Capitol Grilling: NEWS - Are we a Police State Yet?

You are not logged in. [Log In] Main Site » Forums » Discussion » The Grill 2009 » NEWS - Are we a Police State Yet?

Page 1 of 8

Topic Options

Rate This Topic

#113738 - 12-18-02 07:35 PM NEWS - Are we a Police State Yet?
zeroflux zeroflux Administrator Registered: 03-11-01 Posts: 6175 Loc: Arlington, Virginia	Important: Please Read I am using this thread to keep a log of various reports about actions and incidents pertaining to civil rights, the Patriot Act and the larger topic of whether or not we are transforming into a society governed by a police state. This thread is not meant for discussion, but rather to assemble a record of news stories pertaining to the subject matter. Feel free to post relevant article excerpts along with links and brief comments. Any posts falling outside the above listed parameters will be deleted. This thread is not for engaging other users in discussion or posting commentary or reactions to posted news items, or for posting personal commentary not accompanied by a news item. (no duplicate posts for the same news item, please.)
Top

#113739 - 12-18-02 07:38 PM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
zeroflux zeroflux Administrator Registered: 03-11-01 Posts: 6175 Loc: Arlington, Virginia	Secret Service Intercepted Michael Moore’s Email and Searched His Home Without A Warrant by Tom Flocco December 17, 2002 In a not-so-cryptic “message” eventually intended for all U.S. citizens -- but likely one very famous American in particular, three armed U.S. Secret Service agents and a local sheriff employed psychological intimidation to invade the privacy of retired U.S. Navy Chief Petty Officer Michael Moore, 49, of Goldston, North Carolina at his home on December 10, 2002. In another warning sign of what lies ahead for all Americans regarding police-state abuse of power (thanks to sections of the post-September 11 “Patriot Act” approved by Congress and signed into law by President Bush), U.S. Intelligence intercepted North Carolinian Michael Moore’s email -- likely believing it was written by independent film producer-icon (“Bowling for Columbine”) and author (“Stupid White Men”) Michael Moore. In other words, they got the wrong Michael Moore. The Michael Moore raided by the Secret Service last week is a 20-year war veteran who put his life on the line for his country during two separate tours of duty aboard the U.S.S. Paul Revere off the coast of Vietnam in 1971 and 1972 -- one of which was a highly dangerous mine-sweeping operation. Finding a few controversial albeit First Amendment-protected words in the Navy vet’s email, the Intelligence agents apparently decided to kill two birds with one stone: 1) intimidate the former Vietnam veteran into allowing them to violate his personal privacy by performing a search of his home while knowing the story would reach the public -- thereby inculcating citizen fear of government power, and 2) send a veiled “message” to fervent presidential-critic and celebrity Michael Moore to let him know what lies down the road for him should his high-profile and media-oriented presidential disdain persist. There are no reports yet as to whether Michael Moore, the film and book luminary, will join the Navy vet with his appellation to promulgate a legal inquiry into how various sections of the Patriot Act are abused by government officials in order to intimidate and distress the citizenry. That may require the services of a constitutional attorney as valiant as the two Moores will need to be. According to Moore -- the North Carolinian who served in Vietnam, the Secret Service agents informed him that “they work with the FBI and National Security Agency (NSA) jointly on national security issues” -- all of which was exclusively reported yesterday via the probingly perceptive questioning of Meria Heller during a live interview on her Meria Heller Internet Show. One of the agents told Moore that they had “intercepted his email written to an online friend expressing his outrage over the recent election results and that he had called President Bush ‘Satan -- the third anti-Christ,’ and a ‘Communist Republican,’ ” among other soubriquets. In a special-report/email posted on Tom Flocco.com from his online friend “BlackBear,” the 20-year war veteran revealed that the agents said that they “had to access my email to see if I posed a national security risk to the President -- who I now call the ‘Bush-Whacker.’ ” The Secret Service agents and the local sheriff -- all displaying side-arms -- wanted more, however -- a portent of police-state prospects facing all Americans. They asked Michael Moore if they could enter his home because they “wanted to ask him some questions and fill out forms for about a half hour -- which turned into more than an hour.” Moore said “they asked me what kind of drugs I am on, and where they could contact my ex-wife,” adding that “they also required that I sign a form permitting them to access all my medical history in the San Diego and Raleigh-Durham Veteran’s hospitals.” “I was in shock and intimidated,” he told us in a phone interview last night, adding “I just cooperated in order to get them out of my home as soon as possible.” Curiously, the next series of questions became all the more abusive to Moore as he began to realize that “if the agents were already intercepting my email, they undoubtedly also had total prior access to my military occupational specialty (MOS) records, and other personal information not available to other citizens -- before they even entered my home.” “I was also upset when they asked for the names, addresses, and phone numbers of all my family,” the Navy vet continued: “They wanted to know if I had a history of mental illness, what I thought about assassinations, if I was going to Washington, DC to shoot the President, when was the last time I was out-of-state, whether I had sniper training in the military, what work I did in the Navy, and if I had a grudge against the Navy, etc.” His close friend, BlackBear, said "Here is a guy who called me and asked if I would come to Goldston the first Saturday in November when the tiny town hosted the First Annual Chatham County Veterans Day Parade in which Mike Moore proudly donned his Chief Petty Officer's uniform and marched in the parade, passing out miniature American flags to the spectators." Moore was adamant when he told us “they point-blank asked me if I was going to Washington to shoot the President -- after they had already intercepted the email I wrote to my friend saying that ‘under no circumstances would I ever leave my house until the Democrats regained control of the White House,’ ” adding “they knew I wasn’t going anywhere.” “They literally raped my mind -- psychologically,” he said. But the intimidation didn’t stop there. The soldier with a well-known name added, “They wrote down information from my military Retiree’s I.D., my driver’s license, and my vehicle license plate number.” (Information they already possessed before they even made the decision to pay Michael Moore a visit.) In another abuse of his rights against unwanted search without a warrant, Moore revealed that “the local Sheriff (who accompanied the agents into his home) and one other agent wandered throughout my house while I was being interviewed by one of the other Secret Service agents in my dining room.” Read Full Article
Top

#113740 - 12-18-02 07:49 PM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
zeroflux zeroflux Administrator Registered: 03-11-01 Posts: 6175 Loc: Arlington, Virginia	The Legacy of the War on Terror ATF Attacks Innocent Gun Owners On the afternoon of July 13, 2002, 22-year old Elizabeth Meyer of Yakima, Washington was pulled over by a policeman because the license tag on her Chevy Suburban had expired. In the car with her was a female friend and Elizabeth's four children, ranging in age from 4 months to 4 years. The policeman noticed an un-loaded ammo clip on her dashboard and demanded that Elizabeth allow him to search her car. She refused, saying he had no right to search her car. Then she was informed the officer's boss "represented a tri-agency counter-terrorism task force that included the FBI and ATF, and insisted that they had to search my vehicle." Elizabeth refused to cooperate, and was ordered to turn off her car engine. They were held captive for 90 minutes - forcing her children to swelter as temperatures climbed to 107 degrees. Finally, Elizabeth's husband Jim, a firearms expert who trains police, arrived and convinced police to let her go. But that was only the beginning of their ordeal. A week later, an ATF squad showed up at her home and demanded to see every gun the family owned. They had no search warrant. When Jim refused to cooperate, the Meyers were informed they would conduct the search anyway as a matter of "home-land security," and the ATF goons proceeded to ransack their home. If Meyers had resisted, they and their children could have easily been shot. As Elizabeth points out, had she kept her children confined in her car at temperatures of 107 degrees, it would have been a crime, but when police do it, apparently now that's OK - as well as searching your home without a warrant if you own a gun or cartridge. http://www.isil.org/resources/fnn/2002nov/every-evil.html
Top

#113741 - 12-18-02 07:51 PM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
zeroflux zeroflux Administrator Registered: 03-11-01 Posts: 6175 Loc: Arlington, Virginia	Fear mounts as US calls on Muslim men to register December 18 2002 Lines began forming before dawn outside the federal building in Los Angeles as hundreds of men from five Muslim countries came to register with immigration authorities under a sweeping national dragnet designed to identify potential terrorists. The United States Attorney-General, John Ashcroft, issued an order last month requiring male non-citizens over the age of 16 from 18 countries, mostly Arab and Muslim, to be interviewed, photographed and fingerprinted by federal authorities. The program affects tens of thousands of immigrants most of whom hold valid work and study visas. Those who fail to comply face criminal charges and immediate expulsion from the country. The deadline for men from Iran, Iraq, Syria, Libya and Sudan was Monday. Early that morning, the Los Angeles headquarters of the Immigration Naturalisation Service was ringed with hundreds of immigrants accompanied by anxious relatives and immigration lawyers. Over the past week, officials enforcing the program have handcuffed and detained hundreds of men who showed up to be fingerprinted. In some cases the men had expired student or work visas; in others they could not provide adequate documentation of their immigration status. An immigration lawyer, Ali Bolour, said that at one point on Friday, officials ran out of plastic handcuffs as they herded men into the basement lockup of the federal building. Advocates for immigrant rights said the program had sent waves of fear through immigrant communities and said it was unlikely to make the US safer. "All this is doing is making a bigger haystack, not finding more needles," said Angela Kelley, deputy director of the National Immigration Forum, a pro-immigration group. Read Full Article
Top

#113742 - 12-18-02 08:38 PM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
eblank eblank Member Registered: 10-04-01 Posts: 2675	Panel warns against 'secret police' http://www.washtimes.com/national/20021217-30408812.htm The FBI could be perceived as "a kind of secret police" if allowed to continue carrying out traditional law enforcement duties while also gathering terrorism intelligence, a federal commission said in a report issued yesterday. The panel suggested creating a new agency to conduct surveillance and gather intelligence. The National Counter Terrorism Center would include analysts working for the CIA, FBI and other agencies. "It is important to separate the intelligence-collection function from the law enforcement function to avoid the impression that the U.S. is establishing a kind of 'secret police,' " said commission members, comprising federal, state and local officials and chaired by former Virginia Gov. James S. Gilmore III. Justice Department officials opposed the recommendation. "If we pursue security to the point where we give up that which makes us Americans, the enemy has won," Mr. Gilmore said. _________________________ "Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel" --Samuel Johnson "War is the health of the state" --Randolph Bourne "Peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations--entangling alliances with none, I deem one of the essential principles of our government" --Thomas Jefferson "We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them." --Albert Einstein "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." --Benjamin Franklin
Top

#113743 - 01-06-03 05:09 PM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
tlbshow tlbshow Member Registered: 09-20-04 Posts: 245	How Bill Clinton laid the groundwork for the new police state But the Bush-Ashcroft Big Brotherism is nothing startling or new. The USA PATRIOT Act, the military tribunals, and Ashcroft's plan to expand domestic spying are only a public augmentation of the well-oiled police state machinery that was already in place. As we snoozed through the Clinton era, our lovable, sax-playing president was busy deep-sixing legal protections – often in the name of combating terrorism. He presided over a massive expansion of federal phone-tapping powers. Signing the 1996 Counter-terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, our buddy Bill laid the groundwork for Ashcroft's schemes, eviscerating habeas corpus, one of the cornerstones of our judicial system, curtailing due process for immigrants, and creating special courts to try terrorists with secret evidence. Sound familiar? And under Clinton, reinvigorated Red Squads apparently spied on the anticorporate protesters who rocked the Seattle WTO conference. Clinton "set the stage" for the current rollback of rights, says Harvey Silverglate, an attorney, author, and nationally known expert on individual freedoms. "Clinton caved in to the notion that at a time of perceived crisis or danger it is OK to infringe on civil liberties even if the particular infringement does not produce any added security. So now we have a situation where Ashcroft can make some of the most dangerous incursions into civil liberties that we've ever seen, and nobody even notices." http://www.sfbg.com/News/36/11/11war.html
Top

#113744 - 01-06-03 05:12 PM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
tlbshow tlbshow Member Registered: 09-20-04 Posts: 245	Dick Armey's Warning During his years in Congress, Dick Armey was a firm and incisive defender of conservative values. Individual constitutional liberties against the government were very much among them. In his December 6 farewell address at the National Press Club, the retiring Republican Majority Leader warned of the "awful, dangerous seduction" of sacrificing our freedoms for safety in our war to defeat "this insidious threat that comes right into our neighborhood." Armey emphasized that "we the people, had better keep an eye on ... our government. Not out of contempt or lack of appreciation or disrespect, but out of a sense of guardianship. http://www.washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20030106-90177664.htm
Top

#113745 - 01-09-03 01:21 AM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
zeroflux zeroflux Administrator Registered: 03-11-01 Posts: 6175 Loc: Arlington, Virginia	Bold emphasis is mine. Also, I find it interesting according to the second account that Amnesty International is allegedly one of the organizations being watched. If true, it is an ominous sign, and one which places us within the ranks of tinpot dictatorships and police states who also fear, and keep tabs on Amnesty. Grounded: The Government's Air Passenger Blacklist By Dave Lindorff, Salon November 17, 2002 Barbara Olshansky was in Newark International Airport last March when an airline agent at the counter checking her boarding pass called airport security. Olshansky was subjected to a close search and then, though she was in view of other travelers, was ordered to pull her pants down. The Sept. 11 terrorist attacks may have created a new era in airport security, but even so, she was embarrassed and annoyed. Perhaps one such incident might've been forgotten, but Olshansky, the assistant legal director for the left-leaning Center for Constitutional Rights, was pulled out of line for special attention the next time she flew. And the next time. And the next time. On one flight this past September from Newark to Washington, six members of the center's staff, including Olshansky, were stopped and subjected to intense scrutiny, even though they had purchased their tickets independently and had not checked in as a group. On that occasion, Olshansky got angry and demanded to know why she had been singled out. "The computer spit you out," she recalls the agent saying. "I don't know why, and I don't have time to talk to you about it.” Olshansky and her colleagues are, apparently, not alone. For months, rumors and anecdotes have circulated among left-wing and other activist groups about people who have been barred from flying or delayed at security gates because they are "on a list." But now, a spokesman for the new Transportation Security Administration has acknowledged for the first time that the government has a list of about 1,000 people who are deemed "threats to aviation" and not allowed on airplanes under any circumstances. And in an interview with Salon, the official suggested that Olshansky and other political activists may be on a separate list that subjects them to strict scrutiny but allows them to fly. "We have a list of about 1,000 people," said David Steigman, the TSA spokesman. The agency was created a year ago by Congress to handle transportation safety during the war on terror. "This list is composed of names that are provided to us by various government organizations like the FBI, CIA and INS …We don't ask how they decide who to list. Each agency decides on its own who is a 'threat to aviation.'" The agency has no guidelines to determine who gets on the list, Steigman says, and no procedures for getting off the list if someone is wrongfully on it. Meanwhile, airport security personnel, citing lists that are provided by the agency and that appear to be on airline ticketing and check-in computers, seem to be netting mostly priests, elderly nuns, Green Party campaign operatives, left-wing journalists, right-wing activists and people affiliated with Arab or Arab-American groups. Virgine Lawinger, a nun in Milwaukee and an activist with Peace Action was stopped from boarding a flight last spring to Washington, where she and 20 young students were planning to lobby the Wisconsin congressional delegation against U.S. military aid to the Colombian government. "We were all prevented from boarding, and some of us were taken to another room and questioned by airport security personnel and local sheriff's deputies," says Lawinger. In that incident, an airline employee with Midwest Air and a localsheriff's deputy who had been called in during the incident to help airport security personnel detain and question the group, told some of them that their names were "on a list," and that they were being kept off their plane on instructions from the Transportation Security Administration in Washington. Lawinger has filed a freedom-of-information request with the Transportation Security Administration seeking to learn if she is on a "threat to aviation" list. Last month, Rebecca Gordon and Jan Adams, two journalists with a San Francisco-based antiwar magazine called War Times were stopped at the check-in counter of ATA Airlines, where an airline clerk told them that her computer showed they were on "the FBI No Fly list." The airline called the FBI, and local police held them for a while before telling them there had been a mistake and that they were free to go. The two made their plane, but not before the counter attendant placed a large S for "search" on their baggage, assuring that they got more close scrutiny at the boarding gate. Art dealer Doug Stuber, who ran Ralph Nader's Green Party presidential campaign in North Carolina in 2000, was barred last month from getting on a flight to Hamburg, Germany, where he was going on business, after he got engaged in a loud, though friendly, discussion with two other passengers in a security line. During the course of the debate, he shouted that "George Bush is as dumb as a rock," an unfortunate comment that provoked the Raleigh-Durham Airport security staff to call the local Secret Service bureau, which sent out two agents to interrogate Stuber. "They took me into a room and questioned me all about my politics," Stuber recalls. "They were very up on Green Party politics, too." They fingerprinted him and took a digital eye scan. Particularly ominous, he says, was a loose-leaf binder held by the Secret Service agents. "It was open, and while they were questioning me, I discreetly looked at it," he says. "It had a long list of organizations, and I was able to recognize the Green Party, Greenpeace, EarthFirst and Amnesty International." Stuber was eventually released, but after trying for two days at various airports, Stuber found he was barred from boarding any flight and missed his business trip. Read More
Top

#113746 - 01-09-03 12:41 PM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
11O'Clock 11O'Clock This Space for Rent Registered: 02-02-02 Posts: 10446	Crimes before the fact Bob Barr(gasp) In last year's mega-hit movie "Minority Report," starring Tom Cruise in a mid-21st-century sci-fi thriller, D.C. police identify persons who have not yet committed a crime, but who, based on premonition evidence are going to commit a crime, and then swoop in and arrest these pre-criminals before they can carry out their dastardly deeds. A fine movie; I saw it and liked it. Well, it isn't even 2054 (the year in which the movie is set), and already, Washington-area police — in this case, Fairfax County, Va.'s finest — are taking the movie to heart, and putting it into practice now. Seems the local constabularies are getting bored actually waiting for crimes to be committed, and then, based on actual evidence, practicing good police work and arresting the perpetrators. The gendarmes are going into local area bars undercover, waiting for patrons to imbibe what might possibly be too much inside the bar, forcing them outside for a mandatory blood-alcohol content test and, if they fail, citing them. In some instances, eschewing the boredom of operating undercover, they are charging in with full, SWAT regalia, and pulling patrons outside the bar. All this with no evidence whatsoever the poor souls enjoying a drink at the local pub were going to get behind the wheel of a vehicle and drive under the influence. Perhaps the Fairfax County Police Department has its own "pre cog" — the strange humans in "Minority Report" who envision the future and identify the criminals before they are criminals, in order for the police to arrest them and save potential victims of crimes. Maybe this Fairfax pre cog relays to the men and women in blue a vision of these potential evildoers who are drinking too much and might do something bad. Or, perhaps the police in Fairfax County don't have a clue these bar patrons will or will not drive under the influence — which certainly is a crime and certainly ought to be stopped and punished. Perhaps they are simply police officers whose sensibilities are enraged by people in a bar having a good time, even if perhaps drinking more than local Officer Muldoon condones. The department's explanation that it is against the law to be intoxicated in a public place (including a bar), is nonsense, even if, in a hyper-technical sense, correct. Someone perhaps ought to remind Fairfax County that bars actually exist as places in which people drink alcohol; it's not only legal, it's encouraged. This actually is a frightening scenario that one hopes is nipped in the bud. Not only is this sort of Gestapolike behavior chilling in the extreme, but if condoned or encouraged, will find its way into other areas of detaining or arresting people for potential criminal behavior. Come to think of it, however, we're already on the way to that scenario, what with the manner in which law-abiding citizens are subject to humiliating, public partial strip searches for no reason other than they might have looked at an airport security person in the wrong way, or bought a ticket in a manner different from their usual routine. All this fits right in with the "Eye-in-the-Sky" perspective of retired Adm. John Poindexter and the cherished Total Information Awareness system he's building at the Pentagon — collect all the information on as many people as you can in advance, decide who might be bad, and act on it. So what if you invade the privacy of virtually every law-abiding citizen in the country; you might be able to possibly identify a potential lawbreaker. The good retired admiral would really like those guys down at the Fairfax precinct. They're his kind of guys. We are already, as a society, reaping what we've sown. And this is not the movies, folks. • Rep. Bob Barr, Georgia Republican, is the American Conservative Union Foundation's 21st century chairman for privacy and freedom. LINK _________________________ Conservatives exercise moral philosophy..the search for a superior justification for selfishness.
Top

#113747 - 02-09-03 04:01 AM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
zeroflux zeroflux Administrator Registered: 03-11-01 Posts: 6175 Loc: Arlington, Virginia	Bold emphasis is mine. Also, here is a link to the contents of the original Patriot Act: The Patriot Act of 2001 - HR 3162 Expansion of Patriot Act Criticized WASHINGTON - The Justice Department (news - web sites) is preparing to expand the 2001 Patriot Act to increase surveillance within the United States while restricting access to information and limiting judicial review, a nonprofit government watchdog group asserted Friday. The Center for Public Integrity said it obtained a copy of the draft legislation from a government source. The document, labeled "confidential," was posted Friday on the organization's Internet site along with an analysis. snip According to the Center for Public Integrity, the draft expansion of the Patriot Act would be called the Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003. Among other things, it would prohibit disclosure of information regarding people detained as terrorist suspects and prevent the Environmental Protection Agency (news - web sites) from distributing "worst-case scenario" information to the public about a nearby private company's use of chemicals. In addition, the measure would create a DNA database of "suspected terrorists;" force suspects to prove why they should be released on bail, rather than have the prosecution prove why they should be held; and allow the deportation of U.S. citizens who become members of or help terrorist groups. Read Full Article
Top

#113748 - 02-10-03 03:21 PM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
Anonymous Anonymous Unregistered	Judge KOs Anti-War March Near U.N. POSTED: 12:25 p.m. EST February 10, 2003 UPDATED: 2:10 p.m. EST February 10, 2003 NEW YORK -- The First Amendment rights of anti-war demonstrators have not been violated by the city's decision to block them from marching past the United Nations on Saturday, a federal judge has ruled. Citing "this time of heightened security," U.S. District Judge Barbara S. Jones said Monday that the city's need to protect the public outweighs the right of demonstrators to proceed with plans to march past the U.N. "While the court recognizes the distinct importance of marching, the city's restriction on marching is not a restriction on pure speech, but rather a restriction on the manner in which plaintiff may communicate its message," Jones wrote. web page Bolding mine.
Top

#113749 - 02-10-03 04:25 PM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
Anonymous Anonymous Unregistered	Last week Israel announced that it would begin taking a more aggressive role in the war on terrorism, including the use of so-called targeted killings in the US and other friendly countries. This was a significant shift for the Israeli government, which has since the late 1990s officially steered away from practicing lethal covert operations beyond its own borders and throughout the occupied territories. But the most surprising thing about the announcement was the subsequent silence from the Bush administration, which until recently has been a vocal critic of Israel’s use of extrajudicial killings. Indeed, it seems that both Washington and Tel Aviv, to some extent in interplay with each other, have come a long ways toward rehabilitating the legitimacy of state-sanctioned assassination. http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EA25Ak01.html Perhaps not so surprising in light of this: The Bush administration has been seeking Israel's counsel on creating a legal justification for the assassination of terrorism suspects, the Forward has learned. Legal experts from the United States and Israel have met in recent months to discuss the issue, and are considering widening the consultation circle to include representatives of America's closest allies in the war against terrorism. Israeli sources who are intimately familiar with the talks said that American representatives were anxious to learn details of the legal work that Israeli government jurists have done during the last two years to tackle possible challenges — both domestic and international — to its policy of "targeted killings" of terrorist suspects. snip] Roth said that in this sense there is a fundamental difference between Israel's and America's pursuit of terrorists. "The core of the issue is when it is appropriate to treat somebody as an enemy-combatant rather than as a criminal suspect," Roth said. "If you're an enemy combatant, you can be shot. That's what war is about. So the real question is when it is appropriate to characterize someone as such." http://www.forward.com/issues/2003/03.02.07/news5.html
Top

#113750 - 02-10-03 07:17 PM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
toxteth o'grady toxteth o'grady Uncivil Engineer Registered: 10-24-01 Posts: 64784 Loc: At the airport	Son of a USA Patriot Act! U.S. May Seek Wider Anti-Terror Powers The Justice Department is considering legislative proposals that would significantly expand the federal government's power to investigate, detain and punish suspected terrorists in secret and without court supervision, according to a preliminary draft of the bill disclosed yesterday. The draft, a potential successor to the Patriot Act that passed Congress after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, would authorize the Justice Department to conduct clandestine searches or eavesdrop on any suspected terrorist or foreign agent for 15 days after the beginning of a military conflict or "national emergency," rather than after a formal declaration of war, as current law provides. It would also permit wiretaps of U.S. citizens in terrorism cases for longer periods and with less court oversight than now permitted; and allow the department to collect a DNA-sample database from both convicted and suspected terrorists. Under the draft, the government could declare individuals, not just groups, "foreign powers" subject to clandestine surveillance under looser standards than would apply in criminal cases, and it would permit such surveillance against a U.S. citizen suspected of spying for a foreign power, even if the alleged suspicious conduct was not itself criminal. Taken as a whole, the proposals would constitute a far-reaching invitation to Congress to ratify the Bush administration's get-tough legal approach to the war on terrorism. The Jan. 9 document, labeled "confidential -- not for distribution" and titled the Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003, was posted on the Internet by the Center for Public Integrity, a Washington-based nonprofit organization. Civil liberties advocates immediately expressed alarm about the draft. "There are some truly breathtaking provisions here. In some respects it is bolder even than the Patriot Act," said Jim Dempsey of the Center for Democracy and Technology, a nonprofit organization based in Washington. "It raises a wide range of very troubling questions that deserve a lot of thoughtful debate and attention," said David Cole, a Georgetown University law professor. The Justice Department declined to comment specifically on the proposals, but did not dispute the authenticity of the draft, which is being developed in the Office of Legal Policy :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: _________________________ "It's my party and I'll cry if I want to" --Abe Lincoln
Top

#113751 - 02-11-03 09:29 PM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
Anonymous Anonymous Unregistered	Quote: Originally posted by OhMy: Judge KOs Anti-War March Near U.N. POSTED: 12:25 p.m. EST February 10, 2003 UPDATED: 2:10 p.m. EST February 10, 2003 NEW YORK -- The First Amendment rights of anti-war demonstrators have not been violated by the city's decision to block them from marching past the United Nations on Saturday, a federal judge has ruled. Citing "this time of heightened security," U.S. District Judge Barbara S. Jones said Monday that the city's need to protect the public outweighs the right of demonstrators to proceed with plans to march past the U.N. "While the court recognizes the distinct importance of marching, the city's restriction on marching is not a restriction on pure speech, but rather a restriction on the manner in which plaintiff may communicate its message," Jones wrote. web page Bolding mine. More from the article... Quote: In her ruling, Jones noted that the United Nations was "uniquely sensitive among locations in New York City because of its function, our country's treaty obligations and its history as a terrorist target." She said that since the Sept. 11 terrorist attack, the city has banned all demonstrations, parades or other public events in front of the United Nations. "This policy is all-inclusive, makes no reference to the content of the regulated speech and does not distinguish between event organizers or their views," she said. Jones also agreed with the city's argument that the march is expected to be too large for the police department to secure the safety of the landmark. Saying that police concerns about security threats were "far from theoretical," the judge noted that the U.N. was among five landmarks targeted by terrorists in a failed plot in 1993. A dozen men were convicted and sentenced to lengthy prison terms. So the United Nations is a more viable terrorist target than WTC which was attacked TWICE? Yet it would have been perfectly okay to lead a march past the WTC? And where do they have the Macy's Thanksgiving Day parade and how many people were there? And News Year's Eve? Somehow a peace march doesn't seem as threatening as say a commercial airliner or truck bomb or even a bunch of drunk New Yorkers on New Year's Eve or Irish on St. Paddy's Day. If this "ban" sets a precedent, then anytime a group wants to oppose the Bush Administration by "assembling," demonstrating and marching and then being subsequently told they can't because every fucking landmark in the country is now a "terrorist" target, especially if it's media frendly, then we are up the fascist creek without a first amendment paddle. The Notorious M.O.I.
Top

#113752 - 02-11-03 09:35 PM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
toxteth o'grady toxteth o'grady Uncivil Engineer Registered: 10-24-01 Posts: 64784 Loc: At the airport	Actually, a bunch of drunk Irish on St. Paddy's Day are only considered a threat if they are a bunch of drunk Irish homosexuals. Edited by zeroflux (02-03-07 02:19 PM)
Top

#113753 - 02-12-03 12:13 PM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
Watson Watson Member Registered: 08-01-01 Posts: 855	Re ACLU email alerts mailing lists, action@dcaclu.org in case anyone wants to be on the list. Today, Bush has unilaterally, by Executive Order, started gov't-funding religion? (Which, evidently unknown to him or his advisors, is to be taken over temporarily by a covert hater, final antichrist, playing Islam and Christianity against each other, running terrorism, destroying his own nation, 2-chapter short book of Habakkuk and Isaiah 14. He'll be caught, Dan. 7, but not before a lot of people die, I'm afraid. ) The news is all so bad I'm going on an errand instead of reading any more for now!
Top

#113754 - 02-13-03 06:33 PM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
Anonymous Anonymous Unregistered	This one is in the "it's so dumb it's sort of funny" category...but emblematic none the less: The Defense Department has produced a training video that instructs its staff on how to handle requests under the federal Freedom of Information Act. But don't request a screening; the video itself is secret. "It seems ironic, very ironic," said Mike Ravnitzky, a writer for American Lawyer magazine whose request for the video was turned down in November. When he appealed, the Defense Department denied the request again, citing the Freedom of Information Act's trade secret exemption. The 22-minute video can't be released because it contains excerpts from television newscasts and movies, including Casablanca, that cannot be shown without permission from their owners, said Henry McIntyre, Freedom of Information Act director for the Department of Defense. snip] According to a description of the video published on the scriptwriter's web site, the training video follows a character named Trench Coat as he guides the viewer through the ins and outs of a handling freedom of information requests. The department has shown it internally, McIntyre said, and has been trying to get the proper permission from copyright holders, "dotting our i's and crossing our t's," he said. Charles Davis, executive director of the Freedom of Information Center at the University of Missouri's School of Journalism, said he thinks it's "hysterical" the video cannot be released. "This is just such a perfect anecdotal example of what goes on every day all over the country when people make requests for things that are so obviously not secret and then are rejected," Davis said. At the Defense Department, McIntyre said he's going to try to resolve the problem with the video quickly, possibly by editing out copyrighted material from the video and releasing it in that form. snip] A month after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, Attorney General John Ashcroft directed federal agencies to "carefully consider" how the release of information under the act might affect national security and law enforcement. Agencies that legitimately turn down information requests would have the backing of the Justice Department, he said. Experts say responses to freedom of information requests have slowed since then, and more are being denied. http://www.news-record.com/news/now/video13.htm
Top

#113755 - 02-13-03 08:16 PM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
toxteth o'grady toxteth o'grady Uncivil Engineer Registered: 10-24-01 Posts: 64784 Loc: At the airport	The Office of Total Information Awareness, headed up by the disgraced John Poindexter, may have had its wings clipped by Congress, but that hasn't stopped NCR from attempting to peddle its wares to the agency. Is this what Bush envisions in the way of a public-private partnership? :rolleyes: _________________________ "It's my party and I'll cry if I want to" --Abe Lincoln
Top

#113756 - 02-17-03 04:41 AM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
Anonymous Anonymous Unregistered	The Bush administration filed a brief urging the judges to uphold denial of the permit for the peace march in NYC.
Top

#113757 - 02-19-03 05:09 PM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
Anonymous Anonymous Unregistered	Foundations are in place for martial law in the US By Ritt Goldstein July 27 2002 Recent pronouncements from the Bush Administration and national security initiatives put in place in the Reagan era could see internment camps and martial law in the United States. When president Ronald Reagan was considering invading Nicaragua he issued a series of executive orders that provided the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) with broad powers in the event of a "crisis" such as "violent and widespread internal dissent or national opposition against a US military invasion abroad". They were never used. But with the looming possibility of a US invasion of Iraq, recent pronouncements by President George Bush's domestic security chief, Tom Ridge, and an official with the US Civil Rights Commission should fire concerns that these powers could be employed or a de facto drift into their deployment could occur. On July 20 the Detroit Free Press ran a story entitled "Arabs in US could be held, official warns". The story referred to a member of the US Civil Rights Commission who foresaw the possibility of internment camps for Arab Americans. FEMA has practised for such an occasion. FEMA, whose main role is disaster response, is also responsible for handling US domestic unrest. From 1982-84 Colonel Oliver North assisted FEMA in drafting its civil defence preparations. Details of these plans emerged during the 1987 Iran-Contra scandal. They included executive orders providing for suspension of the constitution, the imposition of martial law, internment camps, and the turning over of government to the president and FEMA. A Miami Herald article on July 5, 1987, reported that the former FEMA director Louis Guiffrida's deputy, John Brinkerhoff, handled the martial law portion of the planning. The plan was said to be similar to one Mr Giuffrida had developed earlier to combat "a national uprising by black militants". It provided for the detention "of at least 21million American Negroes"' in "assembly centres or relocation camps". Today Mr Brinkerhoff is with the highly influential Anser Institute for Homeland Security. Following a request by the Pentagon in January that the US military be allowed the option of deploying troops on American streets, the institute in February published a paper by Mr Brinkerhoff arguing the legality of this. Foundations are in place for martial law in the US
Top

#113758 - 02-26-03 09:09 PM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
toxteth o'grady toxteth o'grady Uncivil Engineer Registered: 10-24-01 Posts: 64784 Loc: At the airport	Royal Ahold is in trouble, and not just because their US Foodservice unit appears to have engaged in accounting irregularities that may cause $500 million to be deducted from their bottom line. It turns out they're now peddling all that valuable information they glean when they swipe your Key Card at Giant (here in Washington) or Stop & Shop (New York and Boston) supermarkets. It's all up for sale to the highest bidder with the lowest ethics. An example - your donut-buying patterns will now be common knowledge to the drug company that might want to sell you a prescription to lower your cholesterol or ward off diabetes. And since everyone is giving out these wonderful swipe cards to stick on your key ring, everyone is collecting information they can sell to others. And you thought you were getting points toward a discount... :rolleyes: Here's more... PHOENIX ANTI-CARD BOMBSHELL AIRS TONIGHT: LANDS AHOLD DEEPER IN HOT WATER The ABC affiliate in Phoenix will air explosive footage tonight of a major Ahold supermarket executive admitting to planned abuses of his store's shopper card database. (Details on news program below.) Curt Avallone, Vice President for Marketing and New Technology at Ahold-owned Stop & Shop (the largest grocery chain on the east coast), admits that Stop & Shop has developed software to analyze the eating habits of individual shoppers, converting their shopper card records into detailed nutritional and dietary profiles. Apparently, it was quite expensive to develop the software, so to recoup expenses the company plans to share the data with several HMO's, Avallone reveals on camera. CASPIAN has been warning shoppers for years of this very development. Curt Avallone is the same man who recently boasted of Stop & Shop's plans to utilize "tracking technology in store ceilings [that] couldpinpoint a customer's whereabouts and...cross-reference special offers with personal data." [1] In addition, the Stop & Shop chain recently intoduced RFID-based "Speedpass" payment technology into three of its Boston-area stores --the only supermarket chain in the nation to do it. Shoppers can now "wave" their Speedpass "wands" to pay for their groceries instantly through an automatic credit card charge or checking account deduction. Since the Speedpass is linked with the store's data collection card program, those who participate have their purchases automatically recorded in Stop & Shop's database. [2][3] Stop & Shop has fared quite poorly in CASPIAN pricing surveys in the past. Perhaps all the money the chain has invested in misguided tracking and surveillance technologies explains why their prices are consistently higher than their competitors. That and a little problem with corporate ethics... Sources: [1] http://www.cioinsight.com/article2/0,3959,43528,00.asp [2] http://www.speedpass.com/news/article.jsp?id=55 [3] http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/030212/120397_1.html _________________________ "It's my party and I'll cry if I want to" --Abe Lincoln
Top

#113759 - 02-27-03 09:56 PM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
Anonymous Anonymous Unregistered	The government is getting ready to test a new risk-detection system that would check background information and assign a threat level to everyone who buys a ticket for a commercial flight. The system, ordered by Congress after the Sept. 11 attacks, will gather much more information on passengers. Delta Air Lines will try it out at three unidentified airports beginning next month, and a comprehensive system could be in place by the end of the year. Transportation officials say a contractor will be picked soon to build the nationwide computer system, which will check such things as credit reports and bank account activity and compare passenger names with those on government watch lists. Advocates say the system will weed out dangerous people while ensuring law-abiding citizens aren't given unnecessary scrutiny. Critics see a potential for unconstitutional invasions of privacy and for database mix-ups that could lead to innocent people being branded security risks. There also is concern that the government is developing the system without revealing how information will be gathered and how long it will be kept. "We may be creating a massive surveillance system without public discussion," said Barry Steinhardt, an American Civil Liberties Union director. Transportation officials say CAPPS II - Computer Assisted Passenger Prescreening System - will use databases that already operate in line with privacy laws and won't profile based on race, religion or ethnicity. "What it does is have very fast access to existing databases so we can quickly validate the person's identity," Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta said. An oversight panel, which will include a member of the public, is being formed. And the Transportation Security Administration will set up procedures to resolve complaints by people who say they don't belong on the watch lists. Transportation Department spokesman Chet Lunner said a Federal Register notice about CAPPS II that said the background information will be stored for 50 years is inaccurate. He said such information will be held only for people deemed security risks. Jay Stanley, an ACLU spokesman, was skeptical. "When it says in print, 50 years, we'd like to see something else in print to counter that," he said. snip] Unlike the current system, in which data stays with the airlines' reservation systems, the new setup will be managed by TSA. Only government officials with proper security clearance will be able to use it. CAPPS II will collect data and rate each passenger's risk potential according to a three-color system: green, yellow, red. When travelers check in, their names will be punched into the system and the boarding passes encrypted with the ranking. TSA screeners will check the passes at checkpoints. The vast majority of passengers will be rated green and won't be subjected to anything more than normal checks, while yellow will get extra screening and red won't fly. Paul Hudson, executive director of the Aviation Consumer Action Project, which advocates airline safety and security, is skeptical the system will work. "The whole track record of profiling is a very poor to mixed one," Hudson said, noting profiles of the Unabomber and the Washington-area snipers were wrong. http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGA9LA9HPCD.html
Top

#113760 - 03-02-03 01:41 AM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
zeroflux zeroflux Administrator Registered: 03-11-01 Posts: 6175 Loc: Arlington, Virginia	A recap on Operation Northwoods. U.S. Military Drafted Plans to Terrorize U.S. Cities to Provoke War With Cuba Code named Operation Northwoods, the plans reportedly included the possible assassination of Cuban émigrés, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities. The plans were developed as ways to trick the American public and the international community into supporting a war to oust Cuba's then new leader, communist Fidel Castro. America's top military brass even contemplated causing U.S. military casualties, writing: "We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba," and, "casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation." Details of the plans are described in Body of Secrets (Doubleday), a new book by investigative reporter James Bamford about the history of America's largest spy agency, the National Security Agency. However, the plans were not connected to the agency, he notes. The plans had the written approval of all of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and were presented to President Kennedy's defense secretary, Robert McNamara, in March 1962. But they apparently were rejected by the civilian leadership and have gone undisclosed for nearly 40 years. Read Full Article
Top

#113761 - 03-02-03 01:46 AM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
zeroflux zeroflux Administrator Registered: 03-11-01 Posts: 6175 Loc: Arlington, Virginia	Lockheed-Martin chosen to develop system to check air passenger backgrounds WASHINGTON (AP) Defense contractor Lockheed-Martin will develop a new system to check background information and assign a threat level to all commercial air passengers, the Transportation Department announced on Friday. The company, which employed Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta in the mid-1990s, was awarded a five-year contract to administer the program. The first phase of the contract is worth $12.8 million, transportation officials said. Civil liberties watchdogs see the potential for unconstitutional invasions of privacy and for database mix-ups that could lead to innocent people being branded security risks. ''This system threatens to create a permanent blacklisted underclass of Americans who cannot travel freely,'' said Katie Corrigan, a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union. Brian Roehrkasse, spokesman for the Department of Homeland Security, said a privacy officer will be assigned to safeguard civil liberties. ''Before any new homeland security technologies are deployed, we will ensure that we will uphold the laws of the land,'' Roehrkasse said. ''Any new data-mining technologies or programs to enhance information sharing and collecting must and will respect the civil rights and civil liberties guaranteed to the American people.'' Read Full Article
Top

#113762 - 03-02-03 01:50 AM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
firecracker too firecracker too Member Registered: 05-20-03 Posts: 14971	Saw the info on the CAPPS II system. Alarming. Our rights are eroding daily.
Top

#113763 - 03-03-03 07:41 PM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
toxteth o'grady toxteth o'grady Uncivil Engineer Registered: 10-24-01 Posts: 64784 Loc: At the airport	The Guardian ferreted this one out, and the Nation picked it up. The Bush Admin. will stoop to anything... Revealed: US dirty tricks to win vote on Iraq war Secret document details American plan to bug phones and emails of key Security Council members The United States is conducting a secret 'dirty tricks' campaign against UN Security Council delegations in New York as part of its battle to win votes in favour of war against Iraq. Details of the aggressive surveillance operation, which involves interception of the home and office telephones and the emails of UN delegates in New York, are revealed in a document leaked to The Observer. The disclosures were made in a memorandum written by a top official at the National Security Agency - the US body which intercepts communications around the world - and circulated to both senior agents in his organisation and to a friendly foreign intelligence agency asking for its input. The memo describes orders to staff at the agency, whose work is clouded in secrecy, to step up its surveillance operations 'particularly directed at... UN Security Council Members (minus US and GBR, of course)' to provide up-to-the-minute intelligence for Bush officials on the voting intentions of UN members regarding the issue of Iraq. The leaked memorandum makes clear that the target of the heightened surveillance efforts are the delegations from Angola, Cameroon, Chile, Mexico, Guinea and Pakistan at the UN headquarters in New York - the so-called 'Middle Six' delegations whose votes are being fought over by the pro-war party, led by the US and Britain, and the party arguing for more time for UN inspections, led by France, China and Russia. The memo is directed at senior NSA officials and advises them that the agency is 'mounting a surge' aimed at gleaning information not only on how delegations on the Security Council will vote on any second resolution on Iraq, but also 'policies', 'negotiating positions', 'alliances' and 'dependencies' - the 'whole gamut of information that could give US policymakers an edge in obtaining results favourable to US goals or to head off surprises'. Dated 31 January 2003, the memo was circulated four days after the UN's chief weapons inspector Hans Blix produced his interim report on Iraqi compliance with UN resolution 1441. It was sent by Frank Koza, chief of staff in the 'Regional Targets' section of the NSA, which spies on countries that are viewed as strategically important for United States interests. Koza specifies that the information will be used for the US's 'QRC' - Quick Response Capability - 'against' the key delegations. Suggesting the levels of surveillance of both the office and home phones of UN delegation members, Koza also asks regional managers to make sure that their staff also 'pay attention to existing non-UN Security Council Member UN-related and domestic comms [office and home telephones] for anything useful related to Security Council deliberations'. Koza also addresses himself to the foreign agency, saying: 'We'd appreciate your support in getting the word to your analysts who might have similar more indirect access to valuable information from accesses in your product lines [ie, intelligence sources].' Koza makes clear it is an informal request at this juncture, but adds: 'I suspect that you'll be hearing more along these lines in formal channels.' Disclosure of the US operation comes in the week that Blix will make what many expect to be his final report to the Security Council. It also comes amid increasingly threatening noises from the US towards undecided countries on the Security Council who have been warned of the unpleasant economic consequences of standing up to the US.... _________________________ "It's my party and I'll cry if I want to" --Abe Lincoln
Top

#113764 - 03-03-03 07:48 PM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
toxteth o'grady toxteth o'grady Uncivil Engineer Registered: 10-24-01 Posts: 64784 Loc: At the airport	The Guardian also reprinted the memo. I must say that I am a bit offended by the headline calling these "US dirty tricks". These are BUSH ADMINISTRATION dirty tricks. The ordinary citizens of the United States would never do something this dishonorable. Sunday March 2, 2003 To: [Recipients withheld] From: FRANK KOZA, DEF Chief of Staff (Regional Targets) CIV/NSA Sent on Jan 31 2003 0:16 Subject: Reflections of Iraq Debate/Votes at UN-RT Actions + Potential for Related Contributions Importance: HIGH Top Secret//COMINT//XI All, As you've likely heard by now, the Agency is mounting a surge particularly directed at the UN Security Council (UNSC) members (minus US and GBR of course) for insights as to how to membership is reacting to the on-going debate RE: Iraq, plans to vote on any related resolutions, what related policies/ negotiating positions they may be considering, alliances/ dependencies, etc - the whole gamut of information that could give US policymakers an edge in obtaining results favorable to US goals or to head off surprises. In RT, that means a QRC surge effort to revive/ create efforts against UNSC members Angola, Cameroon, Chile, Bulgaria and Guinea, as well as extra focus on Pakistan UN matters. We've also asked ALL RT topi's to emphasize and make sure they pay attention to existing non-UNSC member UN-related and domestic comms for anything useful related to the UNSC deliberations/ debates/ votes. We have a lot of special UN-related diplomatic coverage (various UN delegations) from countries not sitting on the UNSC right now that could contribute related perspectives/ insights/ whatever. We recognize that we can't afford to ignore this possible source. We'd appreciate your support in getting the word to your analysts who might have similar, more in-direct access to valuable information from accesses in your product lines. I suspect that you'll be hearing more along these lines in formal channels - especially as this effort will probably peak (at least for this specific focus) in the middle of next week, following the SecState's presentation to the UNSC. Thanks for your help _________________________ "It's my party and I'll cry if I want to" --Abe Lincoln
Top

#113765 - 03-04-03 11:14 PM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
zeroflux zeroflux Administrator Registered: 03-11-01 Posts: 6175 Loc: Arlington, Virginia	Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt NEW YORK (Reuters) - A lawyer was arrested late Monday and charged with trespassing at a public mall in the state of New York after refusing to take off a T-shirt advocating peace that he had just purchased at the mall. According to the criminal complaint filed on Monday, Stephen Downs was wearing a T-shirt bearing the words "Give Peace A Chance" that he had just purchased from a vendor inside the Crossgates Mall in Guilderland, New York, near Albany. "I was in the food court with my son when I was confronted by two security guards and ordered to either take off the T-shirt or leave the mall," said Downs. When Downs refused the security officers' orders, police from the town of Guilderland were called and he was arrested and taken away in handcuffs, charged with trespassing "in that he knowingly enter(ed) or remain(ed) unlawfully upon premises," the complaint read. Downs said police tried to convince him he was wrong in his actions by refusing to remove the T-shirt because the mall "was like a private house and that I was acting poorly. "I told them the analogy was not good and I was then hauled off to night court where I was arraigned after pleading not guilty and released on my own recognizance," Downs told Reuters in a telephone interview. Downs is the director of the Albany Office of the state Commission on Judicial Conduct, which investigates complaints of misconduct against judges and can admonish, censure or remove judges found to have engaged in misconduct. Calls to the Guilderland police and district attorney, Anthony Cardona and to officials at the mall were not returned for comment. Snip - He could face up to a year in prison if convicted. Read Full Article
Top

#113766 - 03-07-03 05:11 PM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
Hacker Hacker Junior Member Registered: 03-08-01 Posts: 32	Is Your Television Watching You? Could the federal government find out what you're watching on TV? Even if you're not the subject of a criminal investigation? If you're a satellite TV or TiVo owner, the answer is yes, according to legal experts and industry officials. Under the USA Patriot Act, passed a month after the 9/11 terrorist attack, the feds can force a noncable TV operator to disclose every show you have watched. The government just has to say that the request is related to a terrorism investigation, said Jay Stanley, a technology expert for the American Civil Liberties Union. http://www.tvweek.com/technology/030303isyourtv.html
Top

#113767 - 03-12-03 12:06 PM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
the Real fifi the Real fifi Member Registered: 01-16-02 Posts: 14036	Once again the Administration's procedures to deal with terrorism have been upheld--this time re the claimed right of Guantanamo prisoners to counsel---------- Appeals court rules against prisoners at Guantanamo By Frank J. Murray THE WASHINGTON TIMES A federal appeals court yesterday slammed shut the doors of every federal courthouse in America to fighters captured on Afghan battlefields and imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. "No court in this country has jurisdiction to [hear constitutional claims of] the Guantanamo detainees, even if they have not been adjudicated enemies of the United States," a three-judge panel of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia unanimously ruled. The ruling, which is certain to be appealed to the Supreme Court, was the first by an appeals court that directly determined whether the 600-plus al Qaeda and Taliban combatants at Guantanamo have the right to lawyers or court review of their detention. "If the Constitution does not entitle the detainees to due process, and it does not, they cannot invoke the jurisdiction of our courts to test the constitutionality or the legality of restraints on their liberty," the ruling said. The ruling disposed of three cases filed by families of 12 Kuwaitis, two Australians and two Britons, all of whom denied being "enemy combatants." They all said they were neither al Qaeda nor terrorists. That does not matter because they are aliens captured by the military and held on foreign soil, said the opinion written by Circuit Judge A. Raymond Randolph, a 1990 Bush nominee, and joined by Senior Circuit Judge Stephen F. Williams, a Reagan appointee, and Circuit Judge Merrick B. Garland, a Clinton choice. "They are now abroad, they are in the custody of the American military, and they have never had any presence in the United States," the court said.(snip) Yesterday's D.C. Circuit ruling relied almost entirely upon the 1950 Johnson vs. Eisentrager decision in which the Supreme Court ruled it did not have jurisdiction to issue writs of habeas corpus for aliens detained outside sovereign U.S. territory.(snip) In a separate opinion, Judge Randolph delved further into the extent of presidential power, saying it did not matter that Congress had not declared war. "The level of threat a detainee poses to United States interests, the amount of intelligence a detainee might be able to provide, the conditions under which the detainee may be willing to cooperate, the disruption visits from family members and lawyers might cause — these types of judgments have traditionally been left to the exclusive discretion of the Executive Branch, and there they should remain," Judge Randolph said. By even considering the case and issuing an opinion, the D.C. Circuit split with a 9th Circuit decision that last year rejected a "next friends" claim by clergy and lawyers. Yesterday's ruling defended the historic right of "next friends" to intervene on behalf of those who cannot communicate with a court, saying that procedure, long recognized in the United States, derives from 17th-century English All site contents copyright © 1999-2003 News World Communications, Inc. Privacy Policy No exit from Guantanamo
Top

#113768 - 03-12-03 12:52 PM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
Birdzeye Birdzeye Member Registered: 12-16-01 Posts: 14069	Libraries post Patriot Act warnings Santa Cruz branches tell patrons that FBI may spy on them Along with the usual reminders to hold the noise down and pay overdue fines, library patrons in Santa Cruz are seeing a new type of sign these days: a warning that records of the books they borrow may wind up in the hands of federal agents. The signs, posted in the 10 county branches last week and on the library's Web site, also inform the reader that the USA Patriot Act "prohibits library workers from informing you if federal agents have obtained records about you." "Questions about this policy," patrons are told, "should be directed to Attorney General John Ashcroft, Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. 20530." Library goers were swift to denounce the act's provisions LINK
Top

#113769 - 03-12-03 12:58 PM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
Librarian Librarian Member Registered: 07-05-01 Posts: 1159 Loc: Connecticut	Santa Cruz is not the only library that is posting such warnings. A lot of my librarian colleagues, concerned about law enforcement abuses stemming from the US Patriot Act, are posting similar warnings to patrons. So far, these warnings do not appear to violate the provisions of the act; however, it is a violation to inform a patron (or anyone else) that the patron's circulation record has been subpoenaed by a law enforcement agency. Another way libraries are dealing with this is by purging patron records periodically (like once a month). This process deletes the patron's borrowing record.
Top

#113770 - 03-13-03 10:05 PM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
zeroflux zeroflux Administrator Registered: 03-11-01 Posts: 6175 Loc: Arlington, Virginia	AP Protests Gov't Seizure of Package Government agencies opened a package mailed between two Associated Press reporters last September and seized a copy of an eight-year-old unclassified FBI lab report without obtaining a warrant or notifying the news agency. The Customs Service intercepted a package sent via Federal Express from the Associated Press bureau in Manila to the AP office in Washington, and turned the contents over to the FBI. FBI spokesman Doug Garrison said the document contained sensitive information that should not be made public. However, an AP executive said the package contained an unclassified 1995 FBI report that had been discussed in open court in two legal cases. "The government had no legal right to seize the package," said David Tomlin, assistant to the AP president. The package was one of several communications between Jim Gomez in Manila and John Solomon in Washington, AP reporters who were working on terrorism investigative stories. It was the second time that Solomon's reporting was the subject of a government seizure. In May 2001 the Justice Department subpoenaed his home phone records concerning stories he wrote about an investigation of then-Sen. Robert Torricelli. The Customs Service said its agents opened the package from Manila after selecting it for routine inspection when it arrived at a Federal Express hub in Indianapolis. Agents did not open an identical package addressed to AP's United Nations office. Both packages contained an FBI laboratory report on materials seized from a Filipino apartment rented by convicted terrorist Ramzi Yousef. The reporters were working on a research project that resulted in stories published last month about the government's concerns before April 19, 1995, that white supremacists might bomb a federal building. "The job of Customs is to intercept smuggled contraband and collect import duties," said Tomlin, who is an attorney. "Customs has no authority to seize private correspondence where there's no suspicion it contains contraband. There certainly wasn't any such suspicion here." Read Full Article
Top

#113771 - 03-15-03 12:05 AM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
toxteth o'grady toxteth o'grady Uncivil Engineer Registered: 10-24-01 Posts: 64784 Loc: At the airport	Your clothes may soon be sending information about your whereabouts to data miners and who knows who after that. If you wear Benetton, you may already be under surveillance... "FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Consumer Group Calls for Immediate Worldwide Boycott of Benetton An American consumer privacy group has called for an immediate, worldwide boycott of Benetton (NYSE:BNG) following disclosures that the company has placed identification and tracking devices into its clothingproducts. CASPIAN (Consumers Against Supermarket Privacy Invasion and Numbering) announced today that it will oppose Benetton's plans to place Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) chips into clothing labels intended for the consumer market. RFID chips function as tiny radio transmitters, allowing clothing to be identified and tracked at a distance. According to a joint press release yesterday by Benetton and chip manufacturer Philips Electronics, the devices are "imperceptible to the wearer and remain in individual items of clothing throughout their lifetime." The chips have already begun appearing in Benetton's "Sisley" clothing line. Benetton's announcement sparked an immediate firestorm of concern and outrage among consumers, some of whom liken the technology to the film "Minority Report," where clothing tags were used to identify individuals and target them for advertising. CASPIAN founder and director, Katherine Albrecht, a Harvard University doctoral candidate and consumer privacy advocate, warns that Benetton's chips could be used for more than just unwanted advertising. "Manufacturers of these chips are already promoting them as a way to track individuals and inventory their belongings. It would be easy for Benetton to link your name and credit card information to the serial number in your sweater, in essence 'registering' that sweater to you," she explained. "Then any time you go near an RFID reader device, the sweater could beam out your identity to anyone with access to the database -- all without your knowledge or permission." This scenario is not far-fetched, according to a 2001 INFORMATIONWEEK article. There, RFID proponents predicted the creation of a seamless network of millions of RFID receivers strategically placed around the globe in airports, seaports, highways, distribution centers, warehouses, retail stores, and consumers' homes. CASPIAN is cautioning consumers in all 120 countries where Benetton products are sold to avoid purchasing Benetton clothing until the company publicly renounces its involvement with RFID tracking technology. Albrecht said, "We would rather go naked than wear clothing tagged with spy chips." _________________________ "It's my party and I'll cry if I want to" --Abe Lincoln
Top

#113772 - 03-18-03 11:14 PM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
Danmack2 Danmack2 Junior Member Registered: 05-29-05 Posts: 33 Loc: Dallas, TX	I sure hope this scares the hell out of everybody cause it sure scares the hell out of me. http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Scalia-Rights.html UNIVERSITY HEIGHTS, Ohio (AP) -- The government has room to scale back individual rights during wartime without violating the Constitution, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia said Tuesday. ``The Constitution just sets minimums,'' Scalia said after a speech at John Carroll University in suburban Cleveland. ``Most of the rights that you enjoy go way beyond what the Constitution requires.'' This is going to get ugly. The wackos are on a mission from god to clean the country of all who may disagree with them Goddamn them to hell
Top

#113773 - 03-19-03 12:39 AM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
Anonymous Anonymous Unregistered	Quote: Originally posted by Danmack: ``The Constitution just sets minimums,'' Scalia said after a speech at John Carroll University in suburban Cleveland. ``Most of the rights that you enjoy go way beyond what the Constitution requires.'' Scalia always has had a problem with the 9th amendment. MtY
Top

#113774 - 03-19-03 08:00 AM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
Slippy Slippy Member Registered: 01-23-03 Posts: 347	Dwight W. Watson & Tractor: Again, more than D.C. Police can handle!
Top

#113775 - 03-20-03 07:08 PM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
toxteth o'grady toxteth o'grady Uncivil Engineer Registered: 10-24-01 Posts: 64784 Loc: At the airport	The IRS is talking seriously about outsourcing part or all of its collections. Honk if you think it's a good idea to let private bill collectors call people up and tell them they're from the IRS. Nominee to Head IRS Vows to Strengthen Enforcement President Bush's nominee to head the Internal Revenue Service yesterday pledged, as have many IRS commissioners before him, to step up enforcement of the nation's tax laws and to continue modernizing the agency's computer systems. Mark W. Everson also said he endorses the administration's proposal to turn over to private collection agencies efforts to recover about $13 billion in tax debts. More generally, he said he favors allowing private companies to compete for government work when that work is "commercial in nature and could be done by outsiders." Everson noted that about 22,000 IRS jobs have been identified as fitting this description, though he did not say whether he would push to open them to private competition. He added that where competition is allowed, "more often than not the government wins" and the work remains within the agency. Colleen M. Kelley, president of the National Treasury Employees Union, which represents rank-and-file IRS workers, said after the hearing that using private collectors is bad policy and that agency employees could do the work more cheaply because contractors would be paid up to 25 percent of the taxes they collect.... _________________________ "It's my party and I'll cry if I want to" --Abe Lincoln
Top

#113776 - 03-24-03 11:43 AM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
the Real fifi the Real fifi Member Registered: 01-16-02 Posts: 14036	SCOTUS has rejected an ACLU challenge to the constitutionality of the Patriot Act. Patrio Act withstands challenge
Top

#113777 - 03-25-03 12:05 AM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
toxteth o'grady toxteth o'grady Uncivil Engineer Registered: 10-24-01 Posts: 64784 Loc: At the airport	Much to Feef's delight, this is what the Supremes have authorized. FBI, Justice Dept. Increase Use of Wiretaps, Records Searches Since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, the Justice Department and FBI have dramatically increased the use of two little-known powers that allow authorities to tap telephones, seize bank and telephone records and obtain other information in counterterrorism investigations with no immediate court oversight, according to officials and newly disclosed documents. The FBI, for example, has issued scores of "national security letters" that require businesses to turn over electronic records about finances, telephone calls, e-mail and other personal information, according to officials and documents. The letters, a type of administrative subpoena, may be issued independently by FBI field offices and are not subject to judicial review unless a case comes to court, officials said. Attorney General John D. Ashcroft has also personally signed more than 170 "emergency foreign intelligence warrants," three times the number authorized in the preceding 23 years, according to recent congressional testimony. Federal law allows the attorney general to issue unilaterally these classified warrants for wiretaps and physical searches of suspected terrorists and other national security threats under certain circumstances. They can be enforced for 72 hours before they are subject to review and approval by the ultra-secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. Government officials describe both measures as crucial tools in the war on terrorism that allow authorities to act rapidly in the pursuit of potential threats without the delays that can result from seeking a judge's signature. Authorities also stress that the tactics are perfectly legal.... _________________________ "It's my party and I'll cry if I want to" --Abe Lincoln
Top

#113778 - 04-03-03 04:05 PM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
the Real fifi the Real fifi Member Registered: 01-16-02 Posts: 14036	Those of you interested in putting us under the thumb of International law courts and the UN, might be interested to see what justice is like even in Western Europe---Like what you see?---------------FRENCH JUSTICE: I apologize for sometimes linking to pieces in foreign languages, but sometimes they're the only source for fascinating stories. Here's one from "Proche-Orient," a French publication covering the Middle East. You may recall an anti-Semitic incident at the poignantly named Albert Camus school last year, where a young Jewish girl was beaten in an anti-Semitic attack. A judge has now fined the parents of the girl - yes, the parents - for talking to the media about the affair. The French authorities deal with anti-Semitic violence the way the Catholic Church has historically dealt with child rape. Why? Because they know they're guilty. - 2:34:13 PM---------www.andrewsullivan.com
Top

#113779 - 04-04-03 11:30 PM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
firecracker too firecracker too Member Registered: 05-20-03 Posts: 14971	Quote: from Associated Press: "HILLSBORO, Ore. — An Arab-American software engineer at Intel has been seized by armed FBI agents and jailed in solitary confinement for two weeks without charges, friends say." ... "The government won't give details publicly about the case, including when a grand jury will convene or when Hawash will appear. His attorneys can't discuss the matter because of a federal gag order. His wife, Lisa, won't talk about it because she fears repercussions" Getting damned close to being a police state. No charges, government can hold you indefinitely as a material witness. George Orwell? Ya ain't seen nothin' yet. Feds hold Intel software engineer - no charges, but then so what? Ya think ya have rights, babee?
Top

#113780 - 04-09-03 08:07 PM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
zeroflux zeroflux Administrator Registered: 03-11-01 Posts: 6175 Loc: Arlington, Virginia	Thread Consolidation - Originally posted by TLB Working with the Bush administration, Congressional Republicans are maneuvering to make permanent the sweeping antiterrorism powers granted to federal law enforcement agents after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, officials said today. The move is likely to touch off strong objections from many Democrats and even some Republicans in Congress who believe that the Patriot Act, as the legislation that grew out of the attacks is known, has already given the government too much power to spy on Americans. Senator Orrin G. Hatch, Republican of Utah, that would repeal the sunset provisions and make the law\'s new powers permanent
Top

#113781 - 04-11-03 12:51 AM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
toxteth o'grady toxteth o'grady Uncivil Engineer Registered: 10-24-01 Posts: 64784 Loc: At the airport	More about librarians manning the front lines in the war against the USA Patriot Act. In this instance, all that is needed for us to triumph over evil is for good men to do nothing. The Act has to be renewed or it sunsets. Librarians Make Some Noise Over Patriot Act ...Across the country, in a movement that belies their staid image, librarians are rising up in anger and rallying against a law the Justice Department calls one of its most important new tools to help catch terrorists before they strike. The USA Patriot Act, swiftly approved by Congress after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, gives federal investigators greater authority to examine all book and computer records at libraries. The law requires investigators to get a search warrant from a federal court before seizing library records, but those proceedings are secret and not subject to appeal. It also forbids libraries from informing patrons that their reading or computer habits are being monitored by the government. Federal officials say the new law is essential because prior statutes on obtaining library records imposed too many limits on fast-moving investigations. They also point out that several of the hijackers who rammed planes into the World Trade Center and Pentagon had used library computers to communicate. But many libraries are expressing fears that the law tramples constitutional rights to privacy and thwarts intellectual freedom. Earlier this year, the American Library Association, which has 64,000 members, formally denounced the Patriot Act provision and passed a resolution urging Congress to repeal it. Since then, about two dozen state library groups -- from California to Georgia -- have taken the same stand. And that is only the beginning of the backlash.... _________________________ "It's my party and I'll cry if I want to" --Abe Lincoln
Top

#113782 - 04-12-03 02:39 PM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
toxteth o'grady toxteth o'grady Uncivil Engineer Registered: 10-24-01 Posts: 64784 Loc: At the airport	Another Congress, another anti-porn law. If things follows true to form, this headline will be followed in about twelve months with the headline "Supreme Court Strikes Down Internet Porn Restrictions"... Congress OKs Internet Porn Restrictions Congress passed legislation today that would give jail time to online pornographers who deliberately mask their sites behind innocuous domain names. The House and Senate overwhelmingly approved the Child Abduction Prevention Act, which strengthens penalties for pedophiles, provides funding for a national child-abduction alert system and bolsters prohibitions against child pornography. The proposal is frequently referred to as the "Amber Alert" bill. "America's children will be safer when this bill becomes law," House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) said today. The bill also bans the distribution of "virtual" child pornography -- legal pornographic images of adults that have been digitally altered to look like children having sex.... _________________________ "It's my party and I'll cry if I want to" --Abe Lincoln
Top

#113783 - 04-13-03 11:08 PM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
toxteth o'grady toxteth o'grady Uncivil Engineer Registered: 10-24-01 Posts: 64784 Loc: At the airport	The NYPD picks up where the Chicago and Denver police left off decades ago... NY Police Admit Keeping Anti-War Protest Database NEW YORK (Reuters) - New York police admitted on Thursday to compiling and then destroying a database of people arrested during anti-war protests, but rights groups decried the practice as an erosion of civil liberties in the name of the U.S. war on terrorism. A "debriefing form" was used by detectives to record information on hundreds of people arrested in a series of protests since mid-February against the U.S.-led war on Iraq (news - web sites). "After a review, the department has decided to eliminate the use of the Demonstration Debriefing Form," NYPD chief spokesman Michael O'Looney said in a statement that was first reported in Thursday's New York Times. "Arrestees will no longer be asked questions pertaining to prior demonstration history, or school name. All information gathered since the form's inception on Feb. 15 has been destroyed." The practice ended after pressure from the New York Civil Liberties Union, which received complaints from demonstrators that they felt coerced and that their constitutional rights of free speech and free association were being violated. Thursday's disclosure came just weeks after a judge cited "fundamental changes in the threats to public security" in lifting decades-long restrictions on the New York Police Department's ability to spy on political groups.... _________________________ "It's my party and I'll cry if I want to" --Abe Lincoln
Top

#113784 - 04-21-03 08:12 PM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
toxteth o'grady toxteth o'grady Uncivil Engineer Registered: 10-24-01 Posts: 64784 Loc: At the airport	Miranda is under attack...again. The Supremes are going to consider whether a person who interrupts his Miranda warning and begins to give cops potentially self-incriminating evidence has indeed waived his rights. High Court to Reconsider Miranda Warnings The Supreme Court said Monday it would decide whether the police's failure to advise suspects of their rights while being questioned would make any evidence gathered from their statements inadmissible in court. The high court agreed to hear a Justice Department appeal arguing that such evidence could be used when the suspect gave the police permission, even though he had not been told of all of his Miranda rights. The Supreme Court also said it would decide a second criminal law case about the power of police to search a car after the arrested occupant left the vehicle.... _________________________ "It's my party and I'll cry if I want to" --Abe Lincoln
Top

#113785 - 04-23-03 08:13 PM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
toxteth o'grady toxteth o'grady Uncivil Engineer Registered: 10-24-01 Posts: 64784 Loc: At the airport	Today, NPR ran a piece on a software programmer in Oregon who is being held indefinitely as a material witness in a terrorism investigation. Now, he has not been accused of a crime, but it is alleged that he has knowledge of facts that might help make a case against others. Now this theory that witnesses can be imprisoned (which is essentially what has happened to this person) and held incommunicado indefinitely is a novel interpretation of Constitutional law, especially the part about habeas corpus. And it might have applications elsewhere. For example, Andrew Fastow and others within Enron may have committed certain crimes, but the government has not been able to piece together all the evidence. Now, it seems to me that Kenneth Lay and Jeffrey Skilling are material witnesses who possess valuable information about Fastow's activities. On that basis, they should be held in jail for such time as is needed to collect all the evidence that they are able to provide. Let's go one step further. At AOL Time Warner, certain improprieties in the accounting of revenue are alleged to have happened - perhaps perpetrated by Steve Case. Some of these might rise to the level of RICO conspiracies. There are material witnesses who might have information vital to the case, namely Richard Parsons, Gerald Levin and Ted Turner. To avoid having this information go missing, it seems that the prudent thing for the government to do is to hold these persons in protective custody until such time as the government can extract the evidence they might have. Makes sense, right? _________________________ "It's my party and I'll cry if I want to" --Abe Lincoln
Top

#113786 - 04-24-03 10:33 PM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
toxteth o'grady toxteth o'grady Uncivil Engineer Registered: 10-24-01 Posts: 64784 Loc: At the airport	The 'no fly' list, which allows an airline to deny boarding based on a person being identified as a security risk, has become the Ashcroft version of the Nixon's Enemies List. Only the list is very secretive; you might be on it and not know it, until you are pulled aside while waiting to board a flight. A couple of plaintiffs from San Francisco are seeking to change that... 2 S.F. activists sue over \'no-fly\' Bid to end secrecy on government lists Civil liberties advocates filed suit Tuesday on behalf of two San Francisco peace activists to try to pierce the cloud of secrecy surrounding "no-fly" lists that have snagged thousands of air travelers nationwide. The suit, filed in U.S. District Court in San Francisco, seeks to require the Bush administration to reveal how many names are on the lists, how names are added and removed and how often they have been used to identify the wrong person. "Secret government lists do not allow the public to provide any oversight or comment into our government's activities, nor does secrecy make us any safer," said Jayashri Srikantiah, an American Civil Liberties Union lawyer taking part in the suit. The ACLU said it sought the same information last December under the Freedom of Information Act, but the FBI replied that it had no such documents, and the Transportation Security Administration never replied. Another question posed by the suit was whether the government is targeting political activists like Rebecca Gordon and Jan Adams. The two women, who help publish the anti-war newspaper War Times, were detained briefly at San Francisco International Airport last August after their names showed up on a no-fly list at the American Trans Air counter. They were allowed to board their flight to Boston when officers didn't find their names on an "FBI list," according to police reports, but their bags were subjected to additional searches. "Does someone in some government agency believe that our opposition to the current war policy means we are likely to commit terrorist acts?" Gordon and Adams asked. About 20 activists in Milwaukee asked similar questions a year ago after they were stopped at an airline terminal and missed their flight to a political gathering in Washington, D.C. The government has provided little information about the data it has supplied to airlines since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. But Heather Rosenker, spokeswoman for the Transportation Security Administration, denied Tuesday that anyone was on the government "watch lists" because of political affiliation or beliefs.... _________________________ "It's my party and I'll cry if I want to" --Abe Lincoln
Top

#113787 - 05-12-03 05:06 PM Re: Are we a Police State Yet?
American Patriot American Patriot Member Registered: 08-25-02 Posts: 10128	This, to me, qualifies as "police state" because of the brazenness. THe Texas State GOP members don't want debate, they just want bodies. http://famulus.msnbc.com/famulusgen/ap05-12-090707.asp?t=apnew&vts=51220031340 State troopers, Texas Rangers sent to arrest absent Democratic lawmakers By CONNIE MABIN ASSOCIATED PRESS AUSTIN, Texas, May 12 — State troopers and the elite Texas Rangers were ordered to track down and bring in 59 Democratic lawmakers who brought the Texas House to a standstill Monday by going into hiding - - more at link - - _________________________ GOP 2010: FEAR, IGNORANCE & DIVISIVENESS
Top

Page 1 of 8

Last »

Previous Topic View All Topics

Index Next Topic

Moderator: Lei

Hop to:

Generated in 0.367 seconds in which 0.339 seconds were spent on a total of 13 queries. Zlib compression enabled.