Slashdot Mirror
Bioterrorism Charges Brought Against Professor
gnetwerker writes "Wired
and others are reporting about artist Steve Kurtz, professor at Univesity of Buffalo (NY), and member of the
Critical Art Ensemble will face a Grand Jury in two weeks on bioterrorism charges over artwork that used samples of harmless bacteria to make a statement about genetic engineering and food safety. He is charged with BioTerrorism under Section 817 of the PATRIOT Act. Apparently
John Ashcroft can't tell a weapons lab from an art installation. There is more info and a
Defense Fund on the CAE Defense Fund Site."
The guy is being charged because his otherwise healthy wife in her 40s, mysteriously died.
He is not being held on the patriot act, but a much older late 80's U.S. Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989.
Good god. I'm not fond of Ashcroft or the PATRIOT Act, but not everything is a conspiracy, you know.
Education is a better safeguard of liberty than a standing army.
Edward Everett (1794 - 1865)
(1) You would discover, in both the Wired and USA Today pieces, that Mr. Kurtz is *not* being charged under the Patriot Act. If he is charged with anything, it will be an older act related to bioterrism. He is not being charged under the Patriot Act. He is NOT being charged under the Patriot Act (did it get through?)
(2) Mr. Kurtz hasn't been formally charged with anything. He is currently the subject of a investigation brought about by the death of his wife. This investigation may or may not result in an indictment. Take this fact into consideration before forking over $$ to this "defense fund" (for which there is a VERY convienient link).
From the Wired story: "The subpoenas cited Section 175 of the U.S. Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, which prohibits the use of certain biological materials for anything other than a "prophylactic, protective, bona fide research, or other peaceful purpose."
Section 817 of the PATRIOT Act is not mentioned in either linked story.
Wow. Some people have been subpoenaed to get facts about this case. What an unheard of trampling of rights.
Someone needs to do some fact checking before posting.
"Me fail English? That's unpossible." - Ralph
See comments further up. The Patriot act amended the 1989 Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act.
People know very little about the patriot act, it is actually hard to use it, because you have to convince a federal judge to grant a warrent under the act. It doesn't give the government a be-all end all right of invastion of priviouy, it just consolidates many of the common requests for wire-tapping and other things, that would require seperate warrents. So in essesnse it speeds up a process doesn't change it or grant any more rights or take away any more. This is probably one of the biggest mist conseptions that has been spread by the anti-patriot act people, and most of those people just use it to bash the president, they aren't really concerned with the rights of the people, just more of gaining power back.
/. news post is totally off base and probably has a bias against Aschroft (i.e. Bush).
Also in the wired article it states: "But Kurtz's work and his beliefs are more radical than those of many of his peers. He has written proposals for releasing mutant flies into restaurants, and demonstrated methods for destroying genetically modified crops. And it is Kurtz's views, his supporters say, that have Kurtz on the wrong side of a federal investigation sparked by the death of his wife, Hope Kurtz."
This professor has talked about in papers of releasing genetically engineered flies into resurants, and destroying crops that have been genetically modified. These might be on the lower end of the terrorism totem-pole, but it is still a terroist act. And all of this was sparked by a pecular death of his wife, normally deaths are handled by local cops, unless something really weird is going on that requires the FBI.
So this is IMHO a perfectly good use of the Patriot act. Just remember, that a judge has to agree to sign the warrent inorder for the patriot act to be used. And many of the Federal judges in the past couple of months have rejected the use of the patriot act for stuff they didn't deam in the realm of what is required to warrent one. In addition Ashcroft has been rejected many times by Federal judges including a couple big ones in Chicago about doctors records. So the author of this
Take my comments at what you will, but if you want the real truth go read the patriot act on the U.S. Congress web site.
The relative term "last week" used by parent is misleading. The speech was actually delivered November 9, 2003, and the full version (longer than the excerpt posted by parent) can be read here.
If you get nervous, just remember that there are a few billion other people who don't really give a damn.
Whoever, when the United States is at war, ...
Sometimes I think I am the only person in the US who realizes this but we are NOT at war. Just because President Dumbass sez so doesn't make it so.
Section 8 of Article 1 of the US Constitution clearly states that the US Congress has the power to declare war. Not Bush. Not Ashcroft. Not any bozo bureacrat who declares a war on drugs, poverty, illiteracy, this, that or the other thing.
No war, no extra-constitutional powers, no sedition. Period.
It's simple: I demand prosecution for torture.
Bacteria are not a threat to politicians. A Kurtz's radicalism is.
What makes referenced Patriot Act section extremely practical for political reuse is simple fact, that any chemical or biological substance could be considered as toxic, either in certain condition or in certain quantity.
Expired yoghurt? Molded bread? Can of meat forgotten on sunlight? Either of that is highly biologically dangerous material...
There you are, staring at me again.
Except their GMO plants ARE capable of cross pollination.
I'm a little lazy right now but here is an article/paper about managing cross pollination between GMO and non-GMO plants. I can only assume that if management of cross pollination is required then it must be possible.
What normally would end up happening with cross pollination is that only some of the genes are in the new generation so the terminator gene is not in the new plant. I you look up some of monsanto's actions in canada and mexico against farmers whose fields have been contaminated by GMO crops I think you migh come away with a different view on things.
Last but not least, Monsanto has a patent(copyright?) on all the gene sequences that they insert into their GMO. This means that if your crops get cross contaminated you owe them money. And trust me they'll come to collect.
A blog about stuff.
> Under the Patriot Act (and don't kid yourself into thinking parts of it
> are not classified) if I tried that now I personally would be charged
> with obstruction of justice.
I call bullshit. There are no 'secret' sections of the PATRIOT act. We can;t be expected to obey laws we can't possibly know anything about. I work in a public library and went through all this tinfoil hat stuff already when all the Nadorites went into a frenzy. (Think I'm being extreme? Well I was AT the Texas Library Assoc Convention a few months ago and watched Mr. Nader get more standing ovations than Kerry will likely get at the Democratic Convention next month.)
> I am literally not allowed to request a warrant if the Patriot Act is
> brought up.
Wrong. Our orders are that if a Fed asks for ANYTHING we respond that we aren't authorized to do ANYTHING and to pick up the phone for our boss. She will get in touch with the city attorney (our legal representation of record) and they will handle it from there. But while that happens we should begin collecting the information, but stall on any turnover until we hear from her.
And yes they do nead a warrant to actually take anything, but it is generally considered that a Fed on site will have little problem with that detail and to assume they either already have one or soon will so go ahead and start collecting the requested info. No sense being a total asshole about it.
> Nor am I allowed to tell anyone that the request happened.
Yes, this part IS true. Not sure how I personally come down on this one, but it does make a certain sense. But the more I ponder it the potential for misuse is just fscking huge so I guess I'd prefer to see that section of PATRIOT sunset.
Democrat delenda est