Main

December 28, 2007

Spineless, gutless

From Anthony D. Romero’s column in the Fall 2007 ACLU National newsletter:

[After the 2006 election] many were optimistic that the new Congress would stop acting like a rubber stamp for the White House ... Unfortunately, it seems that our new leaders in the House and Senate didn’t get the message. ... The leaders of the 110th Congress have been so compliant, so silent and so intimidated by Bush administrant accusations that they are ‘soft on terrorism.’

Nearly a year into its first session, this Congress has failed to restore habeas corpus; failed to end torture and rendition; and failed to close the notorious detention camp at Guantanamo Bay.

Congress should be buy righting the wrongs of the past six years.

October 07, 2007

The "End of America"?

Naomi Wolf has the book with the title quoted above. She cites some chilling examples of law enforcement abuses especially at airports. She refers us to the sad and bizare case of musicologist Nalini Ghuman who was refused entry to the US, treated abusively at the airport and has simply been unable to find out why she was excluded.

Ms. Wolf tells us the road we're headed:

what is clear is that the State is habituating citizens to being moved around at gunpoint, physically intimidated or frightened by representatives of the government.

May 20, 2007

The same subject continued

The same subject continued

A day after I posted the previous comment on the boarder patrol, this news item caught my eye in the May 16th Salt Lake City Standard Examiner


The face and fingerprint-matching technology that has been touted over the past decade as a sophisticated new way to stop terrorists and illegal immigrants from entering the country through Mexico has one major drawback: U.S. boarder inspectors almost never use it.

Some of it hasn’t been installed, using it would “create too big a backup at the border,” and besides what fun is this compared to tracking down people who used LSD 25 years ago? I mean, drugs are a threat, right?

May 15, 2007

Great moments in law enforcement

Andrew Feldmar is a Vancouver psychotherapist. In 1981 he used LSD. In 2001 he wrote about it. So, in 2005 he was denied entry to the US because he had admitted using drugs. Because, you see, we don’t allow people who use drugs to enter the US. (Reported by the NY Times, May 14, 2007, p. A12. You can also read about it here

Once again, the mind boggles. Mr. Feldmar has never been convicted for using drugs, the U.S. Border Patrol, evidently with a lot of time on its hands, ran a Goggle search (apparently) and discovered this fact.

And this exclusion was not an accident – it is policy that any use of drugs, no matter how long ago, no matter if no criminal action was taken – gets you banned from the US.

In what way is this man a threat to the US? Just how is it that people never convicted in a court can be regarded as felons?

Continue reading "Great moments in law enforcement" »

January 12, 2007

Children of Men

A great movie, go see it.

While watching it, I had the most curious reaction. I found myself with a distinct longing to be in that world. A horrible, ridiculous feeling, but eventually I discovered its origin. What I longed for was a world in which there was at last the clarity to see that we were in a fight of liberty against fascism.

In the world we live in now, in the United States in 2007, it is still quite possible to believe that it is business as usual, that we can still do ordinary life, that the stock market will go up, if not now, then soon. We do have camps now, we do have militarization of civil life, we do have people made to disappear, but most of us ignore it and can ignore it. We have a president who has asserted the right to do whatever he wants, and most of us ignore it, or make fun of him, but no one is resisting him.

And I also longed for that: the resistance. There is no resistance to join, none. The political wing in congress is flaccid, the activist wing is obsessed with conspiracy theories, the religious wing is self-absorbed and the intellectual wing spends its time finding ways to expel those less pure than themselves. The people quietly withdraw their support from the regime, but we have no leaders. We don’t have leaders ahead of the people, and we don’t even have leaders following the people.

And for people with age and experience, the other times like now keep flashing back into our heads. We had this sort of president once before, at the tail end of the first war of imperialist quagmire, and at that time we first couldn’t believe a president would lie, and then we were outraged to discover he did. And then, his own party disowned him and he went.

Now, we have a similar president, as similar in imperialist purpose as he is different in his inadequate intelligence. Instead of a brilliantly evil consort to pull the strings we have shoes and a dress. Now we know this leader lies, expect him to lie and shrug when he does. We have insulated ourselves from outrage, from righteous indignation, from all feelings unconnected to the joy of purchasing and consuming. And like feeling, we are insulated from thoughts, insulated so we will not connect one fact to the next and see what is happening. Or, at any rate, most of us are like that, but some are not. Some, the receptacles of our unfelt feeling, have too much feeling. For the fanatics are on the rise, mirroring in their explicit rejection of reason the majority’s insulation from it. We see that fanaticism in the societies of our official enemies, but can’t see it in our own society, our own religion.

And so, you see, we didn’t bounce back from the first quagmire, we didn’t renounce anything, we didn’t learn, we didn’t say “never again”, we didn’t polish up the weak spots in the Constitution, we did nothing. This president will go, likely to be replaced by a different emptiness with a different marketing campaign, but not by anyone we need.

And those of us with years and history know that this movie, or some variation on it, is likely our future. We know societies crumble, we see societies around the world turning to barbarism and conflict and we feel ours turning away from the Enlightenment, turning away from reason, turning away from democracy, from civility, from hope. Suddenly, we feel connected to Germans in 1932, to ancestors in Europe when the lights went out at the beginning of the millennium of darkness.

Perhaps God will purge us, with rising temperatures and species out of control and plagues and flood and fire. Perhaps God will remove us with mutations that terminate us or the hope of children. Perhaps it will be something we can’t imagine, something we did, and permitted, and encouraged, and made money from, and then blamed on God. It’s most likely to take a long time.

In the movie, the pregnant mother finds no room, and no inn, and has the child without even a manger of straw. In the movie, the mother of the savior and the man who isn’t the father flee to a place more mythical than Egypt. And the man who has no biological connection protects and guides until he can do so no longer, and then departs from the story, a story to be continued in the child.

In the movie, you see, there was something worth dying for. A child that can make soldiers drop to their knees and remember the image of God within them. But we have nothing. And so, the life within the movie has its appeal.

July 19, 2006

European dirt

We often hope that Europe can provide some check on the adventurism of George Bush, but, as a report done for the Council of Europe (a human rights organization) revealed, Poland and Romania apparently participated in the CIA’s rendition operations.

Sean McCormack, of the US State Department, reported the Financial Times (June 8th, p.1) made the amazing claim that “renditions were an internationally recognized legal practice.”

May 21, 2006

It not just us

Der Spiegel, the German news magazine, reports that the BND, the German foreign intelligence agency has also spied on journalists. This has created a scandal. Also, they have their Judith Millers in that some journalists have been informers for the BND, receiving cash for their work.

Meanwhile, in the NYT today, David “the world’s dumbest columnist” Brooks has an essay arguing that since the press didn’t give any attention to the NSA scandals and the Democrats were their usual spineless selves, that, well, the NSA scandal must not have really been that bad.

May 13, 2006

That non-existent balance between stupidity and intelligence

I’ve written before on the absurdity of the claim that we have to ‘balance’ civil liberties with the need to ‘do anything to stop the terror.’ I’m still looking for an example of where violating civil liberties helped stop terrorism in either the long-run or in the medium-run. But Kung Fu Monkey slams that argument in the context of the latest NSA spying deal (otherwise known as “How much can we do to the sleeping American public before they wake up” party game that Bush is now playing.)

Comment: "We need to catch the bad guys, and anything is worth --"
Answer: Have you secured the ports yet? Secured the chemical plants? Figured out a way to scan all the luggage on US flights? Worked out the kinks in the retarded "No Fly" list? Started buying up some of the 2,000 loose nukes in Russia? Gotten first responders the equipment they need in case of emergency? Fixed FEMA and Homeland Security? Caught Osama Bin Laden? Tell you what, nail down the jobs that don't require you to wipe your ass with the Constitution first.

April 07, 2006

Material support for stupidity

We have a law that prevents people from immigrating to the United States if they supplied “material support” for a terrorist or terrorist organization (section 212(a)(3)(b)), material support being defined in part as “to commit an act that the actor knows, or reasonably should know, affords material support, including a safe house, transportation, communications, funds, transfer of funds or other material financial benefit, false documentation or identification, weapons”

So far, not so bad. We certainly don’t want terrorists coming here. No sir. Here is an example of how it has been applied. This woman in Sierra Leone had a group of terrorists in her house for four days. Her daughter was there also. According to the New York Times (April 3, p. A20) her application for refuge in the US is being denied. Sounds a little harsh, but we don’t like terrorists.

One tiny problem: she, and her daughter, were being raped and further injured by the guerrillas. And there are more cases.

Continue reading "Material support for stupidity" »

April 02, 2006

Protecting you from Casio watches

The New York Times paged through the transcripts of detainee hearings in Guantanamo. There were a few proud to be enemy combatants. And there was the man named Muhibullah who denied he was the man with the same name who was a governor of Shibarghan province in Afghanistan. The prisoner suggested the court should contact the governor and ask him. Well, the court said, that is really your job. They said that to the detainee who can’t have an attorney, can’t collect evidence, can’t use the phone.

Then there is the Casio watches, model F-91W, to be exact. This is part of the evidence against more than one detainee because these have “been used in bombings linked to Al Qaeda.” Well, one detainee asked, why don’t you arrest the people who sell them? Like Amazon, for example, that has them for $12. I think I used to own one. According to Forbes, some guards at Guantanamo have them. Apparently some Moslems wear them because they have a compass that they can use to find the direction to Mecca.

Doubtless the detainees include some very bad people. But if they’re not wearing a Casio watch, I don’t know if our military will be able to find them.

April 01, 2006

What balance?

Most debates about the issue of civil liberties and the war on terror assume that there is something to “balance.” There is an assumed trade off that if you keep to all the picky little rules of protecting people’s rights that this will allow terrorists to get away free.

I have my doubts about this.

Most of the Bush administration semi-legal actions (detaining large numbers of immigrants on weak charges, sweeping up people from the battlefield, widespread spying on Americans, etc.) have, if you notice carefully, produced almost no terrorists to convict or kill. Aside from the sad comedy playing out around Moussaoui, can you recall a single major terrorist trial since 9/11? I can’t. Lots of minor cases about “sympathizing” or “supporting” terror – by talking to people we don’t like or making ill-advised trips to suspicious training camps, but no one who actually planned a significant terrorist action or led a terror group. Many people who overstayed a visa, but not very many who built bombs.

Continue reading "What balance?" »

January 26, 2006

Another mistake in the war on terror

Why will the administration not let Tariq Ramadan into the United States? When asked, a spokesperson for the Homeland Security department in Aug. 2004 referred to a section of the Patriot Act that bars anyone who would “endorse or espouse terrorist activity or persuade others” to do so.

Well, I don’t much want that sort of person here either. But – Mr. Ramadan says he has never supported terrorism. The executive director of the American Academy of Religion, a very respected scholarly association, refers to Mr. Ramadan as “one of the most respected scholars of Islam working today.”

Continue reading "Another mistake in the war on terror" »

January 17, 2006

Return

After 9/11 hundreds of noncitizens were arrested on visa violations and put in detention centers. They were not charged with any crime, nor were they deported for their visa violations. They were, according to their lawyers, beaten, abused, kept in chains and humiliated. The government eventually decided they had no connection to terrorism and sent them home.

Now six are back, suing the government over their treatment.

Continue reading "Return" »