|
Author
|
Topic: Anti-Terrorism and Civil Liberties
|
Dave Thomer
Guardian of Peace and Justice in the Galaxy
|
posted 09-26-2001 01:31 PM
   
I think it's time for us to resume our role as political gadflies, at least somewhat.Here's an article from CNN that describes some civil libertarians' reservations about the anti-terrorism bill Bush and John Ashcroft want to push through Congress. From what I'm looking at, it seems like there is some very vague language there that would let the government detain, search and wiretap people merely because they are suspected of being terrorists. I don't have enough background in the law to know what qualifies as 'suspicion' in this sense, but at the moment, I'm a bit concerned. Not paranoid -- yet -- but concerned. |
Earl Green
True Believer
|
posted 10-16-2001 02:37 PM
This topic is worth revisiting in light of the anthrax scare (and the accompanying hoaxes). I'm sure that, by the end of this month, the TV station where I work will receive its own Mysterious Package of table salt which will have us all locked down, quarantined from the outside work, and undergoing blood tests. I'm expecting it. And there have already been plenty of incidents in this area which immediately jump out to the average Joe as hoaxes, but y'know we can't just ignore them, just in case.Today, the Attorney General announced that the government will be pursuing hoax perpetrators vigorously - not a bad thing in and of itself. But one of the first examples of this is a case where one individual, an employee of the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, faces a potential five-year jail term and a whopping $3,000,000 fine, calculated as approximately double the amount of the hazmat, medical and cleanup operations at the site. I'm torn on this. I think we do need to discourage these hoaxes (even though I considered it inevitable that our own home-grown crazies would pop out of the woodwork at a time like this), but one person bearing a three million dollar fine smacks just a wee bit of overstepping due process. And that overstepping of due process seems to be happening a lot more all of a sudden. And THAT worries me. |
Dave Thomer
Guardian of Peace and Justice in the Galaxy
|
posted 10-18-2001 10:07 PM
I'm torn here. Three million sounds like a lot -- but if it's really only double the cost of the person's actions, I wonder if it's that steep. I mean, I can see the argument for making this guy responsible for the damage he's done. If someone gave the FULL fine, I might have a problem with that . . . but then again, there are probably indirect costs, including the costs of pursuing and trying the guy.Now, if you did give him the full fine, I don't think I'd do much in the way of jail time. The guy's life is pretty much wrecked at that point, and an example has been made. What exactly makes you think it's a due process violation? |
Earl Green
True Believer
|
posted 10-19-2001 12:01 PM
Maybe due process isn't the phrase I'm looking for. But there have been some hints along the way that suddenly everyone's going to be tried with the aim of giving them the maximum possible sentence. Which, I think, is a bit overzealous when you're likely dealing with high school kids who are pouring little piles of table salt into people's mailboxes. Sure, it's a federal offense at a time of heightened sensitivities, but to put 'em behind bars and charge them [i.e., their parents] a huge amount of dough seems a counterproductive, egregious misuse of the court and prison systems.Then again, I do live in a part of the country made famous for God knows how many hangings a century or so ago, so that's at least the kind of "justice" they're talking about here. |
Pattie Gillett
True Believer
|
posted 10-19-2001 05:51 PM
I think you're right Earl - it's a matter of the climate. I remember the story of a high school senior who was expelled just weeks before her graduation because she violated her school's "no weapons" policy. The policy was very strict: one violation, you're out. The weapon was a small kitchen knife that had fallen out of a box that was in the back seat of her car because she happened to be moving all her belongings from her parents' house to her new place. She didn't know it was there but a guard spotted it in her car when she parked on a street near her school. One year before, the matter never would have been mentioned but this was post-Columbine so there you go. . . |
Dave Thomer
Guardian of Peace and Justice in the Galaxy
|
posted 10-23-2001 11:36 PM
This is where a little of that old standby, human flexibility, would come in handy. Otherwise, why not just throw the judicial and disciplinary systems over to computers? |
Suzie
Just Got Here
|
posted 10-24-2001 03:33 AM
The anti-terorrism bills passed by both chambers of congress contain provisions that will severly limit 4th Amendment rights protecting against illegal search and seizure of property. You can check out the text at www.thomas.loc.gov or visit www.aclu.org for an analysis of some of the more limiting provisions of the bill.The house and senate bills passed in both chambers are very similar but not identical. The leadership have decided to bypass a formal conference committee and are ironing out there differences through conference calls, etc. without any public input. I am hoping that a sunset clause (expiration date) will appear in the conference bill as it does in the house bill. These bills have several troubling elements. In addition to allowing law enforcement to search your property without your knowledge, both bills call for the indefinite detention of suspected terrorists. Of course the Secretary of State has the power and authority to determine which organizations are deemed to be terrorist, and the members of these organizations can also be implicated by association, whether or not they actually engaged in any terrorist activity (i.e. if Greenpeace is put on the list by the Secty. of State, then all its members can be deemed terrorists as well). Outside of the obvious limit on freedom, this also limits congressional oversight. In addition, law enforcement can apply for search warrants anywhere in the country to follow (via roving wiretap) anyone in the country...everywhere they go. They do not have to give a judge probable cause for the warrant, so in a sense the judge is just rubber stamping the application for a search warrant...thereby limiting judicial oversight as well. In addition, if law enforcement confiscates or searches your property...you are not allowed to tell anyone - I repeat - anyone that they have done so. There are no provisions for disclosure to bosses or attorneys or family members. I found this clause in the wiretap portion of the bill and have never seen it mentioned in the media. This country was founded on a system of checks and balances. If this bill passes, we will have given up our freedoms as well as the power for many of our elected officials to fix the mistake they have made. We are headed down a very dangerous path. Suzie
|
Pattie Gillett
True Believer
|
posted 10-24-2001 12:47 PM
Thanks for th awesome links, Suzie. I'm going to need some time to read through all this but it does not sound good. You're right, we're not hearing nearly enough of this in the media. Instead we get stories about gas masks on the local news. Color me bitter. |
Earl Green
True Believer
|
posted 10-24-2001 01:36 PM
I think our checks and balances are starting to bounce. |
Earl Green
True Believer
|
posted 10-31-2001 01:20 PM
Just one more thought, this time not so glib, on the recent passing of the so-called "anti-terrorism" bill. I'm disturbed by the lack of anyone on Capitol Hill acknowledging that bill as a necessary evil, not as a shining victory in the increasingly nebulous Battle Against Terror (just the non-specificity of that recurring phrase is starting to bug the heck out of me).It's really starting to scare the hell out of me that the Constitution as I've always known it may all but cease to exist within my lifetime. Assuming it hasn't already done so. It's this sort of thing that makes me think that whoever's orchestrating this campaign has, to some extent, won already. |
Pattie Gillett
True Believer
|
posted 10-31-2001 09:41 PM
I'm there with you, Earl. With all this flag-waving and "Unity" stuff we keep hearing (that is to say, unity unless you remotely look like you might be of Arab descent) our willingness to give up our freedoms makes me wonder if in our fervor to fight the terrorists, we aren't becoming more like them.
I was watching "Messages From Earth" (one of the great Babylon 5 episodes for those who don't know) and this line gave me the chills:
"They don't want us to fight these things, they want us to be more them." As did Dexter's line from "And the Rock Cried Out: No Hiding Place": "Who is the enemy. Is it the alien? No, we are alien to each other. The enemy is Fear . . . The enemy is the person who tells you that you should hate that which is different. Because in the end, that hate will consume you. And in the end, that hate will destroy you." Chills, I tell you, chills. I apologize if I butchered that a bit, my VCR is taping something so I can't pull out the tape and get the exact wording but I've watched that ep enough to know that I am close. |
Earl Green
True Believer
|
posted 11-01-2001 04:05 PM
And yet another bit of news that just came up - the INS, in conjunction with the FBI, has contacted colleges across the country, asking the colleges to track foreign students so they can be checked against student visas on record.At this time, it looks as though the schools are excpected to front the resources and manpower to make this "tracking" program a reality. And of course, y'know, national security is exactly what campus police are set up to handle, in my experience. Oy vey. |
slgorman
One of the Regulars
|
posted 11-01-2001 05:05 PM
...and even scarier is the fact that most of this tracking will have to occur in the Admissions and Records offices of colleges. Who, of course, are known for their throughness, aptitude and abilities to handle information. Not. |
Earl Green
True Believer
|
posted 11-02-2001 03:34 PM
My problem with this is that after tracking comes die-hard discrimination. To quote almost any character who's ever appeared in a Lucasfilm Ltd. production, I have a bad feeling about this. |
Dave Thomer
Guardian of Peace and Justice in the Galaxy
|
posted 11-09-2001 05:24 AM
And yet another case of Santayana Syndrome comes upon us all.I swear I've read this book already . . . but I really don't like the way it ends. My one hope is that a few years from now, it'll be more difficult to renew some of these measures. This may be a moment where we need to look ahead to the battles that can be won. |
Pattie Gillett
True Believer
|
posted 12-07-2001 10:43 AM
OK, when the Attorney General says "If we were violating someone's rights, someone would tell us about it" you know it's time to start researching the cost of housing in Canada. And to think, I was nervous about black armbands and the word "Homeland".
|
Earl Green
True Believer
|
posted 12-07-2001 01:50 PM
Toronto's a lovely city. Very clean place, friendly people. I'd love to live there. |
Dave Thomer
Guardian of Peace and Justice in the Galaxy
|
posted 12-11-2001 03:21 AM
Just read an article on Salon about Salam El Zaatari, an art student who was trying to fly home to Lebanon from Pittsburgh. (He was going home at the request of his father, who was afraid of anti-Arag sentiment in the US following 9/11. The rest of the story shows that irony's death has been greatly exaggerated.) He had a putty knife from his art kit in his laptop case, a knife which two metal detectors failed to detect. (Glad to see the airline industry is using that bailout money wisely.) A random search at the gate turned up the knife, airport security flagged the FBI. The guy is under arrest and charged with one count of bringing a knife on board a plane. No terrorism connection has been alleged. He has been denied bail, on the grounds that he is a flight risk. (He's on an expired student visa.) He's in solitary confinement, probably for his own safety as much as anything. He probably will not go to trial until February. Boy, I sure am glad that if the government were infringing on anyone's rights, someone would let them know. |
Earl Green
True Believer
|
posted 12-11-2001 01:53 PM
Have I mentioned what a nice place Toronto is?  |
Dave Thomer
Guardian of Peace and Justice in the Galaxy
|
posted 12-14-2001 01:45 AM
Toronto's looking better by the minute. The student in question pleaded guilty to one felony count of smuggling a weapon onto a plane, and is 'voluntarily' leaving the country. The odds of him being allowed back into the US or any other country for that matter are somewhere between slim and none.But remember, folks, anyone who questions the administration's actions is just trying to sow dissent and help the terrorists! |
Jack Intveld
Just Got Here
|
posted 12-14-2001 03:35 AM
I've been reading about Ashcroft's attempts to rewrite (obliterate?) constitutional protections for months now. I read each new tidbit in the same state of total panic as the previous couple hundred. I've talked to a lot of people about it and except for my sister, none of them seems the least concerned; none of them understands what I'm all worked up about.Meanwhile there are sites like DemocraticUnderground and BuzzFlash that are full of worrying article links, editorials, and email from people who seem to have the same take on it that I do (i.e. scared to death that our country is being destroyed). At these sites, people reassure each other that there's a silent but significant majority (or at least plurality) who share the same desire to see freedom put back at the top of the national agenda.
...
But I never meet ANY of these people face-to-face! Here's my question: does everyone here have that same experience (concerned about the issue but completely isolated by that very concern), or am I just living in a concentrated pocket of political apathy and conservatism? |
Pattie Gillett
True Believer
|
posted 12-14-2001 09:20 AM
I'm there with you, Jack. When I bring this up with people at work, I'm told that I'm being "Un-American" and asked "Don't you understand that this is what has to be done?"Because who says so? As I have said before, very few people give a rat's ass about civil liberties until they need a lawyer. In the meantime, everyone else is content to call them "bleeding heart liberals." The ironic thing is that liberals seeking hate crimes legislation or other civil rights laws are accused of being the "thought police." So what the hell is this?
|
slgorman
One of the Regulars
|
posted 12-14-2001 05:14 PM
Just piping in to second Pattie's comments. I've taken to being uncharacteristically quiet around people I haven't known for years when this subject comes up. I've also unoffically banned all civil liberties' discussions with my spouse due to the venom and idiocy he has been spouting lately. quote:
Or as Jon Stewart put it: "If the events on September 11th have proven anything, it's that the terrorists can attack us, but they can't take away what makes us American--our freedom, out liberty, our civil rights. No, only Attorney General John Ashcroft can do that."
[This message has been edited by slgorman (edited 12-14-2001).] |
Pattie Gillett
True Believer
|
posted 12-16-2001 08:27 AM
I think we just found what's going to go on the back of our NotNews.org T-shirts! God, that's brilliant! |
Pattie Gillett
True Believer
|
posted 09-11-2002 08:14 AM
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
~Benjamin Franklin "America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
~Abraham Lincoln Some things to think about today and everyday. [This message has been edited by Pattie Gillett (edited 09-11-2002).] |
JackIntveld
Just Got Here
|
posted 05-29-2003 05:00 PM
This might be of special interest:"Phila. council condemns Patriot Act"
http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/5969695.htm Editted to include the headline. [This message has been edited by JackIntveld (edited 05-29-2003).] |
slgorman
One of the Regulars
|
posted 05-29-2003 07:40 PM
This was on our news last night:
"Palo Alto librarians, police chief protest Patriot Act"
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2003/05/28/state1513E DT0099.DTL And can I just add, not only have I been to Arcata but my brother lives there. [This message has been edited by slgorman (edited 05-29-2003).] |
Earl Green
True Believer
|
posted 05-29-2003 09:06 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Jack Intveld:
Here's my question: does everyone here have that same experience (concerned about the issue but completely isolated by that very concern), or am I just living in a concentrated pocket of political apathy and conservatism?
After reading the above links...perhaps you're not living in such a concentrated pocket. But here in redneck central...I appear to be in just such a pocket. If my city passes such a resolution, I'll cook dinner for everyone reading this. That's how unlikely it is to happen. |
Dave Thomer
Guardian of Peace and Justice in the Galaxy
|
posted 07-03-2003 01:42 AM
Rereading this thread, and especially Jack's concern, reminds me of how much I've sort of isolated myself from what I presume is the majority or at least plurality view in this country. I tend to spend most of time in places where even conservatives tend to be a little concerned about civil liberties issues. It's probably a dangerous thing, not only because I can get a false read of what people are thinking but because it's generally not a good idea to surround yourself only with those who will reinforce your existing views. But I'm not even sure at the moment how to have a political conversation with those at the very opposite end of the spectrum. I'm not sure what the point of common reference from which we could start a dialogue would be. And that scares me, because if I can't get past that, then just about everything I believe about human potential and democracy is so much bunk. |
This Is Not News Forums
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
