US Gov't Says They Can Still Freeze Megaupload Assets If the Case Is Dismissed
The Megaupload case continues, and on Friday attorneys for the U.S. government made some interesting claims. They were in court to argue against a request to dismiss the indictment against Megaupload that was raised on the grounds that Megaupload has no U.S. address. After a debate about jurisdiction and precedent, this happened:
"The government also argued that it could keep Megaupload in legal limbo indefinitely. 'None of the cases impose a time limit on service,' the government's attorney told the judge. Therefore, the government believes it can leave the indictment hanging over the company's head, and keep its assets frozen, indefinitely. Not only that, but the government believes it can continue to freeze Megaupload's assets and paralyze its operations even if the judge grants the motion to dismiss. That's because in the government's view, the assets are the proceeds of criminal activity and the prosecution against founder Kim Dotcom will still be pending. The fact that the assets are in the name of Megaupload rather than its founder is of no consequence, the government claimed."
Telling the court that you're going to circumvent the law in the case you lose probably isn't going to be so swell.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/when-government-is-the-looter/2012/05/18/gIQAUIKVZU_story.html
It's much worse than what I've said. Some people commit a crime on your property and they seize your property.
Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
US Constitution, 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 offense 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.
An executive branch agency just deciding to keep your property because they don't like the outcome of their attempt to indict you is not the "due process of law". In fact, it's quite the opposite: it's grand larceny.
While I hold no illusions about the US government's willingness to break the law and violate the constitution whenever they find it convenient to do so, the constitution remains the entirety of the legal basis for its existence. When the government violates the constitution, it does not act as the agent of the people, but as usurpers of the people's sovereign power.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
You mean Guilty even if proven innocent.
Except that most of said assets are outside the US, and the target of the investigation is also outside the US. The US Government had no jurisdiction to seize the assets in the first place. They also have no jurisdiction to hold onto the assets if the case is dismissed. In fact, they have no jurisdiction to prosecute either.
For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
I've spoken to a couple marine types after they've seen real action.. scary shit. They have little-to-no qualms attacking civilians if they are ordered to; for some the distinction between our civilians /or/ others' civilians doesn't even exist.
I grew up on military bases. I know a lot of military personnel, even up to a couple of full-bird colonels and two generals. We've actually had this discussion. I've yet to find any that would fire on US citizens, unless they were like radical Islamic types or similar.
If it came down to the government ordering the US military to "occupy" US cities and towns, round people up into camps, and basically carry out a "government takeover" and provide armed pacification and suppression against civilians, they would refuse, arrest the ones issuing the orders, and even launch an assault on government-loyalist positions if need be if things were that bad.
Google "Oath Keepers". There are many more that feel the same way but are reluctant to expose their beliefs, positions in the power structure, and/or telegraph any possible actions they might need to take in a desperate situation. Be assured a sizable chunk of the US NG and military will throw their lot (and their lives and military assets) in with the civilians in the event of such a takeover attempt.
What the real worry is for me are the treaties and agreements (both open and secret) with other countries that could provide for bringing in foreign troops for civilian pacification and rebellion suppression.
Still, the US government and any forces they employ will face the same threat that prevented both Germany and Japan from seriously considering invasion/occupation. A rifle behind every blade of grass, and knowing the kind of hardware hackers, etc, we have here in the US these days, new and ingenious IEDs lining every freeway, side-road, sidewalk, and footpath, and death waiting behind every window and door, plus our own home-brew drones. That's not even counting the military weapons and other assets that will surely be "liberated".
Unless they are willing to simply kill off ~70%-80% of the US population right from the start with WMDs, an occupation of the US would make Vietnam, Afghanistan, or any of the bloodiest campaigns of WW1 or WW2 look like a stroll in the park. Can you imagine? Former cops, gang-bangers, and mixed military all forming into ad-hoc combat units and working together against a common threat. Not the way I'd choose to unite the country, but revolution and upheaval does make for strange bedfellows when the feces strikes the rotary air circulation device.
I most fervently hope and pray that violence can be avoided. It would be such a waste of life and potential, and an unspeakable tragedy for so many. Sadly, sometimes those who lust for power and control make avoiding it impossible.
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.