Slashdot Mirror
Former Intel Employee 'Disappeared' by U.S.
pmodern writes "Wired has this story about Maher "Mike" Hawash a former Intel programmer who is being held by the DOJ for suspected terrorism. Anyone familiar with the Kevin Mitnick saga will not be surprised that he hasn't been charged and has been locked away in solitary. 'For nearly two weeks, he has been held as a so-called "material witness" in solitary confinement in a federal lockup in Sheridan, Oregon. The designation allows authorities to hold him indefinitely without charging him with a crime.'" See also a NYT article and the Free Mike Hawash website.
I wonder where the goverment got their "Intel" from.
No seriously folks, I'm here all week
a trap :(
I hope this will stop in a few years, when paranoia goes away a bit..
I notice the USA takes every excuse to remove civil liberties.
I sincerely believe that the USA will become what it wants to be in it's belly - a xenophobic police state.
It's Christmas everyday with BitTorrent.
he will not receive the massive support and protest that mitnick received, simply because of his name. Kevin = American, where as Maher = sounds like something from one of those countries we are at war with. Kinda sad, really.
Internal security, the age-cry of the oppressor.
Hi
A fire at the Capital's web hosting facility building prompts Reichschancellor Ashcroft to arrest hundreds of citizens without charges. Some are being deported, while others are being relocated to "Ghettos" without internet connections or access to compilers or interpreters. . .
You are not the customer.
Times like this, I'm glad I'm Canadian ...
PORTLAND, Ore., April 3 -- For the last two weeks, Maher Hawash, a 38-year-old software engineer and American citizen who was from the West Bank and grew up in Kuwait, has been held in a federal prison here, though he has not been charged with a crime or brought before a judge.
Relatives and friends of Mr. Hawash, who works for the Intel Corporation and is married to a native Oregonian, say he has no idea why he was arrested by a federal terrorism task force when he arrived for work at the Intel parking lot in Hillsboro, a Portland suburb. The family home was raided at dawn on the same day by nearly a dozen armed police officers, who woke Mrs. Hawash and the family's three children, friends said.
Mr. Hawash, who is known as Mike, has yet to be interrogated and is being kept in solitary confinement, his supporters say.
Federal officials will not comment on Mr. Hawash, though they have been pressed by Senator Ron Wyden, Democrat of Oregon, and by a group of supporters led by a former Intel vice president, for basic information about why he is being detained.
In a statement after his arrest, the F.B.I. said he was being held as a material witness in an "ongoing investigation" by the Joint Terrorism Task Force. Federal search warrants in the case are sealed.
The case has drawn the attention of civil liberties groups nationwide, who say Mr. Hawash's case is an example of how the Bush administration is holding a handful of American citizens without offering them normal legal protection.
Although at least two American citizens are being held without normal legal rights as "enemy combatants," Mr. Hawash has not been categorized as such. As a material witness, he is being held to compel testimony. But supporters say he has not been told anything about what the government may want from him.
"Our friend has fallen into some kind of `Alice in Wonderland' meets Franz Kafka," said Steven McGeady, the former Intel executive, who started a legal defense fund and a Web site for Mr. Hawash.
"You hear about this happening in other countries and to immigrants and then to American citizens," Mr. McGeady went on. "And finally you hear about it happening to someone you know. It's scary."
Mr. Hawash's family thought at first that his arrest was connected to two donations he made three years ago to an Islamic charity, Global Relief Foundation, whose assets were frozen last year when federal authorities said it was linked to terrorism. But now relatives say the contributions may not be related to his arrest, and he may be asked to testify about six people charged here last year with aiding terrorism.
Asked about the charitable donations -- which totaled a little more than $10,000 -- Mr. Hawash told the local newspaper, The Oregonian, in November: "We believed that they are doing good work. It's a well-known organization."
Civil liberties groups say material witness statutes are being abused by the Bush administration to hold people like Mr. Hawash indefinitely. "The government doesn't have and should not have the power to arrest and detain someone without charging them," said Lucas Guttentag, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Immigrants Rights Project. "If this kind of thing is permitted, then any United States citizen can be swept off the street and locked up without being charged."
Since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, the courts have made conflicting rulings on the legality of holding material witnesses without charging them. A federal judge in Manhattan, Shira A. Scheindlin, said such detentions were "an illegitimate use of the statute," but another ruling in the same court, by Chief Judge Michael B. Mukasey, said detaining witnesses to compel testimony was a legitimate investigative tool.
Attorney General John Ashcroft has defended the tactic, saying it is "vital to preventing, disrupting or delaying new attacks."
The Justice Department has not said how many Americans have been held without charges in terro
You can bypass the NYTimes registration and read the article here...
Slashdot's first reaction to VMware
What will be interesting is the media coverage. I mean, most people in the US are probably not aware that such a thing is possible and might, just *might* be a bit angered about this kind of StaSi-type of behaviour. Or maybe they'll just think "wow, great! Got another one of those terrorist bastards!"
I think one should seriously consider the option of moving to Russia...
But my Mom says I'm cool! -Milhouse
Note he is not being held for suspected terrorism, but as a material witness. AFAIK none of the stories I have read have seen any charges against him.
Three years ago he did donate $5K to an organization that is now being investigated for links to funding terrorist organizations, but that is not the same as being held as a suspected terrorist.
One must wonder if he didn't have rich friends if his case would even be noticed by anybody.
Warblogging.com has been covering Hawash's story, as well as the Total Information Awareness story for a good while now. "George Paine" is a well-informed writer and his links are usually pretty good.
student of animation and the fine arts
I wonder if Americans are more afraid of terrorism or of government actions... Scary stuff.
My penguin ate my sig
this story breaks the surface of the mainstream media to become a potential source of embarrassment about how the Land of the Free and the Home of Brave is treating detainess, then Plan B will be put into effect. and it will be time for a commercial break on CNN.
"Provided by the management for your protection."
So, basically, three years ago he donated 10k to a charity.
This resulted in "arrested by FBI agents at about 7 a.m. March 20 as he arrived for work at the Intel plant in Hillsboro, Oregon. During his arrest, a squad of armed agents in bulletproof vests stormed his home, seizing computers and files. His wife, Lisa, and their three children were asleep at the time"
The charity was "Global Relief Foundation, a Muslim charity that purported to fund mosques and schools in the United States, as well as West Bank medical facilities. "
And now he can be held indefinitely without charging him with a crime?
Err.. Wow. All I can say is I really hope there's something we don't know here. If this is actually what happened, then anyone can be arrested, at any time, without reason. They'll FIND something to do it for, no matter if it makes any sense or not.
Even though he's an important witness, he still has rights. They're treating him like a criminal though he is not. If they do not want him to flee, at least put him under strict house arrest where he'd at least be comfortable though still locked up.
Seems to me he hasn't even committed a crime at all.
The Pigloo
But wait! Didn't we just read something almost like the earlier:
If you don't want the government to do what it must to protect you from terrorists, you should butt out, said Heather MacDonald, a lawyer at the Manhattan Institute, a conservative think tank. She made her remarks Wednesday at the 13th annual Computers, Freedom and Privacy conference.
This is what happens when you let hysteria determine the future of laws and the interpretation of laws. What happens when America is not America anymore? Well I guess we are about to find out.
"I'm just here to regulate funkyness." - James Gandolfini, as Winston in The Mexican
Sound familiar to anyone else? Oh yeah, there was the case of Jose Padilla, an american citizen who was being held as a 'material witness' to some unknown crime, prevented from seeing his lawyer (violating the write of habeas corpus)transferred to a military brig outside Charleston, SC as an 'enemy combatant' and has yet to be charged with a crime.
Ain't it great when the government starts repeating itself?
Triv
There are quite a few people in that situation... If I was of middle-eastern decent, I would be really nervous.
And at the rate that laws are changing, all citizens will be really nervous (think Patriot Act).
Personally, I think that Bush and crew are really taking advantage of the situation.. but I cannot figure out why. Why would they need to be so paranoid?
Free Kevin^H^H^H^H^HMike!
This extra long bumper sticker will go well on all those huge SUVs Americans enjoy so much.
Curmudgeon Gamer: Not happy
After 9/11, Bush made two statements:
1. "Terrorists hate America because America is a land of freedom and opportunity."
2. "We intend to attack the root causes of terrorism."
Sounds like everything is going according to plan.
Tarsnap: Online backups for the truly paranoid
"For nearly two weeks, he has been held as a so-called "material witness" in solitary confinement in a federal lockup in Sheridan, Oregon. The designation allows authorities to hold him indefinitely without charging him with a crime."
With tools like that, who needs dictatorships? Just lockup anyone likely to compete about power of state. No chance of getting caught since everything is stamped "top secret". You simply cannot lay power like that in the hands of people. No matter what it WILL be abused!
The US is imploding far faster than anyone would imagine. Remember how Rome fell and why for a cluebat.
HTTP/1.1 400
"Disappeared" would imply that no one knew where he was.
There are regimes in the world that actually do this, like Iraq and Iran. Some of the South American governments were infamous for this.
So, the issue might be that he is being detained without due process or habeas corpus rights, but please don't confuse the issue and say the US government "disappeared" him.
Your Rights Online?
It seems to relate more to offline, doesn't it?
Developers: We can use your help.
Just subsitute "archive" for "www" in the server name - works for all the NYT articles. here's the link.
It seems to me that the only reason why slashdot would post this story is the fact that he's an Intel employee. If he weren't an engineer and worked at Wal-Mart, the story would be ignored. Makes you wonder just how many 'detainees' there are in the states, not counting Guantanamo, of course. ;-)
So long, and thanks for all the Phish
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Welcome to the beginning of the end, this is where it all starts.
Guilty until proven innocent will reign the USA.
Sad thing is, no one is seeing it
Posting useless rant since 2003.
Yeah, I rhymed.
Bush, the closest thing to fascist we've ever had.
Just remember what it was like 3 years ago: Economy was good, we had jobs, the President was brokering peace between Israel and Palestine, and our biggest worry was that the President had consentual sex with his adult intern. Oh my.
Today: Economy is crashing, > 6% unemployment rate is common in urban areas across the country, we're in a questionable and bloody war for oil, the same people who bolstered Saddam into power are in control today, Israel and Palestine aren't even on the map, the Bush administration is silencing political critics, and the government wants to investigate your private life to make sure you are not a terrorist, headed by Big Brother himself.
So much has been lost in just 3 years.
They know where he is. A lawyer has contact with him. They're not going to burn his body and later deny he was ever taken into custody.
Is it a good situation? No, I think it should be ruled unconstitutional, its following the letter instead of the spirit of the material witness law.
When you use terms like "disappeared" to describe it, though, not only do you sound like a wacky radical, but you also insult the people in oppressive countries who actually have been killed/locked away for life without trials or explainations.
Though he's guessing, McGeady said it was possible Hawash was targeted because of charitable donations he made in 2000 to the Global Relief Foundation, a Muslim charity that purported to fund mosques and schools in the United States, as well as West Bank medical facilities.
If this IS the reason Hawash was detained, and it turns out he had absolutely no reason to be held against his will for so long, I hope there's hell to pay. Seriously, the organization was found to be legit, so wtf is the issue? That he donated $10K? Shit, if I HAD the money, I'd donate that much to the American Diabetes Associated right now. And being that he's a contractor for Intel, I'm sure he had a little bank saved up.
Regardless, this is getting absolutely scary. And for all those "If you have nothing to hide..." folks out there, save your breath. Come and tell me that when your mother's detained for being the 10th degree of seperation between her and some kid who sold groceries to a SUSPECTED terrorist.
"Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned for SEGA. ..."
First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.
Pastor Martin Niemöller
2003: s/Jews/Terrorists/
Never never never smoke crack before geometry class!
Helllooooo New Zealand!!
Your right, but it is pretty damn close to being disappeared. Too damn close for my liking.
Don't confuse economic liberties with civil rights and social liberties...
2003: s/Jews/Arabs/
Never never never smoke crack before geometry class!
CAll it what you want. It is not RIGHT and it doesnt sit worth a damn with THIS RED BLOODED AMERICAN. If we allow this then we are NO BETTER than the 'evil doers' in the world. Im all for getting the bad guys, but not if it means trampling on the basic principles of this country. If hes guilty of a crime charge him, if not cut him free. Holding someone indefinetly is SIMPLY NOT ACCEPTABLE. And yes I am a REPUBLICAN, AND YES I THINK ASHCROFT IS A NAZI!
. I love the sound of burning women and screaming rubber....
"The most salient explanation for the arrest seems to be a link between the programmer, Maher "Mike" Hawash, and a charitable organization to which he donated a fairly large sum three years ago. The U.S. government has subsequently tagged the charity as having ties to terrorism. "
What hogwash. Since the government hasn't given out any of the classified information they have about this guy, these guys are assuming it is because of a donation to a charity. Did the government arrest everyone that donated to that charity? I doubt it. Maybe the feds have a real link between this guy and terrorist cells. Especially since recently several other Arabs actually confessed that they were planning terrorist training camps in that part of the country.
And enough about whether he is a US citizen or not. The Constitution applies to every person in the US. Civil rights are not conditional based on if you are a citizen or not. But the Supreme Court long ago agreed that civil rights can be based on if someone is a foreign infiltrator. If you forget, nineteen foreign infiltrators brought down the World Trade Center towers. Do you really think those were the only ones in this country?
And for those who think I am in support of a police state, no I am not. I would fight the government if they were coming after me for excercising my constitutional rights. But see, I don't make donations to terrorist organizations, so I know they aren't going to come after me. If I did do that, they would have every right to pick me up. I also don't have dinner with the local mafioso, I don't order large packages from Columbia, and I don't hang out at school grounds with bags of candy in my car. Certain actions, while perfectly legal, are also grounds for investigating people. In this case, with the threat of terrorism very high, maybe this guy is getting what he deserves for whatever activities he is involved in that you and I don't know about.
What scares me most about this whole ordeal is no one has any mechanism through the legal system to get him out. Not only is the government tight-lipped about why they have him, when they showed up in force to take him, they claim they have a warrant, which is sealed. There's not even any attempt at demonstrating legitimacy. This means that without some identified party legitimately responsible for the warrant, there can be no satisfaction it is even valid.
"We have a warrant for your arrest. Give yourself up, you're surrounded and outgunned."
"I want to see the warrant."
"Sorry, it's sealed. I can vouch for its legitimacy."
*shudder*
On a personal level, I sincerely hope Mike is treated fairly and due-process is followed. I don't know Mike/Maher, nor do I know why he was detained. I don't know who is running the freemikehawash.com site. I have no more reason to trust those people/that person more than I do the FBI folk that nabbed Maher/Mike. What reason should I have to trust one more than the other?
The freemike site describes him as a family man with an investment in is community. Well, we also hear all the time about people who were "quiet", "good neighbors", etc. that go postal or turn out to be serial murderers, etc. I'll contribute money, time, support, etc. when I have good reason to...not just cuz someone shouts for Civil Liberties! Civil Liberties! and the person is not from Male-Caucasia, USA.
Would it suck if Mike is innocent and is not being held with reason? Hell Yeah! Would it suck if Maher/Mike were a terrorist pilfering my credit card to fund some terrorist organizations? Hell Yeah!
Que Deus te de em dobro o que me desejas
[May God give you double that which you wish for me]
" BOO! TERRORISTS! Ahhhh, booga booga booga! The terrorist are coming and they'll eat your babies! Ahhhh! Terrorists!
Won't sombody think of the children! "
I mean, seriously, this is one of the most insiteful, interesting and underrated statements that I've heard in a long time.
"It's a tarp!" -- Dyslexic Admiral Ackbar
I'm not white,Turkish,so i know a little bit how these people think.
They are obsessed and should monitored.
We should not be letting Arabs into this country any more until their RELIGOUS LEADERS quit talking "DEATH TO USA" .
Why are we so fucking stupid to not monitor these people?
9/11 was our mistake because we didn't monitor.
It was the SECOND attempt at WTC.
A sign I recently saw at JFK airport after returning from a trip abroad:
Welcome to the United Police States of Amerika
All fruits, vegetables, meat products, and inalienable rights must be declared to the Customers officer. In order to gain adminttance to the United Police States of Amerika, these products must be surrendered. Failure to comply will result in civil or criminal action.
The thing is, how do we know this guy has a legit tie to terrorists? He donated a large whack of cash to a charitable organization. I would like to suggest that even if the organization in question does have terrorist ties, it's hardly likely that they would advertise the fact. Even before 9/11, the Feds would not ignore someone who said "Donate money to my organization, because we fund terrorist assholes!"
Furthermore, the little phrase "innocent until proven guilty" should still mean something. Even if Mr. Hawash is complicit in assisting a group that assisted in funding terrorists, it must be proven first. The fact that the government is using these tactics suggests that their evidence is weak and/or non-existant. Considering the federal actions against the organization that Mr. Hawash donated money to, it's hardly likely that if any terrorist connection existed that those terrorists would not have already done whatever they needed to be done to hide any links on their end.
Kierthos
Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
One Nation Under God, Indivisible, With Liberty And Justice For All!
Freedom from fear.
If you don't want to repeat the past, stop living in it.
Yeah the USA is definitly going down hill. I personally wouldn't want to live there right now, it just is way too dangerous. I find this shocking but a more shocking store was one I read a few months back -
Someone wrote on their web-site 'Personally I think we should overthrow the goverment and replace it with one that isn't Microsoft's bitch' (Meaning a goverment that doesn't do what Microsoft asks, like a dog to its owner)
On this the US Gov decided to go around this guys house, brake the door down and interigate him about this! They held this guy as 'A suspected terrorist'
You see nobody is safe!
Has anyone seen the series 'Babylon 5' if they have they might remember a group of people that worked for the goverment that got paied to listen out for 'UnPatriotic' things and tell the boss. As you can imagine things didn't turn out well for this goverment.....Does this organization sound like some organization that the Current US administration has created.
Just to see what happens I have this to say -
I would love to see the US goverment overthrown and am happy to take part in any capasity other than being violent or having to lift a finger
(Sorry for page formatting, can't write HTML)
Here's an article on CNN, talks about the countries that are not supporting human rights, the editor forget USA in the title.
Posting useless rant since 2003.
or ourselves? I mean from the articles I've read, he's legally being held, thanks to all of you who didn't stop the passage of the patriot act. I mean I've seen it mentioned quite a few times in the articles that the patriot act has made this type of holding legal.
Oh boy the excitement when Patriot Act II is passed.
Jesus saves souls and redeems them for valuable cash prizes
I am sure this guy was helping extremists in some way or they wouldn't have arrested him.
Look at how many Arabs are walking free in this GREAT country.
"People simply disappeared, always during the night. Your name was removed from the registers, every record of everything you had ever done was wiped out, your one-time existence was denied and then forgotten. You were abolished, annhilated: vaporized was the usual word."
-------
"In times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
-- George Orwell
Is it that much of a stretch to the imagination to consider that maybe there is a legitimate reason for holding this guy? Not that he himself is to be charged with a crime, but that he knows someone who can be?
Nope, its so much easier to label the US a Fascist nation. To easy to assume were plannng on locking up all arabs. You all enjoy picturing Rumsfeld in jackboots (maybe some leather fetish you have?)
The Material Witness rules have been on the books for almost 20 years. They have survived 4 presidents, including the golden age of Clinton. In this situation again, the law has been used and appears to have been used (proceduraly) correctly.
Yaser Hamdi and Jose Padilla have been locked up now for around a year(Over a year in Hamdi's case I think). Both have been refused access to a lawyer and neither have had charges filed against them. These are american citizens. This could happen to you. This could happen to somebody you know.
Our own government is locking people up without due process or just killing them to save the hassle. Something really has to be done. Write your congressmen, join the ACLU(I did yesterday), participate in protests even if it feels stupid at first. The only way we're going to keep our rights is to actively work to defend them, especially with facists like Bush, Ashcroft, and Rumsfield at the helm.
His name is Mike, not that that matters. If he's lucky he'll get better "support" than the kind that left Kevin locked up for five years. All the good will to Kevin will be funneled this way. It took five years for people to even learn about Mitnick, this time it's not going to happen.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
See Jane disappear Spot.
Since when did "disappear" become a transitive verb?
The US government already hold over 400 people (IIRC) prisoners on Cuba without charging them with a crime. Common sense would say they are war prisoners and should be released, but USA says they're not.
It seems to me that USA is going downhill fast, and yes, to an outsider, the government is pretty much the whole country. We very seldom hear the opinions of anyone else then the government.
I'm having a hard time finding a single one decision of the Bush government that I agree with. It started with backing out of various international agreements, and just keeps getting worse. I've been boycotting products from USA for a while now and will not stop anytime soon. Of course my influence if miniscule at most.
Perhaps these individuals are innocent. I truly believe there are flaws in our laws. Usually the most flawed laws are those that are a direct result of a immediate need. Look at the many other stupid things the government is doing. Here in canada we have a gun control registry that is costing billions. It will not help protect people from illegal or any weapons period. But yet it gives the government a way to keep control over those who are law abiding. Same with this case. If this individual wanted to contribute to terrorists, don't you think he/she would have tried in a less apparent way? Besides the context of "ties to terrorist groups" could mean anything. A brother of a son's friend, could constitute ties to terrorism.
Come on guys, get those real terrorists.
PS: I offer my support for the families and the soldiers fighting abroad.
They say over and over that they do not know of the ties, yet it is already public knowledge (I read it on the free newspaper this morning) that the primary reason why he was originally under investigation is that he made a very large donation to a charity that has known connections to terrorist groups.
If you are going to make a Free Mike website, at least read the newspapers. They obviously aren't that close of friends to not know what people who don't know the guy know.
And yes, that sentence was fun to type.
Dacels Jewelers can't be trusted.
I posted a reply a few days ago about how the US is becoming more facist and that a person could be held in custody without any rights at all under the guise of terrorist activities. Someone here (who shall remain nameless) replied to me and basically 'slapped' me down saying this doesn't happen, no one is held in the US without due proccess. To that person I say "you see this? Maybe the rocket's red glare and the stars & stripes are blocking your view.'
Saddam doesn't have to win and Bin Laden doesn't have show his face again - the damage is already done. The US is no longer the 'land of the free' and the 'home of the brave' is now the the 'home of the paranoid'.
The GEEK shall inherit the earth...
Thanks for reporting this. This is one of the more important stories to have come along in a while. I would be happy to see updates to this on the main page as things progress. (Yes, I do follow up on stories myself from time to time.)
Happens all the time. That's why even the accused have rights. If things like this can happen even when all procedures of law are followed, imagine what can happen when all the procedures are bypassed in the name of "security".
*Some restrictions apply. Void where prohibited
I had a
That the parent comment was written AS A SARCASTIC comment. What the hell is wrong with you people?
I am disgusted by the ability of the government to hold people uncharged.
Scratch that. I am DISGUSTED by the CLAIM that they can hold people uncharged. They may be doing it but I totally question their right to do this.
The sad thing is that many of the people they are holding LIKELY could be charged, but there is such a burden of proof now (There wasn't enough evidence to convict O.J.?!?!) that I believe prosecutors are using this as a hold'em until we can charge them card. It's a tough call if they really are dangerous, but I don't think it is right to hold them if you aren't charging them.
HOWEVER, I have serious doubts that NO ONE has questioned Mr. Hawash??? What sense does that make?
MAYBE, MAYBE this is true. Or maybe it is deeper than that.
Maybe the government has questioned him on things he doesn't want to tell his workers and family about. And the government is stuck because they can't jump out and tell the nation while at the same time claiming they have right to hold him secretly (their fault).
If Mr. Hawash is innocent, I will be the first to say this is miserable and disgusting treatment.
But suppose he is guilty of something...It is wrong to hold him without charging him. Period.
---"What did I say that sounded like 'Tell me about your day?'"---
[Note, this is more of a general rant rather than specifically about Mike Hawash but my point still stands.]
It's disgusting how America and Great Britain can be allowed to go against so many international conventions and strip people of any rights.
There are specific conventions on how to treat suspected criminals, or terrorists, which should be adhered to. Rather than follow conventions, America decided to put people suspected of terrorism in a deliberate state of limbo where they can do anything they want.
These people are not given any legal representation, they do not even need to be accused of any crime (and given than some were released without charge it's probably fair to say not all are guilty of any crime at all), there are no standards for their conditions, they do not need to be treated humanely, they do not need to be allowed visitation from independent organisations (such as Amnesty, Red Cross, etc) and they do not have to be put to trial. They can be held in this state of limbo for as long as they administration want them to be.
For a country (or countries if you include Great Britain - but they contravene human rights to a far lesser extent, and not as written above) that prides itself on its freedom of speech and human rights, it's disgusting that they treat anyone in this way. And it's even more disgusting that they are one of the premier countries to point out international breaches by other countries - particularly when it favours the situation they're in.
My view on the problem with American society is that although everyone pretends to be friendly and respectful of each other and their views, it's very much each person for themself. People don't think that they'll ever be in a situation when they'll need help, so don't support actions to benefit those who do.
For example, the death penalty. It's all very well saying "Fry them!" or whatever, but when you're accused and found guilty of a crime you didn't commit, or you get found guilty because you're black, poor and can't afford proper legal representation, it's a whole new story. Abortions: it's all well and good to say no to abortions but when it's your daughter, your sister or you who's pregnant and shouldn'tt to give birth for whatever reason, it's different. When your family member/friend is dying from Parkinson's or some other degenerate disease, you'll be wishing the government would allow stem cell research, or at least sooner. I've forgotten who it was but when one president got some degenerative disease which could be potentially eradicated with enough research into stem cells (which don't use any fertilised eggs), although he had been staunchly against the research his whole life, the first thing the first lady did was speak directly to President Bush to try get it allowed.
The shear selfishness - while not always apparent/transparent - of many American's is shocking. What if you were accused of some terrorist charge which you didn't commit? Put away on an island with no contact to anyone - even a lawyer, for a simple misunderstanding.
"Throughout history, it has been the inaction of those who could have acted; the indifference of those who should have known better; the silence of the voice of justice when it mattered most; that has made it possible for evil to triumph."
Manta
(Karma bonus abused!)
I have a relative who worked at Intel, and I actually respect Intel quite a bit.
I have trouble imagining a person who worked at Intel being locked up without charges, no explanations and NO ACCOUNTABILITY!
Has anyone actually heard back from any of their representatives on this matter?
This pisses me off really. The government asks for people's trust to handle terrorism investigations, and then you hear something like this.
There better be a damn good explanation coming from the federal government soon.
Well upon *reading the article* the term "disappeared" was used by the family as a description of what happened to him.. hence the quotes in the title.
The Register covered this a bit ago. The main point of the article, and this post, is that stepping on the rights of 'terrorists' (nearly indistinguishable from 'material witnesses' in this case) really does diminish the rights of everyone, just like we learned in 5th grade civics, along with the importance of hygiene and proper manners.
Miss Wormwood wasn't just bullshitting us afterall.
When you use terms like "disappeared" to describe it, though, not only do you sound like a wacky radical, but you also insult the people in oppressive countries who actually have been killed/locked away for life without trials or explainations.
It is sad that people say "yea, but its almost the same" with some self rightous attitude.
Ask the Human Shields that are coming out of Iraq. They are freaked out at how the people were abused. They learned they don't know shit about Iraq, and that their own misconceptions were 100% wrong. They SAW what was going on, and it blew their mind that some leaders really DO oppress people that way. Some people just don't understand what "evil" means. The civil liberties violations in the US do not even compare, except by idiots.
People who equate this matter with the brutal oppression that occurs regularly in the Middle East are completely ignorant of what is going on. This IS unconstitutional, but he hasn't had his teeth bashed out, his wife raped or his children killed. It should be fought here in US, but to say he "disappeared" is insulting. Not to the US, but to those in Iraq, N. Korea, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia among others, that know what the hell "disappeared" really means.
More FUD about our "nasty govt" from editors whose real goal is to protest a man, not a war.
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
Any facts about this case from unbiased sources?
(NYT is no more than an editorial rag and Wired and Slashdot always have been)
I mean, perhaps he truly IS a material witness. Maybe the guy knows something.
You dont get picked up by the feds just for wearing a turban, no matter what michael or some columnist in the NYT tells you.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
Up until the Patriot Act, saying that would have first involved something called the burden of proof.
What good is America if what makes America free is destroyed in the process of making America safe?
By committing these sorts of actions, we show disrespect towards the lives of all those who have died to keep this country free. Are we not as well willing to sacrifice out lives for this great nation? Or are we such pitiful weaklings that the nary is the threat of 'terrorist actions' waved against us that we all surrender our rights, our liberties, and our very heritage, for a sleep free of worries of death?
Need help treating your acne? Come here!
tick tic tickity type tic tick....
Here we go, he's being held in holding cell 44a, sub-level 4 on an "abandoned" oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico.
He's ok for now, but they're not letting him have any smokes. He hasn't even been given his entry processing interrogation yet.
So quit whining, or you're next!
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
I see most of the comments here are just a bunch of USA bashing crap. If you are one of these guys, here are some questions:
1) If you aren't from the US, does your country fair better on civil liberties? Prove it?
2) Do you have any facts in this case? Have any idea why he's being held? If not, why should the US government give YOU all the evidence available in an ongoing investigation?
Please stop whining about things you don't have a clue about.
"God fights on the side with the best artillery." - Napoleon, Marshal of France - speaking truth to power
I don't like the idea of the executive branch taking powers it doesn't have, but isn't that why we have government authority split 3 ways. If he is truly innocent (which we don't know for sure since we can't see the sealed document), then who is not doing their job here?
I might point out that there has yet to exist a government that does not violate its people's rights when it suits them. The term is called 'soveriegnty', which one of my political science professors likes to call "The legal right to kill its citizens". It is easy to pick on the US because it is the most prosperous, visible and free of any state in the world. And it does suck when it chooses to violate the very freedoms it stands for.
For the record, I agree with the 5th ammendment and think the material witness law is unconstitutional. However, if the will to challenge the law does not exist, it will remain in force, regardless of what the Constitution says.
ASCII tastes bad dude.
Binary it is then.
You know, we could stamp out a lot of terrorism in Britain and Ireland by bombing the shit out of Boston, Chicago, and New York, oh yes. And arresting the hundreds of thousands of Irish-Americans that fund terrorist organizations.
As a native Irish-born person, what really bugs me about this current "War on Terror" is that it's really a "War on Wog Terror". Various Irish-American charitiess have funded a sustained, vicious, crippling terror campaign within Ireland and Britain for decades, yet even in the current paranoid climate the Irish-American lobby is so large that the Bush Gang didn't proscribe these "charities" even as it curtailed the activities of many Muslim charities (some legitimate, some terrorist funding fronts).
If there were as many Arab-Americans and there are "Irish"-Americans, bet your arse this War On Terror would be targeted differently.
This was printed in a UK paper a year or so ago, but seems to be no longer available online.
Da Blog
>
.. and sometimes the only way to show that is an end result...
All bad things have small beginnings.. and even though it may be somewhat reactionary it is the duty of the people to point out the wrongs and just as importantly *what they can lead to*
hence comparing this to oppressive regimes.
However, this whole holding without disclosure thing is what makes me uneasy. If they do have credibly accusations, they should be disclosed, or at the very least make the fact that he is being held a matter of public record. If they can just come in the middle of the night and take someone from their home with no accusation, or warrant, or justification, what makes them better than any other totalitarian regime?
I know the American way of life is something valuable to protect, but you cant protect it by violating the very rights and freedoms it stands for. IMO, Bush's vision for America is as bad as Saddam's vision of Iraq.
Im all for John Kerry's "Regime Change".
Manipulate the moderator system! Mod someone as "overrated" today.
I noticed in that entire article that there was not one comment from he or his wife or anyone closer than a coworker (who may or may not be a good friend).
A few things though. He is being held in solitairy confinement as a "material witness". Perhaps they want him to testify against the charity. If he were to claim that he had no idea they were sending money to terrorists then it could make a great case for fraud against the charity.
It may be that the people who run this charity with ties to terrorism want him dead. So perhaps he is somewhat willingly hanging out in solitairy. Note that he's not in general population, perhaps that is why. Normally people don't START in solitairy confinement.
In any case, I don't know. The article is rather sensationalistic. There's a lot of information we simply do not have and cannot speak of. I certainly hope that he makes it through this ordeal. If it becomes clear that he is in fact being held entirely against his will for doing nothing wrong, then I will champion his cause. Until then I refuse to take a position either way.
And yes, what the government did to Mitnick was horribly, horribly wrong. But don't start acting like we don't have the power to change any of this. We do. Tell your friends and neighbors Kevin's story. Tell them how he did not intend to cause any damage and that any damage he did cause was indirect. Tell them how he was held without being charged for years. Tell them how he was held without a trial for years after that. But by god do NOT start championing the cause of someone that nobody really knows anything about (hell, for all we know he actually COULD be a terrorist) because then it really weakens your argument against the wrongs that were committed against Mr. Mitnick.
Jesus, the whole premise of this is FUD.
There are a few hundred people being held without charges right now, many for over a year, and this guys has been held a short time, and NOW you give a damn? Im guessing only since hes in the tech industry.
Total propeganda by the editors here. You can present the story, but to make the Govt. sound like the gestapo over a 14 hold says more about YOUR attitude about the Govt. than it does the Govt. attitude toward its citizens. I agree that its wrong to be held like this, but no one "disappeared" anywhere. Total FUD by the editors. FUD FUD FUD.
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
dont u no the economi is not bushs falt its the terrorits they crashed the WTC and recked all tha money bush only helped saddam befor cos he wsa good then now hes evil just like u and ur livberl commy frends u commy only BUSH and GOD can help us now becos BUSH is GODS CHOSEN LEADER when ur bruning in hel ul be sori
On the one side, you have a political leader who has come to power through undemocratic means[1], who unilaterally breaks treaties[2], who doesn't care about UN-resolutions[3], doesn't care about basic human rights[4] and has weapons of mass destruction[5]. And on the other side you have Saddam Hussein.
Tough to pick a side.
1: Ballot-fraud in Florida,
2: Kyoto-agreement,
3: Invasion of Iraq, keeping prisoners in Cuba without lawsuit
4: This story plus keeping prisoners in Cuba without lawsuit
5: Obvious - about 20000 nuclear heads plus a lot more chemical and biological weapons.
This kind of crap is why I'm far more afraid of our own government than Iraq's.
I'm sure most people out there disagree, it's a lot easier going through life rationalizing or sticking your head in the sand.
Here.
Or here.
Regardless though, one one should be surprised. This is from an administration that employees criminals like Poindexter. The US is also in a war, and has regarded itself as being in one since the September 11 massacre. To win wars, civil liberties are infringed upon.
You can be upset, but don't pretend to be surprised.
Hoist Number One and Number Six.
He's most likely not had charges brought against him since doing so might jeopardize an ongoing investigation.
Anyone have a simpler explination that doesn't involve putting on your tin foil hats to keep the gub'ment info rays out of your mind?
sig--we don't need no goddamn sig
the slashdot summary of this case said this guy is being held in a federal lockup.
Heh. I thought when you are "disappeared" they don't know where you're being held or where you're buried.
Maybe I don't understand the term "disappeared," have they rendered him invisible?
Oh well, I'd better get back to work on my bioweapon (potato cannon) project.
... also known as the "gripping hand".
-pyrrho
What if he commits a crime while in lockup? Let's say he kills a guard. He would have to be charged with a crime at some point. The family of the guard would demand justice. It would be alot harder to explain why they weren't charging someone with a crime when they had dead on proof he did it. If he was charged, then all the necessary rights and regulations would apply. His defense would be he had to do it to get his constitutional rights, etc. If not him, members of his family, etc.
I'm not saying it's the right thing, but at this point, being a polite and cooperative citizen has gotten him nowhere, he has nothing to lose by being the criminal they already are punishing him for being.
Would make an interesting Law & Order episode, in any case...
- JoeShmoe
.
-- I wonder which will go down in history as the bigger failure: the War on Drugs or the War on Filesharing
that Mike will be allowed out soon due to public outcry. The real crime will continue though. We will keep locking up many innocent ppl in the name of security which is based on inuendo and lies.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
This is why I've been screaming about Jose Padilla since his announced arrest as a "material witness" back in May of last year. The real question is, how many other American citizens are being secretly held by either the DOJ or the DOD.
This is just plain sick.
-- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
How is this not in direct violation of the consitution? What the hell good is it if the government can outright ignore it for whatever reason? Who the fuck is suppose to enforce it? Whomever, or whatever entity, that is should be removed from power as they are not protecting the very foundation this country was founded upon, that being our constitution, specifcally the Bill of Rights.
http://www.archive.org/details/ThePowerOfNightmares
More about U.S. government corruption: History surrounding the U.S. war with Iraq: Four short stories
The principles for which the U.S. was known are being increasingly abandoned.
"You hear about this happening in other countries and to immigrants and then to American citizens," Mr. McGeady went on. "And finally you hear about it happening to someone you know. It's scary."
Of course the next step is that they will come for you. Food for thought for those people who think that the end justifies the means when it comes to fighting terrorism.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
I would also have to point out that sometimes our 'inalienable' rights come into conflict with each other. I have the right as an American citizen to ask my government to protect me from terrorists. However, the gentleman in question has the right to due process. What happens, though, when the government things that allowing due process will infringe on my right to safety?
Another such example is the right to free exercise to religion, where sometimes one's right to free exercise is circumscribed by a generally applying law. This law is infringing my right, but according to current interpretations of the Establishment Clause, to allow me an exception to the law would also be a violation of the first amendment. See U.S. Supreme Court case Sherbert v. Verner (374 U.S. 398), pay special attention to the Opinion of Justice Stewart in how the two clauses of the first amemdment come into conflict.
But that's why we have judges. They are not puppets - they make judgement calls based on evidence they have, which you may not. I'm not trying to say that the government is acting correctly in this situation, but I would advocate examining a few possibilities before attacking one side or the other.
Of course no one knows what he did. They won't even tell him why he's being detained.
No matter what he has or hasn't done, it is wrong to detain someone without due process.
Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
Ashcroft has done more damage to our country and our constituion than the terrorists could ever have dreamed of doing. The terrorists have won, and the current administration has done nothing but help them. I believe a regime change is needed indeed--vote against the regime in 2004.
--
$tar -xvf
Intel has a job opening now?
:: sighs ::
Seriously, this sucks, though. What was that about exchanging liberty for security?
If you were me, you'd be good lookin'. - six string samurai
The actions would still be something for which strictly speaking those who carried them out could be charged with human rights violations.
Well, I concur it is not complete on-topic but I am talking about people being detained for terrorism acts, which the topic talks about. I also talk about allowing authorities to hold him indefinitely without charging him with a crime, which is in the topic.
Manta
Guilty of what? He hasn't been so much as charged with anything.
Even if he his guilty of a crime, he deserves a fair and speedy trial, with evidence and a jury and all, as set out in the constitution.
Geez. Fifteen years and we still haven't taken over the world.
I hate to say and see it, but homeland security takes away all the freedoms Americans have.
Like this example: if they claim you're a terrorist, you're put away and loose (almost) all your rights.
extreme situations, like terrorism ask for extreme measures, but this is absurd.
Privacy is terrorism.
More or less what I was going to post, but you beat me to it
I'm not terribly comfortable with the way the government is handling this, but I think we need to acknowledge that we are fighting a new type of war (with a group of violent extremists rather than a readily identifiable nation-state) and that some new rules will be necessary. There's no way in hell that putting all of the "enemy combatants" (Padilla) and the "material witnesses" (like the gentleman mentioned in this article - and I think that holding people like this as "material witnesses" is an egregious perversion of the intent of that rule) through the criminal justice system will work. My initial thoughts (and IANAL) regarding American citizens that are caught up in these situations are as follows:
The government must provide sufficient evidence to hold the suspect. If the information cannot be made public (and I absolutely believe there will be many situations where this will legitimately be the case), then there should be a special grand jury that is cleared to view the secret information and decide if the government has sufficient evidence to hold the suspect. The whole "we're the government and we think this person is bad and you'll just have to trust us" is absolutely unacceptable. A federal grand jury comprised of citizens with Top Secret clearance would not be the easiest thing to convene, but far from impossible and a small price to pay for helping to uphold our nation's ideas of justice.
The government must be liable and accountable for any damages caused by false arrests and detentions. They must publicly acknowledge the mistake and clear the person's name, and should be penalized in a manner that creates a significant disincentive for them to arrest people without being very, very sure of what they are doing.
I'm sure that people with far more legal wisdom than I possess can refine these ideas further, but they're a start.
Help save the critically endangered Blue Iguana
Dude, He's not H1b, he is a __CITIZEN__
I found my inner child, then I got caught abusing it...
You know, we could stamp out a lot of terrorism in Britain and Ireland by bombing the shit out of Boston, Chicago, and New York, oh yes. And arresting the hundreds of thousands of Irish-Americans that fund terrorist organizations.
I wouldn't say hundreds of thousands, but you are probably right. I have a strong feeling that unless you are donating to Sinn Fein, you should be. When this "War on Terrorism" bit started, I was actually concerned as being an Irish-American, and also speaking out in support of Sinn Fein.
Thankfully enough, the Smoked Irish methodology isn't as strong as it was decades ago.
Dacels Jewelers can't be trusted.
All bad things have small beginnings.. and even though it may be somewhat reactionary it is the duty of the people to point out the wrongs and just as importantly *what they can lead to* .. and sometimes the only way to show that is an end result...
Like I said, I agree its a problem. I agree people should speak out. But if you act as if this problem is as bad as Saddam's treatment of his citizens, no one will take it serious. You have to put it in perspective. I mean, the author lost my respect by OVERREACTING in the description. It tells me he has another agenda, so I am not as likely to listen to him.
As to other posters: You can NOT just run and scream, calling John Ashcroft a nazi and expect to get taken serious. I think Ashcroft is very wrong on MOST issues regarding liberties. I also believe he is a good man with the best of intentions, but the wrong ideas.
Anyone who just goes into a name calling frenzy HAS OTHER MOTIVES. They obviously don't care about the truth, they care about pushing an agenda, and LIKE IT when something like this happens, because it appears to substanciate their narrow view of the world. Just like the fools who WANT American casualties so they can say "told you so". Thats a pretty fucking expensive told you so, and frankly, you would have to be a sick person to want that. Same here.
Its about trying to convince everyone that Conservatives\Bush Team are bad, so they dig up any story that appears to support their theory, with no regard to fact or perspective as to the real problem. These efforts are entirely too transpearant.
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
So, they've locked up this guy indefinetly without charge, because he's got suspected links to terrorism, and that is because he donateded some money to an organisation supporting people with suspected links to terrorism.
So what does someone(?) do - set up a support site where sympathetic people can donate (paper check mind you - sign here please...) to an organisation to support the guy. Remember this is the guy with suspected links to terrorism, so you'd be donating to an organisation supporting people with suspected links to terrorism.
I bet it took McCarthy a lot more effort to get his list together - ain't the internet wonderful.
Mod points!
Mod points!
My kingdom for some mod points!
You would have earned mine!
-- I am. Therefore, I think!
Heh, pretty funny you mentioned that.
Bush is right now breaking international laws as he invades a country without support from the security council. That is illegal and the US has condemned such actions before when done by others.
The CIA have in fact helped several guerillas in their cocain/drugs business. You can look it up by yourself since it is an official fact ran numerous times in american tv and press.
The jews are nothing nere taking over the world and i dont view jews as a bad people or jewism as a bad religion. Zionists on the other hand is as bad as the naziz and should be dealt with by the jews for the sake of the jews. The zionists are giving the legit jews a bad reputation around the world. Same goes to the fucked up israeli racist government who tries to build a new South Africa.
HTTP/1.1 400
I am pro-Freedom, which means that I am glad that the madman Saddam is finally getting his just desserts. This also means that I get pissed when I hear about someone being denined their legal right to due process.
I certainly agree that this doesn't make President Bush the moral equivalent of Saddam Hussein, but it isn't right all the same. Locking people up without charging them with a crime is wrong, and if they do charge Mike with a crime he should have the right to a speedy trial by his peers.
This is not the same as what has been done by other tyrants around the world, but it is still tyranny.
The key difference here is that what they did to Mitnick was illegal at the time. What they are doing to this guy is totally legal now thanks to the USA PATRIOT act.
You say we are headed towards a fascist police state
I say we have been here for a while now
You say you want a revolution....
see, the problem is that it does not matter one bit if he is guilty of anything or not. If he was guilty and suspected to be, and being held as material vitness, there should be charges brought against whoever did this for flasely holding him and knowingly bringing false charges.
Its really hard to assume he might be guilty if he is being held as a material witness and not a suspect.
Whatever you want to call it, I personally have a REAL FEAR of something like this happening to me or someone I know. On purpose, or by mistake. I DON'T KNOW what the criteria are for this. Do you have to be of foreign descent and have a beard? That's me. Do you have to have non-mainstream views? I do. What's the cutoff? I know generally if I don't break any laws (even the stupid ones that are hard to avoid), I should be okay. But this guy seems to have NOT broken any laws.
Like I said, its wrong, we should speak out against it. My problem is a matter of perspective. As wrong as it is, it is still not like what is going on elsewhere. These are problems that can be dealt with. He is not going to die in prison, be beaten, etc. He does need representation, we do need to complain, however, if you 'overreact', then no one will pay you any attention. You will be seen as a kook. For good reason.
Welcome to America: if you want us to take you serious, you have to present your arguement reasonably, backed up with facts. If you dish out FUD, we assume you are full of shit, and anything you say is meaningless.
My point: By overreacting and exaggerating these types of stories, you end up screwing the guys in jail because no one will take you serious. Its not enough to be right, you also have to be fair.
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
"'For nearly two weeks, he has been held as a so-called "material witness" in solitary confinement in a federal lockup in Sheridan, Oregon."
Jesus, you didn't even have to RTFA to figure this out.
Also, the Constitution is only a part of opur legal system, it is not the end all be all of laws our local, state and federal governments have at their disposal.
This merely enforce the notion that most citizens of "totalitarian" states knew for some time; rights is what the government lets its citizens have when it is "convenient," and the United States isn't any different.
ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
I guess Bush and his buddies saw how popular Battlefield 1942 and Wolfenstein were and decided we all want to live in Nazi Germany. and he says he dosnt follow polls.
This news following a serious debate on the subject 'Do Privacy Fears Allow Terrorism?'
Technology & the law both give power. There is no reason to believe that a government that abuses one will not abuse the other.
VLC Remote for iPhone and Android
At such a time as he's accused of a particular crime, we can perhaps consider that.
I really feel sorry for you guys. On the seventies, early eighties, we (I'm Brazilian) lived had a military government, really a dictatorship with fragrant violations of civil rights on daily basis. Thank God, we're free and live a full democracy. Lots to do on the social side yet, but I believe we can make it. You take care or you'll go the same path we took. Adilson.
Faith can move mountains. I prefer dynamite.
They've dissapeared as well
rus
Cheap UK and US VPS
Better hope you've never donated to Greenpeace.
Today, Maher "Mike" Hawash, an agent of Goldstein, was captured while attempting to sabotage several of Oceania's critical systems. Be advised, brothers and sisters, that neither this thoughtcriminal nor any other will prevail against our great society.
bb doubleplusgood.
"Of course the people don't want war... That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country." - Hermann Goering, Adolf Hitler's Deputy Chief and Luftwaffe Commander, at the Nuremberg trials, 1946
I certainly agree that this doesn't make President Bush the moral equivalent of Saddam Hussein, but it isn't right all the same. Locking people up without charging them with a crime is wrong, and if they do charge Mike with a crime he should have the right to a speedy trial by his peers.
This is not the same as what has been done by other tyrants around the world, but it is still tyranny.
I agree. And you seem to be able to put it in intellegent words, and you will get listened to. Keep in mind our history in America is riddled with the suspension of Civil Rights during War time. This war has seen LESS suspension than other. Still a problem, but 1) it IS getting better and 2) we can fix it.
You gotta remember, a large minority (if not a small majority) of American's HAVE NO PROBLEM with these people being locked up. Does NOT make it right, but right isn't enough. You have to be reasonable and address their conserns as well, or they won't care what you think (and thus, it stays as is or gets worse). This is just the practical reality of where we live. Yes yes yes, we can all get on our soapboxes, but that alone does NOTHING except make YOU feel better. I am more concerned with actual results instead of this political masturbation where everyone pats themselves on the back for "standing up for freedom". Takes a lot of guts.
Yes, it is tyranny in many ways. But its the LEAST amount of tyranny the world has ever experienced during war time, and its getting better. Put it in PERSPECTIVE. The light at the end of the tunnel is not always a train.
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
I grew up in Northern Ireland. In 1971 the UK governement decided that it could defeat terrorist by using internment. What happened was that the goverment identified who they thought would be likely IRA terrorists. There was no actual evidence involved, just people that the government didn't like. Snatch squads were sent out and people were taken and imprisoned without trial.
This is no different to what the US goverment is doing now.
The one thing that came out of internment in Northern Ireland was that it actually promoted support for the very terrorist organisation it was designed to crush.
That's right!
That Nazi^H^H^H^HCommie^H^H^H^H^H^HTerrorist-infested country is an insidious source of dissent in our great nation! Let's tell them we won't stand for any more of their shenanigans, with lethal force!
It seems that everything's gone wrong
Since Canada came along
They're not even a real country anyway.
You're not old until regret takes the place of your dreams.
don't take this as flaimbait, but if you read the article, the title is taken from an actual quote:
"People say this doesn't happen in this country," McGeady said, "but one of my neighbors has been disappeared. It's not what he might have done that matters to me -- they disappeared him. They need to question him and let him go, or charge him. It's like Alice in Wonderland meets Franz Kafka."
/. nor the poster of the artile didn't come up with the phrase. maybe a little sensational, but it still didn't get you to read the artcle...
Further, if it can happen to one person it can happen to anybody. All it takes is that someone with influence decides that they don't like you. In todays climate, as evidenced by the original parent post all it takes is that they call you a terrorist.
Finally, it amazes me that in a country with the history of the United States, where WWII (anyone remeber how Nazi Germany worked) and McCarthyism (Ronald Regan was investigated by the FBI to see if he was a Communist) are still in the living memory of people, this would tollerated at all. Maybe when considering the implications of the behavior of the Government vis-a-vis people who are identified as terrorists one should replace the work 'terrorist' with 'jew' or 'black' and see how palatable the action still is.
--locust
I tell everyone I'm Canadian when I've overseas anyway. So I might as well live there. I can lean to like that pisswater molson golden. I so "eh" already, so I should fit right in. How's the IT job market? If I can afford a house, car and fast interweb then I'm there. Screw getting held for two years. I'm out of here.
hmmmm....then again...I could just run for congress and fight the stupid laws. Ok, that's what I'll do. Everyone who lives in Indianapolis vote for me ok. I'll try to get Carson's district when she retires.
Yeah but the problem is one of a slippery slope. Maybe the current administration won't torture and kill him, but they are setting an insanely bad precedent that may be used by someone else, in the future, who will.
It isn't enough not to be an 'evil government', you also have to do everything in your power to make it harder for administrations who come after you to LEGALLY be an 'evil government'. The Bush Administration isn't doing this at all..they are passing all sorts of knee-jerk laws that might not be *COMPLETELY* abused by them, but now they are on the books forever.
Thought Crime!
Thought Crime!!
Thought Crime!!!
Now I have to report you to the authorites lest I be made an accessory.
Truth: If it's not one thing, it's another
-1, repetitive
Welcome to america......the land of the free, the home of the brave....
How much longer will you americans tolerate the assesination of the liberties you, yourselves gave birth to?
Bush has brought the future non-society portrayed in Snowcrash to the scariest reality. Its 1984 all over again, but off the book and into my life.
NO SIG
After reading Antiwar.com, here are a few other links I've pulled together: History surrounding the U.S. war with Iraq: Four short stories
The U.S. government is becoming increasingly corrupt.
It's ironic in a very unfunny way that the soldiers who are risking their lives in Iraq to supposedly bring the gift of American values to the oppressed Iraqis are going to come home to find their veteran's benefits cut and the very civil liberties that they are supposed to be promoting stolen from them by the Bush administration. I appreciate that when Shrub visits a service base to give a speech the men and women there want to show their patriotism and loyalty by cheering, saluting, etc., but surely they can see the contradictions between what the President and his cronies say and do? Makes me wonder how most of them feel about him privately.
The "Disappeared" phrase came from a quote by another Intel ex-VP, not just michael taking editorial liberties.
at the scene in the recent The Count of Monte Christo movie, where the police of Napoleonic France come to arrest the hero.
"I place you under arrest."
"For what crime?"
"That information is secret." *clink*
When the crappy movie was first released, I remember one of my more airheaded friends crowing about how glad she was that "nonsense like that can't happen here, cuz this is AMERICA." (Moron.)
You cannot apply a technological solution to a sociological problem. (Edwards' Law)
Check out http://www.lp.org/ [lp.org] for an alternative to the 2-party bullshit.
what? Three Party Bullshit?
hahahahahaha. They all suck ass.
because I have been enjoined by this Holy Office to abandon the false opinion which maintains that the Sun is the centre
Obviously you like to jump the gun on these things...
The quote was written well before this current situation, and it shows how people's hatred of a general group can lead to severe problems.
Screw the fact that you are a jew, I am a Slavik, yiptedoo. It means fuck all. What he is getting at is the fact that people are being arrested because people like you insist on keeping these artificial divisions between us in society.
"He's arab, so he's likely to be a terrorist"
is just as bad as
"He's Jew, so he's likely to be a communist"
The point that the quote gets to is the fact that we need to protect all of these groups from this discrimination.
So... in reality... you are the "fucking racist moron" ironically. Because you insist on dividing us based on race, and not looking deeper into the quote.
Like it matters? My republican buddy hates the fact that Ashcroft busted all the retailers selling glassware, but doesn't seem to care that Bush appointed him. And knowing the attention span of most Americans, I'm sure he'll forget about it come election time.
You reap what you sow.
Maybe you're actually a Libertarian? I see no reason to believe that Republican or Democrat politicians consistently support our basic Constitutional rights.
So if someone accuses you of being the same, you don't need the authorities to produce proof, or the opportunity to prove your innocence?
Oh, wait, I get it: they'll tie you to a bomb, and let it explode. If you die in the explosion, you were innocent, and if you don't die, you're a terrorist!!
The concept of justice is built on the foundation that everyone has certain rights when suspected of a crime. Else, where will the line be drawn? What if you were suspected?
I suffer from attention surplus disorder.
We have had similar episodes in US history. Roosevelt sent the Japanese to internment camps in 1942. Lincoln suspended habeas corpus during the Civil War, enabling the jailing of hundreds of persons, maybe over a thousand, without any charges filed.
The Patriot Act has at least 2 precedents in US history: 1798 and 1916 Sedition Acts. You should google them sometime. Definite eye openers.
The trend is that during times of war or other crisis, civil liberties get short shrift. After the crisis is over, things tend to go back to normal. We'll see how it goes this time.
On the other hand, they can do some preliminary checks to see if the tip might hold promise, then take the guy, search his things and do a thorough investigation while they have him, making sure he doesn't fulfill any nefarious schemes during the investigation.
If it turns out the guy is clean, they'll let him go when they know for sure. He could lose a few weeks or months of his life, very bad to be sure. Or, if it turns out he was on the verge of blowing up the entire intel plant he was working at the next day, it's a dang good thing they took him when they did. And when working against terrorists, you don't want the terrorists to know how much you know, or how you came to know information. So logically, much of it must be kept secret.
Does it suck? Yes. Is there a better way? Maybe, but it's a tough choice where the primary goal is to thwart as many attackes and save as many people as possible.
Looking for a computer support specialist for your small business? Check out
1) All terrorists are people.
2) Detaining and strictly controlling a terrorist stops terrorism.
Therefore
3) Detaining and strictly controlling all people stops terrorism.
So yes, things are going on according to plan.
Who says politicians fail logic?
Maybe the dumbass in the next cel over was looking at him 'funny'?
./'ers tend to fall in to the first group.
Point is, we dont know. But if we dont know then why the presumption that the evil government has him and will surely be mistreating him?
Theres a segment of the population that does not and will not trust the government to act decently. There is another segment that does, but will also hold that government accountable for any abuses of that trust. The first segment tends to bitch and whine about every potential abuse, but never actually do anything. The second is the one to act when it actually occurs. Based on a sampling of posts,
notice how Kuwait isn't on the list, though they're just as bad as the Saudis
I don't really give a damn. This is my freaking country, and I'm going to oppose this sort of junior dictator garbage, DESPITE the fact that someone somewhere else is doing worse. Good grief, since when is "well they're doing it worse than me" an excuse?
Huh? The "representatives" are Republicrats themselves(!), who take their marching orders from the party leadership. Simple... they do not 'invent' priority - they dance the jig the piper (GWB) plays. Do you *listen* to these people spew their Newspeak? its very obviously from the Ministry of Truth(TM)... they get their Talking Points up-to-the-minute im sure. How exactly do you think your "Democracy" in the US works...(????)
FURTHER, government agencies are a DIRECT result of presidential policy - from the directors and appointments to new high-profile hires to the lowliest of bureaucrat - they ALL enact the wishes of The GWB Regime. Feh? Feh is right pal.
FURTHER YET, even though the laws may have been around prior, it is EXCEEDINGLY obvious that loose interpretation of law is something that can be used to reach a goal. Case in Point: The fictional "non-combatant" never-never-land that GWB has invented to end-run Geneva conventions (care to debate this? its the opinion of 99% of non-americans worldwide, red cross, amnesty int., many american law professors etc etc etc). Case in Point: The interpretation of UNSC Res.1441, GWB says it is a sanction for war, but again, everyone outside of the GWB camp says "nope - try again." (this says nothing of sanction from EARLIER resolutions, none of which permit the magic "any necessary means"). This says nothing of a weak justice system to make things right wrt his lawbreaking.
Defending GWB as a 'cog' is just a little naive (though he is too stupid/ignorant to defend himself from the influence of the neocons around him...)
Ahh... the sky is falling! Get a grip. Geez, the regular posters here the very epitome of Pavlovian predictability. A few points: 1) A news article or sound-bite is NOT the full story. You do not have all the information. 2) You can't generate an informed opinion on fragmentary information and anecdotes from "friends", especially about legal cases. 3) There are very specific and effective safeguards in the system--one of them being a free press, no matter how biased or asinine they may sometimes appear--to prevent the Brownshirts from marching outward into the countryside and beating randomly selected citizens with big sticks. Fear not; your illegal .mp3 collection is quite safe.
4) WE ARE AT WAR. Deal with it.
Fin.
Applying this to the current case makes a specious argument. He has not been charged with a crime. Where exists a threat to my inalienable right to life or any other right?
Another such example is the right to free exercise to religion, where sometimes one's right to free exercise is circumscribed by a generally applying law.Correct, a good example of this is the Smith Act as deemed constitutional in Dennis v. US. However, there exists the case of the US District Court v. the United States in which the Court ruled that Judicial warrants were still required despite the need for national security. In the Hawash case, warrants were issued, but the 5th (and 14th) Ammendment was bypassed for reasons of national security. I think the SCOTUS would strike this law down if it had a chance to review it.
ASCII tastes bad dude.
Binary it is then.
"Every dollar you give will come back to you many-fold."
... yea, he is pretty well fukt.
Except this guy was giving cash to a group that happened to be funding Terrorism.
Lets see, he gave $10,000, times a many-fold, carry the one, add some zeros, knock down two towers, add a few more zeros, lean back, scratch head
Reminds me of the KGB under Communism. You know, in a good way. I spent a few months in Moscow right after the fall of Communism and the natives didn't even throw candy wrappers on the ground - now THAT was scary.
Glonoinha the MebiByte Slayer
Islamic law requires one donate at least 2.5% of their income to charity. This is pretty widely followed, compared to the the 10% number used in some Xtian sects. So all kinds of organizations have arisen to "handle" this money- most legitimate and some sleazy. Religious education and widows are the most popular causes.
Some US companies also came under investigation for donations to fake Islamic charities. However, this was for the most part automatic matching funds companies make for employee donations.
Well upon *reading the article* the term "disappeared" was used by the family as a description of what happened to him.. hence the quotes in the title.
I normally don't respond to my own threads, but I did read the article. Taking the quote of one side and using it as the article topic IS being unobjective.
With states considering passing certain laws that would potentially allow for disruptive protesters to be jailed for a mandatory 25 years, events like this aren't entirely surprising.
The only surprising thing is how willing people are to overlook events like these. While they can say that they don't have the facts, they should really be worrying that they don't have any legal channels to obtain them.
Hopefully the majority's attitude will change sooner rather than later.
If we don't start monitoring every person in the US 24/7/365, eradicate the constitution, and stop questioning authority, the terrorists will have already won.
Where was that mentioned in the article? From what's happened in recent similar situations, I'd suspect that there's no access to a lawyer.
He signs them but your representatives make them.
Well, if we are talking about the PATRIOT act then Bush and the people who work for him did write the law, and then submitted it to congress. So Bush and Ashcroft did make the law.
Secondly, Bush is the one executing the law, and Aschroft (who reports to Bush) is the one directly responsible for seeing this crap through. If a law is unconstitutional, it's not supposed to be enforced.
So bush wrote the law, and is causing these things to happen of his own volition.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
I agree. Slashdot editors only care about sensationalist stories to make money (or maybe to push some other agenda). Who else thinks we need new editors with brains, who can spell, and who try to be objective?
/.ers I will not editorialize." I then linked to the article.
I submitted this article but it got rejected. Here is what I submitted:
2003-04-04 17:10:55 Arab-American Software Engineer Held as Material Witness (articles,doj) (rejected)
In the description I said something to the effect of "Unlike most
"I am a student. Please do not fold, spindle, or mutilate me." -Slogan of the Free Speech Movement, 1964.
He was originally detained for suspicion that he might make a dirty bomb. When the government could no long hold him under criminal charges the government decided to list him as an "enemy combatant" and a material witness. So he left a civilian jail and was put into a mility brig in South Carolina.
Basically, the government couldn't find enough evidence to hold him for criminal charges and reclassified him to they can hold him indefinitely. Just recently a judge ruled that he can see a lawyer. Of course, the government is fighting this vigorously. Ironically, this is the same judge that ruled he could be reclassified an enemy combatant.
That's the whole point... they should be forthright with the information they have. Under the kind of rules we are operating now, I should be able to start my own little dictatorship and declare that all the fools who choose to use Windows should be collected and held in concentration camps. Our government is no better than that apparently.
Un-news
They have achieved there goals: - US no longer a free country. - US and Arab world at war. Seems they have the same goals as George W. We really do need regime change, the regime at home is much more of threat to us than 2 - bit Arab dictators. MM
According to the Wired article, the material witness statute is from 1984. Imagine that..
I bought a copy from the Government Printing Office and you CAN'T actually read it unless you're a hardcore legislator. It's basically a bunch of nips and tucks on existing law, with little new content of its own.... Which is probably why it passed. They must have had this abomination sitting on the shelf waiting for this. Check it out at: http://www.epic.org/privacy/terrorism/hr3162.html and the EFF analysis: http://www.eff.org/Privacy/Surveillance/Terrorism_ militias/20011031_eff_usa_patriot_analysis.html
This is really disturbing - but not exactly new stuff. While it takes a slightly different tone, and the process has been different - there are many people in this country who's rights get violated without just cause. Free the West Memphis Three!
The moral of the story is if you're going to donate money to an organisation that could possibly be considered a terrorist group (ie EFF, FSF) at anytime in the future, donate anonymously and don't inform the government by deducting it on your taxes.
Deuteronomy 13:06-9
"Islam Inside"
BOOOM!
You'll notice they didn't interview him, either. And unless I've misread it, its not because he declined to comment, its because he's in isolation and not *allowed* to comment.
That's the crime.
And as for changing what was done with Kevin Mitnick, I don't seem to remember him going free for violation of his civil rights. I seem to remember him finally getting to trial, and being sentenced all the same.
Not until these practices are made ineffective for getting results (results here defined as convictions, etc) will they stop. That's why evedence without a warrant, etc is inadmissable.
-Zipwow
I don't know which is more depressing, that 2/3 didn't care enough to vote, or that 1/2 of those that did are crazy.
Using quotes is being *factual*. They denote that the term should be taken in context.
i.e. When the Iraqi's today said that they would launch a "non-conventional" attack...
If the news had just used non-conventional without quotes many would read it as a WMD attack.. since they used it in quotes it's taken with a larger grain of salt.
Quotes are used to prevent the exact kind of accusations you are making.
I don't give a rat's festering, cancer-ridden gonads if this is less evil than what is going on in Iraq. It's still evil.
Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
home of the venal
The brits wouldn't let kings have secret courts.
The American revolution continued the tradition protecting individual rights.
A Fascist State prefers the rights of the state, business and oligarchs, to those of the individual and protects them with secret courts.
Resist Fascist States in the tradition of the American Revolution!
The Argentine film La Historia Official should become required viewing the the USA.....
If you're going to use spook terminology, use it right. "Disappeared" doesn't mean held without trail. "Disappeared" means murdered and the body disposed of in a way that no one will ever find it. The given headline is extremely misleading and caters to shock value alone.
"5. I am not aware of a United States chemical or biological weapons program. Perhaps you could post more information."
I've been reading books about U.S. government activities since I was serving in the U.S. Air Force during the Vietnam war. At that time, the government was lying to U.S. citizens about what we were doing at the base at which I was stationed in Thailand. I was shocked that the U.S. government would so easily lie, and I began to be interested in knowing more.
I've put together two articles that collect links about mostly hidden violent U.S. government activities. I've been amazed at one of the responses I've gotten: Most people have very little knowledge of U.S. government violence, even though the U.S. government has killed more than 3,000,000 since the Second World War.
The U.S. government is a world leader in biological weapons, although you don't hear about that much any more. Try visiting the U.S. Army Soldier and Biological Chemical Command. The site says, "The operational capabilities of the command include the safe, secure, storage of chemical weapons at the eight United States stockpile sites at Anniston Ala., Blue Grass, Ky., Edgewood, Md., Newport, Ind., Pine Bluff, Ark., Pueblo, Colo., Tooele, Utah and Umatillla, Ore." Most of the site is not accessible to people like you and me who pay taxes to support this. The site is written to show only the mostly defensive activities.
However, the U.S. government is heavily involved in EVERY kind of weapons manufacture. For example, see the October 29, 2002 article in The Guardian US weapons secrets exposed.
The U.S. government has a long history of encouraging and perpetrating violence. For example, see US sent biological weapons to Iraq in 1980s.
I've pulled together some links in two articles: History surrounding the U.S. war with Iraq: Four short stories and What should be the Response to Violence?
The response to violence should be to study why it occurs to make sure that you are not contributing it, and to fix the underlying problems, rather than engage in more violence. Peace cannot happen overnight. If there have been years of trouble-making, it will take years to correct. Since the present violence in Iraq began more than 50 years ago, it may be necessary to have 50 years of attempts at peace to correct it.
$ host www.freemikehawash.org
www.freemikehawash.org has address 0.0.0.0
What's next? The articles on Wired and NYT?
- Preferences: Solaris 10 (servers), Ubuntu (desktops), Solaris 11 (personal servers) -
Yeah, but are you still going to vote for and support the IDIOT WHO APPOINTED HIM?
That is all.
But by god do NOT start championing the cause of someone that nobody really knows anything about (hell, for all we know he actually COULD be a terrorist) because then it really weakens your argument against the wrongs that were committed against Mr. Mitnick.
I just wanted to point out that if you are an American citizen, you still have rights, before and after proof of guilt is established -- especially before. Due process applies to the guilty and the innocent alike.
Join Tor today!
See also this article in the local paper.
Yeah, it's a difficult fact that our rights don't have priority ratings... Like first and foremost, the right to be free... Interestingly enough, most people refer to the Declaration of Independence as the Ur-foundation for our rights. Despite the fact that the Declaration has no legally binding power, people throughout the civil rights movement have referred to it as providing justification for their struggle. In some ways it goes back to the struggle at the heart of any modern state between justice and freedom. Europeans tend to think they err on the side of justice and Americans err on the side of freedom, but I think this case shows Americans can err on the side of "justice" and the war in Iraq shows Europeans can err on the side of "freedom"...
I'm certain that the outrage over this case is well justified. And based on my 5 minutes of exposure to this case, I'm sure that he's not intentionally guilty of anything. Things like this happen, sad though it might seem. Innocent people have been unfairly locked up before, and if he IS cleared and the reasons for doing this to him were found to be unreasonable, then he should be well compensated for the intrusion into his life.
But please stop comparing innocent people with Kevin Mitnick. Yes, I'll agree, there were issues regarding his 5+ years of confinement, but he really brough it upon himself. Here's a few hints for people trying to avoid the Kevin Mitnick treatment:
1. Obey the law.
2. If you neglect to follow rule #1, revisit it after you get caught.
3. If you again neglect to follow rule #1, and don't choose to pay attention to rule #2, REALLY pay attention to it the next time you get caught.
4. If you once again neglect to follow rule #1, and rules #2 and #3 didn't sink in, now would be a good time for a serious attitude change.
5. If you continue to break the law, despite many instances in your life that would imply that this is a bad idea, and a warrant is issued for your arrest, turn yourself in.
6. If you're being pursued by the police, STOP RUNNING.
7. If you continue to run and a place you're living at gets raided, that's a clue that they're on to you.
8. When the police knock on your door with a warrant, ANSWER IT.
Mitnick presented himself as a flight risk. He dug himself a deep hole by constantly attacking 3 letter corporations with deep pockets. They didn't accumulate 10's of thousands of pages of evidence on him because he was a habitual jaywalker. In the end he got a token restitution. Even if the assessed damages weren't accurate, he probably DID cause damage far in excess of what the court required him to pay, considering time spent by system administrators cleaning up after him.
Federal cases also take a long time to prepare. He waived his own right to a speedy trial. That was a mistake. The FBI was kinda busy at the time what with this little incident in OKC. Spare them years of effort and force them to come up with something quickly, they'd probably offer a plea deal that would have been much better than what he ended up with.
Please don't use Kevin Mitnick as a comparison, there IS no comparison. There are plenty of perfectly innocent posterboys you can pick up as a reference. Don't sully Mr. Hawash's name further by comparing him to a criminal.
-Restil
Play with my webcams and lights here
Also a Univ. South Florida professor was caught doing the same thing that the Intel programmer did. USF professor's charities
Everyone seems to be missing this point:
It doesn't matter if he's guilty or not.
I don't care if he's a mass murderer. Our constitution is supposed to guarantee that we cannot be held without being charged for a crime.
The fact that he's not allowed to speak for himself is just another damage on top of that one.
I wasn't saying that Mitnick was innocent (he wasn't), I was saying that he was deprived of his right to a speedy trial. You can see this sentiment in my original post.
You'll notice that I, in fact, did not defend Mitnick's actions. Instead of painting everyone who knows the definition of our rights under the constitution as a "mob-thinker and a wacko", maybe you should get in touch with the current state of the rest of the world?
The only conclusions I've jumped to were clearly:
He's being held without a charge,
He's being held in isolation (which was reported).
Is the reason you can't see the rational people because you assume that anyone with this opinion is irrational?
-Zipwow
I don't know which is more depressing, that 2/3 didn't care enough to vote, or that 1/2 of those that did are crazy.
A-fuckin-men!
The truth doesn't care what I think.
From the article:
The 1984 material witness statute was...
-Ryan C.
-Ryan C.
neither matter. What matters is the electoral college's votes. We have a system that prevents, for example, the entire states of NY, TX, and CA from voting for one candidate and and winning due to the popular vote even though the other 47 states (with lower turn-out) voted mostly for the other candidate.
unfortunately, this causes a lot of people in a lot of states to not even bother voting because they already know the outcome in their state (for example, not a single one of my presidental votes has ever mattered in the slightest), which makes the popular vote mean nothing at all but doesn't prevent idiot chicken littles from running around acting like the popular vote in Gore's favor means anything.
The truth doesn't care what I think.
The civil liberties violations in the US do not even compare, except by idiots.
Double amputees shouldn't complain about their situation! They've still got half their limbs, and they should be DAMNED THANKFUL for that!! At least they're not quadruple amputees, right?
In fact, we should be GRATEFUL to Bush and Ashcroft that they're only chopping ONE of our limbs off by using 'material witness' procedures to lock some of us up without due process.
There's an idiot here, and it's you. Regardless how bad things are in any other country, we need to fight tooth and nail at ANY attempt to make things worse here in OUR country, no matter how comparitively small they may seem.
Michael you got it wrong again!
Whiole Mitnick was charged before doidn a single hour in jail..read the arrest transcript sometime you might be surprised how much Mitnick says that is not quite matching with his sayings before a judge..
This guy is being held without any charges being stated to him before the judge..ie the hearing you get before they hold you in jail..
Don't Tread on OpenSource
Well, it depends on if they decide to classify him as an "enemy combatant" like Padilla. Remember, two prisoners in Camp X-Ray have died in interrogation. What's that about not being beaten and killed in jail?
Well I'm the doctor and I say you're dead, so shut up and take it like a man!
Having a nice bill of rights doesn't mean squat if they aren't respected.
The sooner US citizens as a group realize that their country isn't the best in the world, the sooner they can do something about improving it. This patriotic blindness is bad for the US, and it's bad for the rest of the world too.
Now that is a real possibility. For some reason, the masses in the good 'ol USA seem to like this windbag. If he winds again its because we deserve him. I will be heartbroken that education in this country is far worse than is acknowledged by anyone. Maybe it is time to move...
I just hope that when all the terrorst attacks start that folks recognize the huge red targets Bush painted on all our backs.
I'll PayPal $10 to the person who sets up an online donation site for Mike Wahash's advocate.
What happens, though, when the government things that allowing due process will infringe on my right to safety?
Can you elaborate on this? I find it highly unprobable, if not impossible to conceive that denying someone's right to a trial can make you less secure. Tell me where I'm wrong, if you can.
I hadn't known there were so many idiots in the world until I started using the Internet -Stanislaw Lem
One of Hitler's earliest actions was the building of a detention center for "terrorists", in March 1933 at Oranianberg. Suspension of constitutional guarantees was his principal plank in reaching for absolute power. Hartmann's essay is an essential backgrounder on how Hitler used the same tactics as Rummy's Bush: When Democracy Failed alan
"Bush-Bashing" huh? Is that what the young ladies call it these days? ;)
You'd be amazed the number of girls over here wearing tshirts saying "The only Bush I trust is my own"...tres amusant! Hmmm, I may just pop to McDonalds for some freed^H^Hnch fries!
---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"
An an Australian, I have to mention the two Australian citizens held without trial or access to legal counsel, in Gauntanamo Bay. One was taken captive in Afghanistan, and the other seized in Pakistan (and most likely is a case of mistaken identity).
These people have actually been disappeared. They have no rights, no laws can help them, their government has forsaken them and they are being held in a US military prison camp which has no laws governing it. They've been held for over a year now, I think, and still no charges have been laid. Surely by now the US have tortured these guys enough to get the info and confessions they want?
People are disputing the difference between the US and Iraqi regimes. This is fair enough - they were once poles apart. Now, the treatment of US citizens and especially foreign nationals, makes me wonder how far the US regime has moved towards the Iraqi one. Rights are being thrown out the window, the US constitution is ignored by the powerful, the presidential election is widely considered a farce, stories of war crimes against Afghani Taliban POWs are appearing...
http://www.msnbc.com/news/893950.asp?0cv=CB20
Now it seems that the government can lock you up for looking like you might have a bit of a temperature:
"apprehension, detention or conditional release of individuals to prevent the introduction, transmission or spread of suspected communicable diseases."
This is in connection with SARS, which has been added to the list of diseases. It is good that they can force quarantine on people who have deadly diseases, but think about the potential for abuse, especially with regard to ethnicity- claiming that anyone who looks vagually oriental must have recently been to Hong Kong or Singapore and therefore MAY have SARS.
graspee
I second that. If there were, we'd probably have McCain for president instead of plant life.
I *really* hope he is a one term President. I swear his middle name should've been Orwell.
I'm reminded of a brilliant cartoon in the New Yorker some years back. It showed a couple of pandas in a cage, and one says, "If, as you say, it's no crime to be a panda, how do you explain the fact that we were arrested?"
I don't really give a damn. This is my freaking country, and I'm going to oppose this sort of junior dictator garbage, DESPITE the fact that someone somewhere else is doing worse. Good grief, since when is "well they're doing it worse than me" an excuse?
Its the fact that you consider this a "junior dictator" demonstrates my point. Completely out of preportion to what is going on. Its the proverbial Chicken Little. Its as if you are ready to move to Montana and start a movement.
I don't agree with what they are doing either. But I get tired of reminding people that IF you insist on personal attacks, then no one is going to take you serious. Sorry, but it makes you look like an idiot. Argue your point (which I happen to agree with) but to keep calling GW and crew evil is just stupid. They are wrong about alot of this, but if you don't even consider the fact that they are acting of conscience, and NOT out of some desire to take over the world, then don't bother telling anyone of any consequence, because they are not going to listen.
Once again: when you use terms like "junior dictator" it doesnt make you cool. It makes you look like a paranoid idiot, and it TAKES AWAY from our ability to get the govt. to stop this shit. Let me repeat this: If you act like a paranoid freak in how you protest, you will not create change. If your goals is to create change (rather than look important) then learn to not act like a kook.
They are wrong about plenty, and right about more. But GW and the administration is not trying to take over the world, they are trying to make it a safer place. Sometimes they do it the wrong way, but that is the motivation. Not everyone in the administation has the best intentions, but on the whole, it appears obvious that is the motivation.
If you DO think GW and crew simply want to 'take over the world' then you ARE a nut, or a liar with a different agenda.
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
It may have demonstrated this for you, but it has not for me. While the U.S. is certainly not the only free nation in the world, no other country has the same set of liberties.
Having a nice bill of rights doesn't mean squat if they aren't respected.True, but I would argue that the Supreme Court has not sufficiently degraded the rights found therein (or any part of the Constitution) to justify armed revolution. The system may be broken, but it is not beyond repair (yet). I still believe the US is the best in the world, Australia, Germany and Canada included. The US is the only industrialized country that does not exercise socialist economics. We are the only one without nationalized health care for the whole population (only senior citizens on MediCare and poor people on MediCaid). Socialism is government mandated equality of outcome, or in other words an increase of equality at the expense of freedom. By this test, the US is more free than any other (for good or ill I won't opine).
ASCII tastes bad dude.
Binary it is then.
Ask the Human Shields that are coming out of Iraq. They are freaked out at how the people were abused. They learned they don't know shit about Iraq, and that their own misconceptions were 100% wrong. They SAW what was going on, and it blew their mind that some leaders really DO oppress people that way. Some people just don't understand what "evil" means. The civil liberties violations in the US do not even compare, except by idiots.
I'd be really interested in reading anything you have to back this statement up. I've been in contact with several people who've been over there recently, and read many articles written by others, and they all say the complete opposite. Been watching Fox News lately?
---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"
"So let us, as citizens, behave ourselves in a manner like we would have our government govern us. Let's be polite in conversation, concerned for others, honest in our dealings, and willing to do something to make changes when we see something wrong. No, we won't all agree about everything, but we can agree to disagree agreeably."
I agree thoroughly. Send me an email message, and let's talk.
slashdot 4.4.03 reporting minitruth report undoubleplusgood refs unpersons rewrite fullwise upsub antefilling
When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem
Carl Levin and Debbie Stabnenow should be receiving my letters shortly. Hopefully, they, or someone on their staff with any concern for civil liberties, will read them. Seriously, if you've taken the time to go to the site and read about it and you want to do something, don't be a pud -- write your senator, send some money.. this has to be a nightmare for that family and I know that any type of support is what I'd be looking for.
They have made accusations, that is why the person was taken. The difference is they have not made publicly disclosed accusations.
Thats the problem: if they have a reason for taking this person, is it valid? Is it justified? Just taking somebody because they went to high school with a suspected terrorist is hardly justified. But if you went on 'vacation' to Afghanistan three years ago with this person, that could be justified.
But since they are giving out no information, or even saying if this person is being held, that becomes a serious issue.
Manipulate the moderator system! Mod someone as "overrated" today.
What with identity theft being the fastest growing crime ever, how hard is it to make some one look suspicious enough to suddenly earn a "disappearing?"
For those of you who take the sheep-like "I trust my govn't, they must have good reasons" stance....what if the good reasons are contrived? What if it's the govn't that's being duped? What if there's just a mix-up that makes some unfortunate links between you and some shady others?
When the transparency of your judicial system starts getting this cloudy, you're open to all kinds of corruption and manipulation....whether or not the original impetus was well-intentioned.
Oh, heck! That was ment to be miniluv, not minitruth. Man my newspeak isn't up to par!
When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem
It may be that the people who run this charity with ties to terrorism want him dead. So perhaps he is somewhat willingly hanging out in solitairy.
This is the single dumbest thing posted on Slashdot so far this year, and that's saying something.
Would it have killed you to read the fucking article, or the Free Mike website?
Mr. Hawash was arrested at gunpoint in his company's parking lot, while armed agents invaded and searched his house.
A free clue: this is not how the Feds protect cooperating witnesses who they think might be in danger from the people they plan to testify against. (When that happens, they check you into a hotel with an armed guard.)
Another free hint: if they thought his life might be in danger, why are they letting his family continue to twist in the wind? You don't think Al Qaeda would think to hurt the wife and kids of someone they thought was an informant?
Last but not least: if he was "hanging out" in solitary confinement (and that phrase right there is a strong contender for "dumbest thing said on Slashdot ever") voluntarily, don't you think his wife or lawyer could have somehow communicated this to the Intel Vice President who is running the 'free Mike' campaign?
News for Nerds. Stuff that Matters? Like hell.
Imports would get dearer. Exports would be more competitive. The ridiculous imbalance in the US economy would start to level out. If I were you, I'd be hitting my knees every night praying for a devalued US currency.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo
--Andy Finkel (J. Klass?)
I'm reminded of the excellent play "A Man for All Seasons" by Robert Bolt
Wife: Arrest him!
More: For what?
Wife: He's dangerous!
Roper: For all we know he's a spy!
Daughter: Father, that man's bad!
More: There's no law against that!
Roper: There is, God's law!
More: Then let God arrest him!
Wife: While you talk he's gone!
More: And go he should, if he were the Devil himself, until he broke the law!
Roper: So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!
More: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
Roper: Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!
More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat?
This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down (and you're just the man to do it!), do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then?
Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!
It has come to our attention that you have used "Bush" and "legitimate target" in the same sentence. You are quite obviously a terrorist, and we would appreciate it if you would report to the nearest detention center, so that we don't have to go through the trouble of tracking you down and shooting you to death for "resisting arrest".
Have a nice day,...
I've been called a "Fucking Dick" by better people than you.
Okay. You got me there. That portion of my argument was poorly thought out and weak. The rest of it wasn't too bad though IMHO.
As a matter of fact I did read the entire (fucking) article. I thought it was rather lacking in information. Perhaps I will post again after checking out the Free Mike website.
I don't know what's worse: The fact that shit like this is happening or that so many people in this forum actually support it.
It's getting to the point that I'm embarassed to be an American. At one time I could at least say, we as citizens have freedoms. Now with this story, that isn't even true anymore.
Does Canada need any lawyers? I'd be willing to work cheap?
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
Man, I sure hope you're kidding. Because if you and others in this forum are not, then our country is heading for the crapper.
If you think it's OK that American citizens can be held forever without being charged, that he is guilty BEFORE being proved as such, then what freedom does any of us really have? We now only have the appearance of freedom.
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
This could be consider just another drug war. Uday Hussein is involved with US tobacco smuggling It turns that Uday has figured out he can grow his own and doesn't need to pay US compaines for the stuff and he started draining swams to grow it. Tobacco is how the US keeps the tradbalacnes from getting too bad with oil compaines and now Uday seems to be getting serious. Ever since Gulf War I, the Arabs have been more concerned about how they buy their tobbaco from and prefer to buy Uday's imported and reboxed brands. Some figures connect him to nearly 25% of US tobacco sales. The real story isn't showing up but it appears that some of Bush's best supporters are deeply tied up with the thugs of Iraq. Throw in considerations of Bush's CIA connections (via daddy) combined with the CIA's love of illegal trade makes and you've got one heck of a conspiracy.
Somehow I managed to miss the (well written) NYT article. I still am hesitant to make a determination on this.
I do feel the government should release some basic facts about the case-- nothing that jeopardizes the investigation, but perhaps they could give a clue as to why they are holding this guy.
Most of the terrorists didn't have high paying technology jobs that required a lot of their time, so in that respect Mike doesn't fit the profile. It would be helpful for the government to at least release a little information here. It's been two weeks since he was arrested, so I think that some basic information is a little past due at this point.
I'm not saying it's fair to blame the US for all of the world's corrupt governments, but that's just the way it is when one nation is so much more powerful than any other single nation.
Dude, you just made my friends list. That was one of the best comments I've read in a long time.
-Ryan, with the unoriginal sig
I doubt Ashcroft has "the best of intentions," unless it's "best" that he wants everyone in the U.S. to worship Christ, give up all civil liberties, and basically do whatever he says. His heart may be in the right place (he wants to do good), but what he thinks is "good" curdles my blood.
"Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
Um, it's the opposite. When you quote a term you indicate it's not yours, but comes from a source. Standard and correct practice, where by using the quote the reporters distance themselves from the particular terms used. See this BBC news story for an example.
"Only the small secrets need to be protected. The big ones are kept secret by public incredulity." - Marshall McLuhan
I've got a great idea!
How about we push a bill through congress, and call it "The Alien Registration Act"? This act would make it illegal for anyone in the United States to advocate, abet, or teach the desirability of overthrowing the government. The law would also require all alien residents in the United States over 14 years of age to file a comprehensive statement of their personal and occupational status and a record of their political beliefs.
That would be a big step toward combatting terrorism.
Then we could get the House of Un-American Activies Committee to investigate, well, gee, just about everybody on that list. Maybe they could even start with members of the MPAA, since we all hate them, anyhow. We could follow them around, search their houses (without warrants), and ruin their lives. We could demand that they tell us who their associates are, ignore their pleas for respecting their first amendment rights, and imprison them if they give us answers we don't like. If they "name names", that should be good enough to do the same to those they name.
We could get the FBI to start maintaining a huge blacklist of people who we suspect maybe might be terrorists, and make sure that if anybody hires those people (even unknowingly), they get blacklisted, too. We could even get the FBI to spy on random citizens, and if they had even an inkling they maybe might be terrorists or something, we could ruin their lives too (hey, it's for the greater good, right?). We could especially target people who sound like the people we're at war with -- wouldn't that be great for the IT industry? No more Iraqis to steal our jobs! Hell, we could get them to arrest all the dark-skinned people who talk funny, too -- so we could get rid of all the Indians, Afghans, and Pakistanis who are stealing our jobs. That would be wonderful! (Who cares if they are immigrants or citizens or on H1 visas -- they're not the same as us, they don't deserve the same rights!)
We could also go after people with the same religion as those we're at war with, because they'd almost certainly have the same political beliefs.. and particularly go after those in the military. Hey, we already had one guy with a funny last name lob some grenades at our guys in Kuwait! So, we could use that incident as an excuse to lock up all the Muslims. Now we're talkin'!
Now, here's the tough question.... what kind of a person could we trust to start such a witch hunt? Maybe a senator from Wisconsin.... who are the senators from Wisconsin right now? I can't remember... but I remember that fifty years ago, it was a fellow named Joseph McCarthy .
Thank God for men like Eisenhower and Nixon. If it wasn't for them, half the country would probably be rotting in jail by now.
You, sir, deserve neither liberty, nor security.
Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
Welcome to America: if you want us to take you serious, you have to present your arguement reasonably, backed up with facts. If you dish out FUD, we assume you are full of shit, and anything you say is meaningless.
...unless you're a high-ranking member of the US Government.
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
If he's a sleeper, busting him now will cause the rest of his cell to "go to ground", using spookspeak, will it not? If they're trying to stop a terrorist cell, they're choosing an odd way to go about it, ensuring that they won't catch anybody.
You can't just throw people in jail, hoping that some evidence will pop up or that they'll incriminate themselves...
The system has failed you, don't fail yourself. --Billy Bragg
"Rights are merely priviledges extended unless enjoyed by one and all."
The system has failed you, don't fail yourself. --Billy Bragg
Custom bumper stickers can be found here. Simply make a graphic (either .jpg, .bmp, .tif, or .gif) and upload the design to them. Want just one? 5 bucks (and believe me, when I was looking to get a bumper sticker made a few months ago, this is the only site I could find where there's no minimum order.) Want 10? $2.60 apiece. Free shipping, and you'll get your order within a week or less, depending on how many you order. An absolutely boffo service, and it's one of a kind. Make 10 and give them out to people (or slap them on random bumpers.)
Anger problem.
We treat criminals better than this citizen. It's called "Due Process".
I was a Fool to be a Human Shield for Saddam
Of course, you'll claim "right wing nonsense, all made up", while sitting there reading common drams like its a man page, however, feel free to Take your pick of news stories.
Or they'll be calling it "The Blackhouse" again. ;)
Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
The 10% rule comes from Judaism - it's quite a bit older than Christianity.
Clear, Dark Skies
An avidity to punish is always dangerous to liberty. It leads men to stretch, to misinterpret, and to misapply even the best of laws. He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.
I fear that many in our current cabinet would consider such statements "unpatriotic" and Mr. Paine a danger to the security of the state. Note that my sig is apropos also.
There is no trap so deadly as the trap you set for yourself
-Raymond Chandler, The Long Goodbye
And I'd take issue with the idea that Ashcroft is a "good man". It would be very difficult to convince me that he honestly has democratic principles and the upholding of the Constitution (something he swore to in his oath of office, btw) at heart.
"First, they came for the communists, and I didn't speak up because I was not a communist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me, and by that time there was no one left to speak up for me."
-Rev. Niemoller (who didn't survive Nazi Germany)
'nuff said.
I have to post as AC.
I was once Mike's intern at Intel. I cannot tell you how FUCKING SHOCKED I am to hear this. I sit here, and shake my head in disbelief.
This is the man responsible for architecting the MMX architecture, and is responsible for the beginnings of gaming on the PC architecture. He has contributed many great things to modern consumer computing.
To say that he contributed to terrorist groups is utter bullshit. I can't remember how many times we had pleasant lunches with Israeli Jews. (Shit, he used to work in Haifa, Israel). He was also learning Hebrew at the time I worked with him, because he "wanted a greater appreciation of the Jewish language and culture."
Vote out this fucking administration. I'm so serious.
How the heck did you pass high school social studies? That's exactly what the Constitution is, by definition. It defines the powers available to Federal and State goverments.
I suppose the main differences between the US and Iraq at this point are:
1: No torture (yet) is officially sanctioned in the US.
2: Far fewer informants (20% of the Iraqi population is estimated to be a paid informant for a secret police agency).
3: A more credible and much more independent judicial system where if you are disappeared, at least your lawyer can still file paperwork for you and try to get access to you.
We still have much to be grateful for. But this is still scary anyway.
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
Merely as a hypothetical situation (this isn't meant to imply that Hawash is in this situation, although it may be a possibility): Suppose a suspect is apprehended by the FBI because of tips from an undercover agent or informant. There is sufficient evidence to hold this person - however to reveal this evidence would blow the cover of the agent or informant. If due process were granted and this suspect convicted or even charged, then perhaps the larger operation is put in jeopardy. Again, this is just a hypothetical situation. I'm not trying to claim it is the case for Hawash or it is likely. National Security is a sticky issue.
Do you think the current administration would be doing so good if it wouldn't be for 9/11 and now the war? Do you think the defense budget would be where it is with out it? All am saying that the current political and world situation 'does' helps the current administration in acomplishing their goals. ---- I WANT A REGIME CHANGE!!!!!
They have NOT made accusations. They are holding him as a "material witness". Which, ultimately, is a legal a tool they are abusing in order to keep secret the accusations that, presumably, will be made. Technically, however, there have not been any accusations
http://www.theonion.com/onion3847/bill_of_rights.h tml
Uh, as a matter of fact, the Constitution IS the end all be all of our legal system. Otherwise, what's it for?
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
picking up people who are shooting at you and are not affiliated with any nation on a battle feild and lcoking them up until you figure out what to do or what have you, but they have actualy picked up a US citizen and placed him in prison with out any charges being filed.....this is bad and I think the ACLU and the Supreme COurt needs to smack ASScroft around for doing this.
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
If PATRIOT II passes, and you contribute to his legal defense fund and then he is found to be a part of a terrorist organization, you can lose your citizenship! Scary.
I doubt Ashcroft has "the best of intentions," unless it's "best" that he wants everyone in the U.S. to worship Christ, give up all civil liberties, and basically do whatever he says. His heart may be in the right place (he wants to do good), but what he thinks is "good" curdles my blood.
;) and I do NOT feel that he is trying to shove his religion down my throat. GW is very religious, too, but I don't really have a problem with people who are religious, any brand. Even tho I am not religious, I am not intimidated my persons who are.
Do you really think that is what he wants? I am asking in ernest. I am NOT a christian personally (nor muslim or jew, so i dont have a dog in this hunt
I agree that Ashcroft has a distorted view of what is the right thing to do, but i just don't see him trying to force anyone into christianity (no reference at all for that one) or to 'give up all civil liberties'. I see him trying to pare back some liberties and freedoms that are important (a bit fringe in some areas, but important none the less) and yes, that MUST stop. But I see him as simply wrong, not sinister. I don't think he is rubbing his hands about taking away freedom, he is just narrow minded on how it affects others.
This is a pain, granted, but this does NOT make him an evil guy. It just makes him INCORRECT. I personally believe that in order to influence, you have to understand and give credit where its due. I just don't buy that he is sinister in any way, this is NOT the MO for sinister acts. Its a bit paranoid, over reactive and maybe a bit self righteous. Not I just don't see the evil, even tho I disagree with him on most everything. I do see alot of people (not you in particular) over reacting to him, calling him names, etc. Rule 1: once you start calling names, you lose. its no longer about the issues. This is part of what bugs me. Its hard to effect change if everyone on your side sounds like a paranoid nut.
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
this is exactly the fud i am talking about. short little "look at me, im clever" comments that mean nothing. Just karma whoring.
If you want to ACCUSE someone, use a name, name an event, give a source. If not, then you are just spewing the same FUD you are accusing others of. Its just words.
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
No. I say again: no!
Do not compare this to anything...comparison is irrelevant.
What is relevant is that this has happened. Something has happened which is against the rules you purpose to live by. Camp x-ray violates the geneva convention. This guy has been treated in a way that pre-9/11 would have digusted you.
The fact that 9/11 happened should not change that one iota; something like 9/11 is the price you pay for freedom. The rules should not change; changing the rules means you lose your freedom.
All the 'must''s and 'should''s you mention are fine...but they are not in effect! And that means that what has happened is wrong. THAT is what you must protest if you even consider yourself worthy of the freedom you say you live in.
-- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
I recommend you try some dry lubricant on that shift key, bucko. It's sticking for entire words and phrases. You might also want to look at the screen while you're typing, and remember to review your comments before submitting.
And: you're not a Republican. Did the DNC fax say this is the week to claim you're a Republican and claim Ashcroft is a Nazi??
I am never ever going to visit the USA as long as these laws and that government is in place. I have no wish to go to jail.
It's worse that Saddams because we're supposed to have a process and a government that prevents this. Bush is not a military dictator, and letting him act like one is our failing as much as his.
And I'd take issue with the idea that Ashcroft is a "good man". It would be very difficult to convince me that he honestly has democratic principles and the upholding of the Constitution (something he swore to in his oath of office, btw) at heart.
Your first point is pure FUD. Bush is not acting like a dictator, he has the SIGNATURE of a majority of persons in the Senate and House of Representatives, even the ones who are talking trash of their own now. For you to call him a dictator demonstrates a lack of understanding about what is necessary to go to war. Also, he has NO money. If the congress didn't want the war, they could not fund it. instead they just signed off on 5 billion MORE than they were asked for. Also, 70% of the people agree with the war, with no duress. The congress can take any action they want, as can the courts. And they have. Your analogy is very flawed on that point. Instead, its just a personal attack (see my other posts on this point)
You and he may disagree as to what is free speech and what is inciting a riot (for instance) but you don't back up your concern with a specific instance of an act by him that can be taken outside of simple disagreement. I haven't seen, and you haven't cited, an example that backup up this conclusion.
Its ok to not like him or his policies, but to try to make him out as EVIL because you disagree doesnt hurt him but instead it hurts YOUR arguement, because it is obvious you are biased against him.
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
You are the most rational thinker I have seen on Slashdot for a long time. Please keep posting :)
Finkployd
Does the EFF count as a charity affiliated with terrorists? Dimitry Skylarov was arrested and held unfairly too - he was obviously antiamerican so anyone who donated to the EFF is too and should be arrested. While they are at it, the FBI might also want to look into all those politicians who have sold weapons to terrorists or saddam or have shares in companies that have been affiliated with terrorists.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
Okay... I'll bite.
Our entire argument to the UN for attacking Iraq was a resounding "we know they have WMD, but unfortunately, we can't give you our evidence," and the public PR machine has been spewing a nonstop "Saddam supports terrorists and has WMD," all with zero hard proof given. Given his history, I hardly doubt that Saddam has chemical and biological weapons... but I would have rather seen a more compelling argument than a "Iraq has them... trust us." The US populace seems to disagree with me, dashing your assertion that the American people require more than FUD to take people seriously. We used FUD to start a war.
If perhaps I've missed something, I'd be quite happily corrected, should you choose to provide links. I'd love to see the proof we had before attacking that Iraq has/had chemical/biological weapons. Thus far, the best evidence I've seen is, as one comedian put it "we know they have WMD... we have the receipts," as seen in greater detail here, indicating that we ourselves supplied WMD to Iraq.
Don't get me wrong... I shed no tears for Saddam, and I fully support the guys stuck fighting right now. I just wish we had more to go on than "trust us."
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Whose fault is it. They needed something to be done and this bill conveniently shows up promising to cure all their woes.
Most people dont read legal documents, why should our representatives? If that is the case then the country is going down the crapper. They should read these bills. Now that we have lost these freedomw will we ever get them back?
Will people come and take me away in the middle of the night and hold me indefinitly on some charges that I may have done? Is this how the system supposed to work.
Honestly I dont see the difference between our system and some other less popular ones.
-if you dont fight for your rights someone will come and take them away.
"You're on my side and the dark side, like Lando Calrissian?" --Gimpy, Undergrads
...I sure as shit aint gonna donate to ANY charities...I used to feel comfortable with this government...but I don't know why we have laws when they clearly don't mean anything... ...I used to like our govmnt.
-- A cat is no trade for integrity!
I think this is what happened to Elvis!!!
It wouldn't surprise me to find out that Griffin Bell locked him away as a material witness during the Carter Administration... you know, for giving money to CREEP and supporting the Watergate break-in.
i think that it's been fairly well proven in these past weeks that the united nations does not, in fact, control the US. for further evidence, try the various news agencies.
Guns are like umbrellas and condoms. Better to have one and not need it, than need it and not have one.
I'd suspect you need to RTFA and maybe go back to reexamine recent similar situations
COULD YOU PLEASE STOP YELLING IN MY EAR??? :-)
-braxton
This is New Totolitarianism, after all.
----------
Together, we will drive the rats from the tundra.
I didn't elect this guy
Did you elect this guy?
You over there, did you--
So then who elected this guy?
No, the burden is on both parties to present their case, and it's judge on the "preponderence of evidence" standard (like the parent poster's 50% rule)
"Beyond a resonable doubt" is reserved for criminal cases, and in all criminal cases there is a greater burden on the state than the defendant (defendants often attempt to prove their innocence, but the state _has_ to prove their guilt).
When Democracy Failed:
The Warnings of History
by Thom Hartmann
March 17, 2003
The 70th anniversary wasn't noticed in the United States, and was barely reported in the corporate media. But the Germans remembered well that fateful day seventy years ago - February 27, 1933. They commemorated the anniversary by joining in demonstrations for peace that mobilized citizens all across the world.
It started when the government, in the midst of a worldwide economic crisis, received reports of an imminent terrorist attack. A foreign ideologue had launched feeble attacks on a few famous buildings, but the media largely ignored his relatively small efforts. The intelligence services knew, however, that the odds were he would eventually succeed. (Historians are still arguing whether or not rogue elements in the intelligence service helped the terrorist; the most recent research implies they did not.)
But the warnings of investigators were ignored at the highest levels, in part because the government was distracted; the man who claimed to be the nation's leader had not been elected by a majority vote and the majority of citizens claimed he had no right to the powers he coveted. He was a simpleton, some said, a cartoon character of a man who saw things in black-and-white terms and didn't have the intellect to understand the subtleties of running a nation in a complex and internationalist world. His coarse use of language - reflecting his political roots in a southernmost state - and his simplistic and often-inflammatory nationalistic rhetoric offended the aristocrats, foreign leaders, and the well-educated elite in the government and media. And, as a young man, he'd joined a secret society with an occult-sounding name and bizarre initiation rituals that involved skulls and human bones.
Nonetheless, he knew the terrorist was going to strike (although he didn't know where or when), and he had already considered his response. When an aide brought him word that the nation's most prestigious building was ablaze, he verified it was the terrorist who had struck and then rushed to the scene and called a press conference.
You are now witnessing the beginning of a great epoch in history, he proclaimed, standing in front of the burned-out building, surrounded by national media. This fire, he said, his voice trembling with emotion, is the beginning. He used the occasion - a sign from God, he called it - to declare an all-out war on terrorism and its ideological sponsors, a people, he said, who traced their origins to the Middle East and found motivation for their evil deeds in their religion.
Two weeks later, the first detention center for terrorists was built in Oranianberg to hold the first suspected allies of the infamous terrorist. In a national outburst of patriotism, the leader's flag was everywhere, even printed large in newspapers suitable for window display.
Within four weeks of the terrorist attack, the nation's now-popular leader had pushed through legislation - in the name of combating terrorism and fighting the philosophy he said spawned it - that suspended constitutional guarantees of free speech, privacy, and habeas corpus. Police could now intercept mail and wiretap phones; suspected terrorists could be imprisoned without specific charges and without access to their lawyers; police could sneak into people's homes without warrants if the cases involved terrorism.
To get his patriotic Decree on the Protection of People and State passed over the objections of concerned legislators and civil libertarians, he agreed to put a 4-year sunset provision on it: if the national emergency provoked by the terrorist attack was over by then, the freedoms and rights would be returned to the people, and the police agencies would be re-restrained. Legislators would later say they hadn't had time to read the bill before voting on it.
Immediately after passage of the anti-terrorism act, his federal police agencies steppe
. And we'd be stuck with an algore in the White House. Remember when that survellience plane got shot down by the Chinese? Gore probably would have surrended the whole fleet to China with remorse.
You mean as opposed to how the bush admin asked china to send them a bill for the "repair work", got one for over a million dolars, and then paid it without complaint? I'd hardly call that showing a backbone with the Chinese.
On the other hand, we wouldn't have broken the back of NATO and the UN, we wouldn't be in a constly and pointless war, have alienated 90% of the rest of the world, etc, etc, etc.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
Please report to the nearest reeducation center within 24 hours. You do not need to bring anything.
Yeah, right.
I see your points, its not like he's being tortured (posts saying this is as bad as Saddam are going too far), but even if the gov't "knows something we don't", I think its still the wrong thing to do.
When I say this, I'm reading "knows something we don't" as "believes he's guilty of something". This kind of indefinite incarceration can definitely be used as harassment in order to get him to testify against someone else. This coerced testimony shouldn't be admissiable, as its entirely possible that its a lie in order to get out of jail. Coercion is like that.
Also, I'm sure that even if they haven't said it, and even if they don't intend it, he's got to be thinking that they could do the same thing to his family. Again, strong coercion.
If there were some kind of limitations on this, that would change everything. Like having to disclose what criminal proceeding he's being held for, or if there were a maximum amount of time he could be held. Of course, I'd say the maximum amount of time is something non life-interrupting like two days, otherwise a week in the clink is still a steep punishment for 'suspicion' without an actual trial. And, of course, all this would have to be subject to a judge's approval.
-Zipwow
I don't know which is more depressing, that 2/3 didn't care enough to vote, or that 1/2 of those that did are crazy.
Start spelling better or I'll beat the crap out of you.
Well, Mike Hawash contributed to Global Relief, which before 9/11 was a charity with a good reputation. This is hardly the "same thing." Also, how do you know that Mike is Muslim? Do you have any personal knowledge? As far as I can tell, there's no mention of his religion on the "Free Mike Hawash" site.
Finally, would you ban all Islamic charities, or just the ones of which you don't approve? I have an idea! I don't like Christian charities, let's ban them, too!
Or are you just a troll?
You think that this is corrupt - just wait until they start doling out the money for the rebuilding of Iraq. I think that there will be a great revelation then.
He's being held as a material witness. As far as has been released to the press he isn't under arrest.
"God fights on the side with the best artillery." - Napoleon, Marshal of France - speaking truth to power
OK, I searched for Dunbar... Who here on Slashdot knows where the disappeared reference comes from? (Hint) Joseph H.. Seroiusly, I've been in the military 60 years after that novel was written and it still sounds earily like reality.
This guy is way out there
Jose Padilla ... and possibly doing some research online about so-called "dirty bombs". Hell, I looked online for information about dirty bombs ...
Since all carnivore could be doing is simple text matches (I think that is all it has time for), you are just plain lucky you're not a "material witness".
Actually, kidding aside, I think all the talk about dirty bombs was just to try to plant the idea. Which would you rather clean up, a small pox infection or a dirty bomb. If you make it sound like the dirty bomb, then maybe they will forget the biological route.
What's next? Applying hot irons to witnesses to compel testimony? Looks like these detentions are just a form of "slow torture", which is a very questionable action for a country which wants to be labeled as democratic.
"We would see the multitude oppressed from within as a consequence of the very precautions it had taken against what menaced it from without. We would see oppression continually increase, without the oppressed ever being able to know where it would end or what legitimate means would be left for them to stop it. We would see the rights of citizens and national liberties gradually die out, and the protests of the weak treated like seditious murmurs. We would see politics restrict the honor of defending the common cause to a mercenary portion of the people. We would see arising from this the necessity for taxes, the discouraged farmer leaving his field, even during peacetime, and leaving his plow in order to gird himself with a sword. We would see the rise of fatal and bizarre rules in the code of honor. We would see the defenders of the homeland sooner or later become its enemies, constantly holding a dagger over their fellow citizens."
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. Discourse on the Origin of Inequality.
Recently our national behavior has radically changed from action based on fact to action based on suspicion. Domestically the government now holds people incognito without charge and benefit of legal consul, based on mere suspicion. Internationally we have just attacked a nation at peace because Bush pronounced that he suspects that they may be a threat in the future. Lacking evidence for a legal UN action, Bush jumped to a unilateral, suspicion based first strike policy followed by an immediate invasion without time for citizens to react.
This is not a small change. While experience has show that there are relatively few real criminals and real threats to our nation, there is no bound on the number of suspicions an imaginative mind can have. The check on domestic power of the courts, and the check on unbounded aggression by the consent of the governed have been declared irrelevant by Bush.
I wonder why the http://www.freemikehawash.org/ link listed leads (at least at the moment) to that page so familiar to anyone who has installed the Apache package in Debian. Surely it hasn't been doing that the whole time. IM, I know not many people read the article, but really...
but I have already written my representative (Greg Walden) and explained what has happened here and explained my fears about PATRIOT II. I think if enough people took the 15 minutes they spend posting on slashdot, and wrote their representatives, it would accomplish a lot more good.
credit where due ?
AND YES, SLASHDOT, SHORT COMMENT TAKE LESS THAN 20 SECONDS TO TYPE, WHICH NOT NECESSARILY MEANS THEY'RE LAME.
No, not a War on Islam, a war on Wahabi exremists who have already made very,very,very clear that they consider themselves at war with you, me, and every other American citizen and to a lesser extent all non-wahabis. Read "The Two Faces of Islam: Saudi Fundamentalism and Its Role in Terrorism" by Stephen Schwartz
Smoking is an expensive, slow, and unreliable method of suicide.
Well, I'm from Oregon, and I just emailed Ron Wyden (democrat senator) my opinions regarding this...anyone else taking action, or just trolling about?
It's all fine and dandy to discuss subjects with your peers, but it unfortunately doesn't make much difference until you take that argument to the people who hold the golden keys.
No, no, you misunderstood, he's sleeping in a cell.
I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.
Interesting links - thanks. The first is certainly the most lucid, and interesting, but I have to have some suspicions of it's integrity given the heavily politicised nature of the site it's published on. Like it or not, I find it very hard to consider Isrealis impartial in this particular situation!
As for the google news stories, they're a mixed bunch. A couple refer to another "mystery taxi driver" who told them to support the war, several others just said the shields either became disillusioned (as they realised they weren't making a difference, or were being manipulated by the Iraqi government) or plain scared (a very natural reaction!). I admit to only skim reading most of them, but on balance I'm still thinking the "we decided war is actually good" group are a pretty tiny minority.
---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"
This may be slightly off-topic, but I have often wondered if the reason the TV show Dark Angel was axed after its second season was because it was a little too close to portraying a possible future of America as a totalitarian state at a time when the government was trying to push pro-American sentiment post 9/11. I don't mean the more scifi storylines of genetic mutations and secret organisations, but the images of Seattle after the "pulse" with police shock troops, informants, citizens being taken away for speaking out, etc.
In classic Orwellian tradition, it is hard to show your children what a totalitarian state looks like if there is nothing to point to as an example, even if it is fictitious in nature. (Has the movie 1984 been released on DVD yet?)
With the media already acting as a surrogate education in the Western world, I hope there continues to be provocative TV shows which challenge you to think of the consequences of today's events on the future, and not just regurgitate the government's line that "everything is OK as long as you do as we say, not as we do". Have people already forgotten the post 9/11 story of the US government openly asking Hollywood to make pro-American movies and TV shows? What other shows may have been axed on the quiet for being "anti-American" at such a time?
Oh, and finally this point - Mike Hawash isn't an Arab-American, he's an AMERICAN.
A citizen, like any other in that country, with equal rights under the law (supposedly). The stereotyping of African-American, Native-American, Arab-American etc has no place in a country that gives all citizens EQUALITY. As others have pointed out, it's a slippery slope from saying nothing when they come to take away the "terrorist", to when they come to take away YOU because you didn't speak out when you still had a chance to.
Visceral Psyche Films
This may be slightly off-topic, but I have often wondered if the reason the TV show Dark Angel was axed after its second season was because it was a little too close to portraying a possible future of America as a totalitarian state at a time when the government was trying to push pro-American sentiment post 9/11. I don't mean the more scifi storylines of genetic mutations and secret organisations, but the images of Seattle after the "pulse" with police shock troops, informants, citizens being taken away for speaking out, etc.
In classic Orwellian tradition, it is hard to show your children what a totalitarian state looks like if there is nothing to point to as an example, even if it is fictitious in nature. (Has the movie 1984 been released on DVD yet?)
With the media already acting as a surrogate education in the Western world, I hope there continues to be provocative TV shows which challenge you to think of the consequences of today's events on the future, and not just regurgitate the government's line that "everything is OK as long as you do as we say, not as we do". Have people already forgotten the post 9/11 story of the US government openly asking Hollywood to make pro-American movies and TV shows? What other shows may have been axed on the quiet for being "anti-American" at such a time?
Oh, and finally this point - Mike Hawash isn't an Arab-American, he's an AMERICAN.
A citizen, like any other in that country, with equal rights under the law (supposedly). The stereotyping of African-American, Native-American, Arab-American etc has no place in a country that gives all citizens EQUALITY. As others have pointed out, it's a slippery slope from saying nothing when they come to take away the "terrorist", to when they come to take away YOU because you didn't speak out when you still had a chance to.
(Reposted as new topic this time hopefully!)
Visceral Psyche Films
So lets see. Because of "Patriot" legislation, you can incarcerate an American citizen, and remove his legal rights as a citizen. And why? Because they MAY represent a threat to the safety of the average citizen (a lot of them).
Well, it seems to me that if you own a gun, you may represent a threat to the safety of the average citizen. Guns have been used in all shootings of family members, children, and coworkers. Those gun owners have killed a lot more people each year than those 9/11 terrorists.
Yay for John Ashcroft and the FBI for making us safe. Lets get all these terrorists off the street.
(To the sarcasm-impaired, this is a sardonic post. But I am trying to make a point.)
There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
but I would have rather seen a more compelling argument than a "Iraq has them... trust us." The US populace seems to disagree with me, dashing your assertion that the American people require more than FUD to take people seriously. We used FUD to start a war.
I am not convinced that FUD was used to start a war. If they do not find any WMD, then you may be correct. At this point I would be hard pressed to agree, still too early. I DO expect that we will find them, or be asking a lot of questions otherwise.
The MAIN justification for 'deciding' they have WMD is pretty simple but overlooked. Before 98, they said "yes, these are the WMD we have" and they have not accounted for THOSE. Its not conjecture, its based on THEIR words. They now say "we destroyed them". They may have, but they have a HUGE beauracracy that would have documentation. Since they can't produce paperwork, or wont (Abdul destroyed 15 tons of VX by pouring it in the desert at X location, on X date) we HAVE to assume they still have it. I understand that this is not the same as a photograph, but it IS compelling evidence. They ADMITTED having it, they won't say what they did with it. And yes, we did supply them, and others, with lots of armaments. Thats another story/arguement.
We WILL see. I don't think you and I necessarily disagree. It just seems I am more willing to give the benefit of the doubt to the US and less so to Saddam. Perhaps it is because I am a military vet, and son of a military vet. Vets do NOT like going to war unless there is a damn good reason. We are also at least as skeptical of our own Govt as anyone else.
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
Interesting commentary. I googled for "IRA training bogs in Tipperary" and found lots of links.
People will pass up steak once a week, for crap every day.
"To compare him to the war on terrorism isn't fair to the suspected terrorist"
Mike Hawash is NOT a "suspected terrorist", that is the whole deal!
So far they havn't even disclosed on what grounds they have taken his life from him.
For all we know they can have decided to round him up just because they "think" that picking people here and there will slowly make people accepting this kind of fascist crime from "the Homeland".
This is what you want This is what you get (Repeat)
Yes 1984 is out on dvd, we have it for sale at the local Hollywood Video.
I don't have a sig, can I borrow yours?
Ummm, no shit sherlock. However it only defines the framework, it does not enumerate the actual legal landscape itself. In the US we have a First Amendment right to free speech. Does this mean that I can say whatever I want whenever I want to? If we adhered strictly to the US Constitution then yes, this would be true. However, as the US COnstitution is only a guide for the limits to our legal system, then no, one yould then have to rely on fedreal, state and/or local laws to enumerate the areas where the US COnstitution does not go into detail. Therefore I restaet my first comment that the US Constitution is not the end all be all (last word) in our legal system. As you have so wonderfully put it, [It merely] defines the powers available to Federal and State goverments.
The United States of America USED TO BE a free and open society.
Actually, your country works this way, and you still can't see it, because it works as the owners of your country intend.
Yes, the same new owners of Irak.
--- "pero toda poesía es hostil al capitalismo"
How the hell did this get modded down? Its COMPLETELY on-topic and relevant to the discussion. I guess some moderator has an agenda, or a stick up his
Unless I'm greatly mistaken, the hero does *not* live in Napoleonic France, but in royalist, post-Napoleonic France, for allegedly being a supporter of Napoleon.
As far as I know, the royalist regime following Napoleon's was a far worse one when it came to individual freedoms. The regime began by a "white terror", pursuing alleged revolutionaries and supporters of Napoleon.
This sums it up nicely: Boondocks Comic
The Oregonian has picked it up:
Judge orders that detainee be questioned
Bush is right now breaking international laws as he invades a country without support from the security council. That is illegal and the US has condemned such actions before when done by others.
Um, no, thank you for playing. Time to retake that International Law 101 course.
Iraq and the United States have been at war since 1991 (in a war authorized by the United Nations). Hostilities were suspended as the result of an armistice, NOT a treaty. Neither the United States, nor any of the other members of the coalition, were ever required to get additional permission from the UN.
All that was required was for one side or the other to break the terms of the armistice for hostilities to be resumed, perfectly legally. Additional UN resolutions would have provided political cover, but, all political rhetoric aside, the actions in Iraq by the coalition are perfectly legal, within the tenents of international law, and require no additional UN support whatsoever.
People keep referring to this as a "new" war, but technically, as the former war never officially ended and as Saddam's regime demonstrably DID violate the terms of the armistice on numerous occasions, this is, on paper at least, merely a resumption of the old war. All perfectly legal and legitimate, more's the pity.
This is why (a) we should require a declaration of war from congress for these sorts of thing, and STOP CIRCUMVENTING THE CONSTITUTION simply because we feel it more convinient to do so than to adhere to the terms our founding fathers laid down, and (b) why armistices are such fragile things, and treaties a requirement before any hope of a lasting peace can be entertained. As one who opposed the war at one time (and who changed his mind and was on the fence as a result of the appalling behavior of Germany, Belgium, and France in delaying the deployment of Turkey's defense within NATO), I find this fiction of the war somehow being "illegal" to be one of the weakest of the anti-war arguments around. It simply, demonstrably, within the tenents of international law, is untrue. The war, while bad, is quite legal.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
He's foe happy. This system blows because you can't either leave a reason for your new 'friend' or 'foe' or one for yourself (to remember what it was for). I'm going to foe all my freaks and torture them. hahaha. ;)
Just made u a friend. You said something cool on the RIAA thread.
I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.