Patriot Act

Interrogation and Rights

This entry was posted in ashcroft bush Constitution Domestic Terrorism Libertarianism Patriot Act US Politics War on Terrorism on by

From a recent Newsweek article:

The United States figures it can get plenty out of the newly captured Chemical Ali. But how? And are these �interrogation� techniques being readied for American citizens?

Apparently they are already being used on Americans. Read the whole article and then think again about the closing paragraph:

If the courts buy this line of argument, then we Americans can kiss our sweet rights goodbye. And reading the admiral�s brief, you have to ask yourself if that isn�t really the goal: to give the president and his people the power to treat all Americans like Jos� Padilla, unless and until we give the answers expected of us.

Via Perverse Action Memory.

Ashcroft Tour

This entry was posted in ashcroft bush Democracy Domestic Terrorism Election 2004 Judiciary Patriot Act War on Terrorism on by

Pejman argues that John Conyers’ recent criticism of Ashcroft’s Patriot Act tour is too much:

I understand and respect those who disagree with the USA Patriot Act, but this goes beyond a mere difference of opinion. Conyers is stating that Ashcroft can’t even talk about the measure in speeches across the country. This is just ridiculous, and Conyers’s position is not saved by claiming that Ashcroft is “lobbying.” How can the activity qualify as lobbying when the Patriot Act was passed nearly two years ago?

I do not know if there is legislation that supports Conyers position but if there is I do not like it any more than similar laws (or regulations) that, for example, prohibit recipients of federal funds from providing information on, say condom use, to sexually active clients.
We thrive on a free flow of information and opinions, even information and opinions that we disagree with. Ashcroft should get to talk and he should make a choice to talk to the larger community not just law enforcement folks in closed or semi-closed sessions.
Is Ashcroft lobbying and does Pejman’s argument that the Patriot Act was passed two years ago so it can’t be lobbying hold up? Maybe not. I think that Ashcroft is concerned that congress may move to make changes he does not want. Why else does he, for example, make stops in the home district of the only GOP congressman who voted against it?

U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft is coming to Boise on Monday to talk up the Patriot Act in the home district of the only GOP congressman who spoke against it.
Ashcroft kicked off a monthlong speaking tour of more than a dozen cities this week to deflect growing opposition to parts of the Patriot Act.

Trying to deflect growing opposition may not be lobbying but it does walk just a little bit like it.
The other thing Ashcroft is undoubtably trying to do is build support for the pending Victory Act. Ashcroft is lobbying just as bush is currently on the campaign trail (is his re-election committee paying for this?). They are doing what public officials have done for ever and should continue to do even if we disagree with them: make their cases to the people.

The Iraq Pitch and the Patriot Act

This entry was posted in Constitution Domestic Terrorism Iraq Judiciary Patriot Act War on Terrorism on by

William Rasberry doesn’t want us to be blinded by uraniumgate:

The flap over how the falsehood about uranium purchases from Niger made it into the president’s State of the Union message should not obscure what for me is the most troubling fact: Key members of the Bush administration, convinced in their hearts that America needed to destroy Saddam Hussein, thought it reasonable to exaggerate the threat and deliberately stretch the facts in order to sell the American people on that necessity.

Read his column to see why he thinks this is a pattern of behaviour.
Via Talkleft.