Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

"It's the Bill of Rights, Stupid" -- essential Ventura

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
villager Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-30-04 01:24 AM
Original message
"It's the Bill of Rights, Stupid" -- essential Ventura
Edited on Fri Jan-30-04 01:26 AM by villager
Ventura, hitting nail on head...

Letters at 3AM
It's the Bill of Rights, stupid

BY MICHAEL VENTURA


In the final Democratic debate before the Iowa caucuses, the presidential candidates neglected to emphasize the most critical issue of the 2004 presidential election: the defense and full reinstatement of the Bill of Rights. Most Americans are unaware that we do not have the same Bill of Rights that we had four years ago. Its words haven't changed, but George W. Bush has drastically altered the laws that implement it. The result is the same: Our liberty is in serious danger.

In October 2001, shortly after 9/11, the USA PATRIOT Act passed the House by a vote of 356 to 66; in the Senate, the vote was 98 to 1 -- only Russ Feingold, D-Wis., dissented. The bill was composed by John Ashcroft's Justice Department in secret. Proper congressional hearings weren't held; virtually no questions were asked. The bill was pushed through a servile Congress so fast that many who voted for it have since admitted they didn't have time to read it.

The USA PATRIOT Act allows agents to enter your home in secret, by forced entry, without "probable cause" and without presenting a search warrant; they can then examine any property they think pertinent to their investigation, and they can secretly attach to your computer a device known as the Magic Lantern, which records every keystroke.

<snip>

According to the USA PATRIOT Act, a person may be accused of terrorism if they attempt to "influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion" -- which could mean activities like organizing and attending demonstrations, setting up a Web page, writing an article, or whatever Bush/Ashcroft define as "intimidation." How loose are their standards? The passage of the USA PATRIOT Act emboldened Attorney General John Ashcroft to re-write the FBI's guidelines for investigation. In part those guidelines read, as quoted by Hentoff:

"The nature of the conduct engaged in by a enterprise will justify an inference that the standard is satisfied, even if there are no known statements by participants that advocate or indicate planning for violence or other prohibited acts. ... combination of statements and activities may justify a determination that the threshold standard for a terrorism investigation is satisfied even if the statement alone or the activities alone would not warrant such a determination."

Read that twice. It means you don't have to do or say anything specific or damnable to be investigated. Ashcroft's people can investigate you for any reason they please.

<snip>


These Democratic presidential candidates voted for the USA PATRIOT Act: Senators John Kerry, Joseph Lieberman, and John Edwards. So did Hillary Rodham Clinton, who is almost certain to run one day. I would like to be pure and say that this disqualifies them from getting my vote; Representative Richard Gephardt should also be disqualified for his statement that "we're in a new world where we have to rebalance security and freedom. We're not going to have the openness and freedom we have had." But facts are facts: The Bill of Rights, the most important single political document ever written, is at stake, and Democrats subvert it far less than Republicans (an issue both Ralph Nader and the Green Party do not address). So I would vote for any of those errant politicians -- Kerry, Lieberman, Edwards, Clinton -- over Bush.

<snip>

Gen. Wesley Clark, who supported Nixon and Reagan, is viable, and he would not likely be bullied or fooled by the Pentagon (a major plus). Whether he'd stand for the Bill of Rights is unknown, but he'd get rid of Ashcroft, and Ashcroft is the pit bull in the attack on our freedoms.

Howard Dean has been crippled by the attack ads of Kerry, Lieberman, and Gephardt -- they all have, in effect, donated their negative ads to the Republican Party (Dean and Clark included). But Dean has guts and speaks his mind. It's doubtful that anyone who shoots his mouth off as much as Dean will subvert the Bill of Rights. Senator Tom Harkin (who, like Ted Kennedy and the late Paul Wellstone, also voted for the USA PATRIOT Act) was not far wrong calling Dean this era's Harry Truman. Dean will compromise, Dean will tap dance, but he's not likely to stomp on the Bill of Rights.

<snip>

Hentoff quotes Justice William O. Douglas, words we can't afford to forget: "As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there is a twilight when everything remains seemingly unchanged. And it is in such twilight that we all must be most aware of change in the air -- however slight -- lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness."


uncut & unexpurgated -- while Ashcroft still allows it -- at:

http://www.austinchronicle.com/issues/dispatch/2004-01-23/cols_ventura.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Emillereid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-31-04 12:25 AM
Response to Original message
1. Is there any way of finding out if your computer has this
Magic Lantern device on it.

"The USA PATRIOT Act allows agents to enter your home in secret, by forced entry, without "probable cause" and without presenting a search warrant; they can then examine any property they think pertinent to their investigation, and they can secretly attach to your computer a device known as the Magic Lantern, which records every keystroke. They may re-enter your apartment at intervals, again secretly, and use the Magic Lantern to download all your computer activity."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
villager Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-01-04 12:13 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. *that*...
...is a very good question!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 08:42 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC