meta-roj

Bruce Schneier: Unchecked police and military power is a security threat [the minneapolis-st. paul star tribune, june 24, 2004]

Unchecked police and military power is a security threat — just as important a threat as unchecked terrorism. There is no reason to sacrifice the former to obtain the latter, and there are very good reasons not to.

Sweeping stun guns to target crowds [new scientist, june 16, 2004]

Weapons that can incapacitate crowds of people by sweeping a lightning-like beam of electricity across them are being readied for sale to military and police forces in the US and Europe.

one of the companies is rheinmetall of germany, another is xtreme alternative defense systems of indiana (usa).

you ready for this? keep your free speech in the designated zone, or we’ll take you all out.

i’m expecting a whole new set of spins on “friendly fire” and “collateral damage” – come to think of it, i wonder if these weapons are good at destroying electronic recording devices that might be present in a protest situation.

another story i’m afraid won’t get much traction, but there’s always hope…

part of the story was reported in us news and world report, this version comes from the new york times, via the houston chronicle:

Tenet, Rumsfeld ordered `ghost detainee’ hidden [houston chronicle, june 16, 2004]

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, acting at the request of George Tenet, the director of central intelligence, ordered military officials in Iraq last November to hold a man suspected of being an Iraqi terrorist at a high-level detention center there but not list him on the prison’s rolls, intelligence officials said Wednesday.

This prisoner and other “ghost detainees” were hidden to prevent the International Committee of the Red Cross from monitoring their treatment.

….

He was segregated from the other detainees and was not listed on the rolls. Under the order that had filtered down to Sanchez, military police were not to disclose the detainee’s whereabouts to the Red Cross pending further directives.

this would, on its face, appear to be a high-level order that violates the geneva convention provisions that all prisoners be properly identified and that the international committee of the red cross have access to all facilities and prisoners.

but i’m not a lawyer. there’s probably a memo somewhere in the bush administration that explains how exceptions to these principles can be justified.

in the wake of the memoranda that suggest that torture is somehow legal in america, senator richard durbin (d-il) proposed, with seven co-sponsors – carl levin (mi), arlen specter (pa), dianne feinstein (ca), patrick leahy (vt), edward kennedy (ma), john mccain (az) and hillary rodham clinton (ny) – an amendment (s.amdt.3386) to s.2400 (a defense appropriations bill) affirming america’s opposition to torture.

No person in the custody or under the physical control of the United States shall be subject to torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment that is prohibited by the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States.

It is the policy of the United States to treat all foreign persons captured, detained, interned or otherwise held in custody of the United States (hereinafter “prisoners”) humanely and in accordance with standards that the United States would consider legal if perpetrated by the enemy against an American prisoner.

this passed on a voice vote on june 16, 2004, and it really, really matters.

senator durbin’s floor statement on this is available here.

and just in case we need to review which country we’re talking about, from an era of relatively plainly-written laws:

the fifth amendment to the united states constitution

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

the eighth amendment to the united states constitution

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

with that in mind, i refer you to the us military enlistment oaths and the oath that george w bush took on january 20, 2001:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

if we can preserve these principles through our own civil war, then there is simply no excuse to even hint at compromising them today.

i mentioned it here during the reagan legacy week, with the hope that it wouldn’t be totally lost in the rush to get reagan’s head on a dime or a bill or whatever. i was unplugged from the mass media to a large extent, but the micro-media didn’t drop it, and the best resource i have found to date is here from kevin drum over at washington monthly. this is good, first, because it links most of the original texts (if indirectly), and second, because it’s generated 162 comments (so far).

I’ve got something simpler for the plain spoken President Bush: “We don’t torture prisoners. Not on my watch.” Why didn’t he say that instead and just put the whole subject to rest?

go there, follow the links around for a while, and then do something.

source documents are here (more directly), because they are that important. i haven’t had time to digest this mess myself, but what does it take to get a war crimes tribunal going?

Patrick Philbin, December 12, 2001 [pdf, ~960k]
John Yoo, January 9, 2002 [pdf, ~820k]
Alberto Gonzales, January 25, 2002 [pdf, ~600k]
Colin Powell, response to January 2002 Gonzales memo [pdf, ~400k]
Working Group Report on Detainee Interrogations in the Global War on Terrorism: Assessment of Legal, Historical, Policy and Operational Considerations, March 6, 2003 [pdf, ~2.7m]

and the trend continues…

via slashdot, we have news of the uk studying chipped license plates that can be read from 300 feet.

i’m going to get to work on the neighborhood watch reader that will tell parents when the kids sneak out late at night in the family car…

Baltimore Plans 24-Hour Surveillance [ap via abc news]

Authorities in the Baltimore region are trying to build a network of around-the-clock surveillance cameras to target crimes from terrorism to drug dealing, the state’s homeland security chief said.

“We’re at war, ” said Dennis R. Schrader, director of homeland security for Gov. Robert Ehrlich.

Dozens of surveillance cameras are already in place to deter crime throughout downtown Baltimore, but those images are generally taped and reviewed only occasionally.

The new images will be monitored by about a dozen retired police officers or criminal justice college students, said Elliot Schlanger, Baltimore’s chief information officer.

i feel safer already knowing that criminal justice college students will be looking over my shoulder. that’s an interesting group of people to bring into this effort – it would seem to make the next generation of criminal justice graduates more comfortable with the concept of a surveillance state.

according to the story, this is the first 24/7 monitoring effort in the united states.

under the interpretation of the current administration, australians apparentlydon’t get the protections of the sixth amendment of the united states constitution, but i thought i should refresh memories just in case.

sixth amendment to the united states constitition

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

i’m no constitutional scholar, but “the accused” doesn’t seem to be limited to “the accused citizens of the united states” – which leaves the only room open for interpretation the “speedy and public” nature of the accusations, which brings us to today…

U.S. Charges Australian Guantanamo Prisoner Hicks [reuters]

David Hicks, who was captured in Afghanistan in late 2001, will face trial before a U.S. military tribunal, although no date was set, the Pentagon said in a statement. Hicks became the third Guantanamo prisoner to be charged.

i suppose a few years could be “speedy” in some contexts – geological contexts, of course… maybe even climatological. life expectancy for a 28-year-old australian male is something approaching 70 years, so maybe 4-5% of this person’s life has been spent waiting for “due process.” and hicks is probably one of the luckier detainees – we’re on pretty good terms with australia, and they seem to have pushed pretty hard to move this thing along…

hicks is getting a better deal than most of the detainees – he apparently gets a lawyer, won’t face the death penalty, and even a couple family members will be allowed to attend the proceedings.

the official department of defense news release is available here for your review.

reported by the people for the american way, and in the salt lake tribune, senator orrin hatch is pushing, again, for an amendment to ban flag burning.

throw one on the barbie for me, while you still can.

the flag is safer when its advocates aren’t so busy defending it.

[update: title changed to limit spam targeting]

while we’re on the subject of how you protest and where you protest, and creative prosecution, the miami-dade independent review panel has released their draft reports on the ftaa demonstrations and the complaints that resulted.

draft documents are available in pdf format, and they are actively seeking public comment.