Bush administration: Fourth Amendment doesn't apply to domestic military operations
Danny sez, "Following on from the memo allowing torture overseas, Kurt Opsahl from EFF has spotted a footnoted reference to a memo from the Administration that says 'our Office recently concluded that the Fourth Amendment had no application to domestic military operations.'
So, if you're abroad and deemed an enemy combatant you can be tortured. If you're in the US, and you're caught up in a "military operation", you lose the bill of rights. Where exactly is the constitution supposed to apply?"
Link
(Thanks, Danny!)
Speaking of living a false delusion...
When is Bush ordering the National guard to start wearing red coats?
"Where exactly is the constitution supposed to apply?"
It doesn't. Haven't you people been paying attention to the last 7 years?
Isn't it time to acknowledge that the U.S. has been under Martial Law since shortly after 9-11?
All that's missing is the name.
PAPERS! May I haf your papers, bitte!
Sheesh.
i hate cops
God almighty this moron can't get out of office fast enough......
We are one more "terrorist act on US soil" away from National Socialism.
\War is Peace
\\Freedom is Slavery
\\\Ignorance is Strength
\\\\Amsoc above All
I'm not advocating anything here, but whatever happened to the bit about defending the United States from all threats, foreign AND DOMESTIC? If you ask me, this sorta thing SURE sounds like a domestic threat to my country. Then again, I'm old-fashioned, and believe that one of the best things about our Constitution is (was?) the Bill of Rights.
At least I've got a backup plan if things head south quickly around here - my fiancée is French. Dual citizenship FTW.
To steal a line from Randy Newman's great song, "A Few Words in Defense of Our Country:"
"A President once said,
"The only thing we have to fear is fear itself"
Now it seems like we’re supposed to be afraid
It’s patriotic in fact and color coded
And what are we supposed to be afraid of?
Why, of being afraid
That’s what terror means, doesn’t it?
That’s what it used to mean"
Since when has Bush done anything but wipe his ass with the Constitution?
not to worry, the high degree of political awareness, the defiance of overbearing authority and the the extreme reluctance to resort to force of the the typical American solider will protect you from any misuse of the military against civilians.
i hate cops
what does this have to do with the cops?
Isn't it time to acknowledge that the U.S. has been under Martial Law since shortly after 9-11?
9-11-1862? Yeah.
Crap like this is why we have a 2nd amendment.
Second Amendment and snark are all well and good, but seriously, can we get the Supreme Court on this, like, ASAP?
Takuan in #11
"not to worry, the high degree of political awareness, the defiance of overbearing authority and the the extreme reluctance to resort to force of the the typical American solider will protect you from any misuse of the military against civilians."
Wow, did you know me when I was in the Navy?
I've always been cantankerous. I've always been a grand believer in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. I've always known that following illegal orders will land you in Nuremberg, and I've always believed in the Geneva Convention.
In fact that was true when I did Army basic training between my Jr. and Sr. years in high-school as well.
All that said, while many soldiers believe as I did (and do) there are plenty that don't. And with the increasing police-icization (is that a word?) of the military I suspect those of us who really took seriously the "defend the Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic" are rapidly being outnumbered by the "because we're in charge" crowd.
I weep for my brothers and sisters. (and the rest of the nation as well)
-abs
I know several people who would respond to this story by saying, "Hey, if you're not doing anything wrong, you've got nothing to worry about. Only criminals are always crying about their rights."
Or at least that's how they responded to many similar stories in the past.
the word you are looking for is "privatization", or possibly "commericalization"
When the hell will the people of amerika rise up??? WTF is wrong with you? The entire world is wondering why you elected a moron, why you declared war on everyone, why you abuse your own citizens, torture prisoners, maintain concentration camps, spend a billion dollars a day on a war that is idiotic and still sleep at night.
What the hell is wrong with you? Did you not study history? I wish I lived in the US so I could lead a protest!!
Do you remember when there was a 'coalition of the willing' to make Iraq another state of the US? WTF happened to the search for Bin Laden? Suddenly oil is double the price and no-one is making any noise?
Forgive me if I say it but amerika deserves to die. You were the great ideal once but now you're just sheep. You are already dead, you just don't know it yet. Maybe when you're done screwing over the world you'll figure it out.
And here is my last bit of vitriol: go to any country anywhere in the world and wave your flag proudly. See how long you live.
Censor me if you like. I already know how this ends.
All you paranoid liberal nutjobs are flying off the handle over a president that just wants to protect your children!! Get a life!!
I kid, I kid. Just thought I'd say it before our resident apologists-for-power chimed in with it.
But seriously, our constitution and society are extremely vulnerable to subversion in this way. That's why citizen groups like the ACLU are so important--because they take these things to court, and court precedents are very important in preventing and fighting this kind of thing.
As for the type of society that stands still for stuff like this, I can only quote Scoutmaster from the Dangers of Giant National Database thread:
"A whole lot of people believe that it's more important to do what you're told than to do what you think is right.... For them, thinking for yourself, being responsible, is horror and chaos. For them to think other people aren't under similar constraints is abject fear."
How on-the-nose is that? This describes to a T so many people I know!
PS: hey, ACLU--how come your stickers always peel off my car after 24 hours? Make better stickers, I beg you!
Thank you #9~!
That is why there is the second Amendment, so that We the American people can rise up and overthrow an unjust ruler sic. G.W. Bush. So when the end of his term is neigh and he formally declares martial law and suspends the election, we can rise up and slay his illegal government!
(I still get to fly, right?)
I don't want a flame-war. Don't waste time even responding to my rant. DO SOMETHING.
They have repeatedly said they (Cheney and Addington) intend to keep pushing until they meet some resistance. So far they have met none. Not from Congress and not from the people.
Nice to see that someone who "doesn't want a flame war" can be as coherent as the nutjob who is running our country. Separated at birth?
Thank goodness we have the Bush Administration to tell us what the Constitution really means. Before they came into power I wouldn't have known that the prevention of suspending the writ of habeas corpus only applies to those to which it has already been granted (???), that searches don't require warrants if the government feels that they are really important, and that the military can be deployed to search homes domestically without a rebellion taking place. I feel so silly now! If it wasn't for the Bush Administration I would have thought that the meaning of the Constitution was contained in its wording.
Oh Craig,
Your attitude is no different than the attitude of Americans that you so obviously loathe. "Why won't somebody ELSE do something?" Those Americans who even care about the current situation don't act because they a) don't think it will matter b) think somebody else is already acting for them and/or 3) haven't realized they should act, but instead whine about how nobody else is acting.
If you really cared you could be protesting for your own government (where ever it is that you live) to do something useful like call for the arrest and trial of Bush et al for war crimes, or at least go public with the fact that he's not welcome around for state dinners anymore.
I don't see any of our "allies" in the world holding us accountable. Perhaps their citizens aren't demanding it?
So, just sit back and lay your blame on the American people for all of this. That's the easy, lazy thing to do, isn't it? How American of you.
@#11: "the high degree of political awareness, the defiance of overbearing authority and the the extreme reluctance to resort to force of the the typical American solider will protect you from any misuse of the military against civilians."
Sure. Under martial law, abusing civilians is what the police are for.
Craig,
You won't be so uppity when we annex Canada. Imagine Guam, only really, really cold.
i have marched in a dozen peaceful protests over the last 6 years, ALL FOR NOTHING! i, for one, am getting sick and tired of the continued misuse of the constitution and the bill of rights! must we wait for marshall law to be declared before we, as a people, rise up and DO SOMETHING? they are already beginning to wage war on iran, do we wait til the troops are sent in en masse? i'm beginning to pull out my hair with frustration at both the administration and the populace. sigh. to all humans not affiliated with this country, i fell i must apologise . our president and vice president, in fact this whole admin. is pure evil, i am sorry...
Ceronomus:
Alls I'm sain is fixumacate it. Yew have a screwedimified country. And thats OK. I'm just shakin my hed and wonderin how such an intelugunt, bright, wonderful, free place is suddenly terrimified to the point of prosecutioning everyone and letting god sort 'em out.
Again, don't respondify; make the insanity stop. If you are a US citizen you have the power. More power than that guy in Afghanistan who's going to be shot in the head tomorrow morning for trying to get some water.
Please don't reply. DO SOMETHING.
@28
Well, given that the military in Vietnam couldn't tell which way was up between north and south, fighting in the streets with people who look, talk and share much of the same culture would be rather difficult.
As a voter who was disenfranchised in the 2004 election, tell me again how "I have all the power." Really, I love hearing about that when I wasn't even allowed to vote.
Hey Craig? Don't reply, get of YOUR ass and do something too. I have been, and my efforts have gotten ZERO results.
So, as a citizen of a government who doesn't give a damn about it citizens I must point out that you have as good, if not better, of a chance of forcing change in the US at the moment. After the next election?
Well, here is hoping that I get to vote this time.
Oh, and Craig? Your response is too coherent, so I apologize for thinking you were related to Bush. Everyone knows that HE spells it "Fihksoomikat"
Hi Craig,
I'm planning on doing something. I'm planning on voting. Same as I have every year. I'm also planning on pissing off my friends by talking politics at them until they get off their asses and vote too. (also the same as I do all the time)
Since the climate in the US is not currently one that would allow armed revolution I'm not on-board with anything else at the moment. When that climate changes I'll consider it.
For now I prefer the Rule of Law.
But if it gets much worse I'll have to start looking at the weather more often, so to speak.
-abs
The sad thing is that this administration is so obsessed with "national security" and the "war on terrorism" and so focused on this that they are forgetting what we as a nation stand for--or used to stand for. Constitutionally, the executive branch is weak. Read the document; Congress has the power. But over the course of history, somehow John Yoo's "Unitary Executive Theory" has become a reality. While I know that national security is a very pressing issue, it's not the only issue that we face in our society. And really... I don't think we have much of a society to protect. But regardless, it doesn't take the study of legal cases about warrantless searches and seizures to know that this "shocks the conscious" of even the most morally bankrupt Americans, even if they are watching MTV, playing video games, and planning to shoot up their school.
Mintfresh: don't apologize, and don't give up. Keep fighting the good fight.
I'd like to add here, if it's not too off-topic, that Mr. Supposedly Against Torture John McCain recently failed to live up to that position in the Congress.
So now the idea that waterboarding is not torture is the law of the land. Thanks, Congress!
PS: why is Craiggnoble yelling at people who agree with him, and why has he started talking like Li'l Abner? :)
I'm more depressed by the day. I would say that I can't wait for Jan 20 2009, but that will change little to nothing. We aren't getting out of Iraq. We will probably go into Iran, or stay if we are already there (well... we probably are). We will continue to ignore international law. We will continue to treat our citizens like criminals... etc, etc. And I don't think it matters if we take to the street to protest and vote in the dems in November... Obama or Hilary, either, it doesn't matter because nothing real will change. Obama's deal is working within the system, but what about the system itself? I'm really at a lost for what to do... we can get incremental change of sort, but that is about all we're gonna get.
Craig- yes, we can get out on the street and raise a ruckus, but frankly, all we'll get are democrats who are just as bad as the repubs. And what would an out and out revolt change, really? Not much... It would still end up the same old system or possibly some sort of cult of personality regimes that far too many revolutions end up as. What happens to the idealistic revolutinaries when the revolution is over? They have to run a country, that's what. They get stuck in the same conundrums that those who run nation-states get into now. No one EVER questions the system, and tries to fix that in any meaningful way.
I'm really at a loss to know what to do about this or anything else... It makes me understand why so many in the 60s just sort of gave up...
Mindy
xopl;
I'm not an american. and, yes, I have protested the shit out of this. and, yes, your government doesn't want me in their homeland.
I'm pretty much betting that I can't fly anywhere. I don't want to try that theory because my guess is that I would end up in a torture cell for five years with no trial, no charges, no recourse and lots and lots of torture.
Forgive me if I say 'wake the hell up'. You and your country are doing really, really bad things. If you aren't doing anything to stop it then you are collaborating.
----------
Antinous:
I said I didn't want a flame war. I think you underestimate the resolve of Canada. I think your president underestimates it. We're not in your war, we welcome your draft-dodgers, we have peace and sovereignty. And the last time I checked your dollar was plummeting as everyone suddenly realizes that you are spending a shitload of money on a made-up crusade and the foreclosure-guy is knocking at the door.
Maybe we should close our border now.
What I can tell Americans is: "beware the military governments".
This kind of action (deciding for the suspension of civil rights and allowing the use of brute force for extracting information - and confessions) was largely used by dictatorial governments in Latin America in the 60ies and 70ies.
I think that Bush administration is taking a lot of "preemptive" actions directed to assure continuity. And I feel that these people wont be ashamed to go as far as they think necessary.
Here in the lands of south we have large experience in governments closing congress, closing courts, establishing "state of emergency" (and it would be easy to do that, all they have to do is to blow up another building...).
Remember that lost freedom takes decades to be found again.
@ Craig in #39
"Forgive me if I say 'wake the hell up'. You and your country are doing really, really bad things. If you aren't doing anything to stop it then you are collaborating."
Whoah there cowboy. I call "Bullshit".
Collaboration requires action. French who didn't help the Nazis were NOT collaborators, they were victims. Your usage implies that everyone who wasn't a member of La Resistance was a collaborator, and that's just wrong. That term has a specific meaning, and you are misusing it badly.
If someone helps the Bushies, then they're collaborating. If someone fights them they're resisting. The rest of the people might morally repulse you because of their inaction, but they aren't collaborators.
-abs
Please make the big movement. I don't care what it is but please DO SOMETHING. You are already inside. You are smart people, you know what's going on. Your news progammes tell you the body count from Afghanistan and Iraq every evening, right? You are watching this... uh... because you're paying for it... uh... explosions... people dead... your entire country on a mortgage to the East... hello?
On the other hand; maybe I'm nuts. It's plausible that I see conspiracies where there are none.
What makes this particularly worrying is the last eight years of filling vacant spots in the lower courts with judges who only make passing reference to the law. As it stands, this sort of thing is merely an opinion, the justification that would be used in court if it ever came up. it isn't law. however, as much as conservatives like to bleat on about judicial activists, if you look at recent [conservative] supreme court decisions, they come dangerously close to giving 'because I said so' as justifications of their opinions. Also, seeing as this applies to domestic military operations, by the time a fourth amendment violation got to court, Operation Dumbo Drop would be complete; I don't see Barney Fife going down to arrest the generals for constitutional breach. just why is the US preparing to attack its own citizens anyway? Are you guys actually terrorists? Tell the truth now.
Of course this all leads back to my pet theory that the United States is anarchy in action, but I'll save that for when the trolls arrive.
Okay, I give up. There. You win.
Yippee.
"A whole lot of people believe that it's more important to do what you're told than to do what you think is right.... " (comment #20)
For them, doing what you're told is the right thing to do.
You're not nuts. There are major problems in the US today. The "war" in Iraq is one, but not the only one, and from my perspective not the important one either. (Personally I'm more concerned about the abridgement of civil rights.)
What you are doing however is overestimating the amount of power anyone in America has. So long as the Rule of Law remains in force Americans have little choice about doing anything.
The only power the American people have, within the law, is that of voting the bastards out. Protests are cute and cuddly and all, but they have no force within the eyes of the law. All they can do is hope to convince voters that the NEXT TIME they vote they should vote better.
Beyond that the options of an average American are about nil, provided they do wish to resort to extra-legal sanctions.
And most of us Americans don't think assassinating our government officials for their actions is a really good idea. (at the moment we don't at least) Most of us think Anarchy would be worse.
(If you're Canadian you should bloody well prefer our current state to anarchy as well. If you really think about what the repercussions on Canada would be in the event of REAL anarchy in the USA you would never want it.)
I understand you're frustrated. So am I. But put the rhetoric aside and be realistic about what Americans can and can't do about their government. It won't make you less frustrated, but at least you'll sound more sane.
-abs
Craig, you're telling us to do something, but what should we do, in your opinion? What is to be done? A revolt (end result, violent oppression, things worse than before)? A protest movement (cooption that leads to only incremental change)? I think that there is a whole other level to this that I see no way out of, if that makes any sense. You work within the system, your screwed, you work outside the system, you get nohwere, marginalized and ignored.
See why we're frustrated? It's not that many of us don't think your right, and lots of us are doing stuff... but...
I'm just at a loss, frankly. I think I'm not the only one.
Mindy
#19 - I don't suppose you have any specific suggestions about what "DO SOMETHING" would actually involve, do you? Because people *have* been trying. Maybe not as many as I wish, but still a hell of a lot of people, and nothing we're doing appears to be working. We want to stop it, we want to "do something," *we just don't have a damned idea what to do that could actually accomplish anything at all.*
Conventional protests are apparently completely useless - they happen frequently, and mean nothing. Voting drives and similar efforts are omni-present, and maybe that will result in positive change following next November, and maybe it won't. Armed revolution and the like just ain't gonna happen, and any attempt would be a disaster on par with 9-11 that would make our current national state of sociopathic, xenophobic paranoia look like a minor nervous twitch.
So please, for god's sake, if you have any ideas, please share them with us.
You aren't in "Our War" Craig? Last time I checked, Canadian troops aren't due to be pulled out of Afghanistan until maybe Feb 2009.
As for Iraq? That is nobody's war but Bush's.
Go easy on Craig.
As hard as the current administration are on American citizens who complain, they're much, much harder on foreign nationals who complain and then fall into their grasp.
Redaction (kidnapping) and water-boarding (torture) are just the beginning.
And Canadians get no leniency. In fact, Canadians have become somewhat of a target for refusing to invade Iraq, criticizing U.S. policy on domestic spying and torture, not cooperating with REAL ID and Total Security Awareness, and resisting efforts to militarize the U.S.-Canada border (among other acts of "terrorist support").
Clean up your yard, America. All of your neighbors are complaining.
Craig,
We don't really have flame wars on Boing Boing. We do try to have a sense of humor. What seems to be happening here is that you're screaming and everybody else is scratching their heads wondering why.
I'm not clear why someone in Canada is so interested in vilifying individual citizens of the US. Maybe you don't keep up on economic news. Our lives have kind of gone to hell down here. Many of my compatriots have lost their homes. We've certainly lost our liberties. If I could find a Canadian guy to marry me (and big thanks for making sodomy not just legal but glamorous), I'd be up there last week. Are you hating on the Burmese for their government? The people of Zimbabwe? Yeah, our government sucks. Is that a good reason to hurl poo at us?
Mindy:
You sound like an idealistic person. You're exactly the kind of person who must not get discouraged or succumb to despair.
Hope is the only thing they CAN'T take away from you. They can only gleefully accept it as a gift from you, and congratulate themselves on having worn you down and won that way.
Where would we be if the Civil Rights Movement gave up? They didn't capitualte to depair, and they were being murdered and beaten. I think we can tough it out here, don't you?
Per the Dems: I'm as dissatisfied with them as anyone, and they are decidely too centrist for me, but until a viable third party candidate comes along, the only rational political position to take is to support them. They are at the moment to only alternative to the Republicans.
Three weeks ago, I watched "V for Vendetta" for the first time. The parallels were absolutely chilling. I believe this country was founded on freedom as its guiding principle, not safety. And yet, as our standard of living has grown, We The People have demanded safety: safety from Big Bad Businessmen, safety from hurting ourselves as we voluntarily ride motorcycles, safety from vaguely threatening folks from the other side of the world. I will never make my kids wear helmets or pads (hell, by not wearing those as a bike-riding, skateboarding kid, I learned how to fall) and I teach them to stand up for themselves and to do so for the weaker amongst them. I will not live as a victim and I will not perpetuate that mindset in my family. The government should fear the People, the People should never fear their government.
CStatman, this isn't the police. Let's pray it stays that way.
Craig Noble, we understand your frustration. We've been living with insane levels of frustration for a long time now. Believe me. We know.
Also, can you please make that first screed of yours your ceiling for inflammatory language? It's no damned use to tell us that if we're not fighting back, we're collaborators. Many of us have fought back on every occasion we could.
When is the rest of the world going to figure out that this is a years-long slow-motion coup, and send in the UN peacekeepers and election observers?
Oh and as it relates to protesting in this country, I'm surprised no one has mentioned the repression and persecution of ordinary citizens of the US that tried protesting the WTO meetings held here. Remember? Governors and mayors conspired to outlaw lawful peaceful protest. The times they gotta change...
ACK Ack ACK Aack ack ack ACK Ack!
Remember when they look at each other, shrug and say "it worked the last time" and then go back to "We come in peace" as they fry the Earthmen?
That is you. And the Martians are the neo-con mafia.
ACK Ack ACK Aack ack ack ACK Ack!
It alarms me that I knew exactly what this references without reading any further.
#50 is right - inflamatory language in general probably won't help anything, and I desperately hope the those outside the US are at least vaguely aware that many Americans are aware of what our country has been responsible for around the world and have been trying (however unsuccessfully) to stop or even mitigate it. But given the severity of our country's actions, the rest of the world has every logical reason and right to be incredibly frightened and angry.
Want to help? Go to *your* governments. Go to the UN. America doesn't seem to be capable of stopping itself at this point. We are a rogue state, we're out of control, and our locally-grown agents of sanity are trying to reign us in, and it's not working. We need help. I doubt it could actually happen here and now, but for our own sakes and those of everyone else I wish the UN was actually powerful enough to step in here.
The coup taking place is slow, but it's happening quickly and overtly enough that we could stop it if we cared enough.
The fact that it's so overt is the neo-cons' way of saying two things: 1) See? Americans agree with us, or we couldn't do this; and 2) Protest, you little pissants. You can't stop this.
It's time to prove them wrong on both counts.
Per frustration: sometimes I'm so sick at heart that I want to go out and kill honeybees so as to hasten the demise of our species!
Then it passes and sanity returns.
The EFF is jumping to some pretty far-out conclusions here.
When you are talking about "Authority for Use of Military Force to Combat Terrorist Activities Within the United States" you are talking about the imposition of martial law, which would suspend the fourth amendment among others. If there was a severe terrorist attack that put the population of a city in to mass panic, I could see where military force could be required. I really don't think this applies to domestic surveillance.
I don't put much stock in one organizations's opinion or propaganda, which is all this EFF article is. Does anyone else here see how crying "surveillance on the everyday communications of millions of americans" vs. "terrorists are constantly trying to kill millions of americans" show just about the same level of fermongering?
fear not. A great underclass looms. When enough are hungry, change comes.
**note - the "want to help - go to your governments" was directed at Craig, and any others around who are posting from outside the US. Our country desperately needs to be called on its actions, and the governments of Europe are the closest things to friends that we still have have. People might bitch and moan, but we aren't *actually* going to bomb France.
Teresa @#54 asks:
"When is the rest of the world going to figure out that this is a years-long slow-motion coup, and send in the UN peacekeepers and election observers?"
A team of monitors observed the 2004 United States election, after concerns of voter inaccuracy in the 2000 U.S. election:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._presidential_election%2C_2004#International_observers
I wonder how many people, twenty years down the road when all the dirty laundry has been dug up and classified memos published, will actually admit to having voted for Bush.
"Oh, I was a Republican back then, but I could tell he wasn't a real conservative."
Nick-
Thanks, I guess... I don't know how idealistic it is to see the system as the problem. That means that no matter what, we're up that brown creek of poo completely paddle-less, and short of life vest. It waffles between humans being responsible and the system being responsible... the system has become invisible and human action is almost an after thought when we assign blame...
The two party duopoloy, as Nader likes to call it, doesn't let viable third parties into the game, hence we will never know if a 3rd party can be viable. Let's take Nader... he made serious inroads in 00, and look what happened to him- the democrats decided that those votes "belonged" to them, and that mean old Ralph stole them. What has a tendency to happen is that the major parties will often co-opt 3rd party positions to bring some of those folks into the fold, at least in the past. Now they don't have to budge an inch, because CNN and Fox will tell everyone that the 3rd party candidates are just crazy go nuts, and either "liberal" (ie communist) or "conservative (ie fascist). They don't need to give, and this is what has happened to the democrats, most especially (for some reason liberalism is worse than conservatism).
Sure, in theory, black Americans are now equal. In theory. Reality is another ball game. There is still economic and social inequalities, but of course, people start yelling "affirmative action is bad for white men" and "reverse racism" and everyone backs off, because that's "liberalism" or communism, and that's bad. And we still have far more black men in jail than white. And we have subprime lenders going into communities that "regular" banks won't touch, and then the rug gets yanked out...
Sure, I'll vote. I'll pick a side. Sure, I'll be part of the system, but how am I supposed to hang onto my idealism, my love of humanity, when I'm part of the system, that keeps people doing these awful things to one another (Kosova, Bosnia, Rwanda, The Congo, Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam, the Cultural revolution, the world wars, the holocaust, the Armenian genocide, the native Americans, slavery, imperialism, colonialism- and these are just the big ones off the top of my head). I guess my question is- what do we do about modernity? I suppose I could drop out, but then nothing gets changed, and no one is around to say anything... so here I am. I can point and tell everyone what I think the problem is, and I can have a forum, thanks to the internet, but god damn if things will change because I rant, either in the tubes, or in my academic work, or whatever.
See my problem, Nick?
Mindy
#59 -- Stop it, how? Protests are dismissed or ignored. I call and write my congressmen. I vote when given the chance. None of it seems to make a difference, not that I've stopped trying.
The constitution is dead, or at least parts of it. Coming this November, whoever wins, the constitution looses. You have to pick. One candidate will do all that they can to ignore/abolish the 4th and 5th amendments, and the other will do all they can to destory the 2nd amendment. If you believe, like me, that the ENTIRE constitution is worth defending, then you are out of luck.
The trouble is, that, even now, there is no civilized country that has the freedoms that America still allows you to have.
This discussion gives me faith. It's not all done for.
I have no problem being some sort of target. There is never anything fatal. Of course, I'm preaching to the choir.
I have this to say:
Take it back. I don't know how, I don't know what, but your values and opinions and way of life have been taken away from you. Take them back. Stop killing people. Stop torturing people. Stop ignoring those less fortunate. Stop just being really, really evil.
If this were a galaxy far, far away; yer bildin teh deth str.
Does anyone else here see how crying "surveillance on the everyday communications of millions of americans" vs. "terrorists are constantly trying to kill millions of americans" show just about the same level of fermongering?
WeightedCompanionCube:
Your comment presupposes that my and others' positions are predicated on the statements of one organization (EFF), rather than on our lived experience of the past eight years, and on our analysis of recent events and legislative abominations.
The problem with recent (past eight years or more) legislation is twofold:
1) it increasingly accords the Executive Branch the power to be the sole arbiter of what constitutes a threat, what constitutes an enemy, what constitutes reasonable cause, what constitutes legality, etc., etc., etc. The list goes on and on;
and
2) it increasingly positions the military, under direct command of the Commander-in-Chief, as the sole administrator of order and the rule of law. As these things are interpreted solely by--guess who?-- the Commander-in-Chief.
All of which is a subversion the idea that the military is answerable to the civil government.
Thus we have Bush saying that the sole reason he needs to do whatever he wants in the area of surveillance or security is that he thinks it's a good idea.
There are those who downplay recent amendments to laws by saying, "This has been in force for years, it's nothing new, we've always had provisions for martial law."
My question for them is: why then do we need to make these changes? Changes to laws that were good enough for us during WWII, in the wake of Pearl Harbor? Why is it that Roosevelt could combat Tojo and Hitler under these laws, but Bush finds them too constraining?
I invite you to prove me wrong. If you can, I will thank you for it, I promise.
I think there's been some confusion about the duties of the members of our federal government. I'd just like to put up a quick reminder.
President's oath of office:
"I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
Congressional oath of office:
"I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter."
Judicial oath of office:
"I do solemnly swear that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God."
and
"I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."
Of course, its a bit old fashioned, but may i suggest that since economic power and political or legal power are inextricably linked, it may be wise to seize economic power throuh workplace organisation? Easier said than done, I know, but the fact is any real problem for US citizens, apart from increasing un and under employment, lies squarely in the future. It remains a rich country, and as much as we take the piss, a cultured country, of sorts, which is to say plenty of distractions. You can still, for instance, go to the Metropolitan Museum of Art for free, which is enough to last many lifetimes.
The word radical literally means at the roots; it assumed its present meaning throuh marx, for whom radicalism was precisely getting to the roots of politics and power. so throuh research, we can begin to understand where exactly politicians get off spouting the crap they do; but to change things, that is something that can only be understood through practise. People have tried, succeeded and failed to change thins for as lon as there have been things to change. If you're from the US, the reason you didn't have to work sixteen hours a day six days a week in a coal mine or at a loom is because people fought, bled and died for the right not to do that, a cause much more worthy than your war of independence...and because some poor kids in Singapore are stuck doing it now.
historically, progressive elements are marginalised as a state moves toward more totalitarian powers, so simply meeting a few like minded mates in a pub once a week, month whatever to discuss what's going on is probably an excellent start. I mean, just see what happens. or do people need to be told even how to do this these days?
"I know several people who would respond to this story by saying, "Hey, if you're not doing anything wrong, you've got nothing to worry about. Only criminals are always crying about their rights."
My reply to this is always "If you have nothing to hide, why bother sending your mail in an envelope? Would not a postcard be easier and cheaper?..."
#23 Noen - citation please?
#60 -
Well, there's two parts here, weightedcompanioncube. Firstly, there's no mention of martial law in the memo reference. If you read it in the context of the original memo, it seems clear to me that the implication is that the memo is claiming that the fourth amendment does not apply to *any* military domestic operation, not just those under martial law. Martial law is the ultimate act, and not one to be undertaken lightly. As the Supreme Court said: "If, in foreign invasion or civil war, the courts are actually closed, and it is impossible to administer criminal justice according to law, then, on the theatre of active military operations, where war really prevails, there is a necessity to furnish a substitute for the civil authority, thus overthrown, to preserve the safety of the army and society; and as no power is left but the military, it is allowed to govern by martial rule until the laws can have their free course. As necessity creates the rule, so it limits its duration; for, if this government is continued after the courts are reinstated, it is a gross usurpation of power. Martial rule can never exist where the courts are open, and in the proper and unobstructed exercise of their jurisdiction. It is also confined to the locality of actual war." That's a far step from any domestic military action.
Personally, I find that easily disturbing enough, and I think that's what most of the people here are upset about.
Your second part is connected to EFF's current lawsuit regarding warrantless surveillance. You should understand that EFF is currently in a lawsuit where the government has yet to present its case as to why it believes that its program is legal, although it has repeatedly asserted that it is, and has indeed fought against having to define its defence in court. It has also attempted to change the law to grant retroactive immunity to the defendants in our case, which I humbly suggest might indicate that they are not quite as confident of their legal position as all that.
Of course we are going to assert that what is taking place is warrantless wiretapping of millions. The telcos arguments in Washington that our lawsuit would bankrupt them (their argument, not ours) also seem to back this up, as only the penalties attached to the illegal wiretapping of millions of Americans would cost that much (statutory fines are on a per person basis - a few thousand American contacts of suspects would be pocket change to the telcos).
The questions this Deeplink is mulling is what exactly is the Administration's case that their program was legal. As far as EFF is concerned, both the law and the constitution rules against wiretapping the domestic communications of Americans (we're not talking about domestic->foreign calls here). I don't think it's fearmongering to actually mull what argument is being made behind closed doors. We're as curious as anyone else -- that's part of the many, many reasons that EFF wants this case to continue.
It's painful as hell to stand by and watch this train wreck happening on the other side of the border, and to be unable to participate actively in the process. From a Canadian perspective it is hard to appreciate how entirely fubar'd the American political process is.
You have to remember that up here we produce a major new political party every couple of decades. They often get absorbed into the current edition of the Conservative Party eventually, because the Liberals have effectively staked out the broad political center for so long that they are know as "the natural governing party" in some circles.
But when crazy groups like the CCF/NDP, the Progressives, the Social Credit, Reform/Alliance and the Bloc Quebecois form they are effective at shifting the balance within and between the two major parties. The Greens might be the next force to be reckoned with if they can dump their doctrinaire lefty leader and broaden their appeal to homeless Red Torys.
So from our point of view, the American political process is almost incomprehensibly broken. We feel like we're standing on the outside and if we were just there we could do something. But we forget that unlike Canada, the United States has a completely moribund political culture.
And that is the fundamental enabler for Bush and company. They have no real opposition. It is the political class vs the people, and neither party is on your side.
I don't know what I'd do if I was an American right now. Probably join the Democratic Party and work for change from within, in the hope that a generation from now the rule of law would be restored. Or maybe attack partisans from the outside, and encourage independents to run.
Either way, it is the work of a generation, just like the Civil Rights movement was. You guys are good at this stuff, once you figure out where you want to go and have a rough idea of how to get there.
I just hope that the Bill of Rights isn't completely shredded first. Pasting it back together again would be for another generation entirely.
Mindy: idealism isn't the belief that the system is good or getting better, or even that it CAN get better. It is simply the belief that it should be better.
My ethos dictates that I have to fight for my ideals whether or not I believe I can win. Anything less is cowardice.
Per your other comments: I think you're letting your discouragement color your views. Ask any black man or woman if they would rather be living today or in the 1950s. I think they will, to a person, answer that things are better today. How can you not be encouraged by that?
@ Bluemonq: thank you. I don't think we can remind ourselves too often of what our officials are supposed to be loyal to, by law. Bush's sin is that he has demanded loyalty to nothing but himself. Shame on him and those who have played that game. May they rot in hell.
# 75, Tom said "So from our point of view, the American political process is almost incomprehensibly broken. We feel like we're standing on the outside and if we were just there we could do something. But we forget that unlike Canada, the United States has a completely moribund political culture.
And that is the fundamental enabler for Bush and company. They have no real opposition. It is the political class vs the people, and neither party is on your side."
I think you hit the nail on the head on that count.
#70- Agreed.
#71- Again, agreed. It's quite powerful, but the state of the unions is pretty sorry right now, and of course, Unions can often have their own problems. So, again, we get back to the system, or in the case of unions, another system...
Mindy
so, you think the election will change anything?
Nick D - I didn't argue there was a problem with recent legislation. I was referring solely to the EFF's conclusions and argument that this administraton is possibly conducting surveillance on "millions of Americans". I don't agree with that kind of paranoid assumption any more than I agree with giving up civil liberties because "if you don't, the terrorists will kill millions"
Oh, and if the question is "Why is it that Roosevelt could combat Tojo and Hitler under these laws?" Look up Executive Order 9066, and consider that was enacted after a clear military target was attacked by a clear military combatant. 9/11 saw a civilian target get attacked, which is a situation far more unexpected and uncertain. Considering we didn't round up every person of middle eastern ethnicity on the East Coast, I'd say we have improved a bit. I don't place blame or credit on any administration for the difference in reactions, I just think we've evolved as a nation.
Whenever there is a significant shock to a nation, the administration is going to get paranoid, imagine the threat to be greater than it really is, and compensate by trying to grab more power. This is not a good thing, but it is inevitable. Also, you are going to have organizations that recognize this, but they also overestimate the situation and make exaggerated claims.
Both of these resolve when cooler heads prevail. We're seeing that start to happen.
Nick- I'll grant you that now is better than then. Doesn't that go without saying... But, one could argue that Jim Crow was better than slavery, and did, in fact. Overall, I just think it was a case of co-option and compromise. But that doesn't mean that it's as good as it could be. We have a tendency to fix the effects, not the causes. I'm just wondering if there can ever be anything but compromise under the system as it is, when it has such a pervasive reach into our everyday lives, now more than ever. We have one of the most effective tools for organizing than ever before, true... but they have to most effective surveillance tools ever devised as well. We are at a tipping point, according to Moglen, or we were recently:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NorfgQlEJv8
The question is whether we've gone past that point and it's too late.
As for idealism, I do have some. I do believe that people can do great and wonderful things, but we can do some shit things too. Human nature channeled through group think can be downright scary.
Mindy
Takuan- I'm not sure who you're asking, but I think no. Not in any real way. Anyone else?
Mindy
I was asking any person eligible to vote.
Next question: If your vote is no longer a vote, what do you do now?
Well, the logical next step here, if things are as bad as the commenters here seem to be saying, is armed conflict and resistance. When can we expect you guys to begin your guerrilla war?
Frankly (and maybe I'm just getting cranky here because I'm tired--if so, please excuse me) but there is a point where commiserating about the state of things turns self-indulgent. Let's not go there.
heh!
change "western"to "middle eastern"
“The days of looking the other way while despotic regimes trample human rights, rob their nations' wealth, and then excuse their failings by feeding their people a steady diet of anti-Western hatred are over.”
Dick Cheney quote
wooo-woooo! the spirits are about to speak! EEEEEEEE! (adjusts turban): Ma Feller Boingerinos! Ah has been holdin outs on ya, I can furtell da futchur!
"Quarter Of Americans Now Think Iran is The Biggest Enemy
Consistent neocon propaganda campaign paying off...
by Steve Watson
Global Research, April 2, 2008
A quarter of Americans believe that Iran now poses the biggest threat to the United States, confirming that a sustained neocon propaganda campaign to demonize Iran and its leaders for their own strategic benefit is having a significant impact.
According to a new poll by Gallup, Iran is top of the enemy list, with 25 percent, followed by Iraq at 22 percent, then China with 14 percent, and North Korea with 9 percent.
Republicans are more than twice as likely as Democrats to see Iran as the top U.S. enemy, while Democrats are likelier to name Iraq. Older people and those who say they closely follow world news are less likely to cite Iraq than the younger and less informed, reported the AP.
It was September last year when the New Yorker magazine reported that Barnett Rubin, a highly respected Afghanistan expert at New York University, asserted that Dick Cheney ordered top Neo-Con media outlets, including Fox News and the Wall Street Journal, to unleash a PR blitz to sell conflict with Iran.
The fruits of that propaganda campaign are now clear to see."
Thets all Boingers, carry onz a-dying!