21 May 2007

what's going on here (part XXV)...

can someone, please, explain...

Why are more of our rights and protections being assailed by Czar George and his ministers even more?

1. Gonzales proposing new Orwellian thought crimes law
* Criminalize "attempting" to infringe copyright. Federal law currently punishes not-for-profit copyright infringement with between 1 and 10 years in prison, but there has to be actual infringement that takes place....

* Permit more wiretaps for piracy investigations. Wiretaps would be authorized for investigations of Americans who are "attempting" to infringe copyrights....

* Allow computers to be seized more readily. Specifically, property such as a PC "intended to be used in any manner" to commit a copyright crime would be subject to forfeiture, including civil asset forfeiture....

* Require Homeland Security to alert the Recording Industry Association of America. That would happen when CDs with "unauthorized fixations of the sounds, or sounds and images, of a live musical performance" are attempted to be imported.

All of this would be under the domain of The Department of Homeland Security. It would mean that even if you watch a video of a song or TV program on YouTube you could be at risk of having your computer siezed, your telephone tapped, or your thoughts on a blog be brought up for scrutiny. maybe czar was too mild on my part? is Big Brother more appropriate?

2. Bush Anoints Himself as the Insurer of Constitutional Government in Emergency
With scarcely a mention in the mainstream media, President Bush has ordered up a plan for responding to a catastrophic attack.

In a new National Security Presidential Directive, Bush lays out his plans for dealing with a “catastrophic emergency.”
Under that plan, he entrusts himself with leading the entire federal government, not just the Executive Branch. And he gives himself the responsibility “for ensuring constitutional government.”

He laid this all out in a document entitled “National Security Presidential Directive/NSPD 51” and “Homeland Security Presidential Directive/HSPD-20.”

and from the document itself:
Definitions

(b) "Catastrophic Emergency" means any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions;

Implementation Actions

(6) The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government. In order to advise and assist the President in that function, the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism (APHS/CT) is hereby designated as the National Continuity Coordinator. The National Continuity Coordinator, in coordination with the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs (APNSA), without exercising directive authority, shall coordinate the development and implementation of continuity policy for executive departments and agencies. The Continuity Policy Coordination Committee (CPCC), chaired by a Senior Director from the Homeland Security Council staff, designated by the National Continuity Coordinator, shall be the main day-to-day forum for such policy coordination.

If I'm not mistaken, isn't this called martial law? Isn't there absolutely no mention of it in the US Constititution? Hasn't it been understood for the last two centuries+ that only Congress can suspend habeas corpus, though it never has. Didn't President Lincoln suspend habeas corpus during the Civil War and hasn't Czar George, in effect, done it with his war on terrorism? AND didn't the Supreme Court in ex parte Milligan (71 US 2 [1866]) declare that what Mr. Lincoln did was unconstitutional? Well, yes, I think it did with these exact words:
"The statement of this proposition shows its importance, for, if true, republican government is a failure, and there is an end of liberty regulated by law. Martial law established on such a basis destroys every guarantee of the Constitution, [emphasis added] and effectually renders the "military independent of and superior to the civil power" — the attempt to do which by the King of Great Britain was deemed by our fathers such an offence that they assigned it to the world as one of the causes which impelled them to declare their independence. Civil liberty and this kind of martial law cannot endure {125} together; the antagonism is irreconcilable, and, in the conflict, one or the other must perish [Ex Parte Milligan, 71 U.S. 2 (4 Wall.), (1866)

what other damage can this man and his ministers do in the next




3. GAO Says Homeland Security is Breaking Privacy Laws
Washington - The Homeland Security Department is breaking the law by not telling the public exactly how personal information is used to screen international travelers, including Americans, congressional investigators said Wednesday.

One of the screening programs at issue is a computer-based system called the Automated Targeting System that is used by the Customs and Border Protection agency to rate the risk posed by travelers coming to and from the United States.

In its report, the Government Accountability Office said the department is not in full compliance with privacy laws that require agencies to tell the public how the government uses their personal information.

"CBP's current disclosures do not fully inform the public about all of its systems for prescreening aviation passenger information," the GAO report said. "Nor do they explain how CBP combines data in the prescreening process, as required by law."

The GAO, Congress' auditing agency, also said Customs has not publicly disclosed all the sources of data it reviews on passengers, including information obtained from commercial sources. It did not explain what those commercial sources may be and government officials declined to comment.

And what does the Czar's people have to say? "The GAO in this case is woefully uninformed and I think that Congress and the public are being poorly served by this report," Knocke said. Well of course it's uninformed! You haven't told anyone how it works and what effect it has. That's what the report says, stoopid...


Sources: 1. Americablog; 2. The Progressive & The White House: News & Policies; 3. Truthout;

No comments: