Monthly Archives: September 2003


More CAPPS II

Barry Steinhardt, director of the ACLU’s Program on Technology and Liberty, summed up CAPPs II thusly:

CAPPS II would for the first time put the government in the business of conducting regular background checks on everyday citizens. Not only would the government conduct searches and evaluations of individuals’ past history and records, but it would generate a “risk score” for each person. The social and political consequences of this new role for government are far-reaching and truly frightening.

Read the transcript of the Washington Post online forum he participated in here.
Via beSpacific.


Where is the Foreign Aid

Gwynn Dyer suggests the real reason many countries are responding slowly to bush’s ‘plea’ for help with Iraq:

Nobody talks openly about this, but many governments are also privately debating whether they want to help save the Bush administration from the consequences of its own folly.
Without a lot of military and financial help that can only come via the UN, Bush may be dragged down to defeat by the Iraq war in the November 2004 election. With the extra troops and money, he might contain the problem enough to survive. But, they ask themselves, do we really want that?

xymphora enumerates five additional reasons.


Late Night Reading

Jesse at Pandagon would like to hear something other then the usual pablum from bush on 9/11. Something that will truly “dignify the deaths of 3000 people.”
The 51st Carnival of the Vanities is up at Solport. Plenty of good reading.
Greg Easterbrook and Jacob Levy discuss the revised Oath of Allegiance that new citizens must recite. Luckily natural born citizens do not have to commit to this kind of stuff. Really, I’d like to hear more about the government’s commitments.
Good Night!


Patriot Act II or?

Whatever it is going to be called bush is stumping for it. At Quanitco today, he made a pitch for increased use of administrative supoenas, elimination of bail for terrorist suspects and additional death penalty provisions. Part of his rationale being something like if we can have these things for certain other crimes why not terrorism. For instance, with regard to administrative supoenas:

They’re used in a wide range of criminal and civil matters, including health care fraud and child abuse cases.

Perhaps they shouldn’t be used in any situation. It strikes me that probably cause approved by a judge ought to be the minimum standard.
I don’t think anyone outside bush’s cabal has seen what they plan to send to congress. Expect things to go less well for whatever it is then the roll over and play dead act that congress did for Patriot Act 1.
Talkleft (and I’m sure others) has been working this heavily. See here (the most recent as of this writing) and previous posts.