Liberty Level will be moving to Wordpress, a different blogging site. The new address will be LibertyLevel.wordpress.com.
All posts will be moved to the new site with the original timestamp.
If you have a bookmark, please change it. This site will exist for some time, then be deleted.
Why? Eventually you have to change a blogger account to a Blogger Beta account. Plus, Google isn't living up top it's "Don't be evil" motto.
My other blog, Civilian Casualties, will also be moved to Wordpress at CivilianCasualties.wordpress.com.
My homepage at wordpress will be AgentKGB.wordpress.com.
15 August 2006
14 August 2006
NYPD Permits Would be Needed for Field Trips
Under an initiative that the New York Police Department has proposed, permits will be needed for many new things, such as field trips, according to an op-ed by the NYCLU. Current regulations require only that people marching in a public roadway or using amplified sound on a sidewalk or public park get a permit. Under the proposed regulations, however, 35 or more people on a sidewalk, any roadway procession with 20 or more vehicles and/or bicycles, or two or more people using a roadway "in a manner that does not comply with all applicable traffic laws, rules and regulations," needs a permit to do so.
If you jaywalk, do it alone or you could be arrested for parading without a permit. If you're planning a field trip for a class at one of NYC's underfunded schools, make sure to split the class apart into groups less than 35 people, or your earth science class could be arrested walking into the museum. Funeral processions apparently present a similar risk to our national security, and also would require a permit. If the White House was in NYC, the procession to the White House for inauguration would require a permit, too.
If this initiative took effect, it would put an end to small, often quickly planned or completely unplanned protests that respond to recent events. These marches and rallies are not a threat to anyone, but the initiative is a threat to civil rights.
Getting a permit isn't easy, for the person getting one or the person issuing it. Surely the NYPD has more important things to do than investigate the true agenda behind field trips.
Tags: Politics, Current Events, Current Affairs, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, First Amendment, Protest Permit, NYPD, NYCLU
If you jaywalk, do it alone or you could be arrested for parading without a permit. If you're planning a field trip for a class at one of NYC's underfunded schools, make sure to split the class apart into groups less than 35 people, or your earth science class could be arrested walking into the museum. Funeral processions apparently present a similar risk to our national security, and also would require a permit. If the White House was in NYC, the procession to the White House for inauguration would require a permit, too.
If this initiative took effect, it would put an end to small, often quickly planned or completely unplanned protests that respond to recent events. These marches and rallies are not a threat to anyone, but the initiative is a threat to civil rights.
Getting a permit isn't easy, for the person getting one or the person issuing it. Surely the NYPD has more important things to do than investigate the true agenda behind field trips.
Tags: Politics, Current Events, Current Affairs, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, First Amendment, Protest Permit, NYPD, NYCLU
13 August 2006
Illinois Amendment Banning Gay Marriage Won't Make Ballot
Gay marriage opponents have failed to get an amendment banning same-sex marriage on the ballot in Illinois this November, according to a recent Chicago Sun-Times article. They got the 330,000 signatures, but a sample was found to have only about 91% of the signatures valid, short of the necessary 95%. Illinois actually already prohibits same-sex marriage, due to a 1996 law, but the Christian right fears that courts might realize how idiotic it is and overturn it.
There are a number of arguments against same-sex marriage, many of them having to do with deities not liking it and it causing disruptions to opposite-sex marriages across the country. Sometimes opponents try to ground their arguments in reality, resulting in strange statements like: "Marriage exists solely for procreation," an idea used in Washington, or "Gay marriage is harmful for children."
The idea that marriage exists only for the creation of children is one that would lead to other strange ideas. When a woman reaches menopause, should she automatically have to divorce, so long as her children are grown? Can you marry if you're sterile? Should married couples have to have children?
Of course not. They're all remarkably stupid ideas, ones that would never be accepted in the U.S. for at least decades. But if marriage exists for the sole purpose of creating more children, then those ideas would logically follow.
Likewise, countless things are bad for children, such as racism in schools, wars, poverty, and the high cost of education. No one of the Christian right would suggest the U.S. renounce war, or become a communism, though it is hard to see how that would harm children. Apparently though, having parents of the same sex could do awful things to the minds of these youth, things more awful than being discriminated against when they grow up and not being allowed to marry someone they love solely because they are gay.
There is no logical reason for banning gay marriage, and every reason to allow it. Illinois should overturn their law that prohibits it, and the many other states that have similar laws should do the same, which they will of course do, because it is of course inconceivable that a government official would make decisions affecting so many people based on his religious beliefs.
Tags: Politics, Current Events, Current Affairs, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, Gay marriage, Same-Sex Marriage, Illinois
There are a number of arguments against same-sex marriage, many of them having to do with deities not liking it and it causing disruptions to opposite-sex marriages across the country. Sometimes opponents try to ground their arguments in reality, resulting in strange statements like: "Marriage exists solely for procreation," an idea used in Washington, or "Gay marriage is harmful for children."
The idea that marriage exists only for the creation of children is one that would lead to other strange ideas. When a woman reaches menopause, should she automatically have to divorce, so long as her children are grown? Can you marry if you're sterile? Should married couples have to have children?
Of course not. They're all remarkably stupid ideas, ones that would never be accepted in the U.S. for at least decades. But if marriage exists for the sole purpose of creating more children, then those ideas would logically follow.
Likewise, countless things are bad for children, such as racism in schools, wars, poverty, and the high cost of education. No one of the Christian right would suggest the U.S. renounce war, or become a communism, though it is hard to see how that would harm children. Apparently though, having parents of the same sex could do awful things to the minds of these youth, things more awful than being discriminated against when they grow up and not being allowed to marry someone they love solely because they are gay.
There is no logical reason for banning gay marriage, and every reason to allow it. Illinois should overturn their law that prohibits it, and the many other states that have similar laws should do the same, which they will of course do, because it is of course inconceivable that a government official would make decisions affecting so many people based on his religious beliefs.
Tags: Politics, Current Events, Current Affairs, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, Gay marriage, Same-Sex Marriage, Illinois
12 August 2006
Freedom-Hating at Home
There is some concern (and, from some others, joy) that the events in Britain may help George Bush get his policy on civil liberties accepted. That policy, in five words, is the lack of civil rights. The fourth amendment is apparently an inconvenience for him, never mind that he can get warrants through the FISA court secretly anyway, it's just easier to pretend it doesn't exist. We wouldn't want to have the terrorists take away our freedom because George Bush was too busy looking out for it.
Wiretapping without warrants will not, no matter what Bush says, help stop people from dying. Neither will taking the time to get a warrant, like to make it legal and unimportant things like that. Countless Americans are nonetheless ready to tear up the Bill of Rights to keep themselves safe from foreigners and nonexistent weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. If that's not "freedom-hating", what is?
Tags: Politics, Current Events, Current Affairs, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, Terrorism, Politics of Fear
Wiretapping without warrants will not, no matter what Bush says, help stop people from dying. Neither will taking the time to get a warrant, like to make it legal and unimportant things like that. Countless Americans are nonetheless ready to tear up the Bill of Rights to keep themselves safe from foreigners and nonexistent weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. If that's not "freedom-hating", what is?
Tags: Politics, Current Events, Current Affairs, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, Terrorism, Politics of Fear
09 August 2006
REAL ID Should Have Been Defeated
The State Senate in New Hampshire barely rejected a measure that would have rejected the REAL ID Act recently. New Hampshire, the "live free or die" state, seemed like it should be especially interested in preserving civil liberties, but it has instead preserved the future of an act that will just the opposite.
The REAL ID Act would create a "unified driver's license system," otherwise known as a national ID card. It is so invasive and pointless that the ACLU has created an entire website devoted to protesting the REAL ID Act (www.RealNightmare.org). It creates a federalized identity documentation system that would be necessary to do countless things, from flying on a commercial airplane to opening a bank account. It makes it extremely easy for the US government to keep careful track of everyone, or at least everyone who wants to enter a federal building or do anything else that "the secretary [of Homeland Security] shall determine."
Yeah, anything else that Homeland Security wants to keep tabs on.
Surely our Congress will not be so stupid as to pass an act such as this one? The burden it would place on those who lost their birth certificate, don't have a driver's license, or the thousands of Hudson County, NJ residents who had their birth certificates invalid due to fraud by a clerk, would be far too much for a nonexistent increase in our national security?
Yes, they would, and in fact already did. It will take effect in 2008. It was passed as part of a necessary Iraq War/Tsunami relief bill that had to be passed rapidly. There was little time for consideration, and the Senate did not hold any hearings on the act at all.
It can still fail to take effect, though. The issue is now in the hands of the states, who would have to change their laws, raise taxes, and do a number of other things that they would prefer not to. If states refuse to comply with the act, which they can do entirely legally, the system couldn't work. Just because New Hampshire didn't make the first step doesn't mean it can't be made.
The ACLU Real Nightmare site has a FAQ about the problems and worthlessness of the REAL ID Act (fixed text size, unfortunately).
Tags: Politics, Current Events, Current Affairs, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, REAL ID Act, Terrorism, Politics of Fear
The REAL ID Act would create a "unified driver's license system," otherwise known as a national ID card. It is so invasive and pointless that the ACLU has created an entire website devoted to protesting the REAL ID Act (www.RealNightmare.org). It creates a federalized identity documentation system that would be necessary to do countless things, from flying on a commercial airplane to opening a bank account. It makes it extremely easy for the US government to keep careful track of everyone, or at least everyone who wants to enter a federal building or do anything else that "the secretary [of Homeland Security] shall determine."
Yeah, anything else that Homeland Security wants to keep tabs on.
Surely our Congress will not be so stupid as to pass an act such as this one? The burden it would place on those who lost their birth certificate, don't have a driver's license, or the thousands of Hudson County, NJ residents who had their birth certificates invalid due to fraud by a clerk, would be far too much for a nonexistent increase in our national security?
Yes, they would, and in fact already did. It will take effect in 2008. It was passed as part of a necessary Iraq War/Tsunami relief bill that had to be passed rapidly. There was little time for consideration, and the Senate did not hold any hearings on the act at all.
It can still fail to take effect, though. The issue is now in the hands of the states, who would have to change their laws, raise taxes, and do a number of other things that they would prefer not to. If states refuse to comply with the act, which they can do entirely legally, the system couldn't work. Just because New Hampshire didn't make the first step doesn't mean it can't be made.
The ACLU Real Nightmare site has a FAQ about the problems and worthlessness of the REAL ID Act (fixed text size, unfortunately).
Tags: Politics, Current Events, Current Affairs, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, REAL ID Act, Terrorism, Politics of Fear
08 August 2006
Another Attack on Journalists
Press freedom is important, but that doesn't mean that it needs to be more controlled, it means the press should have more freedom. The New York Civil Liberties Union, the New York affiliate of the ACLU, reports that New York City Police have frequently detained photographers and filmmakers and forced them to show their film to the police, and even to destroy it.
The practice was noticed when Rakesh Sharma, a noted maker of documentaries, was held for several hours after filming taxicabs in NYC. The NYPD has no procedure for dealing with such occurrences, which often results in the detainment of innocent photographers or filmers.
These people are threatened with arrest if thy refuse to show their photographs and/or destroy them.
The NYCLU is suing the NYPD for harassing and detaining photographers.
Tags: Politics, Current Events, Current Affairs, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, First Amendment, Free Speech, Press Freedom, Rakesh Sharma, NYPD
The practice was noticed when Rakesh Sharma, a noted maker of documentaries, was held for several hours after filming taxicabs in NYC. The NYPD has no procedure for dealing with such occurrences, which often results in the detainment of innocent photographers or filmers.
These people are threatened with arrest if thy refuse to show their photographs and/or destroy them.
The NYCLU is suing the NYPD for harassing and detaining photographers.
Tags: Politics, Current Events, Current Affairs, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, First Amendment, Free Speech, Press Freedom, Rakesh Sharma, NYPD
07 August 2006
What Happened to Press Freedom?
Trying to control the press was something only Soviets and Nazis did, right? The American people would never stand for it in their own country. Why, then, is journalist Josh Wolf imprisoned?
Josh Wolf was jailed last week for contempt of court by judge William Alsup, after refusing to release unedited video footage, because investigators believe it may contain footage of a police car being set on fire during a G8 protest in San Francisco, according to Reporters Without Borders (RSF). In an odd twist of fate type thing, he was brought before federal judiciary authorities because it was a federal vehicle. If it had been owned by the state of California, Mr Wolf would not have been in prison, as California protects such things as press freedom.
In a totally unrelated incident, there was once a US president who was born in California in 1913. He was called Richard M. Nixon, and he didn't like giving tapes to courts, either. In fact, when the Supreme Court said they wanted some of the tape recordings he had, he deleted about eighteen and a half minutes of their content, what many people consider to be the important eighteen and a half minutes. Back in the day though, the federal government was more forgiving, and they let him resign and go on his way.
Mr Wolf has a blog at www.JoshWolf.net.
Tags: Politics, Current Events, Current Affairs, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, First Amendment, Free Speech, Press Freedom, Josh Wolf, William Alsup
Josh Wolf was jailed last week for contempt of court by judge William Alsup, after refusing to release unedited video footage, because investigators believe it may contain footage of a police car being set on fire during a G8 protest in San Francisco, according to Reporters Without Borders (RSF). In an odd twist of fate type thing, he was brought before federal judiciary authorities because it was a federal vehicle. If it had been owned by the state of California, Mr Wolf would not have been in prison, as California protects such things as press freedom.
In a totally unrelated incident, there was once a US president who was born in California in 1913. He was called Richard M. Nixon, and he didn't like giving tapes to courts, either. In fact, when the Supreme Court said they wanted some of the tape recordings he had, he deleted about eighteen and a half minutes of their content, what many people consider to be the important eighteen and a half minutes. Back in the day though, the federal government was more forgiving, and they let him resign and go on his way.
Mr Wolf has a blog at www.JoshWolf.net.
Tags: Politics, Current Events, Current Affairs, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, First Amendment, Free Speech, Press Freedom, Josh Wolf, William Alsup
06 August 2006
It's Not Illegal, It's a Response to a Threat
At the New York Times National section, there's a navigation tool
in the middle, listing sub-sections you can visit to find what you're looking for. One might assume that if you wanted to learn about civil liberties issues, you would visit the "Supreme Court" sub-section. In reality, though, such articles are in what the NYT calls the "Threats and Responses" sub-section. That's right, it's not a violation of the Bill of Rights, it's just a response to a threat.
One such response was the suggestion by several lawmakers to fire a professor in Wisconsin be fired for some of his more peculiar ideas. There is a picture of the professor, too, and he looks very threatening.
The White House likes to frighten the American people with stories of such threats: threats to the nation, threats to future generations, threats to the Christian way of life, and other such terrifying ideas. Then, anything outrageous they do is not outrageous, it's just to keep us safe, a response to a threat.
Tags: Politics, Current Events, Current Affairs, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, Bill of Rights, Terrorism, Academic Freedom, New York Times, Politics of Fear
in the middle, listing sub-sections you can visit to find what you're looking for. One might assume that if you wanted to learn about civil liberties issues, you would visit the "Supreme Court" sub-section. In reality, though, such articles are in what the NYT calls the "Threats and Responses" sub-section. That's right, it's not a violation of the Bill of Rights, it's just a response to a threat.
One such response was the suggestion by several lawmakers to fire a professor in Wisconsin be fired for some of his more peculiar ideas. There is a picture of the professor, too, and he looks very threatening.
The White House likes to frighten the American people with stories of such threats: threats to the nation, threats to future generations, threats to the Christian way of life, and other such terrifying ideas. Then, anything outrageous they do is not outrageous, it's just to keep us safe, a response to a threat.
Tags: Politics, Current Events, Current Affairs, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, Bill of Rights, Terrorism, Academic Freedom, New York Times, Politics of Fear
05 August 2006
Getting Around the First Amendment
The first amendment is intended to protect our freedom of speech, among other things. That right is on of the most essential in America, and violating it, although many on the Supreme Court might disagree, is illegal. Now the Bush administration has found a way around this inconvenient part of our law system: using someone else's law system.
In 2003, George Bush signed the Council of Europe Cybercrime Convention, or Cybercrime Treaty, which requires that signatories aid each other in investigating and/or prosecuting for breaking the first country's laws, regardless of the rights guaranteed in the assisting nation. According to an an article by the ACLU, the senate has now ratified it. Thus, the FBI may investigate an American for a cyber-related occurrence that is protected under the Bill of Rights, because another country might not protect that right. Some signing nations are emerging democracies, and may not have the same protections as the US, such as Ukraine and Bulgaria.
In some ways, this should be a huge issue that the senate would now feel ashamed of ratifying, but in other ways our first amendment rights have been taken since they were created.
Tags: Politics, Current Events, Current Affairs, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, First Amendment, Free Speech, Cybercrime Treaty, Internet, Council of Europe Cybercrime Convention
In 2003, George Bush signed the Council of Europe Cybercrime Convention, or Cybercrime Treaty, which requires that signatories aid each other in investigating and/or prosecuting for breaking the first country's laws, regardless of the rights guaranteed in the assisting nation. According to an an article by the ACLU, the senate has now ratified it. Thus, the FBI may investigate an American for a cyber-related occurrence that is protected under the Bill of Rights, because another country might not protect that right. Some signing nations are emerging democracies, and may not have the same protections as the US, such as Ukraine and Bulgaria.
In some ways, this should be a huge issue that the senate would now feel ashamed of ratifying, but in other ways our first amendment rights have been taken since they were created.
Tags: Politics, Current Events, Current Affairs, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, First Amendment, Free Speech, Cybercrime Treaty, Internet, Council of Europe Cybercrime Convention
04 August 2006
Election Fraud Soon to be Hidden
As almost everyone knows, the 2000 election did not result in the popularly elected president actually becoming president. Fewer people are aware that there were a number of uncertainties associated with the 2004 election. The paper ballots in Ohio, the state with perhaps the most issues, are set to be destroyed on September 3rd, according to Save the Ballots.org. Over 170,000 people who intended to vote never did, and 130,000 ballots were never counted. Over 10,500 people who voted for gay marriage also voted for George Bush, according to official records, which is more than a somewhat unusual way to vote.
After the paper trail is destroyed, there will be no way to verify the official counts, or to prove them inaccurate. A more complete report on the occurrences of 2004 across the nation can be found at the Project Censored website. They include the fact that the number of votes was greater than the number of registered voters even though some participation rates in Democratic strongholds apparently fell to 8%. Now, all evidence of this in Ohio is going to disappear.
Imagine if Richard Nixon had removed 18 and a half minutes of tape recordings to cover up Watergate, or if the government kept portions of a 47-volume history of the Vietnam War classified. The American people would be outraged. They'd stand up, call for knowledge of what their government was doing, and demand their rights. It's government by the people, for the people, right?
Tags: Politics, Current Events, Current Affairs, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, 2004 Election, Ohio, Voting Rights, Paper Trail, Election Fraud
After the paper trail is destroyed, there will be no way to verify the official counts, or to prove them inaccurate. A more complete report on the occurrences of 2004 across the nation can be found at the Project Censored website. They include the fact that the number of votes was greater than the number of registered voters even though some participation rates in Democratic strongholds apparently fell to 8%. Now, all evidence of this in Ohio is going to disappear.
Imagine if Richard Nixon had removed 18 and a half minutes of tape recordings to cover up Watergate, or if the government kept portions of a 47-volume history of the Vietnam War classified. The American people would be outraged. They'd stand up, call for knowledge of what their government was doing, and demand their rights. It's government by the people, for the people, right?
Tags: Politics, Current Events, Current Affairs, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, 2004 Election, Ohio, Voting Rights, Paper Trail, Election Fraud
03 August 2006
The Evolution of the Kansas Board of Education
The Kansas Board of Education has come a long way since removing almost all mention of evolution from the high school biology curriculum in 1999. Voters in Kansas voted for moderates that favored evolution in Republican primaries last week, according to the The New York Times.
The First Amendment requires a separation between church and state, thus, religious views cannot be taught in public schools. Intelligent Design is not supported by any actual facts or believed in by anyone not religious, and its connection to religious beliefs is not disputed. One wonders what went wrong in 1999.
When it comes to boards of education, the best curriculums survive to next September, and the Biblical biology classes mandated by the religious right were killed off by Kansas voters.
Tags: Politics, Current Events, Current Affairs, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, Censorship, Evolution, Intelligent Design, Education, Kansas, First Amendment, Religion
The First Amendment requires a separation between church and state, thus, religious views cannot be taught in public schools. Intelligent Design is not supported by any actual facts or believed in by anyone not religious, and its connection to religious beliefs is not disputed. One wonders what went wrong in 1999.
When it comes to boards of education, the best curriculums survive to next September, and the Biblical biology classes mandated by the religious right were killed off by Kansas voters.
Tags: Politics, Current Events, Current Affairs, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, Censorship, Evolution, Intelligent Design, Education, Kansas, First Amendment, Religion
02 August 2006
Miniature Flags a Threat to Cheney
In Mid-July, Vice President Dick Cheney came to Davenport, Iowa. A number of people organized a protest, and many of them had small flags on sticks, according to an article by The Progressive. The police protecting the VP consfiscated the small flags, to protect Cheney from the threat they clearly posed.
On occasion, Mr. Cheney wears small lapel pins with American flags shown on them. On the back lies the danger. Lapel pins are secured by a sharp, pointed object. Mr. Cheney should stop wearing these immediately. They could cause him serious harm.
More importantly though, he should stop hunting. Though he may not be aware of it, guns are actually more threatening to his well-being than flags are. They can even result in almost instantaneous death. As an unfortunate incident some time ago demonstrated, Mr. Cheney's aim is, sadly, deteriorating. It may no longer be safe for him to use guns.
Also deemed a threat was a photographer at the event.
Tags: Politics, Current Events, Current Affairs, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, Censorship, Dick Cheney, Hunting, Davenport, Cheney Hunting, Small Flags, Free Speech
On occasion, Mr. Cheney wears small lapel pins with American flags shown on them. On the back lies the danger. Lapel pins are secured by a sharp, pointed object. Mr. Cheney should stop wearing these immediately. They could cause him serious harm.
More importantly though, he should stop hunting. Though he may not be aware of it, guns are actually more threatening to his well-being than flags are. They can even result in almost instantaneous death. As an unfortunate incident some time ago demonstrated, Mr. Cheney's aim is, sadly, deteriorating. It may no longer be safe for him to use guns.
Also deemed a threat was a photographer at the event.
Tags: Politics, Current Events, Current Affairs, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, Censorship, Dick Cheney, Hunting, Davenport, Cheney Hunting, Small Flags, Free Speech
01 August 2006
Censorship at Home, Censorship Abroad
This summary is not available. Please
click here to view the post.
31 July 2006
Right to Vote Makes a Democracy
A democracy is formed when everyone has a say. Although the US is actually a republic (we choose the people who make the decisions; we don't make the decisions ourselves), we like to pretend that all a democracy requires is people electing leaders, and that that makes us a democracy, so we can sing songs about it and talk about how free and democratic we are. This is very much besides the point, however, the point being that if we're democratic or a republic or anything, we have to let anyone vote.
Obviously, we do not let everyone vote. You have to have attained the enlightened age of eighteen before you can help decide how your tax dollars are spent, and many states do not let felons participate in their government. These people have been deemed unfit to vote, and thus they are prevented from voting.
The state of Colorado recently added to this voting prevention, prohibiting 6,000 people from voting this year because they are on parole.
The right to vote should not be questioned in a "democratic" country. The right to vote makes it a republic. The lack of voting rights, as recent elections have suggested, serves only to make it Republican.
Tags: Politics, Current Events, Current Affairs, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, Colorado, Voting, Voting Rights, Bush, Republican, Democracy, Republic
Obviously, we do not let everyone vote. You have to have attained the enlightened age of eighteen before you can help decide how your tax dollars are spent, and many states do not let felons participate in their government. These people have been deemed unfit to vote, and thus they are prevented from voting.
The state of Colorado recently added to this voting prevention, prohibiting 6,000 people from voting this year because they are on parole.
The right to vote should not be questioned in a "democratic" country. The right to vote makes it a republic. The lack of voting rights, as recent elections have suggested, serves only to make it Republican.
Tags: Politics, Current Events, Current Affairs, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, Colorado, Voting, Voting Rights, Bush, Republican, Democracy, Republic
30 July 2006
The Government Idiocy Reporting Quota
A recent article by the ACLU reports that federal air marshals in Las Vegas have a quota regarding reports identifying individuals as "suspicious." Every month, it seems, each air marshal must file at least one "Surveillance Detection Report," which can lead one to be listed on a national or even international watchlist. This system affects an air marshal's assignment and salary.
Basically, people can be put on a watchlist by an air marshal because the air marshal wants a pay raise. One tourist had an SDR filed on him/her for taking a picture of the skyline in Las Vegas as his/her plane took off. One memo circulated shortly after the quota system began said that, although air marshals may not see anything for a month at a time, "if you are looking for it, you'll see something."
Perhaps firefighters should have to fight a certain number of fires each week? If no one set their house on fire for a while, the firefighter could always do it for them. Maybe every American should have to report their car stolen at least once in their life? It would keep prisons in business. The best option would be if every air marshal reported at least one such governmental display of idiocy in their careers.
The original article can be found at The Denver Channel.com.
Tags: Politics, Current Events, Current Affairs, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, Air Marshal, Surveillance Detection Report, Surveillance, Bush, SDR Quota, Patriot Act
Basically, people can be put on a watchlist by an air marshal because the air marshal wants a pay raise. One tourist had an SDR filed on him/her for taking a picture of the skyline in Las Vegas as his/her plane took off. One memo circulated shortly after the quota system began said that, although air marshals may not see anything for a month at a time, "if you are looking for it, you'll see something."
Perhaps firefighters should have to fight a certain number of fires each week? If no one set their house on fire for a while, the firefighter could always do it for them. Maybe every American should have to report their car stolen at least once in their life? It would keep prisons in business. The best option would be if every air marshal reported at least one such governmental display of idiocy in their careers.
The original article can be found at The Denver Channel.com.
Tags: Politics, Current Events, Current Affairs, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, Air Marshal, Surveillance Detection Report, Surveillance, Bush, SDR Quota, Patriot Act
29 July 2006
Fair Trial for Everyone?
The US has continued to hold a number of prisoners without charges in secret prisons and Guantanamo Bay even though the UN Committee on Human Rights has called for all secret detention facilities to be closed and for all prisoners to be allowed the protection of the law.
The Bush administration recently decided that all prisoners had to be treated according to Geneva Conventions minimums, after a Supreme Court ruling that said that all prisoners were protected under them. Many remain, without charges, held against their will. The US has maintained that the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights did not extend to matters relating to terrorism. The war on terror gives the US the right to declare anyone a "terrorist" and treat them however they want, in order to better keep us free.
The Merriam-Webster definition of "kidnap" is "to seize and detain or carry away by unlawful force or fraud and often with a demand for ransom." The US has certainly seized and detained these prisoners. If the US constitution provides for fair trial (like it does), and they have been denied this right, then it is unlawful. The media has (justifiably) expressed outrage over the kidnapping of Westerners as horrible acts that cannot be allowed, but what of the detentions and abuse of people not given the chance to defend themselves in court? We cannot be a symbol of freedom and equality if everyone is not treated equally and fairly.
Tags: Politics, Current Events, Current Affairs, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, Guantanamo, Guantanamo Bay, Geneva Conventions, Fair Trial, Bush
The Bush administration recently decided that all prisoners had to be treated according to Geneva Conventions minimums, after a Supreme Court ruling that said that all prisoners were protected under them. Many remain, without charges, held against their will. The US has maintained that the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights did not extend to matters relating to terrorism. The war on terror gives the US the right to declare anyone a "terrorist" and treat them however they want, in order to better keep us free.
The Merriam-Webster definition of "kidnap" is "to seize and detain or carry away by unlawful force or fraud and often with a demand for ransom." The US has certainly seized and detained these prisoners. If the US constitution provides for fair trial (like it does), and they have been denied this right, then it is unlawful. The media has (justifiably) expressed outrage over the kidnapping of Westerners as horrible acts that cannot be allowed, but what of the detentions and abuse of people not given the chance to defend themselves in court? We cannot be a symbol of freedom and equality if everyone is not treated equally and fairly.
Tags: Politics, Current Events, Current Affairs, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, Guantanamo, Guantanamo Bay, Geneva Conventions, Fair Trial, Bush
28 July 2006
Redraw State Lines
Last month, the Supreme Court ruled that district lines could be redrawn whenever, not just after the census that occurs once a decade. District lines determine which group of people are voting for which number representative. When the lines are redrawn, it's usually by the party in power at the time (actually, it's always by the party in power at that time), and they have a tendency to draw the lines in their favor, which is less than cool for minorities, which in Texas happens to be the Hispanic population. The plan currently favored by Republicans would split Austin, Texas' most liberal city, into three different solidly Republican districts, dispersing the city's liberal voters into those districts, which would make it unlikely that Austin will bother the state Republican party until the next time the lines are redrawn. Their map has a number of peculiar shapes on it, and can be found with the New York Times article on the issue.
If district lines can be redrawn, why not state lines? We could make New York City part of Kansas and other liberal areas parts of Georgia and Alabama. The voters could be replaced by extra Republican regions from Wyoming and Oklahoma, keeping at least 30 of its electoral votes and go Republican for the first time since any smart people lived there. Or, following the technique used for the 28th district in Texas, we could make all the liberals part of California, and each and every other state could go Republican, because California's electoral power could never grow by enough to offset the 2 votes that every state gets from the senators for no good reason.
The electoral voting system has a flaw, and we should not hesitate to exploit it.
Tags: Politics, Current Events, Current Affairs, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, Redistricting, Supreme Court, Bush, Republicans, Minorities, Tom Delay
If district lines can be redrawn, why not state lines? We could make New York City part of Kansas and other liberal areas parts of Georgia and Alabama. The voters could be replaced by extra Republican regions from Wyoming and Oklahoma, keeping at least 30 of its electoral votes and go Republican for the first time since any smart people lived there. Or, following the technique used for the 28th district in Texas, we could make all the liberals part of California, and each and every other state could go Republican, because California's electoral power could never grow by enough to offset the 2 votes that every state gets from the senators for no good reason.
The electoral voting system has a flaw, and we should not hesitate to exploit it.
Tags: Politics, Current Events, Current Affairs, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, Redistricting, Supreme Court, Bush, Republicans, Minorities, Tom Delay
27 July 2006
Land of the Free, but Not for You
A recent Homeland Security Department plan suggests that all legal permanent residents who immigrated here be subject to fingerprinting. They would be subjected to fingerprinting every time they wanted to come across the border again, too, so that green cards could only be used by the right person. The same practice would apply to some Canadians entering on work visas.
Back in the day, when we let more people in, people at Ellis Island had to have twenty bucks or they'd be turned back (people on slave ships were let in no matter how little money they had). They were also checked for diseases, because everyone already in America was so healthy the government didn't want to let any foreigners contaminate them.
Now, people are being fingerprinted because their mothers were in the wrong country when they gave birth to them. They're not healthy Americans with a healthy, American outlook, they're scary people from somewhere else.
As many have pointed out, it is unlikely that a single member of the Department of Homeland Security is a real American. Each and every one of them is a descendent of some man or woman who came here a number of years ago and who got together with a number of their un-American friends, pushed the real Americans out west, and called themselves citizens of the United States of America.
Now, these new Americans' descendents are fingerprinting what we have termed "immigrants" because their ancestors didn't enter the US before their birth. America may be the land of the free for some immigrants, but not for others, and not for real Americans.
Tags: Politics, Current Events, Current Affairs, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, Immigration, Fingerprinting, Homeland Security, Native Americans, Bush, Terrorism
Back in the day, when we let more people in, people at Ellis Island had to have twenty bucks or they'd be turned back (people on slave ships were let in no matter how little money they had). They were also checked for diseases, because everyone already in America was so healthy the government didn't want to let any foreigners contaminate them.
Now, people are being fingerprinted because their mothers were in the wrong country when they gave birth to them. They're not healthy Americans with a healthy, American outlook, they're scary people from somewhere else.
As many have pointed out, it is unlikely that a single member of the Department of Homeland Security is a real American. Each and every one of them is a descendent of some man or woman who came here a number of years ago and who got together with a number of their un-American friends, pushed the real Americans out west, and called themselves citizens of the United States of America.
Now, these new Americans' descendents are fingerprinting what we have termed "immigrants" because their ancestors didn't enter the US before their birth. America may be the land of the free for some immigrants, but not for others, and not for real Americans.
Tags: Politics, Current Events, Current Affairs, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, Immigration, Fingerprinting, Homeland Security, Native Americans, Bush, Terrorism
26 July 2006
If You Ban Gay Marriage, Ban Divorce
The Washington State Supreme Court recently decided to uphold a 1998 law that banned gay marriage, overruling two lower courts that said it violated the state's Equal Rights Amendment. Justice James Johnson wrote that the legislature had "a compelling governmental interest in preserving the institution of marriage, as well as the healthy families and children it promotes. This conclusion may not be changed by mere passage of time or currents of public favor and surely not changed by courts."
Absolutely, healthy children are good.
Obvious issues concerning equal rights aside for the moment, why not take this "healthy families, healthy children idea" further. We have a responsibility to the next generation.
First, ban divorce. It tears families apart and leaves children to be switched back and forth between parents. It's not Christian, and it's not healthy.
Bring inmates home. Who cares if they're violent criminals. Kids should not be brought up with a single parent. (Note, many states really do have irrational sentencing procedures, especially in relation to drugs, such as Michigan and New York, which often result in inmates being housed six hours by car away from their carless family. It really is bad, and it needs to be fixed.)
Bring soldiers home before they die. Growing up knowing your mom or dad died in a war fought for reasons the president appears unsure of is bad for kids, and does not encourage patriotism. Wars should be ended and soldiers brought home to help raise their kids. (Note, wars really are bad, and the president really does like to change his mind a lot about why we're in Iraq.)
These are measures that need to be taken immediately, because kids grow up fast. We don't want kids growing up with parents in Afghanistan or prison, or with divorced parents, or, worse still, parents with the same kind of gametes.
Tags: Politics, Gay Rights, Current Events, Current Affairs, Gay Marriage, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, Equal Rights, LGBT
Absolutely, healthy children are good.
Obvious issues concerning equal rights aside for the moment, why not take this "healthy families, healthy children idea" further. We have a responsibility to the next generation.
First, ban divorce. It tears families apart and leaves children to be switched back and forth between parents. It's not Christian, and it's not healthy.
Bring inmates home. Who cares if they're violent criminals. Kids should not be brought up with a single parent. (Note, many states really do have irrational sentencing procedures, especially in relation to drugs, such as Michigan and New York, which often result in inmates being housed six hours by car away from their carless family. It really is bad, and it needs to be fixed.)
Bring soldiers home before they die. Growing up knowing your mom or dad died in a war fought for reasons the president appears unsure of is bad for kids, and does not encourage patriotism. Wars should be ended and soldiers brought home to help raise their kids. (Note, wars really are bad, and the president really does like to change his mind a lot about why we're in Iraq.)
These are measures that need to be taken immediately, because kids grow up fast. We don't want kids growing up with parents in Afghanistan or prison, or with divorced parents, or, worse still, parents with the same kind of gametes.
Tags: Politics, Gay Rights, Current Events, Current Affairs, Gay Marriage, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, Equal Rights, LGBT
24 July 2006
Protect Rights, Not Powers
In the past, US citizens feared infringements on rights. That is, theoretically, why there is a United States of America in the first place: the British went overboard with their power and the colonists fought back, created a constitution, and wrote the Bill of Rights to stop anything like that from ever happening again.
Never before has there been concern over an infringement of powers.
But that was one of the president's concerns last week when he agreed to allow limited review of the eavesdropping program being conducted by the NSA. Apparently, although the program is a clear violation of the fourth amednment and is defined by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act as a felony, the president has what have been referred to as "inherent powers," and FISA is in violation of his powers.
Yeah. Preventing the violation of our rights will be in violation of his powers.
If there was truly a separation of powers, the right of the Judicial branch to review the program would not be questioned. It would be demanded. Perhaps more importantly, the Executive branch would be without the "inherent power" to override legislation from the Legislative branch, such as FISA.
Tags: Politics, Current Events, Bush, Current Affairs, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, Politics of Fear, NSA, Terrorism, Wiretaps, Fourth Amendment
Never before has there been concern over an infringement of powers.
But that was one of the president's concerns last week when he agreed to allow limited review of the eavesdropping program being conducted by the NSA. Apparently, although the program is a clear violation of the fourth amednment and is defined by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act as a felony, the president has what have been referred to as "inherent powers," and FISA is in violation of his powers.
Yeah. Preventing the violation of our rights will be in violation of his powers.
If there was truly a separation of powers, the right of the Judicial branch to review the program would not be questioned. It would be demanded. Perhaps more importantly, the Executive branch would be without the "inherent power" to override legislation from the Legislative branch, such as FISA.
Tags: Politics, Current Events, Bush, Current Affairs, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, Politics of Fear, NSA, Terrorism, Wiretaps, Fourth Amendment
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)