High Treason in the US Government
07/08/02
Doreen Miller
Q: Just who is a terrorist?
A: Anyone (non-U.S. citizen or U.S. citizen alike) Attorney General Ashcroft
designates as one.
Q: On what evidence can Ashcroft designate someone as a terrorist?
A: Mere suspicion and hearsay.
Q: What legal rights and Constitutional protections does someone detained on
the grounds of being a suspected terrorist have?
A: Next to none.
It may be difficult for some hard-core, patriotic Americans to believe the
veracity of the preceding question and answer series, but the answers to the
questions are based upon the implications and dangerous ramifications of the
USA PATRIOT Act (USAPA) that was passed last October by so-called
congressional representatives who never bothered to read or debate it.
It slipped through at the midnight hour under the cover of darkness, voted on
by men and women engulfed in a terrifying atmosphere of shock, fear, mass
media hysteria, and suspiciously targeted anthrax mailings.
U.S. government officials would have us believe that this 342-page, complexly
nuanced document was allegedly crafted after September 11 in the time span of
a little over a month. To accomplish this feat would have required the
in-depth study of fifteen other lengthy acts and statutes which it modifies
and amends.
The act's extremely clever yet highly misleading acronym USA PATRIOT, which
stands for "Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools
Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism," is an obvious attempt to
intimidate and brand as "unpatriotic" and treasonous anyone who might dare to
question its alarmingly overreaching provisions.
In light of the egregious evisceration of the Bill of Rights that this law
undertakes, those who blindly supported and signed this blatantly
unconstitutional act into law should be collectively condemned and charged
for high treason to the Constitution and the people of the United States of
America.
Careful perusal of the USAPA reveals that it defiantly and maliciously
tramples on:
* The First Amendment - the people's right to exercise freedom of religion,
speech and peaceful assembly "to petition the Government for a redress of
grievances"
* The Fourth Amendment - the right "to be secure in their persons, houses,
papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures" whereby
warrants - only to be issued upon "probable cause" - must be specific as to
place to be searched and persons or things to be seized
* The Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth amendments - which outline the right to due
process - a trial by one's peers, to face one's accuser as well as view the
evidence against oneself, and to have an attorney
* The Eighth Amendment - which safeguards the people against excessive bale
and fines, or cruel and unusual punishment
Under sections 411 and 802 in the USAPA, a terrorist is loosely defined as
anyone being "a representative of a foreign terrorist organization, as
designated by the Secretary of State," and domestically, anyone engaging in
"activities that - involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation
of the criminal laws of the United States or of any state; APPEAR to be
intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; TO INFLUENCE THE
POLICY OF A GOVERNMENT BY INTIMIDATION OR COERCION..." [capitals mine]
The inclusion of the word "appear" leaves interpretation of the law wide open
to subjectivity and personal whim, as anyone can rightfully claim something
"appears" to be intended for a particular purpose. Note also that our first
amendment right to gather in protest against what we may see as unjust
government policies could easily fall under the concept of "influencing"
government policy by "intimidation or coercion."
Anyone participating in activist groups such as Greenpeace, People for the
Ethical Treatment of Animals, or in protests like the 1999 demonstration in
Seattle against the WTO could find himself suddenly stripped of his rights by
the simple act of being declared a "terrorist" in keeping with the definition
of this law. Under section 803 of this Act, even the simple act of giving
food or shelter to a friend who may have been involved in any of the
aforementioned activities could, in turn, have you incriminated and branded
as a "terrorist" as well.
The USA Patriot Act absolutely shreds to bits the fourth amendment. Section
213 permits so-called "sneak and peek" searches. Translated, that means the
government has the right to go into your home while you are away, copy your
hard drive, files, or whatever, gather and take any information or items they
please without ever serving you notice since "the execution of a warrant may
have adverse effect." They can then delay serving you notice for up to 90
days after the fact. These newfangled warrants can now be issued for a flimsy
"reasonable cause," further undermining the much more difficult to achieve
"probable cause" stipulation of the fourth amendment.
Sections 216, 217 and 218 allow for unrestricted wiretapping, the tracing and
spying on email messages and internet activities of anyone anywhere in the
USA without the need to obtain a court order as long as "the information
likely to be obtained... is relevant to an ongoing criminal investigation."
How nebulous can that get? A lawyer of any worth would be able to argue the
"relevance" of anything to an unspecified "ongoing criminal investigation."
Kiss your protection from "unreasonable searches" good-bye and say hello to
Big Brother USA.
If you think this law applies only to foreign nationals, think again. José
Padilla, although by no means a model U.S.-born citizen, had his civil rights
stripped from him this past May just by Ashcroft's uttering the magic words,
"enemy combatant" and "suspected terrorist." To this day, no solid evidence
has been produced to substantiate Ashcroft's claims - neither bomb parts, nor
bomb assembly instructions, nor any plans or maps of intended strike areas.
A "suspected terrorist," according to section 112, needs only to be
"certified" by the Attorney General on "reasonable grounds" that he
"believes" someone to be engaged in terrorist activities. Again, no solid
evidence is required, only a belief or suspicion suffices.
Section 236A gives the Attorney General unprecedented powers untouchable by
any court, whereby he may detain a suspect in increments of up to six months
at a time if he believes the suspect's release would threaten national
security, or the safety of the community or any person. "At the Attorney
General's discretion" [read: personal whims], "NO court shall have
jurisdiction to review, by habeas corpus, petition, or otherwise, any such
action or decision." [capitals mine]
In other words, the Attorney General's word is sacrosanct! To give one man
such grave and all-encompassing power over the fate of any other individual
is akin to what happens in fascist police states, not in a free and openly
democratic society.
Whatever happened to one's right to face one's accuser, to have a fair trial
by one's peers, to be allowed to view the evidence against oneself, or to
have an attorney?
Is it not cruel and unusual punishment to be denied your civil rights, to be
considered guilty until you can "prove yourself innocent" - which is, in
fact, very difficult to do - to be held in prison on "secret evidence" for
months or years on end with no access to a lawyer and no chance of defending
yourself against false and unfounded accusations?
I heard President Bush on the news a few weeks ago boasting that the U.S. has
so far "captured and detained over 2,400 suspected terrorists." Yet, by most
accounts, most people being detained were initially brought in on minor
violations (which in a saner world would not have resulted in incarceration),
and have not had any terrorist-related charges brought against them.
To this day, it is my understanding that fewer than a dozen have actually
been connected to any terrorist activity. Is that what a democracy does:
imprison whole groups of people to catch the fewer than 1 percent who are
actually committing criminal acts?
The USA PATRIOT Act also includes under the "crimes of terrorism" umbrella
the destruction of property even if no one is hurt (section 808),
telemarketing fraud (section 1011), as well as any kind of computer hacking
(section 217). Under the rubric of "guilt by association," this act also
permits the denial of entry to and even the imprisonment of "the spouse or
child of an inadmissible alien" who's been "designated" as a terrorist within
the past five years (section 211).
The FBI can now legitimately demand access to anyone's business, medical,
student, bank, library or any other personal records in order "to protect
against ... clandestine intelligence activities." (Sec. 501) The Associated
Press reported on June 25 that the FBI has been reviewing the library records
of several hundred individuals in libraries across the nation using a quick
and largely secret process which is now legal under the PATRIOT Act.
Judith Krug, the American Library Association's director for intellectual
freedom, in a straight-forward statement is quoted as saying, "... these
records and information can be had with so little reason or explanation. It's
super secret, and anyone who wants to talk about what the FBI did at their
library faces prosecution. That has nothing to do with patriotism."
It seems we must now extend Ashcroft's warning about watching what we say in
public to include what we may read as well. It is really not such a large
leap to imagine our hyperparanoid government beginning to imprison people
suspected of "aiding and abetting the enemy" based upon their "unpatriotic"
ideologies and choice of reading material.
The USA PATRIOT Act creates and allows for a virtual police state with little
to no judicial oversight. We, as a nation, are literally treading the razor's
edge when it comes to flirting with the grave dangers inherent in giving up
our rights for the empty promises of "safety" and "national security"
masquerading under the guise of a "patriotic" PATRIOT Act. Once we fall off
that edge, reclaiming and reinstating our rights, authority and power as "WE
THE PEOPLE" of this great nation might prove very difficult.
The next obvious question is: just what can the average person do? Across
this nation, wise and enlightened individuals have been forming groups to
fight the injustices that the PATRIOT Act imposes on us. Resolutions have
been passed unanimously by city councils in Amherst, Leverett, Northampton,
Ann Arbor, Berkeley, Denver, and Cambridge. Other cities and towns are in the
process of preparing their own resolutions and gathering signatures on
petitions to protect our civil liberties against the offenses of this Act.
The Northampton Bill of Rights Defense Committee's website,
(www.gjf.org/NBORDC), offers a wide range of organizing tools, links, and
information about similar campaigns around the country to help you get
started in your own community.
A rally in Boston this past June 22 kicked off a movement in Massachusetts to
gather 100,000 signatures to petition our Mass. congressional delegates to
introduce a bill that would call for the repeal or amendment of those
sections of the PATRIOT Act that stand in clear violation of our
constitutional rights. For more information or to get involved, you may
contact the ACLU of Massachusetts at 617-482-3170 x 314.
At this critical juncture, to sit back and naïvely trust our government
officials to protect anything other than maintaining their own uncontested,
ill-gotten power is to risk losing the very liberties, rights, and freedoms
our founding fathers fought so hard to procure for each and every one of us.
If we don't stand up for our rights, then who will? If we don't demand the
extension of these same rights to all people within our borders, then we are
nothing but accomplices in the hypocritical, haphazard, and biased
application of our nation's core principles of democracy and equal rights.
Addendum: For those who may be interested, the final official version of the
USA PATRIOT Act can be found here:
http://216.110.42.179/docs/usa.act.final.102401.html
------------------------------------------------
Doreen Miller encourages your comments: dmiller@YellowTimes.org
|