Domestic Terrorism

Freedom’s Just Another Word

This entry was posted in bush Constitution Domestic Terrorism Libertarianism US Foreign Policy World Affairs on by

In his remarks at the Republican National Committee Presidential Gala on October 8, 2003 bush says:

But the war on terror is more than just chasing down the killers or holding tyrants to account. The war on terror — our security comes in the war on terror from the spread of human liberty. (Applause.) See, free nations do not develop weapons of mass destruction. (Emphasis added) Free nations do not intimidate their neighbors. Free nations are peaceful nations.

bush claims to mean what he says so just how does he explain this:

Yet the Department of Energy is spending an astonishing $6.5 billion on nuclear weapons this year, and President Bush is requesting $6.8 billion more for next year and a total of $30 billion over the following four years. This does not include his much-cherished missile-defense program, by the way. This is simply for the maintenance, modernization, development, and production of nuclear bombs and warheads.

I still looking for definitions of “free” and “weapons of mass destruction” that eliminate the dissonance.
bush quote found via Dubya Speak and the Slate article is via Niall Kennedy.

Public Recording

This entry was posted in Capitalism Constitution Domestic Terrorism Economics Intellectual Property Law Enforcement Libertarianism on by

Max asks:

Can anyone explain by what legal authority a U.S. Marshall can order a journalist to erase a tape recording of statements made in a public place? If only someone with legal expertise had been on the scene.

Eugene Volokh considered the same event and says:

If this report is accurate, then I don’t see any legal justification for the marshal’s demand, or the marshal’s seizing the tape recorder (which therefore sounds like a Fourth Amendment violation to me). To my knowledge, there’s no law — it would presumably have to be a Mississippi law — prohibiting tape recording of public events, even ones on private property.

This practice seems to be common in other contexts. For instance, theater and concerts come immediately to mind. How is Scalia’s practice different from, for example, Bob Dylan’s?
Note, I in no way support Scalia’s practice. He is a civil servant and as such should be 100% transparent in all work and public activities.
On the other hand, I think musicians are being foolish when they prohibit recording. Of course, in many cases (not Dylan) it would take only a few concert recordings to circulate to expose the complete lack of creativity they bring to the stage.

Wasting Millions, Earning Billions

This entry was posted in Capitalism Constitution Culture Domestic Terrorism Economics Law Law Enforcement Libertarianism Regulation Taxation on by

First, via Hit & Run I learn that the american taliban bushies are not only running a ridiculous deficit but that they are also wasting millions of the dollars that they don’t have chasing down willing folks selling product to willing buyers. Come on feds, if there are assaults, rapes, fraud, extortion, etc., go after’m otherwise leave the people you are supposed to serve alone.
And, then I learn via Boing Boing that the guy who may or may not be the world’s richest man makes a portion of his billions selling furniture to the folks willingly buying product from the folks the feds are harrassing.
Ahhhh, the webs of commerce.

Nope, No Transparency Here

This entry was posted in bush Constitution Democracy Domestic Terrorism Election 2004 Federal Government Libertarianism War on Terrorism on by

The bushies will not release to the 9/11 Commission the complete text of rice’s preempted 9/11 speech. Josh Marshall tries to understand why not:

Unless the argument is that we can’t let our enemies know the depth of the poor judgment displayed by the president’s national security team it is searchingly hard to fathom what possible national security issue could be implicated by handing over the speech since it was — do we have to say it? — a speech! A speech for public consumption.

And just to be clear:

Trent Duffy, a spokesman for the White House, said only: �The White House is working with the commission to ensure that it has access to what it needs to do its job.�

These folks must have a different understanding of the commission’s job then the rest of us.

Privacy, Forget It

This entry was posted in CAPPS II Constitution Domestic Terrorism FCC Federal Government Internet Law Enforcement Libertarianism Patriot Act Privacy War on Terrorism on by

The US National Security Agency apparently played a major role in the arrest of 9 folks in Britain and 1 in Canada on charges of planning a terrorist act and belonging to a terrorist group. The key: an intercepted email message:

“That’s the first admission I’ve actually seen that they actually monitor Internet traffic. I assumed they did, but no one ever admitted it,” Mr. Farber said.
Officials at the NSA could not be reached for comment. But U.S. authorities are uniquely positioned to monitor international Internet and telecommunications traffic because many of the world’s international gateways are located in their country. And once that electronic traffic touches an American computer — an e-mail message, a request for a website or an Internet-based phone call, for instance — it is routinely monitored by NSA spies.
“Foreign traffic that comes through the U.S. is subject to U.S. laws, and the NSA has a perfect right to monitor all Internet traffic,” said Mr. Farber, who has also been a technical adviser to the U.S. Federal Communications Commission.

Uhhh, no they do not have that right and to the extent that there are laws allowing this behavior they need to be severly curtailed if not eliminated. There is too great an opportunity for abuse and, at minimum, these searches should not be allowed without probable cause. This does not appear to be the case at NSA.
Frankly, I would have expected Farber, who sits on the board of the Electronic Frontier Foundation to express a little more concern about this.