT
The state of Georgia has pulled out of the U.S. Department of Justice sponsored MATRIX information collection program, leaving data only on its felons and sexual offenders behind in the Orwellian database.
Georgia Governor Sonny Perdue has cited both privacy concerns and costs as the two key reasons the state will no longer participate in the MATRIX (Multistate Anti-Terrorism Information Exchange) pilot project. ...
Read It Rating: 4.5
Left/Right Rating: L4
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 55%
October 09, 2003
Driving dangerously with the Patriot Act
Driving dangerously with the Patriot Act
By Pat M. Holt
WASHINGTON -- Attorney General John Ashcroft is running a dead heat with A. Mitchell Palmer, attorney general in the Wilson administration, for the distinction of being the worst in that job in the history of the United States.
One of the duties of the attorney general as head of the Justice Department is to protect the Constitution. Both Mr. Ashcroft and Palmer found that the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights, got in their way more than it protected anything. It has gotten in Ashcroft's way in his pursuit of terrorists after Sept. 11, especially those who dress differently and practice a different religion. Palmer's crusade was the pursuit of communists, in the aftermath of World War I. He especially went after people with what to him were funny names from Eastern Europe. He tended to equate liberals with communists.
Ashcroft's vehicle is the USA Patriot Act, which Congress, abdicating its own duties of vigilance, passed with a whoop and a holler in the days after Sept. 11. Even the name of this odious legislation is offensive. It implies that the purpose of the act is to promote patriotism and that those not cooperating with it are somehow less patriotic.
...
Pat M. Holt is former chief of staff of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L1.1
Freedom Rating: 1.1
Learning Percentage: 1%
Local Peace Group Infiltrated By Government Agent
Local Peace Group Infiltrated By Government Agent
By Mike Rhodes
October 4, 2003
Peace Fresno was infiltrated by an agent working for the Fresno Sheriff's Department. Aaron Kilner, known by Peace Fresno activists as Aaron Stokes, attended several Peace Fresno meetings. Peace Fresno activist Nicholas DeGraff remembers him taking voluminous notes and several members say they saw him at peace vilgils held at Shaw and Blackstone. He was also on the bus local anti-globalization activists took to attend the WTO ministerial-level conference on Agricultural Science and Technology demonstration in Sacramento in June 2003.
Aaron Kilner died in a motorcycle accident on August 30, 2003. In his obituary in The Fresno Bee he was identified as a member of the Fresno County Sheriff's department. The obituary went on to say that he was "assigned to the anti-terrorist team." Local activists believe that this "anti-terrorist team" is, in fact, the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) that has recently been formed in this area.. When members of Peace Fresno saw the picture and read of Kilner's association with law enforcement they began piecing the story together.
The infiltration by law enforcement of progressive community groups in Fresno and throughout the country has long been used to disrupt legitimate political work. This disruption occurs by sowing seeds of mistrust among members, agents often promote discord within the group, and sometimes encourage illegal or violent actions. Agent provocateurs have been know to instigate violence at demonstrations, giving the police an excuse to attack protestors.
...
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 45%
October 08, 2003
Terror suspect tortured: dad claims
Terror suspect tortured: dad claims
By Rebecca Urban
October 8, 2003
Australian terrorist suspects David Hicks and Mamdouh Habib had likely been tortured while detained at Guantanamo Bay, a lawyer and Hicks' father said today.
Australian lawyer Richard Bourke, who has been working with prisoners at Camp X-ray for the past two years, told ABC radio leaks from the American military and reports from former inmates revealed the detainees had been forced to kneel in the sun until they collapsed and were tied up and had rubber bullets fired at them.
...
Read It Rating: 6
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -3
Learning Percentage: 30%
Sullum: Ashcroft's Patriot Act tour
The Washington Times: Commentary
By Jacob Sullum
August 26, 2003
Attorney General John Ashcroft is on a publicity tour, promoting the Patriot Act and preparing the public for a sequel. But just as you can't always believe an actor who tells you his latest film is sure to be a hit, you have to take what Mr. Ashcroft says with a grain of salt.
Mr. Ashcroft is reacting to bad reviews from critics who say the Patriot Act -- given a green light just a month and a half after the September 11 terrorist attacks by members of Congress who had not even read the script -- was rushed into production. The result, they say, was a deeply flawed work in which civil liberties make only a brief appearance.
...
Read It Rating: 7
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: .3
Learning Percentage: 10%
Media elite debate Patriot Act
Arbiter Online - Media elite debate Patriot Act
Privacy policies concern librarians
by Amy Olsen
October 06, 2003
Pulitzer Prize winner and Washington Post reporter David Broder spoke Oct. 2 at Boise State, encapsulating the day-long “Freedom and Secrecy: Trading Liberty for Security?” conference held by the Andrus Center for Public Policy.
Broder's speech was one of several activities and joint panel discussions focusing on the philosophical and political question of balancing civil liberties and homeland security.
Broder was the last speaker among three distinguished panelists at the conference on Thursday. Former Vice President Walter Mondale and former Washington State Senator Slade Gorton joined Broder for the event.
The lecturer gave several examples of past uses of the act, ranging from long-term immigrant confinement to inquiries into library records across the nation by agents of the law.
Broder reported that among 1,500 major libraries in the United States, 178 reported "visitations from FBI members" since the USA PATRIOT Act's passage in Oct. 2001.
...
Read It Rating: 4.5
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 35%
October 05, 2003
Fed Court tells NY to back off Russell Simmons and Hip Hop Summit
FEDERAL COURT ISSUES ORDER SUSPENDING NY LOBBYING COMMISSION INVESTIGATION OF RUSSELL SIMMONS AND THE HIP-HOP SUMMIT ACTION NETWORK
NEW YORK, N.Y. -- OCTOBER 2, 2003 - Russell Simmons and Dr. Benjamin Chavis, who together with the Hip-Hop Summit Action Network, filed a lawsuit in July of this year charging the New York Temporary State Commission on Lobbying with violating their First Amendment rights, reconvened in federal court this morning to ask Judge Loretta A. Preska to enforce the suspension of the Lobbying Commission's investigation into Russell Simmons and Dr. Chavis.
Today, Judge Loretta A. Preska issued an order suspending the Lobbying Commission's investigation into Plaintiffs' First Amendment activities, which were aimed at raising public awareness about the unfairness of the Rockefeller Drug Laws. The Judge found that the Lobbying Commission had unfairly tried to back out of a court-approved agreement to suspend the investigation. The suspension that Judge Preska ordered today will last until the Court can issue a full decision in this case.
...
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 4
Learning Percentage: 85%
Ashcroft Is Unprintable, and Glad of It
Ashcroft Is Unprintable, and Glad of It
On tour, he bars the press and cozies up to local TV reporters.
September 25, 2003
COMMENTARY
By Todd Gitlin and Jay Rosen
Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft, who is continuing his tour of the country to promote the Patriot Act, has at several stops, including Buffalo and Philadelphia, refused to speak to print reporters. While television correspondents can often breeze right in, their newspaper colleagues are kept at bay by Secret Service agents doing the bidding of the nation's chief law enforcement official, who prefers audiences of handpicked enthusiasts and interviews with local television reporters.
According to Justice Department spokeswoman Barbara Comstock, Ashcroft wants to explain "key facts directly to the American people" and not have to subject himself to "as much of a filter from people who are already invested in having a different view of it."
Of course he does. What public official wouldn't prefer a stenographer to an interlocutor? Ashcroft, like the president he serves, wishes to conduct the public's business in an echo chamber. With aplomb and no hint of bad conscience, they practice the politics of no-politics, the politics of l'etat, c'est moi.
...
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 50%
October 03, 2003
Chicago City Council votes against parts of USA-PATRIOT Act
Below is an official news story about it. Here is a slightly less journalistic story that provides more background info on the movement behind the resolution. (That story, by Elaine Cassel, seems to have originated at her blog here.
Council decries Patriot Act in watered-down resolution
October 2, 2003
BY FRAN SPIELMAN City Hall Reporter
Warning of civil liberties abuses similar to those that preceded the Holocaust, the City Council on Wednesday approved a watered-down resolution urging repeal of portions of the USA Patriot Act.
The 37-7 vote followed an emotional debate that invoked the chilling words of Nazi leader Hermann Goering and ignored Mayor Daley's warning that the federal government needs extraordinary tools to fight terrorism.
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: 1.5
Learning Percentage: 75%
Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
You can read a news story about the vote mentioned below -- Austin did indeed pass a resolution against the USA-PATRIOT Act -- here. There's also a pretty interesting local news video clip about the meeting here. The story aims to be a transcript of the video, though that's not fully the case. The U.S. Attorney who is interviewed sounded like he might have only read the beginning of the act, and then skipped the rest.
t r u t h o u t - William Rivers Pitt | Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
[TruthOut] Editor's Note | The following remarks were delivered by William Rivers Pitt at a Town Hall meeting in Austin, Texas on Tuesday, September 16. The meeting was called on the eve of an historic vote; the capitol city of Texas is very near to joining hundreds of other American communities in passing a resolution that repudiates the Patriot Act.
Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
By William Rivers Pitt
t r u t h o u t | Perspective
Monday 22 September 2003
I have listened to the defenses of the Patriot Act offered tonight. The essence of the defenses, the essence of the rebuttals to our reservations and complaints, is "Trust us. We're the government. We're the constitutional scholars. Trust us."
I've heard that before.
There are tons of mass destruction weapons in Iraq. Trust us. There are al Qaeda terrorists all over Iraq. Trust us. September 11 happened because of enemies who hate our freedoms. Trust us.
With all due respect, I say hell no. The one thing this government's behavior has not created is trust.
Ladies and gentlemen, I have come here today to appeal to your patriotism. We are all patriots here, every one of us. Let no one deny that or doubt that.
What are our duties as patriots? Is one a patriot if they fly the flag, to stand for the national anthem? Yes…and no. One may do these things and be filled with love of country, but if that is all you do, then you have not done enough. In this time, and in this place, and with all that is happening in this country and around the world, the duties of a patriot go far, far, far beyond flying the flag.
The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
That is how our freedom began 227 years ago. We said 'No.' Now, we must talk, and listen, and ask questions, and understand. If we do not like where we find ourselves, we must once again say 'No' with roaring voice, and without fear.
So let us, as patriots, speak tonight about the Patriot Act....
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 1.2
Learning Percentage: 15%
October 01, 2003
Mr. Bush and the Flag
Here's the whole short editorial. The original is linked to in the title.
Mr. Bush and the Flag
Washington Post | Editorial
Sunday 31 August 2003
THE WHITE HOUSE supports the wrongheaded constitutional amendment that would give Congress the power "to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States." Yet in light of an incident last month, Mr. Bush should consider whether he might be the first person jailed should this perennial foolishness -- passed most recently by the House of Representatives earlier this year -- ever become part of the Constitution. Mr. Bush, at a political event in Livonia, Mich., autographed supporters' flags, an apparent violation of an obscure provision of American law that details the respect with which flags should be treated. "The flag," reads the code, "should never have placed upon it . . . any mark, insignia, letter, word, figure, design, picture, or drawing of any nature." The last time Congress sought to ban flag-burning, in a statute the Supreme Court struck down in 1989, it made a criminal out of anyone who "defaces" a flag -- language Mr. Bush likewise appears to have violated. Never mind the fact that he clearly meant no disrespect; if Congress had the power to criminalize flag desecration, he would at least arguably be indictable.
We say arguably because there's no telling what "desecration" actually means. The proposed amendment is meant to deal with flag-burning, but what about that American soldier who, in a moment of unadulterated patriotism, wrapped a flag around a statue of Saddam Hussein? What about a person who proudly wears a ripped T-shirt displaying the flag? Of course, such cases would never be brought in court. The amendment, in practice, would be used to punish only unpopular political expression, expression that, though sometimes odious, is today unambiguously protected by American constitutional law -- as it should be. But the notion that the president, or anyone, could be charged with signing a flag should not be even arguable. It should be laughable -- as it would be if politicians such as Mr. Bush had the guts to stand against constitutional pollution rather than pandering to it.
Read It Rating: 8.5
Left/Right Rating: L4
Freedom Rating: 3
Learning Percentage: 25%
Fear as human shield faces jail
BBC NEWS | Americas | Fear as human shield faces jail
Sitting in her modest two-bedroom home on the west Florida coast, Faith Fippinger begins to cry as she talks about the prospect of going to jail.
This spring, the 62-year-old retired schoolteacher decided to travel to Iraq as a human shield.
To many she is a humanitarian, but in the eyes of the US Government she is a criminal.
...
when she returned home there was a letter waiting for her from the US Treasury Department.
"It was a requirement to send information as to why I was in Iraq," she says.
"It also said the penalties for being there could be as high as a million dollars and up to 12 years in jail."
'Freedom of speech'
By going to Iraq Faith Fippinger had broken the US economic embargo on Iraq, which had been in place for many years.
The letter explained that by travelling to the country and spending money there, Miss Fippinger was now liable for prosecution.
Read It Rating: 8.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: -4
Learning Percentage: 25%
September 22, 2003
Ashcroft Rips Anti-Patriot Act 'Hysteria'
The last statement quoted below is a common technique used by Justice Department folks to diffuse "hysteria" (a.k.a., legitimate concern about civil liberties): you could call it the "We don't want to search you" method. The FBI guy who spoke at the public forum I organized in March used the same line, multiple times in different forms. "You regular, law abiding folks have nothing to worry about."
Right -- because law enforcement has never investigated, searched, or surveilled an innocent person.
They don't care what you're reading -- just what the bad guys are reading. So, no worries. Carry on.
(In the preceding paragraph, Ashcroft uses another common rhetorical trick -- painting a silly, cartoonish scenario, and attributing it to the law's critics. I call him on this in the local news hour segment that I posted on my main blog recently.)
Ashcroft Rips Anti-Patriot Act 'Hysteria'
The Associated Press
WASHINGTON Sept. 15 — Attorney General John Ashcroft denounced as "hysteria" the contention by some librarians and civil liberties groups that the FBI can use a new anti-terror law to snoop into Americans' reading habits.
In a speech Monday to an American Restaurant Association conference, Ashcroft said people are being wrongly led to believe that libraries have been "surrounded by the FBI," with agents "dressed in raincoats, dark suits and sunglasses. They stop everyone and interrogate everyone like Joe Friday.
"Now, you may have thought with all this hysteria and hyperbole, something had to be wrong," Ashcroft said. "Do we at the Justice Department really care what you are reading? No."
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 5%
September 14, 2003
Patriot II -- More Power, Please, Says Bush
So, they just want the power to violate the privacy of tens of thousands of people on the spot, on their own discretion.
Here's the question then: Why bother having warrants or judicial approval in any cases? What's the logic wall which prevents the example they give below from proceeding to the government simply always having instant access to all the hotel bases to check for any "known offender" in all fields of law enforcement?
Bush Seeks to Expand Access to Private Data
WASHINGTON, Sept. 13 -- For months, President Bush's advisers have assured a skittish public that law-abiding Americans have no reason to fear the long reach of the antiterrorism law known as the Patriot Act because its most intrusive measures would require a judge's sign-off.
But in a plan announced this week to expand counterterrorism powers, President Bush adopted a very different tack. In a three-point presidential plan that critics are already dubbing Patriot Act II, Mr. Bush is seeking broad new authority to allow federal agents -- without the approval of a judge or even a federal prosecutor -- to demand private records and compel testimony.
Mr. Bush also wants to expand the use of the death penalty in crimes like terrorist financing, and he wants to make it tougher for defendants in such cases to be freed on bail before trial. These proposals are also sure to prompt sharp debate, even among Republicans.
...
But Mr. Corallo gave a hypothetical example in which the F.B.I. received a tip in the middle of the night that an unidentified terrorist had traveled to Boston. Under Mr. Bush's plan, the F.B.I., rather than waiting for a judicial order, could subpoena all the Bost
Driving dangerously with the Patriot Act
Driving dangerously with the Patriot Act
By Pat M. Holt
WASHINGTON -- Attorney General John Ashcroft is running a dead heat with A. Mitchell Palmer, attorney general in the Wilson administration, for the distinction of being the worst in that job in the history of the United States.
One of the duties of the attorney general as head of the Justice Department is to protect the Constitution. Both Mr. Ashcroft and Palmer found that the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights, got in their way more than it protected anything. It has gotten in Ashcroft's way in his pursuit of terrorists after Sept. 11, especially those who dress differently and practice a different religion. Palmer's crusade was the pursuit of communists, in the aftermath of World War I. He especially went after people with what to him were funny names from Eastern Europe. He tended to equate liberals with communists.
Ashcroft's vehicle is the USA Patriot Act, which Congress, abdicating its own duties of vigilance, passed with a whoop and a holler in the days after Sept. 11. Even the name of this odious legislation is offensive. It implies that the purpose of the act is to promote patriotism and that those not cooperating with it are somehow less patriotic.
...
Pat M. Holt is former chief of staff of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L1.1
Freedom Rating: 1.1
Learning Percentage: 1%
Local Peace Group Infiltrated By Government Agent
Local Peace Group Infiltrated By Government Agent
By Mike Rhodes
October 4, 2003
Peace Fresno was infiltrated by an agent working for the Fresno Sheriff's Department. Aaron Kilner, known by Peace Fresno activists as Aaron Stokes, attended several Peace Fresno meetings. Peace Fresno activist Nicholas DeGraff remembers him taking voluminous notes and several members say they saw him at peace vilgils held at Shaw and Blackstone. He was also on the bus local anti-globalization activists took to attend the WTO ministerial-level conference on Agricultural Science and Technology demonstration in Sacramento in June 2003.
Aaron Kilner died in a motorcycle accident on August 30, 2003. In his obituary in The Fresno Bee he was identified as a member of the Fresno County Sheriff's department. The obituary went on to say that he was "assigned to the anti-terrorist team." Local activists believe that this "anti-terrorist team" is, in fact, the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) that has recently been formed in this area.. When members of Peace Fresno saw the picture and read of Kilner's association with law enforcement they began piecing the story together.
The infiltration by law enforcement of progressive community groups in Fresno and throughout the country has long been used to disrupt legitimate political work. This disruption occurs by sowing seeds of mistrust among members, agents often promote discord within the group, and sometimes encourage illegal or violent actions. Agent provocateurs have been know to instigate violence at demonstrations, giving the police an excuse to attack protestors.
...
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 45%
Terror suspect tortured: dad claims
Terror suspect tortured: dad claims
By Rebecca Urban
October 8, 2003
Australian terrorist suspects David Hicks and Mamdouh Habib had likely been tortured while detained at Guantanamo Bay, a lawyer and Hicks' father said today.
Australian lawyer Richard Bourke, who has been working with prisoners at Camp X-ray for the past two years, told ABC radio leaks from the American military and reports from former inmates revealed the detainees had been forced to kneel in the sun until they collapsed and were tied up and had rubber bullets fired at them.
...
Read It Rating: 6
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -3
Learning Percentage: 30%
Sullum: Ashcroft's Patriot Act tour
The Washington Times: Commentary
By Jacob Sullum
August 26, 2003
Attorney General John Ashcroft is on a publicity tour, promoting the Patriot Act and preparing the public for a sequel. But just as you can't always believe an actor who tells you his latest film is sure to be a hit, you have to take what Mr. Ashcroft says with a grain of salt.
Mr. Ashcroft is reacting to bad reviews from critics who say the Patriot Act -- given a green light just a month and a half after the September 11 terrorist attacks by members of Congress who had not even read the script -- was rushed into production. The result, they say, was a deeply flawed work in which civil liberties make only a brief appearance.
...
Read It Rating: 7
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: .3
Learning Percentage: 10%
Media elite debate Patriot Act
Arbiter Online - Media elite debate Patriot Act
Privacy policies concern librarians
by Amy Olsen
October 06, 2003
Pulitzer Prize winner and Washington Post reporter David Broder spoke Oct. 2 at Boise State, encapsulating the day-long “Freedom and Secrecy: Trading Liberty for Security?” conference held by the Andrus Center for Public Policy.
Broder's speech was one of several activities and joint panel discussions focusing on the philosophical and political question of balancing civil liberties and homeland security.
Broder was the last speaker among three distinguished panelists at the conference on Thursday. Former Vice President Walter Mondale and former Washington State Senator Slade Gorton joined Broder for the event.
The lecturer gave several examples of past uses of the act, ranging from long-term immigrant confinement to inquiries into library records across the nation by agents of the law.
Broder reported that among 1,500 major libraries in the United States, 178 reported "visitations from FBI members" since the USA PATRIOT Act's passage in Oct. 2001.
...
Read It Rating: 4.5
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 35%
October 05, 2003
Fed Court tells NY to back off Russell Simmons and Hip Hop Summit
FEDERAL COURT ISSUES ORDER SUSPENDING NY LOBBYING COMMISSION INVESTIGATION OF RUSSELL SIMMONS AND THE HIP-HOP SUMMIT ACTION NETWORK
NEW YORK, N.Y. -- OCTOBER 2, 2003 - Russell Simmons and Dr. Benjamin Chavis, who together with the Hip-Hop Summit Action Network, filed a lawsuit in July of this year charging the New York Temporary State Commission on Lobbying with violating their First Amendment rights, reconvened in federal court this morning to ask Judge Loretta A. Preska to enforce the suspension of the Lobbying Commission's investigation into Russell Simmons and Dr. Chavis.
Today, Judge Loretta A. Preska issued an order suspending the Lobbying Commission's investigation into Plaintiffs' First Amendment activities, which were aimed at raising public awareness about the unfairness of the Rockefeller Drug Laws. The Judge found that the Lobbying Commission had unfairly tried to back out of a court-approved agreement to suspend the investigation. The suspension that Judge Preska ordered today will last until the Court can issue a full decision in this case.
...
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 4
Learning Percentage: 85%
Ashcroft Is Unprintable, and Glad of It
Ashcroft Is Unprintable, and Glad of It
On tour, he bars the press and cozies up to local TV reporters.
September 25, 2003
COMMENTARY
By Todd Gitlin and Jay Rosen
Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft, who is continuing his tour of the country to promote the Patriot Act, has at several stops, including Buffalo and Philadelphia, refused to speak to print reporters. While television correspondents can often breeze right in, their newspaper colleagues are kept at bay by Secret Service agents doing the bidding of the nation's chief law enforcement official, who prefers audiences of handpicked enthusiasts and interviews with local television reporters.
According to Justice Department spokeswoman Barbara Comstock, Ashcroft wants to explain "key facts directly to the American people" and not have to subject himself to "as much of a filter from people who are already invested in having a different view of it."
Of course he does. What public official wouldn't prefer a stenographer to an interlocutor? Ashcroft, like the president he serves, wishes to conduct the public's business in an echo chamber. With aplomb and no hint of bad conscience, they practice the politics of no-politics, the politics of l'etat, c'est moi.
...
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 50%
October 03, 2003
Chicago City Council votes against parts of USA-PATRIOT Act
Below is an official news story about it. Here is a slightly less journalistic story that provides more background info on the movement behind the resolution. (That story, by Elaine Cassel, seems to have originated at her blog here.
Council decries Patriot Act in watered-down resolution
October 2, 2003
BY FRAN SPIELMAN City Hall Reporter
Warning of civil liberties abuses similar to those that preceded the Holocaust, the City Council on Wednesday approved a watered-down resolution urging repeal of portions of the USA Patriot Act.
The 37-7 vote followed an emotional debate that invoked the chilling words of Nazi leader Hermann Goering and ignored Mayor Daley's warning that the federal government needs extraordinary tools to fight terrorism.
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: 1.5
Learning Percentage: 75%
Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
You can read a news story about the vote mentioned below -- Austin did indeed pass a resolution against the USA-PATRIOT Act -- here. There's also a pretty interesting local news video clip about the meeting here. The story aims to be a transcript of the video, though that's not fully the case. The U.S. Attorney who is interviewed sounded like he might have only read the beginning of the act, and then skipped the rest.
t r u t h o u t - William Rivers Pitt | Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
[TruthOut] Editor's Note | The following remarks were delivered by William Rivers Pitt at a Town Hall meeting in Austin, Texas on Tuesday, September 16. The meeting was called on the eve of an historic vote; the capitol city of Texas is very near to joining hundreds of other American communities in passing a resolution that repudiates the Patriot Act.
Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
By William Rivers Pitt
t r u t h o u t | Perspective
Monday 22 September 2003
I have listened to the defenses of the Patriot Act offered tonight. The essence of the defenses, the essence of the rebuttals to our reservations and complaints, is "Trust us. We're the government. We're the constitutional scholars. Trust us."
I've heard that before.
There are tons of mass destruction weapons in Iraq. Trust us. There are al Qaeda terrorists all over Iraq. Trust us. September 11 happened because of enemies who hate our freedoms. Trust us.
With all due respect, I say hell no. The one thing this government's behavior has not created is trust.
Ladies and gentlemen, I have come here today to appeal to your patriotism. We are all patriots here, every one of us. Let no one deny that or doubt that.
What are our duties as patriots? Is one a patriot if they fly the flag, to stand for the national anthem? Yes…and no. One may do these things and be filled with love of country, but if that is all you do, then you have not done enough. In this time, and in this place, and with all that is happening in this country and around the world, the duties of a patriot go far, far, far beyond flying the flag.
The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
That is how our freedom began 227 years ago. We said 'No.' Now, we must talk, and listen, and ask questions, and understand. If we do not like where we find ourselves, we must once again say 'No' with roaring voice, and without fear.
So let us, as patriots, speak tonight about the Patriot Act....
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 1.2
Learning Percentage: 15%
October 01, 2003
Mr. Bush and the Flag
Here's the whole short editorial. The original is linked to in the title.
Mr. Bush and the Flag
Washington Post | Editorial
Sunday 31 August 2003
THE WHITE HOUSE supports the wrongheaded constitutional amendment that would give Congress the power "to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States." Yet in light of an incident last month, Mr. Bush should consider whether he might be the first person jailed should this perennial foolishness -- passed most recently by the House of Representatives earlier this year -- ever become part of the Constitution. Mr. Bush, at a political event in Livonia, Mich., autographed supporters' flags, an apparent violation of an obscure provision of American law that details the respect with which flags should be treated. "The flag," reads the code, "should never have placed upon it . . . any mark, insignia, letter, word, figure, design, picture, or drawing of any nature." The last time Congress sought to ban flag-burning, in a statute the Supreme Court struck down in 1989, it made a criminal out of anyone who "defaces" a flag -- language Mr. Bush likewise appears to have violated. Never mind the fact that he clearly meant no disrespect; if Congress had the power to criminalize flag desecration, he would at least arguably be indictable.
We say arguably because there's no telling what "desecration" actually means. The proposed amendment is meant to deal with flag-burning, but what about that American soldier who, in a moment of unadulterated patriotism, wrapped a flag around a statue of Saddam Hussein? What about a person who proudly wears a ripped T-shirt displaying the flag? Of course, such cases would never be brought in court. The amendment, in practice, would be used to punish only unpopular political expression, expression that, though sometimes odious, is today unambiguously protected by American constitutional law -- as it should be. But the notion that the president, or anyone, could be charged with signing a flag should not be even arguable. It should be laughable -- as it would be if politicians such as Mr. Bush had the guts to stand against constitutional pollution rather than pandering to it.
Read It Rating: 8.5
Left/Right Rating: L4
Freedom Rating: 3
Learning Percentage: 25%
Fear as human shield faces jail
BBC NEWS | Americas | Fear as human shield faces jail
Sitting in her modest two-bedroom home on the west Florida coast, Faith Fippinger begins to cry as she talks about the prospect of going to jail.
This spring, the 62-year-old retired schoolteacher decided to travel to Iraq as a human shield.
To many she is a humanitarian, but in the eyes of the US Government she is a criminal.
...
when she returned home there was a letter waiting for her from the US Treasury Department.
"It was a requirement to send information as to why I was in Iraq," she says.
"It also said the penalties for being there could be as high as a million dollars and up to 12 years in jail."
'Freedom of speech'
By going to Iraq Faith Fippinger had broken the US economic embargo on Iraq, which had been in place for many years.
The letter explained that by travelling to the country and spending money there, Miss Fippinger was now liable for prosecution.
Read It Rating: 8.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: -4
Learning Percentage: 25%
September 22, 2003
Ashcroft Rips Anti-Patriot Act 'Hysteria'
The last statement quoted below is a common technique used by Justice Department folks to diffuse "hysteria" (a.k.a., legitimate concern about civil liberties): you could call it the "We don't want to search you" method. The FBI guy who spoke at the public forum I organized in March used the same line, multiple times in different forms. "You regular, law abiding folks have nothing to worry about."
Right -- because law enforcement has never investigated, searched, or surveilled an innocent person.
They don't care what you're reading -- just what the bad guys are reading. So, no worries. Carry on.
(In the preceding paragraph, Ashcroft uses another common rhetorical trick -- painting a silly, cartoonish scenario, and attributing it to the law's critics. I call him on this in the local news hour segment that I posted on my main blog recently.)
Ashcroft Rips Anti-Patriot Act 'Hysteria'
The Associated Press
WASHINGTON Sept. 15 — Attorney General John Ashcroft denounced as "hysteria" the contention by some librarians and civil liberties groups that the FBI can use a new anti-terror law to snoop into Americans' reading habits.
In a speech Monday to an American Restaurant Association conference, Ashcroft said people are being wrongly led to believe that libraries have been "surrounded by the FBI," with agents "dressed in raincoats, dark suits and sunglasses. They stop everyone and interrogate everyone like Joe Friday.
"Now, you may have thought with all this hysteria and hyperbole, something had to be wrong," Ashcroft said. "Do we at the Justice Department really care what you are reading? No."
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 5%
September 14, 2003
Patriot II -- More Power, Please, Says Bush
So, they just want the power to violate the privacy of tens of thousands of people on the spot, on their own discretion.
Here's the question then: Why bother having warrants or judicial approval in any cases? What's the logic wall which prevents the example they give below from proceeding to the government simply always having instant access to all the hotel bases to check for any "known offender" in all fields of law enforcement?
Bush Seeks to Expand Access to Private Data
WASHINGTON, Sept. 13 -- For months, President Bush's advisers have assured a skittish public that law-abiding Americans have no reason to fear the long reach of the antiterrorism law known as the Patriot Act because its most intrusive measures would require a judge's sign-off.
But in a plan announced this week to expand counterterrorism powers, President Bush adopted a very different tack. In a three-point presidential plan that critics are already dubbing Patriot Act II, Mr. Bush is seeking broad new authority to allow federal agents -- without the approval of a judge or even a federal prosecutor -- to demand private records and compel testimony.
Mr. Bush also wants to expand the use of the death penalty in crimes like terrorist financing, and he wants to make it tougher for defendants in such cases to be freed on bail before trial. These proposals are also sure to prompt sharp debate, even among Republicans.
...
But Mr. Corallo gave a hypothetical example in which the F.B.I. received a tip in the middle of the night that an unidentified terrorist had traveled to Boston. Under Mr. Bush's plan, the F.B.I., rather than waiting for a judicial order, could subpoena all the Bost
Fed Court tells NY to back off Russell Simmons and Hip Hop Summit
FEDERAL COURT ISSUES ORDER SUSPENDING NY LOBBYING COMMISSION INVESTIGATION OF RUSSELL SIMMONS AND THE HIP-HOP SUMMIT ACTION NETWORK
NEW YORK, N.Y. -- OCTOBER 2, 2003 - Russell Simmons and Dr. Benjamin Chavis, who together with the Hip-Hop Summit Action Network, filed a lawsuit in July of this year charging the New York Temporary State Commission on Lobbying with violating their First Amendment rights, reconvened in federal court this morning to ask Judge Loretta A. Preska to enforce the suspension of the Lobbying Commission's investigation into Russell Simmons and Dr. Chavis.
Today, Judge Loretta A. Preska issued an order suspending the Lobbying Commission's investigation into Plaintiffs' First Amendment activities, which were aimed at raising public awareness about the unfairness of the Rockefeller Drug Laws. The Judge found that the Lobbying Commission had unfairly tried to back out of a court-approved agreement to suspend the investigation. The suspension that Judge Preska ordered today will last until the Court can issue a full decision in this case.
...
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 4
Learning Percentage: 85%
Ashcroft Is Unprintable, and Glad of It
Ashcroft Is Unprintable, and Glad of It
On tour, he bars the press and cozies up to local TV reporters.
September 25, 2003
COMMENTARY
By Todd Gitlin and Jay Rosen
Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft, who is continuing his tour of the country to promote the Patriot Act, has at several stops, including Buffalo and Philadelphia, refused to speak to print reporters. While television correspondents can often breeze right in, their newspaper colleagues are kept at bay by Secret Service agents doing the bidding of the nation's chief law enforcement official, who prefers audiences of handpicked enthusiasts and interviews with local television reporters.
According to Justice Department spokeswoman Barbara Comstock, Ashcroft wants to explain "key facts directly to the American people" and not have to subject himself to "as much of a filter from people who are already invested in having a different view of it."
Of course he does. What public official wouldn't prefer a stenographer to an interlocutor? Ashcroft, like the president he serves, wishes to conduct the public's business in an echo chamber. With aplomb and no hint of bad conscience, they practice the politics of no-politics, the politics of l'etat, c'est moi.
...
Read It Rating: 7.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 1
Learning Percentage: 50%
Chicago City Council votes against parts of USA-PATRIOT Act
Below is an official news story about it. Here is a slightly less journalistic story that provides more background info on the movement behind the resolution. (That story, by Elaine Cassel, seems to have originated at her blog here.
Council decries Patriot Act in watered-down resolution
October 2, 2003
BY FRAN SPIELMAN City Hall Reporter
Warning of civil liberties abuses similar to those that preceded the Holocaust, the City Council on Wednesday approved a watered-down resolution urging repeal of portions of the USA Patriot Act.
The 37-7 vote followed an emotional debate that invoked the chilling words of Nazi leader Hermann Goering and ignored Mayor Daley's warning that the federal government needs extraordinary tools to fight terrorism.
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: 1.5
Learning Percentage: 75%
Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
You can read a news story about the vote mentioned below -- Austin did indeed pass a resolution against the USA-PATRIOT Act -- here. There's also a pretty interesting local news video clip about the meeting here. The story aims to be a transcript of the video, though that's not fully the case. The U.S. Attorney who is interviewed sounded like he might have only read the beginning of the act, and then skipped the rest.
t r u t h o u t - William Rivers Pitt | Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
[TruthOut] Editor's Note | The following remarks were delivered by William Rivers Pitt at a Town Hall meeting in Austin, Texas on Tuesday, September 16. The meeting was called on the eve of an historic vote; the capitol city of Texas is very near to joining hundreds of other American communities in passing a resolution that repudiates the Patriot Act.
Patriot Act Finds Trouble in Texas
By William Rivers Pitt
t r u t h o u t | Perspective
Monday 22 September 2003
I have listened to the defenses of the Patriot Act offered tonight. The essence of the defenses, the essence of the rebuttals to our reservations and complaints, is "Trust us. We're the government. We're the constitutional scholars. Trust us."
I've heard that before.
There are tons of mass destruction weapons in Iraq. Trust us. There are al Qaeda terrorists all over Iraq. Trust us. September 11 happened because of enemies who hate our freedoms. Trust us.
With all due respect, I say hell no. The one thing this government's behavior has not created is trust.
Ladies and gentlemen, I have come here today to appeal to your patriotism. We are all patriots here, every one of us. Let no one deny that or doubt that.
What are our duties as patriots? Is one a patriot if they fly the flag, to stand for the national anthem? Yes…and no. One may do these things and be filled with love of country, but if that is all you do, then you have not done enough. In this time, and in this place, and with all that is happening in this country and around the world, the duties of a patriot go far, far, far beyond flying the flag.
The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
That is how our freedom began 227 years ago. We said 'No.' Now, we must talk, and listen, and ask questions, and understand. If we do not like where we find ourselves, we must once again say 'No' with roaring voice, and without fear.
So let us, as patriots, speak tonight about the Patriot Act....
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: 1.2
Learning Percentage: 15%
October 01, 2003
Mr. Bush and the Flag
Here's the whole short editorial. The original is linked to in the title.
Mr. Bush and the Flag
Washington Post | Editorial
Sunday 31 August 2003
THE WHITE HOUSE supports the wrongheaded constitutional amendment that would give Congress the power "to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States." Yet in light of an incident last month, Mr. Bush should consider whether he might be the first person jailed should this perennial foolishness -- passed most recently by the House of Representatives earlier this year -- ever become part of the Constitution. Mr. Bush, at a political event in Livonia, Mich., autographed supporters' flags, an apparent violation of an obscure provision of American law that details the respect with which flags should be treated. "The flag," reads the code, "should never have placed upon it . . . any mark, insignia, letter, word, figure, design, picture, or drawing of any nature." The last time Congress sought to ban flag-burning, in a statute the Supreme Court struck down in 1989, it made a criminal out of anyone who "defaces" a flag -- language Mr. Bush likewise appears to have violated. Never mind the fact that he clearly meant no disrespect; if Congress had the power to criminalize flag desecration, he would at least arguably be indictable.
We say arguably because there's no telling what "desecration" actually means. The proposed amendment is meant to deal with flag-burning, but what about that American soldier who, in a moment of unadulterated patriotism, wrapped a flag around a statue of Saddam Hussein? What about a person who proudly wears a ripped T-shirt displaying the flag? Of course, such cases would never be brought in court. The amendment, in practice, would be used to punish only unpopular political expression, expression that, though sometimes odious, is today unambiguously protected by American constitutional law -- as it should be. But the notion that the president, or anyone, could be charged with signing a flag should not be even arguable. It should be laughable -- as it would be if politicians such as Mr. Bush had the guts to stand against constitutional pollution rather than pandering to it.
Read It Rating: 8.5
Left/Right Rating: L4
Freedom Rating: 3
Learning Percentage: 25%
Fear as human shield faces jail
BBC NEWS | Americas | Fear as human shield faces jail
Sitting in her modest two-bedroom home on the west Florida coast, Faith Fippinger begins to cry as she talks about the prospect of going to jail.
This spring, the 62-year-old retired schoolteacher decided to travel to Iraq as a human shield.
To many she is a humanitarian, but in the eyes of the US Government she is a criminal.
...
when she returned home there was a letter waiting for her from the US Treasury Department.
"It was a requirement to send information as to why I was in Iraq," she says.
"It also said the penalties for being there could be as high as a million dollars and up to 12 years in jail."
'Freedom of speech'
By going to Iraq Faith Fippinger had broken the US economic embargo on Iraq, which had been in place for many years.
The letter explained that by travelling to the country and spending money there, Miss Fippinger was now liable for prosecution.
Read It Rating: 8.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: -4
Learning Percentage: 25%
September 22, 2003
Ashcroft Rips Anti-Patriot Act 'Hysteria'
The last statement quoted below is a common technique used by Justice Department folks to diffuse "hysteria" (a.k.a., legitimate concern about civil liberties): you could call it the "We don't want to search you" method. The FBI guy who spoke at the public forum I organized in March used the same line, multiple times in different forms. "You regular, law abiding folks have nothing to worry about."
Right -- because law enforcement has never investigated, searched, or surveilled an innocent person.
They don't care what you're reading -- just what the bad guys are reading. So, no worries. Carry on.
(In the preceding paragraph, Ashcroft uses another common rhetorical trick -- painting a silly, cartoonish scenario, and attributing it to the law's critics. I call him on this in the local news hour segment that I posted on my main blog recently.)
Ashcroft Rips Anti-Patriot Act 'Hysteria'
The Associated Press
WASHINGTON Sept. 15 — Attorney General John Ashcroft denounced as "hysteria" the contention by some librarians and civil liberties groups that the FBI can use a new anti-terror law to snoop into Americans' reading habits.
In a speech Monday to an American Restaurant Association conference, Ashcroft said people are being wrongly led to believe that libraries have been "surrounded by the FBI," with agents "dressed in raincoats, dark suits and sunglasses. They stop everyone and interrogate everyone like Joe Friday.
"Now, you may have thought with all this hysteria and hyperbole, something had to be wrong," Ashcroft said. "Do we at the Justice Department really care what you are reading? No."
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 5%
September 14, 2003
Patriot II -- More Power, Please, Says Bush
So, they just want the power to violate the privacy of tens of thousands of people on the spot, on their own discretion.
Here's the question then: Why bother having warrants or judicial approval in any cases? What's the logic wall which prevents the example they give below from proceeding to the government simply always having instant access to all the hotel bases to check for any "known offender" in all fields of law enforcement?
Bush Seeks to Expand Access to Private Data
WASHINGTON, Sept. 13 -- For months, President Bush's advisers have assured a skittish public that law-abiding Americans have no reason to fear the long reach of the antiterrorism law known as the Patriot Act because its most intrusive measures would require a judge's sign-off.
But in a plan announced this week to expand counterterrorism powers, President Bush adopted a very different tack. In a three-point presidential plan that critics are already dubbing Patriot Act II, Mr. Bush is seeking broad new authority to allow federal agents -- without the approval of a judge or even a federal prosecutor -- to demand private records and compel testimony.
Mr. Bush also wants to expand the use of the death penalty in crimes like terrorist financing, and he wants to make it tougher for defendants in such cases to be freed on bail before trial. These proposals are also sure to prompt sharp debate, even among Republicans.
...
But Mr. Corallo gave a hypothetical example in which the F.B.I. received a tip in the middle of the night that an unidentified terrorist had traveled to Boston. Under Mr. Bush's plan, the F.B.I., rather than waiting for a judicial order, could subpoena all the Bost
Mr. Bush and the Flag
Here's the whole short editorial. The original is linked to in the title.
Mr. Bush and the Flag
Washington Post | Editorial
Sunday 31 August 2003
THE WHITE HOUSE supports the wrongheaded constitutional amendment that would give Congress the power "to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States." Yet in light of an incident last month, Mr. Bush should consider whether he might be the first person jailed should this perennial foolishness -- passed most recently by the House of Representatives earlier this year -- ever become part of the Constitution. Mr. Bush, at a political event in Livonia, Mich., autographed supporters' flags, an apparent violation of an obscure provision of American law that details the respect with which flags should be treated. "The flag," reads the code, "should never have placed upon it . . . any mark, insignia, letter, word, figure, design, picture, or drawing of any nature." The last time Congress sought to ban flag-burning, in a statute the Supreme Court struck down in 1989, it made a criminal out of anyone who "defaces" a flag -- language Mr. Bush likewise appears to have violated. Never mind the fact that he clearly meant no disrespect; if Congress had the power to criminalize flag desecration, he would at least arguably be indictable.
We say arguably because there's no telling what "desecration" actually means. The proposed amendment is meant to deal with flag-burning, but what about that American soldier who, in a moment of unadulterated patriotism, wrapped a flag around a statue of Saddam Hussein? What about a person who proudly wears a ripped T-shirt displaying the flag? Of course, such cases would never be brought in court. The amendment, in practice, would be used to punish only unpopular political expression, expression that, though sometimes odious, is today unambiguously protected by American constitutional law -- as it should be. But the notion that the president, or anyone, could be charged with signing a flag should not be even arguable. It should be laughable -- as it would be if politicians such as Mr. Bush had the guts to stand against constitutional pollution rather than pandering to it.
Read It Rating: 8.5
Left/Right Rating: L4
Freedom Rating: 3
Learning Percentage: 25%
Fear as human shield faces jail
BBC NEWS | Americas | Fear as human shield faces jail
Sitting in her modest two-bedroom home on the west Florida coast, Faith Fippinger begins to cry as she talks about the prospect of going to jail.
This spring, the 62-year-old retired schoolteacher decided to travel to Iraq as a human shield.
To many she is a humanitarian, but in the eyes of the US Government she is a criminal.
...
when she returned home there was a letter waiting for her from the US Treasury Department.
"It was a requirement to send information as to why I was in Iraq," she says.
"It also said the penalties for being there could be as high as a million dollars and up to 12 years in jail."
'Freedom of speech'
By going to Iraq Faith Fippinger had broken the US economic embargo on Iraq, which had been in place for many years.
The letter explained that by travelling to the country and spending money there, Miss Fippinger was now liable for prosecution.
Read It Rating: 8.5
Left/Right Rating: L2
Freedom Rating: -4
Learning Percentage: 25%
Ashcroft Rips Anti-Patriot Act 'Hysteria'
The last statement quoted below is a common technique used by Justice Department folks to diffuse "hysteria" (a.k.a., legitimate concern about civil liberties): you could call it the "We don't want to search you" method. The FBI guy who spoke at the public forum I organized in March used the same line, multiple times in different forms. "You regular, law abiding folks have nothing to worry about."
Right -- because law enforcement has never investigated, searched, or surveilled an innocent person.
They don't care what you're reading -- just what the bad guys are reading. So, no worries. Carry on.
(In the preceding paragraph, Ashcroft uses another common rhetorical trick -- painting a silly, cartoonish scenario, and attributing it to the law's critics. I call him on this in the local news hour segment that I posted on my main blog recently.)
Ashcroft Rips Anti-Patriot Act 'Hysteria'
The Associated Press
WASHINGTON Sept. 15 — Attorney General John Ashcroft denounced as "hysteria" the contention by some librarians and civil liberties groups that the FBI can use a new anti-terror law to snoop into Americans' reading habits.
In a speech Monday to an American Restaurant Association conference, Ashcroft said people are being wrongly led to believe that libraries have been "surrounded by the FBI," with agents "dressed in raincoats, dark suits and sunglasses. They stop everyone and interrogate everyone like Joe Friday.
"Now, you may have thought with all this hysteria and hyperbole, something had to be wrong," Ashcroft said. "Do we at the Justice Department really care what you are reading? No."
Read It Rating: 8
Left/Right Rating: 0
Freedom Rating: -2
Learning Percentage: 5%
September 14, 2003
Patriot II -- More Power, Please, Says Bush
So, they just want the power to violate the privacy of tens of thousands of people on the spot, on their own discretion.
Here's the question then: Why bother having warrants or judicial approval in any cases? What's the logic wall which prevents the example they give below from proceeding to the government simply always having instant access to all the hotel bases to check for any "known offender" in all fields of law enforcement?
Bush Seeks to Expand Access to Private Data
WASHINGTON, Sept. 13 -- For months, President Bush's advisers have assured a skittish public that law-abiding Americans have no reason to fear the long reach of the antiterrorism law known as the Patriot Act because its most intrusive measures would require a judge's sign-off.
But in a plan announced this week to expand counterterrorism powers, President Bush adopted a very different tack. In a three-point presidential plan that critics are already dubbing Patriot Act II, Mr. Bush is seeking broad new authority to allow federal agents -- without the approval of a judge or even a federal prosecutor -- to demand private records and compel testimony.
Mr. Bush also wants to expand the use of the death penalty in crimes like terrorist financing, and he wants to make it tougher for defendants in such cases to be freed on bail before trial. These proposals are also sure to prompt sharp debate, even among Republicans.
...
But Mr. Corallo gave a hypothetical example in which the F.B.I. received a tip in the middle of the night that an unidentified terrorist had traveled to Boston. Under Mr. Bush's plan, the F.B.I., rather than waiting for a judicial order, could subpoena all the Bost
Patriot II -- More Power, Please, Says Bush
So, they just want the power to violate the privacy of tens of thousands of people on the spot, on their own discretion.
Here's the question then: Why bother having warrants or judicial approval in any cases? What's the logic wall which prevents the example they give below from proceeding to the government simply always having instant access to all the hotel bases to check for any "known offender" in all fields of law enforcement?
Bush Seeks to Expand Access to Private Data
WASHINGTON, Sept. 13 -- For months, President Bush's advisers have assured a skittish public that law-abiding Americans have no reason to fear the long reach of the antiterrorism law known as the Patriot Act because its most intrusive measures would require a judge's sign-off.
But in a plan announced this week to expand counterterrorism powers, President Bush adopted a very different tack. In a three-point presidential plan that critics are already dubbing Patriot Act II, Mr. Bush is seeking broad new authority to allow federal agents -- without the approval of a judge or even a federal prosecutor -- to demand private records and compel testimony.
Mr. Bush also wants to expand the use of the death penalty in crimes like terrorist financing, and he wants to make it tougher for defendants in such cases to be freed on bail before trial. These proposals are also sure to prompt sharp debate, even among Republicans.
...
But Mr. Corallo gave a hypothetical example in which the F.B.I. received a tip in the middle of the night that an unidentified terrorist had traveled to Boston. Under Mr. Bush's plan, the F.B.I., rather than waiting for a judicial order, could subpoena all the Bost