HLS and food for thought?

[Wayne Johnson]

Section 802.  That has a nice wring, uh, ring to it.  Oh, where are Sinclair 
Lewis, George Orwell or Philip K Dick when we most need them?

wgJ
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "IgorLoving" <lovingigor@earthlink.net>
To: <austin-ghetto-list@pairlist.net>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2004 11:26 AM
Subject: HLS and food for thought?


>
> Homeland Security
>
> What is most frightening to me is the erosion of our rights under the 
> constitution. Look at society, and ask the question as to whether we are 
> free?  The Bush attack on the First Amendment and freedom of speech comes 
> to mind right off the bat. And the Homeland Security Act.
>
> Section 213: Changes the standards for search warrants to allow  "sneak 
> and peak" searches in any investigation. Snoop now let you know later.
>
> Fourth Amendment, allowing secret U.S. courts to authorize secret searches 
> if the government can allege (ALLEGE) a foreign-intelligence rationale. 
> Any evidence can now be used in court
>
> Section 206" Permits "roving wiretaps," which allows the government to tap 
> all phones or computers a suspect might use. Example those in a 
> neighborhood church or pool hall.
>
> Section 220: Curtails judicial oversight on wiretaps.
>
> Section 214: By claiming relevance to a terrorism investigation, the 
> government can track your incoming and outgoing calls without a warrant or 
> probable cause.
>
> Section 216:  Allows Internet wiretaps to be used in any criminal 
> investigation.
>
> Section 215: Without probable cause the FBI can search you personal 
> records held by a church, library, bookstore, and etc. with a gag order so 
> you do not know it was done.
>
> Section 505: Anyone from John  Ashcroft down can issue a national security 
> letter and get information on you without your knowledge.
>
> Section 802: New crime definition "Domestic Terrorism" an illegal act that 
> appears to be intended to influence government policy by intimidation or 
> coercion. This can be used against environmentalists, anti-abortionists 
> and makes any civil disobedience reclassified as an act or terror. A 
> football pep rally could fit this definition.
>
> Section 806: Judge can seize the assets of alleged domestic terrorists.
>
> Then there are others. Do we have the right to trial by jury? Is there a 
> right of habeas corpus?  Is the argument that executive authority leaves 
> no room for a second-guessing by federal courts?  Is the incarceration of 
> people in Cuba by the U.S. military lawless? Do we still have to abide by 
> the Geneva Convention?
>
> I think that this might be quite an Imperial way of thinking. We  see what 
> the Supreme Court has to say on that subject. If Bush wins and he appoints 
> his own court we may be in deep doo doo.
>
> Do we actually have the right to have extraterritorial prisons?
> Should we have extraterritorial prisons? And should we use these to punish 
> extraterritorial crimes? Should the United States government create 
> "rights free zones?"
>
> Food for something?
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Eisenstadt <michaele@hotpop.com>
> Sent: Oct 24, 2004 9:32 AM
> To: austin-ghetto-list@pairlist.net
> Subject: Bush is right about one thing
>
> the Iraqi resistance is surely praying for
> Kerry to win.
>
>
>
>
>
>