[Onthebarricades] Repression in America - part 2 of 2
Andy
ldxar1 at tesco.net
Mon Apr 14 19:06:48 PDT 2008
* Protesters charged over SF anti-war protest
* After seven months interned, Arab man has freedom but no answers
* Muslim charity under attack, accused of terror links
* More than 1 in 100 Americans now in jail
* NYPD seeks to ban pollution detectors
* Global biometric database mooted
* Bureaucracy impedes spread of organic farming
* ACLU: Pentagon sought citizens' bank records
* Tacoma bans hip-hop
* US troops asked if they would shoot American citizens
* FBI deputises mercenaries to shoot Americans
* 911 campaigner arrested for shouting at Clinton rally
* ACLU: 900,000 on US terror watch list
* Quaker university teacher fired for changing loyalty oath
* Police murder cancer patient over marijuana
* Animal activist found guilty for rescuing abused dog - judge tries to
censor case
* Police beat up defenceless woman for arguing
* WalMart sues disabled ex-employee for money she doesn't have
* Jeff Luers' sentence reduced - but still not free
* At some sites, fingerprints replace clocking-in; workers condemn
surveillance, fear
* Homegrown Terrorism Act fails in Congress
* City sued for handcuffing, terrorising 4-year-old "nap nixer"
* Academic sentenced to 11 YEARS in jail for refusing to inform
* Priests jailed for five months for trespassing to protest torture
* Woman stripped naked by mob of cops
* Congress trip deemed "aiding Iraq", man charged
* Sami al-Arian transferred back to jail as hunger strike continues
* Courts deny human rights to humans, give them to corporations
* Congressman charged for lobbying for now-banned charity
* Police officer caught sending vicious personal letter
* Cop caught with racist cartoon - "cop by day, Klan by night"
* Protesters charged for pouring fake blood on themselves
* Microsoft designs office spy software
* Tasers are torture says UN
* Bison extermination continues - and is covered up - at Yellowstone
* Collection of police brutality and taser vids
Publicly Archived at Global Resistance:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/globalresistance
Solidarity is something very important to many of us anarchists especially
when our friends and loved ones are put behind bars, or when we happen to
find
ourselves held captive there, being kept from those we care about.
Yesterday,
the 19th of March, more than one-hundred people were arrested in the streets
and side walks of San Francisco at the DATW. Among those were three
anarchists Bryan Riggins, Kenneth Pack and Mitch Inclin who where wrongfully
arrested
and are now being held at the Sheriff's Dept. at 850 Bryant St. These are
people who have done amazing work within their communities and have no place
behind bars. We wan't them back home as soon as possible. We have been told
that their arraignment will probably be on Monday, and if not on Tuesday. We
would like not only support from those who are anarchists but support for
all of
those who have been jailed and have had friends locked away standing up and
saying no to those who think it is ok for them to put profit over people and
bussiness over our communities.
As of right now the charges are as follows:
Mitch I.- one felony weapons charge, one felony conspiracy charge, and one
felony asult of an officer charge. bail set at $40,000
Bryan R.- one felony weapons charge, one felony conspiracy charge, and one
felony asult of an officer charge. bail set at $40,000
Kenneth P-one felony of concieled weapon charge. bail not known by those
posting this.
We have heard that there is an other who also has not been released as of
yet. This would be Kurt Therkslen who is facing a Felony charge and has had
no
arraignment date has been set. He is being held at the Sheriff's dept. at
850
Bryant as well. We do not know much info on Kurts specific charges or
wheather or not Kurt will be arrained at the same time as the other three;
however,
we would strongly encurage support at Kurts arraignment as well. Kurt was
arrested during the protests and should be showed solidarity and supported
in
court.
The SF Booking Centers # is (415) 575-4419
They would love to hear from every one and explain when our friends and
comrades will have their arraignment and be released.
As of right now, the times of these arraignments are unknown, and when more
specific details about their arraignments are released we will keep everyone
updated to the best of our ability. In the mean time, please keep in mind
the
importance of solidarity in these situations. It would be greatly
appreciated, especially to those who are being detained.
Update on three anarchists arrested in San Francisco
One of our three friends have been released. Kenneth P. is now free on bail
while Mitch I. and Bryan R. remain in jail. Their arraignment will be on
Tuesday, some time after 9 am, along with the other person arrested, Kurt.
We
have been told to go to room 101 at 850 Bryant St. to find out about when
the
arraignment is. That is thanks to the pressure put on the jail by those of
you
calling asking them all the questions they love hearing. Hope to see people
there.
Again the number to those amazing people at the jail is (415) 575-4419. They
would love to hear from every one with concerns and questions.
In solidarity,
-anarchist comrades
--------------------------------------------------------------
After seven months, man has freedom but not answers
Immigration authorities will not comment on his case.
By REBECCA CATALANELLO and ABBIE VANSICKLE, Times Staff Writers
St. Petersburg Times
Iyad Abuhajjaj, 37, poses for a portrait outside the Council on
American-Islamic Relations in Tampa. Abuhajjaj has been released from
Krome Detention Center in Miami, following 7 months of detainment
throughout Florida. He said he was not told why he was being held
during that time.
TAMPA -- Iyad Abuhajjaj walked out of jail last week with as many
questions as he had when he went in 7-1/2 months earlier.
Over those weeks, he had been questioned by police detectives, FBI
agents, newspaper reporters and attorneys. Every part of his life from
birth to now was spilled and discussed in detail with strangers. And
yet, he says, he never got the answer he craved: Why was he held by
immigration authorities 3,000 miles from home?
He lost 20 pounds, his job in California, his car. He prayed every day
for God to release him in time to celebrate the last day of Ramadan
with his wife, Karen.
He got that wish, reunited with her the day before the end of the
Muslim holy month, but not much more.
"Seven and a half months of my life are wasted," he said this week
during a stop in Tampa. "Taking me away from my family, my work, my
clients, my friends, my soccer team, my singing choir."
Justice Department and immigration officials won't talk about his
case. One of his attorneys said he thought the government was trying
to recruit Abuhajjaj to be an informant. Another attorney thinks
bureaucracy played a role.
On Tuesday, 37-year-old Abuhajjaj boarded a Southwest Airlines plane,
bound for San Jose, Calif., where he lives. A thousand times he
wondered whether he shouldn't just drive cross country instead. It
was, after all, a Southwest flight that led to his incarceration in
the first place.
Water pooled in his eyes when he thought about what might happen next.
* * *
The details of that first Southwest flight on Feb. 28 come from
Abuhajjaj, a physical therapist who works with the developmentally
disabled.
He wanted a Florida vacation.
On the flight from San Jose to Phoenix to Tampa, he went to the
restroom and stretched his legs and was told to be seated. On his
laptop, he watched scenes from a movie he acted in: The Strange Case
of Salman abd al Haaq, a film by two Stanford University students
about terrorist torture.
When he landed, police questioned him about the flight and the movie.
They found a warrant for his arrest out of Okaloosa County. A Florida
woman he met online accused him of accessing her AOL account without
her permission, according to documents. Abuhajjaj said he thought the
charges had been dropped.
He was jailed in Tampa but was moved to Okaloosa County.On March 14,
he pleaded not guilty, posted $20,000 bail and expected to be
released. Instead, the Department of Homeland Security took him into
custody and shipped him to the Wakulla County Jail in Crawfordville.
* * *
What are my charges? he wanted to know. Why am I being held?
Abuhajjaj tried to see into the minds of his questioners for answers.
Two men who introduced themselves as FBI agents grilled him for four
to five hours.
"They talked about my life," he remembered this week, "since I was
born to the day I met them -- Palestine, Israel, my travels elsewhere,
my stay in America, my activities, my work."
Abuhajjaj's attorney wrote in court documents that Abuhajjaj believed
he was being detained to force him to spy on fellow Muslims.
The same month Abuhajjaj was arrested in Tampa, Hamas terrorists
killed his nephew while trying to kidnap Abuhajjaj's brothers, both of
whom work for the Palestinian National Authority police, records show.
Federal prosecutors argued in court filings that it was time to boot
Abuhajjaj from the United States. He had come here with conditional
residency in 2000, married to an American. But in 2001, he was
convicted of stalking the same woman, now his ex-wife. He said he was
merely being insistent, as is expected of men in his homeland. The
concept of stalking, he said, was new to him.
The government ordered his deportation after the 2001 conviction,
documents show. While Abuhajjaj was free on bail and living his life
in San Jose, he spent three years appealing the government's decision
on grounds of changed political conditions.
In 2005, he got a break: An appeals court granted a stay, allowing him
to remain.
But amid reapplying for asylum in 2007 came his Florida arrest.
Abuhajjaj was dangerous, prosecutors argued, and his most recent
charge in Florida showed a pattern that should not be ignored.
* * *
Growing up in Rafa, Gaza, Abuhajjaj was kidnapped and tortured more
than once, according to Justice Department records. He threw rocks at
Israelis during demonstrations against Israeli occupation in 1987,
records said. He was shot in the leg walking home from school at age
19. As recently as 2000, he told authorities, an Israeli officer
detained him, asking him to provide information about the Palestinian
National Authority.
When Abuhajjaj came to the United States to live, he says, he did so
seeking refuge. "I wanted peace," he said. "I had a very tough life
back home. ... I wanted to come and just have a better life."
* * *
In June, while Abuhajjaj was still in the Wakulla County Jail, the
Justice Department found that he had successfully demonstrated cause
to reopen his request for asylum from persecution. He fears Hamas,
they said.
In August, without explanation, authorities took him to Miami's Krome
Processing Center, an immigrant detention center. A few days later, he
entered a deal with Okaloosa prosecutors, pleading guilty to a
misdemeanor charge of "attempting to access a computer without
authorization" in exchange for time served.
It would be another two months before a judge would grant Abuhajjaj
what he really wanted: freedom.
On Oct. 11, Abuhajjaj posted $25,000 bail and walked into his wife's arms.
"I think it was just bureaucracy," said Elias Shamieh, a San Francisco
lawyer who will represent Abuhajjaj in the next phase of his asylum
case in California. "He was bond-eligible from day one. He should not
have been held in custody for this length of time."
The Homeland Security Department would not immediately disclose
documents related to Abuhajjaj's case.
* * *
Iyad and Karen Abuhajjaj flew from Orlando to California on Tuesday
aboard another Southwest flight. That was deliberate.
"I wanted to tell them that I've never done anything wrong," he said,
"and I'm not afraid to fly Southwest."
He touched down in California. The Abuhajjajes made it home without
incident.
"It feels good," he said Wednesday. "It's my own bed. I saw my cats.
I'm very relaxed from the first minutes I came to my home."
Now, he will continue his plea for longer-term asylum. He will apply
for a green card because he is married to a U.S. citizen, his attorney
said.
He wants to stay. He thinks of the United States as his country. But
he said he's still seeking the peace he wanted when he first arrived
on American soil.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Judge won't release 3 in Muslim charity case
By Lee Hammel - lhammel @ telegram.com
TELEGRAM & GAZETTE STAFF
Saturday, January 26, 2008
WORCESTER, MA— Judge F. Dennis Saylor IV yesterday refused to set
conditions for the release of three defendants jailed since their
conviction Jan. 11 for conspiracy to defraud the government in a
Muslim charity case in U.S. District Court.
Judge Saylor said Muhamed Mubayyid, 43, of Shrewsbury, and Emadeddin
Z. Muntasser, 43, of Braintree, and Samir Al-Monla, 50, of Brookline,
both formerly of Worcester, "have not carried their heavy burden of
establishing by clear and convincing evidence that they are not likely
to flee" before they are sentenced in April. Judge Saylor held bail
hearings Jan. 18 at the federal courthouse inWorcester to consider
whether to set conditions under which they could be freed.
Yesterday's decision was not without good news for the defendants,
with Judge Saylor observing that "at a minimum, this case — which is
both complex and relatively unique — presents a variety of substantial
issues for possible appeal, and has a significantly
greater-than-average chance of resulting in a reversal." Judge Saylor
is scheduled to hear defense requests to acquit the defendants or to
set a new trial.
All three were convicted of the conspiracy charge and of scheming to
conceal material information from the government. Mr. Mubayyid was
also convicted of three counts of making a false statement on an
income tax return and of obstructing the Internal Revenue Service. Mr.
Muntasser was also found guilty of making a false statement, while Mr.
Al-Monla was acquitted on that charge.
The government charged the three officials of the defunct Muslim
charity in Boston, Care International, received and kept tax-exempt
status that it might not have gotten, had the officials not withheld
information from the government. That information, the government
said, is that Care was an outgrowth and successor to Al-Kifah Refugee
Center, which later was named a specially designated global terrorist
organization, and that Care supported and gathered contributions for
Muslim holy war and the mujahedeen who fought it.
Judge Saylor noted the arguments for freeing the defendants, including
that each has substantial ties to the community and that Mr. Muntasser
offered to put up $1.9 million in addition to the $422,000 — both in
real estate — that he previously put up for security and Mr.
Mubayyid's offer of the home in which he has more than $100,000 equity.
But he said he was swayed by the U.S. Attorney's arguments that the
defendants are citizens of other countries with family, financial and
other substantial supports outside this country.
Assistant U.S. Attorney B. Stephanie Siegmann said the defendants are
citizens of Lebanon, Libya and Kuwait, respectively, which do not have
extradition treaties with the United States.
She said that they are convicted of serious crimes for which the
government is likely to seek higher sentences than the 3-1/2 to 4
years recommended by the advisory sentencing guidelines.
-----------------------------------------------------------
What does this say about our society?
Report: More than 1 in every 100 Americans now behind bars
>From the Associated Press
February 28, 2008
For the first time in history, more than one in every 100 American adults is
in jail or prison, according to a new report tracking the surge in inmate
population and urging states to rein in corrections costs with alternative
sentencing programs.
The report, released today by the Pew Center on the States, said the 50
states spent more than $49 billion on corrections last year, up from less
than $11 billion 20 years earlier. The rate of increase for prison costs was
six times greater than for higher education spending, the report said.
Using updated state-by-state data, the report said 2,319,258 adults were
held in U.S. prisons or jails at the start of 2008 -- one out of every 99.1
adults, and more than any other country in the world.
The steadily growing inmate population "is saddling cash-strapped states
with soaring costs they can ill afford and failing to have a clear impact
either on recidivism or overall crime," said the report.
Susan Urahn, managing director of the Pew Center on the States, said budget
woes are prompting officials in many states to consider new, cost-saving
corrections policies that might have been shunned in the recent past for
fear of appearing soft in crime.
"We're seeing more and more states being creative because of tight budgets,"
she said in an interview. "They want to be tough on crime, they want to be a
law-and-order state -- but they also want to save money, and they want to be
effective."
The report cited Kansas and Texas as states which have acted decisively to
slow the growth of their inmate population. Their actions include greater
use of community supervision for low-risk offenders and employing sanctions
other than reimprisonment for ex-offenders who commit technical violations
of parole and probation rules.
"The new approach, born of bipartisan leadership, is allowing the two states
to ensure they have enough prison beds for violent offenders while helping
less dangerous lawbreakers become productive, taxpaying citizens," the
report said.
While many state governments have shown bipartisan interest in curbing
prison growth, there also are persistent calls to proceed cautiously.
"We need to be smarter," said David Muhlhausen, a criminal justice expert
with the conservative Heritage Foundation. "We're not incarcerating all the
people who commit serious crimes -- but we're also probably incarcerating
people who don't need to be."
According to the report, the inmate population increased last year in 36
states and the federal prison system.
The largest percentage increase -- 12 percent -- was in Kentucky, where Gov.
Steve Beshear highlighted the cost of corrections in his budget speech last
month. He noted that the state's crime rate had increased only about 3
percent in the past 30 years, while the state's inmate population has
increased by 600 percent.
The Pew report was compiled by the Center on the State's Public Safety
Performance Project, which is working directly with 13 states on developing
programs to divert offenders from prison without jeopardizing public safety.
"For all the money spent on corrections today, there hasn't been a clear and
convincing return for public safety," said the project's director, Adam
Gelb. "More and more states are beginning to rethink their reliance on
prisons for lower-level offenders and finding strategies that are tough on
crime without being so tough on taxpayers."
The report said prison growth and higher incarceration rates do not reflect
a parallel increase in crime or in the nation's overall population. Instead,
it said, more people are behind bars mainly because of tough sentencing
measures, such as "three-strikes" laws, that result in longer prison stays.
"For some groups, the incarceration numbers are especially startling," the
report said. "While one in 30 men between the ages of 20 and 34 is behind
bars, for black males in that age group the figure is one in nine."
The nationwide figures, as of Jan. 1, include 1,596,127 people in state and
federal prisons and 723,131 in local jails -- a total 2,319,258 out of
almost 230 million American adults.
The report said the United States is the world's incarceration leader, far
ahead of more populous China with 1.5 million people behind bars. It said
the U.S. also is the leader in inmates per capita (750 per 100,000 people),
ahead of Russia (628 per 100,000) and other former Soviet bloc nations which
make up the rest of the Top 10.
http://www.downtownexpress.com/de_244/nypd.html
N.Y.P.D. looks to regulate environmental detectors
By Julie Shapiro
A far-reaching bill before the City Council would make it illegal to
possess a biological, chemical or radiological detector without a permit
from the New York Police Department.
The bill, Intro 650, met resistance even among its proponents at a
Public Safety Committee hearing Tuesday morning. Because of concerns
about the impact of the bill on independent environmental health
assessments following a terrorist attack, the committee postponed a vote.
Downtowners in particular were concerned because many relied on
independent environmental tests after 9/11 in response to the
Environmental Protection Agency's questionable assertions.
In a recent explosion of technology, detection equipment once available
only to the military is trickling down into the private sector. The
mayor's office, prompted by the Department of Homeland Security,
proposed the bill to control the proliferation of these detection
devices, sorting the useful from the fraudulent and minimizing false alarms.
There are currently no guidelines on possession of detection devices,
and individuals who detect contamination are not required to notify the
authorities. The bill, the first of its kind in the country, requires
owners of the devices to apply for a free, five-year permit and requires
all owners, whether they have permits or not, to inform the city of any
contamination.
"Our mutual goal is to prevent false alarms and unnecessary public
concern by making sure that we know where these detectors are located
and that they conform to standards of quality and reliability," said
Richard Falkenrath, N.Y.P.D. deputy commissioner for counter terrorism.
The public generally believes the N.Y.P.D. should be involved and aware
of these devices, said Councilmember Peter Vallone, Jr., the bill's sponsor.
However, the broad language of the bill caused concern among several
members of the Public Safety Committee and many members of the public,
who pointed out that the bill does not explicitly exclude commonplace
devices such as smoke and carbon monoxide detectors. Vallone said those
devices would not require permits.
Falkenrath promised that the Police Dept. would "whittle down" the
coverage of the bill in enforcement, but he implored the council to pass
the broad version of the bill. The rapidly evolving technology of
detection devices would make it hard for the council to pinpoint which
types of devices to regulate, he said. Falkenrath would not commit to
publishing a list of approved devices or approved device specifications,
because he said that list could give terrorists information about what
the city is capable of detecting.
Vallone replied that the council normally does not pass bills with such
broad language, but that he would defer to the Police Department's
judgment in this case.
Borough President Scott Stringer, who testified next, was less willing
to accept N.Y.P.D.'s reasoning.
"This legislation will undermine an important check on the government,"
Stringer said. "It would undermine environmental advocates."
After 9/11, the first group to sample the air at the World Trade Center
site was the National Hazmat Program of the International Union of
Operating Engineers, which came from West Virginia. Under the bill, that
group would have had to register with the N.Y.P.D. first, substantially
delaying the tests, Stringer said.
"Had Intro 650 been in place in 2001, it is possible that we still would
not have an accurate understanding of the air quality Downtown," he said.
Stringer added that he has never heard of a false alarm caused by
private monitoring. "This is a fake emergency that doesn't exist," he
said. "If it's not a problem, let's not try to create one."
In response to the council's concerns, Falkenrath gave several examples
of the types of devices he wants to regulate. The bill would not require
permits for radiation equipment used to treat oncology patients, but it
would require them for emergency-room radiation detectors, since
terrorists whose experimental weapons go wrong often end up there. The
bill also would not regulate industrial safety chemical detectors or
detectors used for instruction in university classrooms.
Falkenrath emphasized that he wants to keep the application process
simple and swift, to keep good devices in good hands.
Vallone was concerned that there is no appeal process for N.Y.P.D.'s
decisions. Falkenrath replied that people will be able to resubmit their
applications if they make the requested changes.
Vallone also mentioned the widespread concerns about the E.P.A.'s
assurances about air quality after 9/11.
"If an independent group wants to verify the air quality, how would the
[new] regulations affect that?" he asked Falkenrath.
"Our interest is in weapons," Falkenrath replied, saying he is less
concerned about chemicals like asbestos. However, he said, "An
independent group could run into a problem."
That's exactly what's worrying Steve Abramson, who has lived near the
World Trade Center since before 9/11. Abramson and the other residents
of 114 Liberty St. hired a consultant to test their building after 9/11.
"Frankly, in our building we didn't trust [the E.P.A.] and we wanted to
do it on our own with an independent paid consultant," Abramson said
after the hearing, "so we didn't have to worry about any government
interpretation or anybody using standards we disagreed with."
As a result of the consultant's recommendations, Abramson and the other
building residents agreed to replace all the central air-conditioning
ducts, a measure the E.P.A. did not think was necessary.
"The E.P.A. didn't feel we needed to go through rigor we went through,"
Abramson said. But the residents went with the consultant's opinion
"because at end of day you want it clean not only for your physical
health but for your peace of mind, too," he said.
Abramson does not see why the bill is necessary, and he worried that it
would delay future testing by independent contractors. "It sounds like
it adds just another layer of bureaucracy onto everything," he said.
Esther Regelson, a resident of 109 Washington St., was dissatisfied with
E.P.A.'s testing of her apartment after 9/11.
"We have reservoirs of dust in and around our building from 9/11 and we
should be able to test that if we need to," she said. "Who would trust
E.P.A. after what they told us on 9/11?"
The city seems concerned that people who independently test for
contamination will create alarm, Regelson said, but she disagrees.
Independent testing "creates an informed population, not an alarmed
population," she said.
At the hearing, City Councilmember John Liu asked about community groups
who do air-quality testing in schools and parks.
"Obviously no one is opposed to the N.Y.P.D. keeping us safe," Liu said.
"But it seems to me the administration is asking for a huge amount
here." The bill amounts to a "blank check," Liu added.
Falkenrath replied that it comes down to an issue of public safety
versus public health. The bill would not affect air-quality monitoring
in schools, he said, but he would not want to specifically state that in
the bill for fear of creating a loophole.
The bill should explicitly refer to weapons detectors, not detectors in
general, said Dave Newman, industrial hygienist at New York City
Occupational Safety and Health. After the hearing, Newman added that
unions have a right under federal law to bring in outside experts to
test environmental conditions.
City Councilmember Alan Gerson has not taken a position on the bill and
said he would look into it further. "My immediate reaction is that it's
a little overbroad, or a lot overbroad," he said.
The committee was originally supposed to vote on the bill after the
hearing, but Vallone postponed the vote to give the committee more time
to address concerns with the city.
http://infowars.net/articles/january2008/150108Grid.htm
A vast intelligence program is to establish a global biometric database
known as
Server in the Sky that will collate & provide a International Information
Consortium
with access to the biometric measurements and personal information of
citizens
of the US,UK,Australia, and Canada, in the name of fighting the War On
Terror.
As reported by the London Guardian, he plan is being formulated by the FBI
with the cooperation of the home offices and law enforcement agencies of
American allies.
Biometric measurements, irises or palm prints as well as fingerprints, and
other
personal information are likely to be exchanged across the network.
The FBI told the Guardian: "Server in the Sky is an FBI initiative designed
to foster the advanced search and exchange of biometric information on a
global scale. While it is currently in the concept and design stages, once
complete it will provide a technical
forum for member nations to submit biometric search requests to other
nations. It
will maintain a core holding of the world's 'worst of the worst'
individuals. Any iden-
tifications of these people will be sent as a priority message to requesting
nation.
Of course as well as holding the information of the world's 'worst of the
worst', the
database will eventually hold the records of every other citizen who's ever
traveled
in and out of the member states,or has ever been arrested with or without
charge.
Britain's National Policing Improvement Agency has been the lead body for
the FBI
project because it is responsible for IDENT1, the UK database holding 7m
sets of
fingerprints & other biometric details used by police forces to search for
match-
es from scenes of crimes.Many of the prints are either from a person with no
criminal record, or have yet to be matched to a named individual.
Any non national now entering the US must provide an Iris scan and 10
fingerprints.
This week has also seen Britain enact legislation ensuring that anyone
applying for
a visa from 133 countries covering three quarters of the world’s population
now
has their fingerprints checked against UK databases.
Police in Britain hold vastly more DNA samples than any other country in the
West-
ern world, & many are from people who have never committed a crime.More than
three million samples have been added to the national DNA database: more
than 5
percent of the population, and this is rising exponentially.
We previously noted that the vast array of databases currently being
employed by
intelligence agencies,government and law enforcement agencies worldwide were
designed to be linked together in a system which will tie in the management
and
control of all facets of life for citizens to one central hub.
The Guardian report on "Server in the Sky" further notes:
IDENT1 was built by the computer technology arm of US defence company
Northrop
Grumman. In future it is expected to hold palm prints, facial images & video
sequen-
ces. A company spokeswoman confirmed that Northrop Grumman had spoken to
the FBI about Server in the Sky. It can run independently but if existing
systems
are connected up to it then the intelligence agencies would have to approve.
The component systems have been designed by the military industrial complex
to strengthen and perpetuate its own existence.
The news of global database network dovetails with announcement that US Nat-
ional Intelligence Director Mike McConnell is drawing up plans for
cyberspace
spying that would make the current debate on warrantless wiretaps look like
a walk in the park.The plan would mean giving the govt the authority to
exam-
ine the content of any email,file transfer or Web search.
Last month it was revealed that another military spy agency, the NSA has
increasing
control over SSL,now called Transport Layer Security,the cryptographic
protocol that
provides secure communications on the internet for web
browsing,email,messaging,
and other data transfers.
In other words the agency is capable of intercepting & reading your emails &
instant messages in real time.
At the same time a lawyer for an AT&T engineer went public with claims that
within
2 weeks of taking office,the Bush administration was planning a
comprehensive eff-
ort of spying on Americans phone usage.That is BEFORE 911, before the nation
was
embroiled in freedom stripping exercise known as the War On Terror had
begun.
This swell of surveillance activity was also enhanced with news that
Department of
Homeland security is forging ahead & finalizing plans to use network of spy
satellites
for domestic surveillance. The DHS plans to create a new department branch
called
the National Applications Office to oversee the program and be responsible
for pro-
viding images from the satellites to non military law enforcement agencies.
After 911 the work of 16 different intelligence agencies,including the CIA &
the giant
NSA,which eavesdrops on international communications,as well as the Energy
De-
partment & the Drug Enforcement Administration was centralized under the
office
of the Director of National Intelligence.
Over decades we have witnessed the evolution of Govt surveillance programs
and
information databases targeting citizens.We are now witnessing the
centralization
of this vast control grid Panopticon beyond our own borders.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/01/opinion/01hedin.html
My Forbidden Fruits (and Vegetables)
by Jack Hedin
March 2, 2008 by the New York Times
If you've stood in line at a farmers' market recently, you know that the
local food movement is thriving, to the point that small farmers are
having a tough time keeping up with the demand.
But consumers who would like to be able to buy local fruits and
vegetables not just at farmers' markets, but also in the produce aisle
of their supermarket, will be dismayed to learn that the federal
government works deliberately and forcefully to prevent the local food
movement from expanding. And the barriers that the United States
Department of Agriculture has put in place will be extended when the
farm bill that House and Senate negotiators are working on now goes into
effect.
As a small organic vegetable producer in southern Minnesota, I know this
because my efforts to expand production to meet regional demand have
been severely hampered by the Agriculture Department's commodity farm
program. As I've looked into the politics behind those restrictions,
I've come to understand that this is precisely the outcome that the
program's backers in California and Florida have in mind: they want to
snuff out the local competition before it even gets started.
Last year, knowing that my own 100 acres wouldn't be enough to meet
demand, I rented 25 acres on two nearby corn farms. I plowed under the
alfalfa hay that was established there, and planted watermelons,
tomatoes and vegetables for natural-food stores and a
community-supported agriculture program.
All went well until early July. That's when the two landowners
discovered that there was a problem with the local office of the Farm
Service Administration, the Agriculture Department branch that runs the
commodity farm program, and it was going to be expensive to fix.
The commodity farm program effectively forbids farmers who usually grow
corn or the other four federally subsidized commodity crops (soybeans,
rice, wheat and cotton) from trying fruit and vegetables. Because my
watermelons and tomatoes had been planted on "corn base" acres, the Farm
Service said, my landlords were out of compliance with the commodity
program.
I've discovered that typically, a farmer who grows the forbidden fruits
and vegetables on corn acreage not only has to give up his subsidy for
the year on that acreage, he is also penalized the market value of the
illicit crop, and runs the risk that those acres will be permanently
ineligible for any subsidies in the future. (The penalties apply only to
fruits and vegetables - if the farmer decides to grow another commodity
crop, or even nothing at all, there's no problem.)
In my case, that meant I paid my landlords $8,771 - for one season
alone! And this was in a year when the high price of grain meant that
only one of the government's three crop-support programs was in effect;
the total bill might be much worse in the future.
In addition, the bureaucratic entanglements that these two farmers faced
at the Farm Service office were substantial. The federal farm program is
making it next to impossible for farmers to rent land to me to grow
fresh organic vegetables.
Why? Because national fruit and vegetable growers based in California,
Florida and Texas fear competition from regional producers like myself.
Through their control of Congressional delegations from those states,
they have been able to virtually monopolize the country's fresh produce
markets.
That's unfortunate, because small producers will have to expand on a
significant scale across the nation if local foods are to continue to
enter the mainstream as the public demands. My problems are just the tip
of the iceberg.
Last year, Midwestern lawmakers proposed an amendment to the farm bill
that would provide some farmers, though only those who supply
processors, with some relief from the penalties that I've faced - for
example, a soybean farmer who wanted to grow tomatoes would give up his
usual subsidy on those acres but suffer none of the other penalties.
However, the Congressional delegations from the big produce states made
the death of what is known as Farm Flex their highest farm bill
priority, and so it appears to be going nowhere, except perhaps as a
tiny pilot program.
Who pays the price for this senselessness? Certainly I do, as a
Midwestern vegetable farmer. But anyone trying to do what I do on, say,
wheat acreage in the Dakotas, or rice acreage in Arkansas would face the
same penalties. Local and regional fruit and vegetable production will
languish anywhere that the commodity program has influence.
Ultimately of course, it is the consumer who will pay the greatest price
for this - whether it is in the form of higher prices I will have to
charge to absorb the government's fines, or in the form of less access
to the kind of fresh, local produce that the country is crying out for.
Farmers need the choice of what to plant on their farms, and consumers
need more farms like mine producing high-quality fresh fruits and
vegetables to meet increasing demand from local markets - without the
federal government actively discouraging them.
Jack Hedin is a farmer.
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/101507R.shtml
ACLU: Pentagon Sought Citizens' Bank Records
The Associated Press
New York - The American Civil Liberties Union said Sunday that newly
uncovered documents show that the Pentagon secretly sent hundreds of
letters seeking the financial records of private citizens without
court approval.
The ACLU said an analysis of 455 so-called national security
letters issued after Sept. 11, 2001 shows that the Pentagon
collaborated with the FBI to circumvent the law and may have
overstepped its legal authority to obtain financial and credit
records. The ACLU has been reviewing the letters and the accompanying
documentation over the past few days.
"Once again, the Bush administration's unchecked authority has led
to abuse and civil liberties violations," said ACLU Executive Director
Anthony D. Romero in a statement. "The documents make clear that the
Department of Defense may have secretly and illegally conducted
surveillance beyond the powers it was granted by Congress."
No spokesman for the Pentagon was available for comment Sunday.
The New York Times first disclosed the military's use of the
letters in January, and members of Congress and civil liberties groups
said the practice conflicted with traditional Pentagon rules against
domestic law-enforcement operations.
Vice President Dick Cheney defended the practice as a "perfectly
legitimate activity" used to investigate possible acts of terrorism
and espionage.
The documents relating to the letters were obtained through the
Freedom of Information Act by the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier
Foundation.
The Times reported Sunday that the documents show that the
Pentagon's own review of the program found systemic problems and poor
coordination.
According to the Times, the documents suggest that military
officials used the FBI to collect records for what started as purely
military investigations.
The Times said military officials defended the letters, which they
said had been used to gather information about military personnel and
contractors.
Maj. Patrick Ryder, a Pentagon spokesman, told the Times that
investigators could use the letters, for example, to examine the
assets of a military contractor who seemed to have sudden and
unexplained wealth.
But the Times said internal memos issued by Defense Department
agencies seemed in some cases to encourage the gathering of records on
nonmilitary personnel.
Recipients of national security letters, including Internet
service providers, financial institutions and credit reporting
agencies, are generally forbidden to disclose that they have received
the letters.
The ACLU filed Freedom of Information Act requests with both the
Defense Department and the CIA in April seeking all documents related
to their use of the letters to gain access to personal records of
people in the United States. And in June, the ACLU filed a lawsuit to
force those agencies to turn over the documents.
"The expanded role of the military in domestic intelligence
gathering is troubling," Melissa Goodman, staff attorney with the
ACLU's National Security Project, told The Associated Press on Sunday.
"These documents reveal that the military is gaining access to records
here in the U.S. in secret and without any meaningful oversight. There
are real concerns about the use of this intrusive surveillance power."
http://seattle.indymedia.org/en/2008/03/265271.shtml
March 10th: Rally Against Tacoma's Ban on Hip Hop
author: tac-tivist
Mar 09, 2008 19:38
Tacoma recently passed legislation that will ban hip hop shows from Tacoma's
public venues. The legislation came into effect last Friday. Tacoma hip hop
artists and producers heard about this just recently and are staging a rally
at the Pantages Theaters, Downtown Tacoma, Monday, March 10 at noon.
The community-led rally will be in front of the Pantages Theater at noon on
March 10th.
Be there to show your support.
http://prisonplanet.com/articles/february2008/020408_shoot_americans.htm
U.S. Troops Asked If They Would Shoot American Citizens
Iraq vet exposes how he was trained to round up Americans in martial law
exercise, asked if he would kill his own friends and family
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Monday, February 4th, 2008
U.S. troops are being trained to conduct round-ups, confiscate guns and
shoot American citizens, including their own friends and family members, as
part of a long-standing program to prepare for the declaration of martial
law, according to a soldier who recently returned from Iraq.
We received an e mail from "Scott", a member of a pipefitters union that
runs an apprenticeship program called Helmets To Hard Hats, which according
to its website, "Is a national program that connects National Guard, Reserve
and transitioning active-duty military members with quality career training
and employment opportunities within the construction industry."
Scott writes that his company hired a soldier who had recently returned from
Iraq, who told him that U.S. troops were being quizzed on whether or not
they would be prepared to shoot their own friends and family members during
a national state of emergency in America.
"I have become very close to this young man and have gained his respect and
trust," writes Scott. "I want you to know that he informed me about one
particular training exercise his superiors made them perform. It was
concerning the rounding up of American citizens that disobey any type of
martial law or in other words any type of infringement on our freedoms."
"He was asked if he could shoot his friends or family members if ordered to
do so. At the time he said he could," writes Scott.
Scott says that the soldier later "had time to clear his head" and realize
the truth, recanting his vow to kill his own countrymen if ordered to do so.
The issue of whether U.S. troops would be prepared to round-up, disarm and
if necessary shoot Americans who disobeyed orders during a state of martial
law is a question that military chiefs have been attempting to answer for at
least 15 years.
Its known origins can be traced back to an October 1994 Marine questionnaire
out of the Twentynine Palms Marine Base in California. Recruits were asked
46 questions, including whether they would kill U.S. citizens who refused to
surrender their firearms.
Documentary film maker Alex Jones brought to light similar training programs
that were taking place across the country in the late 90's which revolved
around U.S. Marines being trained to arrest American citizens and take them
to internment camps.
During one such program in Oakland California, dubbed "Operation Urban
Warrior," Marines refused to answer if they would target American citizens
for gun confiscation if ordered to do so.
During hurricane Katrina, National Guard units were ordered to confiscate
guns belonging to New Orleans residents.
As we first exposed in May 2006, Clergy Response Teams are being trained by
the federal government and FEMA to "quell dissent" and pacify citizens to
obey the government in the event of a declaration of martial law.
Pastors and other religious representatives are being taught to become
secret police enforcers who teach their congregations to "obey the
government" in preparation for the implementation of martial law, property
and firearm seizures, mass vaccination programs and forced relocation.
Many scoffed at our original story, which was based on the testimony of a
whistleblower who was asked to participate in the program. Claims that the
story was a conspiracy theory soon evaporated when a mainstream KSLA news
report confirmed the existence of the program.
The experiences of U.S. troops in the worst areas of Iraq, where soldiers
are ordered to go door to door and arrest all men of military age as well as
confiscate their weapons, is a mere portend of what is being planned for
America if these training programs ever come to fruition.
http://www.progressive.org/mag_rothschild0308
EXCLUSIVE! THE FBI DEPUTIZES BUSINESS
By Matthew Rothschild
Progressive
March 2008 (posted Feb. 7)
Today, more than 23,000 representatives of private industry are
working quietly with the FBI and the Department of Homeland
Security. The members of this rapidly growing group, called
InfraGard, receive secret warnings of terrorist threats before the
public does -- and, at least on one occasion, before elected
officials. In return, they provide information to the government,
which alarms the ACLU. But there may be more to it than that. One
business executive, who showed me his InfraGard card, told me they
have permission to "shoot to kill" in the event of martial law.
InfraGard is "a child of the FBI," says Michael Hershman, the
chairman of the advisory board of the InfraGard National Members
Alliance and CEO of the Fairfax Group, an international consulting
firm.
InfraGard started in Cleveland back in 1996, when the private sector
there cooperated with the FBI to investigate cyber threats.
"Then the FBI cloned it," says Phyllis Schneck, chairman of the
board of directors of the InfraGard National Members Alliance, and
the prime mover behind the growth of InfraGard over the last several
years.
InfraGard itself is still an FBI operation, with FBI agents in each
state overseeing the local InfraGard chapters. (There are now eighty-
six of them.) The alliance is a nonprofit organization of private
sector InfraGard members.
"We are the owners, operators, and experts of our critical
infrastructure, from the CEO of a large company in agriculture or
high finance to the guy who turns the valve at the water utility,"
says Schneck, who by day is the vice president of research
integration at Secure Computing.
"At its most basic level, InfraGard is a partnership between the
Federal Bureau of Investigation and the private sector," the
InfraGard website states. "InfraGard chapters are geographically
linked with FBI Field Office territories."
In November 2001, InfraGard had around 1,700 members. As of late
January, InfraGard had 23,682 members, according to its website,
www.infragard.net, which adds that "350 of our nation's Fortune 500
have a representative in InfraGard."
To join, each person must be sponsored by "an existing InfraGard
member, chapter, or partner organization." The FBI then vets the
applicant. On the application form, prospective members are asked
which aspect of the critical infrastructure their organization deals
with. These include: agriculture, banking and finance, the chemical
industry, defense, energy, food, information and telecommunications,
law enforcement, public health, and transportation.
FBI Director Robert Mueller addressed an InfraGard convention on
August 9, 2005. At that time, the group had less than half as many
members as it does today. "To date, there are more than 11,000
members of InfraGard," he said. "From our perspective that amounts
to 11,000 contacts . . . and 11,000 partners in our mission to
protect America." He added a little later, "Those of you in the
private sector are the first line of defense."
He urged InfraGard members to contact the FBI if they "note
suspicious activity or an unusual event." And he said they could sic
the FBI on "disgruntled employees who will use knowledge gained on
the job against their employers."
In an interview with InfraGard after the conference, which is
featured prominently on the InfraGard members' website, Mueller
says: "It's a great program."
The ACLU is not so sanguine.
"There is evidence that InfraGard may be closer to a corporate TIPS
program, turning private-sector corporations -- some of which may be
in a position to observe the activities of millions of individual
customers -- into surrogate eyes and ears for the FBI," the ACLU
warned in its August 2004 report *The Surveillance-Industrial
Complex: How the American Government Is Conscripting Businesses and
Individuals in the Construction of a Surveillance Society*.
InfraGard is not readily accessible to the general public. Its
communications with the FBI and Homeland Security are beyond the
reach of the Freedom of Information Act under the "trade secrets"
exemption, its website says. And any conversation with the public or
the media is supposed to be carefully rehearsed.
"The interests of InfraGard must be protected whenever presented to
non-InfraGard members," the website states. "During interviews with
members of the press, controlling the image of InfraGard being
presented can be difficult. Proper preparation for the interview
will minimize the risk of embarrassment. . . . The InfraGard
leadership and the local FBI representative should review the
submitted questions, agree on the predilection of the answers, and
identify the appropriate interviewee. . . . Tailor answers to the
expected audience. . . . Questions concerning sensitive information
should be avoided."
One of the advantages of InfraGard, according to its leading
members, is that the FBI gives them a heads-up on a secure portal
about any threatening information related to infrastructure
disruption or terrorism.
The InfraGard website advertises this. In its list of benefits of
joining InfraGard, it states: "Gain access to an FBI secure
communication network complete with VPN encrypted website, webmail,
listservs, message boards, and much more."
InfraGard members receive "almost daily updates" on
threats "emanating from both domestic sources and overseas,"
Hershman says.
"We get very easy access to secure information that only goes to
InfraGard members," Schneck says. "People are happy to be in the
know."
On November 1, 2001, the FBI had information about a potential
threat to the bridges of California. The alert went out to the
InfraGard membership. Enron was notified, and so, too, was Barry
Davis, who worked for Morgan Stanley. He notified his brother Gray,
the governor of California.
"He said his brother talked to him before the FBI," recalls Steve
Maviglio, who was Davis's press secretary at the time. "And the
governor got a lot of grief for releasing the information. In his
defense, he said, `I was on the phone with my brother, who is an
investment banker. And if he knows, why shouldn't the public
know?' "
Maviglio still sounds perturbed about this: "You'd think an elected
official would be the first to know, not the last."
In return for being in the know, InfraGard members cooperate with
the FBI and Homeland Security. "InfraGard members have contributed
to about 100 FBI cases," Schneck says. "What InfraGard brings you is
reach into the regional and local communities. We are a 22,000-
member vetted body of subject-matter experts that reaches across
seventeen matrixes. All the different stovepipes can connect with
InfraGard."
Schneck is proud of the relationships the InfraGard Members Alliance
has built with the FBI. "If you had to call 1-800-FBI, you probably
wouldn't bother," she says. "But if you knew Joe from a local
meeting you had with him over a donut, you might call them. Either
to give or to get. We want everyone to have a little black book."
This black book may come in handy in times of an emergency. "On the
back of each membership card," Schneck says, "we have all the
numbers you'd need: for Homeland Security, for the FBI, for the
cyber center. And by calling up as an InfraGard member, you will be
listened to." She also says that members would have an easier time
obtaining a "special telecommunications card that will enable your
call to go through when others will not."
This special status concerns the ACLU.
"The FBI should not be creating a privileged class of Americans who
get special treatment," says Jay Stanley, public education director
of the ACLU's technology and liberty program. "There's no `business
class' in law enforcement. If there's information the FBI can share
with 22,000 corporate bigwigs, why don't they just share it with the
public? That's who their real `special relationship' is supposed to
be with. Secrecy is not a party favor to be given out to
friends. . . . This bears a disturbing resemblance to the FBI's
handing out `goodies' to corporations in return for folding them
into its domestic surveillance machinery."
When the government raises its alert levels, InfraGard is in the
loop. For instance, in a press release on February 7, 2003, the
Secretary of Homeland Security and the Attorney General announced
that the national alert level was being raised from yellow to
orange. They then listed "additional steps" that agencies were
taking to "increase their protective measures." One of those steps
was to "provide alert information to InfraGard program."
"They're very much looped into our readiness capability," says Amy
Kudwa, spokeswoman for the Department of Homeland Security. "We
provide speakers, as well as do joint presentations [with the FBI].
We also train alongside them, and they have participated in
readiness exercises."
On May 9, 2007, George Bush issued National Security Presidential
Directive 51 entitled "National Continuity Policy." In it, he
instructed the Secretary of Homeland Security to coordinate
with "private sector owners and operators of critical
infrastructure, as appropriate, in order to provide for the delivery
of essential services during an emergency."
Asked if the InfraGard National Members Alliance was involved with
these plans, Schneck said it was "not directly participating at this
point." Hershman, chairman of the group's advisory board, however,
said that it was.
InfraGard members, sometimes hundreds at a time, have been used
in "national emergency preparation drills," Schneck acknowledges.
"In case something happens, everybody is ready," says Norm Arendt,
the head of the Madison, Wisconsin, chapter of InfraGard, and the
safety director for the consulting firm Short Elliott Hendrickson,
Inc. "There's been lots of discussions about what happens under an
emergency."
One business owner in the United States tells me that InfraGard
members are being advised on how to prepare for a martial law
situation -- and what their role might be. He showed me his
InfraGard card, with his name and e-mail address on the front, along
with the InfraGard logo and its slogan, "Partnership for
Protection." On the back of the card were the emergency numbers that
Schneck mentioned.
This business owner says he attended a small InfraGard meeting where
agents of the FBI and Homeland Security discussed in astonishing
detail what InfraGard members may be called upon to do.
"The meeting started off innocuously enough, with the speakers
talking about corporate espionage," he says. "From there, it just
progressed. All of a sudden we were knee deep in what was expected
of us when martial law is declared. We were expected to share all
our resources, but in return we'd be given specific benefits." These
included, he says, the ability to travel in restricted areas and to
get people out.
But that's not all.
"Then they said when -- not if -- martial law is declared, it was
our responsibility to protect our portion of the infrastructure, and
if we had to use deadly force to protect it, we couldn't be
prosecuted," he says.
I was able to confirm that the meeting took place where he said it
had, and that the FBI and Homeland Security did make presentations
there. One InfraGard member who attended that meeting denies that
the subject of lethal force came up. But the whistleblower is 100
percent certain of it. "I have nothing to gain by telling you this,
and everything to lose," he adds. "I'm so nervous about this, and
I'm not someone who gets nervous."
Though Schneck says that FBI and Homeland Security agents do make
presentations to InfraGard, she denies that InfraGard members would
have any civil patrol or law enforcement functions. "I have never
heard of InfraGard members being told to use lethal force anywhere,"
Schneck says.
The FBI adamantly denies it, also. "That's ridiculous," says
Catherine Milhoan, an FBI spokesperson. "If you want to quote a
businessperson saying that, knock yourself out. If that's what you
want to print, fine."
But one other InfraGard member corroborated the whistleblower's
account, and another would not deny it.
Christine Moerke is a business continuity consultant for Alliant
Energy in Madison, Wisconsin. She says she's an InfraGard member,
and she confirms that she has attended InfraGard meetings that went
into the details about what kind of civil patrol function --
including engaging in lethal force -- that InfraGard members may be
called upon to perform.
"There have been discussions like that, that I've heard of and
participated in," she says.
Curt Haugen is CEO of S'Curo Group, a company that does "strategic
planning, business continuity planning and disaster recovery,
physical and IT security, policy development, internal control,
personnel selection, and travel safety," according to its website.
Haugen tells me he is a former FBI agent and that he has been an
InfraGard member for many years. He is a huge booster. "It's the
only true organization where there is the public-private
partnership," he says. "It's all who knows who. You know a face, you
trust a face. That's what makes it work."
He says InfraGard "absolutely" does emergency preparedness
exercises. When I ask about discussions the FBI and Homeland
Security have had with InfraGard members about their use of lethal
force, he says: "That much I cannot comment on. But as a private
citizen, you have the right to use force if you feel threatened."
"We were assured that if we were forced to kill someone to protect
our infrastructure, there would be no repercussions," the
whistleblower says. "It gave me goose bumps. It chilled me to the
bone."
--Matthew Rothschild is the editor of the Progressive magazine and
the author of You Have No Rights: Stories of America in an Age of
Repression. This article, "The FBI Deputizes Business," is the cover
story of the March issue of the Progressive.
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/911_protester_arrested_after_yelling_at_0303.html
9/11 protester arrested after yelling at Bill Clinton
RAW STORY
Published: Monday March 3, 2008
A protester has been charged with disorderly conduct after yelling at former
President Bill Clinton during a campaign stop.
The Corpus Christi Caller-Times says that the man was holding a sign saying
the Sept. 11 attacks were an inside job as Clinton spoke. The man yelled at
Clinton later as the former president shook hands with the crowd.
Police were approaching the man when someone in the crowd grabbed his sign
and tore it in half. The paper says the unidentified man screamed at
officers to protect his First Amendment rights. Police handcuffed the man
and took him to a patrol car and said he would be charged with disorderly
conduct.
Campaigning for his former first lady, Democratic presidential candidate
Hillary Rodham Clinton, he spoke Monday to fewer than 1,000 people in a gym
at the University of Texas-Pan American in Edinburg, touching on his wife's
plans to reinvigorate the economy, provide health insurance and make college
affordable.
In his 17-minute speech, Clinton did not mention his wife's rival, Barack
Obama. Obama spoke to more than 5,000 on the campus two weeks ago.
Last month, the former president had an angry response to another 9/11
protester, as RAW STORY reported.
"9/11 was not an inside job, it was an Osama Bin Laden job," Clinton said at
a campaign event in Denver.
"We look like idiots, folks, denying that the people who murdered our fellow
citizens didn't when they are continuing to murder people all around the
world," he added. "So we heard from you, you go away."
http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2008/02/aclu-900000-nam.html
ACLU: 900,000 Names on U.S. Terror Watch Lists
Email
Print
Share
February 27, 2008 12:40 PM
Justin Rood Reports:
The FBI now keeps a list of over 900,000 names belonging to known or
suspected terrorists, the American Civil Liberties Union said today.
If that number is accurate, it would be an all-time high, exponentially more
than the 100,000 names on the list several years ago. But the number needs
to be taken with a grain of salt: after all, the ACLU doesn't keep the list,
the FBI does, and the bureau doesn't generally like to talk about it.
(Indeed, the FBI has not yet responded to a request for comment for this
post.)
But if the ACLU's figure isn't accurate, it's also unlikely to be off by
that much. Last September, the ACLU notes, the Department of Justice's
Inspector General reported the FBI watch list was at 700,000 names, and
growing at 20,000 names per month.
The ACLU says they "extrapolated" from those figures to determine the list's
current size. ACLU's Barry Steinhardt added that the group had spoken
privately with people familiar with the watch list, who told them the
900,000 figure was not outlandish.
In the past, The FBI has told ABC News that the size of its watch list is
classified. Despite that, both the bureau and the DoJ Inspector General have
published the total figure in unclassified reports.
There's no doubt the FBI's list is growing: just last June, ABC News
reported it was at 509,000 names, based on information in an unclassified
FBI budget document.
But strangely, the list may be growing not because of swelling legions of
foreign terrorists. Instead, it appears the FBI may be adding tens of
thousands of names belonging to U.S. persons it suspects of being domestic
terrorists -- people who have no known ties to international terrorist
organizations.
A separate entity, the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), keeps a list
of all names believed to belong to terrorists linked to international terror
groups. That list, which was at 100,000 names in 2003, grew to 465,000
names by last June – but since then has grown only modestly, according to
NCTC spokesman Carl Kropf. Today, Kropf said that list stands at roughly
500,000 names. (Unlike the FBI, the NCTC does not maintain that the size of
its watch list is classified information.)
The FBI takes that list and adds to it a new collection of names which
belong to U.S. persons believed to be domestic terrorists: people who have
links to terrorism but not to any international group.
Last June, the NCTC was responsible for putting 465,000 names on the watch
list, and the FBI appeared to add an additional 44,000. By September,
extrapolating from the DoJ Inspector General's report, the FBI's
contribution appears to have grown to somewhere north of 200,000 names.
Today – if the ACLU is to be believed – the FBI's contribution may be as
high as 417,000 names. Which would raise a new question: Where are so many
domestic terrorists coming from? Or do they simply use more aliases than
foreign terrorists?
Update: The FBI responded late Wednesday afternoon. Spokesman Chad Kolton
did not dispute the ACLU's figure, but noted that the watch list contains
names, aliases and name variations for individuals. The number of people on
the watch list, he said, was around 300,000, and only 5 percent are U.S.
persons. Kolton noted that the list is "regularly reviewed for accuracy."
Last year the bureau removed 100,000 records "related to people cleared of
any nexus with terrorism," Kolton said.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/02/29/BAQPVAUVO.DTL
Quaker teacher fired for changing loyalty oath
Nanette Asimov, Chronicle Staff Writer
Friday, February 29, 2008
California State University East Bay has fired a math teacher after six
weeks on the job because she inserted the word "nonviolently" in her
state-required Oath of Allegiance form.
Marianne Kearney-Brown, a Quaker and graduate student who began teaching
remedial math to undergrads Jan. 7, lost her $700-a-month part-time job
after refusing to sign an 87-word Oath of Allegiance to the Constitution
that the state requires of elected officials and public employees.
"I don't think it was fair at all," said Kearney-Brown. "All they care about
is my name on an unaltered loyalty oath. They don't care if I meant it, and
it didn't seem connected to the spirit of the oath. Nothing else mattered.
My teaching didn't matter. Nothing."
A veteran public school math teacher who specializes in helping struggling
students, Kearney-Brown, 50, had signed the oath before - but had modified
it each time.
She signed the oath 15 years ago, when she taught eighth-grade math in
Sonoma. And she signed it again when she began a 12-year stint in Vallejo
high schools.
Each time, when asked to "swear (or affirm)" that she would "support and
defend" the U.S. and state Constitutions "against all enemies, foreign and
domestic," Kearney-Brown inserted revisions: She wrote "nonviolently" in
front of the word "support," crossed out "swear," and circled "affirm." All
were to conform with her Quaker beliefs, she said.
The school districts always accepted her modifications, Kearney-Brown said.
But Cal State East Bay wouldn't, and she was fired on Thursday.
Modifying the oath "is very clearly not permissible," the university's
attorney, Eunice Chan, said, citing various laws. "It's an unfortunate
situation. If she'd just signed the oath, the campus would have been more
than willing to continue her employment."
Modifying oaths is open to different legal interpretations. Without
commenting on the specific situation, a spokesman for state Attorney General
Jerry Brown said that "as a general matter, oaths may be modified to conform
with individual values." For example, court oaths may be modified so that
atheists don't have to refer to a deity, said spokesman Gareth Lacy.
Kearney-Brown said she could not sign an oath that, to her, suggested she
was agreeing to take up arms in defense of the country.
"I honor the Constitution, and I support the Constitution," she said. "But I
want it on record that I defend it nonviolently."
The trouble began Jan. 17, a little more than a week after she started
teaching at the Hayward campus. Filling out her paperwork, she drew an
asterisk on the oath next to the word "defend." She wrote: "As long as it
doesn't require violence."
The secretary showed the amended oath to a supervisor, who said it was
unacceptable, Kearney-Brown recalled.
Shortly after receiving her first paycheck, Kearney-Brown was told to come
back and sign the oath.
This time, Kearney-Brown inserted "nonviolently," crossed out "swear," and
circled "affirm."
That's when the university sought legal advice.
"Based on the advice of counsel, we cannot permit attachments or addenda
that are incompatible and inconsistent with the oath," the campus' human
resources manager, JoAnne Hill, wrote to Kearney-Brown.
She cited a 1968 case called Smith vs. County Engineer of San Diego. In that
suit, a state appellate court ruled that a man being considered for public
employment could not amend the oath to declare: his "supreme allegiance to
the Lord Jesus Christ Whom Almighty God has appointed ruler of Nations, and
expressing my dissent from the failure of the Constitution to recognize
Christ and to acknowledge the Divine institution of civil government."
The court called it "a gratuitous injection of the applicant's religious
beliefs into the governmental process."
But Hill said Kearney-Brown could sign the oath and add a separate note to
her personal file that expressed her views.
Kearney-Brown declined. "To me it just wasn't the same. I take the oath
seriously, and if I'm going to sign it, I'm going to do it nonviolently."
Then came the warning.
"Please understand that this issue needs to be resolved no later than
Friday, Feb. 22, 2008, or you will not be allowed to continue to work for
the university," Hill wrote.
The deadline was then extended to Wednesday and she was fired on Thursday.
"I was kind of stunned," said Kearney-Brown, who is pursuing her master's
degree in math to earn the credentials to do exactly the job she is being
fired from.
"I was born to do this," she said. "I teach developmental math, the lowest
level. The kids who are conditionally accepted to the university. Give me
the kids who hate math - that's what I want."
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The story I�m about to share with you sickens me. It�s a story of how our
government turns the prohibition of medical marijuana into an excuse for
murdering a cancer patient.
Dallas resident Stephen Thorton was a thyroid cancer survivor who used
marijuana to control chronic pain, eliminate nausea, and gain weight. In
2005, a federal court in Texas convicted Thorton of "possession of a firearm
by an unlawful user of a controlled substance and for distributing marijuana
and marijuana plants."
In other words, this cancer patient faced a federal prison sentence for
having a gun that would have been legal except for the presence of
marijuana, which he was using to treat a life-threatening illness.
Thorton fled Texas in late 2005, fearing that his prison term would
undermine his battle against cancer � and in the process became a fugitive
who was wanted by the U.S. Marshals Service. He took up residence in
Raleigh, North Carolina, where he continued to grow his medical marijuana.
Last week, he was shot and killed by law enforcement officers in a drug raid
at his home.
Investigators said they thought Thorton was the "kingpin" of a marijuana
manufacturing ring.
You can read more about this latest victim of our government�s war on
marijuana users here.
While this story is outrageous, it isn�t unique. On MPP�s Web site, you can
read a whole series of stories about other drug war victims.
Please help end marijuana prohibition � and the frightening police actions
that accompany it � by making a financial contribution today. We cannot keep
fighting the federal government � including lobbying Congress to pass
legislation to end the federal government�s raids on medical marijuana
patients � without the generosity of people like you.
Thank you. I�m grateful for anything you can do to help end the government�s
cruel war on the sick.
Sincerely,
Rob Kampia
Executive Director
Marijuana Policy Project
Washington, D.C.
http://www.animallawcoalition.com/tethering-penning/article/388
Justice for Tammy: Watch and Listen to the Tribute to a Hero!
Posted Feb 14, 2008 by lauraallen
o Tethering-Penning
Click here to play Justice for Tammy by singer/songwriter Maria Daines.
http://www.maria-daines.com/music-65.html and
Click here to watch the video put together by Kathy Smola.
http://iacmusic.com/Stations/KIAC2157.htm
Also, watch and listen here: In Support of Tammy Grimes online.
Update February 22, 2008: Judge Elizabeth Doyle sentenced Tammy Grimes to
300 hours of community service and one year of probation. Oh, and Tammy must
pay the costs of the trial, $1700.
Judge Doyle ordered the community service must be provided to a "people
organization". And, Tammy must pay the cost of community service, whatever
that means, but the total will be around $1500.
Judge Doyle has also said Tammy must remove everything related to Doogie
from websites she controls. The judge said Tammy cannot profit from the sale
of materials that refer to Doogie. Tammy is the founder of the 501c3
non-profit, Dogs Deserve Better, http://www.dogsdeservebetter.org/
Judge Doyle added that Tammy was not Rosa Parks or Martin Luther King, Jr,
that she is a disgrace to her cause and her supporters. The judge did say
two wrongs don't make a right, so maybe she is admitting the Arnolds'
treatment of Doogie was wrong. Actually, it was criminal.
District Attorney Richard Consiglio who has been criticized for wasting
taxpayers' money by pursuing the charges against Tammy, chimed in that her
saving Doogie was a "publicity stunt". He said the Arnolds were victim of
her "lies". Consiglio claimed Tammy showed "disrespect for the law".
Actually, Consiglio has showed an ongoing disrespect for the law in his
refusal to enforce animal cruelty laws.
Tammy's lawyer has said he will appeal the potential First Amendment
violation in the order to remove all Doogie-related information from the
internet. He might also want to appeal the judge's comment that because
Tammy chose to go to trial, she should be required to pay the costs. The 6th
Amendment frowns on retaliation for exercising the right to a jury.
A really tough day for Tammy. Our heart goes out to her and all the chained
dogs she works tirelessly to save.. Tammy is one of the heros of the animal
welfare movement. But most people won't recognize that until it becomes more
mainstream to treat animals as living sentient beings with rights. That's
also how it was for Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King, Jr.
To get a pardon for Tammy Grimes, it
will help to contact these legislators:
Click on the names of state representatives for Blair County below and
contact them and urge them to recommend a pardon for Tammy Grimes who was
convicted of theft and receiving stolen property for rescuing a dying dog on
the end of a chain:
Open Letter from Tammy Grimes, December 17, 2007
Dear [name deleted]
On September 11, 2006, I rescued a dog that was dying at the end of a chain
in a muddy yard in a small Pennsylvania town. I was subsequently arrested. A
little over a year later, on December 15, 2007, I was convicted of theft and
receiving stolen property.The last year has been the most traumatic and the
most inspirational of my life. I have been labeled a "terrorist" a
"vigilante", a "publicity hound" and an "anarchist." I have been called a
hero. I have been humbled by encouragement and well wishes from people all
over the world. I have been attacked in person and in print in my small
town, where the prevailing view is that it is fine and dandy to tie a dog to
a tree or a dog house and leave it to pace back and forth for year after
agonizing year, in skull-cracking cold or 100-degree weather, with nothing
but parasites for company. I don't regret what I did. Not for one second.
And when it comes to rescuing dogs and changing minds and laws, I'm just
getting started. Here's why.The dog at the center of all this, a dog we
would eventually name Doogie, had been lying in the mud and rain for three
days, chained to the dog house he had been attached to for years. He was
unable to stand and was pawing the air in desperation. His owners chose to
go four-wheeling and to work on Monday instead of getting him the vet help
he needed and deserved, but most importantly was entitled to by law. A
distraught neighbor had called animal control repeatedly over the course of
the three days. But as so often happens, no "humane" officer called back. No
one ever showed up. (Surprised? Trust me, it happens all the time, and not
just in my town.) The frantic neighbor eventually reached out to me and to
Dogs Deserve Better.What I did next set in motion a chain of events that
would eventually garner national attention, the wrath of some, the support
of others, and an agonizing trial during which I had to listen to lies and
mischaracterizations for three days: I removed that dog's chain and I took
him to the veterinarian. It was all very clear to me as I lifted the
emaciated, wet dog into my van. I had been in animal rescue long enough to
know that I would probably be labeled the villain while the dog's caretakers
wouldn't even be questioned for leaving a suffering dog on the ground for
three days, not to mention all the years they tied him to a shabby box in
the yard; letting his toenails to grow so long they were curling back toward
his pads, denying him vet care when he most needed it.But I also knew that
what I was doing was morally correct. It was the compassionate thing to do.
It was the only thing I could do. Time was of the essence. A dog was
suffering. I felt he was dying.In court, it became increasingly clear that
our 'humane officer' left me "holding the bag," in this case little more
than a bag of bones. He had been offered the dog by me as part of what
should have been a cruelty case against the caretakers 2 times on September
11th, but ignored me both times. On the witness stand the officer, in an
attempt to cover his own hide, stated he told me and the vet assistants not
to remove Doogie from the vets. This is absolutely untrue, and if he had
done so I would not have been put in the position of choosing between
Doogie's skin and my own.So, now I'm guilty. Ah yes, guilty of caring about
a dog that had been left to die. Guilty of putting myself and my reputation
on the line because I can't stand to see suffering. Yes, call me guilty.At
Dogs Deserve Better, we see dogs in horrific situations every day. Sometimes
these sad animals are neurotic or aggressive from years at the end of a
chain. Sometimes, they are half-starved or have collars embedded in their
necks. Sometimes they are dead. So, why go out on a limb for one old dog?
Why take a moral stand in this one instance? Why challenge a law, when Dogs
Deserve Better has stuck to the letter of the law in almost 1,000 rescues to
date? The answer is simple: because it was the right thing to do. Because
our laws regarding personal property and animal welfare are contradictory
and archaic. Because Michael Vick can't kill his dogs, but the Arnolds can.
Because, at the end of the day, I knew I simply couldn't live with myself if
I walked away from that dog and left him to suffer there in the mud. Doogie
blossomed after we got him medical care and showed him a warm bed and a
little love. He not only walked again, but actually ambled around with a
spring in his step. Imagine. A dog that for many years could not take more
than a few steps before being yanked back by a chain, was trotting around a
yard and enjoying soft hands and a warm home!I have no illusions about my
life's work. I know some people will never get it. I know some people think
"it is just a dog." I know some people consider me the representation of all
that is evil because I have compassion for animals and because in one
isolated incident, where the clock was ticking and life was ebbing, I took
someone's "property" -- property that the owners had for all intents and
purposes abandoned on the ground like a used-up piece of junk. But I don't
care what my detractors think because I now know that I have more support,
more friends, more allies, than I ever dreamed possible.The support I have
received during the last year has made me stronger in my convictions and
more steadfast in my work. I know that the vast majority of reasonable,
educated, compassionate people believe that it is barbaric beyond imagining
to chain a dog for its life. I know that anti-tethering laws will continue
to be passed in states, cities and counties across this country.
("No-brainers" a recent news article called these laws.) And I'm going to
work harder than ever to make sure that happens. Five years ago, when I
started Dogs Deserve Better, people laughed in my face when I talked about
laws against chaining. Today, three states have passed laws that severely
limit the practice, as have hundreds of cities and counties, some banning
chaining altogether. I know that I will see the day when our society sees
tying a dog to a doghouse for 15 years as abhorrent as eating a dog. Oh yes,
make no mistake: times change and morality and compassion eventually triumph
over ignorance and stupid, blind habit. Slavery ended. Women got the right
to vote. Wife beating is no long accepted. You don't see a lot of kids
working in mines or sweat shops anymore. Even dog fighting was made a crime.
I can't help but think about Rosa Parks. We can be sure she never regretted
refusing to budge from that Montgomery bus seat. And though I may never be
as brave as she was, I'll never regret taking a half-dead dog from someone's
yard. In memory of Doogie. May he rest in peace.-Tammy Grimes, December 17,
2007To read the press release and view just-released photos, visit the
Doogie page.
http://www.dogsdeservebetter.org/sponsor2007.html
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/february2008/021908_thug_cop.htm
Thug Cop Beats Up Defenseless Handcuffed Woman
Claims victim who ended up with two black eyes in a pool of her own blood
"fell over"
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Tuesday, February 19th, 2008
Shocking police station video of an argumentative woman
who ended up unconscious in a pool of her own blood
with two black eyes, a broken nose and broken teeth
did not lead to criminal charges against the cop
after officials claimed the woman "fell over."
Quite how Angela Garbarino received two black eyes, a broken nose,
broken teeth and blood pouring from her head after a "slip and fall"
is not quite explained by officials or ABC News,
who ran with the headline Police Brutality or Slip and Fall?
http://news.aol.com/story/_a/wal-mart-sues-disabled-ex-employee/20080329083609990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001
Wal-Mart Sues Disabled Ex-Employee
CNN
Posted: 2008-03-29 09:54:15
Filed Under: Nation News, Law News
JACKSON, Missouri (March 29) - Debbie Shank breaks down in tears every
time she's told that her 18-year-old son, Jeremy, was killed in Iraq.
The 52-year-old mother of three attended her son's funeral, but she
continues to ask how he's doing. When her family reminds her that he's
dead, she weeps as if hearing the news for the first time.
CNN
"Who Needs
The Money More?"
Debbie Shank, 52, suffered severe brain damage after a traffic accident
in 2000. The Wal-Mart employee received about $470,000 from the
retailer's health plan for medical expenses, but the company has sued to
get the payout back.
Shank suffered severe brain damage after a traffic accident nearly eight
years ago that robbed her of much of her short-term memory and left her
in a wheelchair and living in a nursing home.
It was the beginning of a series of battles -- both personal and legal
-- that loomed for Shank and her family. One of their biggest was with
Wal-Mart's health plan.
Eight years ago, Shank was stocking shelves for the retail giant and
signed up for Wal-Mart's health and benefits plan.
Two years after the accident, Shank and her husband, Jim, were awarded
about $1 million in a lawsuit against the trucking company involved in
the crash. After legal fees were paid, $417,000 was placed in a trust to
pay for Debbie Shank's long-term care.
Wal-Mart had paid out about $470,000 for Shank's medical expenses and
later sued for the same amount. However, the court ruled it can only
recoup what is left in the family's trust.
The Shanks didn't notice in the fine print of Wal-Mart's health plan
policy that the company has the right to recoup medical expenses if an
employee collects damages in a lawsuit.
The family's attorney, Maurice Graham, said he informed Wal-Mart about
the settlement and believed the Shanks would be allowed to keep the
money.
"We assumed after three years, they [Wal-Mart] had made a decision to
let Debbie Shank use this money for what it was intended to," Graham
said.
The Shanks lost their suit to Wal-Mart. Last summer, the couple appealed
the ruling -- but also lost it. One week later, their son was killed in
Iraq.
"They are quite within their rights. But I just wonder if they need it
that bad," Jim Shank said.
In 2007, the retail giant reported net sales in the third quarter of $90
billion.
Legal or not, CNN asked Wal-Mart why the company pursued the money.
Wal-Mart spokesman John Simley, who called Debbie Shank's case
"unbelievably sad," replied in a statement: "Wal-Mart's plan is bound by
very specific rules. ... We wish it could be more flexible in Mrs.
Shank's case since her circumstances are clearly extraordinary, but this
is done out of fairness to all associates who contribute to, and benefit
from, the plan."
Jim Shank said he believes Wal-Mart should make an exception.
"My idea of a win-win is -- you keep the paperwork that says you won and
let us keep the money so I can take care of my wife," he said.
The family's situation is so dire that last year Jim Shank divorced
Debbie, so she could receive more money from Medicaid.
Jim Shank, 54, is recovering from prostate cancer, works two jobs and
struggles to pay the bills. He's afraid he won't be able to send their
youngest son to college and pay for his and Debbie's care.
"Who needs the money more? A disabled lady in a wheelchair with no
future, whatsoever, or does Wal-Mart need $90 billion, plus $200,000?"
he asked.
The family's attorney agrees.
"The recovery that Debbie Shank made was recovery for future lost
earnings, for her pain and suffering," Graham said.
"She'll never be able to work again. Never have a relationship with her
husband or children again. The damage she recovered was for much more
than just medical expenses."
Graham said he believes Wal-Mart should be entitled to only about
$100,000. Right now, about $277,000 remains in the trust -- far short of
the $470,000 Wal-Mart wants back.
Refusing to give up the fight, the Shanks appealed to the U.S. Supreme
Court. But just last week, the high court said it would not hear the
case.
Graham said the Shanks have exhausted all their resources and there's
nothing more they can do but go on with their lives.
Jim Shank said he's disappointed with the Supreme Court's decision not
to hear the case -- not for the sake of his family -- but for those who
might face similar circumstances.
For now, he said the family will figure out a way to get by and "do the
best we can for Debbie."
"Luckily, she's oblivious to everything," he said. "We don't tell her
what's going on because it will just upset her.
http://eugeneweekly.com/2008/03/06/letters.html
AN HONORABLE MAN
On Feb. 28, environmental activist Jeff Luers' 22 years and 8 month sentence
was reduced to 10 years. Mr. Luers was resentenced to 90 months for an
admitted June 16, 2000, arson that caused $50,000 of reparable damage to
three trucks, and to 30 months for an alleged, but denied, May 27, 2000,
attempted arson that caused $0 in damage.
If Lane County Assistant DA Hasselman had decided that Luers could serve the
90 months for the admitted Romania fire and the 30 months for the Tyree
non-starter concurrently, he would have been free to leave the courtroom
with the rest of us at 9:30 am because he has been incarcerated since his
June 16, 2000, arrest, 92 months ago.
But Hasselman argued that Jeff should serve the 90 and 30 month sentences
consecutively. Judge Billings agreed, even though he described Luers'
statement as the most impressive he'd heard in 35 years as a lawyer,
compared him to a returning war hero and heaped praise on Luers' male
lawyers, Hugh Duvall and Jesse Barton. Judge Billings did note Luers' female
lawyer, Lauren Regan.
As a resident of Lane County, I am disgusted that Luers did not walk out a
free man on Feb. 28. It is not surprising that Luers was the most thoughtful
defendant Judge Billings has encountered in 35 years — Luers was the most
thoughtful and honorable man in the courtroom on Thursday.
Deborah Frisch, Eugene
--------------------------------------------------------------
Fingerprint Scans Replace Clocking In
Mar 27, 6:42 AM (ET)
By DAVID B. CARUSO
NEW YORK (AP) -"They don't even have to hire someone to harass you anymore.
The machine can do it for them," said Ed Ott, executive director of the New
York City Central Labor Council of the AFL-CIO. "The palm print thing really
grabs people as a step too far."
The International Biometric Group, a consulting firm, estimated that $635
million worth of these high-tech devices were sold last year, and projects
that the industry will be worth more than $1 billion by 2011.
Ingersoll Rand Security Technologies, a leading manufacturer of hand
scanners based in Campbell, Calif., said it has sold at least 150,000 of the
devices to Dunkin' Donuts and McDonald's franchises, Hilton hotels and to
Marine Corps bases, who use them to track civilian hours.
Protests over using palm scanners to log employee time have been especially
loud in New York City, where officials are spending $410 million to install
an automated attendance tracking system that may eventually be used by
160,000 city workers.
Scores of civil servants who are members of Local 375 of the Civil Service
Technical Guild rallied Tuesday against a plan to add the city medical
examiner's office to the list of 17 city agencies which already have the
scanners in place.
The scanners have rankled draftsmen, planners and architects in the city's
Parks Department, which began using them last year.
"Psychologically, I think it has had a huge impact on the work force here
because it is demeaning and because it's a system based on mistrust," said
Ricardo Hinkle, a landscape architect who designs city parks.
He called the timekeeping system a bureaucratic intrusion on professionals
who never used to think twice about putting in extra time on a project they
cared about, and could rely on human managers to exercise a little
flexibility on matters regarding work hours.
"The creative process isn't one that punches in and punches out," he said.
A spokesman for Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Matthew Kelly, said the system
isn't meant to be intrusive and has clear benefits over old-style punch
clocks or paper time sheets.
The city expects to save $60 million per year by modernizing a complicated
record keeping system that now requires one full-time timekeeper for every
100 to 250 employees. The new system, dubbed CityTime, would free up
thousands of city employees to do less paper-pushing.
Another benefit of the system is curtailing fraud. Several times each year,
New York City's Department of Investigation charges city employees with
taking unauthorized time off and falsifying timecards to make it looked as
though they worked.
Other cities have embraced similar technology.
Cities as big as Chicago and as small as Tahlequah, Okla., have turned to
fingerprint-driven ID systems to record employee work hours in recent few
years. And the systems have been introduced into plenty of other workplaces
without much grumbling by employees, especially those already used to
punching a clock.
But the New York workers aren't the first to fight it. The American
Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees complained vigorously
two years ago after the city of Pittsburgh proposed installing fingerprint
readers.
"We had a lot of questions, a lot of concerns, and so far they haven't put
it in," said AFCME Council 84 Director Richard Caponi.
Jon Mooney, Ingersoll Rand's general manger of biometrics, said the privacy
concerns are unfounded. The hand scanners don't keep large databases of
people's fingerprints - only a record of their hand shape, he said.
Still, union officials in New York said they are concerned that the machines
could eventually be used not just to crack down on employees skipping work,
but to nitpick honest workers or invade their privacy.
"The bottom line is that these palm scanners are designed to exercise more
control over the workforce," said Claude Fort, president of Local 375. "They
aren't there for security purposes. It has nothing to do with productivity.
... It is about control, and that is what makes us nervous."
I know that i can be accused of being a reformist for forwarding this, but i
think that if the news are good, they are good.
--------------------------------------------------
- -------- Original Message --------
Dear Friends,
Have you heard the news? The Violent Radicalization and Homegrown
Terrorism Prevention Act is dead. And I think grassroots opposition
killed it.
According to an obscure paragraph in CQ Politics on December 14, the
Senate version of the bill "died a quiet death" in early December.
What's amazing to me (or really, shouldn't be a surprise, I guess) is
how well hidden this is. I could find no mention on Thomas, or anywhere
else on the web (please help me if I've missed something). Thanks to
our friends at the ACLU for alerting us to this obscure paragraph!
The wildfire of grassroots opposition to this "thought crime" bill,
which apparently stopped it cold, is receiving no credit. And because
this lone CQ article is the singular reference to the death of the bill,
articles churning up opposition to _HR 1955_
<http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:h.r.01955:> and _S 1959_
<http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:s.01959:> continue
to populate the Internet. In a case of odd timing, the Committee on
Homeland Security issued a _"Fact Sheet"_
<http://homeland.house.gov/sitedocuments/hr1955factsheetpdf.pdf>
declaring each point of opposition to the bill to be myth. The "Fact
Sheet" was released (according to _Atlantic Free Press_
<http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/content/view/3117/81/>) on December
17, though the bill had expired in the Senate earlier in December.
http://www.nypost.com/seven/03102008/news/regionalnews/public_enemy_no_1_101271.htm
PUBLIC ENEMY NO.1
CITY SUED FOR CUFFING 4-YR.-OLD NAP NIXERS
By DENISE BUFFA
BABY-FACE NELSON:Jaden Diaz may not look dangerous, but a suit says he was
handcuffed in school for . . . not being sleepy.
March 10, 2008 -- The parents of two Bronx preschoolers are suing the city,
charging that their kids were tossed out of class - and handcuffed by a
school-safety officer - for refusing to take a nap.
Lawyer Scott Agulnick said Jaden Diaz and Christopher Brito - both then 4
and students at CS 211, The Bilingual School - told their parents that a
substitute teacher took them and another boy to an empty classroom on Nov.
17, 2006, and left them there alone.
Soon, the lawyer said, the school-safety officer entered the room, cuffed
the boys' wrists - and further terrified them by telling they that they
would never see their parents again.
"I wasn't shot, but my hands were tied," Christopher, now 5, recalled,
according to his mother, Vasso Brito, a 34- year-old office worker - who
says the little guy is now scared of police officers.
Brito, who's trying to transfer Christopher to another public school, said
she was "shocked" to learn of what she considers to have been an absolute
abuse of authority.
"Right now, I feel [there are] monsters in school," she said. "I'm still
perturbed. As I'm talking to you, I'm shaking."
Jaden, now 6, remembers that a man who was dressed like a cop walked in, sat
at a big desk - "like the one the judge is on" - and threatened them.
"He was police," Jaden said. "He said, 'You know what happens when you don't
go to sleep in there? . . . 'When you go to jail, you're not going to have
no fun, no TV, no toys.' "
Jaden - who asked his dad to move far enough away from him so as not to be
able to hear his account of what happened-whispered to a reporter that he
got a "little scared" when he saw the handcuffs attached to the safety
officer's "costume."
He insisted that he was not handcuffed - though his mom, Sasha Diaz, said he
confided in her that he was.
"It took me about a day to get it out of him. He didn't want to tell me . .
. I don't know if he thought it was his fault," said Diaz, 27, an assistant
teacher who now finds herself suddenly struggling to pay for her only child
to attend Catholic school.
The families are seeking unspecified damages, said Agulnick, adding:
"Failure to comply with nap time is hardly an offense that warrants being
handcuffed, or threatened, for that matter. Nothing would've warranted
that."
The city Department of Education and the NYPD, which oversees school-safety
officers, did not return requests for comment.
The boys' claims recall two other recent cases. In one, a mentally
challenged 10-year-old Brooklyn girl said a school-safety officer handcuffed
her outside school. In the other, a 5-year-old Queens boy said a
school-safety officer snapped the cuffs on him inside his school.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/22/us/22hamas.html?_r=1&ref=us&oref=slogin
Former Professor Is Sentenced in a Hamas Case
CHICAGO — A former business professor accused of
taking part in a Palestinian terrorist network was
sentenced to more than 11 years in prison for
refusing to testify before a federal grand jury.
The defendant, Abdelhaleem Ashqar, 49, a former
associate professor of business at Howard University
in Washington, was taken into custody by federal
marshals immediately after the sentencing.
In a passionate, arm-waving statement before
sentencing, Dr. Ashqar painted a grim picture of the
suffering of Palestinians in the occupied territories
and said that some of his own relatives had been
killed or jailed.
He said he would rather go to prison than betray his
people as they strived to free themselves from Israeli
domination. "The only option was to become a traitor
or a collaborator," Dr. Ashqar said, "and this is
something that I can't do and will never do as long as
I live."
The case, based on a long-running federal
investigation of the Palestinian militant group Hamas,
was closely watched as a major Justice Department
initiative in the war on terrorism after the Sept. 11
attacks.
Dr. Ashqar and a co-defendant, Muhammad Salah, were
acquitted this year on a racketeering conspiracy
charge that accused them of bankrolling Hamas. But
prosecutors presented telephone records showing that
Dr. Ashqar had been in contact with Hamas leaders.
Dr. Ashqar was convicted of obstruction of justice and
criminal contempt for refusing to testify before the
grand jury on June 25, 2003, even after he had been
granted immunity from prosecution. Mr. Salah was
convicted of lying on a document and sentenced to 22
months in prison.
Defense lawyers said Judge Amy J. St. Eve of Federal
District Court imposed an unusually stiff sentence on
Dr. Ashqar given the complex political background. In
addition to 11 years and 3 months in prison, he was
fined $5,000.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18584.htm
Priests Protesting Torture Jailed
By Bill Quigley
Louis Vitale, 75, a Franciscan priest, and Steve Kelly, 58, a Jesuit
priest, were each sentenced to five months in federal prison for
attempting to deliver a letter opposing the teaching of torture at
Fort Huachuca in Arizona. Both priests were taken directly into jail
from the courtroom after sentencing.
Fort Huachuca is the headquarters of military intelligence in the U.S.
and the place where military and civilian interrogators are taught how
to extract information from prisoners. The priests attempted to
deliver their letter to Major General Barbara Fast, commander of Fort
Huachuca. Fast was previously the head of all military intelligence in
Iraq during the atrocities of Abu Ghraib.
The priests were arrested while kneeling in prayer halfway up the
driveway to Fort Huachuca in November 2006. Both priests were charged
with trespass on a military base and resisting orders of an officer to
stop.
In a pre-trial heating, the priests attempted to introduce evidence of
torture, murder, and gross violations of human rights in Afghanistan,
Abu Ghraib in Iraq, and at Guantanamo. The priests offered
investigative reports from the FBI, the US Army, Amnesty
International, Human Rights Watch, and Physicians for Social
Responsibility documenting hundreds of incidents of human rights
violations. Despite increasing evidence of the use of torture by U.S.
forces sanctioned by President Bush and others, the federal court in
Tucson refused to allow any evidence of torture, the legality of the
invasion of Iraq, or international law to be a part of the trial.
Outside the courthouse, before the judge ordered them to prison, the
priests explained their actions: "The real crime here has always been
the teaching of torture at Fort Huachuca and the practice of torture
around the world. We tried to deliver a letter asking that the
teaching of torture be stopped and were arrested. We tried to put the
evidence of torture on full and honest display in the courthouse and
were denied. We were prepared to put on evidence about the widespread
use of torture and human rights abuses committed during interrogations
at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo in Iraq and Afhganistan. This evidence
was gathered by the military itself and by governmental and human
rights investigations."
Fr. Vitale, a longtime justice and peace activist in San Francisco and
Nevada, said: "Because the court will not allow the truth of torture
to be a part of our trial, we plead no contest. We are uninterested in
a court hearing limited to who was walking where and how many steps it
was to the gate. History will judge whether silencing the facts of
torture is just or not. Far too many people have died because of our
national silence about torture. Far too many of our young people in
the military have been permanently damaged after following orders to
torture and violate the human rights of other humans."
Fr. Kelly, who walked to the gates of Guantanamo with the Catholic
Worker group in December of 2005, concluded: "We will keep trying to
stop the teaching and practice of torture whether we are sent to jail
or out. We have done our part for now. Now it is up to every woman and
man of conscience to do their part to stop the injustice of torture."
The priests were prompted to protest by continuing revelations about
the practice of torture by U.S. military and intelligence officers.
The priests were also deeply concerned after learning of the suicide
in Iraq of a young, devout female military interrogator in Iraq,
Alyssa Peterson of Arizona, shortly after arriving in Iraq. Peterson
was reported to be horrified by the mistreatment of Iraqi prisoners.
Investigation also revealed that Fort Huachuca was the source of
infamous "torture manuals" distributed to hundreds of Latin American
graduates of the U.S. Army School of Americas at Fort Benning, GA.
Demonstrations against the teaching of torture at Fort Huachuca have
been occurring for the past several years each November and are
scheduled again for November 16 and 17 this year.
Bill Quigley is a human rights lawyer and professor at Loyola
University New Orleans. Bill can be reached at Quigley @ loyno.edu .
--------------------------------------------------------------
Police pile-on draws Ohio Attorney General's interest
via Disloyal Opposition
by J.D. Tuccille on 2/11/08
The bizarre case of Hope Steffey, the Salem, Ohio, woman who was
forcibly stripped naked by a mixed-sex mob of Stark County sheriff's
deputies after being arrested and dragged to jail by the officer
responding to an assault complaint in which Steffey was the victim, is
drawing high-level attention. First, Gerald McFaul, the sheriff of
Cuyahoga County, criticized Stark County deputies, saying their
conduct was "way out of line" and that male deputies should never
forcibly remove the clothes of a female. Now, Stark County Sheriff Tim
Swanson has formally asked the Ohio Attorney General to investigate
the incident. This is quite a turnabout from his earlier claims that
his deputies behaved properly, and that the policy requiring strip
searches to be conducted by officers of the same sex as the prisoner
didn't apply because, while Steffey was stripped, she wasn't actually
searched.
Apparently, it was all just good fun.
Swanson's change of heart comes as video of the jail-house assault on
Steffey hits the airwaves and the Internet, allowing people to see the
actual incident for themselves.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Ku7pbvOr2Y
Swanson just might be trying to get ahead of the wave of revulsion
that could make the Steffey family's federal lawsuit a winner.
http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN2627725720080327?sp=true
Man charged as Iraqi agent over Congress trip
Wed Mar 26, 2008 8:19pm EDT
By Randall Mikkelsen
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - An Iraqi-American who helped organize a controversial
U.S. congressional trip to Baghdad in 2002 was charged on Wednesday with
working for ousted Iraqi President Saddam Hussein's government, which paid
for the visit, the Justice Department said.
The indictment against Muthanna al-Hanooti said Iraq's foreign intelligence
service funneled $34,000 through the Islamic charity Life for Relief and
Development to pay delegation expenses.
It said al-Hanooti had been a lobbyist and public-relations coordinator for
the charity, based in Southfield, Michigan.
The indictment did not name the three lawmakers who took the trip in
September-October 2002, less than six months before the U.S.-led invasion to
oust Saddam.
But during the time in question, Democratic U.S. Reps. Jim McDermott of
Washington, Mike Thompson of California and David Bonior of Michigan, who
were all opposed to war against Iraq, took a highly publicized trip to Iraq.
Delegation members said during their trip they warned Saddam's government it
must allow U.N. arms inspections, and McDermott charged that President
George W. Bush was willing to "mislead the American people" about the need
for war.
Republicans accused delegation members at the time of sounding a bit like
spokesmen for the Iraqi government and threatening to undermine U.S. efforts
to assemble an international coalition against Iraq.
Thompson said on Wednesday the trip had been approved by the U.S. State
Department and the United Nations.
"I was determined to learn as much as I could before voting on whether or
not to commit US troops to war," he said.
"Obviously, had there been any question at all regarding the sponsor of the
trip or the funding, I would not have participated."
ECONOMIC SANCTIONS
McDermott spokesman Mike DeCesare said the congressman, a medical doctor,
had gone on the invitation of a Seattle church group. "We went to see the
plight of children under economic sanctions in Iraq," DeCesare said. "In
terms of who or whatever from Michigan, we didn't know them or anything
about them."
The indictment said al-Hanooti traveled to Baghdad with the delegation.
Bonior left office in 2003. He later served as manager of John Edwards'
unsuccessful 2008 presidential campaign.
Justice Department spokesman Dean Boyd said, "None of the congressional
representatives are accused of any wrongdoing, and we have no information
whatsoever that any of them were aware of the involvement of the Iraqi
Intelligence Service."
Al-Hanooti was arrested on Tuesday when he entered the United States from
abroad, Boyd said.
He was charged with working as an unregistered Iraqi agent, violating
economic sanctions against Iraq and making false statements. He was released
on $100,000 bond with an electronic monitor after an initial court
appearance in Detroit.
The indictment said Saddam's oil ministry gave al-Hanooti two million
barrels of oil in exchange for his help, and he resold the oil.
It said al-Hanooti traveled to Iraq and met with Iraqi intelligence agents,
who asked him to publicize the negative effects of economic sanction against
Iraq, and he reported to the agents information about members of Congress.
The charity says on its Web site it was founded in 1992 by "Iraqi-American
professionals" to respond to a humanitarian crisis after the 1991 Gulf War.
It said it has provided more than $50 million in humanitarian assistance
worldwide.
The group was not immediately available for comment on the al-Hanooti
indictment.
(Additional reporting by Joanne Allen, editing by Todd Eastham)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Al-Arian Transferred to Virginia
Tampa Bay Coalition for Justice and Peace
March 18, 2008
ALEXANDRIA, Va.-- Yesterday, Dr. Sami Al-Arian was transferred from
the Federal Medical Center in Butner, NC back to the local jail
in Warsaw, Virginia where he was held previously, to comply with a
judge's March 3 order granting him immunity for a THIRD grand jury
appearance. Today is the 17th day of a water and food strike that Dr.
Al-Arian began to protest persistent harassment and psychological
torture by the Department of Justice. He has since lost 29 pounds.
Dr. Al-Arian is being asked to testify before yet another grand jury
less than three weeks before his scheduled release date. His attorneys
have advised Dr. Al-Arian not to testify, as the plea agreement signed
with prosecutors in April 2006 removed the possibility of cooperation.
Additionally, these grand jury subpoenas are a trap intended to
prolong Dr. Al-Arian's imprisonment long after his promised release date.
If he testifies, he is to be charged with perjury, facing years of
additional prison time. If he is convicted of criminal contempt for
not testifying, Dr. Al-Arian faces a minimum of five years in prison.
These efforts to convict Dr. Al-Arian in a wholly separate case (more
than two years after he was acquitted by a federal jury) are clearly a
last-ditch, vindictive effort on behalf of the Justice Department, led
by a rogue prosecutor who has made bigoted statements against Muslims,
to punish Dr. Al-Arian for his acquittal. The Department of Justice
must keep the prom! ise it made to Dr. Al-Arian in his plea agreement
and release him on April 7, when his current sentence is up.
Members of Dr. Al-Arian's family visited him last weekend at the
prison medical facility where he was being held in Butner, North
Carolina. They observed the effects of the hunger strike on Dr.
Al-Arian, noting symptoms of severe dehydration. As of Monday, Dr.
Al-Arian was examined by a doctor only one time in nearly a week. The
government refuses to allow an outside doctor to examine Dr. Al-Arian
despite requests by his attorneys, family members, and thousands of
supporters. Butner Medical Center received thousands of telephone
calls from concerned people from across the country and around the
world.
http://tinyurl.com/ypychj
Friday, February 8, 2008
CommonDreams.org
Corporations Given ‘Human Rights,’ Humans Are Denied Them
by Jeffrey Kaplan
In evaluating allegations that U.S. military forces deprived four
British men of human rights during two years they were held captive in
Guantanamo Bay prison, a U.S. appeals court found an innovative way to
let the Bush administration off the hook. Two of three judges ruled the
men -- because they are not U.S. citizens and, technically, were not
imprisoned in the U.S. -- were not legally “persons” and, therefore, had
no rights to violate.
While those judges were defying common sense and decency by denying
legal personhood to living human beings, an appeals court in Boston has
been reviewing an April 2007 decision by Federal Judge Paul Barbadoro
that engaged in a different form of judicial activism -- granting human
rights to corporations.
Barbadoro struck down a New Hampshire law that prevented pharmaceutical
corporations from learning exactly what drugs doctors prescribe and how
much they prescribe. The law aims to protect doctors and, indirectly,
their patients, from drug companies pressuring doctors to choose their
products.
The judge’s grounds? He claims corporations, as legal persons, have
“free speech rights” that would be infringed by such a measure.
The real issue in these cases (Maine recently passed a similar law)
isn’t free speech at all; it’s manipulation and control. The drug
salespeople only will decide what to say after poking into the doctors’
prescription records. Under the guise of protecting speech, Judge
Barbadoro denied both legitimate privacy rights of doctors and key
protections to ensure patients are prescribed drugs based on their
medical situation, not pressure applied to their physician.
Taken together, these two rulings are a perplexing and dangerous
development. The founding principle of our country is right in the
Declaration of Independence: all people are “endowed by their Creator
with certain unalienable Rights.” It is not for judges to decide who is
and who is not a human being.
Nor should the courts play Creator by endowing legal constructs like
corporations with human rights. Our constitutional rights exist to
prevent large, powerful institutions -- whether governments,
corporations, or other entities -- from oppressing us humans.
For too long a strange dichotomy has persisted between principled people
on the political left and right wings. The left wing often warns against
the growing power of business corporations. The right wing complains the
left ignores the overweening power of the government and is “anti-business.”
Both sides have been seeing only part of the same elephant. What’s
happening is a merger of corporations and state.
Already there are corporate “black holes” for human rights that rival
government affronts like Guantanamo. Under the Bush administration’s
legal framework for Iraq during its occupation, the Iraqi government
wields no authority over Blackwater corporation’s security guards.
And it’s not clear the U.S. government does either. As a result, we may
never see anyone punished for Blackwater’s wanton killing of Iraqi
civilians in Baghdad last September.
Then there’s the case of Jamie Leigh Jones, an American employee of
Halliburton/KBR in Iraq who claimed she was gang raped by co-workers in
2005. U.S. officials reportedly handed the evidence to KBR, whereupon
the evidence apparently disappeared. Nobody in Congress, Democrat or
Republican, has been able to persuade the Bush administration to reveal
what it has done about the case since then.
Halliburton/KBR, like Blackwater, apparently enjoys the rights of a
person, but not the responsibilities.
The danger of “corporate personhood” is a bit like global warming;
people have warned us of the threat for decades only to go unheeded
because the dire consequences seemed far-fetched.
But look at what’s happened to the First Amendment. Corporations use it
to strike down laws clearly designed to protect citizens, even while
courts deny prisoners the right to know what evidence the government is
using against them. It’s time for alarm.
We should take offense whenever we hear the dangerous notion of
“corporate citizenship” promoted. Soon, the only citizens with real
power in the United States may be the corporate kind.
Jeffrey Kaplan is a researcher with http://ReclaimDemocracy.org , a
non-profit organization working to restore citizen authority over
corporations.
http://tinyurl.com/ytx3xz
Ex-Congressman Charged in Terror Conspiracy
By LARA JAKES JORDAN – 38 minutes ago
WASHINGTON (AP) — A former congressman and delegate to the United Nations
was indicted Wednesday as part of a terrorist fundraising ring that
allegedly sent more than $130,000 to an al-Qaida and Taliban supporter who
has threatened U.S. and international troops in Afghanistan.
The former Republican congressman from Michigan, Mark Deli Siljander, was
charged with money laundering, conspiracy and obstructing justice for
allegedly lying about lobbying senators on behalf of an Islamic charity that
authorities said was secretly sending funds to terrorists.
A 42-count indictment, unsealed in U.S. District Court in Kansas City, Mo.,
accuses the Islamic American Relief Agency of paying Siljander $50,000 for
the lobbying — money that turned out to be stolen from the U.S. Agency for
International Development.
Siljander, who served two terms in the U.S. House of Representatives, was
appointed by President Reagan to serve as a U.S. delegate to the United
Nations for one year in 1987.
http://www.wsbtv.com/news/15256835/detail.html
DEKALB COUNTY, Ga. -- A mother got a shocking flyer in the mail calling her
daughter a homewrecker. Now a police officer is in big trouble for sending
it.
That DeKalb County police officer admits using a classified law enforcement
computer to look up another woman's personal information. She then mailed
flyers
to the woman's family and friends.
“I read it and I sat there. I was devastated. I’m looking at my child’s
picture.
I was totally devastated,” said Susan Barcon.
Words like "homewrecker," "ashamed," and three Bible verses about adultery
were
scrawled across the page along with a picture of Susan Barcon's daughter.
Barcon
was stunned as was her daughter, Samara, when she heard from two neighbors,
her
former boss and other relatives who got the same letter.
“She just knew so much about us, our personal lives and it was frightening,”
said Barcon.
[The question "Why did the police kept files about personal life of an
average
person?" just doesn't seem to surface. - Volodya]
"She" is Officer Teresa Shover, a 13-year veteran of the DeKalb County
Police
Department. She was separated from her husband and had just found out he was
dating Samara and wanted to get even, according to officials.
"I felt that they were here to protect us and not to harm us and for a
police
officer to do this to us, it just kind of violated our trust,” said Barcon.
Especially since Shover used the Georgia Crime Information Center to look up
Samara’s personal information -- her address, birthdate, tag and picture.
Every
officer signs a form acknowledging that that is a crime.
"The citizen’s trust is very important to us. That's big for us,” said
Deputy
Chief Michael Burrows.
Burrows recommended the five week suspension and says Shover's actions were
extremely severe but criminal charges aren’t necessary.
[If this was an animal liberation activist, this would not be the official
story. - Volodya]
"Handling it internally was the best route to take. It would serve no
legitimate
or useful purpose to pile on. We feel that we got the employee's attention,”
said Burrows.
"We didn't want her to be fired, we felt like that punishment was just and
hopefully it's a warning to others," said Barcon.
In her statement to Internal Affairs, Shover said she has since gotten
counseling to help her deal with her divorce. Her ex-husband is also a
DeKalb
County police officer.
http://tinyurl.com/yotdx8
Cop's lawyer: Racist cartoon was prank on his client
Narcotics officer alleges an unidentified colleague planted stickers on
his locker
By WENDY RUDERMAN
Philadelphia Daily News
rudermw at phillynews.com 215-854-2860
SCOTT SCHWEIZER, the narcotics officer accused of keeping racist
propaganda inside his locker, was the victim of a "practical joke," his
attorney claimed yesterday as new details about the case emerged.
Schweizer's attorney, Allan J. Sagot, acknowledged that police superiors
had found not one - but two - inflammatory stickers affixed to the
inside of his client's locker:
One sticker said, "White Power." The other depicted a cartoon of a man,
half as an officer in uniform and half as a Klansman, with the words
"Blue By Day - White By Night."
But the stickers didn't belong to Schweizer, Sagot said.
Sagot said another officer within the Narcotics Strike Force slapped the
stickers on Schweizer's locker on separate occasions. In both instances,
Schweizer ripped the sticker off his locker and quickly stuck it on the
inside without thinking, Sagot said.
"We know that the stickers were placed on the outside of his locker by a
person unknown to us," Sagot said. "I believe it was a practical joke by
one of his fellow officers."
When asked why Schweizer had not thrown the stickers in the trash, Sagot
said, "It's a wonderful 20-20-hindsight question . . . He just said he
wanted to get [the stickers] out of sight, so he threw them inside his
locker. He was in a hurry, and he never really spent much time thinking
about it."
The Internal Affairs Bureau is investigating the origin of the stickers
and exploring whether the case is limited to Schweizer or somehow broader.
Police sources familiar with the probe said that investigators had
dusted Schweizer's locker for fingerprints and that only his prints
turned up. Sagot declined to discuss the investigation further, saying
it was ongoing.
William Colarulo, chief inspector in the Internal Affairs Bureau, said
the investigation was nearly finished.
"I only see a few interviews that need to be done," Colarulo said
yesterday. "I think it should wrap up relatively soon."
Yesterday, Barry Morrison, regional director of the Anti-Defamation
League, wrote a letter to Police Commissioner Charles H. Ramsey
expressing concern.
"You can understand why we would be troubled to learn of such a cartoon
seemingly showing sympathy for the Ku Klux Klan, appearing in the locker
of a police officer," Morrison wrote. "We are writing not only to voice
our concern, but to ask for clarification."
In an interview, Morrison cautioned against jumping to conclusions. He
said the "Blue By Day - White By Night" phrase and the imagery of a
police officer juxtaposed with a Klansman is typically associated with
extremist groups that are anti-police. For example, an anarchist punk
band called MDC, sometimes calling itself "Millions of Dead Cops," used
a version of the image on an album in the 1980s.
"Typically, people who use this imagery are not admiring the police but
denigrating the police and saying, in their view, that the police and
the Klan are cut from the same evil cloth," Morrison said.
Yesterday, Rochelle Bilal, president of the Guardian Civic League, which
represents 3,000 African-American officers, said: "We are appalled by
that type of material on city property and on or in somebody's locker.
However it got there, it still was on the property. As for a practical
joke, we African-Americans are not laughing."
The internal case against Schweizer began earlier this month, after an
African-American officer in his unit spotted the stickers inside his
locker and complained to superiors. Schweizer was removed from the elite
narcotics surveillance unit and put on desk duty at police headquarters.
He faces discipline ranging from a reprimand to dismissal, if
administrative charges are brought against him.
Schweizer is not likely to face criminal charges because possession of
such stickers is not a crime, legal experts said.
Meanwhile, defense lawyers across the city began to strategize on behalf
of convicted and suspected drug dealers arrested by Schweizer.
Schweizer, 33, who joined the force 10 years ago, orchestrated dozens of
undercover drug busts in predominantly African-American neighborhoods
while serving on the strike force. Schweizer often testified in court as
a witness for prosecutors.
"It seems like Christmas Eve for defense attorneys like me," Michael
Coard said.
The allegations against Schweizer, if true, "open up an ugly and smelly
can of racist worms because this thing can go much, much deeper," Coard
said.
Coard, a Philadelphia-based defense lawyer, said he expects dozens, if
not hundreds, of criminal defendants to file appeals or seek
post-conviction relief. Coard said defense lawyers could request a new
trial based on "newly discovered evidence in terms of a failed
opportunity to cross-examine a key witness as to his bias or motive to
lie on black defendants."
If a judge accepts that argument, the floodgates could open and hundreds
of defendants could get their cases reheard, Coard said.
Troy Wilson, chairman of the criminal-justice section of the
Philadelphia Bar Association, said the investigation of Schweizer
presents not only an opportunity for defendants sitting in jail, but a
problem for the Philadelphia District Attorney's Office, which must
decide how to proceed with pending cases in which Schweizer was the
arresting officer.
"Let's say I'm a prosecutor: Do I want to take the risk of losing a case
by putting someone like that on the witness stand?" Wilson said. "I
doubt it."
Wilson said that if the D.A.'s office is "crazy enough to want to use
[Schweizer] as a witness in active cases . . . one of the first things
that I'm going to do is cross-examine him. I could hold up a copy of the
front page of the Daily News and say, 'Isn't it true that this came from
your locker and who did you lock up in my case? An African-American male.' "
Cathie Abookire, spokeswoman for D.A. Lynne Abraham, declined to comment
on the matter yesterday.
http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/religion_theseeker/2008/03/whos-to-judge-h.html
Who's to judge Holy Name protesters?
Cardinal Francis George has long opposed politics at the communion rail. But
Sunday’s anti-war protest at the start of his Easter homily spotlighted a
frustrated faction in the Roman Catholic church who believe committed
Catholics must do more than preach and pray for peace.
Chicago police charged six young protesters Sunday with felony criminal
defacement of property and two counts of simple battery for spattering
parishioners’ clothes with sticky red stage blood. Five of the protesters
are being held in lieu of $25,000 bail. The sixth, who served time in prison
for illegally entering a U.S. military installation, received $35,000 bail
A friend of the activists, who called themselves Catholic Schoolgirls
Against the War, told the Tribune that he hoped the marred Easter service
might inspire parishioners to consider the Muslim holy days that have been
marred by violence in Iraq.
Dan Daley, a founding member of Call to Action, a Chicago-based Catholic
activist group, said that while calls for social justice are important, they
must be carefully considered when they disrupt the worship experience.
"Peace and justice is part of what we believe. We always need to be
challenging each other in the church to do more," Daley said. "[Where] very
much depends on the individual situation and who they hope to communicate
with."
The peace movement is especially thriving on Catholic college campuses.
Since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq,
more colleges and universities have implemented programs to teach students
how to develop a culture of peace. Some believe peaceful activism requires
civil disobedience or political statements in sacred settings.
But Gerard Powers at the Joan B. Kroc Institute for International Peace
Studies said the sacred space is not the right place for a political
protest.
"They can be applauded for their concern about a critically important
issue," he said. "But their protest I think was misdirected. The focus
should be on the policy makers who got us into this war, not on the bishops
who opposed the intervention ... It’s really a violation of the sacred
space."
George, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, which has
called for a responsible transition in Iraq, has been adamantly opposed to
mixing politics with the Eucharist. For that reason, he has instructed
priests to deny communion to parishioners who participate in what has become
a traditional gay rights demonstration on Pentecost Sunday.
The Eucharist should not become a political forum, he has said, an argument
he also has used to explain why bishops will not put out a blanket decree
for priests to deny communion to pro-choice politicians.
http://chicago.indymedia.org/newswire/display/81859/index.php
Holy Name 6 Update #4: Bail Has Been Posted for All Prisoners!
As of 5:00 pm this evening, bond has been posted for Ephran, Mercedes, and
Regan—the remaining three people arrested Sunday morning.
Around 2 pm this afternoon, bond was posted for Ephran Ramirez. Two hours
later, supporters were on their way to the Cook County Courthouse to post
for the remaining two defendants, Mercedes Phinaih and Regan Maher. All
three will be released later this evening. Everyone's delighted that we will
be seeing them soon.
However, our work isn't finished yet. In order to return our friends to
freedom, some very generous souls have fronted the money for several of the
bonds. We have promised these folks that they will be repaid, and that runs
into several thousands of dollars. And posting bond isn't the end of the
fund-raising; there will be lawyer's fees and restitution costs.
We'd like to extend our heartfelt thanks to everyone who has stood up in
solidarity and thrown down with cash! This is just the beginning for Ryne,
Regan, Donte, Mercedes, Ephran, and Angela, but we couldn't have gotten them
out this quickly without your help.
Peace and Solidarity!
-The Holy Name 6 Support Team
http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/...cle3193480.ece
>From The Times
January 16, 2008
Microsoft seeks patent for office 'spy' software
Alexi Mostrous and David Brown
Microsoft is developing Big Brother-style software capable of remotely
monitoring a worker's productivity, physical wellbeing and
competence.
The Times has seen a patent application filed by the company for a
computer system that links workers to their computers via wireless
sensors that measure their metabolism. The system would allow managers
to monitor employees' performance by measuring their heart rate,
body temperature, movement, facial expression and blood pressure. Unions
said they fear that employees could be dismissed on the basis of a
computer's assessment of their physiological state.
Technology allowing constant monitoring of workers was previously
limited to pilots, firefighters and Nasa astronauts. This is believed to
be the first time a company has proposed developing such software for
mainstream workplaces.
Microsoft submitted a patent application in the US for a "unique
monitoring system" that could link workers to their computers.
Wireless sensors could read "heart rate, galvanic skin response,
EMG, brain signals, respiration rate, body temperature, movement facial
movements, facial expressions and blood pressure", the application
states.
How computer spy will monitor everything
Even bosses need to look over their shoulder
Film rental service puts MacWorld in a spin
The system could also "automatically detect frustration or stress in
the user" and "offer and provide assistance accordingly".
Physical changes to an employee would be matched to an individual
psychological profile based on a worker's weight, age and health. If
the system picked up an increase in heart rate or facial expressions
suggestive of stress or frustration, it would tell management that he
needed help.
The Information Commissioner, civil liberties groups and privacy lawyers
strongly criticised the potential of the system for "taking the idea
of monitoring people at work to a new level". Hugh Tomlinson, QC, an
expert on data protection law at Matrix Chambers, told The Times:
"This system involves intrusion into every single aspect of the
lives of the employees. It raises very serious privacy issues."
Peter Skyte, a national officer for the union Unite, said: "This
system takes the idea of monitoring people at work to a new level with a
new level of invasiveness but in a very old-fashioned way because it
monitors what is going in rather than the results." The Information
Commissioner's Office said: "Imposing this level of intrusion on
employees could only be justified in exceptional circumstances."
The US Patent Office confirmed last night that the application was
published last month, 18 months after being filed. Patent lawyers said
that it could be granted within a year.
Microsoft last night refused to comment on the application, but said:
"We have over 7,000 patents worldwide and we are proud of the
quality of these patents and the innovations they represent. As a
general practice, we do not typically comment on pending patent
applications because claims made in the application may be modified
through the approval process."
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,22814674-5001028,00.html?from=public_rss
Tasers a form of torture, says UN
>From correspondents in Geneva
November 24, 2007
TASER electronic stun guns are a form of torture that can kill, a UN
committee has declared after several recent deaths in North America.
"The use of these weapons causes acute pain, constituting a form of
torture,'' the UN's Committee against Torture said.
"In certain cases, they can even cause death, as has been shown by
reliable studies and recent real-life events,'' the committee of 10
experts said.
Three men, all in their early 20s, were reported to have died in the
United States this week, days after a Polish man died at Vancouver
airport after being Tasered by Canadian police.
The man, Robert Dziekanski, 40, fell to the ground and died after the
police officers piled on top of him.
There have been three deaths in Canada after the use of Tasers over
the past five weeks.
The company that makes the weapons has said that similar deaths have
been shown by "medical science and forensic analysis'' to be
"attributable to other factors and not the low-energy electrical
discharge of the Taser".
The UN committee made its comments in recommendations to Portugal,
which has bought the newest Taser X26 stun gun for use by police.
Portugal "should consider giving up the use of the Taser X26,'' as its
use can have a grave physical and mental impact on those targeted,
which violates the UN's Convention against Torture, the experts said.
-------------------------------------------------------------
BUFFALO FIELD CAMPAIGN (BFC)
P.O. BOX 957
WEST YELLOWSTONE, MONTANA 59758
406-646-0070
bfc-media at wildrockies.org
http://www.buffalofieldcampaign.org
* PRESS RELEASE*
YELLOWSTONE NATIONAL PARK CAPTURES 53 OF AMERICA'S LAST WILD BISON
Park Intends to Slaughter Without Testing; Calves May Be Sent to
Experimental Quarantine Facility
For Immediate Release, February 8, 2008
Contact: Buffalo Field Campaign, Stephany Seay 406-646-0070
GARDINER, MONTANA - Yellowstone National Park officials captured 53
wild American bison this morning inside the Stephens Creek bison trap
located within Yellowstone National Park's borders. The captured
bison are members of the last wild, genetically intact population
existing in the United States, and number fewer than 4,600. Most, if
not all, will be sent to slaughter without being tested for
brucellosis antibodies.
"The National Park Service is caving in to the unreasonable demands
of Montana's livestock industry at the expense of an American icon,
our national heritage," said Stephany Seay, media coordinator for
Buffalo Field Campaign.
The bison were captured for following their natural migratory
instincts and walking onto habitat that is privately owned by the
Church Universal & Triumphant (CUT). CUT land hosts fewer than 250
head of cattle. Wild bison are also refused access to publicly
owned Gallatin National Forest lands adjacent to Yellowstone National
Park and CUT property. In the winter months, grasslands in the Park
are obscured by deep snow and bison and other wild ungulates venture
to lower-elevation habitat where they find critical forage necessary
for survival.
Yellowstone National Park officials said they will send the adult
bison to slaughter without first testing them for exposure to
brucellosis.
Bison calves may be tested for brucellosis antibodies. If testing
occurs, those testing negative for antibodies will be sent to a
state-federal quarantine feasibility study facility, while the rest
will be slaughtered. More than half of the calves previously
captured and quarantined by the government have been slaughtered,
while the rest are being raised in pens like livestock.
Cattle interests claim such actions are necessary to prevent the
spread of brucellosis, a livestock disease introduced to native
wildlife in the early 20th century, from wild bison to cattle.
However, there has never been a documented case of wild bison
transmitting brucellosis to cattle.
"In one day the National Park Service is sending more than half as
many bison to slaughter as have been killed during Montana's entire
three-month bison hunt," said Mike Mease, co-founder of Buffalo Field
Campaign. "When will the Park Service understand that they are in
charge of protecting our wildlife, not protecting cattle interests?"
2,120 wild American bison have been killed or otherwise removed from
the remaining wild population since 2000 under actions carried out by
the Interagency Bison Management Plan (IBMP), as well as state and
treaty hunts. The IBMP is a joint state-federal plan that prohibits
wild bison from migrating to lands outside of Yellowstone's
boundaries.
Wild American bison are a migratory species native to vast expanses
of North America and are ecologically extinct everywhere in the
United States outside of Yellowstone National Park.
Buffalo Field Campaign strongly opposes the Interagency Bison
Management Plan and maintains that wild bison should be allowed to
naturally and fully recover themselves throughout their historic
native range, especially on public lands.
Buffalo Field Campaign is the only group working in the field, every
day, to stop the slaughter of the wild American buffalo. Volunteers
defend the buffalo and their native habitat and advocate for their
lasting protection. Buffalo Field Campaign has proposed real
alternatives to the current mismanagement of American bison that can
be viewed at
http://www.buffalofieldcampaign.org/actnow/solutions.html. For more
information, video clips and photos visit:
http://www.buffalofieldcampaign.org.
A Sickening Slaughter
http://www.counterpunch.org/jackson03012008.html
Why is Yellowstone Destroying Its Bison Herd?
By BOB JACKSON
March 1 / 2, 2008
I spent 30 years in Yellowstone protecting its resources, which I
carried out with all my heart. Yellowstone, for most of those years,
enthusiastically supported me whenever I brought a poacher to court.
But the black and white of whether a person is a poacher is not the
same as managing the greater population of animals in the Park.
Yellowstone has always been prone to politics. But due to its
mission, Yellowstone has always led the country, with science, in
countering the detrimental political influence imposed on Park
resources. Employees always rose to the occasion because they had the
deep conviction to protect the Park's resources. But not now with the
bison issue. I wish one could simply say Yellowstone has rolled over
and given up, but it is much worse. I see the Park actively ensuring
the status quo of ignorance. Yellowstone IS CULPABLE in the
destruction of its bison.
I had heard of the elk reductions in the 50's and 60's. A few of the
old time rangers, during evenings shared in backcountry cabins, would
confide in me. None liked what they had been ordered to do. I was
told the Model 70 Winchester 30-06, the very same one I slipped into
my saddle scabbard for all those years of boundary patrol, had kill
over 2000 elk in Yellowstone. But those days of unenlightened and
exploitive management were over! I was proud to carry the same gun
used to kill so many Park elk, because now it protected them.
No one thought Yellowstone would ever again stoop to allow such abuse
of its resources. Black and white has blurred into shades of gray.
The best Yellowstone administrators can offer is backroom whispering
to non profits telling them to save their bison. Where is the honor
and conviction of these public servants to stand up for what is
right? If they had it, there would be a desperate search for answers,
as was done for Yellowstone's elk in the 60's. Yellowstone had a lot
of years to address this bison issue and has unequivocally failed to
take the lead.
There is so much Yellowstone can do to fight for their bison. To
start with, they need to acknowledge bison herds are composed of
families and extended families, the same as elephants. Then they
could focus studies showing the effects to the remnants of these
families after they are broken up in the Park corrals. After
determining family order, they also would realize each bison has a
role within its family. Therein lies the solution to the brucellosis
issue. For example, elimination of scout bulls, the Jim Bridgers and
Kit Carsons of the bison world, upon entering unoccupied (ranch)
lands, would solve the problem of bison families expanding into areas
of concern.
Culpability comes from Yellowstone's administrators lobbying against
all but perfunctory University research to study these family groups.
Why? It was something too far out of their knowledge grasp and thus
became threatening to in-house status quo.
Second, Yellowstone needs to acknowledge the Mountain Bison culture
of the non-migratory MirrorñPelican herd still exists as a distinct
functioning entity. The matriarchal segments of this herd are much
warier than the introduced Plains bison and would never occupy areas
where humans habituate. Protecting these bison from human contact in
the summer means expansion of this native herd and at the same time
be assured these animals will not leave the Park. Why doesn't
Yellowstone acknowledge this unique herd? Because they would have to
reassess then rewrite their Bison Management Plan. Include in this
the fear of the inevitable demands to remove the introduced Plains Bison.
More culpability comes in because Yellowstone had already been given
this information about Mountain Bison. They have done nothing but
give precautionary research lip service to it. Of course if they wait
long enough, biologists "in-the-knowî can then claim it as their own
"discoveryî. All this stalling, while our last native bison herd is
fractured and destroyed.
Third, Yellowstone is covering up abuse of bison at their Stevens
Creek Corrals. The Humane Society asked to film these corrals because
they had heard of injuries and deaths at this facility. Even though
no animals were around when filming was to be done, one excuse led to
another until finally the Park's Public Affairs Office had to come
out and say NO. The Humane Society has a long history of cooperation
and is welcome in other National Parks as a monitor. Not Yellowstone!
Nor is the media now permitted to film corralling activities-- in the
name of animal welfare.
Culpability also comes from Yellowstone not questioning the off limit
policy of filming carcasses after shipment of animals from
Yellowstone. But with initial reports of massive bruising and broken
ribs wouldn't administrators, in the name of humane treatment, insist
on independent monitoring? They do not, and thus they are culpable.
I wish I could simply say Yellowstone doesn't have the backbone for a
fight like they did with 50's elk reductions or eliminating garbage
dumps. But what Yellowstone has allowed to happen on their soil
today, to my "alma mater,î is sickening. I ask the rank and file in
Yellowstone; rise above the fear of job retaliation and remember why
you joined the Park Service.
To cower in the closets of your Ranger Stations, maintenance sheds,
and Mammoth administration buildings may secure careers, but every
year of compromise means adding another year of personal slow death.
Is it worth it? Lack of initiative by park administrators to have
employees' concerns heard and documented lets employees know their
"leadersî are more like political lemmings following Washington pied
pipers. Perhaps "political servantî is more appropriate than public servant.
For the public, I ask you to question the Park on these
culpabilities. In fact question my statements. It is the best way to
come up with personal conviction. Your questions means substantiating
facts are disclosed. The cover up of inhumane treatment especially
needs to be addressed.
>From the beginning, the interagency bison committee insulated
themselves by writing in "experimental handlingî language, making
them immune to Montana State's animal humane treatment laws. There is
nothing going on at Yellowstone's Steven's Creek corrals today to
justify being above the law, unless one believes in the validity of
Holocaust experiments.
I ask Yellowstone and any of the public who cares about Yellowstone
to take the bull by the horns. Let's rectify what's happening to our
Park and its wildlife.
PSYCHO COPS Strip Search Innocent Woman - part 1 of 2
http://youtube.com:80/watch?v=a1yUsYIk2EM
PSYCHO COPS Strip Search Innocent Woman - part 2 of 2
http://youtube.com:80/watch?v=iQ6Lsqmf9yM&feature=related
Man's Wife Attacked, Stripped Naked and Abused By Police
http://youtube.com/watch?v=6YBYje0sCkI&feature=related
Woman TASED At Best Buy
http://www.cfnews13.com/News/Local/2007/12/20/tased_at_best_buy.html?refresh=1
Video showing officers arresting Carol Ann Gotbaum at Phoenix's Sky Harbor
Airport just before she DIED WHILE HANDCUFFED in a holding cell.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/10/04/airport.death/index.html#cnnSTCText
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/10/05/airport.death/index.html?iref=mpstoryview#cnnSTCVideo
Speeding Ticket Taser in Utah
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMaMYL_shxc
Student Tasered: Judge Napolitano Is Outraged!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yKppgYEVsis
University of Florida student Tasered at Kerry forum
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6bVa6jn4rpE
Woman Tasered / Police Brutality
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rM6x2XeMiU
Alexandria, La. Police Brutality
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lx6Ve9RXPy8
Policemen Joking About a Taser Attack
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESzvBL0cXUc&NR=1
Pittsburgh Police Taser
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wUO0RZbTsgg&feature=related
miami police taser protesters
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1LCQgREv5b8&NR=1
More information about the Onthebarricades
mailing list